Morality of the Old Testament

[McBell]

King James: Thou shalt not kill.
Revised Standard Version: You shall not kill.

Imteresting rebuttal.
What is your basis that 'kill' is a better translation than 'murder'?
Surely it is not simply the number of versions that use 'kill'?

Here is a list of versions that use 'murder' instead of 'kill':

Spoiler: Murder versions

ABP+) You shall notG3756 murder.G5407
(AFV) You shall not murder.
(BBE) Do not put anyone to death without cause.
(Brenton) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
(BSB) You shall not murder.
(CEV) Do not murder.
(ERV) "You must not murder anyone.
(ESV) “You shall not murder.
(ESV+) R16“You shall not murder.N1
(GNB) "Do not commit murder.
(GW) "Never murder.
(ISV) "You are not to murder.
(JPS) Thou shalt not murder.
(JUB) Thou shalt not murder.
(LEB) "You shall not murder.
(LITV) You shall not murder.
(LSV) You do not murder.
(NET) “You shall not murder.
(RV) Thou shalt do no murder.
(TLV) Do not murder.
(TS2009) “You do not murder.
(WEB) “You shall not murder.
(WEBA) “You shall not murder.
(YLT) 'Thou dost not murder.

Does this mean that 'murder' is the better translation?
I mean, I have listed many more versions that use it than you have presented that use 'kill'.

 

[Audie]

Miriam-Webster dictionary:


1213:





1213:



Thank you for that-- I should have caught those passages.

1213:



I'll address the New Testament morality in a future posting.

1213:


Paying taxes is definitely NOT the same thing as slavery. The only type of society that I know of that does not assess taxes is anarchy.

1213:

As I said, I'll address New Testament morality in a future posting.

Plz dont.

 

[jimb]

Imteresting rebuttal.
What is your basis that 'kill' is a better translation than 'murder'?
Surely it is not simply the number of versions that use 'kill'?

Here is a list of versions that use 'murder' instead of 'kill':

Spoiler: Murder versions

ABP+) You shall notG3756 murder.G5407
(AFV) You shall not murder.
(BBE) Do not put anyone to death without cause.
(Brenton) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
(BSB) You shall not murder.
(CEV) Do not murder.
(ERV) "You must not murder anyone.
(ESV) “You shall not murder.
(ESV+) R16“You shall not murder.N1
(GNB) "Do not commit murder.
(GW) "Never murder.
(ISV) "You are not to murder.
(JPS) Thou shalt not murder.
(JUB) Thou shalt not murder.
(LEB) "You shall not murder.
(LITV) You shall not murder.
(LSV) You do not murder.
(NET) “You shall not murder.
(RV) Thou shalt do no murder.
(TLV) Do not murder.
(TS2009) “You do not murder.
(WEB) “You shall not murder.
(WEBA) “You shall not murder.
(YLT) 'Thou dost not murder.

Does this mean that 'murder' is the better translation?
I mean, I have listed many more versions that use it than you have presented that use 'kill'.

Murder is the correct interpretation. If anyone reads the Old Testament, there are many times when the Jews, God's chosen people, successfully waged war and prevailed.

 

[DavidSMoore]

Imteresting rebuttal.
What is your basis that 'kill' is a better translation than 'murder'?
Surely it is not simply the number of versions that use 'kill'?

I only meant to imply that there have long been discrepancies as to how that passage should be translated. But I withdraw the comment.

 

[joe1776]

Murder is the correct interpretation. If anyone reads the Old Testament, there are many times when the Jews, God's chosen people, successfully waged war and prevailed.

What difference does it make? Neither version of the commandment is useful as moral guidance.

"You shall not kill", if taken as a general rule, will conflict with conscience in a clear case off self-defense. If taken as an absolute rule, meaning that we should never kill, the good people of the planet would inevitably be enslaved by the bad.

And "you should not murder" doesn't offer guidance in determining whether and act of killing is a murder or a justifiable killing.

Fortunately, for moral guidance, we don't need to rely on the reasoning minds of men long dead. We were born with a conscience (moral intuition) to guide us whether the act involves killing or any other act.

Humans are born with a hard-wired morality: a sense of good and evil is bred in the bone. I know this claim might sound outlandish, but it's supported now by research in several laboratories.

Paul Bloom

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I only meant to imply that there have long been discrepancies as to how that passage should be translated.

Discrepancies or differences?

 

[Ajax]

Imteresting rebuttal.
What is your basis that 'kill' is a better translation than 'murder'?
Surely it is not simply the number of versions that use 'kill'?

Here is a list of versions that use 'murder' instead of 'kill':

Does this mean that 'murder' is the better translation?
I mean, I have listed many more versions that use it than you have presented that use 'kill'.

It can mean both either murder or kill. In the Septuagint the verb used is "φονεύω" which can be used for taking any life.
The point is, can the "you shall not kill/murder" be used against people in wars?
It seems to me that the reason "murder" was preferred later, was because we do not consider murder, killing enemies. And a lot of theists did not want to take arms (JW if I'm not mistaken).

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It can mean both either murder or kill. In the Septuagint the verb used is "φονεύω" which can be used for taking any life.

Quoting Robert Alter:

You shall not murder. Readers thoroughly conditioned by the King James Version's "Thou shalt not kill" need to be reminded that the Hebrew verb ratsah clearly means "murder," not "kill," and so the ban is specifically on criminal acts of taking life. [source]​

Quoting Nahum Sarna:

13. murder The Hebrew stem r-ts-h, as noted by Rashbam and Bekhor Shor, applies only to illegal killing and, unlike other verbs for taking of life, is never used in the administration of of justice or for killing in war. [source]​

​

I'll let others address the Septuagint and the targumim.

 

[McBell]

I only meant to imply that there have long been discrepancies as to how that passage should be translated. But I withdraw the comment.

Fair enough

 

[jimb]

What difference does it make? Neither version of the commandment is useful as moral guidance.

"You shall not kill", if taken as a general rule, will conflict with conscience in a clear case off self-defense. If taken as an absolute rule, meaning that we should never kill, the good people of the planet would inevitably be enslaved by the bad.

And "you should not murder" doesn't offer guidance in determining whether and act of killing is a murder or a justifiable killing.

Fortunately, for moral guidance, we don't need to rely on the reasoning minds of men long dead. We were born with a conscience (moral intuition) to guide us whether the act involves killing or any other act.

Humans are born with a hard-wired morality: a sense of good and evil is bred in the bone. I know this claim might sound outlandish, but it's supported now by research in several laboratories.

Paul Bloom

Obviously you don't understand what the commandment means. It has nothing to do with "the reasoning minds of men long dead". Do you apply that to the founding fathers? Plato? Shakespeare?

If "we are born with a conscience" and a "hard-wired morality" why is there so much crime?

Why do you believe laboratory research and not the Bible?

 

[2ndpillar]

Different rules for different groups based on when and where? When we talk to different people, we don't always talk about the same things. In Torah, God makes it clear He is talking only to the Jewish people.

With respect to the Commandments, according to Ecclesiastes 12:13, God was speaking to every person. With respect to Israel, the keeping of the Commandments would be a mark on their hand and forehead, as also with keeping the high holy Sabbath of Passover (Deut 11:18 & Ex 13:9). The mark on the hand and head of most Gentiles, is the mark of the "beast with two horns like a lamb", who was the founder of the Roman church, the Roman emperor Constantine with respect to keeping his decrees and traditions. As for "Jewish people", that would apply to Judah, and not Ephraim/Israel, who was "scattered among the nations" (Ezekiel 36:22) and will eventually be reclaimed from among the nations (Ez 36:24).

Ecclesiastes 12:10
New American Standard Bible
The conclusion, when everything has been heard, is: fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person.

Exodus 13:9 And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thy hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes, that the law of Jehovah may be in thy mouth: for with a strong hand hath Jehovah brought thee out of Egypt.

Deuteronomy 11:18​

“You shall therefore lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul, and you shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes.

 

[McBell]

If "we are born with a conscience" and a "hard-wired morality" why is there so much crime?

um...

• More people = more crime?
• Religions have been severely lacking installing morals into people?
• signal jammers preventing remote upgrades?

Why do you believe laboratory research and not the Bible?

Laboratory research has proven to be much more reliable?

 

[joe1776]

Obviously you don't understand what the commandment means.

If you do, explain it please. It's obviously meant as guidance, but I can't see how either version could possibly guide us in making an actual moral judgment.

It has nothing to do with "the reasoning minds of men long dead". Do you apply that to the founding fathers? Plato? Shakespeare?

I do when what I read makes no sense.

If "we are born with a conscience" and a "hard-wired morality" why is there so much crime?

Because we have free will. Our intuitive conscience is a guide only. To follow its guidance or not is up to us.

Why do you believe laboratory research and not the Bible?

I see the Bible as the obviously flawed work of well-intentioned men. Science, within the past 2O years, is only confirming for me that, if a higher power exists (and I do think it's possible) and it wanted to give us moral guidance, then we would be born with a very simple, universal, intuitive guidance system. Over the years, some believers have called conscience "The Voice of God."

 

[jimb]

um...

• More people = more crime?
• Religions have been severely lacking installing morals into people?
• signal jammers preventing remote upgrades?

Laboratory research has proven to be much more reliable?

"Religions have been severely lacking installing morals into people", and you blame religion???

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh sure, science is always reliable. That's why it is continually modified and updated. LOL!!!

On the other hand, God is unchanging and the source of all truth.

Guess which one I choose!

 

[Eddi]

Oh sure, science is always reliable. That's why it is continually modified and updated. LOL!!!

On the other hand, God is unchanging and the source of all truth.

Guess which one I choose!

 

[jimb]

 

[McBell]

"Religions have been severely lacking installing morals into people", and you blame religion???

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh sure, science is always reliable. That's why it is continually modified and updated. LOL!!!

On the other hand, God is unchanging and the source of all truth.

Guess which one I choose!

you really need to work on your reading comprehension.

 

[McBell]

Posts like that make it extremely difficult to take them seriously.

 

[Eddi]

Posts like that make it extremely difficult to take them seriously.

It's almost as if they don't want to be taken seriously

 

[jimb]

you really need to work on your reading comprehension.

There is NOTHING wrong with my reading comprehension. YOU need to work on your lack of faith.