DiscussMormonism.com

...and deliver the 10 Commandments to him? These questions were asked of John Spong. He answers them below. I think his response deserves thoughtful consideration:

Dear Hxxxxx,

No! God did not dictate the Ten Commandments or the Torah to Moses on Mt. Sinai. There are in fact three different versions of the Ten Commandments in the Bible. The oldest one is from the oldest strand of the Torah, and was written around the year 950 BCE. It is found in Exodus 34. It is quite cultic with the last commandment of the ten being (v 26) "thou shalt not boil a kid in its mother's milk". To my knowledge I have never even been tempted to break that commandment! The familiar version of the Ten Commandments is in Exodus 20 but it represents at least two sources, one from the 9th century or about 850 BCE and one from the period of the Exile, in the 6th century or about 560 BCE. Keep in mind that Moses lived around 1250 BCE.

The third version of the Ten Commandments is found in Deuteronomy 5 and comes from the late 7th century, or about 625 BCE. This version is similar to the Exodus 20 version, but with one striking difference. In Deuteronomy 5 the reason for observing a day of rest on the Sabbath was that the people must remember that they were once slaves and even slaves need a day of rest. In Exodus 20 the reason for the Sabbath observance was to follow God's example since God rested from the work of creation on the seventh day. This explanation, we now know, is part of what we identify as the addition of the priestly writers to the Exodus version of the Ten Commandments. The priestly writers did their work during the Babylonian Exile 586-500 B.C.E. and among their other contributions to the biblical text was the six-day creation story with which the Bible now opens. That story was not written when Deuteronomy was composed so the author of that book had to have another reason for the Sabbath.

Other parts of the commandments have been changed in human practice over the years. Christians have, for example, abandoned the seventh day as the Sabbath of rest in favor of the first day of the week as a weekly celebration of the resurrection. The commandment about taking the name of the Lord in vain originally had nothing to do with profanity or swearing. It had to do with the fact that business deals were secured by the two people clasping hands and swearing in the name of the Lord to be true to their word. If they broke their word, they had taken the name of the Lord in vain.
The commandment against murder excluded legal executions, the killing of prisoners of war and killing in warfare itself. The commandment against adultery was coupled with the practice of polygamy as the style of marriage for centuries. Stealing is hard to define since private property was all but unheard of in those days.

The Ten Commandments were in fact the laws of the community. They grew out of the life of the community and the community invoked God to get them established and obeyed. If one broke the law, they said God would punish. In fact it was the community that punished and enforced the rules.

It seems that Jesus transformed them all when he summed the commandments up by saying love God and love your neighbor as yourself.

John Shelby Spong (B,I,UL, added by RM)

It seems to me the more we learn, there seems less likely hood that the Bible contains little that can survive as it once did. Thought? Roger

Sorry folks, looks like i missed a step. I wanted to comment in the 'Quote' post. "Senior-Slip" ;-) :-( Anyway...

While this piece of Spongism didn't evoke any comment, it might have stimulated some 'unspoken' thought?? OTOH, maybe every one is past giving any credibility to Moses, and/or the Bible? (We should be so lucky?! :-) The significant thing to me:

When/since the Bible has been microscoped to reveal its inconsistencies, irregularities, and fantasias, there seems little reason to give ANY credibility to whom ever followed with THEIR theology. Placing Joseph Smith simply as a late comer into a centuries old list of noteable unbelievables. And, as with the others, hardly worth time discussing, except possible as an anomally...

OTOH, those who recognize(d) the Universal truths--pertaining to human justice, and the common-good, that are contained within Bible pages, especially in the NT--have indeed had their conscience piqued to rise above our beastly ancestors.

Such folks, be they Christian or therwise, serve (not exploit) their neighbors as taught by the man-Jesus. (and others) The whole of Humanity then experiences--and enjoys--"God's" grace: Free and natural access to Universal resources that are available to ALL.

Accessed equitably, produced equitably, and distributed equitably World wide. No human caste should be forced to survive as dump-pickers. No human caste should monopolize wealth while others go hungry, unsheltered and ignorant...

To that end, i am encouraged when the Bible is understood for what it is. I thought Spong's answer, helped that... Maybe just mee? Warm regards, Roger

Roger,

I'm sorry this didn't get any responses. For me, personally, I was already aware of this sort of information. I was enamored of Spong when I first left the church and was still clinging to some sort of god-belief.

I will say that this is one reason I don't view regarding the Book of Mormon as "the word of God" any more problematic than viewing the Bible as "the word of God". Although, obviously, the Bible has one advantage in that it is a genuinely ancient document written by a real group of people, much of its contents were "created" in roughly the same manner as the Book of Mormon was created - a human being writing something and then attributing it to either God, or fallaciously attributing it to some ancient prophet speaking for God.

Yes Beastie, i think we're on the same page. Probably more on that page than many might like to think?? Maybe those who cannot be fooled are becoming an increasingly larger number, if not a more vocal number, eh? Maybe a non-issue? YIKES! What will happen to MDB?? Warm regards, Roger

beastie wrote:written by a real group of people

Oh my! I had no idea that Joseph Smith, Emma Smith, Martin Harris, Oliver Cowdery et al. were all fictional!

The final blow to my testimony.

Roger Morrison wrote:When/since the Bible has been microscoped to reveal its inconsistencies, irregularities, and fantasias, there seems little reason to give ANY credibility to whom ever followed with THEIR theology. Placing Joseph Smith simply as a late comer into a centuries old list of noteable unbelievables. And, as with the others, hardly worth time discussing, except possible as an anomally...

I think the problem is that Joseph created a following, just like the men who wrote the books of the Bible created a following. Perhaps it would be beneficial to study why some religions "take" and others don't? Why did the Jews prevail for centuries, while other religions that started in the same time period died out? Why did Christianity take hold and still prevails, although it's a tad bit younger than Judaism? Why has Islam prevailed?

A combination of strong leaders, political might, and money?

"inconsistencies, irregularities and fantasies."

Mr Spong notes serveral versions of ten commandments. I have seen other speculated possiblities as well. One curious thing about his conclusion about this is that the information is hardly hidden. It has been right there in the text for all Christian and Jewish readers for a couple of thosand years. Not everybody concludes the same thing from the observation as Mr Spong though it is a possible conclusion.

It was only in noticing that inconsistencies irregularties etc that I started to find the Old Testament interesting. In setting aside completely the idea that it was composed by special authorities and instead seeing it as a living record of a peoples faith and living experience that the book became for me human and thus interesting.

I was at that time interested in how different minority groups might hold onto their own tradition and identity as a part of resistence to elimiination by controlling empires. I noticed that the old testament is an example of such a struggle.

It is interesting that it outlasted the predatory empires so completely that we sometimes forget about that struggle completely as if the Jews were the empire, hardly.

I was thinking of Harmonys question, why. For Judism it is hardly support of money and power. The religion only occasionally had the support of the kings in its own tiny little country. It may have occasionally had the advantage of being so small that it got ignored.

Christianity would have been similar for first three centuries. Of course imperial favor changed that into a completely different social role. It seems pretty difficult to be sure how things would have gone without that favor.

One could make some general observation. A religioun must be compelling enough to capture peoples interest and entheusiasm. It must be flexible enough to deal with the changing circumstances of life. It must genereate ideas that at least allow people to believe and continue to learn.

Perhaps that could said by saying that a religion has to inspire the kind of understanding that leads people to seek life and the kind of positive decisions that lead to spiritual life. (i am thinking to the phrase spritiual life as something existing in this world between real people not just some supernatural attachment to our life.) I think religions which do not do this as well die away by neglect.

I am going to add a little observation that at least fits here. Atheists frequestly describe religion as in the business of explaining confusing things about reality such is why lightning, Zeus. It sets up a nice argument but completely misses why people have ever been interested in religoun. It does not provide fake science except by accident. Instead it supplies a story of life through which people share the important moments of life and share the meaning. It organizes peoples values and aspirations so they can continue through change chaos and disappointement. It reminds us of values we constantly risk forgetting like responsibliities to others. those who would llike to replace religion will be perpetually disappointed if they expect sciences explanations of lightning to do away with the interest in Zeus.

On authors,
It may be a disappointment that Samuel is not written by Samuel. Kings was not written by Mr King. Interestingly it seems accepted is studious circles that Chronicles was written by the Chronicler.

I doubt very much Psalms come from David. well perhaps maybe a few. Instead they appear to be a collection by many people over many centuries. they have been reworked and added to. This is all part of why they are such a strong part of the Old Testament. They are not just one persons view but the conversation of many.

There are parts that clearly are one identifiable person. Jeremiah or Amos. It is true Isaiah is not only an individual but some followers as well. That is good. Now it does mean that the little phrase about Cyrus doesn't prove inspriation. It likely was written after the name became part of current events. Good riddance to a silly proof.

Thanks Huck. An excellent post! Well thought, expressed, clear, concise, not arguementive, no sarcasm, and meaningful. A model for other threads. Yes, that is how i too see it. When seen that way, not as "God's word" one can appreciate for what it is, not for what it isn't: "God's word."
It needs no defence.

Some of its characters, Ab, Ike, and Jak specifically, IMSCO, are not role models. They are folks of their genes and time. More like Jesse James, Robin Hood, and King Arthur... I often wonder, had Jacob not been favoured by his sicko mother over his twin Essau, "What a Wonderful World" this might have been ;-) ???

Yesterday, i had one of my best-ever church experiences. It was like "WOW!" A non-denom group, "The Church Without Walls" in Lakeland Florida. Not a Service in traditional terms. It was a Concert. A concerted-effort to inform, instruct and inspire. AND, it did.

A wonderful Black influence in Music, Spirit, Style, and Warmth, congregation an inspiring interracial mix... Apart from that ambience, the Latino Ministers/Pastors, Scott and Cindy Thomas were outstanding "Presenters"... My point: He developed his theme from Abraham's experiences--his maid/child-bearer, and the Promised Land in unique ways and meanings. The morals drawn were not the norm, but were seen as "applicable". Rather than "acceptable" as "God's" will. Since this was the last Sunday of the year he tied it in with moving into "Your Promised Land". Which necessitates leaving 'stuff' behind": "Let it go!" Which included anger, animosity, fears, anxieties, poor relation ships, guilt, possesions dragging one down, self destructive habits et al...

Your posts reinforced that approach. Not new to me, but more respected and appreciated. Thanks.

Intersting that you mention Zeus. Just been reading about "His"(?) clash with Prometheus. Mythical but very modeled in reality. So much to learn. Warm regards, Roger

harmony wrote:

Roger Morrison wrote:When/since the Bible has been microscoped to reveal its inconsistencies, irregularities, and fantasias, there seems little reason to give ANY credibility to whom ever followed with THEIR theology. Placing Joseph Smith simply as a late comer into a centuries old list of noteable unbelievables. And, as with the others, hardly worth time discussing, except possible as an anomally...

I think the problem is that Joseph created a following, just like the men who wrote the books of the Bible created a following. Perhaps it would be beneficial to study why some religions "take" and others don't? Why did the Jews prevail for centuries, while other religions that started in the same time period died out? Why did Christianity take hold and still prevails, although it's a tad bit younger than Judaism? Why has Islam prevailed?

A combination of strong leaders, political might, and money?

Harmony, i appologize for not getting back to You sooner. Good questions and "thinking". I can only put forward my own rationals as conditioned by my experiences:

1. More people are followers than leaders. As such they are like iron flakes--no pun intended--looking for a magnet. Magnets coming in all shapes, sizes, appeals and powers. Even electros... Then we have the Pyed Piper story :-)

2. Leaders, generally speaking, have an egenda that may, or may not, be all together altruistic. But they hold out BIG carrots that attract those with a need of vit-A, so to speak. (Maybe silly :-) Anyway, many "needs", many "remedies"...

3. Big difference between those Leaders who instruct, and those who enthrawl. Generally when one is instructed, they take their instructions, apply them and move on.

The enthrawled however, generally speaking, may become fixated/addicted to/with the need of continuous enthrawlment. Never fully informed or satisfied/gratified, and possibly become eternal patients of their "Physician". Interesting, Jesus is said to have said, there are, "those who need not a physician." Hmmmn...

4. Since, generally speaking, the greatest human fear is DEATH, then the greatest human need is to address that fear with some semblance of satifaction. Religion, and its leaders have attempted to do that, without much of a difference, or imagination.

THEN, along comes Joseph Smith with an innovative, creative, and very unconventional--to the point of rejection by the majority--presentation that appeals to disidents of the conventional.

Joseph is a very strong magnet to ferrous-metal types, following that anology. At the same time, nonferrous metals such as stainless steel or copper alloys are not drawn to ANY magnet, or "Leader" who is appealing to fear of life's mortal ending, and offering immortality.

Those death-oriented religions, or sects therein, will remain popular until knowledge, personal self-confidence, and responsibility for ones actions, lifts them from the need of a saviour from sin, and the fear leaving their body to the elements from which it came. Another point of interest, to me, this is srtongly alluded to in Genesis, simply as a matter of fact, not of fear.

The above is not neccessarily meant as answers, just some thoughts to consider... Warm regards, Roger