Exodus 21:28-36
The commandments against stealing or coveting another mans belongings make it clear that there is to be a respect for the property rights of others. As an old saying goes, every right depends on an underlying responsibility. The right to own property entails taking responsibility for it.
“If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit. But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him. Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him. ” (Exodus 21:28-31)
If a domestic animal killed some one but had never shown aggressive tendencies before, the animal was to be destroyed and not eaten, but the owner should not be charged wiuth a crime. On the other hand, the animal had shown aggressive tendencies and the owner had not taken precautions, he was considered to have deliberately put others at risk and guilty of voluntary manslaughter and should be executed. If he’d taken precautions but for some reason they’d failed, they could assess damages against him as an alternative. His choice was to pay the assessment or be executed.
“If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.” (Exodus 21:32)
Any animal which attacked a person was to be killed and the owner held accountable for damages. The principle is the same as that described in Genesis 9:5-6. “And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” While justice demands that life be given for taking life, execution ensures that the guilty will not repeat the behavior, thus preventing future killings. Competency to stand trial was not relevant.
“And if a man shall open a pit, or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein; The owner of the pit shall make it good, and give money unto the owner of them; and the dead beast shall be his.” (Exodus 21:33-34)
A person had a responsibility to take precautions to protect the public from obvious dangers on his property. Failure to do so required payment of actual damages but no punitive damages were to be assessed. When he paid for the replacement, the original became his property.
“And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die; then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money of it; and the dead ox also they shall divide. Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past, and his owner hath not kept him in; he shall surely pay ox for ox; and the dead shall be his own.” (Exodus 21:35-36)
By their very nature, animals are quite competitive and may fight. In such cases the responsibility for damages were to be shared. If one died, the owners were to sell both animals and split the money evenly. If there was a history of aggressiveness by one however, and there had been no effort to restrain such behavior, they were to exchange animals, because the one had been willing to take the risk.
The commandments against stealing or coveting another mans belongings make it clear that there is to be a respect for the property rights of others. As an old saying goes, every right depends on an underlying responsibility. The right to own property entails taking responsibility for it.
“If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit. But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him. Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him. ” (Exodus 21:28-31)
If a domestic animal killed some one but had never shown aggressive tendencies before, the animal was to be destroyed and not eaten, but the owner should not be charged wiuth a crime. On the other hand, the animal had shown aggressive tendencies and the owner had not taken precautions, he was considered to have deliberately put others at risk and guilty of voluntary manslaughter and should be executed. If he’d taken precautions but for some reason they’d failed, they could assess damages against him as an alternative. His choice was to pay the assessment or be executed.
“If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.” (Exodus 21:32)
Any animal which attacked a person was to be killed and the owner held accountable for damages. The principle is the same as that described in Genesis 9:5-6. “And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” While justice demands that life be given for taking life, execution ensures that the guilty will not repeat the behavior, thus preventing future killings. Competency to stand trial was not relevant.
“And if a man shall open a pit, or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein; The owner of the pit shall make it good, and give money unto the owner of them; and the dead beast shall be his.” (Exodus 21:33-34)
A person had a responsibility to take precautions to protect the public from obvious dangers on his property. Failure to do so required payment of actual damages but no punitive damages were to be assessed. When he paid for the replacement, the original became his property.
“And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die; then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money of it; and the dead ox also they shall divide. Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past, and his owner hath not kept him in; he shall surely pay ox for ox; and the dead shall be his own.” (Exodus 21:35-36)
By their very nature, animals are quite competitive and may fight. In such cases the responsibility for damages were to be shared. If one died, the owners were to sell both animals and split the money evenly. If there was a history of aggressiveness by one however, and there had been no effort to restrain such behavior, they were to exchange animals, because the one had been willing to take the risk.
No comments:
Post a Comment