James: the better wizard?/Biblical mistranslations, & Levitical rules

[Brooks A. Rowlett]

No: HPFGUIDX 1475

> James was first in his class at Hogwarts, wasn't he? 

Welll.....what we know is that James was Head Boy but remember Lily was
Head Girl, which also means something!   And 'cleverest' student isn't
the same as 'best wizard'.   More below after a diversion....

I am given to understand that the Commandment which we generally read as
"Thou shalt not kill" actually would be more accurately translated into
English as "Thou shalt not murder" which implies that there is *not* a
restriction, or contradiction of that commandment, and a government
(including a theocracy such as the Mosaic Hebrews) employing capital
punishment.  Murder is *unlawful taking of life*.

The translation would be from Hebrew or even Aramaic.


By the way, the posting the other day on the 'Old Testament'
(specifically Leviticus) 'rules' and how obviously we don't follow them
today, yet 'God's law is unchanging' - in fact most of the examples
cited are indeed overturned in the New Testament. These include the
unclean food constraints; possibly by extension of that one, the ritual
female impurity; certainly animal sacrifice, and the constraint on
priests and impurity approaching the alter/presence of God.  Also, with
reference to the Sabbath observation and the 'kill' commandment,
execution is reserved to the government, not to individuals.  So that
one is also countered.  

The remaining ones are slavery, which is not overturned in the New
Testament.  But on the other hand, Mediterranean civilizations' slavery
was not the same as Arab, or Western hemisphere slavery that most
immediately comes to our minds - for one thing, Mediterranean slaves,
unlike US blacks, were not forbidden to be taught to read and write:
indeed slaves generally were considered more valuable if they could do
so.  For another, slaves in at least some of the Mediterranean
civilizations were entitled to handle masters' or even possess their own
money, and could save theiss and eventually buy their freedom.  

At any rate, those Levitical examples make the uninformed look at Faith
as ridiculous.  Which is probably their intent.  Which is a pity, as
they are taken out of context.  Of course, someone who has studied, can
demolish that misinformation, by pointing out exactly where those
Levitical rules are overturned and made obsolete, in the Gospels and the
Book of Acts.  I make no claim to this degree of study - I just remember
enough to know that Christians are generally taught to look at Leviticus
as mostly historical, since the New Testament clearly and even
specifically overturns a large majority of those rules (and makes life
much simpler)!   There are real Biblical inconsistencies, but the
'shalt-not-kill' commandment is not one of them, because of the
translation; and those Levitical rules are indeed changed later.  A God
Who cannot change WOULD be dead.

And this response is no more off topic than the original post, or the
related thread, to which it responds..... and if that great fantasy
writer CS Lewis can also be a Christian apologist, and argue points
about theology with Tolkien, I have some Inkling (nudge, nudge) that
this list can indulge that a bit....especially in the case of pointing
out mis-statements or inaccuracies.  I am myself intrigued to see the
'poisoner' bit, because although I knew it I had forgotten it.  Here's
another one to ponder - the word translated in Genesis 1 as "day" can
also mean "an (unspecified) period of time."


To get back ON topic, I also do not see James' reaction to Voldy's
attack (he's the one who faces Voldy & tells Lily to take Harry and run)
to be indicative of anything other than good old fashioned male 'protect
the woman and child' instinct - possibly not at all affected by taking
any time to reflect on whether he or she is the better wizard.  I hope I
would move to place myself between a female and a threat, even if I
*know* she has a black belt in some martial art whereas i am an
overweight wimp with a bad knee.  That is a HUMAN trait, a valuable one
(protecting the females and young, especially one's own, is an
evolutionary positive for the species and the individual, even if the
protector must sacrifice himself) and it is highly doubtful it would be
bred out of wizards.


> As for JKR wondering why no one ever begs her not to kill off
> Hermione..


No, she is COMPLAINING/exasperated that no-one ever begs her not to kill
off Hermione (because Hermione is based on her, she also said....).  And
by the way, *I* certainly get no sense of impending doom hanging around
Ron..... even accounting for all the fates he cooks up to satisfy
Trelawney's homework assignments!! 

 For that matter, a 'doom' in  older usage is a *fate*, (and not
necessarily a deadly fate).  There is clearly a Doom around Harry, in
that older sense!

-Brooks