closeicon

An eye for an eye? A no for no.

November 24, 2016 22:54

In a comment piece on Express Online, Chris Royford-Davis led the cheers for the Dubai assassination widely believed to be Mossad's handiwork.

His article, entitled “Why Can’t This Country Follow Israel’s Lead” included the paragraph:
“World opinion means nothing – whatever London, Washington or Damascus may say the Israelis are convinced that they are right. An eye for an eye is the most basic concept of natural justice, dating back 4,000 years to Babylonian times and is promoted three times in the Old Testament. Even in the New Testament Jesus says: Those who take up the sword shall die by the sword.”

I can’t help feeling uneasy about the reference to an “eye for eye”, even if he is citing it approvingly. Too often, it has been used to typecast Jews as vindictive and unforgiving (usually in contrast to the 'turn-the-other-cheek' values of the New Testament). But at least, here he quotes the New Testament in support of his views, too.

November 24, 2016 22:54

Want more from the JC?

To continue reading, we just need a few details...

Want more from
the JC?

To continue reading, we just
need a few details...

Get the best news and views from across the Jewish world Get subscriber-only offers from our partners Subscribe to get access to our e-paper and archive