Introduction
In the 1870s fragments of a leather scroll were found by Bedouins in a cave on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. Through the involvement of Jerusalem antiquities dealer Moses Shapira, the scroll was analyzed and interpreted by Shapira himself, and several scholars in Germany and the United Kingdom. I’ve presented an introduction to this scroll in a previous piece titled: Moses’ Real Words?
Our purpose here is to compare and contrast the “Ten Words” (Decalogue) found in the “Moses Scroll” (MS) with both of the other canonical versions found in Exodus and Deuteronomy, but also with the teachings of Jesus. We’ll see if the nuances in the MS Ten Words (and their blessings and curses) can also be detected in Jesus’ teachings. And if they can, can we propose how such a linkage could exist when at the same time it is missing or much harder to find between our published versions of the Decalogue? Let’s see.
The Ten Words
This table compares the Decalogues of the MS, Deuteronomy 5 and Exodus 20, for analysis. (You may want to open it in a separate window as we step through each one.)
There Shall Not Be to You Other Elohim. You Shall Not Make or Worship Idols
It’s interesting that by Jesus’ day, the issue of idol worship among Israelites was apparently a back-burner issue. Our evidence for this conclusion is the lack of mention of the practice of idol worship in the New Testament, other than in the context of Gentiles, and their potential for eating meat from idol sacrifices in the foreign cities in which Paul found them. So at least on this issue, by the first century, the religious establishment seems to have finally overcome the practice that was historically rampant in ancient Israel (e.g. Is 2:8). The MS blessing associated with this command is, notably, “Blessed is the man who loves Elohim.”
As an editorial anomaly, the Exodus and Deuteronomy versions split this command into two: 1) You shall have no other gods but Elohim, and 2) You shall not make or worship idols of other gods. Interestingly, this means the Moses Scroll list will have to come up with yet another command, a new command to complete its list of ten in its Decalogue.
A distinctive of this and the other Deuteronomy commands is that they typically contain a phrase like “as your God commanded you” as if this current reading is a reprise, or reminder (there in Moab, before Israel’s entry into Canaan), of the original command given at Sinai. It is from this past tense character that the book acquired its name, whose meaning is “second law” or “a copy of the law” – a retelling or repetition of the Law.
Sanctify the Sabbath and You Shall Cease on it Because in Six Days I Made the Heavens and the Earth and All That is in Them, and I Ceased on the Seventh Day
Looking at the different command versions, the MS identifies the rationale for the Sabbath as a memorial to God’s seventh day of rest following the six-day Creation. It extends to everyone and all animals within the household. The Ex 20 version is essentially the same. The Deut 5 version, however, doesn’t mention God’s rest on the 7th day of Creation but wants its reader to remember their days as servants in Egypt and so use that memory to extend the Sabbath rest to their servants as well as themselves. So, this version seems to be more of an Exodus memorial than a Creation memorial. Clearly, someone has editorialized. All three versions, in different words, make clear that this command applies to every living thing in one’s household.
Jesus had a lot to say and teach about the law of observing the Sabbath. His principal message seems to have been that His (and God’s) clear priority was of doing good and took priority over Sabbath rest, a view He summarized in Mk 2:27: “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath”. Here are Jesus’ teachings on the subject:
Mt 12:[7] And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. [8] For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.”
Lk 6:[11] He said to them, “Which one of you who has a sheep, if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not take hold of it and lift it out? [12] Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.”
Lk 13: And he laid his hands on her, and immediately she was made straight, and she glorified God. [14] But the ruler of the synagogue, indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, said to the people, “There are six days in which work ought to be done. Come on those days and be healed, and not on the Sabbath day.” [15] Then the Lord answered him, “You hypocrites! Does not each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or his donkey from the manger and lead it away to water it? [16] And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?”
Lk 14:[2] And behold, there was a man before him who had dropsy. [3] And Jesus responded to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath, or not?” [4] But they remained silent. Then he took him and healed him and sent him away. [5] And he said to them, “Which of you, having a son or an ox that has fallen into a well on a Sabbath day, will not immediately pull him out?”
[6] When Jesus saw him lying there and knew that he had already been there a long time, he said to him, “Do you want to be healed?” [7] The sick man answered him, “Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, and while I am going another steps down before me.” [8] Jesus said to him, “Get up, take up your bed, and walk.” [9] And at once the man was healed, and he took up his bed and walked.
Now that day was the Sabbath. [10] So the Jews said to the man who had been healed, “It is the Sabbath, and it is not lawful for you to take up your bed.” [11] But he answered them, “The man who healed me, that man said to me, ‘Take up your bed, and walk.’”
Jn 7:[22] Moses gave you circumcision (not that it is from Moses, but from the fathers), and you circumcise a man on the Sabbath. [23] If on the Sabbath a man receives circumcision, so that the law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with me because on the Sabbath I made a man’s whole body well? [24] Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”
Jn 9:[13] They brought to the Pharisees the man who had formerly been blind. [14] Now it was a Sabbath day when Jesus made the mud and opened his eyes. [15] So the Pharisees again asked him how he had received his sight. And he said to them, “He put mud on my eyes, and I washed, and I see.” [16] Some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath.” But others said, “How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?” And there was a division among them.
Honor Your Father and Mother
Essentially all three versions of this commandment are the same. And, of course, Jesus echoed it in His ministry.
Mt 19:[17] And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” [18] He said to him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, [19] Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
This response by Jesus to the “Rich Young Man” is particularly telling for our thesis here. Jesus has been asked “What good deed do I have to do to have eternal life?” Jesus responds by rattling off the main commands of the Moral Torah/Law – specifically, versions of the Ten Words of the Moses Scroll. Based on this exchange it becomes easy for us to postulate that if Jesus had been asked “what is God’s Law/the Law of Moses?”, he would have recited the Ten Words we now have (versions of) from the Moses Scroll. He would not have recited the Pentateuch.
But here we encounter an issue: Jesus includes in His list of “commandments” this phrase: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”. It is an issue because that admonition is not one of the canonical Ten Commandments. Yet, clearly, it is one that Jesus understood to be within the “Law of Moses”. We’ll look at why this might be a little later.
You Shall Not Kill the Soul of Your Brother
Here, the Moses Scroll version seems distinctive. The canonical versions are terse and identical: “You shall not murder”. The MS, however, expresses it as: “You shall not kill the soul of your brother.”
What does it mean to not “kill the soul” of your brother?
The word rendered “soul” is apparently the Hebrew:
-
- נֶפֶשׁ nep̱eš: A feminine noun meaning breath, the inner being with its thoughts and emotions. It is used 753 times in the Old Testament and has a broad range of meanings. Most of its uses fall into these categories: breath, literally or figuratively (Je 15:9); the inner being with its thoughts and emotions (Jdg 10:16;Pr 14:10;Eze 25:6); and by extension, the whole person (Ge 12:5;Lev 4:2;Eze 18:4). Moreover, the term can cover the animating force of a person or his or her dead body (Lev 21:11;Nu 6:6;Je 2:34). It is even applied to animals in a number of the above senses: the breath (Job 41:21 [13]); the inner being (Je 2:24); the whole creature (Ge 1:20); and the animating force (Lev 17:11). When this word is applied to a person, it doesn’t refer to a specific part of a human being. The Scriptures view a person as a composite whole, fully relating to God and not divided in any way (Dt 6:5; cf. 1Th 5:23).
Perhaps the most instructive usage of this term we find in Gen 2:
[7] then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature/(soul KJV).
This verse gives us the insight that the thing being called out in the Moses Scroll commandment is this term for the essence of that which is living – the nephesh. It is that property of a person (or animal) that makes him a living being (James Tabor renders this word “living breather”). So, we see that this MS version, while being perhaps more poetic than its canonical equivalents, is saying the same thing: “Don’t kill (the life essence of) your brother.” However, once again, the MS specifies the context of the command as pertaining to one’s “brother”, while the canonicals are unequivocal. We’ll have a little bit more to say on this idiom below.
Jesus doesn’t expound further on this fundamental commandment. Apparently, it was widely understood and followed, except, of course, in the case of Jesus Himself and other of His followers at the hands of the Sanhedrin.
You Shall Not Commit Adultery with the Woman of Your Neighbor
Here we find a subtle distinction between the scroll and canon. The MS command qualifies the prohibition as “with the woman of your neighbor”, whereas the canonical commands are unqualified. The question I would ask is: was this qualification “with the woman of your neighbor” actually a qualification? I don’t think so. To the author of the Moses Scroll, if you committed adultery with a woman, she, by definition was the woman of another man – his wife. And if you could make contact with her, her husband was your neighbor. So to me, this is a textual distinction without a difference.
Jesus, as was typical of Him, took this command to a different level:
Mt 5:[27] “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ [28] But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Notice how this response ties directly into the Moses Scroll’s ninth commandment:
“You shall not desire [your neighbor’s] woman, his servant, his maidservant, or anything that is his. I am Elohim your Elohim.”
Here Jesus’ “lustful intent” seems to be what is specifically prohibited by this ninth commandment’s “desire”. People reading Jesus’ statement typically think it is something revolutionary and extreme – something to be aspired to, but certainly not a realistic expectation. Assuming (as we are here) that the Moses Scroll’s Ten Words are the authentic words of God given to Moses, it seems that Jesus, in His expanded version, is doing nothing more than echoing His Father’s original command, albeit it being distributed across a couple of numbered “commands”.
You Shall Not Steal the Property of Your Brother
We know this commandment as “thou shall not steal”. Simple enough. Here again, the MS version couches the commandment in terms of one’s relation with his “brother/neighbor”, rather than unequivocally. I don’t see any fundamental difference, but only an editorial difference. But why would you be motivated to steal the property of your brother?
As the Moses Scroll’s 9th commandment prohibits, because you “desire it”. In other words, you “covet” your “brother’s”[i] stuff. And most clearly, you should not be dissatisfied with what God has given you. Said positively, you should be content with that which God has deemed to give you (a long list of talents and abilities, family and friends, teachers and mentors, life itself.)
Jesus told the Rich Young Man “you shall not steal”. Behind that admonition He no doubt had in mind this deeper, more insidious issue of covetousness that is endemic in the human species, as we see condemned in Moses’ Scroll’s 9th commandment.
You Shall Not Swear in My Name to Deceive
The companion canonical commands are:
“You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.” (ESV)
by which most Sunday schoolers were taught that they weren’t to blurt out ‘God damn it!”.
This translation is unfortunate. What God is saying is that He doesn’t want us to use His name to substantiate a fraudulent or deceitful claim.
Swearing oaths was a common practice among the ancients. It was a way to emphatically state the commitment of the swearer to fulfill the promise he was swearing to. When the oath-maker swore in the name of “God”, his intent was to leave no doubt that he was faithfully going to carry out his oath. However, since there were no apparent consequences for swearing in God’s name disingenuously, some deceitful folks did.
The issue that gets obscured here is the motive of the one falsely swearing: that is, his intent to deceive those to whom he is testifying by claiming ‘in the name of God’ that the falsehood that he professes is the truth. God(/Moses) here says: “Don’t do that.”[ii]
Jesus upped the ante on this commandment saying simply: “Don’t swear at all.” Mt 5:33-37:
[33] “Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.’ [34] But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, [35] or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. [36] And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. [37] Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil.
This statement (like many) is just a little ambiguous. Clearly, He is teaching that those who would take oaths in the name of God-related things (e.g. “Heaven”, “Earth”, “Jerusalem”, “the Temple”, etc. See, e.g. Mt 23:20-22) while intending to deceive should just stop it. He is not explicitly prohibiting sincere oaths in the name of God here. So it seems that, rather than usurping this command, He is simply extending and clarifying it.
You Shall Not Respond Against Your Brother With a Testimony of Deceit
Perhaps most of us know this “Word” as: “You shall not swear falsely against your neighbor” or “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor”.
Thinking about this phrase “You shall not respond against your brother…” seems to imply that your brother has done or said something to which you are inclined to at least disclaim (e.g. “No, that’s not right” or “that’s not what happened”) if not simply shout it down. The core issue here seems to be that you are not permitted to lie against your brother, whatever your inclinations may be (likely to preserve your self-esteem or reputation). One wonders what the world would look like if no one ever cast lies/dispersions on those around them. Try to imagine never being lied about!
One form of this reaction is to slander your neighbor, claiming, falsely (and often secretly in salacious gossip), that he does or did something nefarious that he actually didn’t do. The other form is to simply deny the truthful claims of your neighbor. For example, the Moses Scroll has a classic allusion to this form of “a testimony of deceit” when, in its “Word” 6 it says in its curse that “Cursed is one who moves his neighbor’s land boundary.”[iii] In this example the neighbor, through his legitimately placed land boundary marker, stated a truth. You, the violator, moved it (assumedly for your advantage), thus calling false the truth that your neighbor had asserted.
Jesus actually didn’t comment on this commandment, other than to recognize it in Judas, and in a condemning tone of voice, tell him: John 13:[27]
Then after he had taken the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, “What you are going to do, do quickly.”
Certainly, Judas responded against his brother, Jesus, with a testimony of deceit. He slandered Jesus by confessing Him implicitly as simply just a guy the authorities happened to want to get out of their way, rather than what he knew Him to be – the Son of God. In this, he lied. Did Judas think that his actions would force Jesus to assert Himself as the King of Israel, the One to vanquish Israel’s oppressors, thus inaugurating the Kingdom of God in Israel? It’s impossible to say, but this is a common commentary on the event.
You Shall Not Desire [Your Neighbor’s] Woman, His Servant, His Maidservant, or Anything That is His.
This is the covetousness prohibition. Jesus did have something to say about it. Lk 12:[15] says:
And he said to them, “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.”
It’s interesting that the Deuteronomy and Exodus versions of the Ten Words actually elaborate on this version to include coveting of the neighbor’s house, and ox, and donkey, perhaps citing some of the commonly desired possessions of one’s neighbor. This version doesn’t enumerate any material possessions of the neighbor but rather just says “anything that is his”. To me, this sounds more divine, in some way more “elevated” than the pedantic enumeration of specific objects not to desire.
Jesus tried to teach us to be content not just with the material possessions we find ourselves with, but with Him. The author of Hebrews gives us this admonition: Heb13:[5]
“Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have, for he has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.”
The profound idea he is communicating here is that having Jesus (in us, as our Lord, as our God) is all-sufficient for our lives—all we need. It is only secondarily not to love money, the message favored by most commentators and pulpits.
The Moses Scroll’s “Brother” References
As noted above, one of the distinctions of the “Words” of the Moses Scroll is their focus on the application of their admonition relative to one’s “brother”, while the canonical commands are unequivocal. What, if anything, should we make of this distinction?
If we take the Moses Scroll as God’s instructions to Israel for how to live in the land He was giving them, how is our perception of them changed based on that context? Well, for one thing, the intention for their taking of the land is that they would be its sole inhabitants (Dt 7:2). That is, they would not be one group among others coexisting together. So those who would be their neighbors would be Israelites, not “foreigners” – some “unbrothers”.
So given this contextual scenario for taking the land, and the fact that God’s instructions were for how they were to live in that land, the use of “brother” seems not only completely reasonable but practical.
We here are making the assumption that the words of the Moses Scroll are the authentic words that Moses gave to Israel at Moab before they entered Canaan. The whole context of these commands, therefore, was as instruction (Torah) for how to live with one another in the land that God was giving them. Moses is talking to the Israelites here, giving them specific instructions, as he knows he will not be with them to guide them once they cross over into Canaan. So, in this context, the context of Israel as a community, it seems perfectly fitting that these moral and ethical instructions are couched in terms of their interactions with one another.
You Shall Not Hate Your Brother In Your Heart
Here is the punch line of the Ten Words in the Moses Scroll. It has no corollary in the canonical versions of the Ten Words in either Deuteronomy or Exodus. We should wonder why this is. If the MS predated the versions of the Ten Words in the canon, why is it (literally at least) not found there today?
Of course, we have the entry in Lev 19:18b extolling us to “love your neighbor as yourself”. But that admonition never actually ends up in our versions of God’s Law as engraved on the stone tablets, or in any version we have. Yet it is top-of-mind for Jesus, and He treats it as a literal commandment. After all, that’s the category He places it in…”and the other is like it: you shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” It seems totally in sync with the other “Words” of Moses’ Scroll. In other words, in my opinion, at least, the Scroll’s Ten Words are the fundamental moral and ethical bedrock of God’s Kingdom for humanity.
And, importantly, returning to Jesus’ exchange with the Rich Young Man (above), Jesus cites this commandment’s positive corollary: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”. In fact, the blessing associated with this commandment in the Moses Scroll is: “Blessed is the man who loves his neighbor.”
Did Jesus, perhaps because He had all of the Law and the Prophets committed to His memory, select the Lev 19:18b version of this commandment? Or, rather, did He know exactly what His Father had commanded Israel through Moses, and so cited His version of its tenth “Word”. Why do you suppose it is that when He answered the Pharisee in Mt 22:36-40:
[36] “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” [37] And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. [38] This is the great and first commandment. [39] And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. [40] On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”
He cited this verse when it is not a part of the Law of Moses from Sinai at all; not (supposedly, at least) an entry from God on the tablets of Moses? Why did Jesus do this? What did He see that we don’t see?
Leviticus’s “but you shall love your neighbor as yourself” isn’t literally presented in the Moses Scroll for Jesus to appropriate. True. But let’s see what is. The word used in these verses rendered “love” is (assumedly) 157. אָהַב ‘āhaḇ (as it is in Lev 19:18) which can mean all manner of desires for something. The Hebrew Bible contrasts this word with the word rendered ‘hate’ (ESV, KJV) or ‘love less’, 8130. שָׂנֵא śānē’ (as in Gen 29:30-31). So, it seems likely that semantically this commandment is to not שָׂנֵא śānē’ your brother, leading directly to its corollary in its blessing: “Blessed is the man who אָהַב ‘āhaḇs his brother.” So how do we get to: “You shall love your brother as yourself” (Lev 19:18b)?
For me, the key is the semantic we see in Gen 29:30-31:
[30] So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and he loved (אָהַב ‘āhaḇ) Rachel more than Leah, and served Laban for another seven years. [31] When the LORD saw that Leah was hated (שָׂנֵא śānē’ ), he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren.
Leah was loved less than Rachel (v30) which v31 characterizes as “hated“. From this, I think it is perfectly reasonable to read this MS command as: “You shall not love less (שָׂנֵא śānē’) your brother”. But “love less” than what? Well, the other things you love, especially yourself. If you don’t love him less than yourself, it seems you love your brother as much as you love yourself, so the semantic equivalent of “love your brother as yourself”. At least that’s the way I read it.
It is also interesting to note that the first commandment’s, blessing (“Blessed is the man who loves Elohim”) bookends the Decalogue with the last command’s love blessing: “Blessed is the man who loves his brother.” The love-of-God blessing is reinforced in the Shema in Deut 6:4-5, which the MS[iv] renders as follows (Ross Nichols’ Translation):
“Hear, O Israel, Elohim our Elohim, Elohim is one, and you shall love Elohim your Elohim with all your heart and with all your soul – very exceedingly.”
So, the MS Decalogue starts with the promise of blessing to the one who loves, and ends with the promise of blessing to the one who loves, a perfect symmetry.
Within this single scroll, Jesus had all the instructions (Torah) He needed to answer the Pharisee’s “greatest commandment” question (Mt. 22:37-39, Mk 12:29-31), and answer the Rich Young Man’s “eternal life” question without needing to refer to the Leviticus, or any other, scroll. For myself, I find the argument that Jesus, while he knew, of course, the 8th-5th century BC Priestly scrolls, including Leviticus’ v19:18b[v], He also knew of their pedigree and knew He had no need of them to answer the truth to His questioners. He had everything essential to respond within the Moses Scroll.
Though this case is circumstantial, it seems that Jesus knew exactly what His Father had instructed Israel through Moses at Moab. And not only was He on exactly the same page as that original Mosaic Law, He was in a position to raise its bar in many cases. Why? Because He was here not only to teach how to live in accordance with the will of God as reflected in His “Words”, but to enable humanity to actually do so through His subsequent pouring out of God’s Spirit into those who trusted Him with their lives.
Nothing in the Moses Scroll disclaims Christ or His message. And nothing Jesus taught disputes the Moses Scroll’s instructions. They seem to be perfectly united.
[i] I can’t find any hidden distinction between the concept named “brother” (251. אָח ‘āḥ) and that named “neighbor” (7453. רֵעַ rēa רֵיעַ rēya ). It seems that “neighbor” is a somewhat more generic relationship, while “brother” seems to imply one of the same ancestry. The author of the Moses Scroll appears to use these terms more or less interchangeably.
[ii] To get around this element of the Law, deceivers often swore to their intent to fulfill their oath by swearing in the name of the “Temple”, or “all that is Holy”, or “Jerusalem”, thus avoiding use of the term for or name of God, and so adhering to the letter, but not the spirit, of this Law.
[iii] You can review all of the Moses Scroll’s blessings and curses associated with its “Words” in this table: The Shapira Scrolls’ Commandments, Blessings, and Curses.
[iv] You can read the full text of the Moses Scroll here: Shapira Scroll Translations
[v] It should be pointed out that Lev 19:18 does seem to encapsulate some of the spirit of the blessing and commandment in the MS: “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people” [i.e. your ‘brothers’], “but…” How this came about in the midst of the otherwise spiritless Priestly Torah – who was involved; what their circumstances were, etc. would surely be fascinating to know.
Leave a comment