What does "eye for an eye" mean?
112829
The meaning is a little broader than simply revenge.  The term "eye for an eye" appears in Exodus 21:24-25.  It is about compensation for injuries and also criminal penalties (i.e. let the punishment fit the crime).
678400
The upholding of the rights of criminals is the paradox of justice. Perhaps if people just adhered to the lex talionis we should not have so many ciminals and terrorists now. The lex talionis says "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." But some philosophers injected the idea that "The law of an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind." \n\nSo here we are gripped by man's inability to see the distinction between real justice and justice denied.
1100095
A persons eyes are a window to the soul. You need to pay attention When talking with someone to see if they have eye contact when confronted. Hope this helps.
1025652
An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.
1103712
No.......eye for an eye
1091801
it means to see something for what it is.  nothing more, nothing less.
353920
Copied from the referenced website:\n\nFor the answer, we have to go a bit further back in time. Since the 17th century, "bull's-eye" has been used as a term for almost anything small and circular, especially if it protrudes slightly, forming a hemispherical bump resembling the protruding eye of a bull or cow. Thus, at various times, "bull's-eye" has been used to designate a thick piece of glass set into the deck of a ship to illuminate the lower decks, a one-crown coin of British currency, a globular piece of candy, and a small circular window, among other things. So although the spot in the center of a target doesn't protrude like a real "bull's eye," it is small and circular and thus fit the popular definition of "bull's-eye."
123853
Just like all Scripture, this one too, is often misquoted by people who do not understand the context or the meaning. So, while it's sad, we need to pray for them to have their eyes opened and try to gently instruct them (1Corinthians 12:31) "in a more excellent way". \n\nUnless you undersstand the culture of the time, it would be easy to misunderstand the verse. When God gave this law to Israel through Moses, it was set as a "Maximum" penalty. In other words "you shall take no MORE than an eye for an eye".\nExodus 21 goes on to say that if you strike a servant of yours and they lose an eye or a tooth, you should set them free on account of the eye or the tooth.\nLeviticus 24:22 (repeating the same command) the also says that it applies without respect to persons (whether a native or a stranger).\nWhen Jesus Quoted this passage he went on to explain that to fulfill this law means not taking any vengeance.\nMatthew 5:39-49
750119
I think the word you are looking for is typical christian.\n\nLooking past the beam in their own eye to point out the speck of dust in the eye of another.\n\nLove and blessings Don
718058
What you speak of is called Decepcion Detection.  The actual movement of the eyes represents the brain trying to see (uper right), hear (Lower right), or feel (upper left), the truth.
421249
I'm not totally opposed to the idea, but you gotta remember that in the old days, these punishments were meted out on site and without the benefit of "interference" from an impartial judicial system.  While "eye for an eye" would certainly cause some criminals to take a closer look at their actions, it would still have to be administered carefully and minimally, much in the way the death penalty is handled today.
1105266
Eye for eye vs turn the other check-- The eye for an eye thingwas under the old testament. we are not under that law. The same way we make laws today and then change them because the needs of our society change, so did they.\n\nThe camel thing. thats not a contradiction. You may say that we lack evidence to prove that camels were used but there is not one part of the bible contradicting another.\n\nCain, Abel, and where did the other come from. The bible is not a day by day account. this part skips ahead and tells the signifacant parts. Seen from a historical perspective the other births are not crucial.\n\nBlasphemy- I doubt that you done worse than Saul/Paul. So get to a good solid church and learn more about Christ\n\nThe trinity-Father/ Son /and Holy Ghost-- Okay lets say just for the sake of arguement that an all powerful God decided to take on two different physical forms. What would stop him? Remember he is all powerful. Would that second form not be God also? Now this God who is not limited by time, space or anything else is also not limited by his physical form. He is also able to be spirit as well.  There you have it in a nutshell.\n\nThe genesis you may eat from any tree thing is pretty simple. the language may throw some off but there is no contradiction. God basically tells Adam you can eat from any tree but that one.\n\nSkipping ahead a little\nBecause God changed a law does not mean that he made a mistake and therefore is not God. It simply means that the people were capable of following different laws at different times. At one time the best thing for them was one law and at another time it was better that they have a different law.\n\n2 versions of creation man firstthen animals or animals first then man-  -        One way of telling a story is in chronological terms. that is you list things out exactly in the order in which they occured. but that is not the only way.You can also give a brief summary and then go back and tell thinngs by order of importance or by the way those things go together. Think of the way you describe your house. One person would start with one room and then go on to the next and so on. Another would Describe it as follows\nFirst we did the foundation/ then we did the framing /then we did the electric.  Point is both would be accurate.\n\nJohn 6:44 and John 14:6 do not contradict either. Both are saying that the way to God is thru Jesus. But why would we be drawn to them. Because Jesus glorified God and God glorified Jesus so that we would be drawn to him.
769802
it means "i like your eyes." :) and do u like this person? b/c if u do, you could say u like their eyes 2. tell me what u want to say back. ill try and check back. good luck :)
329389
This sounds like a "spin-off" of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".  "Eye of the beholder" are the key words.  It simply means that each individual perceives reality based on a unique set of experiences or internal and external influences.  Any two individuals may "see" the same thing, but each will interpret or internalize what they see through their own unique process.  Maybe that is why people don't always "see eye-to-eye".
642625
to detect with the eyes\n\n\n1 a : to detect with the eyes b : to detect with senses other than vision\n2 : to recognize or identify as separate and distinct : DISCRIMINATE\n3 : to come to know or recognize mentally\nintransitive senses : to see or understand the difference
844437
Not likely.  Our country follows the Moses Law & not the Jesus Law.  Moses said "an eye for an eye" where as Jesus said "turn the other cheek."  Which do you think we are more likely to follow as a nation?
812737
I'm not 100% sure, the wording is a little ambiguous.Maybe this will help.\n\nhttp://www.eye-floaters.com/images/eyeanat.gif