359
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Most "Christians" are also unaware of the extra ones, despite them being listed in black and white in the bible.

In Exodus 20, Moses is given the tablets containing the ten commandments, which are listed off in the text of the bible in that chapter and are the ten that "everyone knows."

Then, in Exodus 32:19, Moses gets so pissed off at witnessing his people worshiping the golden calf that he breaks the tablets that have the commandments carved on them. In Exodus 33 he goes back up the mountain to ask god what to do about it. In Exodus 34, god goes as far as to say unto Moses, "Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest." Throughout the chapter he does so, listing off a screed that contains a couple of the original commandments (no other gods before me, and remember the sabbath) but the rest of his directions are quite different from the first list.

Further, there is a recitation of the first ten commandments in Deuteronomy 5, where a different explanation for the sabbath day is given. In Exodus god claims the sabbath is holy because he created the world in six days and the seventh day is a day of rest, but in Deuteronomy he says the sabbath actually holy because the people of Israel were slaves in Egypt and god gave them rest in the form of their freedom. Moses further goes on to say after this recitation that these were the words god spoke and he "added no more," which as we saw in Exodus 34 is bogus.

I guess actually it's 18 in total, then. We can treat it as a trick question for Mike Johnson.

[-] kromem@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There's an interesting detail to the whole "Moses breaking the original tablets in response to the golden calf worship."

This parallels the alleged reforms of Josiah.

Josiah "finds a new book of laws" and then suddenly carries out major religious reforms. He performed human sacrifice slaughtering the priests of the high places on their altars to defile them. He hides away the Ark, the anointing oil, the manna jar. He gets rid of the Asherah worship.

And he gets rid of the golden calves in Bethel and Dan while getting rid of the old laws and bringing new ones.

Oh, and he institutes the Passover narrative.

So suddenly in the events around Moses, the central part of that Passover narrative, is a scene that has old laws being destroyed in response to golden calf worship and new laws taking their place.

Very sus.

Even more sus is that Josiah's reforms appear to be anachronistic given the correspondence over a century later between Elephantine and Jerusalem.

We should really be taking Hecataeus of Adbera's claim that the scriptures of the Jews had recently been significantly altered around the Exodus narrative under the Persian and Macedonian conquests more seriously.

Edit: Also if the Shapira scroll is legit, there was originally an 11th commandment.

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

SMH. I can't stand when fantasy authors have such shoddy and inconsistent worldbuilding. Doesn't anyone proofread and run the manuscript by beta readers anymore?

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Fun fact, the King James version (which wingnuts love to swear adherence to, maybe because of all the flowery language) was supposed to be the edit that fixed many of these worldbuilding gaffes. Obviously, it categorically failed to do so -- it even still includes both mildly contradictory accounts of the creation of the world in Genesis, which another poster here already mentioned.

[-] killeronthecorner@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

It also includes contradictions on pretty much every part of the gospels in relation to each other but, to be fair, that's the case in all of them.

Does beg the question of why they didn't align them when they had the chance. Some times the word of God is more malleable than others I guess.

[-] 1024_Kibibytes@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

The original King James version included the apocrypha, which are found in the Catholic versions, but booksellers realized they could sell more copies if they left out the apocrypha. That's why most copies today don't have the apocrypha.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

They did try to align them. Mark original ends at the Tomb, eventually scribes started adding details post-tomb to Mark. Which is why the Mark Gospel we have now reads like it has three separate endings.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

No one reads the KJV except people seeking a doctrine in biblical studies. Everyone reads the revised KJV. The original version was plagiarized off an earlier English Bible instead of going directly to the source material. So even when it was first published it sounded like an old time way of speaking. Also it contained non-canon books that publishers would later take out to save on costs.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Well to be fair none of these people knew they were writing the Bible. You are some ancient scribe. The local king/warlord wants you to take some old story or scroll and revamp it to argue how great he is. Can't really refuse a guy with a throne of human bones especially since a. He is paying you b. This is your chance to write a fanfic, maybe it won't suck this time.

Over and over the translations and copies were altered. As each group tried to prove that they had it right and everyone before them had it wrong.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Which is part of the reason why it is thought that the final editors, prior to the 3rd century, were fusing two different narratives together. Same thing happens in Genesis and to a lesser extent in Mark.

this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
359 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19126 readers
1982 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS