11th commandment?

Ray K · May 27, 2002

Anyone ever thought of something that they wish had been one of the 10 Commandments or maybe an 11th?

I'd be curious to know what you guys would have added. Considering the history of civilization up through the 19th century, it would have been nice to have this one:

11. Thou shalt not own slaves

I think that's an obvious one. Any other ideas?

E-beth · May 27, 2002

Actually, I think God did a pretty good job the first time and I don't think I can improve on His holy work.

I am glad, though, that the Ten Commandments are unlike our Constitution that can be ammended on a whim. God's law, unlike human law, is perfect. Just as it is. Period.

2002 Christian · May 27, 2002

The 10 cover all there is to cover, properly understood.

DT 5:22 These are the commandments the LORD proclaimed in a loud voice to your whole assembly there on the mountain from out of the fire, the cloud and the deep darkness; and he added nothing more. Then he wrote them on two stone tablets and gave them to me.

Ray K · May 27, 2002

Originally posted by E-beth
Actually, I think God did a pretty good job the first time and I don't think I can improve on His holy work.

I am glad, though, that the Ten Commandments are unlike our Constitution that can be ammended on a whim. God's law, unlike human law, is perfect. Just as it is. Period.

OK, I understand the need to think that everything in the Bible is absolutely perfect and therefore cannot be improved upon, but surely someone will agree that an anti-slavery commandment would have been useful.

Think of all of the human suffering that could have been prevented if Christians knew, in no uncertain terms, that slavery was impermissable under ANY circumstances.

That's the beauty of the commandments: they are difficult to misinterpret. Considering all of the Old Testament verses that can be interpreted to condone slavery, having a "No Slavery" commandment would have been a boon to mankind.

And, by the way, the U.S. Constitution is notoriously difficult to amend. It certainly cannot be amended "on a whim", especially now that it is standard practice to give all new amendments only a 7-year period to be ratified by 2/3rds of the states.

What are some other serious social problems that are not addressed in the commandments?

How about:

Thou shalt not inflict cruelty upon your fellow man

Just think of all of the "witches" and "heretics" who were tortured until they confessed to crimes for which they were eventually killed.

That would have been a nice commandment, too.

Ioustinos · May 27, 2002

I think Jesus Christ said it best:

John 13:34
A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Christ's love was unconditional.

Jesaiah

Ray K · May 27, 2002

Originally posted by Jesaiah
I think Jesus Christ said it best:

John 13:34
A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Christ's love was unconditional.

Jesaiah

Now we're talking... that's a good one!

Thou shalt love one another

elephanticity · May 27, 2002

That's the beauty of the commandments: they are difficult to misinterpret.

Um, have you READ the bible? How many times do Heroes and Heroines of the bible kill? In God's name, or at God's behest? Or how often does God himself do the killing? If there is sufficient justification, killing seems to be okay. The other commandment, for example, about not letting witches live. Exactly what did He mean by that, if we weren't to kill them?

While Jesus put out rules on how to treat slaves, he did not make it flat out illegal. That might be why there isn't such a commandment. Note that there is also no commandment about homosexuality...or creationism...or abortion...or any of the other high-profile causes of today. When the Big Happy Infallible Sky Guy listed his top ten tick-offs, 'honor mom and dad' scored higher than extra marital sex, birth control or whether good works or faith or both were required for salvation.

I'd say the commandments were well enough as is, but a lot of people are really strident about things that ARE NOT on the Big List.

Neo · May 27, 2002

Originally posted by E-beth
Actually, I think God did a pretty good job the first time and I don't think I can improve on His holy work.

I am glad, though, that the Ten Commandments are unlike our Constitution that can be ammended on a whim. God's law, unlike human law, is perfect. Just as it is. Period.

Actually, Gods law is kind of like the constitution in that sense.. Jesus came along and reformed it, didn't he?

Ray K · May 27, 2002

Originally posted by elephanticity
Um, have you READ the bible? How many times do Heroes and Heroines of the bible kill?

I think you missed my point. When you place an edict in "commandment" form, there is the implication that it is a universal command regardless of context.

Whether the other verses contradict one of the commandments was irrelevant to my point.

elephanticity · May 27, 2002

it's not an implication, it's implicit...that's why they're called commandments. But how universal a command can it be if it contradicts another universal command?

That's my point. Even if it were in commandment form, it wouldn't matter a bit. People would still find justification and rationalization to do whatever they wanted to.

Exodus 21, verses 1-6 have god's rules on how to treat slaves, so there is no liklihood of such a commandment, anyway. But, even if there were a commandment condemming the practice, people would find other reasons or verses justifying it. Or, they'd call it something else. Or there would be a fundamental law that God wouldn't let anyone be a slave unless they were going to hell, anyway, or something like that.

The commandment against witches clearly contradicts the one about not killing...but the people that burned or stoned or pressed or disembowled or boiled or dunked or beheaded witches still maintained that they followed all ten of God's commandments.
He might as well have left a blank spot on the plates for each person to write in their own commandment.

Ray K · May 27, 2002

Originally posted by elephanticity
But how universal a command can it be if it contradicts another universal command?

I do not consider other verses to be "universal commands", so there is no conflict.

If there is a conflict between anything in the Bible and what Jesus actually said, then a Christian should opt for Jesus' word. If there is a conflict between a commandment and a Biblical verse, the commandment should take precedence.

However, many Christians inexplicably prefer Old Testament principles over Jesus' actual teachings. They would deny that, of course, but it is true. Case in point: would Jesus persecute homosexuals? Of course not!

gasm · May 28, 2002

Originally posted by Ray K

would Jesus persecute homosexuals? Of course not!

are you implying that homosexuality is ok by Jesus?

Ray K · May 28, 2002

Originally posted by gasm

are you implying that homosexuality is ok by Jesus?

No. I am saying that he would not persecute homosexuals.

If you believe in the doctrine of free will, then it is none of our business what consenting adults do in private.

Ioustinos · May 28, 2002

The question posed was: What would you choose as a 11th commandment?

Originally I posted:

John 13:34
A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Afterwards I saw this statement made by a fellow poster:

Actually, Gods law is kind of like the constitution in that sense.. Jesus came along and reformed it, didn't he?

Actually Jesus just exposed the reasoning behind the 10 Commmandments, and the explanation agrees with what He said in John 13:34

Matthew 22:36-40
Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Above is a greater detailed quote of Jesus' teaching on the greatest command.

1) THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME
-If one loved God then they would not worship a false god when they knew and understood that He was the only true God.

2) THOU SHALT NOT MAKE UNTO THEE ANY GRAVEN IMAGE
-This ties in with the first commandment. Yet also it could apply to man worshipping his own works rather than God.

3) THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD THY GOD IN VAIN
-If one loved God they would not slander His name, but would rather show a bit of respect towards the Creator of the Universe.

4) REMEMBER THE SABABATH DAY, TO KEEP IT HOLY
-If one loved God they would make time from their regular schedule for worshipping God and studies on God's instructions and teachings.

5) HONOR THY FATHER AND THY MOTHER
-If one loved their parents they would at least respect them.

6) THOU SHALT NOT KILL
-If one loved their neighbor then one would not kill them, obviously. (Some translations state the commandment as: Thou shalt not murder. This is a conversation within itself)

7) THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY
-If one loved their spouse then they would not cheat on them with another person.

8) THOU SHALT NOT STEAL
-If one loved their neighbor then one would not steal anything that belonged to their neighbor. Just as that person would not want anyone to steal anything that was theirs.

9) THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THY NEIGHBOR
-If one loved their neighbor then they would not lie against them. For one would not want someone to lie against them.

10) THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE, WIFE, ETC
-If one loved their neighbor then they would not be jealous and desirous of their neighbor's belongings.

So in reality Jesus exposed the motive behind the 10 Commandments, and compacted it into one commmandment.

Jesaiah :priest:

LouisBooth · May 28, 2002

Funny how people don't understand a couple of things in this discussion. 1. not all slaves are treated the way they were in the americans. the idea of slavery today is very westerized and not at all like biblical slavery. It had to do with debt and was more indentered serventhood then anything else. There was also something called year of jubille every 7 yrs. Check it out. Second is that there is a huge diference between murder and killing. Check that out too and maybe you'll begin to understand the things brought up and see that there is no problem at all biblically.

LouisBooth · May 28, 2002

"If you believe in the doctrine of free will, then it is none of our business what consenting adults do in private."

saying its okay and not judging them are two very different things. say people are wrong when they are and don't say their action is okay, but they are human and make mistakes, just shouldn't make the same ones over and over and over and over again..that's called habitual sin.

Ray K · May 28, 2002

Originally posted by LouisBooth
Funny how people don't understand a couple of things in this discussion. 1. not all slaves are treated the way they were in the americans. the idea of slavery today is very westerized and not at all like biblical slavery. It had to do with debt and was more indentered serventhood then anything else. There was also something called year of jubille every 7 yrs. Check it out. Second is that there is a huge diference between murder and killing. Check that out too and maybe you'll begin to understand the things brought up and see that there is no problem at all biblically.

Exodus 21:20-21
"And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money "

Here, the Bible clearly equates human slaves with money and says that it is OK to beat slaves as long as you don't kill them. Exodus 21:16 also provides the death penalty for stealing another man's slaves, so slaves were certainly considered to be valuable property.

Concerning the "Year of Jubilee"
Exodus 21:2-6
"If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her masters, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever"

Funny how you and I can read the exact same verses and interpret them differently. The Hebrews clearly allowed men to leave after 7 years ONLY if they were willing to leave their wife and children. If not, they were branded as slaves for life.

LouisBooth · May 28, 2002

"Here, the Bible clearly equates human slaves with money and says that it is OK to beat slaves as long as you don't kill them. "

"Here, the Bible clearly equates human slaves with money and says that it is OK to beat slaves as long as you don't kill them"

Nooo..it says if you beat one and kill him you will be punished. It doesn't say its okay to beat slaves. read the text will ya? The priniciple is that they should be disciplined, but not killed nor permently injuryed, etc. I would akin it to getting a spanking as when you where a child. Again, doesn't show the westernized slavery you're trying to akin it to.

funny how you miss the context don't you?

" If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.

Exd 21:3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.
"

first the first verse clearly shows that I am in the right by saying it was indentered serventhood. and the only time the wife and childer must say is when the wife and childer are debtors. Its like you marrying someone and being cleared of all your debt. That's not fair to the companies that give you credit. Think about the situation. Its very attuned to the debt system. Thanks for supporting my arguement.

Ray K · May 29, 2002

Originally posted by LouisBooth
"Here, the Bible clearly equates human slaves with money and says that it is OK to beat slaves as long as you don't kill them. "

Nooo..it says if you beat one and kill him you will be punished. It doesn't say its okay to beat slaves. read the text will ya? The priniciple is that they should be disciplined, but not killed nor permently injuryed, etc. I would akin it to getting a spanking as when you where a child. Again, doesn't show the westernized slavery you're trying to akin it to.

funny how you miss the context don't you?

Maybe YOU should read it. It basically says, "if you beat your slave, you will be punished if you kill him. If you beat him but he doesn't die, you will not be punished because he is your property"

Funny how you think that is something to brag about. I find the verse and its meaning completely repugnant.

" If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.

Exd 21:3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.
"

first the first verse clearly shows that I am in the right by saying it was indentered serventhood. and the only time the wife and childer must say is when the wife and childer are debtors. Its like you marrying someone and being cleared of all your debt. That's not fair to the companies that give you credit. Think about the situation. Its very attuned to the debt system. Thanks for supporting my arguement.

I didn't see anything about the wife being a "debtor", so I don't know where you got that. However, you close with:

"That's not fair to the companies that give you credit. Think about the situation. Its very attuned to the debt system. Thanks for supporting my arguement. "

LOL! You admit that the Bible considers slaves to be nothing more than property, and that supports your argument?!?

WOW! Don't ever let me catch you saying that the phrase "All men are created equal" is Biblically inspired, because I will remember this post for a long time!

It is truly amazing the lengths people will stretch to justify their God-belief.

Let me make this perfectly clear, just so there is no misunderstanding...

Slavery is wrong in ANY context. It is a crime against humanity and any literature that condones slavery, including Exodus 21, should be used as toilet paper or simply discarded into the dustbin of human ignorance.

LouisBooth · May 29, 2002

"Funny how you think that is something to brag about. I find the verse and its meaning completely repugnant"

That's your opinion then. I think you don't even come close to understanding what biblical "slavery" or indentered serventhood was all about.

"You admit that the Bible considers slaves to be nothing more than property, and that supports your argument?!? "

*sigh* no where did I say that. What it is talking about is that the man in slavery owes someone money and he is working it off. For more information why don't you read ex 22:3 or maybe you can read some of the jewish writings on it instead of talking from biblical ignorance?

*sigh* you really don't understand anything in the bible do you ray? Try letting your mind out of the box you've created around it will ya?

11th commandment?

Cogito ergo sum

Senior Contributor

Well-Known Member

Cogito ergo sum

Veteran

Cogito ergo sum

This appears beneath your name.

the one

Cogito ergo sum

This appears beneath your name.

Cogito ergo sum

Confused with U

Cogito ergo sum

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Cogito ergo sum

Well-Known Member

Cogito ergo sum

Well-Known Member

Similar threads