by jimwalton » Sun May 15, 2022 1:32 pm
> The 10 commandments are literally moral rules for you all to follow
They are not. As Daniel Block comments, "This document is to be interpreted, not as a legal code, but as a statement of covenantal policy. ... They are so general as to be virtually unenforceable through the judicial system. ... Instead of serving as a mere listing of commands, the Decalogue serves more as a bill of rights. By casting each of the terms in the second person of direct address, the document is addressed, not to potential victims of crime, but to a would-be perpetrator of a crime against God or the community. What is being protected is not one’s own right, but the rights of the next person. The addressee is perceived as a threat to the community. Indeed, each of the terms may be recast as a statement of the other person’s rights and addressee’s responsibility to guard the rights of others."
John Walton writes, "The 10 Commandments are often understood as the summary and most important part of biblical law. But the term “commandments” is misleading—the Bible never calls them that, but rather the “ten words.” They do not and cannot stand as the summary of the law or be singled out as more important than the rest. They function the way the rest of the Torah functions—a list of illustrations that serve to circumscribe, in part, the realm of legal wisdom.
"The Decalogue is focused on directing Israel to construct an identity as the people of God. It provides information about the shape of the covenant community (Ex. 20.12), both in terms of how the people interact with YHWH and in terms of how they interact with one another.
"The Torah was not intended to establish or reflect an ideal society, but instead how Israel ought to conduct itself given the structure of society. It is the people that are expected to be transformed, not the shape or structure of society. They are given a mission statement, not a revised curriculum. ... The law is not intended to give a universal moral/ethical system. It was designed to help Israel know that divine favor is extended as it maintains this sort of order as his covenant people in the presence of a holy God."
> nowhere in the bible is this condemned
As I said, the Bible never claims to give universal and comprehensive lists of ethical breaches. There are many unethical and immoral actions that are not specifically condemned by the Bible. Instead, we look for the principles. The question for you to answer is: "Where in the Bible are such things made OK?"
> it could spend time to talk about mixed fabrics and condemn gay acts but not this?
There are many subjects we wish the Bible would comment on, but it doesn't. The Bible never professes to be a complete guide to moral subject matter. Nevertheless, it has plenty to say about sexuality, and condemning exploitation, abuse, and sexual morality.
> According to the bible and the culture around that time a girl was a woman or alma once she started her period, most people believe even mary was around 14-16
So what. Your point is wondering about the morality of a marriage of a 30M with a 14F. That girls often got married around 14-16 doesn't speak to your point. So did the boys marry at age 14-16. So what. What you need to show is that the Bible endorses such things as a mismatched marriage. That's what you need to provide now to continue your case.
> The 10 commandments are literally moral rules for you all to follow
They are not. As Daniel Block comments, "This document is to be interpreted, not as a legal code, but as a statement of covenantal policy. ... They are so general as to be virtually unenforceable through the judicial system. ... Instead of serving as a mere listing of commands, the Decalogue serves more as a bill of rights. By casting each of the terms in the second person of direct address, the document is addressed, not to potential victims of crime, but to a would-be perpetrator of a crime against God or the community. What is being protected is not one’s own right, but the rights of the next person. The addressee is perceived as a threat to the community. Indeed, each of the terms may be recast as a statement of the other person’s rights and addressee’s responsibility to guard the rights of others."
John Walton writes, "The 10 Commandments are often understood as the summary and most important part of biblical law. But the term “commandments” is misleading—the Bible never calls them that, but rather the “ten words.” They do not and cannot stand as the summary of the law or be singled out as more important than the rest. They function the way the rest of the Torah functions—a list of illustrations that serve to circumscribe, in part, the realm of legal wisdom.
"The Decalogue is focused on directing Israel to construct an identity as the people of God. It provides information about the shape of the covenant community (Ex. 20.12), both in terms of how the people interact with YHWH and in terms of how they interact with one another.
"The Torah was not intended to establish or reflect an ideal society, but instead how Israel ought to conduct itself given the structure of society. It is the people that are expected to be transformed, not the shape or structure of society. They are given a mission statement, not a revised curriculum. ... The law is not intended to give a universal moral/ethical system. It was designed to help Israel know that divine favor is extended as it maintains this sort of order as his covenant people in the presence of a holy God."
> nowhere in the bible is this condemned
As I said, the Bible never claims to give universal and comprehensive lists of ethical breaches. There are many unethical and immoral actions that are not specifically condemned by the Bible. Instead, we look for the principles. The question for you to answer is: "Where in the Bible are such things made OK?"
> it could spend time to talk about mixed fabrics and condemn gay acts but not this?
There are many subjects we wish the Bible would comment on, but it doesn't. The Bible never professes to be a complete guide to moral subject matter. Nevertheless, it has plenty to say about sexuality, and condemning exploitation, abuse, and sexual morality.
> According to the bible and the culture around that time a girl was a woman or alma once she started her period, most people believe even mary was around 14-16
So what. Your point is wondering about the morality of a marriage of a 30M with a 14F. That girls often got married around 14-16 doesn't speak to your point. So did the boys marry at age 14-16. So what. What you need to show is that the Bible endorses such things as a mismatched marriage. That's what you need to provide now to continue your case.