Re: [GTh] GTH just #109 Inheritance and dedication
- --- In gthomas@y..., BitsyCat1@a... [John Moon] wrote:
>>There is the matter of Jewish Law (Mosaic Law). This would be amatter of Inheritance. Even if the Son sold the Field It would remain
first to the Nearest Kinsman. Then outside of the Kinsmen. It would
stay within the same tribe.
There is Mosaic Law to prevent the Passage of Land to other Lev 25:
23 The Land shall not be sold forever for the Land is Mine and you
are strangers and sojourners with me Lev 25:24 and in all the land of
your possession ye shall grant a redemption for the Land. (The
Sojourner and strangers may Be Israel itself) See Leviticus 25:25. It
forbids (As I read it) the permanent sale and would return to the
seller come the Jubilee year.
Lev 25:34. But the field of the pasture lands of their cities may not
be sold for it is their perpetual possession.
Lev 25:28 But if he is not able to restore it to him then that which
is sold shall remain in the hand of him that hath bought it until the
year of the Jubilee: and then he shall return it to his possession.
Therefore technically the Buyer only has this field until the
Jubilee. The profit of Interest (of a found treasure?) [...] would be
entirely his (The new owners) [and thus] One unknown to the Father
and the Son.
Also consider the Leviticus 25:35 and 36 .... Take thou no interest
from him or profit but fear thy God that thou brother should live
Lev 25:37 Thou shalt not give him thy money on interest (this of
course to a poor brother).
However it would appear that the Land actually never leaves the
Owners (Tribes) possession.
Leviticus 25:26-28 Even if the man does not redeem the land it is
returned to the owner upon the Jubilee.<<
This is an interesting question, but I am not so sure that such
biblical laws were actually enforcable under the governments that
ruled Palestine since at least the Greek period. I was recently
reading a couple books on the subject of land tenure (by Jack Pastor
and David(?) Feinsey) bjut I am away from my notes for another week.
The books were recommended to me by Nikos Kokkinos over in the
Ioudaios-list some months ago, and I found them very enlightening. If
you can wait, I can get back to you about titles, or perhaps others
here can supply these details for you.
In short, laws and practices regarding land tenure are controlled by
the ruling government. It is possible that the Persian administration
officially sanctioned an aspect of the Law, but the certainty depends
on how much credit one assigns to the Persian "edicts" found in Ezra-
Nehemiah. There is also one or two later, hearsay, references to this
supposed law in non-biblical sources, but these may be dependent upon
The Greeks who conquered the Persians had a policy of considering
all lands conquered by war ("spear-won" they called it) as belonging
to the ruler personally. He could either approve of the current
owners (in exchange for their loyalty) or distribute it to others,
such as government ministers. Large tracts of the best land were set
aside for the ruler's private estates, and this was often the source
of these rulers great personal wealth. Greek cities would have tracts
of land associated with them as well. Sometimes land was granted to
groups of retired soldiers, etc.
The rulers could, if they chose to, sell plots, but why should they?
While significant private land ownership still existed, even at the
small free-holder level, the prevailing system seemed to be to lease
or rent land to individuals in return for either a portion of the
crop (share-cropping, mainly the system employed by large private
landholders) or for a fixed price (very common for the ruler to do,
since it made estimating revenues simpler - hey, rulers have expenses
It may be better to call these people "landHOLDERS" rather
than "landOWNERS." Possession was 9/10 of the law, to use a modern
saying. Could some of these large landholders have leased or rented
out land with some provision for Mosaic laws? Sure. Was it real
common? Maybe not. The surviving deeds, etc, are hard to interpret.
Some of the deeds with stipulations that most closely resemble the
ones in the Mosaic Law were actually found in Nabatean territory, and
those found in Palestine often specifically negate provisions of
Mosaic Law (and not in the manner of the Prosbul of the Mishna,
Cleveland, Ohio, US of A