The Real Ten Commandments: Solon vs. Moses

infidels.org ^ | Richard Carrier

[Bluntpoint]

The ten commandments are only absolute when they are convenient.

Your wife, she is mighty attractive, what are your office hours again?

[Bluntpoint]

You evidently have been fortunate enough never to have been around a human cadaver that has been dead for any length of time.

What are you doing next weekend? I will supply the beer!

[spunkets]

" You may rationalize these things any way you like, and believe them too.

I made no rationalization. It's the truth. Moses was building a nation. He was formong the fabric of their society and obtaining land. For your information those were the old days. That's the way things were done back then. Conquest and plunder and other rights violations ruled the Earth. The Israelites opted to change that within their own borders.

"But, for the rest of us, "thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth ... as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee," cannot possibly be stretched to mean "self defense." What threat, exactly, were babies and animals?"

Yes it did mean self defense to them. Did you read the last sentence in the chapter you posted? They wanted all external influence out of their borders. They were separatists. Besides, the rest of the world would kill, or enslave them if they could. That's the way it was back then and still is with some folks, especially the socialists.

So, what is wrong with the commandments, Thou shalt not steal, lie, kill, covet, dishonor your parents, or commit adultery. Does the fact that Moses didn't behave as you would have liked detract from them.

" We just don't believe you, and the more you protest, the more we are convinced its all a big sham."

Would Mr. Kerchief have acted any differently back then? I think not, or he would be either kerchief slave of whoever grabbed his ass first, or the kerchief the deceased.

[A. Pole]

The new, Godless Left refuses to use BC and AD for their dates. Instead, they use B.C.E (Before Current Era or Before Common Era) and C.E. or CE (Current Era or Common Era), rather than the religious abreviations of our legal calendar (BC and AD).

Why? I would rather read C.E. as Christian Era and B.C.E. as Before Christian Era :)

[A. Pole]

Do any serious non-primitive polytheists even exist today?

Yes - Shinto and some currents of Hinduism.

[donmeaker]

Law has several levels.

Physical law: Example-The speed of light is 186,284 miles a second, it is not just a good idea, it is the law. Physical laws take care of it self.

Natural Law: Example: People retain the right of revolution. Of course, Tyrants retain the right of oppression. The strongest wins. Self evident indeed!

Constitutional Law: The prescription of organizations, powers, and prohibitions associated with the founding documents of a nation. It can either be a single document, or a vast number accumulated over time as is done in the UK.

Legislative Law: Made by the legislature, and in the US approved by the executive (or the legislature overrides his veto). This includes rules on filibusters in the legislature itself.

Common law: The body of court cases which provide guidance to judges. Most of this covers procedures in the US since matters of fact are normally reserved to the Jury.

Tradition: habitual practice, which can be changed by any of the above. If physical law changes ( a new value of pi, due to changes in the physical universe) then the traditional value of pi is no longer used, because it doesnt work.

That all men are created equal is not self evident. We all have differences, and wealth, royalty, stature were all unequal. Oh but it sounded so GOOD, and was a mighty poke in the eye to the servants of the king! The D of I was a mighty work of propaganda! By objecting to it the King was cast in the role of tyrant or legal nitpicker, either of which loses.

[donmeaker]

Socrates was not their greatest thinker. He was a traitor!

Athens had fought a war for liberty, and LOST. They were regaining their freedom. Socrates promugated the notion that the state was supreme, the organizing principle of Sparta, who had just defeated Athens.

So, the clever men in the government of Athens set him a puzzle. Governments can act capriciously, and because of that, the power of the state must be restrained. The government of Athens passed a sentence of death by drinking Hemlock on him. To be true to his stated principle, he would have to accept it, or he could run away, accept exile, and be shown to be a hypocrite. Socrates accepted the Hemlock, demonstrating that the State must be restrained, and gained immorality due to his student Plato.

By the way, Plato was not present at his death. Hemlock is excrutiating, and according to Plato, he just fell asleep. Sparta, and their partisan, Socrates, was the spiritual founder of statists everywhere.

[donmeaker]

"Descartes-style skepticism of all experience "

I kind of liked Descartes. He observed. His premise before "I think, therefore i am" was I doubt, therefore I think".

So know you know what I think of faith. If you do not doubt, then.....

[donmeaker]

According to Genesis, Ishmael was the first born of abram. Issac was never the only son, and if Sarah was Abram's sister, then Issac was the child of incest.

Abram had another wife too, Keturah. Sons mentioned include Midian, Hanoch, Abidia, Eldaah, Ephah, Epher. Each was given land.

The oldest part of the bible is the story of David and Jonathan. The rest of the bible was written backwards! Judges was written in the time of Solomon to create a common people. Deuteronomy was written in the time of Josiah to justify the authority of priests. It is an old story, that little stories are turned into big stories. It happened in the New Testament too, Matthew being written based on the desire to flesh out Mark, and dump in as many prophecies as possible. Of course, the author of Matthew (4th century) began by lying about his authorship. His prophecies used the greek version of the old testament, and many prophecies such as that of the virgin birth have no basis in the Hebrew or Aramaic texts.

It still goes on. The Koran, and the Book of Mormon are recent examples of religious fraud. Joseph Smith was found guilty of plagerism after he lifted the manuscript of a book of fiction from the house of a doctor whose well he had been hired to dig. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a forgery of the Tsarist police based on earlier forgeries in France, also fit in here. Frauds are usually compiled for political purposes. After a few years, they get accepted by some lunatics, and a few hundred years later, the fraud is the "Word of God".

If you would like your eyes opened, read "The sacred mushroom and the cross" by john allegro.

[donmeaker]

Xenophon was from Athens. While he fought, he fought as an Athenian general. After he retired he retired to Sparta.

[Phsstpok]

According to Genesis, Ishmael was the first born of abram.

And you point is? Isn't that what I said?

If you would like your eyes opened, read "The sacred mushroom and the cross" by john allegro.

OK, that's just stupid. Read any Von Daniken lately? It's better than Allegro and a far sight more believable. Concentrate on this:

NON NOBIS DOMINAE NON NOBIS SED NOMINI TUO DA GLORIAM

[PatrickHenry]

Xenophon was from Athens.

Well, poo!

[WOSG]

He was quite a good thinker, but you shouldnt be too fond of Descartes. He was wrong to trust inner "reason" over real experience, he "I think therefore I am" is flawed inasmuch as identity itself can be a mirage (think of a psychotic multi-personality disordered individual). The sort of thinking that allows you to defy common experience is what has led to the evils of ideologies, moral relativism, nihilism, communism, etc. in short, a host of idealisms that are wrong and dangerous. Doubt is a thinking "process" not a valid epistemology nor conclusion.

[WOSG]

"I would rather read C.E. as Christian Era and B.C.E. as Before Christian Era."

I still like BC/AD, but a pinch, that will do as a fine retort the PC abbreviation police!

[WOSG]

"none of the Ten Commandments were incorporated into Federal Law when our Nation was founded."

This doesnt surprise at at all as much as the Federal Govt was limited in scope to matters between states, not regulation of individuals. That kind of obtrusiveness only started in the New Deal era and after.

The States themselves had "police" powers, and did incorporate much of the Ten Commandments.


As for the history: Alfred the Great prefaced his laws with the Ten Commandments. English common law grew out of the same root.

[WOSG]

I am sorry you misunderstand the "natural law" concept as understood by our Founders and thinkers of the enlightenment. and earlier. Aquinas had a quite different take on justice and 'natural law'.

Are you another soul 'lost' to modernist "will to power" relativism? Hope not.

[WOSG]

"Moral relativism" is a modern invention.

The dilemma you speak of is quite different and is one which was discussed and dispatched my medieval scholars and age-old philosopher - to wit: Is it possible for God to be immoral?
Of course, this question is only of interest if you actually believe in God. Is that not so?

Otherwise your point is debate-tactic sophistry. The retort in such case would be God's claim in the Bible: "My ways are not your ways". Of course, God is smart enough to keep his bases covered!

[Hank Kerchief]

Is it possible for God to be immoral?

The real question would be, "is it possible for God to be moral?

Morality requires a choice between right and wrong. If, as most theologians have taught, right and wrong are dictated by God, God cannot be a moral being. He never has to make a choice, because whatever He chooses is morally correct, because He decides.

The problem is, this is essentially the ammoral principle of "might-makes-right."

Hank

[Aric2000]

That was an interesting article, thanks for the link.

Perhaps a case could be made that it get it's own thread going, or is one already started?

[Aric2000]

And actually, the true translation is, "thou shalt not murder"

it is not kill, making war is NOT exempted through the 10 commandments.

War is therefore OK, to kill your enemies before they kill you is OK with the Jewish and Christian god, and therefore the Muslim one too I suppose, since they are all supposedly the same god, except the dude has got to be some kind of Schizo if that is the case, Multiple personality and all that Psychobabble.