Understanding History and Understanding the Word

I love historical movies.  But I had not watched the Downton Abbey series on PBS as it was happening.  I did however begin one rainy afternoon to look for something relaxing and fun to watch and found the series online.  The scene is set for the whole of it, beginning right after the turn of the Century.  Not this one, but the one prior to it, the  early 1900′s. Besides the grand cooking, the grand houses and the grand attire, the thing that stood out to me was the “grand manners”.  Even those who were not “upper crust” so to speak had a huge honor toward the “rules of decorum”.  Those rules are no where near what ours today are.  We have as a nation always been less inclined to follow the societal rules that Downton Abbey sets forth as the norm.  But we have changed so much even from the turn of our “Victorian Era” of the same time as Downton, but also from the time of the fifties, when on tv a man and woman were never seen on tv in the same bed, but twins were used as late as the late 60′s when Dick Van Dyke and his lovely wife Laura always were shown in them.  I was born in 55, so I remember when women who were expecting a child were not even referred to as pregnant. as if the word itself had some dark meaning even is the woman was a legally married woman.  I was taught to use the term. P G. It really makes me laugh to think of it.  There were also laws written and on the books of country, state and local juridictions that today we could not imagine the law getting involved in.  And example bastardy.  Having a child out of wedlock.  It was a crime in the days of the Victorian Era punishable according to the punishment set forth by the law of the various county seats of the country.  I know of a case in 1939 only because I have the records of Townville, SC in my possesion.  And it is there among the pages.  That time is less than a hundred years ago, yet today if someone was brought forward on those old laws to be fines or brought to court on the grounds of bastardy, wouldn’t it be a national if not worldwide outrage?

Well, two thousand years ago when Messiah was on earth there were laws that were written by locals jurisdictions that we would not understand at all.  Then lets add to it another 2 thousand years.  What was the world like then, what was the NORM?  What laws of countries and what traditions were accepted?  Do you know? Have you ever considered it?  How did the world at large and their rules and customs effect YHWH and HIs children?  What was going on the the world that YHWH felt He needed to protect His chosen children from?

A certain man has said that the God YHWH set forth rules for keeping slaves and for bloody sacrifices and that those things make Him be evil.  I say that the young man from Texas has little understanding of either the commandments given or the entity that gave them.  He further has given no consideration to the times that the commandments were given nor the things that the world was doing and considered NORMAL.

I don’t like to just give my opinions, I would rather give PROOFs from places of experts and so I will do so from source on the web so we can document them and give you all, including my Texas friend what kind of world the children of Israel were living in at the time of the giving of the commandments so that we can all see the NORMS and what Father YHWH might have been working to change at the time of the giving these very new and very different kinds of rules for His people to live by.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/museums-static/digitalegypt/administration/law.html

The above link is for Ancient Egpytian sources of proofs of different contracts we can put our hands on today and read.  

• inscriptions in the tomb-chapel of governor Djefahapy at Asyut (Twelfth Dynasty), preserving copies of contracts between the governor and the men appointed to maintain the offerings and rites in his chapel in perpetuity

(Amenemhet I, was the first ruler of the Twelfth Dynasty (the dynasty considered to be the beginning of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt). He ruled from 1991 BC to 1962 BC.)

• Leather roll Berlin 10470 (late Middle Kingdom), an original legal document recording the involvement of the central administration (bureau of the vizier) in a local case concerning the transfer of rights to the labour of a working-class woman

(This would have been the rights of the ownership of a slave and all her labors so we have to assume that slavery was a NORM, however there is no finding of the rights of the slave only those of who owned that slave.)

• the Tomb Robbery Papyri of the Twentieth Dynasty, with reference to the king as ultimate judge
• the Harim Conspiracy Papyri of the Twentieth Dynasty, recording a case of treason, the attempt on the life of Ramesses III

http://www.crystalinks.com/egyptlegalsystem.html

The ancient Egyptians viewed men and women, including people from all social classes except slaves, as essentially equal under the law, and even the lowliest peasant was entitled to petition the vizier and his court for redress.

http://history-world.org/sumerianlaws.htm

From the above source here are the laws of ancient Sumaria:

Ancient Sumerian/Mesopotamian Laws

1. BE it enacted forever and for all future days: If a son say to his father, “You are not my father,” he [the father] can cut off his [the son's] locks, make him a slave and sell him for money. If a son say to his mother, “You are not my mother,” she can cut off his locks, turn him out of town, or (at least) drive him away from home, deprive him of citizenship and of inheritance, but his liberty he

loses not. If a father say to his son, “You are not my son,” the latter has to leave house and field and he loses everything. If a mother say to her son, “You are not my son,” he shall leave house and furniture. If a wife be unfaithful to her husband and then says, “You are not my husband,” let her be thrown into the river. If a husband say to his wife, “You are not my wife,” he shall as a fine pay one half mana of silver. If some one hires a servant and the latter dies or is rendered useless otherwise (e.g.,by flight, rebellion, or sickness) he shall give to the owner as daily wages ten qa of grain a day.

2. If an overseer or a fisherman ordered to the service of the king does not come, but sends a hireling in his stead, that same overseer or fisherman shall be put to death, and his house shall go into the possession of the hireling.

3. If a man lets out his field to a farmer and he has received the rent for his field, and afterward a flood pours down upon that field, or some animal destroys the harvest of the farmer; in case now the rent of this field is not yet paid, or ______. [The law here no doubt said that, in case of damage by weather or animals, a renter of a field will have certain reduction granted. If he paid in advance, part of the money will be refunded to him, if he pays at the end of the lease, he need not pay the full amount.]

4. When a merchant gives to his clerk grain, wool, oil, or some other merchandise for sale, the clerk shall give a strict account and turn in the money to the merchant: and the merchant shall give to the clerk a receipt for the money paid over to him.

5. When a man has bought a male or female slave, and the sale is fought by a third party (the real owner) and is in consequence thereof declared void, the seller of the slave has to pay for all damages.

6. When in an inclosed yard a disturbance occurs, or again, when a lion kills, his keeper shall pay all damages, and the owner of the yard shall receive the killed animals.

7. When a peasant says to the date-vendor, “All the dates in this garden you may take for your money,” that vendor shall not do so; but the dates that grow in the garden shall be and remain the property of the owner, and with these dates he shall pay the vendor for the latter’s money and the interests accrued, as the written agreement calls for; but what remains of dates after that shall be and remain the property of the owner.

8. When a shepherd of small cattle, after having driven the herd from pasture, and when the whole troop has passed within the city gates, drives his cattle to another rnan’s field (within the city walls), and pastures it there, that shepherd shall take care of the field, which he has given to his flock as pasture, and shall give to the owner of the field for every day the amount of sixty qa.

9. If a man sell a slave girl for money, and another party proves just claims to her, and takes her away from her present owner, the seller shall return the money to the buyer, to exactly the same amount that his receipt calls for; if in the meanwhile she has borne children, he shall in addition pay for each child one half shekel.

10. If a man, after having promised, either verbally or in writing, a certain dowry to his daughter, loses part of his property, he can give his daughter a dowry in accordance with the property as it is now, and neither father-in-law nor son-in-law shall go to law on that account.

11. If a man has given his daughter a dowry, and the dlaughter dies without an issue, the dowry reverts to the house of her father.

12. If a woman, whose dowry her husband has taken charge of, remains childless and loses her husband, her dowry shall be returned to her in full out of the late husband’s estate. If her husband during his lifetime has presented her part of his property, she shall retain this also and still receive her own dowry in full. But if she had no dowry, the judge shall examine into the condition of her husband’s estate and then give her a proper share in accordance with her late husband’s property.

Ancient Mesopotamian Laws

1. BE it enacted forever and for all future days: If a son say to his father, “You are not my father,” he [the father] can cut off his [the son's] locks, make him a slave and sell him for money. If a son say to his mother, “You are not my mother,” she can cut off his locks, turn him out of town, or (at least) drive him away from home, deprive him of citizenship and of inheritance, but his liberty he

loses not. If a father say to his son, “You are not my son,” the latter has to leave house and field and he loses everything. If a mother say to her son, “You are not my son,” he shall leave house and furniture. If a wife be unfaithful to her husband and then says, “You are not my husband,” let her be thrown into the river. If a husband say to his wife, “You are not my wife,” he shall as a fine pay one half mana of silver. If some one hires a servant and the latter dies or is rendered useless otherwise (e.g.,by flight, rebellion, or sickness) he shall give to the owner as daily wages ten qa of grain a day.

2. If an overseer or a fisherman ordered to the service of the king does not come, but sends a hireling in his stead, that same overseer or fisherman shall be put to death, and his house shall go into the possession of the hireling.

3. If a man lets out his field to a farmer and he has received the rent for his field, and afterward a flood pours down upon that field, or some animal destroys the harvest of the farmer; in case now the rent of this field is not yet paid, or ______. [The law here no doubt said that, in case of damage by weather or animals, a renter of a field will have certain reduction granted. If he paid in advance, part of the money will be refunded to him, if he pays at the end of the lease, he need not pay the full amount.]

4. When a merchant gives to his clerk grain, wool, oil, or some other merchandise for sale, the clerk shall give a strict account and turn in the money to the merchant: and the merchant shall give to the clerk a receipt for the money paid over to him.

5. When a man has bought a male or female slave, and the sale is fought by a third party (the real owner) and is in consequence thereof declared void, the seller of the slave has to pay for all damages.

6. When in an inclosed yard a disturbance occurs, or again, when a lion kills, his keeper shall pay all damages, and the owner of the yard shall receive the killed animals.

7. When a peasant says to the date-vendor, “All the dates in this garden you may take for your money,” that vendor shall not do so; but the dates that grow in the garden shall be and remain the property of the owner, and with these dates he shall pay the vendor for the latter’s money and the interests accrued, as the written agreement calls for; but what remains of dates after that shall be and remain the property of the owner.

8. When a shepherd of small cattle, after having driven the herd from pasture, and when the whole troop has passed within the city gates, drives his cattle to another rnan’s field (within the city walls), and pastures it there, that shepherd shall take care of the field, which he has given to his flock as pasture, and shall give to the owner of the field for every day the amount of sixty qa.

9. If a man sell a slave girl for money, and another party proves just claims to her, and takes her away from her present owner, the seller shall return the money to the buyer, to exactly the same amount that his receipt calls for; if in the meanwhile she has borne children, he shall in addition pay for each child one half shekel.

10. If a man, after having promised, either verbally or in writing, a certain dowry to his daughter, loses part of his property, he can give his daughter a dowry in accordance with the property as it is now, and neither father-in-law nor son-in-law shall go to law on that account.

11. If a man has given his daughter a dowry, and the dlaughter dies without an issue, the dowry reverts to the house of her father.

12. If a woman, whose dowry her husband has taken charge of, remains childless and loses her husband, her dowry shall be returned to her in full out of the late husband’s estate. If her husband during his lifetime has presented her part of his property, she shall retain this also and still receive her own dowry in full. But if she had no dowry, the judge shall examine into the condition of her husband’s estate and then give her a proper share in accordance with her late husband’s property.

now lets look to religous rituals of ancients 

http://www.toptenz.net/10-ancient-cultures-practiced-ritual-human-sacrifice.php

It’s estimated that from 800 B.C. until 146 B.C., when the Romans conquered Carthage, about 20,000 babies were sacrificed. However, not all experts believe that the Carthaginians did in fact engage in infant sacrifice. They contend that discovered infant remains had instead died of natural causes.

Many scholars firmly believe that the ancient Israelites performed a “burnt offering of children” in the name of an ancient Canaanite god named Moloch. Not all of ancient Israelpracticed this ritual — experts believe it was only practiced by an Israelite cult that dedicated their lives to worshiping Moloch, and that the ritual had a Canaanite origin.

Some scholars don’t agree with this, contending that Moloch never existed in ancient Israelite society. For these scholars, the word mlk from which the word Moloch was derived doesn’t mean “god,” but rather “sacrifice.” As such, sacrifices may have been made in a more general sense, or perhaps not at all. Scholars can’t agree on the matter, and the debate continues to this day.

The Etruscans were an ancient people who lived in what is now known as Tuscany. They were farmers and traders who made business transactions with both Greece and Carthage. Aside from farming and trading, the Etruscans relied on minerals to fuel their economy.

For many years, scholars were unwilling to accept the fact that the Etruscans did engage in the practice of human sacrifice. But when archaeologists at the University of Milan unearthed important evidence in Tarquinia, Italy, it was proven conclusively that the Etruscans did indeed practice human sacrificial killings. The archaeologists discovered several remains of sacrificed adults, infants, and children who were either foreign, ill, or of low social ranking. Aside from human remains, the archaeologists also discovered a sacred building, a stone altar, and “a ritual deposit of secular power” that included a trumpet, an axe, and a shield.

The practice of human sacrifice was very common in ancient China, particularly during the Shang Dynasty—the first Chinese dynasty with written records. In fact, archaeological evidence suggests that human sacrifice was practiced on a grand scale during the Shang dynasty.  The purpose was twofold: political control and religious communication.

Experts believe that there were three types of human sacrifice practiced by the Shang. In pit sacrifices, young men were sacrificed. Their bodies were dismembered and they were buried without their personal possessions. In foundation sacrifices, children and babies were used. Archaeological evidences show that these human sacrifices experienced violent deaths, and they too were buried without possessions. Finally, in internment sacrifices, young girls were sacrificed. Unlike the first two, they were buried in the standard burial position and their bodies were kept intact.

The Celts practiced human sacrificial killings as part of their religious rituals, and there’s extensive evidence to prove it. There are the written works of Roman and Greek historians, Irish texts written during medieval times, and recent archaeological evidence. Strabo, a Greek geographer and philosopher, discussed the Celtic ritual of human sacrifice in his book, Geography. He said,

“they [the Celts] would strike a man who had been consecrated for sacrifice in the back with a sword, and make prophecies based on his death-spasms; and they would not sacrifice without the presence of the Druids.”

Furthermore, he mentioned the wicker man, and how the Celts used it for sacrifice.

“They would construct a huge figure of straw and wood, and having thrown cattle and all manner of wild animals and humans into it, they would make a burnt offering of the whole thing.”

Many scholars doubt the veracity of Strabo’s accounts, as well as other Greek and Roman historians, primarily because their works were filled with political propaganda. However, the discovery of a male body in Lindow bog proved once and for all that the Celts did engage in human sacrifice to some degree. The Lindow man is said to have been “strangled, hit on the head, and had his throat cut, in quick order, then surrendered to the bog.”

The ancient Hawaiians believed that by sacrificing humans they could gain the favor of Ku, the god of war and defense, and achieve victory in their battles. Sacrifices were held in temples called Heiau. The people used were captives, particularly chiefs from other tribes, who would be “hung upside down on wooden racks.” The priest would be anointed with sweat collected from the sacrifice. Then the sacrifice would be beaten repeatedly until their flesh became smooth. Finally, they would be eviscerated. The ritual didn’t end there, though. Once disemboweled, the flesh would be either “cooked or eaten raw” by the priest and the chief of the tribe.

The Mesopotamians practiced human sacrifice as part of the burial rituals of their royal and elite families. Palace attendants, warriors, and handmaidens were sacrificed for the purpose of accompanying their masters into the afterlife. After they had been killed their bodies were put in a systematic, decorative order. The warriors would have their weapons at their sides, while the handmaidens would be adorned with headdresses.

For many years, experts believed that these sacrifices were killed with poison. However, new examinations show that their deaths were much more brutal — they were stabbed through the head with a pike, a painful but quick death.

Aztec society would offer human lives in order to keep the sun from dying. The Aztecs strongly believed that  human blood was “sacred life force” and that the god of the sun, Huitzilopochtli, needed it for nourishment and appeasement.

The Aztecs performed brutal and gruesome human sacrificial killings of both volunteers and members of other tribes who were captured during war. In one type of ritual, the sacrifices would be required to walk up the stairs of the temple. When they reached the top a priest would open their stomachs, cutting from their throats down to their bellies. The priest would then offer the heart to the gods, while the bodies would be dismembered at the bottom of the temple. Estimates of the scope of these sacrifices are fiercely debated, a problem compounded by the fact that few neutral sources are available.

Many Egyptologists believe that the ancient Egyptians practiced both human sacrifice. Though there are some experts who disagree with this, sacrificial tombs found in Abydos prove that the ancient Egyptians did engage in at least some ritual retainer sacrifice, where the servants of pharaohs or other key figures would be killed so they could continue to serve in the afterlife. Renowned Egyptologist George Reisener suggested that the tombs of King Djer and King Aha were filled with servants who were sacrificed by being buried alivewith their tools. Reisener also hypothesized that the wife of King Djer was buried alive with his body. However, these retainer sacrifices were eventually phased out and replaced withsymbolic human figures.

The Incas resorted to the practice of human sacrifice to the gods, particularly the offering of their children, as a way to prevent natural calamities. The Inca Empire was plagued by numerous natural disasters, including volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and floods. The Inca believed that these natural catastrophes were controlled by the gods, and that favor needed to be gained through sacrifice.

While this article has gotten rather long for reading I will stop and leave my contrast of the laws of YHWH and His Kingdom and a bit of explanation of that kingdom with the laws and practices of other kingdoms of the world who were doing these things at the time of the laws and commandments of YHWH given to Moses.

I pray that just reading and the Holy Spirit give you a time of thought and meditation on who YHWH is and how the God YHWH and His commandments were needed for those who desire to live in HIs kingdom.