The Ten Commandments (2)
We can probably all agree that the ten commandments as listed in Exodus 34 are mostly not that relevant to modern life. So let's take a look at the "traditional" Ten Commandments (ie., those from Exodus 20).
Are they good law?
| 1. I am the Lord your God... You shall have no other gods before me. 2. You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to thousands who love me and keep my commandments. |
As a Christian, I would have said: "We have to make God number one - for our own good. God is here just telling us what is good for us."
But notice the appalling injustice, the severity of the punishments given. Why should another person (my great-grandchild) suffer for my crime? Is this really intended to be for anyone's good? Or is it a scribe writing on behalf of a dictator - gaining obedience from the people by getting them all to submit to the one god. A dictator would find it difficult claiming to be the mouthpiece of several gods.
Ayn Rand said: "The Argument from Intimidation is a confession of intellectual impotence."
God so far appears insecure, vindictive, vengeful and dictatorial.
| 3. You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name. |
This outlaws free speech. Any decent leader without a defective personality allows free speech, debate, feedback, and yes, even verbal abuse.
At least, that is true today; it wasn't in the time of Moses and it isn't in theocracies like Saudi Arabia where you can still be given the death penalty for blasphemy. Enlightened, civilised societies and rulers allow free speech.
| 4.
Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. On it you shall not do any
work, (includes you, your family, servants, strangers in your midst...) |
Just about everyone on the planet has broken this commandment. So what is the penalty?
The penalty is DEATH:
(Exodus 31:15 Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death.)
If American judges want the 10 commandments posted in their court-rooms, they should also post a list of the penalties - they are barbaric and 3000 years out of date.
Here is the awful story of what happens when such laws are given any authority; imagine this man was your brother, or dad or grandad:
| Now while the sons of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering wood on the sabbath day. Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation; and they put him in custody because it had not been declared what should be done to him. Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp." So all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, just as the LORD had commanded Moses. (Numbers 15:32-36) |
Notice it says "all" the congregation. If this man had been your brother, or dad or grandad, you would have been compelled by Moses (and his henchmen) to throw stones. This was totalitarian government by a murderer - Moses - determined to maintain absolute control over the people.
| 5. Honour your father and mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you. |
This is a good rule - although it has no bearing on modern law and would have no place on a courtroom wall in any "top ten laws".
This commandment had a promise attached. Unfortunately, their god later barred nearly all of the people from entering the promised land - most of them died in the desert. So - he broke that promise.
Very few people need a commandment to make them love and honour their own parents. However, most adolescents go through a rebellious time - this verse has been useful for thousands of years for keeping the kids in their place.
Perhaps a better law might have included the words: "and never abuse your children."
These laws are about keeping power and authority, not protecting the weak.
Here is the dreadful treatment given to a rebellious child under these laws:
| "If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his hometown. "They shall say to the elders of his city, `This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.' "Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death. (Deuteronomy 21:18-21) |
Remember that if you're a teenager! Keep that stereo turned down!
| 6. You shall not kill. |
It is ridiculous to imagine that before the Ten Commandments were written, everyone went around killing people guiltlessly. The human race's moral sense, and its ethics, have evolved over millions of years through cooperation and conflict. They are still evolving.
Dan Barker - "Laws against murder and manslaughter, based on self-preservation and social stability, have found their way into almost every culture."
This is the first one that might appear in a modern courtroom, but is it a good law?
Dan Barker: "The drawback of this law is its absoluteness - good laws make distinctions..."
It is hopelessly vague. What about in self-defence?, what about in time of war?, what about accidents? what about capital punishment? etc
The New International Version tries to make it more specific and deliberately mis-translates this commandment as "You shall not murder" - in an effort to counter the objections above.
We know the NIV is wrong for the following reason: The Hebrew word used here is ratsach - which can mean murder, slay or accidentally kill. There are other common Hebrew words that can mean similar things - all used interchangeably.
For example, Deuteronomy 4:42 uses ratsach, in the context of "Cities of Refuge"...
| ...where anyone who had killed (ratsach) a person could flee and find refuge if he had unintentionally killed (ratsach) his neighbour without malice aforethought. |
So the NIV has falsely translated this as "murder" - a very specific English word, when in Hebrew it was a general word for "to kill".
Numbers 35:22-24 talks about accidental killings very clearly, using the word ratsach
| But if he pushed him suddenly without enmity, or threw something at him without lying in wait, or with any deadly object of stone, and without seeing it dropped on him so that he died, while he was not his enemy nor seeking his injury ...and he is not his enemy, nor seeking his evil; then the congregation shall judge between the slayer (ratsach) and the blood avenger.. |
Note: the NIV again wrongly translates this as: "the assembly must judge between him and the avenger of blood. In other words, they have avoided translating ratsach here, because of these very objections to the sixth commandment.
| In Exodus 32:27-28 ,just after giving Moses these commandments - god directly causes people to murder each other - in the true sense. This is an horrific passage: He said to them, "Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, `Every man of you put his sword upon his thigh, and go back and forth from gate to gate in the camp, and kill every man his brother, and every man his friend, and every man his neighbor.' " and he said to them, `Thus said Jehovah, God of Israel, Put each his sword by his thigh, pass over and turn back from gate to gate through the camp, and slay each his brother, and each his friend, and each his relation.' So the sons of Levi did as Moses instructed, and about three thousand men of the people fell that day. To understand the true horror of this passage, perhaps you have to be an atheist. I mean, Christians become so desensitised by all the blood in their religion, that I guess they don't feel the dreadfulness and pointlessness of these verses. This was supposedly commanded by the Christian god. Imagine what it was like.... |
Next....
| 7. You shall not commit adultery |
Adultery causes unhappiness and pain. But it is not illegal and should not be. People have free choice about their lives and relationships. This commandment does not belong on a courtroom wall.
The penalty: DEATH, a grossly irrational response to a problem involving three people's personal lives. Today we have counselling and marriage guidance.
| Leviticus 20:10 If a man commits adultery with another man's wife - with the wife of his neighbour - both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. |
If it involves children, it is a very sad state of affairs, but one that is not improved by killing one of the parents.
Today, few denominations will stone you to death for adultery, at least in the UK, but some of them may try to stop you re-marrying after divorce. So, any future happiness that could have been salvaged from a marriage breakdown is effectively ruined by religious inflexibility.
The Christian response:
1. "That was then... god has lifted us, educated us, brought us out of those primitive times."
2. "God hates sin... he was showing us our sinful natures..."
1. In no way does making a barbarous law with such barbaric penalties constitute "education". There is no justification for an "unchanging, all-knowing" god making such crass attempts at legislation.
2. Would a god really toy with the lives of millions of people simply to "show us our sinful natures"?
Would he really put the Jewish race through such horrors, battles, wars, as we see in the Old Testament, simply to give us "illustrations" for sermons?
Here's an idea, maybe a god could have done this:
A god could have said "I forgive you".
After all, that's all I ever do when someone offends me. Particularly someone I love. He could have mended our sinful natures - because he
Origin
I think the whole story of Moses was mythological, although possibly there was once a man by that name. I've explained why, in my essay "Mind Twister".
However, for the purposes of this essay, let's assume that Moses did exist and did lead the Israelites for a while.
First of all, let's not forget that Moses was already a murderer who had hidden the corpse and skulked away (Exodus 2:12). He was now trying to assert control of a horde of hungry people who believed in a god or gods. What a good way to give your voice a bit of authority! Tell them a god gave you the laws!
And more to the point - why should we automatically accept anything as true or noble, when presented to us by a skulking murderer?
If, for example, a known killer presented me with a piece of paper saying: "Killing is bad", I would check it against my own ethics, see that it was okay, then agree with him.
If the same killer gave me the same piece of paper and told me that an invisible being had instructed him to give me it - I would seek out the prison doctor. I may agree with the note's content, but I would still doubt his truthfulness.