Welcome to the Knox Talks blog. Here you can find recent and past sermons relating scripture to a wide variety of topics. I would like to thank Shelley Rose for transcribing my notes into text for the blog.
“Ask Andrew” is an annual opportunity for Knox members to ask question that might make for good sermons. Here’s the fourth and final one in the series.
Ask Andrew 4: Should the Ten Commandments Evolve?
“There are 3 versions of the Ten Commandments in the Bible; Exod. 20, Exod. 34 & Deut. 5. In keeping with the final part of our (draft) Vision Statement, “Evolving to be relevant in the changing world around us, while still honouring past traditions,” do you think it is time for the original laws to continue evolving into relevant (meaningful) Christian practices today?”
Scriptures: Deuteronomy 5:12-15
This question starts with information that many people don’t know: the Bible has three versions of the Decalogue – the Ten Commandments. Two of them are almost identical: Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5; while the Exodus 34 commandments have some overlap but contain lots of ritual rules and warnings against fraternizing with the people whose land they were taking.
One can argue that elements of Exodus 34 really amount to detailed expansions of other commandments: like having no other gods; making no idols. This list is sometimes called the Ritual Decalogue and no one was ever made to memorize this list in Sunday School. It is not practical for our own everyday lives and omits sins like murder, adultery and theft, so it has never been given the same attention or reverence as the Ten Commandments we know better (which, by contrast, are sometimes called the Ethical Decalogue).
Was this Ritual Decalogue part of an evolution of the Ten Commandments? Scholarly arguments suggest that this version represents a division amongst early Jewish religious leaders, with both versions being included in Exodus in different places.
We don’t know if one was adapted from the other or whether the two developed in parallel. I would like to draw attention, though, to the difference between our reading today from Deuteronomy 5 and the more familiar version from Exodus 20.
Deuteronomy is probably the oldest written book of the bible and in the commandment that makes the Sabbath day holy, the reason for this commandment is different. The older version, which we just read, says that we should have a day of rest because God rescued Israel from slavery and so everyone, including every family member, every servant and slave, even every animal should have a day of rest.
This is a call to empathy, a call to decent behaviour, a call to basic justice, a call to remember the history that shaped a people and to treat others well as a result.
The one in Exodus 20, which we know better, says that the Sabbath is holy because God rested on the seventh day of creation. That’s a call to holiness, to follow God’s example, and it still applies to all people and all beasts of burden.
To my mind, a call to holiness is more abstract than a call to remember past oppression and injustice so we can avoid future oppression and injustice. So, is that an evolution of the ten commandments? Yes, from a theological perspective at least. It changes the emphasis without changing the law itself.
The Ritual Decalogue changes the very laws themselves. So, if you want an example of a more radical evolution, there you have it, but is it an improvement? It seems to be preparation and justification for a genocide because it describes the steps taken to destroy the local religion completely. This version supports the political sensibilities of the day, and that’s the risk we take whenever we discuss updating scripture.
My previous congregation in Chatham had a number of people who wanted to see the Hebrew scripture section of the Bible completely removed. They would have preferred if I only preached from the New Testament. They saw the older books as being too judgmental, too violent.
Of course, I immediately saw it as my duty to introduce them to the wonders of the stories we find in those books and what they can tell us about today. It’s a knee-jerk preacher thing; I reacted with similar difficulty when members of our last study group wanted to try writing their own parables.
Of course, parables are a very human form of communication. They are not divine by nature but I wasn’t comfortable with the idea of penning any myself and I think that those who tried discovered just how difficult it can be to put deep meaning into a short, even pithy, story and to avoid accidentally putting in unintended meanings. You never know how someone is going to interpret what you’ve written.
A central part of my job as a minister is to be an interpreter of ancient texts, to take things like the Ten Commandments and demonstrate how they speak to us today. To my mind, that is precisely what the question asks for: an evolution of the ancient words into a modern meaning, for today’s context.
But that’s probably not the form the questioner was imagining. It’s not hard to visualize a poster with re-worded or updated commandments and really, is that much different than what we have already done by adopting the Holy Manners document?
I believe that there is a constant evolution in our interpretation and application of scripture but I would resist very strongly having the original words changed in the texts we read.
Can you imagine what the Bible would look like today if the Victorians had re-written it to suit their worldview? The original words of scripture have helped us overcome so much Victorian Imperialism and those helpful words would have been deleted.
I am also very cautious about adding to the scriptures. Some churches have done this, such as the Mormons, but many Christians don’t take those additions seriously and at this point, their words feel dated; they don’t feel fresh or modern anymore.
Maybe my training is too strong but I feel best about taking the original scriptures we have and examining them for their original meaning, first, and then imagining how they might apply in the 21st century.
That really is a central pillar of the Reformed Tradition: we don’t want to be stuck in the past; or simply re-hashing old interpretations; we feel the call to keep updating our understanding of what God is doing in the world. That’s why there’s a new sermon every Sunday: there’s always something new to discover in these old words.
Should the commandments and other scriptures evolve? Yes, in terms of our understanding and application of their principles, but we need to keep the original words intact because those words keep us honest; they keep us from playing fast and loose as we try to meet the political agendas of our age.
As much as we like to challenge the interpretations of the past, we will only grow if we let the ancient words challenge us and influence how we go into the future.
Amen.
Knox United Church Nepean 