Commandment #6: Thou Shalt Not...?

What is the sixth commandment? Thou shalt not kill [Thou shalt not do murder] (Exodus 20:13)

Written in a distinctive terse style, the Ten Commandments are set apart as foundational, given by no less an authority than the very hand of God (Exodus 20:1-17; Deuteronomy 5:4-21). The commandments can be divided into sets of five with the second group addressing life in community (Exodus 20:13-17; Deuteronomy 5:17-21). The shift occurs with the sixth commandment.

You shall not murder. (Exodus 20:13 NASB; cf. Deuteronomy 5:17).

This commandment is the first to address a relationship among equals and affirms that the protection of human life is the starting point of living in community.

One could hardly derive a more natural, universal law as the taking of life has been objectionable throughout the annals of history. The clarity of the sixth commandment is seen in the fact that (unlike many of its counterparts) the prohibition contains no explanation or threat of consequences. Its merits are self evident.

Yet not all killings are viewed the same. For instance, murder is a singular sin. W.H. Auden (1907-1973) writes, “Murder is unique in that it abolishes the party it injures, so that society has to take the place of the victim and on his behalf demand atonement or grant forgiveness; it is the one crime in which society has a direct interest (Auden, “The Guilty Vicarage: Notes on the Detective Story by an Addict”, Harper’s Magazine, 1948, 406).”

The sixth commandment has been cited in arguments regarding abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, self-defense, suicide, war, etc. The forbidden action (ratsach) is typically translated as either “murder” (CEV, ESV, HCSB, MSG, NASB, NIV, NKJV, NLT, NRSV) or “kill” (ASV, KJV, RSV). Though not an uncommon term, this is the first time word is used in the Bible.

The scope of the term is not rigidly bounded. If anything, the Hebrew muddies the waters further. Patrick D. Miller (b. 1935) expounds:

The simplicity of the commandment fades quickly as soon as one tries to translate it. Matters become more complex when one tries to relate the prohibition to actual acts of taking life...The commandment consists of a negative particle, “do not,” and the second-person imperfect of the verb rāṣaḥ. The precise meaning of this verb, however, is where the complexities arise. The divided voice of the NRSV translation committee, which split down the middle on the matter, is indicative of the issue and its complexity. Usually the commandment is translated either “You shall not kill”...or “You shall not murder”...More recent translations have tended toward the latter interpretation, recognizing that the verb of the commandment is a more particular and specialized verb, a more technical term in a sense, than others commonly translated in English as “kill”...or “put to death”...The problem, however, is that the verb does not have a single narrow meaning or usage “to murder.” The matter is more complicated, and the force of the verb as it is examined on its trajectory of meaning and usage in the Scriptures broadens toward a wider understanding from the very beginning. Thus the tension between a narrower and a wider interpretation of the verb is an inevitable and the locus of the community’s effort to comprehend and obey the commandment (Miller, The Ten Commandments (Interpretation: Resources for the Use of Scripture in the Church), 221-223)

Peter Enns (b. 1961) adds:

The Hebrew word translated “murder”...is a common one in the Old Testament. It is a restricted term, generally referring to the killing of someone who is not an “enemy” of the people. In other words, it is not used in contexts of war or just punishment for a crime. It can, however, refer to unintentional killing (e.g., Deuteronomy 4:41-43), a circumstance in which “murder” is not an appropriate term...at the very least we can state that this commandment refers to any type of killing that God disallows. Just what that means is, again, a matter of wise reflection on the part of Israelite leaders. (Enns, Exodus (The NIV Application Commentary), 422)

Though the Hebrew verb is different (harag, not ratsach), it is said that there is a “a time to kill” (Ecclesiastes 3:3). When is taking life acceptable? Why? What makes this Biblical commandment any different from the countless other mandates against killing in virtually every society in human history?

While the biblical rule reads the same as those in other cultures, the rationale is different. Terence E. Fretheim (b. 1936) explains, “The basis of the command is that all life belongs to God (Leviticus 17:11; Genesis 9:6). The divine intention in creation is that no life be taken. Life is thus not for human beings to do with as they will; they are not God. It is to God to determine what shall be done with life (Fretheim, Exodus: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, 233).”

After researching countless comparable laws in parallel cultures, Mark F. Rooker (b. 1951) concludes:

Differences between ancient Near Eastern and biblical views of murder are ultimately connected to their contrastive views of the nature of God and man. Although the literature of Mesopotamia considered murder to be a severe iniquity, which aroused the anger of the gods, man was considered as part of the creation and nothing more than an economic value. He was created to be a servant of the gods. Another contrast has to do with payment of a fine as punishment for a convicted murderer. In most of ancient Near Eastern law, the acceptance of a ransom or a fine was dependent completely on the will of the relatives of the murder victim. Biblical law prohibited acceptance of a ransom or fine for a murder that happened with malice or by accident (Numbers 35:31; Deuteronomy 19:12). This distinction shows that the Bible places a high premium on the life of man because man was created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). (Rooker, The Ten Commandments: Ethics for the Twenty-First Century, 123)

The sixth commandment’s underlying belief is that life comes from God and as such is precious. David Hazony (b. 1969) wonders:

From violence in our streets to terror in our skies, from honor killings to organized crime to wartime atrocities to domestic violence, we tolerate murder to a breathtaking degree. Not so long ago, the most enlightened nation in Europe embarked on the most far-reaching plan of genocide in human history, exterminating its innocents by the millions as the world stood by. Today, similar wickedness is repeated elsewhere in the world, in places like Sudan and Rwanda, places where if we really cared we would stop the killing. Our collective Western pride blinds us to our collective failure to stop the worst crimes. Do we really care about life as much as we think? (Hazony, The Ten Commandments: How Our Most Ancient Moral Text Can Renew Modern Life, 145)

Do you truly value life as much as you should?

“How strange it is that murder has the sanction of law in one and only one of the human relationships, and that is the most important of all, that of nation to nation.”
Paul Harris (1868-1947), lawyer who founded the Rotary Club in 1905

Jacob: Burial and Growth (Genesis 35:4)

Where did Jacob bury his household gods [idols]? At Shechem (Genesis 35:4)

In what many see as the climax to Jacob’s life story, God instructed the patriarch to move to Bethel and erect an altar (Genesis 35:1). Before embarking on this new stage of his life, Jacob took care of some unfinished business. He ordered his entire household to “put away” any “foreign gods” they might have accrued, to purify themselves and to change clothes (Genesis 35:2 NASB). Of the three directives, the first was the most important as evidenced by the fact that it alone is explicitly said to have been followed (Genesis 35:4).

So they gave to Jacob all the foreign gods which they had and the rings which were in their ears, and Jacob hid them under the oak which was near Shechem. (Genesis 35:4 NASB)

This incident marks the first of four burials in Genesis 35, a chapter of prominent transitions (Genesis 35:4, 8, 19, 29).

The buried items are most commonly rendered “foreign gods” (ASV, ESV, HCSB, NASB, NIV, NKJV, NRSV, RSV) but are also translated “alien gods” (MSG), “idols” (CEV), “pagan idols” (NLT), and “strange gods” (KJV). Kenneth A. Mathews (b. 1950) speculates that they were pagan icons based upon the verb Jacob uses - “‘Get rid of’ (sûr) elsewhere in the Old Testament (e.g. II Kings 18:4; I Chronicles 30:14) describes moving cult objects (Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26, 617).”

There has been debate as to how Jacob’s household came into possession of these artifacts. It has been suggested that Jacob’s family acquired some of them in their pillage of Shechem in the preceding chapter (Genesis 34:27-29). The patriarch’s edict would also include the “household gods” (teraphim) that his wife Rachel had stolen from her father (Genesis 31:19, 32).

Some have questioned why Jacob buries these idols instead of destroying them. Jacob does not grind them to powder as Moses later did to the idolatrous golden calf (Exodus 32:20). Is Jacob hedging his bets, taking measures to reacquire these gods if need be?

Victor P. Hamilton (b. 1941) writes:

What is the significance of burying gods? Is it a black magic ritual of interment of guardian figures? Is it a preparatory rite in holy war to activate the “terror of God” against the enemy, and thus not a real burial, but a laying aside of religious figurines? Or is it a forsaking of the father gods?..The best parallel to Jacob’s actions seems to be that of Joshua, who (also at Shechem) commanded the elders “to put away the gods...that your fathers served” (Joshua 24:14). The presence of such “other gods” will be a barrier preventing legitimate service of Yahweh. The language of Jacob also matches that of Samuel, who calls Israel to the ancient covenant ritual of renouncing foreign gods. (Hamilton, Book of Genesis: Chapters 18-50 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament Series), 375).

Shechem is the place where idols are tossed aside and though our “foreign gods” are likely not in statuette form, we still create them today.

What idols do you house? What do you need to bury to better serve God? What unfinished business do you need to complete? Have you ever had a Shechem moment where you rededicated your life to God? Why did Jacob not simply destroy the idols?

Jacob realized that he could not serve God fully while in possession of idols. Jacob’s situation is a microcosm of his descendants’ spiritual predicament. Walter Brueggemann (b. 1933) explains:

Israel cannot either leave the land or kill all the Canaanites. Israel must find a way to stay in the land with the Canaanites and yet practice faithfulness. The way chosen to do this without either destructiveness or accommodation is by way of radical symbolization. Israel engages in dramatic ritual activity as a mode of faithfulness. It is apparent that this ritual (later used at Shechem, cf. Joshua 24:23) permits Israel to be Israel in the land. (Brueggemann, Genesis (Interpretation: a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching), 283)

Jacob’s act of religious exclusivism would become a precursor to the second of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:4; Deuteronomy 5:8). James McKeown compares, “Another traditional feature of Israelite faith already observed in patriarchal worship is the absence of images of Yahweh. Images of gods other than Yahweh are mentioned, and they seem to have been greatly valued (McKeown, Genesis (Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary), 358).”

Shmuel Klitsner adds:

Though later in the Bible, idol worship warrants the death penalty, in pre-Sinai narratives this is not the case, as explicit in Genesis 35:2-4, where Jacob himself instructs his household members to rid themselves of ‘foreign gods.’ There, the only consequence is the need for the offenders to purify themselves and change their clothing. (Klitsner, Wrestling Jacob: Deception, Identity, and Freudian Slips in Genesis, 115)

Significantly, this religious precedent was set at Jacob’s own initiative as the mandate to remove the idols was not part of God’s instructions (Genesis 35:1). Jacob instinctively senses that possessing foreign gods is not conducive to the new life that he was preparing to live for God. With this pronouncement, Jacob finally makes a commitment to God alone. This represents dramatic spiritual maturation. John H. Walton (b. 1952) concludes that “God’s patient work in his life has resulted in a transformation of character that may have seemed beyond reach in the earlier chapters (Walton, The NIV Application Commentary: Genesis, 636).”

Leon R. Kass (b. 1939) explains, “Jacob understands immediately that he has been called not just to physical relocation but to spiritual repurification. He leaves off thinking about matters of international trade, safety, and justice, and focuses on his orientation to the divine. He sees for the first time that the central question is the question of false or foreign gods (Kass, The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis, 501).”

What steps have you made in your spiritual progress? Is it ever too late for a new spiritual beginning? How do you know if you are growing?

“Growth is the only evidence of life.” - John Henry Newman (1801-1890)

10 Commandments, 2 Places (Ex. 20 & Deut. 5)

In which two Old Testament books are the Ten Commandments recorded? Exodus (20:1-17) and Deuteronomy (5:1-21)

The Ten Commandments, or Decalogue, are foundational laws given by God to Moses on Mount Sinai (Exodus 20:1-17; Deuteronomy 5:1-21). They appear twice in the Old Testament, both times in the Law, in the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. Moses first communicated the Ten Commandments after descending from Mount Sinai (Exodus 20:1-17) and then reiterated them in his final discourse to the people (Deuteronomy 5:1-21). This is not surprising as Deuteronomy is a retelling of the law. The name Deuteronomy means “second law”. Churches have given preferential treatment to the version given in Exodus.

The Ten Commandments are referred to elsewhere in the Bible as the ten devarim (“statements”) which is why they are grouped as a unit of ten (Exodus 34:28; Deuteronomy 4:13, 10:4). Early English Bible translations Tyndale (1530) and Coverdale (1535) referred to them as the “ten verses”. The Geneva Bible (1560) appears to be the first English translation to use “tenne commandements”, which established the precedent for the King James Version (1611). Various religions and denominations number the commandments differently. (To see different ways in which the Ten Commandments have been grouped, click here.)

There are subtle differences in the two versions of the Ten Commandments. One glaring dissimilarity is seen in the rationale behind keeping the Sabbath, the fourth commandment. The first version cites the precedent of God resting on the seventh day of creation (Genesis 2:1-3). Exodus reads:

“For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.” (Exodus 20:11 NASB)

In contrast, Deuteronomy explains:

“You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out of there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to observe the sabbath day.” (Deuteronomy 5:15 NASB)

Compare and contrast the two versions of the Ten Commandments. What differences do you notice? Does it bother you that there are different reasons given to explain the fourth commandment? Which is the real reason for observing the Sabbath?

Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089-1164) explained that Deuteronomy did not need to repeat the reference to creation in recording the fourth commandment as Deuteronomy itself refers back to the command from Exodus with the words “as the Lord your God has commanded you (Deuteronomy 5:12 NASB).” Instead, Moses revealed an additional motive for the command.

Moses Maimonides (1135-1204) gave equal weight to both rationales for the Sabbath command. He explained, “God commanded us to abstain from work on the Sabbath, and to rest, for two purposes; namely, (1) That we might confirm the true theory, that of the Creation, which at once and clearly leads to the theory of the existence of God. (2) That we might remember how kind God had been in freeing us from the burden of the Egyptians - The Sabbath is therefore a double blessing: it gives us correct notions, and also promotes the well-being of our bodies (Maimonides, The Guide for the Perplexed, 406).”

The two explanations given for observing the Sabbath do not contradict one another. One action can be completed for more than one reason, hence the expression killing two birds with one stone. A person eats to sustain life but might also eat to enjoy a good meal or to celebrate an event. Why did they eat? All reasons might be equally accurate.

Jesus resolved that God instituted the Sabbath for humanity’s benefit - “ The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27 NASB).

What examples can you find of people performing one action for multiple reasons? In what ways does the Sabbath benefit humanity? Do you observe the Sabbath? If so, why?