Compare And Contrast The Code Of Hammurabi

Comparing and Contrasting Two Hammurabi code of law Paintings. In my Final Project I will begin comparing the two works of art and consider how the themes which I have chosen and they both share finds discoveries in contemporary ideas of events that have happened. The visual works of art is by L.W. King that is titled The Code of Hammurabi. The Code of Hammurabi was painted in approximately 1790 B.C in Parson, France and represents a Editio princeps painting style. The Code of Hammurabi was written in a style that is only used in sculptures and inscriptions with formal or solemn character, the laws were made in a more simplified style called ancient Babylon italics are written in short columns that is read from the top down.

¥ Contrast & Compare---

¥ Justice.  Given that the image of God is in all men, and given that the law of God is inscribed on the hearts of men, it comes as no surprise that some of the laws in The Code are just.
¥ Civil order.  Whenever a person would apply The Codes of Hammurabi and Moses, they each offers a recipe for a civil order.
¥ The Lex Talionis, or “the principle that a person who has injured another person is similarly injured in retribution” (hat tip to Wikipedia for the helpful, concise definition.)  There is a lot of eye-for-an-eye type language in The Code, which also pops up in Moses, too.    

The laws are divided into different sections; each one explains a trial that compare with a general law. Although it was not the underlying purpose in which they were written; nonetheless it acknowledges important information for us today in affiliation to agriculture, society in its habits, trade, sex, politics, military life, inheritance, adoptions, the law over the private property rights as well as other conditions of the private life of citizens. I will point out the themes and tones of the works of art, and some of the knowledge and positions of the main characters of each. I will join together these to some contemporary knowledge. Especially, those who have had their faith challenged by scientific theories, and some other planned events in the world. The key differences between Mosaic Law and the Hammurabi Code are equitably significant. The Law of Moses covers more than the Code of Hammurabi. The Law of Moses is more than a legal code; it speaks of sin and responsibility to God. The Hammurabi Code and other ancient laws do not do this. The Code of Hammurabi focused exclusively on criminal and civil laws and meted out harsh, and sometimes brutal, punishments. The Law of Moses provided justice, but it also dealt with spiritual laws and personal and national holiness.
Hammurabi, King of Babylon reunited Mesopotamia and instituted the Code of Hammurabi, a comprehensive set of laws addressing nearly all aspects of both civil and criminal offenses.
Hammurabi is portrayed receiving the laws directly from Shamash the sun god. (a parallel to Moses can be made here). Shamash is the dominate figure—he is seated on his throne, wears a crown composed of four pairs of horns, holds a ring and staff, and has flames issuing from his shoulders. Although Hammurabi is subservient to the god he still makes a powerful authority statement by addressing the god directly. Even though he has his hand raised in reverence he shows that he has a personal relationship with the gods while mere mortals do not.

Similar--- Both Hammurabi and Moses recorded a complex system of laws that were unique to their times. Hammurabi claimed to receive his code from the Babylonian god of justice, Shamash. Moses received God’s Law atop Mount Sinai directly from Yahweh, the God of the Israelites. There are some similarities between the Mosaic Law and the Code of Hammurabi, as would be expected from two legislative systems. However, their significant differences demonstrate the baselessness of the charge that Moses copied from the Code of Hammurabi.----

Differences--There is a dramatic difference in perspective between Hammurabi and Moses.

One’s focus is horizontal, while the other’s is vertical. Archaeologist Alfred Hoerth, author of Archaeology and the Old Testament, says, “The Old Testament law code is religiously oriented, while others are civil. The Mesopotamians believed the god Shamash gave Hammurabi his law code so people could get along with one another. In the Bible, the law code was given primarily so people could get along with God.”---

--.I will compare the themes and tones of the works of art, as well as the experiences and attitudes of the main roles of each individual that represents the paintings in the above paintings. I will connect these to the experiences of the believers, that particular in those who have had their faith disputed by some ideas, theories, and some events in the world today. --

The Stele Law Code of Hammurabi, an ancient Babylonian artifact, is a slightly over seven-foot sculpture made from diorite and engraved with the code of laws written by L.W. King Hammurabi of Babylon. This code of laws was written to cover just about any possible type of law for general society, particularly as dealing with criminal acts. This set of laws primitively dictated by King Hammurabi had to be rendered into several different languages around the empire, but the stele engraved with it is one of the greatest records we have of Babylonian

law
Both Hammurabi and Moses recorded a complex system of laws which were unique to their times.

The discrepancy between Mosaic Law and the Hammurabi Code are equally important. For example, the Law of Moses went far beyond the Code of Hammurabi in that it was entrenched in the worship of one God, supreme over all (Deuteronomy 6:4-5). The moral predominant of the Old Testament are based on a conscientious God who demanded that mankind, created in His image, live equitably. The Law of Moses is more than a legal code; it speaks of sin and authority to God. The Hammurabi Code and other ancient laws do not do this. Hammurabi claimed to receive his code from the Babylonian god of justice, Shamash. Moses received God’s Law a top Mount Sinai precisely from Jehovah, the God of the Israelites. The Code of Hammurabi focused exclusively on criminal and civil laws and meted out harsh, and sometimes brutal, discipline. In this way, Hammurabi has more in common with Draco than with Moses. The Law of Moses contributed justice, but it also dealt with spiritual laws and personal and national holiness. As a result, the Mosaic Law dealt with the cause of crime, not just its effects. The Mosaic Law elevates the value of human life, and its whole tenor is more sympathetic than that of the Hammurabi Code. The spiritual dimension is what makes the Law of Moses exclusive. The black stone stela containing Hammurabi’s Code was carved from a single, four-ton slab of diorite, a durable but incredibly

difficult stone for carving. At its top is a two-and-a-half-foot relief carving of a standing Hammurabi receiving the law—symbolized by a measuring rod and tape—from the seated Shamash, the Babylonian god of justice. It appears to be a simple, large, black stone stela, shaped like an index finger, with a straightforward relief of two figures at the top. The rest of the seven-foot-five-inch monument is covered with columns of chiseled cuneiform script. In his book Highlights of Archaeology in Bible Lands, Fred Wight writes, “The Mosaic Law gives strong insistence to the recognition of sin as being the cause of the destruction of a nation. Such a thought is entirely inadequate in Hammurabi’s Code. . . . The great fundamental assumption of the laws of God in the Hebrew Bible may be summed up in the words: ‘Be ye holy, for I am holy’ [Leviticus 11:45]. Such a principle as this was utterly unknown to the Babylonians as seen in their law code.”
• The Code of Hammurabi is a well-preserved Babylonian law code of ancient Mesopotamia, dating back to about 1780 BC. It is one of the oldest deciphered writings of significant length in the world. The sixth Babylonian king, Hammurabi, enacted the code, and partial copies exist on a man-sized stone stele and various clay tablets. The Code consists of 282 laws, with scaled punishments, adjusting "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" (lex talionis) as graded depending on social status, of slave versus free man. Nearly one-half of the Code deals with matters of contract, establishing, for example, the wages to be paid to an ox driver or a surgeon. Other provisions set the terms of a transaction, establishing the liability of a builder for a house that collapses, for example, or property that is damaged while left in the care of another. A third of the code addresses issues concerning household and family relationships such as inheritance, divorce, paternity, and sexual behavior. Only one provision appears to impose obligations on an official; this provision establishes that a judge who reaches an incorrect decision is to be fined and removed from the bench permanently. A few provisions address issues related to military service. Hammurabi ruled for nearly forty-two years, c. 1792 to 1750 BC according to the Middle chronology. In the preface to the law, he states, "Anu and Bel called by name me, Hammurabi, the exalted prince, who feared Marduk, the patron god of Babylon (The Human Record, Andrea & Over field 2005), to bring about the rule in the land." On the stone slab there are forty-four columns and twenty- eight paragraphs that contained 282 laws. The laws follow along the rules of 'an eye for an eye'. "An eye for an eye ..." is a paraphrase of Hammurabi's Code, a collection of 282 laws inscribed on an upright stone pillar. The code was found by French archaeologists in 1901 while excavating the ancient city of Susa, which is in modern-day Iran.

This theme of faith in the faith of adversity is relevant for the code of law in believers today. Believers could face many crises for focusing on the epic of law and some events that may happen within. Which might result and spread the beliefs of others. The percentage of Americans who believe in themselves and the affiliations rising in todays society might leave no room for the miracles of which could happen within the world we live in today. While there is some reasoning with the scientific explanations about this certain works of art, they could be disputed in the remaining reasons...