Exodus 22:18 (Jesus, punishment, Torah, tradition, translation)

[Fluffy]

Here is the verse in a variety of translations provided by www.wikipedia.org

King James Version: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."
New King James Version: "You shall not permit a sorceress to live."
English Standard Version: "You shall not permit a sorceress to live."
New International Version: "Do not allow a sorceress to live."
New American Standard Bible: "You shall not allow a sorceress to live."
Amplified Bible: "You shall not allow a woman to live who practices sorcery."
New Living Translation: "A sorceress must not be allowed to live."
Contemporary English Version: "Death is the punishment for witchcraft."
American Standard Version: "Thou shalt not suffer a sorceress to live."
Young's Literal Translation: "A witch thou dost not keep alive."
Septuagint, English translation by Sir Lancelot Brenton: "Ye shall not save the lives of sorcerers."
New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures: "You must not preserve a sorceress alive."

How do you think the verse should be interpreted and why do you believe your interpretation is superior to the alternatives?

For those who believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and the translation you use asks you to kill witches, how does this affect your life?

For those who believe the Bible is the inspired word of God, do you believe that this passage has a place within Christianity?

[Seyorni]

I don't read Hebrew, so I won't comment on the translations, but as to it's place in Christianity, it strikes me that there is a great deal in the OT that is conveniently ignored by modern Christians.

[jewscout]

From the artscroll Stone Edition Chumash: "You shall not permit a sorceress to live"

The commentary is as follows:
The Talmud teaches that Keeshoof (best transliteration i can give, sorry) is a contraction of Pamal'ya shel ma'lah mach'cheesheen (again best transliteration i can do) meaning, They deny the Divine retinue (Sandhedrin 67b). By definition, sorcery is an attempt to assume control of nature through the powers of impurity and thus to deny G-d's mastery.

again i stress that in Traditional judaism this is a prohibition placed on the Israelites, i don't know if it is equally applied to all the other nations as well, nor do i know how christianity as a whole views this particular commandment.

[Fluffy]

again i stress that in Traditional judaism this is a prohibition placed on the Israelites, i don't know if it is equally applied to all the other nations as well, nor do i know how christianity as a whole views this particular commandment.

Is such a belief rooted in biblical scripture also or is that founded on other authorities? If it is, how can one tell which were limited to the Israelites and which were not?

[jewscout]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

Is such a belief rooted in biblical scripture also or is that founded on other authorities? If it is, how can one tell which were limited to the Israelites and which were not?

again traditional judaism holds the 613 Mitzvot of the Torah are placed upon the Children of Israel alone...
for the rest of the world we believe you need only follow the guidlines of the 7 Noahidic laws:
http://www.aish.com/wallcam/7_Noachide_Laws.asp

and even those are really believed to be much looser than that of the Mitzvot of the Torah.

[angellous_evangellous]

To me, all of the various translations say essentially the same thing.

A literal interpretation of the verse has no place whatsoever in Christian life because Jesus bore the penalty of every sin. However, if we are going to have human government, we cannot have anarchy, so there must be laws in place established by reason only. The Bible is not a product of reason, so it is not a source of law for the human community.

For the Christian community, the Bible provides insight for how we are to live our lives. In the ancient Hebrew community, God commanded that sorcerers or witches be put to death, and the Christian community has frowned upon these practices historically.

[Fluffy]

again traditional judaism holds the 613 Mitzvot of the Torah are placed upon the Children of Israel alone...
for the rest of the world we believe you need only follow the guidlines of the 7 Noahidic laws:
http://www.aish.com/wallcam/7_Noachide_Laws.asp

and even those are really believed to be much looser than that of the Mitzvot of the Torah.

Thanks for that, that was very informative. Is there any kind of scriptural basis for this however?

the Christian community has frowned upon these practices historically.

To which historical periods are you referring? I would agree if you meant specifically the modern era.

[michel]

I personally think you are 'O.K' Fluffy...........

The first problem (IMO) is that we are dealing with the O.T..........errant as it is.

From: http://www.religioustolerance.org/exe_bibl1.htm




for black magic: Exodus 22:18 states: Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. This is a mistranslation. The passage has nothing to do with Wicca or other forms of Neo-paganism, which are the only types of Witchcraft that are practiced today in North America in significant numbers . The original Hebrew word is translated "sorceress" in most other versions of the Bible. A more accurate phrase would be "women who engage in black magic, harming others by the use of spoken curses." Men are left off the hook.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harry_Potter/archive_1

"The Bible" is commonly understood to refer to a document, currently in print in many different versions, which DOES mandate that witches be put to death in it's text. This says nothing about what individual Christians want. Those who claim to follow the Bible literally perforce must approve of the execution of witches. More liberal interpretations surely obviate the necessity of killing witches, but that does not change what the text itself says. Exodus 22:18, in KJV, NIV and RSE all spell it out quite clearly. --Dante Alighieri
"The Bible" contains verses which some say mandate capital punishment, and verses which some say forbid it. It is therefore wrong to assert that just one of these is what "The Bible" says. Further discussion of suffering those who read Harry Potter to live belongs on another page, not the Harry Potter page. -- Someone else 01:32 Nov 27, 2002 (UTC)
You can sit there and write about how "The Bible" does not necessarily mandate that witches be executed as long as you like. It does not alter the text of the document(s) one bit. Feel free to object to my characterization. I've even changed it so that the reference is to Exodus 22:18 rather than the Bible as a whole. If you have a problem with what's in the Bible, I suggest you take it up with the Pope and the heads of the various Protestant faiths... although since we're talking about the Old Testament here, you might want to talk to a few Rabbis as well. --Dante Alighieri
The bible also specifies that children who speak out of turn should be stoned to death, as should anyone wearing cotten/polyester mix shirts. CheeseDreams 01:12, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I agree that the bible is contradictory on these matters, esp. New vs. Old Testament. However, even suggesting so can bring any god-fearing Christian up in arms -- it's all a natural flow and development! And it all coincidentally supports their belief system and no other! ;-) We should keep the article as it is now, or add a direct reference, but as SE said this is perhaps too detailed. --Eloquence
It's not too detailed. We're talking about controversy over the books, and Exodus 22:18 is the root of that controversy. How can we talk about one without mentioning the other? --Dante Alighieri
I have no problem with that, but when I read that, I'd like to directly get a quotation, and when we add that, it does in fact become too detailed, so we might want to move this information into a separate article (which should also include a list of all HP book burnings, I'd love to have that list). --Eloquence
Hence the suggestion for a separate article on controversy, which I think we should have. Still, I've made the textual reference quite clear. There's a link to an entry on the Bible and that links to various online Bibles where one could look-up the relevant text. --Dante Alighieri
It's false to suggest that said Christians oppose Harry Potter on the basis of a single Bible verse, or that their opposition depends on a mandate for capital punishment. All that remains is to think of a title for an article that might discuss this. -- Someone else 01:51 Nov 27, 2002 (UTC)
I didn't say that Christians oppose Harry Potter on the basis of a single Bible verse. I also didn't say that their opposition depends on a mandate for capital punishment. I said that the ROOT of the controversy is that passage... which is true. Without that verse, I doubt the witch-burning hysteria of centuries past would ever have occurred. If you think that the witch-burnings and the ideology surrounding them have nothing to do with the current controversy, then I must quite simply disagree with you. That being said, I'm all in favor of an article on Exodus 22:18. Anyone agree? --Dante Alighieri
I'm just saying that a reference invites a detailed discussion. But let's leave it at that until we have a separate article on the issue. --Eloquence
I just wanted to explain why I added that disclaimer about not everyone believing that the Bible mandates capital punishment for witchcraft. According to what I have read at religioustolerance.org, in the original Greek or Aramaic or whatever, the quote about not suffering a witch to live is mistranslated and "witch" means "poisoner" (i.e. a murderer) in the original. I'm not saying this is true (I don't know or care), but it is an interpretation of the Bible. One can believe in the inerrancy of the Bible without believing in capital punishment for witches. Tokerboy 01:53 Nov 27, 2002 (UTC)
The witch of endor is definitely a witch. I very much doubt that poisoners are in the habit of deliberately raising ghosts from the dead. CheeseDreams 01:12, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Well, the point is that most Christians who have problems with Harry Potter don't read those sort of things. The point of that section of the article is not to talk about all Christians, but those who have problems with the books. As I've stated above, all the major English translations of the Bible say basically the same thing. --Dante Alighieri
I think the current paragraph on the controversy is excellent. I think it meets the requirement really very well indeed, and is a model of NPOV. Nevilley 08:57 Nov 27, 2002 (UTC)
It's definitely better NPOV wise, but it's a false statement. It implies that "Some Christians" oppose Harry Potter because they believe the punishment for witchcraft is death: in actuality, they oppose Harry Potter because they believe witchcraft is evil. -- Someone else
Well, that's just asking for further clarification -- what do they believe "witchcraft" to consist of? What do they believe "evil" to mean? Why do they believe that witchcraft is evil? How do the various prohibitions against witchcraft in scripture fit into it: is the modern belief that witchcraft is evil simply based on the longtime presence of biblical prohibitions against the practice, or is there something more specific which may or may not be directly relatable to the fictional wizardry depicted in fantasy novels, movies, and role-playing games? --Brion 11:55 Nov 27, 2002 (UTC)
As I've stated above, I believe that the hysteria surrounding the Inquisition and the burning of witches (yes, I know, they are not necessarily directly related) has something to do with it. That and Exodus 22:18. --Dante Alighieri
To qualify your post, the two or three centuries in which witchhunts were prominent (mainly the very late mediæval period and the whole of the renaissance) were characterised by persecutions in many non-English speaking countries. The concern was also more a variant of the concern with heresy than a simple literal application of the rule from the Bible. See witchhunt
See Sarem witch trials CheeseDreams 01:12, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)