Jump to content

Talk:Ten Commandments: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted to revision 777760039 by Jeffro77 (talk): Not apparently related to editing the article. (TW)
→‎Deuteronomy 27: new section
Line 138: Line 138:


For the same reasons as above, I have also removed the recent addition: "According to the story in Exodus, God inscribed them on two stone tablets, which he gave to Moses on Mount Sinai." The story in Exodus ''does not'' refer to the 'commandments' at Exodus 20:1–17 as the '10 commandments', nor does it specify that ''those commandments'' were inscribed on stone tablets, nor is Moses presented as being on Sinai at the time.--[[User:Jeffro77|<span style='color:#365F91'>'''Jeffro'''</span><span style='color:#FFC000'>''77''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jeffro77|talk]]) 02:40, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
For the same reasons as above, I have also removed the recent addition: "According to the story in Exodus, God inscribed them on two stone tablets, which he gave to Moses on Mount Sinai." The story in Exodus ''does not'' refer to the 'commandments' at Exodus 20:1–17 as the '10 commandments', nor does it specify that ''those commandments'' were inscribed on stone tablets, nor is Moses presented as being on Sinai at the time.--[[User:Jeffro77|<span style='color:#365F91'>'''Jeffro'''</span><span style='color:#FFC000'>''77''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jeffro77|talk]]) 02:40, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

== Deuteronomy 27 ==

I have heard others refer to Deut. 27 as ten commandments. While this is clearly a minority position, I couldn't find any mention of it on this page at all, which seems odd. It is actually 12 commandments, but this claim is also made about other versions. The commandments are in the form of the threat of curses, if you do not follow them. It covers idols, honoring mother and father, lying, murder, and many limits on sex. [[Special:Contributions/24.57.220.238|24.57.220.238]] ([[User talk:24.57.220.238|talk]]) 15:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:22, 22 June 2017

Template:Vital article

Former good article nomineeTen Commandments was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 7, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
December 24, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Good Article Nominee (GAN)

A good article is:

  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    2. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
    3. it contains no original research; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria


— Preceding unsigned comment added by Telpardec (talkcontribs) 19:15, 24 December 2011‎ (UTC)[reply]

14 mitzvot / commandments?

This article needs to mention that the Jewish intellectual Maimonides elucidated way more than just ten commandments:

Ex. 20:2 — To know there is a God

Ex. 20:3 — Not to even think that there are other gods besides Him

Ex. 20:5 — Not to make an idol for yourself

Ex. 20:6 — Not to worship idols in the manner they are worshiped

Ex. 20:6 — Not to worship idols in the four ways we worship God

Ex. 20:7 — Not to take God's Name in vain

Ex. 20:8 — To sanctify the day with Kiddush and Havdalah

Ex. 20:10 — Not to do prohibited labor on the seventh day

Ex. 20:12 — Respect your father or mother

Ex. 20:13 - Not to murder

Ex. 20:13 - Not to have sexual relations with someone else's wife

Ex. 20:13 — Not to kidnap

Ex. 20:13 — Not to testify falsely

Ex. 20:14 — Not to covet and scheme to acquire another's possession

64.180.15.26 (talk) 17:38, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is based on the oral law. Do you have a source? JFW | T@lk 13:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Ten Commandments in the body of the article are confusing

Hi, just went to this article to get the ten commandments from Exodus 20 in a coherent list and instead found ten different commandments from Exodus 34 in a list, labeled as the "new commandments". This to me seems misleading.

The way that particular section was written seemed to possibly contain personal research instead of citing. It would be nice if Exodus 34's "re-written ten commandments" could be referenced as a side note, instead of a whole section dedicated to it without citations. I have no idea from what denomination or religious background the new-commandments concept even comes from; the section didn't say. 71.112.154.205 (talk) 01:52, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I've temporarily removed them into the next section. JFW | T@lk 13:46, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ritual decalogue redux

I was most alarmed to find the following content in "Passages in Exodus and Deuteronomy":

The new commandments given to Moses in Exodus 34:1–28 differ greatly from those in Exodus 20:1–17. There are, in the order as they appear in chapter 34, as follows:
  1. "Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God." Exodus 34:14
  2. "Do not make any idols." Exodus 34:17
  3. "Celebrate the Festival of Unleavened Bread." Exodus 34:18
  4. "The first offspring of every womb belongs to me, including all the firstborn males of your livestock, whether from herd or flock." Exodus 34:19
  5. "Six days you shall labor, but on the seventh day you shall rest; even during the plowing season and harvest you must rest." :Exodus 34:21
  6. "Celebrate the Festival of Weeks with the firstfruits of the wheat harvest, and the Festival of Ingathering at the turn of the year." Exodus 34:22
  7. "Three times a year all your men are to appear before the Sovereign LORD, the God of Israel." Exodus 34:23
  8. "Do not offer the blood of a sacrifice to me along with anything containing yeast, and do not let any of the sacrifice from the Passover Festival remain until morning." Exodus 34:25
  9. "Bring the best of the firstfruits of your soil to the house of the LORD your God." Exodus 34:26
  10. "Do not cook a young goat in its mother's milk." Exodus 34:26
  • (NIV version of the bible)

Over the years we have repeatedly discussed whether the "Ritual Decalogue" is regarded by anyone as mainstream. I have never seen convincing proof that this has been anything more than a theory propounded by the Documentary Hypothesis people. If you ask any member of the public to mention "The Ten Commandments" they will always mention those in Ex 20 and Deut 5, and never those from Ex 34. I think it is therefore completely unacceptable to suggest that the list in Ex 34 is "The Ten Commandments" without any kind of caveat or modifier. Of course there is further discussion in "Critical historical analysis" and I am not suggesting that we avoid the topic as there are enough sufficiently strong sources to warrant a discussion, but we cannot speak about "new commandments" without making it very clear that this is a theory of limited provenance. JFW | T@lk 13:46, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Critical Bible scholars argue that Bibles contain three versions of the Ten Commandments, two almost similar and one very different (see above). This is a mainstream view in Bible scholarship. Sources could be found on Google Books. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:01, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Documentary Hypothesis is no longer the consensus because mainstream Bible scholars have become more radical than Wellhausen, so if anything, the case for biblical inerrancy is worse than DH paints it. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:05, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Tgeorgescu I am aware of the critical scholars' view, but the article was suggesting that this view was widely held and not controversial. As it so happens, this view is not held by a single traditional Jewish commentator that I'm aware of; I have no information on traditional Christian commentators but I suspect they will say the same thing. We can therefore not state that "there is another version of the Ten Commandments" without making it abundantly clear that this is only the view of the critical scholars. JFW | T@lk 15:31, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia relies upon mainstream expert opinion. In this case the experts are Bible scholars (academics, not priests or rabbis). Tgeorgescu (talk) 16:39, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. The point is that the priority of the RD is not unanimously held even by people who hold the documentary hypothesis. Nor is the documentary hypothesis (in its Wellhausen/JEDP form) unanimously held by critical academic scholars. It is quite wrong to suggest that everyone who doubts the priority of the RD must be a fundamentalist who believes in single authorship and Biblical inerrancy and is trying to hush up the truth because it hurts them.
Also, this argument has been trawled through umpteen times already. The point is a semantic one. Whatever the facts about the RD, that is not what people mean by "the Ten Commandments", and not what people are wanting to find out about when they read an article by that name. To be sure, it would be dishonest to withhold the fact that the RD exists and that many authorities believe that it antedates the Ten Commandments we have. But that point is adequately made, and given reasonable prominence, by the article as it stands; there is also a separate article about the Ritual Decalogue. Surely that is enough? There is no need to promote the RD to "a third version of the Ten Commandments" to be presented in parallel with the other two and given equal status, as if this is an earth-shattering fact that has to be shoved in people's faces on every possible occasion. It's an instance of Bernard Levin's Single Issue Fanatic, or the bore in Cruiskeen Lawn with the one pet fact that must be raised in every conversation: "Of Course Dan O'Connell Was A Freemason, Of Course You Knew That". --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) (talk) 12:20, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source for the LXX numbering of the commandments

Could someone source this? It does not appear to be in the LXX. 2602:306:C576:720:8C82:B15:E0B6:D545 (talk) 03:27, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect statements

The article currently states in the lead:

The Ten Commandments are listed twice in the Hebrew Bible, first at Exodus 20:1–17, and then at Deuteronomy 5:6–21. Both versions state that God inscribed them on two stone tablets, which he gave to Moses on Mount Sinai.

This is quite inaccurate. The passage at Exodus 20:1–17 refers to commandments spoken by God directly to the Israelites, it does not refer to those commandments being written on stone tablets, they aren't referred to there as the 10 commandments, and Moses isn't on Sinai at the time (Exodus 19:25). Moses only goes up to the mountain after that, and Exodus only refers to the covenant at Exodus 34:10–28 as the '10 commandments'. Even if the other list (and that given in Deuteronomy) are to be assumed as the 'real' '10 commandments', it remains the fact that the sentence in the lead misrepresents the passage in Exodus 20.--Jeffro77 (talk) 10:40, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:20, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For the same reasons as above, I have also removed the recent addition: "According to the story in Exodus, God inscribed them on two stone tablets, which he gave to Moses on Mount Sinai." The story in Exodus does not refer to the 'commandments' at Exodus 20:1–17 as the '10 commandments', nor does it specify that those commandments were inscribed on stone tablets, nor is Moses presented as being on Sinai at the time.--Jeffro77 (talk) 02:40, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deuteronomy 27

I have heard others refer to Deut. 27 as ten commandments. While this is clearly a minority position, I couldn't find any mention of it on this page at all, which seems odd. It is actually 12 commandments, but this claim is also made about other versions. The commandments are in the form of the threat of curses, if you do not follow them. It covers idols, honoring mother and father, lying, murder, and many limits on sex. 24.57.220.238 (talk) 15:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]