The 10 commandments

Ok in Greek the word is Hupotasso. Which means, be under obedience, ( obedient ), put under, subdue unto, ( be, make ) subject ( to, unto ), be in subjection ( to, under ).

Obedient is, dutifully complying with the commands, of instructions of one in authority.

Which is where I got Listening from and live for their husbands and no one else. Like I said though we, have the hard part.

Coveting is wishing something or someone that is not yours was yours. Pretty much they would be jealous of someone who had a car they wanted.

well, overweightness isn't just about being "ugly" it's also about being HEALTHY. someone that's underweight is also ugly, imo.

And I was just putting somekind of example in there so that you could see where I was coming from.

to an extent, but not all of them.

What do mean by not all of them?

paul came how many years after the commandments? honestly, the perfect being would lay that down if he put THEFT and COVETING in there.

I understand Paul came well after the Commandments but, If you listen to what BOTH say then I don't believe you would rape.

and what does that have to do with raping your OWN wife? spousal rape wasn't looked down upon back then...

I answered that with this part of my post:

we ( the men ) have to in turn love them like Christ loved the church, which means we have to be willing to stand by her to the end, willing to do anything for her, be willing to be ridiculed, beat, and die for her. Without once not thinking of her. So in truthfulness, we ( the men ) have the hard part.

By listening to that we would not abuse our wives, or even rape our wives.

God Bless

Originally posted by followerofchrist

Obedient is, dutifully complying with the commands, of instructions of one in authority.

Which is where I got Listening from and live for their husbands and no one else. Like I said though we, have the hard part.

Oh please, in what universe is being in charge the "hard" part? I just escaped a marriage with a man who thought a wife was there to submit and it was sheer hell. I have PTSD from his "tender ministrations".

It's bogus. The whole attitude of women submitting to their husbands, you can dance around and wave pretty flags and try to distort the true meaning of the word all you want, but madness is absolutely correct -- women were property then. In fact, in most cultures of the time women couldn't own property, they were themselves property.

When we were all hunter/gatherers, before we became pastoralists and farmers, women and men were equal. They had separate but equal duties. Modern hunter/gatherer tribes also generally have this behavior. Hunter/gatherer tribes in general also don't have an idea of ownership of anything but personal possessions, and even then, frequently there are cultural mores that require them to share, sometimes quite lavishly.

Monotheistic traditions, patriarchal and judgmental, put a stop to that. Once the idea of ownership of land became a universal ingrained concept, men looked around and thought, "hey, owning stuff is really nifty. What else can I own? Oh, yeah, my wife! I'll say god says I'm supposed to tell her what to do and she's supposed to do what I say or else." And this is what I suspect really drove god's wife out of the system: if god had a wife, women might get uppity and start thinking for themselves. So let's keep them pregnant, housebound and uneducated so they don't get any ideas. And take away their female deities too.

Oh please, in what universe is being in charge the "hard" part?

Again answered in my last post:

we ( the men ) have to in turn love them like Christ loved the church, which means we have to be willing to stand by her to the end, willing to do anything for her, be willing to be ridiculed, beat, and die for her. Without once not thinking of her. So in truthfulness, we ( the men ) have the hard part.

I just escaped a marriage with a man who thought a wife was there to submit and it was sheer hell.

I am sorry to hear that. He was not doing his duty as a husband then.

It's bogus.

Not really. If you listen to the first part about the wives then, you have to listen to the last part about the husbands. If it is just one-sided then you end up with problematic marriges. You have to have both parts to have a healthy relationship together.

Submitting has many meanings and a lot of them can look bad, and in fact be bad if used in line with marrage. If you LOVE that person then you have submitted your heart to that person, and no one else.

God Bless

Originally posted by followerofchrist
Submitting has many meanings and a lot of them can look bad, and in fact be bad if used in line with marrage. If you LOVE that person then you have submitted your heart to that person, and no one else.

but that's not the context for the word submit. in the context it means "be subservient to"

Being OBEDIENT. Right? and being obedient is how I explained it in my other posts. Besides, I would rather listen to my wife than anyone else when it comes to something to do with her. If I was a girl ( which I am not ) I would gladly listen to anything my husband said.

When it comes to supporting the household, feeding the family, and making sure there is shelter all these things men have took upon themselves to provide for the family. Women being more independent then before, have took it upon themselves to do the same. So how would in this day in age fit into the Bible when it says women submit yourselves to your husbands? What is one thing a women gives to that one person whom she cares about more than anything? Her heart.

This is where submitting comes into play madness.

Love generally means more to women then it does to most guys. Women don't just give their hearts to anyone random person, so when they do they are saying " I am giving myself to you, my life is in your hands, I am trusting you to never let go. "

Now as it happens then and now men have taking advantage of that. Then it was more they saw submitting as how everyone in this thread is seeing the word, so women to almost all males were property. Now, we are seeing the same thing, but, women have more ground to stand on legally.

Am I saying you should submit to your husbands, well, if that husband is one that is treating you right, then you have already made the choice. Husbands, am I saying to do nothing? no. I am telling you if your wives have given their heart to you it is your duty to never let them down, fight for them, die for them, and love them.

That's submitting.

God Bless

wow this thread went from commandents to submitting


if the the one simple commandment do unto your neighbour which covers all ten, twelve or how ever many is applied to your spouse then your both submitting if they act the same

which is the way its supposed to be
you leave mother and father and become one


Treat others as you would be treated...that is submitting
without giving away too much.


[edit on 13-6-2007 by junglelord]

followerofchrist, you highlight my point about religion. it's in THIS DAY AND AGE that you're looking for the definition of "submit" that fits into your moral compass. the bible isn't creating morality, religion isn't creating the morality, society has already created it and you've already got it in your head.

Originally posted by followerofchrist

Husbands, am I saying to do nothing? no. I am telling you if your wives have given their heart to you it is your duty to never let them down, fight for them, die for them, and love them.

That's submitting.

While I still think that the bible means submit in an entirely different manner, those words I can agree with. Haven't seen any of this to date in my life from my partners, not even my religious first husband, and Catholic second.

If every other man thought "submit" meant what you think it means, the world would be different. But you, FoC, are in the minority. Just coming from my own personal experience.

Well JungleLord, I believe you hit the nail on the head.

if the the one simple commandment do unto your neighbour which covers all ten, twelve or how ever many is applied to your spouse then your both submitting if they act the same

which is the way its supposed to be you leave your mother and father and become one

I agree with that.

Treat others as you would be treated...that is submitting

Plain and simple. A good defining of submitting using the Bible.

it's in THIS DAY AND AGE that you're looking for the definition of "submit" that fits into your moral compass

Not really Madness. I was just explaining to you the word submit in a way everyone could grasp. And it really does not stray from the way the Bible describes it.

While I still think that the bible means submit in an entirely different manner, those words I can agree with. Haven't seen any of this to date in my life from my partners, not even my religious first husband, and Catholic second.

That is unfortunate MM.

If every other man thought "submit" meant what you think it means, the world would be different. But you, FoC, are in the minority. Just coming from my own personal experience.

That is true. Very true. I know I am not the only one that thinks that way, however I do know that there is not that many that think like I do in that respect. I don't just throw around the word love anywhere or, to anyone looking at the word like that reveals in a way how powerful the word is.

God Bless

followerofchrist, you really don't realize it but you're just adjusting the bible to fit the morality of the modern secular society you live in.

tell me, what does it mean when the bible tells you to let all the men of the town stone your son if he backtalks you?
and what about all those other laws in the bible you don't follow? what do they mean?

In the christian bible it says somewhere That husbands love your wives and do not be harsh to them.

I don't think it was meant to have men in total control over their wife. Now a days compromising works allot better.

But some men still think their still in power because the female is weaker and is supposed to submit to their husbands. (lol)

Reverse the roles with everything- Walk a mile in each others shoes then the men will realize being a woman and dealing with ahem you know what isn't easy as its cut out to be. And based on the bible because of Adam and Eve's sin, the women are cursed with the pain of child birth. Scary huh?

So any boyfriends or husbands out there- please don't plop down and crack open a beer then yell "Honey whats for dinner.." Unless you want to sleep on the couch...Be sensitive.

Back to the OP's original question, what is so bad about following the 10 Commandments?

Aside from the fact that I have ethics without needing to follow a set of rules carved in stone, as has been pointed out, they are archaic at best.

Another reason is that people always say that they're right because "it's in the bible."

However, also in this bible are the punishments suggested for violating the ten commandments:

Ten Punishments

1. Exodus 22:20: He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed.

2. Leviticus 24:16: And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death.

3. Exodus 31:15: Whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

4. Exodus 21:15: He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.

5. Exodus 21:17: He that curseth his father or his mother, shall surely be put to death.

6. Exodus 22:19: Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.

7. Leviticus 20:13: If a man lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death.

8. Leviticus 20:10: And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death.

9. Mark 16:16: He that believeth not, shall be damned.

10. Malachi 2:1-4: And now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you. If you will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name, ... behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces.

from: www.positiveatheism.org...

Madness has made the point often that the bible contradicts itself so people who claim to follow it are picking and choosing the parts they consider to be valid and ignoring the rest, all the while claiming that whatever passages THEY say are valid are the only ones. I can only agree with that.

The commandments are just a guideline for a moral code believed in by ancient peoples. The moral code predates language -- some animals even show signs of "morality" in the form of reciprocal altruism, exchanging favors over time. This is the beginning of our own more complex sense of morality.

Our morality has grown with our brains throughout our evolutionary history. As we became more complex, our morality became more complex. But the basic values, which include "Do unto others" are part of our natural behavior.

The commandments were written, as all laws were written, by men (supposedly Moses' god in this case, but we all know my stance on god's existence so I'll skip it this time) to try to control other men's behavior to enhance our lives in social groupings.

I think it rather telling that while athiests make up 10% of the US population, they make up only .2% of the prison population. Whereas the rate of self-professed Christians in jail and out are approximate.

Theists love to throw the fact that Hitler and Stalin were atheists as proof that atheists are evil. Shoe on other foot time.

Tomas de Torquemada (of the Spanish Inquisition), Pope Urban II (who launched a crusade), Adolf Hitler -- all Christians. All causing needless and numerous deaths.

What's that? Hitler was an atheist you say? No, he was a Catholic.

"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.."

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

People know right from wrong, they just don't act on the knowledge many times. It's too bad too, because if they did, we wouldn't feel the need for lists of rules of proper conduct.

Madness where did you get a child would get stoned for backtalking his father from?? The closest thing I think your talking about is in the Bible, if a child back talked their father the father or, a member of the family had a right to spit on that kids face, and the kid had to leave the spit on for seven days out of shame for dishonoring his/her father.

If you want Book, Chapter, and Verse it is found in Numbers 12:14 where Miriam had leprosy for seven days because Moses and Aaron speaking out against God.

As far as what you talked about concening the other laws? The 216 other laws we as a society follow because they were a ground work for how a nation was to be run. Being that Israel was nowhere near a nation then, they had to learn to become one. The punishments have changed on a few.

And Leyla what you wrote pretty much sums what Junglelord and I said about it is repect, and it is not just the wives who are doing something in the marrage it is the husbands as well.

God Bless

Originally posted by followerofchrist
Madness where did you get a child would get stoned for backtalking his father from?? The closest thing I think your talking about is in the Bible, if a child back talked their father the father or, a member of the family had a right to spit on that kids face, and the kid had to leave the spit on for seven days out of shame for dishonoring his/her father.

it in deuteronomy

21:18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
21:19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
21:20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
21:21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

If you want Book, Chapter, and Verse it is found in Numbers 12:14 where Miriam had leprosy for seven days because Moses and Aaron speaking out against God.

oh, i knew about that too.

As far as what you talked about concening the other laws? The 216 other laws we as a society follow because they were a ground work for how a nation was to be run. Being that Israel was nowhere near a nation then, they had to learn to become one. The punishments have changed on a few.

well, they're in a book held up to be infallible. why not folow them? and honestly, what does killing homosexuals have to do with becomming a nation?

Maddness that sounds like a extreme case. Those old laws I say would be outdated. So I wouldn't worry about them. If people choose to follow the 10 commandments I think that would be enough.

I say a spanking would be good enough but nowadays people can't even do that.:shk:

Spare the rod spoil the child.

[edit on 6/14/2007 by Leyla]

Originally posted by Leyla
Maddness that sounds like a extreme case. Those old laws I say would be outdated. So I wouldn't worry about them. If people choose to follow the 10 commandments I think that would be enough.

yeah, that's the point. the bible is a book of errancies. it's faulty all over.... yet some people see it as truth.

I say a spanking would be good enough but nowadays people can't even do that.

Spare the rod spoil the child.

yes, let's encourage the striking of children. because you're right and the leading research into child development and psychology is wrong

see, more crock the bible spews out.

Maddness I didn't say beat them to a pulp. Good grief. Just don't let your kids run all over you. Its how you teach kids. I have a 7 year old nephew and his intellagence is incredable. He knows more about the bible then I do and he's a good kid.

If you don't want to read the bible Maddness thats your right. I did try to be civil about this.

You know I have to say im sorry Madness for misinterpreting what you were talking about. Thats how they delt with problem childs back then in Covenant society but, it was not like it was the first time the child did something like that did they take him to the elders, it was after many times and the elders actually held counsel with the parents about the kid usually telling them if they refused to stone their kid then the elders would stone the parents and the kid. Sounds a little extreme as far as our nations standards now. But you remeber Israel was a covenant nation then, and it was if you broke the laws of the Covenant then you paid fo it with your lives.

And Im sorry for misrepresenting the number of laws there were 213. But they were Covenant laws.

I personally believe in spanking though not to a bloody pulp. Strictly for disciplinary purposes. It is sad though that even that can put you in jail for " abusing your child. "

God Bless

Originally posted by Leyla
Maddness I didn't say beat them to a pulp. Good grief. Just don't let your kids run all over you. Its how you teach kids.

yes, and physical threats should have no part in it.

I have a 7 year old nephew and his intellagence is incredable.

that's great.

He knows more about the bible then I do and he's a good kid.

well, i have several things to say about that.
1: there's no connection between being a good kid and knowing crap about the bible
2: is he a christian?
3: if he is a christian you should be ashamed of the abusive indoctrination your brother/sister put your nephew through.

If you don't want to read the bible Maddness thats your right. I did try to be civil about this.

um... i've read the bible
hell, i've even read it cover to cover (twice)
that's how i know what's in it and that's how i made my rational decisions about it

and follower, stop trying to rationalize the atrocious laws and punishments in the bible, if the laws were set down by a perfect being for a covenant wouldn't those laws be perfect?
what about homosexuals? they were just killed outright, weren't they?

and what about the several genocides? how do you excuse those? and the sex slavery?

Madness by now you should know what I am going to say about homosexuality it is a choice read this that comes from a paper in hong kong. The person writing gives some good examples. If you don't like that one how about this one homosexuality a choice

um... i've read the bible hell, i've even read it cover to cover (twice) that's how i know what's in it and that's how i made my rational decisions about it

I have heard your story before, and as I had said before no wonder you did not find Christ... but that is a different topic.

and follower, stop trying to rationalize the atrocious laws and punishments in the bible, if the laws were set down by a perfect being for a covenant wouldn't those laws be perfect?

How am I rationalizing the Laws? The Law was the Law. They were perfect, they set Israel apart from every other nation in the world at the time. There is punishment for disobeying the Laws God have given the people to build there nation.

Did you know a marrage is a covenant? when you understand Covenant you understand the reason God was so strict.
This concerns Covenant, though I cannot remember exactly where it is found in the Bible.

" Let your yay be yay and your nay be nay "

what about homosexuals? they were just killed outright, weren't they?

Hopfully I will answer not just that question but your last one with this. Sodomy was not exactly a good thing in the eyes of God, because it was a bad choice that leads away from Him. Why do you think Sodom and Ghemorah was destroyed ( granted not just because of homosexuality ) because it had nothing to do with God. Why do you think those people died in Noahs time? Because they had nothing to do with God. Why do you think Adam and Eve were punished? Because they turned away from God. Why do you think there are a lot of people claiming it to be the " End Times? " A reason is because we are turning away from God. A willing choice. Every time God punishes a large amount of people it is because they have made the consious decision to go against the Covenant God made with them.

God Bless