Truth Magazine

By Doug Roush

The Code of Hammurabi, was discovered by a French archaeological expedition under the direction of Jacques de Morgan in 1901-1902 at the ancient site of Susa in what is now Iran. It was written on a piece of black diorite, 2.25 m (7 ft. 5 in.) in height, and contained 282 sections. Although the block was broken into three pieces, the major portion of it has been restored and is now in the Louvre in Paris.

Many scholars believe that the code is actually a series of amendments to the common law of Babylonia. It addresses legal procedure with statements for penalties for unjust accusations, false testimony, and injustice done by judges. In addition, it states laws concerning property rights, loans, deposits, debts, domestic property, and family rights. The sections covering personal injury invoke penalties for injuries sustained at the hand of another as well as permanent injury incurred by unsuccessful operations that were performed by physicians. In addition, the code established rates for various services in trade and commerce.

The Code of Hammurabi and the Written Word

Bible critics once made the charge that Moses could not have written the first five books of the Old Testament because the art of writing was not developed until well after his death. This criticism, however, has been negated by a multitude of archaeological discoveries, among which is The Code of Hammurabi. Free and Vos have stated: 

The Code of Hammurabi was written several hundred years before the time of Moses (c. 1500-1400 B.C.). . . . This code, from the period 2000-1700 B.C., contains advanced laws similar to those in the Mosaic laws. . . . In view of this archaeological evidence, the destructive critic can no longer insist that the laws of Moses are too advanced for his time (Free, Joseph P. and Howard F. Vos [1992], Archaeology and Bible History 103, 55).

The Code of Hammurabi, among other discoveries of ancient writing, established beyond doubt that writing was practiced for hundreds of years before the time of Moses. This fact is so well documented by archaeological discovery and historical confirmation that only the dishonest or  misinformed critic of the Bible would appeal to this line of argumentation.

Similarities and Contrasts Between the Code of Hammurabi and the Law of Moses

The other misuse of the Code of Hammurabi against the Law of Moses by Bible critics was the similarities between the two systems. Since it had been established that the Code predated the Law, it was charged that Moses had plagiarized Hammurabi, or at least had borrowed from him.

It is true that the Code and the Law contain many similarities. However, most of the similarity ends with the topics they address. The specifics as to how the topic is handled are, in most cases, different, if not contrasting.

Bible critics often point to the principle of equal retribution in the Code. Paragraphs 196, 197, 199 establish, an eye for an eye, a broken bone for a broken bone, and a tooth for a tooth, respectively. However, the Code treats those who are born free, made free, and slaves differently in the matter of retribution. Equal retribution is practiced only toward those who are born free. A price of one gold mina was to be paid to an injured freed man, and if the injured be a slave, the offender was to pay one-half of the slaves value to his master. No mention is made of a slave who suffers permanent injury at the hand of their owner, however the Law of Moses provided for the freedom of a slave that was so injured (Exod. 21:26-27).

The Law provided that, “. . . he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death” (Exod. 21:15). In comparison and contrast, the Code provided, “If a son strike his father, his hands shall be hewn off” (§195).

Numerous comparisons can be made between the Code of Hammurabi and the Law of Moses. Few are exactly the same, however the similarities are striking. Perhaps one explanation for these similarities can be the civil and moral portion of the law of God that was handed down by word of mouth through the patriarchs. Just as there are similarities between the Mosaic Law and the law of Christ in their moral principles, it should not be surprising to find hints of the civil and moral aspect of the Patriarchal Law in the written codes of ancient cultures; even though these cultures had become corrupt and, like Hammurabi, attributed their code to gods of idolatry.

Explanation of Pre-Mosaic Customs 
Among the Patriarchs

Perhaps the most valuable aspect of the Code of Hammurabi is the insight it provides into the customs of patriarchal cultures. Although, as near as one can now tell, Abraham lived shortly before the time of Hammurabi, other ancient writings verify that many of the customs that Hammurabi codified were widely practiced by patriarchal cultures.

For instance, Abraham had resigned himself to the situation that Eliezer of Damascus, “one born in my house (i.e., the son of one of his slaves) is mine heir” (Gen. 15:2-3). This statement is consistent with the practice of adoption as outlined in the Code of Hammurabi and other, more ancient codes. Therefore, in the mind of Abraham, adoption of a child born to one of his slaves presented a acceptable cultural solution to God’s promise as it was stated in Genesis 6:2-3.

In addition, the insistence of Sarah, Rachel, and Leah for their husbands to bear them children by their handmaids (Gen. 16:1ff; 30:1ff, 9ff) is consistent with the cultural custom that is described in paragraphs 144 and 146 of the Code of Hammurabi. As written in the Code, it is apparent that the practice was common prior to the time of Hammurabi; however, his code protected all parties involved in this arrangement.

Paragraphs 159-161 of the Code address fair treatment of the “purchase price” for a bride in the event the prospective groom or father-in-law should change his mind about the marriage. Although there are some differences, the practice of a purchase price or dowry is consistent with what we find in Genesis 24:10, 53, where we find Abraham’s servant went in search of Isaac’s prospective wife with “all goodly things of his master’s in his hand,” and then giving Rebekah and Rebekah’s mother and brother precious things. The practice of a “purchase price” being paid to the father of the bride is especially evident in the case where Jacob, when he did not have possession of a “purchase price,” worked for Laban for two consecutive seven year periods to satisfy the “purchase price” for each of Laban’s daughters, Rachel and Leah.

Conclusion

Archaeological discoveries provide us with some fascinating information that enhances our appreciation of the Bible record. Perhaps, most striking, as exemplified in the early years of Abraham, is how ancient cultures attempted to make God’s revelation fit their cultural practice rather than fully embrace God’s promise. Thousands of years have passed, but man continues to make the same mistakes. However, like Abraham, we come to know the grace of God and his blessings when we fully accept him at his word.

18883 Pinkley Rd., Fredericktown, Ohio 43019 DougRoush@ecr.net

By Dick Blackford

One night I dreamed I died and went to heaven. I heard songs, and was asked to join the huge group that was singing. There were 1000 sopranos, 1000 altos, 1000 tenors, and one bass — me. We reached a crescendo, which called for as much volume as we could muster. Right in the middle of it the conductor stopped and said, “Brother Blackford, pu-leez, a little softer on the bass.

Well, that didn’t really happen. But sometimes I sing too loud. Sometimes I sing the wrong verse when everybody else is singing something different. I hate it when that happens. And those times when I sing too loud seem to always happen when I’m singing the wrong verse! I enjoy singing, but I’ve got to stay in my place and sing with the group.

When I was younger and much of a dreamer, I imagined what it would be like to be the conductor of a huge orchestra and chorus. I never made it, but I have done something that far exceeded those dreams. There is scarcely anything more rewarding than directing the hearts and voices of children in vacation Bible school! Their bright eyes, smiling faces, enthusiasm and volume (!) do more for me than being an orchestra conductor could ever do. Children who are eager to learn and unashamed to sing of their faith are worth more than gold.

Another opportunity a few years ago reminded me of some of our heavenly benefits. I returned to my hometown to direct 17 grandchildren as they sang at the funeral of their grandmother. It hadn’t been long since we had done the same at their grandfather’s funeral. Surely, the angels couldn’t have sung any sweeter. 

One of the most touching and memorable occasions was when I spoke at the funeral of a little girl. It was difficult to keep my composure as children sang the cherished children’s hymn, “Jesus loves me, this I know.”

Singing fits many occasions. We sing when we are sad, and we sing when we are happy. Paul and Silas sang after having been beaten and imprisoned unjustly (Acts 16). “Is any cheerful? Let him sing praise” (Jas. 5:13). In John’s heavenly vision he saw victorious saints singing the song of Moses and the Lamb (Rev.15:3). Some were depicted as singing “a new song” (Rev. 5:9; 14:3).

Those who miss heaven will miss one of the greatest joys for having chosen the sounds of wailing and gnashing of teeth over the song of victory.

One of the reasons we sing today is to encourage people to obey the gospel. It is difficult to understand why anyone would reject the invitation. It is the strange mercy of our God that he continues to linger while “sweetly the tones are falling.” We sing a number of hymns that express in words better than we could the need and urgency for you to obey the gospel. I often wonder how anyone could resist. But ever so often there is a breakthrough. And perhaps at the next worship service, as we sing, there will be a tender heart that is touched by the message and will break out of the bonds of sin and declare their faith in Jesus Christ. Will it be you?

P.O. Box 3032, State University Arkansas 72467 rlb612@aol.com

By David Dann

The New Testament opens in the book of Matthew by introducing, “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ” (Matt. 1:1). Matthew’s opening statement is followed by a lengthy list of names, that establishes a direct family line from the patriarch Abraham to Jesus Christ. 

Anyone who has even casually read the Bible knows that it contains numerous genealogical lists, the first of which is found as early as Genesis 4. In fact, there are so many genealogical lists in the Old Testament that we are often tempted to rush through them or even skip over them altogether, rather than take the time to patiently try to pronounce the various names included in the list. Why does the Bible include these genealogies? Since the Scriptures are a product of the mind of God (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:20-21), our Creator must have had some purpose for including them in the inspired text. And, the great frequency with which they occur further points to the importance and necessity of their inclusion. But, what exactly is that purpose, and why are they necessary? 

Bible Genealogies

1. Are an evidence of the historical authenticity of the Scriptures. While many may view the genealogies recorded in the Bible as boring and tedious, they actually serve to support the historical integrity of the Scriptures. For example, Genesis 5 contains the genealogy of Adam all the way down to Noah and his sons. The genealogical record of Genesis 5 contains important details, as well as the various ages of the patriarchs mentioned. We live in an age in which it is popular to dismiss the early chapters of the book of Genesis as nothing more than mythical poetry. But, the genealogies are present as a testimony to the historical authenticity and accuracy of the Genesis record. The genealogies serve to show that the men mentioned in Genesis are real individuals who lived real lives and fathered real sons and daughters, who in turn, raised real families of their own. The history of the nation of Israel recorded in the Old Testament is replete with detailed genealogical records. One cannot simply discredit the historical accuracy of the Old Testament without having to grapple with the fact that the Israelites were able to carefully preserve these detailed genealogies.

2. Help to establish an accurate chronology of events. We know from secular history that approximately two thousand years have passed since the coming of Christ. Secular history and archaeology also affirm that roughly two thousand years elapsed from the time of Abraham to the time of Christ. In Luke 3:23-34, Luke presents a genealogy of Jesus in which he includes 55 generations within the period of time falling between Abraham and Christ. If each generation spans about 40 years, we have approximately 2000 years from Abraham to Christ. Luke continues his genealogical record from Abraham all the way back to Adam, which covers twenty generations (Luke 3:34-38). Since Genesis 5:1-32 provides the ages of those mentioned in Luke’s genealogy, we can estimate the time from Adam to Abraham to have been no more than a few thousand years. It is possible to cover this span of time with only twenty generations due to the fact that the ages of the patriarchs mentioned in Genesis 5 often exceed nine hundred years. Since we know that the earth is only five days older than Adam (Gen. 1:1-31; Exod. 20:11), we can be sure that the earth’s age should be referenced in the context of thousands, rather than billions, or even millions, of years.

3. Were necessary in order to keep the Law of Moses. The law of the Old Covenant that God gave Israel at Mt. Sinai made it necessary for the nation of Israel to keep careful genealogical records. One of the key components of the Law of Moses was the Levitical priesthood. God instructed Moses saying, “And thou shalt give the Levites unto Aaron and to his sons: they are wholly given unto him out of the children of Israel. And thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall wait on their priest’s office: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death” (Num. 3:9-10). The only way the Israelites could keep the Law of God was to make sure that the priests were descendants of Aaron, of the tribe of Levi. And, the only way to be make sure of that was to keep genealogical records. Because of this, we should not be surprised that God commanded Moses to make a careful record of the families of the Levites (Num. 3:14-39). Correct genealogical records had to be maintained in order to ensure that the priests were selected from the proper tribe and family. 

4. Are not important under the New Covenant. The only genealogies recorded in the New Testament are the two genealogies of Christ found in Matthew 1 and Luke 3, respectively. These genealogies are necessary in order to show the fulfillment of prophecy concerning the family line of Christ. However, the New Testament includes no other genealogies beyond these. There is no longer a need to keep track of the families of the priests, since the priesthood and law have been changed (Heb. 7:12). Genealogical records are conspicuously absent throughout the New Testament. We do not have genealogical records of the apostles and evangelists of the New Testament, nor do we need them. In fact, the apostle Paul warned Titus to “avoid foolish questions, and genealogies”(Tit. 3:9). He gave similar instructions to Timothy (1 Tim. 1:4). Under the gospel, genealogies are of no spiritual importance, since we are to “rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh” (Phil. 3:3).

Conclusion

The genealogical records presented in the Bible serve an important purpose in unfolding the story of mankind’s redemption, and in upholding the historical accuracy and validity of the Scriptures. Before you skip over those    genealogies, remember that God put them there for a reason, for “his work is perfect” (Deut. 32:4).

2 Wesley St. #5, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M8Y 2W3 www.preachthegospel.com

By Joshua Gurtler

A young preacher in the south preaches a sermon on a common error taught by brethren today. Following the sermon, he is pulled aside by an older member of the church and instructed, “It’s OK to expose one’s error as long as you don’t mention his name.” When the evangelist pointed out that teachers of error were named throughout the New Testament, the member said, “True, but this was only done by apostles. And you, sir, are not an apostle.” (See Mike Willis’ multi-part series entitled “You Are Not An Apostle” beginning with the March 2, 2000 issue of Truth Magazine.)

A young preacher in the southwest delivers a lesson in which he discusses a common error taught on divorce and remarriage and exposes one prominent teacher of this doctrine. Following the lesson, on more than one occasion, the young evangelist was publicly castigated to the point of tears and severely threatened that from now on he speak to no man concerning this teacher of error. These members included deacons of that church.

Though the aforementioned events occurred to my brother and me, similar situations are being replicated by brethren all over our great land. In regards to the mentioning of a current teacher of error, a brother recently told me, “I think this brother has been beaten into the ground enough. Isn’t it time for a little relief?” Another brother told me he no longer wanted to hear me mention the doctrine and names of brethren in error. He said “listening to brothers bash other brothers in Christ is not encouraging to me.” Can you imagine Timothy telling the apostle, “Paul, I think we’ve beaten these poor Judaizers into the ground enough, isn’t it time for a little relief?” Or the disciples to Jesus, “Lord, listening to Jewish brethren bash their brothers is not encouraging to us.” Such would be unheard of in the Holy Writ, but is commonplace in the church today. In this regard, do we see approved apostolic examples for exposing error, the teacher of such, or both? If so, we then have the authority to warn others, as Paul said, “Let us walk by the same rule, let us be of the same mind. Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern. For many walk, of whom I have told you often (my emphasis jg) and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil. 3:16-18; 4:9). 

Exposing Error

The Scripture is replete with examples of exposing damnable heresy. This fact is abundantly clear to all good Bible students based on just one epistle. Paul’s letter to Corinth is full of examples in this regard (1 Cor. 1:12, 13; 5:1; 6:1; 8:7). Let’s bear in mind that Paul was not a member of this autonomous church to whom he was writing. Rather he was, as we are authorized, to lovingly, albeit harshly, expose and rebuke them concerning their present condition.

Exposing The Teacher And His Error

Even though good students of the Scripture are also privy to this fact, far too many church leaders and Bible teachers are either ignorant of, or have been deluded into thinking that Christians are forbidden from warning others about an errorist and his heresy. Nothing could be further from the truth. Notice the following teachers exposed by our Lord and other New Testament disciples.

• Matt. 15 and 23 — The Pharisees for binding traditions.
• Mark 6:18 — Herod for having his brother’s wife.
• Acts 13:8-10 — Elymas for withstanding teachers of the truth. 
• 1 Timothy 1:20 — Hymenaeus and Alexander for blasphemy.
• 2 John 9 — Diotrophes for refusing the apostles doctrine.
• 2 Timothy 2:17 — Hymenaeus and Philetus for error concerning the resurrection.
• Revelation 2:14 — Those in Pergamum for holding the teaching of Balaam.
• Revelation 2:20 — Jezebel for teaching people to commit acts of immorality.

Exposing The Teacher Himself

Although we have just as much scriptural justification for exposing the teacher of error alone as we do the previous two categories, Christians who do such are oftentimes opposed and exposed for this practice. This is commonly done by other Christians who will correct us for naming the errorist and then turn around and expose and name us to others in the process (Rom. 2:21-23). Such has been my experience. Let’s examine some teachers that were named without mentioning the error.

The Pharisees, Sadducees and Herod (Mark 8:15; Matt. 16:6)

In warning his followers about the teachers of error, Christ warned, “Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod.” Matthew includes also the Sadducees. What did their leaven, influence, and doctrine consist of? We, of course, know this from Christ’s subsequent teaching and it is quite possible that the disciples knew it as well. But the fact remains that there were certain situations that Christ deemed it important to expose the teacher without exposing his error on the same occasion.

The Party of the Circumcision (Phil. 3:2) 

“Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation!” The NASB says, “. . . beware of the false circumcision.” Vine says this expression comes from the Greek katatome meaning concision or mutilation. It is understood that Paul was making reference to the Judaizing teachers who bound circumcision and other particulars of the Old Law. We know that was their teaching and no doubt the brethren in Philippi did as well. This does not, however, change the fact that Paul exposed this group of teachers to the Philippians alone without mentioning their error.

Nicolaitans (Rev. 2:15)

The final example we wish to look at is the Apostle John where he warns the church at Pergamum concerning the Nicolaitans whose teaching was held by some of the members there. Who was this group of teachers and what did they teach? I have an idea. Many faithful brethren have varying ideas, and no doubt you do as well. Who is correct? Since there is no other mention of this group outside of history and tradition, and since John named not the error but only the group, it is impossible for us to ascertain exactly what they taught. Because John named not the doctrine of this group but the group itself, he made evident the fact that certain situations call for the exposure of the teacher without mentioning the error, with the goal of the saving of souls in mind.

While the Scriptures teach us to expose teachers of darkness and their error, let us not lose sight that it also teaches us to speak “the truth in love,” letting our “speech always be with grace, seasoned with salt that you may know how you ought to answer each one” and to “become all things to all men that I might by all means save some” (Eph. 4:15; Col. 4:6; 1 Cor. 9:26). Though the mockers may scoff and the heathen may rail, let us continue to expose that which is wrong in the hopes of snatching but one from the fire which will burn with an eternal fervor.

2520 Tallapoosa St., Notasulga, Alabama 36866