Restoration Quarterly 14 (1971)
184-204.
Copyright © 1971 by
Restoration Quarterly, cited with permission.
God's Gracious Love Expressed:
Exodus 20:1-17
DAVID R. WORLEY, JR.
The past fifty years have witnessed
the discovery of a
wealth of material from the ancient Near East which
has
illuminated many of the customs of the Old Testament.
Of
particular interest to this study is the large
amount of
material which has shed light on our
understanding of law
and covenant in the Old Testament. The need has
arisen to
revise many earlier conclusions. The purpose of this
study is
to take another look at the ten commandments.
Within this
century alone, a large corpus of material has
been written on
the Decalogues in Exodus
20 and Deuteronomy 5.1 In view
of the new insights, an attempt will be made to
exegete
Exodus
20:1-17. In the process of evaluating the role of the
ten commandments in today's world, the first step
must be
to understand the demands of the Decalogue in the
original
historical context. This paper is limited to the
first step.
The general context in which the events of
chapter 20
had their roots must first be reviewed. Having
crossed the
(Exodus
15:22). The story of God's people during the
wilderness period was one of discontent, murmuring,
strife,
rebellion, and a general lack of faith. Throughout
the
difficult journey, however, God continued to care
for the
people, providing them with manna and quail (16:1-36)
and
deliverance from the Amalekites
(17:13). On the third new
moon after the people had escaped
1 The bibliography gathered by
H. H. Rowley, "Moses and the
Decalogue,"
Men of God (Great Britain: Nelson,
1963), pp. 1-36, is
quite extensive.
184
God's Gracious Love Ex. 20: David Worley 185
wilderness of Sinai (19:1). In Sinai, God extended
His great
promise to the people. "If you will obey my
voice and keep
my covenant you shall be my own possession among
all
peoples" (19:5). The people affirmed their
decision to follow
the LORD's word. In
preparation for the great theophany,
they consecrated themselves and washed their
garments
(19:14).
The descension of God upon
Sinai was to allow the
people to hear God's speech with Moses and to instill
in
them a trust in Moses (19:9).
On the morning of the third day, the great
cosmic scene
evolved. Thundering, lightning, and a thick
cloud surrounding
the mountain provided the backdrop for the presence
of
Yahweh. The people were not permitted to ascend
or to
touch the border of the mountain. All the camp
trembled
(19:16).
After Moses received further instructions from the
LORD
and returned to the people, God began to speak. After
identifying Himself as the God who delivered them
from
was to, follow (20:1-17). Having witnessed the
awesome Sinai
scene, the people requested that Moses speak to them,
not
God (20:19). Moses again drew near
to the thick cloud where
God
was (20:22). The LORD gave Moses ordinances to
communicate to the people (20:21-23:33), which he
laid
before them, with all the words of the LORD. Again the
people spoke, "We will do [all the words]"
(24:3). Moses
wrote all the words and the next morning built an
altar to the
LORD.
Ratification of the covenant occurred soon (24:8).
The immediate context for chapter 20 is set in
19:16ff.
with the beginning of the theophany.
On this day of cosmic
eruption the three blocks of material in chapter
20 find their
setting (Sitz im Leben). The presence of
the LORD saturated
Mount
Sinai. The people viewing the smoking mountain and
hearing the sound of the trumpet stood at the
foot of the
mountain trembling. After Moses returned to the
people and
reiterated to them the consequences of approaching
too close
to God's majesty, God spoke the words which form
the unit
of material to be considered in this study
(20:1-17).
The commandments found in 20:1-17 are said to be
186 Restoration
Quarterly
spoken by God at Sinai. The audience is not mentioned
in
the opening statement (20:1). Throughout the com-
mandments the pronoun
"you" is singular. This would,
perhaps, suggest that Moses was the immediate
listener.2
However,
it appears from other passages that the people
heard God speak. For instance, before the theophany, the
LORD
revealed to Moses that the people would hear His
communication with Moses (19:9). Also
later the LORD
stated that He had talked with the people from heaven
(20:22).
After God had spoken, the people requested that
Moses
be the mediator (20:19): the people did not want God
to speak to them, lest they die (20:19).3
If (as it seems)
emphasizes the message addressed to the individuals
within
the community and the requirement of individual
observance.4
Much of the new information concerning the ten
commandments5 has come from an
analysis of the form of
the "ten words" and a comparison of the
form with others in
the ancient Near East. By simple observation one
recognizes
2 Since the pronoun
"you" is singular throughout 20:1-17, it
might appear that God was addressing Himself to Moses
alone. Of
course Moses would then be expected to relate the
message to the
Israelites.
3 It could be argued that the
people had not yet heard the voice of
God. By observing the activities of nature around
Sinai, they might feel
that if God spoke to them, surely they would die.
Though this passage
is somewhat ambiguous, the other passages seem to
indicate that the
people indeed heard God's voice.
4 J. P. Hyatt, "Moses and
the Ethical Decalogue," Encounter
XXVI (1965), 202. Noth
feels
second person; cf. M. Noth, Exodus, trans. J. B. Bowden (
5 The introductory remark
(20:1) does not mention "ten words"
but simply states "these words." Other
passages, however, give
precedence for coining the term "ten
commandments" or "ten words"
(Ex.
34:28; Dt. 4:13; 10:4). There is no complete
agreement on a
God's Gracious Love Ex. 20: David Worley 187
that all of the commandments are in the negative
except for
those relating to the Sabbath and the honoring of
parents
(20:8,12). Further analysis indicates that the laws of
were of two types. Albrecht Alt' has identified two
forms
of law.7 One type of law (casuistic
law) is to be found in the
"if" clauses of the Book of Covenant (20:22-23:19) and
also
in the Holiness Code (Lev. 17-26).8
This conditional law
consisted of the characteristic formula: If this
happens, then
that will be the consequence. This type of law was
common
in the ancient Near East as is evident from legal
documents
division of the commandments into their separate
entities. The RSV
follows Josephus, Philo, the Greek fathers, and
the Reformed Church in
dividing 20:2-3 for the first, 20:4-6 for second,
20:7 for the third,
20:8-11
for the fourth, and 20:12-17 for the remaining six. Modern
Jews
tend to separate 20:2 for the first, 20:3-6 for the second, and
20:7-17
for the remainder. The Latin fathers, the Roman Catholics, and
the Lutherans see 20:2-6 as the first, 20:7 as the
second, 20:8-11 as the
third, 20:12-16 as the fourth through eighth, 20:17a
as the ninth and
20:17b
as the tenth. Each of these different divisions reflects not only
different emphases, but also an approach toward
handling critical
exegetical problems; cf. J. E. Huesman,
"Exodus," The Jerome Biblical
Commentary (New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, 1968).
6 A, Alt, Essays in Old Testament History and Religion, trans. R.
A.
Wilson (New York: Doubleday & Co., 1968), pp. 103-171.
7 J. J. Stamm
with M. E. Andrew, The Ten Commandments in
Recent Research (Illinois: Alec R. Allenson, Inc., 1967), p. 31. Stamm
and Andrews' book is an excellent compendium of the
more important
explanations of various portions of
the decalogue. It provided a major
source for this study.
8 At this point it may be
helpful to identify the legal material
designated by various terms by scholars. Hyatt
quotes Pfeiffer's list: (cf.
Hyatt, op. cit., 200.)
1. Covenant Code--Ex. 20:22-23:19
2. Ritual Decalogue--Ex. 34:10-26 and 22:29b-30;
23:12,15-19
3. Twelve (originally ten) Curses--Dt. 27:14-26
4. Ten Commandments--Dt.
5:6-21 and Ex. 20:1-12
5. Deuteronomic Code--Dt. 12-26
6. Holiness Code--Lev. 17-26
7. Priestly Code--Lev., in toto and parts of Ex. and Num.
188 Restoration
Quarterly
from Sumeria and the laws
in the Code of Hammurabi. On
the other hand, Alt felt that the short command or
prohibition, characteristic of the ten commandments,
was
without parallel in ancient oriental law. Alt
concluded that
this form of legal material was unique to
expression of her religion.9 In the course of time, an
interesting discovery was made: There were
extra-Israelite
parallels to apodictic law. George Mendenhall
found parallels
between the Decalogue and vassal treaties of
Hittite kings
who reigned in the fourteenth and thirteenth
centuries
B.C.10 Of course such a date indicates that the treaties
were
written around the time of the Exodus. Evidently
the Hittite
covenant form circulated in the same area where
the Israelites
had wandered, i.e., from Northern Syria to
possible that
period. One type of Hittite treaty was the suzerainty
treaty,11
in which the suzerain extended his terms to the
vassal king.
In
a similar manner, God extended the terms of His love to
the benevolence of the king. In fact, the vassal's
motive for
obligation was gratitude for what had been done for
him by
the suzerain.12 The ten commandments are
prefaced by a
reminder to Israel of God's care.
9 Alt sees the connection of
apodictic law with Moses and Sinai as
grounded in the cultic practices of
law at the Feast of Tabernacles; cf. Stamm, op. cit.,
p. 35.
10 G. Mendenhall, "Ancient
Oriental and Biblical Law," Biblical
Archaeologist Reader III (New York: Anchor
Books, 1970), 3-24.
11 Another Another type of treaty has been discovered, viz., the
parity
treaty, in which both partners in the treaty had equal
status; cf. G.
Mendenhall,
"Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition," Biblical
Archaeologist Reader III (New York: Anchor
Books, 1970), 25-53.
12 D. Hillers has written an
excellent book on the covenant idea.
One
chapter deals with Sinai (and Shechem) and the
parallels to the
Hittite
treaties; D. Hillers, Covenant: The
History of a Biblical Idea
(Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins Press, 1969), pp. 46-71.
Gods Gracious Love Ex. 20: David Worley 189
Beyerlin has written an
interesting study of the parallels,
and he notes particularly those parallel to Exodus
20 which
aid in the text's interpretation.13 The
Hittite treaties had
preambles in which the originator of the covenant
presented
himself (cf. 20:2). A historical prologue gave
the great deeds
of the Lord (cf. 20:2). The dependence on the
founder of the
covenant excluded any concurrent dependence (cf.
20:3).
The
covenant was not valid unless it existed in written
form.14 Moses, too, wrote the "words of the
covenant, the
ten words" (34:28). The Hittite documents had
to be kept in
appropriate places (cf. Deuteronomy 31:9-26), and
the
documents were to be read regularly to the people.15
These
examples of Hittite treaties provide many
parallels with the
legal material at Sinai." The question is how
one should
13
Traditions, trans. S. Rudman (Great Britain: Basil Blackwell, 1965), pp.
52-67.
14 A covenant tablet for Rimisarma, king of the Halap
country.
My
father Mursiks made it for him, but the tablet was
robbed. I, the
Great
king, made a new tablet for him, with my seal I sealed it and gave
it to him. In all future nobody must change the
words of this tablet."
Cf.
A. S. Kapelrud, "Some Recent Points of View on
the Time and
Origin of the Decalogue," Studia Theologica
XVIII (1964), 87.
15 Although there is no
regulation in the text of Exodus 20
concerning the reading of the words, "there
can be no doubt that the
Decalogue
was proclaimed at more or less regular intervals in
cult in some form or other;" cf. Beyerlin, op. cit.,
p. 59.
16 Beyerlin
feels the logical conclusion is that the decalogue
was
modeled after the well-established treaty form
found in the Hittite
treaties (cf. Ibid.,
p. 43). M. Andrew has a valuable discussion on the
caution which should be taken in making
assertions as to the
dependence or origin of treaties or apodictic laws.
He mentions, in
particular, the work of Dennis McCarthy in
evaluating the covenant,
treaty idea; cf. Stamm, op. cit., pp. 44-74.
190 Restoration Quarterly
interpret these data.17 For the purpose of this study, these
observations can be made. The genre
of legal material
represented by Exodus 20:1-17 is not unique in the
ancient
different; however, the basic forms of expression
and
terminology used in formulating the covenant has
parallels in
the thirteenth century B.C. Therefore, the form of
literature
confirms a date of origin which is compatible
with the time
period expressed in the Biblical material, i.e., about
the
thirteenth century B.C.
Most scholars feel that originally all the
commandments
were a brief single clause.18 Also some
think that the
commandments on the Sabbath and on
reverence toward
parents were originally in prohibitive form.
Thus the sixth,
seventh, and eighth commandments (20:13-15) have
been
understood as normative. The differences between
the
Deuteronomic statement of the ten
words and the Exodus
account have been adduced as proof that the
original list of
17 D. McCarthy is "wary
of using literary forms to argue to
historical dates since literary forms can and do
have a complex and
variable history...." In other words, he is
hesitant to use similar
literary forms (i.e., Hittite treaties) in dating
the Decalogue. In fact,
McCarthy
feels that "the Decalogue itself is really something different
from the apodictic stipulations of the treaties and
can hardly be
deduced from the treaty form." D. J.
McCarthy, "Covenant in the Old
Testament:
The Recent State of
Quarterly XXVII (1965), 229f.
18
A typical reconstruction is suggested by R. Kittel:
(cf. Stamm,
op. cit., pp. 18f.).
I. I, Yahweh, am your God: you shall have
no other gods before me.
II. Do not make yourself a divine image.
III. Do not utter the name of your God
Yahweh for empty purposes.
IV. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
V. Honor father and mother.
VI. Do not murder.
VII. Do not commit adultery.
VIII.
Do not steal.
IX. Do not speak lying witness against your
neighbor.
X. Do not covet the house of your neighbor.
God's Gracious Love Ex. 20: David Worley 191
the commandments was briefer. For instance, in
Exodus the
reason for "remembering" the Sabbath is that
God rested on
the seventh day; in Deuteronomy the reason given is
that the
people of
gives a reason for honoring parents not mentioned in
Exodus,
viz.,
"that it may go well with you" (Deuteronomy 5:16).
Different
words also occur in these two passages.19 The
variations in the two accounts must be explained
somehow.
Scholars
feel the accounts represent two traditions of the
Decalogue, expanded as they were transmitted. Thus,
scholars say, originally both were briefer.
Quest for the original Decalogue leads one to
look for
the origin of the commandments. Mention has been
made of
attempts to parallel the literary form with
existing forms in
the ancient Near East. Some of the major theories
which have
been proposed for the origin of the commandments are
now
to be noted. Many scholars are rather vague as to
the origin
of the Decalogue. They speak of the Sinai
tradition. Von Rad
thinks the Sinai tradition grew out of the Shechemite shrine's
festival legend and that its basic structure
reflected the
pattern of the cult there.20 Noth also connects
the revelation
on Sinai with a cult and its creed; he thinks
various traditions
(e.g.,
result of the tribal confederacy or amphictyony.21
To Noth,
Moses
had no historical connection with the event which
19 In Ex. 20:16, the expression
‘ed saqer occurs; in Dt. 5:20,
the
same commandment has ‘ed saw. In Ex. 20:17, lo tahimod is
found; the
similar commandment in Dt.
5:21 has lo tih'aueh.
20 Von Rad
also finds an Exodus-Settlement tradition which was
independent of the Sinai tradition. The former
tradition was associated
with the Feast of Weeks at Gilgal.
After both traditions had been
severed from this cultic background, the Yahwist incorporated the two
traditions into his work; cf. G. von Rad, The Problem of
the Hexateuch
and other essays, trans. E.W.T. Dicken
(
21 Beyerlin, op. cit.,
xvi.
192 Restoration
Quarterly
occurred on Sinai.22 For both of these scholars, participation
by all
"out of the question." Both Kapelrud
and Beyerlin locate the
origin of the Decalogue at Kadesh.
The tribes gathered there
and summed up what had happened to them. Evidently
Sinai
was not far from Kadesh
(Deuteronomy 1:2). It was at
Kadesh that the great historical events received a
cultic
expression.23 Beyerlin suggests that the part
played by the
cult in developing the Sinaitic
tradition should not cause one
to overlook the impulse which proceeded from
historical
circumstances. "It was God's
activity in history that gave the
impulse to the formation of this tradition and
had a decisive
influence on its contents and character."24
He holds that the
Decalogue
was recited in the cult for the renewal of the
covenant for many years and that through its long
and active
use, explanatory clauses were added to the
original, briefer
Decalogue
for the people's benefit.25 Noth feels
the original
Decalogue
was expanded by explanations, reasons, and
recommendations.26 The theories of the
traditions as
proposed by these scholars by no means exhaust
all the
theories.27
22 Hyatt, op. cit., 220.
23 Kapelrud, op. cit.,
89.
24 Beyerlin, op. cit., p. 169.
25 Ibid., p. 50.
26 Noth, op. cit., p. 161. "When a piece
which, like the Decalogue,
represents a catechism-like collection of the
fundamental requirements
of God, has been handed down over a long period
and has been
repeated, the secondary appearance of expansions
and alterations is not
to be wondered at."
27 See Eduard
Nielsen, The Ten Commandments in New
Perspective (Illinois: Alec R. Allenson, Inc.; 1968). Nielsen's study
attempts to present a history of the traditions
of the Decalogue, after
first dealing with literary and form-critical
problems (thus the reason
for his subtitle "A traditio-historical
approach"). Another approach is
God's Gracious Love Ex. 20: David Worley 193
Among the benefits from the various explanations
given
for the origin and subsequent history of the
Decalogue is that
the evidence affirms the importance of Moses in
Israelite
history.28 The tradition concerning the writing of the
"words of the LORD" (Exodus 24:3, 13) appears to be
reliable. Thus the origin at Sinai through the mediatorship of
Moses
seems probable. That the Decalogue had a "historical
development" after Moses seems to be supported
by the
Bible itself. The differences between
the accounts of the "ten
words" in Exodus and Deuteronomy lend validity
to the
supposition that some additions were made in the
trans-
mission, which seemed appropriate to those who
handled the
text.29 The efforts to arrive
at the original Decalogue by
making the other commandments conform to the structure
of the sixth, seventh, and eighth commandments do
not
appear convincing.
Concerning the growth of the material and its
com-
proposed by Mowinckel,
who sees the Sitz im Leben for the Decalogue
as a prescription formula for entry into the cult.
He believes it
originated in the cult; cf. Stamm,
op. cit., p. 29. Fohrer
sees the
customary laws as transmitted independently
(orally) and later
absorbed by the source strata of the Pentatuech; cf. G. Fohrer,
Introduction to the Old
Testament,
trans. David Green (
Abingdon
Press, 1968), p. 133.
28 Harrelson states that the
Old Testament is implicit about the
importance of Moses: "no more appropriate
author could be
suggested;" cf. W. J. Harrelson, "Ten
Commandments," Interpreter's
Dictionary of the Bible IV (Nashville: Abingdon
Press, 1962), 573.
Rowley
is also impressed by the magnitude of Moses' contribution. "To
Moses,
the man of God, we are indebted, and to God, through him, for
this high standard which is set before men, and for
all that it has
wrought for the enrichment of life by its
inspiration and its summons
down all the ages." Rowley, op. cit., 36. Rowley mentions
many men
who accept the Mosaic origin of the Decalogue,
e.g., T. K. Cheyne, R.
Kittel, S.
R. Driver, H. Gressmann, and G. A. Smith. Ibid., p. 2.
29 It is even possible that
Moses altered the account when he
related it to
194 Restoration
Quarterly
pilation, it appears from the
text that the Decalogue
(20:1-17)
and the Covenant Code (20:22-23:33) were
recorded soon after they were spoken (24:12 and
24:3).
Later
some individual wrote the material of 20:18-21, giving
an account of the incidents which preceded Moses
receiving
additional instructions from the LORD (20:22-26).30
The
same author probably also composed the material in
10:16ff., for many descriptions of the cosmos are the same in
both accounts.31 The narrative in 20:18-21 is important,
both because it relates the reaction of God's people
to this
momentous event and because it emphasizes the
important
place Moses had in the eyes of the people.32
Analysis and Interpretation
Upon an understanding of the general structure
and
context of the "ten words" in chapter
20, the remainder of
the study will be concerned with an analysis and
inter-
pretation of the individual
passages and their relationship to
the whole (i.e., to the pericope
and the entire chapter).
Unless
a grammatical construction bears particular sig-
nificance to the interpretation
of a passage, the notation will
be reserved for the footnote.
The words of God in 20:1-17 form the pericope to be
30 Beyerlin
feels 20:1-17 stood between 20:18-21. and 24:lff.
before the insertion of the Book of the Covenant.
Therefore the
Decalogue
was inserted into its context before the insertion of the
Book
of the Covenant which displaced the Decalogue in its role as the
Book
of the Covenant; Beyerlin, op. cit., p. 11.
31 Beyerlin
attributes this material to E; cf. Ibid.
This writer feels
the account was written nearer to the period when
the theophany
occurred. If the laws could be written, then
surely narratives which
accounted for the origin of the laws and the
circumstances could also
be written.
32 Beyerlin
feels this section was written to answer the question
why the voice of God was no longer heard by the
cultic community at
the cultic recapitulation of the Sinai-theophany; cf. Ibid.,
p. 139.
God's Gracious Love Ex. 20: David Worley 195
interpreted. The tone for the entire section is set
by verse 2:
"I
am the LORD, your [sing.] God33 who brought you
[sing.]34 out of the
The
LORD can call on His people because he has delivered
them;35 the Israelites have changed masters. The
Israelite was
to view the commandments through a heart which had
been
touched by the loving action of the LORD. The
com-
mandments were an expression of
God's concern for
God's
grace was manifest in the demands of the law.
One
must determine whether the first commandment
intends to advocate monotheism or monolatry. "There shall
not be to you [sing.] other gods before me"36
(20:3). The
verse claims that Yahweh tolerates no rivals to his
authority.
If
other gods confront you now or in the future, he would
warn, immediately consider them as nothing. None
should be
in your presence, for Yahweh is among His people.
The force
of lo’
with the imperfect stresses permanent prohibition.37
The second "word" draws on the
implications of the
first: "You shall not make for yourself an idol
or any form
33The phrase ‘anoki yehah ‘eloheyka can be
interpreted in two
ways: "I am Yahweh, your God" or "I,
Yahweh, am your God." The
former interpretation is followed by the LXX and
Vulgate and is herein
advocated. The phrase "Yahweh, your God"
is found in 20:5, 7, 10,
12.
34 The second person singular is
used throughout the 17 verses. As
has been suggested, it emphasizes the necessity of
individual response.
35 Again the relation is to be
viewed in light of the benefits that
were extolled in the vassal treaties of the
Hittites, as an incentive to
obedience by the vassal.
36 The phrase ‘al panay
is rendered in various ways: RSV: "before
me" or "beside me";
me;" LXX, plen emou. All the interpretations would
indicate the same
general meaning for the verse.
37 Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar, edited by
Cowley (Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1952),
paragraph 107 o, p.
317 and paragraph 152 b, pp. 478-479.
196 Restoration Quarterly
which is ... (anywhere)" (20:4). To the ancient
Near Eastern
mind, the idol was the place of residence of the
god.38 The
deity was not considered the material of the image;
the deity
simply resided in the form. The question has arisen
whether
the images prohibited were those of foreign gods or
of
Yahweh. Perhaps with a view toward the
situation, the
Israelites
were commanded not to cleave to any forms of
wood, stone, or metal; the images of the Canaanite
gods were
abundant in the land. Not only were the
Israelites not to
offer religious worship to foreign deities39
"residing in
images," but they, no doubt, were not to
construct a form of
Yahweh.40 They were to remember, "I am the LORD, your
God,
a jealous God41 visiting upon the iniquities of fathers
to sons upon those of the third and fourth
generations to
those who hate me" (20:15). The phraseology is
reminiscent
of the opening acclamation (20:2): "
LORD
your God was the one who brought you out of
slavery; I am zealous for your welfare. Do not
be led to serve
38 As early as the First Dynasty
of Egypt it was stated in the
"Theology
of
stone....; cf. Hyatt, op. cit., 203.
39 Stamm
states that the phrase tistahweh ta’ab dem in 20:5,
means in essence "to offer religious
worship" and is only used in
connection with divinities which are foreign to
her, op. cit.,
p. 85.
40 No figures of Yahweh
have been found in excavations, though
many Canaanite figurines in Israelite houses have
been found; cf.
D.M.G.
Stalker, "Exodus," Peake's Commentary on
the Bible (Great
41 Orlinsky
feels qana’ entails being zealous (LXX, zelotes,
emotionally involved, impassioned; Harry Orlinsky, The Torah
(Philadelphia:
Jewish Publication Society, 1969), p. 175.
God's Gracious Love Ex. 20: David Worley 197
other gods."42 Yes, I punish those
who hate me,43 but view
my stedfast love44
which extends to thousands, to those who
love me and keep my commands45 (20:6).
A name was a precious thing to ancient man; it
reflected
his being, his personality. Accordingly, God's name
was
representative of His nature, His
Holiness.46 "You shall
not
take47 the name of the LORD
your God in vain, for the
LORD
will not leave unpunished the one who takes His name
in vain" (20:7). The use of God's name for no
purposeful
intent included at least two activities.48 The Israelite was not
to swear by God's name falsely (Leviticus 19:12).
There was,
however, a legitimate, meaningful way of
swearing by His
42 BDB thinks ta ‘abedem
means to "be led or enticed to serve." F.
Brown,
S. R. Driver, and A. A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English
Lexicon
(Great Britain: Oxford, 1959). The
them" as a possibility. Also, Zimmerli thinks the lahem refers back to
"other gods"; cf. Stamm, op. cit., p. 85.
43 Possibly such a judgment is
placed on the sons because they too
hate the LORD (20:5).
44 Hesed is hard to express in
English: RSV, "stedfast love"; ASV,
"loving kindness"; BDB, "kindness";
"mercy"; (LXX, Eleos).
45 It appears that a
parallelism is indicated; those who love me are
those who keep my commands (Dt.
6:5ff. ).
46 Stalker, loc. cit.
47 Andrew sees nasa
in the sense of lifting up one's voice. He
further states that sawi' "is used in many sections of the Old Testament
for what is false (just made up) [Dt. 5:20], empty (having no point or
purpose, hopeless) [Isa.
1:13], and for what even has a light-minded
but nevertheless mischievous wantonness in it [Ex.
23:11. " M. Andrew,
"Using
God," Expository Times LXXIV
(1963), 305.
48 No doubt, another way of
using God's name for no meaningful
reason was in cursing God (Lev. 24:13ff. ).
198 Restoration
Quarterly
name.49 Another way of dishonoring God's name was using
it in magic formulas. The names of divinities were
prominent
in incantations in the ancient Near East. The use
of the name
of a deity was important in affecting curses or
bringing
misfortune upon a person. The sorcerer who invoked
a
deity's name was actually attempting to gain
control of a
deity and his power. Yahweh made it clear to
pronouncement of His name was
prohibited and was pun-
ishable. Yahweh's name was to
be protected from unlawful
use in oath, curse, or sorcery. Control could not
be gained
over Yahweh either by making an image or invoking
His
name.50
The
Israelite was to "remember the day of the Sabbath
to observe it as holy" (20:8) for the LORD
"rested on the
seventh day (and) . . . blessed the day of
Sabbath and
observed it as holy" (20:11).51
Man was asked by God to
share in the observance of the Sabbath. Not only was
the
man not to work,52 but also those under
his care were to
cease from labor (20:10).53 The origin of
the Sabbath
49 Jeremiah speaks of swearing
by the phrase "as the LORD lives"
as being expressive of God's people (Jer. 12:16).
50 Stamm,
op. cit., p. 89.
51
Deuteronomy has the motivation of remembrance of the slavery
in
52 It is commonly alleged that
this commandment cannot be from
Moses because those tending the flocks could not
rest even one day.
Hyatt
comments that one does not know how
Hyatt, op.
cit., 204.
53 Both the LXX and Dt. add two animals to the list in Exodus
20:10
(ox and ass).
Gods Gracious Love Ex. 20: David Worley 199
outside the institution of Yahweh is obscures.54
The next commandment, like the Sabbath
statement, is
positive, rather than negative in form:55
"Honor56 your
father and mother in order that your days will
continue long
upon the land57 which the LORD your God
gives you"
(20:12).
It appears that this is the only commandment which
is intended for children, rather than for the paterfamilias.
However,
in light of the family situation in
relationship between adults and
their aged parents lies within
the scope of the commandment also. The normal
family unit
was the clan which dwelt together on inherited
property.58
Aged
parents lived with their adult children. In those years
when the parents would be unable to care for their
own
needs, it was the adult child's responsibility to
provide for
their welfare.59 That the commandment was
directed also to
54 Stamm
posits three possible origins: (1) sapattu in
which was the 15th day of the month, (2) Kenites, a tribe of smiths,
had a Sabbath day of rest, which Moses appropriated
(Koehler, Budde,
Rowley),
and (3) the market day which developed into a festival day
(
Babylonian
sapattu was quite different from Jewish Sabbath
(e.g., there
is nothing about ceasing work in connection with
it); Stalker, loc. cit.
55 Many scholars feel that the commandment
was originally
negative (e.g., "You shall not curse your
father or mother."). Nielsen
suggests that the affirmative form was a
transformation which occurred
under the influence of the Wisdom literature; cf.
Nielsen, op. cit., p.
117.
56 Kabed was the opposite of despise
(Dt. 21:18-21). In Num.
22:17,
to do a person honor is to obey a person. In Mal. 1:6, honor is
associated with fear. Upon the death of Nahash, David sent comforters
to Hanun. Such an action
by David was considered as a means of
honoring Nahash (II
Sam. 10:3ff.).
57 Both the LXX and Dt.
add "and that it may go well with you."
58 Stamm,
op. cit., p. 95.
59 G. Beer states, "The
aged parents, those over 60 years, whose
capacity for work and whose valuation has
diminished are not to be
treated harshly by the Israelite; he is not to
begrudge them the bread of
charity, or force them to leave the house or
take the way of voluntary
death, or even to kill them himself." Ibid.
200 Restoration
Quarterly
children is seen in Deuteronomy 21:18-21.60
The book of
Proverbs
contains much material on the child-parent relation-
ship (e.g., 19:26; 20:20). The fifth commandment
concludes
with the promise that one's life upon the land will
be
lengthy. This promise should be seen in view of
Yahweh's
promise concerning the gift of the land.61
The com-
mandment is indicative of the
fact that a woman as mother
was equal to the man as father. Proverbs insists on
the respect
due to one's mother (e.g., 23:22; 30:17). Though a
woman's
position was often limited, her role as mother
and wife was
an honored one.62
An understanding of the sixth commandment,
"You
shall not kill," centers on the meaning of rasah. Three
words
are used in the Old Testament to designate
"killing:" hemit
(201
times), harag
(165 times),63 and rasah (46 times). Some
would confine the meaning of rasah in Exodus 20:13 to
"murder”64 (i.e., premeditated killing). However,
other
passages indicate that rasah is used for accidental
(i.e.,
unintentional) killing as well as for
deliberate killing.65
60 A stubborn and rebellious
son was to be taken by his parents to
the elders of the city. All the men of the city
would then stone him to
death.
61 As Nielsen states, "The
basic idea is, of course, not that
obedience to parents leads automatically to the
attainment of a long
life, but that those who show respect to and care
for their parents are
rewarded by Yahweh with length of life on the
plot of land which he
has bestowed upon them," Nielsen, op. cit., p. 103.
62 See de Vaux "s comments on the position of women in
de Vaux, Ancient Israel I (New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Co., 1965),
39.
63 Hemit and harag are "used for killing
one's personal enemy, for
murdering him, for killing a political enemy in
battle, for killing one
who was punishable according to the law, and for
death as a judgement
of God." Stamm, op. cit., p. 99.
64 The
65 Cf. Dt.
4:41-43; 19:1-13; Josh. 20-21.
God's Gracious Love Ex.
20: David Worley 201
Nielson
is justified in saying that "it is no part of the purpose
of this commandment to rule out the death penalty
or the
waging of war."66 Though rasah is used in one instance of
capital punishment (Numbers 35:30), it is clear
that such
punishment when
commanded by God is not prohibited by
the sixth "word." Also the wars sanctioned by Yahweh in the
Old
Testament and the accompanying
killing of enemies in
battle (cf. Deuteronomy 20:1ff) are outside the
meaning of
20:13.
In fact, rasah is never used for the killing of the
enemy in battle.67 That premeditated
murder is prohibited is
unquestionable; that accidental
killing is prohibited also may
be surprising. However, in a society where capital
punishment
and wars were permitted and commanded, the sanctity
of
human life had to be perserved.
It was God's prerogative, and
His alone, to give and take life.
The seventh commandment, "You shall not
commit
adultery," is directed toward unfaithfulness
in the marriage
relationship. In fact, Rylaarsdam states that naap is used
exclusively in the Old Testament concerning marital
in-
fidelity.68 Leviticus 20:10 and
Jeremiah 29:23 define naap
as a man with the wife of his neighbor.69
Adultery
constitutes a denial of the unity of the
relationship between
66 Nielsen, op. cit., p. 108.
67 Cf. Stamm, loc. cit.
68 J. C. Rylaarsdam,
"The Book of Exodus," The
Interpreter's
Bible (Nashville: Abingdon
Press, 1952), 986.
69 Hauck comments,
"Adultery is the violation of the marriage of
another, Gn. 39:10ff.
Hence a man is not under obligation to avoid all
non-marital intercourse. Unconditional fidelity is
demanded only of the
woman, who in marriage becomes the possession of her
husband." D. F.
Hauck,
"Moicheuo"
Theological Dictionary of the New
Testament
(Grand
Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans Publ.
Co., 1967), p. 730. De Vaux
states, "The husband is exhorted to be faithful
to his wife in Pr.
5:15-19,
but his infidelity is punished only if he violates the rights of
another man by taking a married woman as his
accomplice." De Vaux,
op. cit., p. 37.
202 Restoration
Quarterly
man and woman, a unity offered by Yahweh.70
The eighth “word” prohibits stealing.71
Harrelson thinks
the Old Testament conceives of property as a kind
of
extension of the "self" of its owner
(Joshua 7:24).72 He
concludes that acts of theft are violations of the
person. Alt
asserts that the commandment did not mean theft
in general,
but refers rather to the kidnapping of the free
Israelite man.
The
kidnapping of dependent persons or those not free was
covered by 20:17. Because Exodus 21:16 was from
an
apodictic series, Alt concluded that it would be
placed into
the Decalogue (i.e., defining 20:15).73 However, as
has stated, simply because one meaning can be found
in one
apodictic series does not mean that another
apodictic series
has the same meaning.74 It seems best to preserve the general
meaning of "steal."
The next commandment does not deal primarily
with
gossip, but with the lying witness who jeopardizes the
welfare
of another. "You shall not testify (as) a
witness of
false hood75 against your neighbor
(20:16). The setting for
this commandment is in the court.76 "He who showed
himself to be truthful here would not have
wanted to give
way to falsehood elsewhere.”77
70
Harrelson, loc. cit.
71 Commandments six through
eight are variously arranged: LXX:
14,15,13; Philo, Luke 18:20, Romans 13:9: 14, 13, 15 (Matt.
19:18
and Mark 10:19 follow the MT ).
72
Harrelson, loc. cit.
73 Cf. Stamm,
op. cit., p. 104
74 Ibid., p. 106.
75 BDB (p. 729) reads ‘ed as a person; RSV and
translated it as objective evidence.
76 Anah has a special meaning for
the reciprocal answering of the
parties in law.
77 Stamm,
op. cit., p. 109.
God's Gracious Love Ex. 20: David Worley 203
The last "word" of the ten centers
around the meaning
of hamad. "You shall not desire the house of your
neighbor;
you shall not desire the wife of your neighbor78
or his slave
or his maidservant or his herd of cattle or his
ass or anything
which is to your neighbor." The question has
arisen as to
whether the Decalogue really prohibited a
covetous impulse
of the heart. Herrmann showed that hamad was
repeatedly
followed in the Old Testament by verbs meaning
"to take" or
"to rob" (Deuteronomy 7:25; Joshua 7:21). He concluded
that the Hebrew understood the verb to mean an
emotion
which led to corresponding actions.79 Herrmann's attempts
to validate his point have not been accepted by
all
scholars.80 Hyatt takes a different view. A person in a
place
of authority or serving as a judge should not be
covetous and
thus allow himself to be bribed. Since the courts of
justice
were administered by laymen, bribery was a common
temptation. Hyatt feels an injunction against it
was
necessary.81 Concerning whether
covetousness would have
been forbidden in Moses' time, Hyatt cites an early
document
which forbids covetousness.82 This writer favors the view
that the commandment is directed toward the impulse
of the
heart.
Of necessity, this exegesis has limited itself
to Old
78 Both the LXX and Dt. reverse house and wife.
79 He used Ex. 34:24, where hamad is not
followed by a verb to
show that desire was closely related to action.
80 H. J. Stoebe
is somewhat doubtful as to the meaning of hamad;
cf.
Stamm, loc. cit.
81 Hyatt, op. cit., 205. He feels this
would follow the court motif
for 20:16.
82 “The Instruction of the
Vizier Ptahhotep" relates, "Do not be
covetous against thy (own) kindred .... It is
(only) a little of that for
which one is covetous that turns a calm man into a
contentious man";
cf.
Ibid.
204 Restoration
Quarterly
Testament material. An attempt has been
made to express
the meaning of the Decalogue in its original
historical
context. The task remains of evaluating later
references and
interpretations of the "ten
words" found in the New
Testament
and in Rabbinic literature in light of the
Decalogue's
original meaning. No doubt, reinterpretations
were made in changing circumstances. Perhaps this
study has
acquainted the reader with a new perspective in
which to
view the commandments. The words were given in a
less-than-passive setting; though the
cosmic eruptions invoked
fear in the people, they were to remember that the
God of
the Exodus was in control. The commandments He gave
them were expressive of His gracious love and, in
fact, were
designed for their welfare.
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
Restoration
Quarterly Corporation
www.restorationquarterly.org
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at: