Valiantly continuing my apparently hopeless quest to find some part of the Bible worthy of basing a rational moral system on, I turn now to the Sixth Commandment.

#6 – “Thou shalt not kill.”

Just when I was about ready to abandon my quest, I come to this – the Commandment that perhaps has the most going for it of any of them. It’s short (in fact, the shortest of them all at just 4 words totaling 16 letters); it apparently leaves little room for misunderstanding; it touches on an obviously important moral issue with obvious real world consequences – behavior that’s truly a matter of life and death; it’s perhaps the most quoted of all the Commandments; it seems to be the one people have most in mind when they say we ought to be posting the Ten Commandments in all our schools to prevent future Columbines; and it seems to be part of virtually every rational moral system I’ve ever heard of (though often qualified or modified a bit).

Alas, things are never simple when it comes to the Bible.

First off, it’s odd and troubling that such an important law is buried in the middle of the Ten Commandments. Less significant ones bracket it. Less important ones are given far more room and emphasis. This creates the impression that God didn’t take it as seriously as He should have. And if He didn’t, why should we?

Secondly, it’s one more Commandment that’s just given – plop. No explanation accompanies it. No rationale is given for its inclusion here. The consequences of following or not following it are not described. This further undermines its significance, and it also seems to reduce the likelihood of people actually following it.

Thirdly, it turns out that it is neither as obvious nor as understandable as it seems. Some people think it actually means or should read “Thou shalt not murder.”

By saying this, they force us all to go on another long detour down a rabbit hole….

Imagine you’re a teacher in a classroom. Imagine that you’ve given the following assignment: “Come up with a list of ten guiding laws or principles for moral behavior. You have as much time as you need to complete this assignment. You may have anyone and everyone help you. Go!” A couple thousand years later, a student comes in and gives you the Bible. The student tells you it was in effect written by God Himself. You spend a lot of time looking it over very carefully. In the course of doing so, you read “Thou shalt not kill,” and have a few problems with that. You whip out your red pen, leave a few comments, grade the Bible accordingly, and hand it back. Next day, the student comes storming back in and says, “Unfair! It really meant to say ‘Thou shalt not murder’!” What do you do? Do you say, “Oh, silly me – of course!”? Do you say, “Yes, I can see how thousands of years might not be enough time to polish a simple, 4-word sentence – here’s an extension”? Do you say, “Oh, sure – every perfect God is entitled to a few mistakes even when it comes to what’s perhaps the most important thing He’s ever said.” Do you decide to practice your own sort of “an eye for an eye” justice and say “Well, if YOU get to say ‘kill really means murder,’ then I get to say that ‘Thou shalt not steal’ really should read ‘Thou shalt now steal’ – so hand over your lunch money – NOW! – and nobody will get hurt!”? Or do you do what I’d do and reassign this student to a remedial reading class before he or she can waste anymore of your time?

Ok, that’s admittedly just my initial, visceral response to being jerked around this way. Here’s my completely logical, rational response for those who might be interested.

If God or the Bible meant “murder” instead of “kill,” God and the Bible should have said “murder” instead of “kill.”

On what grounds do I grant you the right to amend them? If you have the right to amend the Bible to better fit your beliefs and arguments, why don’t I? Why is it that defenders of the Bible always seem to claim the right to re-interpret the Bible to better fit current sensibilities but they never ever grant others the right to re-interpret it for the worse?

The claim has been made that “kill” is the result of a mistranslation or a silly error if not an outright act of stupidity. If so, it is an error that the scholars who put together the King James Version, the Revised Standard Version, the Catholic New American Bible, the Jerusalem Bible, the Geneva Bible, and others have all made. If these scholars managed to mangle something so simple and important as the Sixth Commandment, it would be foolish to trust them with regards to anything at all, really, so we might as well throw all these Bibles away as inherently unreliable and untrustworthy.

The New International Version, on the other hand, renders the Sixth Commandment as “You shall not murder.” But then it also differs from other versions of the Bible in rather interesting ways. For example, the KJV and the RSV say that Ahaziah began to reign when he was 22 years old in 2 Kings 8:26 but 42 years old in 2 Chronicles 22:2. The NIV changes this to read “22″ in both locations. Apparently we are to believe that hundreds of previous translators had as much trouble with simple numbers as they did with simple words like “kill.” Forgive me for thinking it more likely that the translators of the NIV are merely fudging inconvenient words and contradictions for their own purposes.

Going one level deeper, the original Hebrew version of the Sixth Commandment seems to use the word “ratsach.” When “ratsach” appears in Deut. 4:42 and Num. 35:27, however, even the NIV renders it as “kill.”

The New Testament, on the other hand, seems to have been written originally in Greek. The KJV and the RSV quote Jesus as saying “Do not kill” in Mark 10:19 where he repeats some of the Ten Commandments. It also quotes Paul as saying the same thing in Romans 13:9. If the translators of these Bibles are confused, it’s a complex multilingual confusion which casts further doubt on their ability to do anything right.

For what it’s worth, Quakers and other Christian pacifists have sacrificed a lot over the centuries in the unshakable belief that these translators got “Thou shalt not kill” exactly right.

Of course it’s possibly that we can sidestep the whole “murder/kill” issue by simply going to Gen. 9:6 – “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” The KJV, RSV, and the NIV pretty much agree here. That sounds like a prohibition against killing to me – but then it also sounds like it mandates the execution of the executioner, too. That doesn’t make sense to me, but I read the Bible with an open mind and refuse to impose my version of sense on it. If it wants to be nonsensical, hey – who are we to clean up after it?

For the sake of argument, let’s assume for a moment that the correct translation or interpretation of the Sixth Commandment is in fact “Thou shalt not murder.” The sad fact is, God often excused murder in the Old Testament – when He wasn’t actively ordering it. Cain, after all, got away with murder (Gen. 4:15). So did Moses, who murdered an Egyptian (Exodus 2:11-12). Jacob’s sons murdered all the men of a city, yet were protected by God for it (Gen. 34; 35:5). Moses and Joshua both conducted wars of extermination against their enemies in which countless men, women, and children were murdered, and they obviously pleased God in the process. Jael – called the most blessed of all women by the Bible (Judges 5:24) – lured a man to her tent and brutally murdered him while he slept (Judges 4:17-21). Samson murdered and robbed 30 men after he lost a bet because of his own stupidity – and he allegedly committed these murders with God’s help (Judges 14:19). David in effect murdered Uriah in order to steal Uriah’s wife for himself and God punished him by killing his innocent baby – not him. Jesus is commonly considered the Prince of Love and Peace, yet Luke 19:27 quotes him as saying, “But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” Paul consented to the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58-8:1) and generally terrorized Christians before joining them. After joining them, he said “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient….” (1 Cor. 6:12).

If “Thou shalt not murder” can be made the basis of a sound moral system, it would seem that there’s no evidence for it in the Bible.

Do we have any better luck if we assume the correct translation of Exodus 20:13 is “Thou shalt not kill”?

Let’s see.

We get as far as Exodus 29:11 before God orders the killing of a bullock, and as far as Exodus 29:20 before He orders the killing of a ram. In fact, God orders the killing of animals at least 16 times after giving Moses the Ten Commandments. Clearly, the Sixth Commandment – at best – must be rephrased as “Thou shalt not kill other human beings.”

Alas, this won’t work either. Exodus 21:12 says “He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.” The Sixth Commandment has to be modified again to allow for the execution of murderers.

But wait – Exodus 21:15 says that “And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.” Apparently, non-fatal blows delivered by children to their parents merit a bit of killing, too.

Exodus 21:16 extends the killing to those who steal and/or sell men.

Exodus 21:17 extends the killing to those children who merely curse their parents.

Exodus 21:29 extends the killing to the owners of murderous oxen.

Exodus 22:18 extends the killing to witches.

Exodus 22:19 extends the killing to those guilty of having sex with animals.

Exodus 31:15 extends the killing to those who work on the sabbath.

Leviticus 20:2 extends the killing to whoever “gives his seed to Moloch.”

Leviticus 20:10 extends the killing to adulterers.

Leviticus 20:13 extends the killing to men who engage in homosexual acts.

Leviticus 20:27 extends the killing to mediums and wizards.

Leviticus 24:16 extends the killing to those who “blasphemeth” the name of the Lord.

Number 1:51 extends the killing to strangers who approach the tabernacle.

Numbers 31:17 extends the killing to the male children of enemies defeated in battle. It extends the killing to the enemy’s non-virginal women as well. (The virgins are merely forced to marry their holy rapists.)

Deuteronomy 13:5 extends the killing to those prophets and “dreamers of dreams” who would lure people away from God and the Ten Commandments. (Do you think Jesus was aware of this when he told people it was ok to work on the sabbath? Just wondering.)

Deuteronomy 13:6-10 extends the killing to family members and friends who try to convert Jews to other religions. (Do you think Paul was aware of this passage?)

Joshua 1:18 extends the killing to anyone who disobeys Joshua in any way.

Joshua 6:21 extends the killing to all the inhabitants of Jericho save for one harlot.

1 Samuel 15:3 extends the killing to every enemy man, woman, child, ox, sheep, camel, and ass. (Apparently ancient Middle Easterners did not keep hamsters, gerbils, or goldfish.)

And Ecclesiastes 3:3 assures us that there is a time to kill – just in case there might be any doubt left in our minds after all this slaughter.

Did I miss anything? Probably. The Bible is one big book and I tend to lose patience with it after the first 10 or 20 moral outrages allegedly sanctioned by God. Suffice it to say that whatever system of ethics it attempts to establish with “Thou shalt not kill” it more than obliterates in succeeding pages.

No wonder those people who want the Ten Commandments posted in our schools in an attempt to reduce violence seem to me to be as misguided as those who might want to post the wit and wisdom of Genghis Khan or Jeffrey Dahmer for the same reason. Even if the wit and wisdom of these men somehow includes a few valuable moral precepts, their actions simply make it impossible for me to take them seriously.

So it is with the God of the Bible.

Continue to Commandments 7-10…

[Enjoy this post? Go to Atheist Under Ur Bed's Journal for more Sane Wailings!]