The Ten Commandments in the courtroom

Although the values put into words by the Ten Commandments, such as 'thou shalt not kill,' are not only proper but should definitely be upheld, they should not be displayed in a government building. This country runs as well as it does (it could be a lot worse!!) because of separation of church and state, among other things. If it was a citation from the Koran, it would too be in support of virtue and righteousness, but every Judeo-Christian in the Western World would flip out. (I'd have no problem with it.) As long as there is separation of church and state, there can be no quotation from any religious text in government buildings.

There is an eleventh comandment.
Post no signs :wink:

It's really a rediculous argument being considered by our Supreme Court; whether religious' symbols are equivalent to art in museums. They just don't want to admit the obvious.

Well technically isn't having the 10 cammandments displayed anywhere other than the bible a breach of one of them anyway? This disallowance of any sort of 'graven images' covers all of the stuff (crosses, paintings of jesus, stained glass images, etc) our churches routinely use - wouldnt the commandments come under this wing too?

yelloworld, Often wondered about that myself! It seems there are a whole lot of "exceptions" to the bible.

Thats what happens when u trust people to write down, true to the original fact, an event years after it actually happened. Lets face it, how many ppl do u know that, if they thought they could get away with it, would change the wording in an important document or add a little bit if they thought it would help them personally, professionally, privately or financially?

Human nature as it is, anything is possible...

You're stretching really hard. The Commandment you are referencing states "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.".

By your interpretation any form of writing is a graven image. I've yet to see any writing floating about in the sky, on the earth or beneath the seas that wasn't man-made.

The Commandment also specifically uses the word "idol". For an item to be an idol it has to be the object of worship itself. I don't know of any religious people that worship stained glass or a crucifix. Those are images of something else that is being idolized - not the object of the idolization itself.

Which version says "idol" and which says "graven image"? The Catholic Encyclopedia says "Graven Image", so does the American Standard but not the New American Standard. It must have been an interesting discussion down there in Texas, trying to figure out which version to chisel onto the stone. Did they listen to the South Baptists or the Lutherans? Did they talk with the Archbishop of Dallas or even make a phone call to the Office of Cannon Law?

Maybe they should have gone with the version you see in old Pre-Vatican II churchs, the one where the laws are just designated with Roman Numerals:
I.......VI
II......VII
III....VIII
IIII...VIIII
V........X

One thing is for sure, the Ten Commandments got us off on the wrong foot when it came to writing laws, all those Shalt Nots delivered us into the world of negative laws, saying what was forbidden. It was another six hundred years before Christ changed that to saying what one ought to do: Love one another, do unto others as you would have done unto you, and the Blessed be(s), of course.

Oh, and by the way, this issue of graven images, idols, stained glass, statuary etc is a continuing debate amongst the various Christian sects. The Brethren of the American Middle West allow no images of any kind, neither do most fundamentalist churchs, Pentecostals, Church of Christ, for example, whereas the Methodists allow a bit of stained glass here and there. The Catholics have cut back on having statues of Jesus, Mary and Joseph, (Donated by the Sons of Italy) St. Patrick (donated by the Ancient Order of Hiberians) and the Little Infante de Prague (donated by the Czech American Association) in every chapel, church and cathedral since Vatican II. It's made things a little duller but the members of the First Christian Church and the Congregationalists are less spooked when they arrive for the ecumenical service.

Joe(I love them all)Nation

There is something I learned as a result of this controversy. Each religion it appears has it's own version. I can't comprehend how there can be any version except for that given in the old testament. Anyone have an explanation?

au, I posted this above. "yelloworld, Often wondered about that myself! It seems there are a whole lot of "exceptions" to the bible."

Au1929, besides the three common versions, Protestant, Catholic, and Hebrew that result from selective abbreviation and numbering, there are actually three variations in the Old Testament. Two are in Exodus and one is in Deuteronomy. There is an online book that probably has more than you want to know about the subject (644 pages).THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

There is also this two page handbill which give a side by side comparison of the three common version plus the must see ten punishments.
Which Ten Commandments

Both are well worth a quick look.

mesquite
Interesting. Given by God and rewriten by man. :wink:

au, What makes you think it's "given by god?" Why not "given by man and rewritten by man?"

C.I.
Good question. Had one of my weaker moments.

Of course im stretching it Fishin' but, to be fair, from what ive seen, everyone, including every religion, stretches the bits they want in order to justify their beliefs. Just an opinion.

Religious people do, it's called faith. They can get away with as little or as much as they want...it's faith!

Scientists do too but they call it "theory" not fact.

When a scientist makes the mistake of claiming an unproved theory as fact he is called to task by every other scientist on the planet.

That's essentially the difference between science and ALL religion right there.

C.I. are they exceptions or just things you stretch and contort to try and make a "valid" point.

vol_fan06
If you need to stretch and contort it how valid can it be? The truth must stand on it's own two feet.

im saying that ci needs to stop pulling things and contorting them. so with doing that how can what he says be valid.