The Ten Commandments

[southern california guy]

I actually got into an argument recently with a woman who contacted me through Ave Maria Singles. I showed her some of my writing and she felt that I was breaking the "Second" Commandment when I had one of my characters say "God D------t".

I told her that there was more than one interpretation of that Commandment. The Commandment reads:

[b]Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain[/b]

She argues that I'm not really Catholic and we've decided to end contact. Anyway here's what she wrote:

[i]I do not believe there are interpretations to the 10 Commandments. Do you know what "in vain" means? It means when unnecessary. That means the commandment is 'Do not use the Lord's name when you don't mean it'. If you're not talking about God or to God, it's "in vain".
[/i]
And here's the other interpretation that I was talking about. It's the Jewish interpretation by Rabbi Gerhson (link):

[color="#FF0000"]The Ten Commandments

On a recent trip to New York, I was riding in a cab. As is my custom, I ask all cab drivers where they are from. Over the years, I've gotten some pretty interesting responses. This time, instead of answering my question, the cab driver asked me a question in a thick New York accent. "Are you a rabbi?" he blurted out. Clearly he noticed my kippah and made the assumption that I might be a rabbi. He then said: "You know, I follow the Ten Commandments."

I was struck by that statement because very few Jews could name all of the Ten Commandments, no less name them in order. In this week's Torah reading, we read the Ten Commandments.

When people say they follow the Ten Commandments, I wonder if they realize that observing Shabbat is one of them. How many of us understand what it means not to covet one's neighbor's goods or wife? One of my favorite mitzvot to focus on when teaching the Ten Commandments is that "You shall not take God's name in vain." Just what does that mean?

Does God really care if we say "God ---- it!?" Actually the Hebrew gives us a clue. In Hebrew, it is "lo tisa et shem adonai elohecha lashav" - "You shall not carry God's name in vain". What does it mean to carry God's name in vain?

I offer an example taught by one of my teachers many years ago:

"If you cheat in business and keep Kosher, I will ask you to stop cheating in business. But, if you will not stop cheating in business, I will ask you to stop keeping Kosher."

If we purport to lead a religiously observant life, but then that religious observance does not transfer to our ethical behavior, then we have carried God's name in vain. We have brought down God. One of the first things an atheist will say is: "Why believe in God? Look at all those people who believe in God and who are not ethical!"

Please don't misunderstand. I am in no way arguing that ethics somehow are more important than leading a religiously observant life. Keeping Kosher, observing Shabbat, studying Torah, observing Holidays and daily prayer all form part of a system of religious expression which can enrich us spiritually, and bring great meaning to our lives. Ethics and ritual are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, one reinforces the other. What I am saying is that a religiously observant life that does not lead to ethics or motivate us to create a more compassionate world, misses the point of leading a religious life in the first place.

So the next time someone asks you if you keep the Ten Commandments, give your answer much thought.

Shabbat Shalom
[/color]
And there is a similar interpretation given in the "Christian Reader". Here's the link : [url="http://http://christianreader.com/2011/02/the-name-in-vain-2/"]The Name In Vain[/url]


---------------------

The only reason I found this out is because I was debating with somebody on a traditional Catholic forum about annulments. I knew that in Mark chapter ten Jesus had debated the subject of divorce and remarriage with the Jewish pharisee's. Jesus had argued that even if a man received a Jewish divorce -- according to Moses -- if he were to remarry he would be committing adultery. I decided to research it and try and see if anything in the Old Testament also backed Jesus's position up. I found an article by a Jewish guy that argued that we violate the "Third" Commandment (It's the same Commandment as the Catholic Second Commandment.) when we don't keep a vow to god. I lost the link to this article but I'll find it again. I just need to get back to that forum and do a search. Anyway the point is that I found out that "taking gods name in vain" can be interpreted differently than just using the word "God" as a cuss word.

And I became curious about the fact that this Commandment was the Third Commandment according to the Jews -- but the Second Commandment according to the Catholics. It turns out that the Catholic church deleted the original Second Commandment:

[color="#FF0000"]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 a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my Commandments. (Exodus 20:4-6)
[/color]
The Catholic church made another change to the Ten Commandments. The Tenth Commandment according to the Jews is:

[color="#FF0000"]Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his man servant, nor his maid servant, nor his ox, nor his arse, nor anything that is thy neighbor's.[/color]

The Catholic church split this Commandment into two parts:

[color="#FF0000"]9 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife.

10 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods.[/color]

--------------

Any thoughts or explanations? I'm curious because I've never heard this discussed.

[havok579257]

that made like 50% sense.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1306035089' post='2244404']
that made like 50% sense.
[/quote]

Fifty percent is not bad.

The second half of it is the part that I seem to have wrong. The first part about the different interpretations of "Thou shalt not take the name of the lord thy god in vain" was my better part of the post.

[southern california guy]

deleted

Edited May 22, 2011 by southern california guy

[southern california guy]

I see in looking at the Catholic catechism that the meaning is spelled out. So the Jewish and Catholic interpretations are different. And I was suggesting that the Catholic church made changes because the Jewish version came first. I'm still a little confused by the whole thing.

[CatherineM]

Which version of the ten commandments, the one in Exodus or the one in Deuteronomy.? As the Israelites went from wondering in the desert to settling down, their society changed, and the change in the ten commandments reflects that. Novel concept.

[AccountDeleted]

Regarding your first point SCG, perhaps what is at issue here is the fact that this woman felt offended by the use of God's name in a way that was not reverent. Since it was a work of fiction, perhaps you could have been sensitive to her and explained that you felt it was necessary for the character to speak in such a manner but you understood her opposition to it?

To someone who loves God dearly, the use of His name in anything other than a reverent manner does seem like using it in vain, and even if you don't feel this way, it would be good to realize that some others do. I have to catch myself from time to time on this because I was raised in a house where there was no respect for religion and using His name this way wasn't even considered a curse. Now I know why it is offensive and although I don't react as badly as some people, I do cringe if there is a lot of anger or hostility associated with the use of God's name.

Whether or not the Commandment is interpreted in a less strict way by others is not the issue - sensitivity to the feelings of others is. Hopefully you don't use these words yourself, but only put them in the mouths of your characters. If this is so, then try to explain that when you give others your works to read and it might save trouble in the future. Or you could just leave Him name out of it - the phrase "d*mn it" is still a curse without His name, isn't it?

[southern california guy]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1306077414' post='2244469']
Which version of the ten commandments, the one in Exodus or the one in Deuteronomy.? As the Israelites went from wondering in the desert to settling down, their society changed, and the change in the ten commandments reflects that. Novel concept.
[/quote]

It looks to me like the versions in Exodus and Deuteronomy are basically identical. My original post wasn't clearly written. I suppose I was a little afraid to go straight to the point.

My point should have been that [b]the Jewish version of the Ten Commandments disagrees with major Catholic and Christian beliefs[/b].

And the differences appear to have been reconciled by a reordering and reinterpretation of certain key Commandments by the early Catholic church.


[b]The key Commandments are the Jewish second and third commandments[/b] (From; [url="http://www.jewfaq.org/10.htm"]Judaism 101:Aseret ha-Dibrot: The "Ten Commandments[/url]")

[b]2. Prohibition of Improper Worship[/b]
This category is derived from Ex. 20:3-6, beginning, "You shall not have other gods..." It encompasses within it the prohibition against the worship of other gods as well as the prohibition of improper forms of worship of the one true God, such as worshiping God through an idol.

[b]3. Prohibition of Oaths[/b]
This category is derived from Ex. 20:7, beginning, "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain..." This includes prohibitions against perjury, [b]breaking or delaying the performance of vows or promises[/b], and speaking God's name or swearing unnecessarily.


The Second Commandment seems to argue against Catholic practices such as bowing down and praying before a statue, adoring the host, lighting candles and praying to the dead. And adoring relics like a dead monk's head or a dead saint's finger.

The Third Commandment is really interesting. It says "You shall not [b]take[/b] the name of the Lord your God in vain." The original Hebrew word for "take" was "Nasa". It means to lift up, take up, carry (http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Glossary/Word_of_the_Week/Archived/Nasa/nasa.html). It appears that the Third Commandment is saying is that you must not call yourself a man of god -- while not behaving like one. There seems to be a contradiction between this Commandment and what Paul taught when he argued that we are saved by faith and not by deed. And according to the Jewish interpretation this Commandment also applies to vows as stated in the link above. So how could this jibe with the Catholic practice of marriage annulments? Or even the Jewish practice of divorces according to Moses. Jesus said that a divorced man who remarried still committed adultery despite the divorce. According to the Jewish religion it's not adultery if you get a divorce first -- just like the Catholics with their annulments.

The early Catholic church appears to have dodged these issues by burying the Second Commandment within the First, reinterpreting the Third Commandment to mean only using gods name as a cuss word, and then splitting the Tenth Commandment into two parts so that an even Ten Commandments were created.

--------------------------------------------

I think that you could argue that I was sinning when I used the phrase "God d----t" in my story, but that wasn't the point of this post. However if I wanted to use the Catholic line of arguing used for marriage annulments I would argue that if I said "G-d d---t" but didn't really mean it -- then in God's eyes it would be exactly the same as if I'd never said it at all.

Edited May 22, 2011 by southern california guy

[southern california guy]

Come on somebody explain to me why I'm wrong. I don't necessarily want to be right about this!

[havok579257]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1306105296' post='2244599']
Come on somebody explain to me why I'm wrong. I don't necessarily want to be right about this!
[/quote]


praying in front of a statue and praying to a statue are two completely different things.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='southern california guy' timestamp='1306105296' post='2244599']
Come on somebody explain to me why I'm wrong. I don't necessarily want to be right about this!
[/quote]
Dearie, we are not worshipping statues, we use them as visual aides as we direct our prayers to the person they represent, asking them to pray for us. Only God Almighty is to be worshipped.

[southern california guy]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1306119533' post='2244701']
Dearie, we are not worshipping statues, we use them as visual aides as we direct our prayers to the person they represent, asking them to pray for us. Only God Almighty is to be worshipped.
[/quote]

I guess that is a good point but I don't understand this statement:

Deuteronomy Chapter five, verse 7

7 Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, [b]even any manner of likeness[/b], of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

[Luigi]

That's really a command against idols. The pagan cultures surrounding the Jews worshipped cats, cows, and all sorts of other animals. Thus the specific mention of in the commandmen about makeing a graven image of anything "in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth" - no birds, no cows, no fish. That's why Moses got so PO'd when he came down from the mountain with the ten commandments, only to find that the Jews had built a golden calf and were worshipping it.

And yet, God did command Moses to make a "graven image" - of a snake. But the graven image of the snake wasn't an idol.

[southern california guy]

Here's a Jewish viewpoint from Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idolatry )

[color="#483D8B"][b]Idolatry[/b]

Judaism strongly prohibits any form of idolatry, and holds that idolatry is not limited to the worship of a statue or picture itself, but also includes worship of the Almighty Himself with the use of mediators and/or any artistic representations of God such as "Jesus on the Cross". According to this understanding, even if one directs his worship to the Almighty Himself and not to a statue, picture, or some other created thing, but yet he uses a created thing as a representation of the Almighty in order to assist in his worship of the Almighty, this is also considered a form of idolatry. In fact, Maimonides explains in chapter 1 of Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim (Avoda Zarah) in the Mishneh Torah that this is one of the ways that idolatry began.[/color]

I'm finding very different points of view between the old Jewish and the Catholic.

Edited May 23, 2011 by southern california guy

[Luigi]

"I'm finding very different points of view between the old Jewish and the Catholic."

Ummm, right... because we're different religions? There are certainly ties - and some strong ties - between Judaism and Catholicism, but ultimately we're not Jewish and they're not Catholic. So I would expect there to be differences.

One reason the Church has promoted artistic images is that they can serve a teaching function in areas of high illiteracy. I don't know if all Jews were literate in the ancient world, but they are these days; so [i]perhaps [/i]a reason - and it would be only [i]one[/i] reason - against the graven images is that, as a literate people, they relied on the written word for transmission of the truth rather than relying on images for the transmission of truth.

But you seem to be conflating "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain" with the issue of graven images. I see them as two different issues.