Then my reading of the Law must have missed these other criminal penalties. Where are they found? The Jews, and other ancient peoples, had nothing resembling our long-term imprisonment. So what form of punishment did they use, if the eye for an eye principle was not used?
I realize that Orthodox Jews view the Talmud as of similar authority with the Law. I do not, however, agree with them.
I am well aware of the origin of the Pharisees as the "liberals" (in the original sense of the word) of Jesus' day. The Saducees and several other sects of the time disappeared in the great revolt against the Romans and its aftermath. However, Jesus does not appear to have a much higher opinion of the Pharisees of his day than he did of the Saducees.
That OJ and other rich, famous people can manipulate the legal system to be acquitted is very different from a legal system where the punishment, if convicted, consists solely of the equivalent of a fine. I think this argument is sophistic.
The ancient Germans had such a system. Each person had their wereguild (?), or price for murder or injury. It varied by station in life. Rich men could commit a crime and pay the same fine for it as a poor man. (If even convicted.)
You are the very first person I have ever run across who appears to claim that having purely monetary penalties for crime is a morally superior system. The immorality of it can be seen by the idiocy of today's sports commissions who "punish" a player earning $20M/year by fining him $5000.
"You are the very first person I have ever run across who appears to claim that having purely monetary penalties for crime is a morally superior system. The immorality of it can be seen by the idiocy of today's sports commissions who "punish" a player earning $20M/year by fining him $5000."
Never claimed it. You are misstating my views. I never said that there should be purely monetary penalties for intentional crimes in which people are killed or maimed.
I said that the biblical 'eye for an eye' was a tort concept for unintentional harm.
"The Jews, and other ancient peoples, had nothing resembling our long-term imprisonment. So what form of punishment did they use, if the eye for an eye principle was not used?"
And you know this how? The ancient system was much more complex than you are imagining. Look up the term Arei Miklat for starters.
And I see from the other post that you know about indentured servitude to pay off debts. That puts the rich on a more equal footing with the poor than today's accused using a public defender compared to OJ's legal team. The sophism is viewing the US criminal justice system as an equal opportunity justice meter. It isn't.
"I realize that Orthodox Jews view the Talmud as of similar authority with the Law. I do not, however, agree with them."
What do you mean by "I don't agree with them?" Are you Jewish?
"However, Jesus does not appear to have a much higher opinion of the Pharisees of his day than he did of the Saducees."
Was that Jesus or the Gospels?
Further the derogation of the term "legalistic" is contradictory to Christian, and by that I mean Western, society which took this essential concept, that the law is above the state, from Judaism.
"The immorality of it can be seen by the idiocy of today's sports commissions who "punish" a player earning $20M/year by fining him $5000."
The analogy here would be punishing murder by a week in jail. In other words because the monetary punishment is too little does not mean no monetary punishment would suit.