View source for Translations:Was God's law available prior to Sinai?/3/en

# The plain "blood for blood" statement in Gen. 9:6 is not sufficient, in itself, to guide the type of action which YHWH is commanding. Consider the following questions which Noah might have had, after hearing this simple statement:
## ''Any'' shedding of blood? Or is "blood" merely a metonym<ref>A metonym is a figure of speech in which something is referred to by the name of another closely-related thing.</ref> for killing?
## ''Any'' killing? Or is killing in self-defense lawful? How about killing in defense of others?
## What if the "shedding of blood" is accidental (an axe head flies off: Deut. 19:5)? Is there still blood-guilt?
## What are the judicial procedures which must be followed when rendering YHWH's retributive justice?  How many witnesses are required? What if the witnesses lie? What would be the civil penalty for false testimony in court?<br/><br/>I could multiply questions, but you get the point. God doesn't just give ambiguous commands to kill in response to killing. He supplies additional guidance, and he must have done so to Noah. In scripture, we have a record of <em>four</em> separate instances in which even Moses had to go back and ask YHWH directly for clarification on the law which he had been given.  Are we expected to believe that Noah would know everything which a civil judge needed to know merely by hearing YHWH's sentence in Genesis 9:6?