Our modern-day laws are the results of centuries of refinement, learning, and trial-and-
error. We can trace their roots back to some of the earliest civilizations, namely, Hammurabi’s
Babylonian empire. Beginning here, we can follow their growth up through the Persians, Greeks,
and Romans. The Romans’ Law of the Twelve Tables especially is where we begin to find laws
that seem more civilized. While we can find early, secular laws that bear similarities to our
modern laws, their dictates fall short of God’s Word, which has ever been the best example of
justice and law.
Hammurabi, king of the Babylonian empire, found that he needed a code of laws that
could be used to govern his kingdom without his direct intervention. Creating the Code of
Hammurabi, he attempted to set the standard for the behavior of law-abiding citizens.
Hammurabi’s law states that its primary goal is to “to rule over men, to give the protection of
right to the land, I did right and righteousness in…, and brought about the well-being of the
oppressed” (King, 2008). He claims to have received this purpose directly from the gods, and his
laws he received from the god Shamash. His polytheistic religious system, which holds to the
belief that all natural forces are mystical and divine, shows its weaknesses blatantly in the second
law, which to summarize, says that if someone is accused of a crime, he should jump into the
river. If he sinks, he is guilty. If he floats, he is innocent, and the accuser is punished instead.
Laws such as this one show that Hammurabi’s kingdom still primarily depended on the authority
of the gods to enforce his will, and that their understanding of the natural world around them was
still undeveloped. Hammurabi tried to provide a means of justice for his people, but Hammurabi
was limited by the knowledge and belief systems of his culture.
In Contrast, the Roman Laws of the Twelve Tables seem much more grounded in realism
and draw their authority from a civil government instead of the mysterious and mythical gods.
The twelve tables do not rely on random chance or the will of divine beings to dispense justice,
instead, they depend on their learning and experience to give them wisdom on how to judge
court cases. Table two says: “500>as-pieces shall be the sum when the object of dispute under
solemn deposit is valued at 1,000 in bronze or more, 50 pieces when less” (Warmington, 1938).
The Romans, having centuries more learning and experience than the Babylonians, went as far as
setting down common deposits and bail amounts. The laws outlined by the Romans are another
step forward in trying to find a truly just set of codes that apply equally to all. However, they still
fall short of the mark, as there are multiple instances of extreme measures. For instance, Table
three denotes that if a man is unable to pay his debts after his 30-day grace period, he can be put
in chains and held by the lender for up to three market days. If by the end of this holding period
the debt still has not been paid, the lender can enact partis secanto, which (if you follow the
older translations from Latin) means that the debtor will be cut into pieces. Such brutality is
common in Roman law.
Both Hammurabi’s Code and the Law of the Twelve Tables put forward new concepts of
justice that apply to all. Both sets of law take a brutal approach to the value of life, and instead of
valuing it and protecting it, they instead cheapen it. They both acknowledge that people can be
property, and both use capital punishment in response to crimes that modern courts respond
much more gently to. Both sets also viewed nobility as set apart from the common people. While
the Twelve Tables gave those nobles more responsibilities towards any commoners that might
dwell on their property, they and Hammurabi viewed the nobility as higher than the commoners,
and as such, more deserving of privileges.
Hammurabi and Rome tried to create justice in a broken world, without going to the
source of righteousness. Neither could understand that the Law, as God created it, is designed to
protect the righteous and encourage the followers of God. Mark 12:31 says: “‘Love your
neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these” (Mark 12:31, NIV). The
Word of God itself commands love more than anything else; nothing is more important in God’s
eyes than His children showing love to one another. God’s Law, written with this in mind, makes
it clear that, while it condemns, the Law is designed to be a protection for God’s followers, as
well as a standard to follow. Hammurabi’s Code and the Law of the Twelve Tables both mete
out destruction on those who do wrong, but they dole this punishment out in a desire to punish
and inflict suffering on those who have broken the law, not out of a desire to guide and protect
those who are faithful.
“For the LORD loves the just and will not forsake his faithful ones. Wrongdoers will be
completely destroyed; the offspring of the wicked will perish” (Psalm 37:28, NIV). The Law of
God exists to protect His chosen people and provide support to those who follow His commands.
This purpose sets it above all earthly laws and makes it the highest standard for all nations to
follow. Hammurabi tried to follow the standard set by pagan gods, and in the end achieved only
a flawed result. The Roman Law of the Twelve Tables attempted to follow a standard set by
men, and again fell short of perfection. Only the law given to us by God achieves what it set out
to do and guides us in righteousness and justice.
