The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

I saw a Oklahoma legislative bill listing special preferences for certain historic documents. Most of them seemed historic to me, but the list also listed the Ten Commandments.

I would think the definition of historic would require an actual date in history when it happened. My dictionary says something can be historic for "having once existed or lived in the real world, as opposed to being part of legend or fiction or as distinguished from religious belief."

Am I missing something here about the Ten Commandments? I am not attacking the commandments (even though the one about covet your neighbor's wife in the bible actually says his wife, his male servant, his female servant, his ox, his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor's. It seems oddly specific.)

I can't find any reference to an actual date in history when the Ten Commandments happened. The only reference I see about them at all is that they were written by the finger of God, which to me might say they were not of the real world.

I don't mean to offend anyone here. But what part of them are "historic"?

It depends on the context.  In terms of Judaism and Christianity, they are quite historic.  In terms of state government, if they were relied upon heavily in the framing of the state constitution, you could go so far as saying they have historical relevance to the state.

Interesting question.  I’d never thought of something deemed historic to need to have an actual date assigned to it.  If something is handed down orally then eventually put on paper (or stone), I’d never really thought twice about it needing to have an origination date to be historic.

To me if someone produced the original covenant that would be historic, just like the temple of Athena Nike is historic or the original Winged Victory is historic.

Copies of the 10 C's are just copies and are no more historic then a plaster copy of Nike in a suburban garden. 

The definition of "replica" should also be reviewed.  What was the monument at the capitol a replica of? was it really in English? did they misspell Sabbath?

Conan:

The 10 Commandments have almost no historic effect on our laws.  True, they are an example of bronze age laws - but there are many and more such examples.  There are really only 20% that are laws: don't kill and don't steal.  Up to 30% if you take lying and correlate it to perjury.  They are really RELIGIOUS laws that would enable tribes of people worshiping the same God to prosper.

And the 20-30% that are laws are universal.  We can easily predate Judaism's laws in Egyptian rules, Sanscrit laws written down in the Indus valley, or any culture really.  Many historians think the 10 Commandments were an attempt to maintain Jewish culture in light of Hammarabis code. Cultures with no theist tradition, native Americans, Aborigines, or the Chinese had the same basic laws.

The Ten Commandment are religious law.  A monument to the Ten Commandment or a depiction therein is a symbol of devotion and commitment to following the Word of the God of Abraham.

If we actually cared about their historical context - the dating places them between 1300 and 1500 BCE.  The Jewish tradition being near 1300 and other scholars working with biblical dates to be closer to 1450 (we know when X happened in the bible and we know it to be a real event that happened in the year Y.  The Bible event then occurs within a generation of Y).  However, I this much more likely, from a historical perspective, that the commandments were either an oral tradition for centuries OR written into existing founding myths after Israel had an established order and wanted unity.  I tend to agree with scholars who see unrefutable similarities with Babylonian law and think the Commandments were written into the original Exodus story during the exile of the Jewish Court to Babylon (as a way of maintaining seperation for 2-3 generations before Persia conquered Babylon).

That would put the date of the creation of the story near 600 BC without relying on the Bible to accurately record mythological events (such as a god delivering special laws to a 300 year old man from magic bush).

As they say, it is a matter of faith.  Which is to say - not actually history.

Let's hear what the independent judiciary has to say:


[Emphasis added]. I encourage all to read the opinion in Lynch v.Donnelly. Humbling to say the least for some with a "separation of church and state" knee jerk when considering religion's role in this country.

http://splashurl.com/lfy9tu3

Look at CF's post, its full of history...(but you must have faith because there are no links)

Achilles is historical.  So is the epic of Gilgamesh.  The flood story of Babylon.  The founding story of Rome. king Arthur.  Robinhood.

There are many stories that are historical and of cultural significance.  Religious stories, the bible included, among them.  So long as it isn't taught as fact and in line with similar historical myths, it can he educational.

But for some reason I don't think Oklahoma really wants to include the historical context in the discussion.  Great chance its an excuse to post the preferred religious doctrine.

So long as it isn't taught as fact and in line with similar historical myths, it can he educational

Perhaps we can teach it but....there must be a practicing attorney present, a historian on call and a judicial court within 30 miles of the school.
That would be the Oklahoma way of approaching it.

Which. aqua, is why its better to just avoid it.

Can you imagine the uproar if Oklahoma taught that the Ten Commandments story was viewed historically as a myth generated at some point in a 1200 year time span but serves as an important milestone in monotheistic tribal law.  Then move on to talk about the laws God gave to Mohammed - which do have a more historic basis (we know exactly when, exactly where, and they were written down by contemporaries)... but point out those were supposedly also given by the same God.

It would not be pretty.

Let's stick to basic history.  And real historic documents.

Seriously,  that would be a great college-level class.  Something along the line of:  "Laws and Society:  Religious Doctrine and Societal Influences"    But I agree, no way could they teach that (especially in OK) in high school.