christian_soldier
Member
Drew said:On what basis do you conclude that "him" is the smiter? "Him" obviously refers to the thief.
Consider the following simplified version of the statement:
If a thief is found breaking into a house and he is smitten so that he dies, there shall be no blood sacrifice for him.
Obviously the "him" is the thief. Your interpretation is simply not valid given the conventions of English.
And the fact that Proverbs 25:26 does not exclude your interpretation does not mean that it supports your interpretation.
Neither of these texts provide any support for the use of violence in self-defence.
I don't disagree that him is the thief! There will be no blood shed on his behalf, i.e., no penalty for smiting him.
Hey, leave my interpretation alone. 8-)