Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-10-2010, 04:04 PM
Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
Too many people say that the ten commandents are the moral basis of a modern western society. But what are the punishments for breaking them? The ten commandments are in the books of moses, and so are the punishments.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
_______________________________________________________________
1. I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; Do not have any other gods before me.
I don't know if there's a punishment for this, probably not. But you gotta kill everyone who tries to tempt you to serve other god/s. (5th book of Moses 30:2-11)

2. You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
No punishment as far as I know.

3. You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit* anyone who misuses his name. (In the finnish translation: ''will not leave unpunished'').
If misusing gods name means blasphemy, the punishment is stoning to death (3rd book of moses 24:16). BUT it could mean sothing else, but what?

4. Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy or die (2nd book of moses 31:14-15).

5. Honor your father and your mother. Mock them and you shall die (3. book of moses 20:9). Hit them and you shall die (2nd book of moses 21:15).

6. You shall not murder. Murder and you die (21:12-14).

7. You shall not commit adultery. You shall die, but only if the person you're adultering with is also married (3rd book of moses 20:10).

8.You shall not steal. Steal and you must compensate (twice the value of) what you have stolen. (2nd book of moses 22:8). I like this one.Rolleyes

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. No punishment(?).
10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor. No punishment(?).
_______________________________________________________________
Tell me if something's not on the list or something's out of context. And tell me if YHWH ever took his words back, since I have'nt yet read the whole bible. I got better stuff to read. I do.
But the law of Moses is only for the israelians? This guy does'nt agree: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vA9fJ87-xyM

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2010, 05:55 PM
RE: Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
Hey, Kikko.

I'm no Catholic theologian but my understanding is that the punishment for sin is eternal damnation. That can be avoided if you confess your sins and are remourseful about committing them. Then you can be absolved (because God forgives everything). Absolution grants you access to heaven. If you die before confession or don't get last rights but you're remourseful about your sins, then you spend time in purgatory and then get into heaven. All of that is to say that the punishments have to do with the afterlife. The threat of eternal damnation in death is the coercive force that controls sinful behaviour in life.

Again, no theologian, but it's my understanding that there is some degree of conflict (at times at least) between the laws of God and the laws of man.

So to try and speak directly to your point, I think the argument that morality has grown out of the rules about sin is based in the idea that "these sins are wrong" more than it's based on the idea that the legal system and its system of punishments is based on it (beyond where the legal system gets its morality).

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2010, 08:28 PM (This post was last modified: 10-10-2010 11:34 AM by gamutman.)
RE: Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
There is some conflict biblically over whether the Israelite laws of Leviticus and Deuteronomy and Judges etc still apply to Christians today.

Here I quote Jesus:
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil" (Matthew 5:17)

And this:
"For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no way pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled" (Matthew 5:18)

So Jesus says the old laws still apply until all is fulfilled. Presumably that means not until the second coming.

On the other hand, Paul contradicts Jesus. In Romans he tells people no food is unclean even though the old testament rules about food preparation are clear. In Second Ephesians Paul says this:

"Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ." (Eph2 2:11-13)

So here Paul is saying the covenant Abraham made with God does not apply to Gentiles.

So what it comes down to is who you want to choose to believe; Paul or Jesus.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2010, 03:08 AM
 
RE: Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
(09-10-2010 05:55 PM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, Kikko.

I'm no Catholic theologian but my understanding is that the punishment for sin is eternal damnation. That can be avoided if you confess your sins and are remourseful about committing them. Then you can be absolved (because God forgives everything). Absolution grants you access to heaven. If you die before confession or don't get last rights but you're remourseful about your sins, then you spend time in purgatory and then get into heaven. All of that is to say that the punishments have to do with the afterlife. The threat of eternal damnation in death is the coercive force that controls sinful behaviour in life.

Again, no theologian, but it's my understanding that there is some degree of conflict (at times at least) between the laws of God and the laws of man.

So to try and speak directly to your point, I think the argument that morality has grown out of the rules about sin is based in the idea that "these sins are wrong" more than it's based on the idea that the legal system and its system of punishments is based on it (beyond where the legal system gets its morality).

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

So, if that is the case, why was the Spanish Inquisition so good at torturing and killing people when they could have been left to suffer penalties set by god in the afterlife? Surely human punishment wasn't neeeded was it?
Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2010, 03:57 AM
RE: Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
I´ve read a couple of christian pages about the Moses' law, but they seemed to quote Paul and the letter to hebrews. One quote was from Jesus, Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presses into it., but right after that comes the verse 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one pronunciation mark of the law to fail.
gamunman Wrote:So what it comes down to is who you want to choose to believe; Paul or Jesus.
_______
Quote:I'm no Catholic theologian but my understanding is that the punishment for sin is eternal damnation. That can be avoided if you confess your sins and are remourseful about committing them. Then you can be absolved (because God forgives everything). Absolution grants you access to heaven. If you die before confession or don't get last rights but you're remourseful about your sins, then you spend time in purgatory and then get into heaven. All of that is to say that the punishments have to do with the afterlife. The threat of eternal damnation in death is the coercive force that controls sinful behaviour in life.
I'll get more into on what this is based on later, I've only read one christian page about it, but their bible quotes were from Paul and Peter, only one was from god and that was out of context.

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2010, 09:40 AM
RE: Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
Hey, wheels5894.

Quote:So, if that is the case, why was the Spanish Inquisition so good at torturing and killing people when they could have been left to suffer penalties set by god in the afterlife? Surely human punishment wasn't neeeded was it?

Uhhh... are you asking me to defend the Inquisition?

The theology behind the Inquisition is very particular. It is in no way standard Christian doctrine. If it was it would still be occuring. So it has little to do with God's will and more to do with one particular interpretation of what God's will is.

My understanding is that the idea that mortals are responsible for purging sin from people in this life is a part of a very narrow theology. Christianity, in terms of Christ's message, is based on tolerance, love and forgiveness. I don't remember Jesus ever saying, "Yeah. If you could go torture the people that don't accept me into their hearts, that'd be greaaaaaat." God forgives all sins (provided the sinner is remourseful) and judgement is supposed to occur in the afterlife. So to answer your question, punishment at the hands of people in this life was absolutely unneccesary. I think most Christian theologians today would call that period a horrible mistake.

My understanding is that the Spanish Inquisition was (and I'm coining/trademarking a phrase here) a meme hunt. It was set in motion to ensure that Spaniards were good Catholics and in particular, that Jewish and Islamic converts were good Catholics. A good Catholic has a "pure" Catholic memeplex. If people possessed a different memeplex or if the Catholic memeplex had been invaded by foreign memes, those memes would be eliminated, either by renouncements brought about by torture or by killing the person.

That being said, meme hunts are not exclusive to Catholocism or to any other religion. The MacCarthy trials were a meme hunt. Stalin's gulags were the result of a meme hunt.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2010, 10:08 AM
RE: Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
meme hunt - I like it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2010, 10:49 AM (This post was last modified: 10-10-2010 10:55 AM by BnW.)
RE: Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
Ghost

I am continually perplexed by your lack of historical knowledge. This is not the first time I've read something you've posted on history and thought "really?". This does not make you unique but given your focus on academics and how you package your opinions together based on sociological concepts I'd figure you would have taken more time to do the background checking.

Fortunately for you: you have me. Wink

The "Spanish Inquisition" is a bit of a misnomer. What you had was the "Inquisition" and what happened in Spain was a small part of it. The Inquisition started in what is now France in the 12th Century with the Cathars (hence the word catharsis). The Cathars were Catholics who's crime was to, amongst other things, to question the sanctity of the God of the Old Testament because of the horrible things he did. Clearly, these people had to be punished. And so mass murder ensued. We know how mass because the Church kept very good records. They also kept the property and wealth of all the people they condemned (which I'm sure did not factor in to the decision of whom to target ... nah, couldn't be). Once the Church tasted blood .. and wealth .. the Inquisition just took on its own life. It finally ended in the mid 1800s, but had been fading in power and popularity all through the Enlightenment period. It also contributed to the Protestant reformation in the 16th century.

It's primary purpose was to ensure adherence to Church doctrines. Your comments about it being a "meme hunt" is probably not wrong, per se, but you are being very narrow in what the Church did and what its motivations were. You are also limiting it to Spain, which,while the most famous aspect of the Inquisition, is just one small part of it.

Of course, on the plus side, if we did not have the Inquisition, we never would have had The Mel Brooks version!

Btw, something of interest on the Spanish Inquisition: there are even today devout Catholic families in Spain who, for reasons they will never be able to explain to you, light candles on Friday nights because it is a family tradition. The tradition is actually based on their Jewish heritage and the tradition of lighting Shabas candles on Friday nights. Funny how, 500+ years later, they still do this. I worked in Spain for a short period and met someone who's family did this and when I told him why he was adamant he was not Jewish. I told him he was not but 500+ years ago his family was - until they were "shown" the error of their ways.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2010, 04:46 PM
RE: Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
Hey, BnW.

Soooooooooo.... you're wrong.

Quote:Historians distinguish four different manifestations of the Inquisition:
1.the Medieval Inquisition (1184–1230s)
2.the Spanish Inquisition (1478–1834)
3.the Portuguese Inquisition (1536–1821)
4.the Roman Inquisition (1542 – c. 1860 )
-SOURCE

So, not a misnomer. I was talking about the Spanish Inquisition in particular because the question that was asked of me refered to the Spanish Inquisition in particular. So, I mean, what you wrote is ahight. It's just that your critique of me is, well, poop. I'm glad I had you, but please make sure that I actually possess a lack of historical knowledge before you accuse me of having a lack of historical knowledge. Sound fair? You also might wanna go back to some of those "really" moments. You might shed some of that perplex.

And for the record, the Catholic church didn't actually run the Spanish Inquisition. It was under the full control of the Spanish Monarchy. Sooooooooooooo buttons.

Quote:It's primary purpose was to ensure adherence to Church doctrines. Your comments about it being a "meme hunt" is probably not wrong, per se, but you are being very narrow in what the Church did and what its motivations were. You are also limiting it to Spain, which,while the most famous aspect of the Inquisition, is just one small part of it.

Memes are expressed as behaviour. Adhering to a doctrine is a behaviour. A transmissable one. Transmissable by memes. The memes that challenge, counteract or disarticulate those memes from the Catholic memeplex or that replace the Catholic memeplex entirely are the ones they were hunting. So I was right per se. I mean, don't get be wrong, there's the political questions and the stealing lands and wealth and all the other good motivations, but, yeah, I stick to what I sad, it was a meme hunt.

Also, the Spanish Inquisition wasn't restricted to Spain:
Quote: It operated in Spain and in all Spanish colonies and territories, which included the Canary Islands, the Spanish Netherlands, the Kingdom of Naples, and all Spanish possessions in North, Central, and South America.
-SOURCE

And for the record, when I say "my understanding is..." I'm not saying "the cold, hard, irrefutable facts are..." Sooooooooooooooda.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2010, 05:59 PM
RE: Punishments for breaking the ten commandments?
I'm aware that history books break up the Inquisitions as you state, mostly for presentation purposes, but they all stem from a common point and continued for ~800 years. And, while the Church did not actually run all of them they had heavily influenced them. None of them would have taken place without at least Church tacit approval and all of them followed the original Church organized slaughters. In terms of governance, the Church could have, theoretically at least, stopped any of them had it chosen to do so. I say "theoretically" because it is impossible to know exactly what would have happened had they tried. I suppose the Pope could have sent an emissary to Spain to put an end to the whole thing and the Spanish king could have said "no thanks". But, in theory at least, the Pope at that time was the final say on these things and the Monarch should have relented.

Quote:Memes are expressed as behaviour. Adhering to a doctrine is a behaviour. A transmissable one. Transmissable by memes. The memes that challenge, counteract or disarticulate those memes from the Catholic memeplex or that replace the Catholic memeplex entirely are the ones they were hunting. So I was right per se. I mean, don't get be wrong, there's the political questions and the stealing lands and wealth and all the other good motivations, but, yeah, I stick to what I sad, it was a meme hunt.

This is what drives me crazy. The massive simplification of events that ignores the important details and nuances. Of course in its simplest form it's a meme hunt. So what? The actual motivations are important. It seems almost dismissive to break it down the way you do, at least to me it does. The what's and why's are more important then the sociological definitions.

We had a similar disagreement on the Crusades and I'm getting a better understanding of how you approach things. To me, it seems you are ignoring the small, which are often the important, details of the story.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: