I'm reading this book.  It's pretty interesting.  It's called "100 Things You're Not Supposed To Know" by some guy named Russ Kick.  Interesting name too.  hehe

Anyways, one of the things he talks about is the ten commandments.  He says that the ten commandments that are so prominently displayed and thought of as the ones Moses brougt down are actually wrong.  Here's a few clips from the book...

Getting out your King James version, turn to Exodus 20:2-17.  You'll see the familiar list of rules about having no other gods, honoring your parents, not killing or coveting, and so on.  At this point, though, Moses is just repeating to the people what God told him on Mt. Si'nai.  These are not written down in any form.

He goes on to say this...

Later, Moses goes back to the Mount, where God gives him two "tablets of stone" with rules written on them (Exodus 31:18).  But when Moses comes down the mountain lugging his load, he sees people worshipping a statue of a calf, causing him to throw a tantrum and smash the tablets on the ground (Exodus 32:19).

I was never told or taught this.  I was always told that the ten commandments were the ones we're familiar with and they were written in stone.  Like the stone that they used to etch them in at that controversial moment in that courthouse in Alabama.  Or those pictures you see on gifts that depict them on stone.  You know the ones that look like the McDonald's logo if you look just at the top of the tablets.

But he goes on...

In NEITHER of these cases does the Bible refer to "commandments".  In the first instance, they are "words" which "God spake", while the tablets contain "testimony".  It is only when Moses goes back for new tablets that we see the phrase "ten commandments" (Exodus 34:28). 

He then says that the commandments on the tablets are DIFFERENT (significantly different, actually)  than the ones he recited to the people the first time.  Did he bonk his head on the way down the first time?  Or did God do a redo?  I'm not sure.  But like I said it is interesting.  Here are the ten commandments he says were on the tablets...

1. Thou shalt worship no other god.
   
2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
   
3. The feast of unleavened bread thou shalt keep.
   
4. Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest.
   
5. Thou shalt observe the feat of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.
   
6. Thrice in the year shall all your men children appear before the Lord God.
   
7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of sacrifce with leaven.
   
8. Neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning.
   
9. The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the LORD thy God.
   
10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.

I'm just curious.  Is it that the tradition is just carried on because of traditions sake (assuming this is true of course)?  If that is the case, then does that not make it tradition to lie to people and forgo the truth in the name of tradition?  Because if it is then there is a great disservice being done.  People are being taught the wrong rules if that is the case!!!!!!

There were originally 15 Commandments.  Or haven't you seen:

History of the World part 1

I don't see why this is a big deal. This has been known since the book of Exodus was scribed. You've only experienced the lack of good teaching regarding the Word of God.

  I was taught this by the Minister at my local Church basically when I was 5. Youd amazed how much depth there is to the bible when you take the time to read and read and read and read....... 12 times so far for me. At this point it means something totally different to me then when I was 5. Not in a bad way mind you. I actually love the creation scenario in the bible. I was comparing the basic creation scenario to what scientists believe happen and its amazingly accurate.

Originally posted by MarleVVLL

I don't see why this is a big deal. This has been known since the book of Exodus was scribed. You've only experienced the lack of good teaching regarding the Word of God.

I haven't had any good or bad teaching regarding the "word of God".  My parents didn't take it upon themselves to push any single religion on me as the "right" one.  They told us kids that there will come a day when we might find ourselves interested in religion and that there are many choices to choose from.  But that we should seek one out that fits our idea of what is our truth.

What I find a big deal about it is that it's thrown around like the real thing.  If the popular portrayal of the ten commandments on stone tablets is wrong, then why is it still occurring?  I find it a really big deal when people are willing to cling to a tradition and present it as fact when it is false.

I won't detrail this thread with the subject of 'truth', but the reason why it is so hailed today is because it is still canonized. It is still the Word of God, whether you like it or not (oops, I sort've just derailed). Sure, it wasn't the 'first' copy, but it doesn't matter. Moses (or Moshe) was God's prophet and those commandments are just as important as the first.

lol .... i learned of this years ago, why is this even relevant? Or even worthy of a forum thread? 

Thank you gnome for contributing so much to this forum, your threads are a beacon of unbiased truths (lol)

Ok, I decided to look a little further into this subject (thank you for distracting me from my important tasks ) and it appears that we've all apparently been mislead by Cecil B. DeMille's Ten Commandments.

The Ten Commandments (or Decalogue as they were known in the ancient Near East in Roman times) were given to Moses by the Lord in Exodus 20 (as gnomexxx mentioned).  No where does it say that they were inscribed in stone.  Skip ahead to Exodus 31:18 where it says, "He (God) gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God."

These were the tablets Moses shattered in Exodus 32:19.  So what was the "testimony" written on these tablets?  Well, in Exodus 32:10 after it was discovered the Israelites were worshiping a golden calf, God says to Moses, "Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them and that I may destory them; and I will make you a great nation."

But Moses pleaded with the Lord saying, "Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servents to whom you swore by Yourself, and said to them, 'I will multiply your descendents as the stars of the heavens and all this land of which I have spoken I will give to your descendents, and they shall inherit it forever." (Exodus 32:13)

It doesn't say for sure, but it seems pretty clear to me that the tablets were God's covenent with the nation of Israel, and even though Moses persuaded the Lord not to destroy the Israelites, Moses himself shattered the covenent written in stone, which God later replaced.

Something to consider is that the Bible is only a small set of books (canonized), with later revisions/translations being made (ie: comparing the King James version to the Greek Orthodox version).  So in my opinion I disregard any specific words or exact worded phrases due to the lacking of other unpublished material or by the translation process of centuries gone by.

I would love to see a world of honesty, charity and no more greed.

But at the moment it's dishonest people who bug me the most. Lying over such stupid little things too. I really hate one of my friends for being the fat liar that he is (and how he couldn't care less about bearing false witness (commandment 9), ie. lying).

Originally posted by MarleVVLL

I won't detrail this thread with the subject of 'truth', but the reason why it is so hailed today is because it is still canonized. It is still the Word of God, whether you like it or not (oops, I sort've just derailed). Sure, it wasn't the 'first' copy, but it doesn't matter. Moses (or Moshe) was God's prophet and those commandments are just as important as the first.

I like to call what you've just described, "contextualized truth".  I'll let you work on what that means.

So, you're trying to tell us that there are really 20 commandments?

"The Ten Commandments -or- The Somewhere Around 20 Commandments"

I guess the earlier title does sound a bit more like it has come from meaningful intent.

Yeah, I'm trying to keep a straight face.  It's hurting, really bad.  Am  I doing a good job though? 

Originally posted by tvalentine

lol .... i learned of this years ago, why is this even relevant? Or even worthy of a forum thread? 

Thank you gnome for contributing so much to this forum, your threads are a beacon of unbiased truths (lol)

Ahhhhh, I love the way you used that word truth in your statement.  Am I free to take as much creative privilege with the word as you and others have?

Originally posted by Dracus

Something to consider is that the Bible is only a small set of books (canonized), with later revisions/translations being made (ie: comparing the King James version to the Greek Orthodox version).  So in my opinion I disregard any specific words or exact worded phrases due to the lacking of other unpublished material or by the translation process of centuries gone by.

Yeah, I do too.  That's what myself and some others have been trying to get through to people for quite some time.

Reality is not so easy to find when you're trying to figure out what an ancient group of people were doing.  And another thing that's hard is trying to apply all the different realities that so many people claim as real to today's society.  No wonder everyone is putting each other down.  You can pretty much find anything you want to make your case.

It's time for a clean slate.

Originally posted by Thrakk

I would love to see a world of honesty, charity and no more greed.

But at the moment it's dishonest people who bug me the most. Lying over such stupid little things too. I really hate one of my friends for being the fat liar that he is (and how he couldn't care less about bearing false witness (commandment 9), ie. lying).

Yeah, lying is a horrible thing.  I think it's a behavioral and psychological malfunction.  Like a program that has a glitch in it and is trying to sort things out by altering the programs around it forcefully.

It's a hurtful thing.  Which is why when something like I posted is said so many people get offended.  The pokes at me so far have been fairly mild.  I'm actually quite surprised.  I love these discussions though because it makes people think about things around them.  I think, for some, their first reaction is to try to patch up their doubts.  But it's later in time that the nagging doubts resurface and the act of trying to find the real answers begins.

Want to see a huge bit of double talk?  Watch what a lot of Christians today tell the gays to do.  They tell them to just keep their mouths shut and not advertise who they are or act upon it.  In other words, bear false witness is their advice.  Some Christians even tell them to find a woman and marry anyways.  Now if that is not bearing false witness, I don't know what is.  That ends up hurting both parties in the end. 

I do understand your pain in the dishonesty dealt to you though.  I have had friends betray me with their own self interests many times too.  Just try your best not to lose hope on the people who are working hard to be as honest as possible.

Originally posted by gnomexxx

I like to call what you've just described, "contextualized truth".  I'll let you work on what that means.

So, you're trying to tell us that there are really 20 commandments?

"The Ten Commandments -or- The Somewhere Around 20 Commandments"

I guess the earlier title does sound a bit more like it has come from meaningful intent.

Yeah, I'm trying to keep a straight face.  It's hurting, really bad.  Am  I doing a good job though? 

Ah, I'm not entirely sure how to respond to this comment. I won't go down the road of Truth at the moment. That is another topic for another day/thread.

However, regarding commandments, its hard to pinpoint what one is exactly looking at. There are not just '10' commandments, but over 600 in Torah. However, when one mentions, 'the 10 commandments', everyone (usually) instantly knows what they are talking about. So, it appears to me to be a game of labeling instead of trying to figure out if we are wrong or not by saying there are 10 commandments somewhere.

Originally posted by gnomexxx

 

Getting out your King James version

In NEITHER of these cases does the Bible refer to "commandments".  In the first instance, they are "words" which "God spake", while the tablets contain "testimony".  It is only when Moses goes back for new tablets that we see the phrase "ten commandments" (Exodus 34:28). 

He then says that the commandments on the tablets are DIFFERENT (significantly different, actually)  than the ones he recited to the people the first time.  Did he bonk his head on the way down the first time?  Or did God do a redo?

To get one obvious point out of the way, Mosheh (Moses) didn't write the KJV bible... he wrote in Hebrew.  The Hebrew word (dabar) which is translated "commandments" in one verse is the exact same word that's translated as "words" in the other verse.  It can refer to a unit of speech (such as a word or clause), or it can refer to the entire communication.

As to the commandments being different the 2nd time around, there are 2 points to make. First, the Torah contains 613 commandments total.  When YHWH told Moshe to write down the words of the covenant, he was referring to everything he was saying, not just the 10.

Exodus 24:4 - "And Mosheh wrote down all the Words of YHWH..."

Second, YHWH was the one that wrote the 10 commandments on the tablets, not Mosheh.  Mosheh was writing the other stuff down at the same time.

Exodus 24:12 - "And YHWH said to Mosheh, 'Come up to Me on the mountain and be there, while I give you tablets of stone, and the Torah and the command which I have written, to teach them."

Exodus 34:1 - "And YHWH said to Mosheh, 'Cut two tablets of stone like the first ones, and I shall write on these tablets the Words that were on the first tablets you broke."

Exodus 34:28 - "And he (Mosheh) was there with YHWH forty days and forty nights.  He (Mosheh) did not eat bread and he (Mosheh) did not drink water.  And He (YHWH) wrote on the tablets the Words of the covenant, the Ten Words."

You can see from 34:1 that YHWH specifically said the contents of the 2nd tablets were the same as the first.  The only difference is this time around, he made Mosheh cut the tablets out himself.  The other commands in chapter 34 are just part of the whole 613 that Mosheh was documenting in addition to the 2 tablets that YHWH wrote.

Originally posted by gnomexxx

Originally posted by tvalentine

lol .... i learned of this years ago, why is this even relevant? Or even worthy of a forum thread? 

Thank you gnome for contributing so much to this forum, your threads are a beacon of unbiased truths (lol)

Ahhhhh, I love the way you used that word truth in your statement.  Am I free to take as much creative privilege with the word as you and others have?

i used truths because there is 10 ten commandments, moses did go up the mountain twice(from what i believe i remember), the second time when he saw the people worshipping a calf. You just put a biased opininated spin on it to try and make the bible, christianity, or whoever look bad. Some people call this as having an agenda.

The real question is why god would see it fit to write his word, bearing in mind your understanding of this word has to be exact if you want to secure your eternity, in one specific language when he must of known that in order for everyone to read it the translating must be done by humans and is therefore subject to error. This is why I'm an anti-theist, not only do I not believe it but I also don't want to. If I believed the bible or any other religious scripture I'd be mortified at how god is not only constantly expressing his favouritism towards certain humans but also his general incompetence.

the "10 Commandments" (Aseret ha-Dvrim) were intended for JEWS only, descendants of Avraham; those willing to worship G, ONLY; no worshiping Miriam (Christ's mother), no worshiping jesus, no worshiping "saints" deemed worthy of veneration by the 'church' (rcc).

The byzantine greeks hyjacked Christ's version ("the Way") of Judaism renaming it christianity by abridging their new testament (they conspired to fabricate with more than half it's content the dogma of saul [who btw saul was NEITHER a Disciple of Christ NOR a Prophet from G ! therefore saul's dogma is NOT scripture on par with Moshe nor other ACTUAL Prophets speaking for G]) to the jewish Old Testament (to give it validity); even renaming Yeshua (Joshua) the Christ into IesouS (greek) later Iesu (latin) later jesus (protestant).

Those byzantines modified many of those older "jewish" Commandments since there was open hatred for all things "jewish."

With the roman catholic version these "jewish" 10 Commandments were rewritten (Fathers of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore [1886] prescribed for the United States) into:
* to keep the Sundays and Holy Days of obligation holy, by hearing Mass and resting from servile work;
* to keep the days of fasting and abstinence appointed by the church;
* to go to confession at least once a year;
* to receive the Blessed Sacrament at least once a year and that at Easter or thereabouts;
* to contribute to the support of our pastors;
* not to marry within a certain degree of kindred nor to solemnize marriage at the forbidden times...

from the 915ad useless and positively harmful precepts of the church:
*if anyone has not kept the fast of Lent, or of the ember-days, or of the rogations, or that which may have been appointed by the bishop for the staying of any plague;
*if there by any one who has not gone to Holy Communion three time in the year, that is at Easter, Pentecost and Christmas;
*if there by any one who has withheld tithes from god and His (the church designated) saints (read $ into the coffers of the church;)
*if there by anyone so perverse and so alienated from god as not to come to church at least on Sundays;
*if there be anyone who has not gone to confession once in the year, that is at the beginning of Lent, and has not done penance for his sins.

PS. The Sabbath is sundown friday to sundown saturday, NOT sunday; another example of how the west rewrote the Laws from G to distance themselves from the 'jews.'

pss. if you are interested, the ACTUAL Disciples of Christ sent missionaries to pursue saul in his ministry to the gohim (gentiles) correcting them that saul did not preach an accurate version of Christ's Teachings! this is documented in sauls 'epistles' to those gentile churches (can be found in the nt)

Originally posted by Jeffs

The real question is why god would see it fit to write his word, bearing in mind your understanding of this word has to be exact if you want to secure your eternity, in one specific language when he must of known that in order for everyone to read it the translating must be done by humans and is therefore subject to error. This is why I'm an anti-theist, not only do I not believe it but I also don't want to. If I believed the bible or any other religious scripture I'd be mortified at how god is not only constantly expressing his favouritism towards certain humans but also his general incompetence.

Your premise is wrong. You don't have to have complete understanding of the Word of God to inherit the promise of salvation. There is only one requirement: calling upon the name of the LORD (Jesus). The proof of this is continual repentance towards God, faith in the work of His Son, and to be filled with the Holy Spirit.

Here is a great example (John 5:39 - 40): You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

You listed a grave concern. This is not what this thread is about but if you're actually serious in your beliefs and not just vocalizing why Christianity or faith in general is stupid/flawed/weak/or agnostic in nature (we'll never know if we are right), then throw me a PM. We can even post it here in the off topic forums for people openly read for a safety net for the both of us.

Blessings,

Originally posted by billie

pss. if you are interested, the ACTUAL Disciples of Christ sent missionaries to pursue saul in his ministry to the gohim (gentiles) correcting them that saul did not preach an accurate version of Christ's Teachings! this is documented in sauls 'epistles' to those gentile churches (can be found in the nt)

Are you talking about the Jesuits? Is the Epistle you're referring to Galations? Haha, bud, you got yourself in the wrong debate. I won't derail the thread here, but I'll just wait for your response..

Originally posted by MarleVVLL

 Sure, it wasn't the 'first' copy, but it doesn't matter.

You can say this about the whole of the cannon.

Unfortunately it really does matter the 10 commandments, like all western biblical cannon's, have no original to point back too.

It's like a Federal Reserve that never had a Gold Standard. When talking about the foundation of all creation just taking it on faith that these documents existed and say what you claim is fail by any measure.

Actually, its completely different than the federal reserve.

We have over 6,000 manuscripts, the oldest being (either the dead sea scrolls or Sinaiticus) saying the exact same thing, all of which point to an original copy. Of course, the grammar structure is different and different translators used different words, but if you compare every version against every other one, the same meaning in nearly every verse is the exact same.

Completely different than the Federal reserve.

---

Originally posted by MarleVVLL
...We have over 6,000 manuscripts, the oldest being (either the dead sea scrolls or Sinaiticus) saying the exact same thing, all of which point to an original copy. Of course, the grammar structure is different and different translators used different words, but if you compare every version against every other one, the same meaning in nearly every verse is the exact same...

---

Is this intentional deception?
One of the most important contributions of the Dead Sea Scrolls is the numerous Biblical (Old Testament, OT) manuscripts which have been discovered. Until those 1947 discoveries at Qumran, the oldest manuscripts of the Hebrew Scriptures were copies from the 9th and 10th centuries AD by a group of Jewish scribes called the Massoretes. Now we have manuscripts around a thousand years older than those. The amazing truth is that these manuscripts are almost identical! Here is a strong example of the tender care which the Jewish scribes down through the centuries took in an effort to accurately copy the sacred Scriptures. We can have confidence that our Old Testament Scriptures faithfully represent the words given to Moses, David and the prophets. ref
It is the JEWISH scriptures that somewhat maintain content after the elohist & Yahwist redactions of the 8th-6th century BC.

The greek/latin/english versions of the nt do not exhibit this same congruity (whole chapters and books are missing between them.)
Modern "christanity" is not based on these old jewish scriptures, it is founded on the dogma of saul (aka paul) with it's atonement and grace scam replacing actual explicit orthodox jewish LAW. In fact modern "christanity" does about everything it can to separate itself from judaism; continuing that age-old hatred for all things jewish.
It always amazes me when i tell people Christ was a Jew and see their disbelief! Much moreso that his name was Joshua (Yeshua) and not jesus!! They always respond that is NOT what it says in their nt nor what they were preached at in church.

You rely on these later anonymous nt "scriptures" (e.g all four records of the Gospel: Mat, mark, luke, John) because you remove G and Christ from the picture, relying instead on the dogma of saul and modern dictates of a corrupt clergy. Intentionally misrepresenting that dogma of saul as bona fide teachings of Christ... NEVER specifying that is what saul preached vs this is what Christ taught! you scam people ALL of it (i.e nt) is what Christ taught. You are not faithful to Christ and especially not obedient to the ONE that sent him.

That nt seems to omit that Christ and G STILL exist!! You have no desire whatsoever to get verification from the top, rather just parrot what man has written (talmud, nt, recitation) replacing the Law passed down from G; but then again since you are not a jew you do not really care about Torah nor the 10 Commandments and the other +600 rules in the OT since they are for Jews, not 'christains.' (just like saul preached, ignore all that OT stuff he has a new religion for you guys!)

And when it is pointed out you are not even using the correct Name for Christ ("in his name"!!), nor his actual Teachings, you just ignore that and thump your nt to back up your agenda that justifies persecution of the current undesirables.

Nice timeline brings into even sharper focus that apparent intention of the early Christians to remain Jews, in the fullest sense of that word, for decades after Yeshua's murder. The differences of opinion between James, called the Brother of Christ, and paul seem now to have been dominated by this specific dividing line. Paul wanted to include non-Jews, and to allow modifications to Jewish Laws to accommodate them (e.g. no circumcision required) while James and his followers still considered themselves Jews, intended for their sect to remain Jewish, and expected their members to all be Jews. One can predict, on the basis that paul's faction won through the catholic apostlic church, that Christian writings have also been purged of this earlier tradition. It also explains why the "Church in Jerusalem" seems to have died out without a whimper. James and Mary and most of the unknown members of that church were literally cut out of the history of Christianity by later church fathers who purged the Christian literature as surely as the Roman destruction of Jerusalem purged much of the Jewish literature.

fyi, the romans murdered over half of the world's Jewish population, hitler murdered less than one quarter.

I think it's relevant to also point out that the generally accepted image of Jesus is long hair and a beard, something like this...

The only reason people believe he looked anything like that is because of the turin shroud. As for the shroud itself science has placed its gracious hand on this peice of fabric and the evidence that it's actually Da Vinci is quite striking.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/5706640/Turin-Shroud-is-face-of-Leonardo-da-Vinci.html