2 sets of 10 commandments?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sophie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sophie

Guest
Why are there 2 sets of 10 commandments in the bible? The set in Exodus 20 that Jews and Christians follow. But then another set in Exodus 34:1-29. that God gave Moses to replace the first stone tablets that were broken:

Exodus 34:14 -

"You shall not worship any other god, for the Lord is the jealous one.

You shall not make for yourself molten gods.

You shall keep the feast of Unleaven bread.

To me belongs every first born male that opens the womb of all your livestock…

No one shall appear before me empty-handed.

For six days you may work, but on the seventh day you shall rest.

You shall keep the feast of weeks with the first of the wheat harvest: likewise with the feast of the fruit harvest at the close of the year.

You shall not offer me the blood sacrifice with leavened bread…

The choicest first fruits of your soil you shall bring to the house of the Lord your God.

You shall not boil a kid in it’s mother’s milk."

Check it out! Two different sets of the 10 commandments! What gives???
 
That is the so-called ‘Ritual Decalogue’ as opposed to the ‘Ethical Decalogue’.

Some believe that the Tablets of the Law contain both these sets of Commandments while a few say that these are THE commandments that is written on the original tablets that Moses broke.

However, these Ten could also easily be ‘additions’ or ‘supplements’ provided by God in the light of the Golden Calf incident to the Ethical Ten. God could have rewritten the Ethical ones while Moses finished the job by also writing the text of these commands.
 
patrick457 said:
That is the so-called ‘Ritual Decalogue’ as opposed to the ‘Ethical Decalogue’.

Some believe that the Tablets of the Law contain both these sets of Commandments while a few say that these are THE commandments that is written on the original tablets that Moses broke.

However, these Ten could also easily be ‘additions’ or ‘supplements’ provided by God in the light of the Golden Calf incident to the Ethical Ten. God could have rewritten the Ethical ones while Moses finished the job by also writing the text of these commands.
Click to expand...
So your saying there might have been 20 commandments instead of only 10!!!

The bible says about these commandemts I’ve quoted above, "The Lord said to Moses, ‘Cut two stone tablets like the former, that I may write on them the commandments which were on the former tablets that you broke.’ Exodus 34:l And, “…and he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.” Exodus 34:28

So according to the bible itself, these are supposed to be the same 10 commandments that God originally gave Moses. Sorry, but the bible itself states your theories are wrong. These are supposed to be the original 10 commandments God gave Moses. The bible obviously gets it wrong and gives two different sets of commandments, but says they are the same thing!
 
Sophie said:
Why are there 2 sets of 10 commandments in the bible? The set in Exodus 20 that Jews and Christians follow. But then another set in Exodus 34:1-29. that God gave Moses to replace the first stone tablets that were broken:

Check it out! Two different sets of the 10 commandments! What gives???
Click to expand...
Your question was thought provoking. The thread title made me first think of the restating of the original 10 commandments that is found in Deuteronomy 5 but such was not the case.

As I looked through Exodus, I was interested to note that there is no mention of stone tablets until Chapter 31. Many commandments beyond the first 10 were mentioned before any were committed to stone.

More significantly, I think what makes the original 10 commandments so special is not that they were written in stone, but that they were spoken by God within earshot of all the people. It is the original 10 commandments that convinced the people of God’s greatness and majesty as well as making them feel like they should stand further back and let Moses do all the listening.

To put it another way, commandments written in stone are not nearly as impressive as those heard in God’s own voice. The 10 commandments we all know are the only ones that everyone heard directly.

I think this whole carved-in-stone thing is a little distorted by Hollywood versions of the Exodus story.

Peace

Jim
 
Sophie said:
The bible says about these commandemts I’ve quoted above, "The Lord said to Moses, ‘Cut two stone tablets like the former, that I may write on them the commandments which were on the former tablets that you broke.’ Exodus 34:l And, “…and he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.” Exodus 34:28

So according to the bible itself, these are supposed to be the same 10 commandments that God originally gave Moses. Sorry, but the bible itself states your theories are wrong. These are supposed to be the original 10 commandments God gave Moses. The bible obviously gets it wrong and gives two different sets of commandments, but says they are the same thing!
Click to expand...
Sophie,
There does appear to be a potential contradiction in the verses that you quote, but whenever the bible appears to be wrong there is always some other explanation…more than likely, our own understanding of it.

Numerous other passages (see Deut 10:1-2,4) support that God Himself re-wrote the original 10 commandments, as spoken on the mountain, on the tablets that Moses was commanded to make.

In Ex 34:27, meanwhile, …“the Lord said to Moses, ‘Write these words; in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.’” Moses is given a separate task to write the Book of the Covenant while God re-writes the commandments on stone.

This is the explanation from Bernard Orchard’s “A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture:”

‘Finally he orders Moses to write down the words of the renewed covenant and he himself similarly renews the legislation of the decalogue by writing the ten commandments on the tables of stone. The sequence of thought is clear and consistent but the conclusion of the narrative is obscured by a gloss or corruption in the text.’

rocketrob
 
Sophie;:
Why are there 2 sets of 10 commandments in the bible?
Click to expand...
You forgot one set.

The Ritual Decalogue: Exodus 34:
The Ethical Decalogue: Mount Horeb: Deuteronomy 5
The Ethical Decalogue: Mount Sinai: Exodus 20

The Ritual Decalogue tells one how/when to celebrate the religious festivals.

The Ethical decalogue tells one how to behave.

xan

jonathon
 
rocketrob said:
The sequence of thought is clear and consistent but the conclusion of the narrative is obscured by a gloss or corruption in the text.’

rocketrob
Click to expand...
Thanks rocketrob, but I would think that God who is omnipotent and all-knowing wouldn’t let his word be obscured or corrupted.
 
Thanks for the replies, but they don’t answer why God re-wrote the original 10 commandments he gave Moses with different ones. Seems like either He changed His mind about some of the commandments or He just plain got them wrong or someone didn’t get that chapter right when they wrote it. Those would be the only logical conclusions.
 
Sophie said:
Thanks rocketrob, but I would think that God who is omnipotent and all-knowing wouldn’t let his word be obscured or corrupted.
Click to expand...
Well, as you undoubtedly know, there are many different translations of the bible, protestant vs. Catholic versions, as well as ancient texts that don’t always agree with each other 100%. Its also a known fact that text corruptions have historically taken place, and the Catholic Church has had to fight/correct these occurrences in the past. It is for these reasons that Scripture must be read with the following principles in mind from the Catechism:

"The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.

112
  1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture.” Different as the books which comprise it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.
The phrase “heart of Christ” can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.

113
2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church.” According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (“according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church”).

114
3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation."

If there is still a seemingly major contradiction in Scripture, it is undoubtedly due to a lack of understanding on the reader’s part rather than, as you mentioned in an earlier post, that the “bible obviously gets it wrong.”

rocketrob
 
Sophie said:
Thanks for the replies, but they don’t answer why God re-wrote the original 10 commandments he gave Moses with different ones. Seems like either He changed His mind about some of the commandments or He just plain got them wrong or someone didn’t get that chapter right when they wrote it. Those would be the only logical conclusions.
Click to expand...
None of this is supported by the unity of Scripture, for Deuteronomy 10:1-2,4 (written my Moses himself) states:

“At the time the Lord said to me, ‘Hew two tables of stone like the first, and come up to me on the mountain, and make an ark of wood. And I will write on the tables the words that were on the first tables which you broke, and you shall put them in the ark.’…And he wrote on the tables, as at the first writing, the ten commandments which the Lord had spoken to you on the mountain out of the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly…”

rocketrob
 
rocketrob said:
Well, as you undoubtedly know, there are many different translations of the bible, protestant vs. Catholic versions, as well as ancient texts that don’t always agree with each other 100%. Its also a known fact that text corruptions have historically taken place, and the Catholic Church has had to fight/correct these occurrences in the past. It is for these reasons that Scripture must be read with the following principles in mind from the Catechism:

"The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.

112
  1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture.” Different as the books which comprise it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.
The phrase “heart of Christ” can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.

113
2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church.” According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (“according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church”).

114
3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation."

If there is still a seemingly major contradiction in Scripture, it is undoubtedly due to a lack of understanding on the reader’s part rather than, as you mentioned in an earlier post, that the “bible obviously gets it wrong.”

rocketrob
Click to expand...
Wow!!! One must go through all these gymnastics to understand the word of God and His truth??? And then many Catholic folks still disagree about certain bible passages??? Sounds very similar to the Book of Morman or the Koran!
 
Sophie said:
Wow!!! One must go through all these gymnastics to understand the word of God and His truth??? And then many Catholic folks still disagree about certain bible passages??? Sounds very similar to the Book of Morman or the Koran!
Click to expand...
Actually, no…these principles are really logical and full of common sense. And they enable us “Catholic folks” to agree on the meaning of Scripture.

I think by now its apparent that your original post was not made with a sincere interest in getting an answer to your question. I’ll let others continue to engage you in this discussion if they so desire.

rocketrob
 
Sophie;:
Wow!!! One must go through all these gymnastics to understand the word of God and His truth?
Click to expand...
One denomination I ran across has a working assumption that a statement is non-scriptural, unless it can be supported by verses in :
  • The Torah;
  • The Writings;
  • The Prophets;
  • The Gospels and the book of Acts;
  • The Pauline Epistles;
  • The General Epistles;
  • The Book of Revelation;
IOW, suppose one can find support for a specific belief in four of those groups of books of the Bible. That belief is not based upon Scripture, according to their dogma.

xan

jonathon
 
Sophie, given all your questions it’s plain you’re actually not Catholic, so why are you lying in your profile when you list Catholicism as your religion?
 
LilyM said:
Sophie, given all your questions it’s plain you’re actually not Catholic, so why are you lying in your profile when you list Catholicism as your religion?
Click to expand...
It’s possible that she spoke her true religion but something else got written down?
 
cerad said:
It’s possible that she spoke her true religion but something else got written down?
Click to expand...
Every person who joins writes their own information into their own profile - no one else adds anything, there’s no default where it will automatically list you as Catholic or anything.

In other words it says ‘religion’ - clearly asking her for her religion. She typed in ‘Catholic’. No possibility of mistake here.
 
She may well be a Catholic who is questioning what appear to be contradictions in the Scripture. Plenty of sincere Catholics have taken up such questions, perhaps even wrestled with doubts.

We should not be so quick to judge someone as “not Catholic” based on their questions or even a hostile tone.

Usagi
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top