Alternet offers an interesting take on what should happen if the Supreme Court should say that it is permissible for governments to post the 10 commandments as demonstrations of the history of law and a non-religious demonstration of where our law comes from. In that case it really doesn't seem appropriate to provide some intermediate version of the commandments. For real history, the presentation needs to go back to the original.
Christianity did not exist when the commandments were given. It is more consistent to go with the Hebrew version rather than any modified Christian version adopted thousands of years after Moses lived. That would mean that the version from the Jewish Torah is the only one that is truly historical. Anything later than that is merely the expression of some specific religion, and is thus an attempt to proselytize that religion.
For history, you have to go back to primary sources. That's history 101.
Right?
No comments:
Post a Comment