Replies

Kind of off-topic but this seems like as good a time as any to repost this:

Do Not Murder
by Dennis Prager
------------
You would think that of all the Ten Commandments the one that needs the least explaining is the Sixth, because it seems so clear. It is the one that the King James Bible, the most widely used English translation of the Bible, translates as "Thou shall not kill." Yet, the truth is the quite the opposite. This is probably the least well understood of the Ten Commandments.

The reason is that the Hebrew original does not say, "Do not kill." It says, "Do not murder." Both Hebrew and English have two words for taking a life - one is "kill" (harag, in Hebrew) and the other is "murder" (ratzach in Hebrew).
The difference between the two is enormous. Kill means:
1) Taking any life -- whether of a human being or an animal.
2) Taking a human life deliberately or by accident.
3) Taking a human life legally or illegally, morally or immorally.
On the other hand, murder can only mean one thing:
The illegal or immoral taking of a human life.
That's why we say, "I killed a mosquito," not "I murdered a mosquito."
And that's why, we would say, "the worker was accidentally killed," not "the worker was accidentally murdered."

So why did the King James translation of the Bible use the word "kill" rather than "murder"? Because 400 years ago when the translation was made, "kill" was synonymous with "murder." As a result, some people don't realize that English has changed since 1610 and therefore think that the Ten Commandments prohibits all killing. But, of course, it doesn't. If the Ten Commandments forbade killing, we would all have to be vegetarians -- killing animals would be prohibited. And we would all have to be pacifists -- since we could not kill even in self-defense.

However, you don't have to know how the English language has evolved in order to understand that the Ten Commandments could not have prohibited all killing. The very same part of the Bible that contains the Ten Commandments -- the Five Books of Moses, the Torah as it is known by Jews -- commands the death penalty for murder; allows killing in war; prescribes animal sacrifice, and allows eating meat.

A correct understanding of the commandment against murder is crucial because, while virtually every modern translation correctly translates the commandment as "Do not murder", many people cite the King James translation to justify two positions that have no biblical basis: Opposition to capital punishment and pacifism.

Regarding capital punishment and the Bible, the only law that appears in each one of the Five Books of Moses is that murderers be put to death. Opponents of the death penalty are free to hold the view that all murderers should be allowed to live. But they are not free to cite the Bible to support their view. Yet, many do. And they always cite the Commandment, "Do not kill." But that, as should now be abundantly clear, is not what the commandment says, and it is therefore an invalid argument.

As regards pacifism, the belief that it is always wrong to kill a human being, again, anyone is free to hold this position, as immoral as it may be. And what other word than "immoral" can one use to describe forbidding the killing of someone who is in the process of murdering innocent men, women and children, in, let's say, a movie theater or a school?

But it is dishonest to cite the commandment against murder to justify pacifism. There is moral killing -- most obviously when done in self-defense against an aggressor -- and there is immoral killing. And the word for that is murder.

The Ten Commandments are portrayed on two tablets. The five commandments on the second tablet all concern our treatment of fellow human beings.

The first one on that list is "Do not murder." Why? Because murder is the worst act a person can commit. The other four commandments -- prohibiting stealing, adultery, giving false testimony, and coveting, are all serious offenses. But murder leads the list because deliberately taking the life of an innocent person is the most terrible thing we can do.

The next time you hear someone cite "Do Not Kill" when quoting the Sixth Commandment, gently but firmly explain that it actually says "Do Not Murder."

I'm Dennis Prager.
------------

It is not murder to kill in the legitimate defense of one's own life or the life of another, to kill the enemy in battle, or to kill those who have been judged to be truly wicked.

I am Jewish, and certainly no scholar of Christian theology.

However, much of Christianity’s doctrine obviously comes from its Jewish roots. Thanks, servo1969, for posting that piece from Dennis Prager - I’ve heard it before, and it utterly puts to rest the idea that killing is totally prohibited in the 10 Commandments, and thus by both Judaism and Christianity.

I would like to add to that - specifically, instances in Jewish history where arms were either used or available for use to defend the Jewish People (and of which the writers of the Christian bible were certainly aware), in chronological order:

1. Upon exiting from Egypt during the Exodus. See Exodus 13:18, in which it says: “...and the children of Israel were armed when they went up out of Egypt.” Of course, the Jewish People under Moses, and then Joshua, fought many battles (using those arms) with the heathens in the Sinai, and in and around the Holy Land. http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9874

2. The (non-Biblical) holiday of Purim http://www.chabad.org/holidays/purim/article_cdo/aid/645995/jewish/The-Basic-Purim-Story.htm, the origin of which is the attempt by the Persian Vizier Haman to exterminate the Jews (about 2,500 years ago). As detailed in the Book of Esther, Queen Esther (who was Jewish) was able to convince her husband, the Persian Emperor, to allow the Jews to defend themselves throughout the lands controlled by the Persians. Note that he could not rescind the genocide order that Haman had earlier convinced him to sign - that was a peculiarity of Persian Law - but a new order solved that by allowing the Jews to defend themselves. The (quite obviously armed) Jews killed about 75,000 Persians who wanted to exterminate them. http://www.chabad.org/holidays/purim/article_cdo/aid/1358/jewish/Purim.htm

3. Chanukah - the origins of this (also non-Biblical) holiday were in the Holy Land about 2,180 years ago, when the Syrian-Greek King Antiochus IV had thousands of Jews killed, and forbade the observance of key elements of Judaism. A former priest, Mattityahu, organized resistance to Antiochus, and his son Judah (the famous Judah Maccabee) defeated 3 attacking forces and then re-took Jerusalem and the Temple (the latter of which was reconsecrated with oil that was supposed to last 1 day, but which lasted 8 days - the Miracle of Chanukah). With arms, of course. http://www.chabad.org/holidays/chanukah/article_cdo/aid/102978/jewish/The-Story-of-Chanukah.htm

So, there you have it - 3 solid and well-known cases in which Jews used arms to defend themselves...all pre-dated Jesus, meaning that he certainly knew about them, as did his disciples. Again, though I am no scholar regarding Christianity, it seems to me to be rather impossible for it to forbid, as a matter of doctrine, the taking up of arms for self-defense or defense of the Christian people in general. In addition, historically, Popes (deemed by Roman Catholic doctrine to be religiously infallible) have given their blessing to (heavily armed) attempts to re-take Jerusalem and the Holy Land (not so much recently, of course, but it happened as a matter of historical record). So, to me, it seems that there is no problem at all from a religious P.O.V. for Christians to be armed, and to use those arms for defense of self, family and community.

In any case, this Jew - who had distant relatives murdered in the Holocaust, and others brutally repressed by the Communists in Russia - will ALWAYS have arms and WILL use them to defend himself, his family and his community (meaning not just the local Jewish community, but my nation - THIS nation - which gave my family both refuge and opportunity). Anyone trying to take them will, uh, regret that choice.