Comments on: Bible-Based Morality? The Third Commandment http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/ Atheism & Religious Skepticism Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:23:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Ray_Light http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-5471 Ray_Light Sun, 04 Oct 2009 01:35:04 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-5471 If the Third Commandment is all about respect, as you say, why is that such a big deal? Be respectful, is that so terrible? Is it such a difficult thing to ask? Parents expect respect from their children; bosses expect it from their coworkers. Why is it so strange that God requires it as well, especially since He is very much like our father? Are parents labeled tyrants because they demand respect? Are bosses crybabies for expecting respect in the office? Would a spouse be out of line for requiring that you treat her respectfully? No, and if you did not respect her she would likely leave you, as will God. Again, these Commandments revolve around love. If you love Him you will do them; if you don’t, you won’t. There was a woman who had a husband in the military. He ran a very strict house and she was miserable in the marriage. Every day he would give her a checklist of things she had to accomplish that day. Do the laundry, wash the dishes, mail these letters, straighten the attic etc. After a few years passed he was killed in the line of duty and she eventually remarried. She loved her new husband and was much happier in her second marriage. One day while cleaning the attic she came across one of her first husbands' notes and she became angry at all he had required her do. Then she began to cry as she read the list. Clean windows, do laundry, wash dishes, clean fridge. She had not realized it until that moment, but she had been doing all of the very same things for her new husband; the difference being that she was now doing them out of love and the desire to please her husband rather than taking orders from someone she did not care about. The same can be said of our relationship with God. If you love him you will keep the Commandments, not by force, but out of love. That is why study and the development of a relationship are so important. If the Third Commandment is all about respect, as you say, why is that such a big deal? Be respectful, is that so terrible? Is it such a difficult thing to ask? Parents expect respect from their children; bosses expect it from their coworkers. Why is it so strange that God requires it as well, especially since He is very much like our father? Are parents labeled tyrants because they demand respect? Are bosses crybabies for expecting respect in the office? Would a spouse be out of line for requiring that you treat her respectfully? No, and if you did not respect her she would likely leave you, as will God. Again, these Commandments revolve around love. If you love Him you will do them; if you don’t, you won’t.

There was a woman who had a husband in the military. He ran a very strict house and she was miserable in the marriage. Every day he would give her a checklist of things she had to accomplish that day. Do the laundry, wash the dishes, mail these letters, straighten the attic etc. After a few years passed he was killed in the line of duty and she eventually remarried. She loved her new husband and was much happier in her second marriage. One day while cleaning the attic she came across one of her first husbands' notes and she became angry at all he had required her do. Then she began to cry as she read the list. Clean windows, do laundry, wash dishes, clean fridge. She had not realized it until that moment, but she had been doing all of the very same things for her new husband; the difference being that she was now doing them out of love and the desire to please her husband rather than taking orders from someone she did not care about. The same can be said of our relationship with God. If you love him you will keep the Commandments, not by force, but out of love. That is why study and the development of a relationship are so important.

]]> By: Ray_Light http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-5470 Ray_Light Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:52:10 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-5470 The wording of the Third Commandment is not a matter of “editing,” it is a matter of translation. Some versions of the Bible can be more difficult to understand than others. If it is hard to get a clear understanding of what is being said, try starting with a more simplified version and working your way up to other translations as your skill and understanding increases. Here is a version that makes it quite plain: “You are not to make use of the name of the Lord your God for an evil purpose, whoever takes the Lord’s name on his lips for an evil purpose will be judged a sinner by the Lord.” - Bible in Basic English The wording of the Third Commandment is not a matter of “editing,” it is a matter of translation. Some versions of the Bible can be more difficult to understand than others. If it is hard to get a clear understanding of what is being said, try starting with a more simplified version and working your way up to other translations as your skill and understanding increases. Here is a version that makes it quite plain:

“You are not to make use of the name of the Lord your God for an evil purpose, whoever takes the Lord’s name on his lips for an evil purpose will be judged a sinner by the Lord.” – Bible in Basic English

]]> By: Ray_Light http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-7005 Ray_Light Sat, 04 Jul 2009 17:51:09 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-7005 Several reasons were just listed, forgive my repetition but apparently they were not clear. The same word (in Hebrew) was used for Isaac when he was in his twenties and with Joseph when he was in his thirties, this should indicate “young men” to you and not “little youths.” Solomon used this word for himself (1 Kings 3:7) after his father died and he was king; and it was also used in regard to the age of the men in the army in 1 Kings 20:14-15. This should clearly indicate “young men” to you as well because Solomon was not on the throne as a “small boy” and it certainly would not make sense for an army to be made up of “little children.” Word and phrases can change meaning over time and expressions from other countries in other languages can fog things up a bit too. Even words in our own language today can have very different meanings. For example, if someone asked me if I drank anything today I would say yes, I had water. But if a police officer pulled me over and asked me if I had anything to drink today my answer would be no, I do not drink. Returning to the subject of children and youth, think of a 25-year-old male. Those younger than him would refer to him as a man while those several years older than him would call him a boy, child, youth, or young man; same person, very different words to describe him. Several reasons were just listed, forgive my repetition but apparently they were not clear. The same word (in Hebrew) was used for Isaac when he was in his twenties and with Joseph when he was in his thirties, this should indicate “young men” to you and not “little youths.” Solomon used this word for himself (1 Kings 3:7Open Link in New Window) after his father died and he was king; and it was also used in regard to the age of the men in the army in 1 Kings 20:14-15Open Link in New Window. This should clearly indicate “young men” to you as well because Solomon was not on the throne as a “small boy” and it certainly would not make sense for an army to be made up of “little children.”

Word and phrases can change meaning over time and expressions from other countries in other languages can fog things up a bit too. Even words in our own language today can have very different meanings. For example, if someone asked me if I drank anything today I would say yes, I had water. But if a police officer pulled me over and asked me if I had anything to drink today my answer would be no, I do not drink. Returning to the subject of children and youth, think of a 25-year-old male. Those younger than him would refer to him as a man while those several years older than him would call him a boy, child, youth, or young man; same person, very different words to describe him.

]]> By: Ray_Light http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-7004 Ray_Light Sat, 04 Jul 2009 17:50:37 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-7004 I can understand how easily this can be concluded; but again (and as always) study and context are of the utmost importance. Aside from a study Bible, a few references include: Wesley’s Notes, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary, and Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary. I can understand how easily this can be concluded; but again (and as always) study and context are of the utmost importance. Aside from a study Bible, a few references include: Wesley’s Notes, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary, and Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary.

]]> By: Ray_Light http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-7003 Ray_Light Sat, 04 Jul 2009 17:50:16 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-7003 The quote was either completely misunderstood or intentionally taken out of context and misconstrued, but certainly not a “reasonable extension.” And where is a “command” for “absolute love and respect” found in the Bible? The quote was either completely misunderstood or intentionally taken out of context and misconstrued, but certainly not a “reasonable extension.” And where is a “command” for “absolute love and respect” found in the Bible?

]]> By: James Tracy http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-6416 James Tracy Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:26:49 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-6416 The whole episode consists of two verses. A group of children make fun of his baldness and then they are mauled. I don't know where you get the idea that Elisha was being threatened or was in any physical danger from those verses. The whole episode consists of two verses. A group of children make fun of his baldness and then they are mauled. I don't know where you get the idea that Elisha was being threatened or was in any physical danger from those verses.

]]> By: James Tracy http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-6415 James Tracy Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:25:17 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-6415 What makes you think so? The NRSV renders the words as "small boys." Which means that the translators are probably not thinking of young men that could be as old as 30 but actual children. I looked up the passage in five other English translations and they used the phrases, "youths", "little children", "young lads", "boys", and "little youths". At least among all of these translations, there seems to be a consensus, and that consensus tells me that the phrase in question is not "best rendered" as "young men". What makes you think so? The NRSV renders the words as "small boys." Which means that the translators are probably not thinking of young men that could be as old as 30 but actual children. I looked up the passage in five other English translations and they used the phrases, "youths", "little children", "young lads", "boys", and "little youths". At least among all of these translations, there seems to be a consensus, and that consensus tells me that the phrase in question is not "best rendered" as "young men".

]]> By: James Tracy http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-6414 James Tracy Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:13:28 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-6414 It seems to me that the reference in the post is a reasonable extension of what Franlkin said. If God is good and true then there should be no need for that God to command absolute love and respect. It seems to me that the reference in the post is a reasonable extension of what Franlkin said. If God is good and true then there should be no need for that God to command absolute love and respect.

]]> By: Ray_Light http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-5477 Ray_Light Mon, 11 May 2009 18:09:27 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-5477 Again the claim that God is “imposing” Himself and His law upon us. Citing examples of human laws preventing free speech is completely irrelevant to this discussion as there is no suppression of free will in the Bible. Yes, there are consequences for your actions, but what action does not have consequences? Think about it, if there were no free will you would not have been able to write this, let alone post it. There are so many variations of the words “have to” and “must.” At risk of sounding like a broken record, you do not “have to” believe anything; you do not “have to” follow anything. There are no demands made, only a set of guidelines to follow if you desire more than this sinful world. The implication is made over and again that if you do not follow God He will kill you, but we are all already facing death; we are all already going to die. Jesus is not coming back to put sinners to death; Jesus is coming back to give those who have turned from sin, eternal life. If you do not follow God it is not that He will kill you, it is that you will have chosen to reject eternal life because you prefer this world to His love. Yes, “if you want to avoid mocking your God, that’s your right and privilege,” but it is also your right and privilege to do so! He is not telling us what we “must” do; He is showing us what we “can” do and how to do it properly. The Commandments were given so we would always know how to honor God. No one is forced; it is our choice. And thus far that right (free will) has been proven with all these increasingly slanted and biased claims that are proving, with every post, to be more about trying to make fun of God and the Bible than actually proving anything dysfunctional about them. Again the claim that God is “imposing” Himself and His law upon us. Citing examples of human laws preventing free speech is completely irrelevant to this discussion as there is no suppression of free will in the Bible. Yes, there are consequences for your actions, but what action does not have consequences? Think about it, if there were no free will you would not have been able to write this, let alone post it.

There are so many variations of the words “have to” and “must.” At risk of sounding like a broken record, you do not “have to” believe anything; you do not “have to” follow anything. There are no demands made, only a set of guidelines to follow if you desire more than this sinful world. The implication is made over and again that if you do not follow God He will kill you, but we are all already facing death; we are all already going to die. Jesus is not coming back to put sinners to death; Jesus is coming back to give those who have turned from sin, eternal life. If you do not follow God it is not that He will kill you, it is that you will have chosen to reject eternal life because you prefer this world to His love.

Yes, “if you want to avoid mocking your God, that’s your right and privilege,” but it is also your right and privilege to do so! He is not telling us what we “must” do; He is showing us what we “can” do and how to do it properly. The Commandments were given so we would always know how to honor God. No one is forced; it is our choice. And thus far that right (free will) has been proven with all these increasingly slanted and biased claims that are proving, with every post, to be more about trying to make fun of God and the Bible than actually proving anything dysfunctional about them.

]]> By: Ray_Light http://www.anatheist.net/2009/01/bible-based-morality-the-third-commandment/comment-page-1/#comment-5475 Ray_Light Mon, 11 May 2009 18:08:57 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=1319#comment-5475 A fact not directly clear to the unstudied reader is the age of the “little children” in the mob. When we hear the words “little children” today we think of elementary and middle school kids; that is not the case here. The Hebrew word is best rendered as “young men” and can be used for males up to the age of 30. It makes sense if you think about it; when men were living past 130, plain old 30 or 40 is still pretty young. The true meaning of this Hebrew word is evidenced in several places throughout the Old Testament, such as Isaac, who was around 30 at the time of his near sacrifice during the test of Abraham's faith. Joseph was described this way when he was 39, and in 1 Kings 3:7 Solomon described himself as a “little child” when he asked the Lord to give him wisdom to rule the kingdom (after David died and he was king). This terminology was also used regarding the age of the men in the army in 1 Kings 20:14-15. A fact not directly clear to the unstudied reader is the age of the “little children” in the mob. When we hear the words “little children” today we think of elementary and middle school kids; that is not the case here. The Hebrew word is best rendered as “young men” and can be used for males up to the age of 30. It makes sense if you think about it; when men were living past 130, plain old 30 or 40 is still pretty young. The true meaning of this Hebrew word is evidenced in several places throughout the Old Testament, such as Isaac, who was around 30 at the time of his near sacrifice during the test of Abraham's faith. Joseph was described this way when he was 39, and in 1 Kings 3:7Open Link in New Window Solomon described himself as a “little child” when he asked the Lord to give him wisdom to rule the kingdom (after David died and he was king). This terminology was also used regarding the age of the men in the army in 1 Kings 20:14-15Open Link in New Window.

]]>