The Ten Commandments (a.k.a.
The Decalogue) A possible origin of the Ten Commandments
The
10 Commandments, the Code of Hammurabi, the Vedas,
the Egyptian Negative Confessions and the Book of Change? Show
1Overview:
According to Wikipedia 2About
the Egyptian "Book of the Dead:" 3A
second trial 4 Hail to thee, great God 5 Comparison of ancient Egyptian and Hebrew texts: 6 Comparing another translation of the Book with
the KJV of Exodus: 7 References
1The
10 Commandments, the Code of Hammurab 2 Similarities! Similarities? 3 The story presented in the Enuma Elish 4 The Enuma Elish is indeed an important ancient
text 5 Gilgamesh vs Bible 6 Complete "Epic of Gilgamesh" (from 650
BC) was unearthed 7 God (or several gods in the Gilgamesh account 8 how the stories remain consistent over time 9 For those who believe the Bible is God's Word 10 Moses vs Hammurabi 11 Hammurabi was a Babylonian king 12 There are other examples 13 Highlights of Archaeology in Bible 14 This is what sets the Mosaic Law apart 15 Babylonian laws were probably well-known to the
Hebrews of Moses' day 16 Related Comments 17 Related Questions 18 Similarities / differences- 10 Commandments /
Code of Hammurabi 18-1Anonymous 18-2 Ranjiv Kurup Hindu 18-3 Ranjiv Kurup, Author on History and
Philosophy of the Hindu
Introduction
This is the background common today. In January 2019 the evidence of
studying Mohammad's life showed me that he took Moses as his role model for
starting a Theocratic Murder Cult!.
In Numbers 31, Moses says the Midianite women were corrupting the
Jewish men. He uses this as justification for killing all the men in
battle then having all the male babies, boys and widows murdered but keeps
32,000 virgins as slaves and concubines.
Overview: According to Wikipedia:
"Some historians....have argued that the Ten Commandments originated
from ancient Egyptian religion, and postulate that the Biblical Jews borrowed
the concept after their Exodus from Egypt. Chapter 125 of the [Egyptian] Book of
the Dead (a.k.a. the Papyrus of Ani) includes a list of things to which a man
must swear in order to enter the afterlife. These sworn statements bear a
remarkable resemblance to the Ten Commandments in their nature and their
phrasing.....The Book of the Dead has additional requirements, and, of course,
doesn't require worship of Yahweh." 1
The Book of the Dead was written circa 1800 BCE. 2 The Schofield Reference
Bible estimates that the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt and the provision of the Ten
Commandments on Mount Sinai occurred in 1491 BCE., some three centuries later.
Many religious liberals, historians, and secularists have concluded that the
Hebrew Scripture's Ten Commandments were based on this earlier document, rather
than vice-versa.
About the Egyptian "Book of the Dead:"
The ancient Egyptian religion taught that person had to undergo trials
after death as they proceeded towards the underworld.
One major test was that the weight of their heart was compared to that of
a feather. This appears to be a test that everyone would fail. Egyptians
believed that If the person had committed sin during his or her lifetime, then
their heart would become heavier. The heart does naturally gain weight with age.
The Egyptians might have noticed this and assumed that the weight gain was
caused by the commission of sins. Unfortunately, there appears to be no chance
that the deceased person can pass that test. Adult hearts weigh over a half
pound (227 grams). A male heart typically weighs 280 to 340 grams. Female hearts
weigh from 230 to 280 grams. 3 A feather weighs a small fraction of a pound.The
Book of the Dead states that: "The god Thoth would record the results and
the monster Ammit would wait nearby to eat the heart should it prove
unworthy." 4 Presumably, failing this test and having one's heart eaten
would not be an encouraging sign for one's future well being.
A
second trial
A second trial was that the deceased would have to recite a
negative confession "when [she or] he descends to the hall of the Two
Truths." In the statement, he or she swore that they had not engaged in
specific behaviors while alive. According to Egyptologist Ahmed Osman, one
translation of the statement reads:
Hail to thee, great
God
"Hail to thee, great God, Lord of the Two Truths. I have come unto
thee, my Lord, that thou mayest bring me to see thy beauty. I know thee, I know
thy name, I know the names of the 42 Gods who are with thee in this broad hall
of the Two Truths . . . Behold, I am come unto thee. I have brought thee truth;
I have done away with sin for thee. I have not sinned against anyone. I have not
mistreated people. I have not done evil instead of righteousness . . .
I have not reviled the God.
I have not laid violent hands on an orphan.
I have not done what the God abominates . . .
I have not killed; I have not turned anyone over to a killer.
I have not caused anyone's suffering . . .
I have not copulated (illicitly); I have not been unchaste.
I have not increased nor diminished the measure, I have not diminished the palm;
I have not encroached upon the fields.
I have not added to the balance weights; I have not tempered with the plumb bob
of the balance.
I have not taken milk from a child's mouth; I have not driven small cattle from
their herbage...
I have not stopped (the flow of) water in its seasons; I have not built a dam
against flowing water.
I have not quenched a fire in its time . . .
I have not kept cattle away from the God's property.
I have not blocked the God at his processions. 5
Comparison of ancient Egyptian and Hebrew texts:
A comparison of the Book of the Dead text with the version of the Ten
Commandments found in Exodus 20:2-17 is striking. Both consist of a series of
negative statements.
Comparing another translation of the Book with the King James Version of
Exodus:
Book of the Dead: "I have done away sin for thee and not acted
fraudulently or deceitfully. I have not belittled God. I have not inflicted pain
or caused another to weep. I have not murdered or given such an order. I have
not used false balances or scales. I have not purloined (held back) the
offerings to the gods. I have not stolen. I have not uttered lies or
curses."
bullet Exodus 20:7-16: "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in
vain....Thou shalt not kill. Thou shalt not commit adultery...Thou shalt not
bear false witness against they neighbor..." 6,7
One major difference between the two documents is that statues of the Gods
and Goddesses formed a major part of the ancient Egyptian religion. The religion
of the ancient Hebrews forbade any image or statue of Yahweh. Another difference
was the Decalogue's emphasis on the Sabbath -- one day of rest each week. It is
not found in the Book of the Dead or in ancient Egyptian culture.
References:
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the
above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
1) "Ten Commandments: Origins," Wikipedia, 2006-JAN-04, at: http://en.wikipedia.org/
2) "Time-table (chronological)," Knops Boekrestauratie, at: http://www.xs4all.nl/
3) Henry Gray, "Anatomy of the Human Body: 4b. The Heart," 1918, at: http://www.bartleby.com
4) "Book of the Dead," Wikipedia, 2006-JAN-05, at: http://en.wikipedia.org/
5) Ahmed Osman, "The Ten Commandments and the Book of the Dead," Out
of Egypt, at: http://dwij.org/
6) Didaskalex, "So you'd like to... Implement the True meaning of the
Decalogue," Amazon.com, at: http://www.amazon.com/
7) "Egyptian & Old Testament Scriptural Correspondences," at: http://www.mystae.com/
What are the similarities and differences
between the 10 Commandments,
the Code of Hammurabi, the Vedas, the Egyptian Negative Confessions and the Book
of Change?
The people who don't agree with my information posted can create their posts.
"Seven Tablets of
Creation," is a Babylonian creation myth that has a number of literary and cultural connections to the creation account in Genesis 1. The Enuma Elish is one of the oldest creation records ever discovered, likely dating to 1100 BC (Genesis, which is older, was written around 1400 BC). The title, Enuma Elish, is taken from the
account's first two words, which translate to
"when in the
heights." Studying this mythology helps Bible scholars understand the non-empirical, poetic literature so common in ancient Near Eastern writings. However, the Enuma Elish has also been used by skeptics as a supposed proof that the Genesis 1 account is merely mythology or a parallel of contemporary mythologies.
The
story presented in the Enuma Elish
The story presented in the Enuma Elish (which you can read here) is of a great clash between various gods of the Babylonian pantheon. The two most important characters are the god Marduk and the goddess Tiamat. After Tiamat prepares many monsters and lesser gods to destroy the remainder of the pantheon, and a few younger gods have already failed at challenging her, Marduk offers to destroy Tiamat in return for being made highest among the gods. The other gods readily accept this offer, and Marduk becomes locked in mortal combat with Tiamat. After killing Tiamat, Marduk splits her body in two, making one half the sky and one half the earth. He makes humans from his own flesh and bone and brings order to the universe.
On the surface this does not sound anything like the Genesis creation account, but the poetic structure and terminology in their original languages do bear some similarities. Some liberal Bible scholars have used this resemblance to imply that the creation account in Genesis 1 is merely a poetic interpretation of creation rather than a factual account. While there is no denying the similar poetic structures of the Genesis 1 and Enuma Elish creation accounts, this does not mean both are equally mythological, only that they came from similar cultural backgrounds. Writing form does not affect the veracity of content. A novel can be written in a biographical style, but that
doesn
't mean the novel and the biography are equally true (or false).
The
Enuma Elish is indeed an important ancient text
The Enuma Elish is indeed an important ancient text and is invaluable to scholars of ancient Near Eastern culture and language and, by extension, to biblical scholars. As such, it is an interesting piece of mythology, but it should not be mistaken as the original creation account or a parallel of Genesis 1.
Gilgamesh vs Bible
There are many similarities between the Gilgamesh flood account and the biblical flood account (Genesis
6
-8), beginning most importantly with God choosing a righteous man to build an ark because of an impending great flood. In both accounts, samples from all species of animals were to be on the ark, and birds were used after the rains to determine if flood waters had subsided anywhere to reveal dry land. There are other similarities between the Gilgamesh flood account and the biblical flood account.
One major point of clear agreement is that a global flooding disaster occurred in ancient times. Portions of the Gilgamesh account (Chaldean Flood Tablets) have been found dating back to 2000 BC or earlier. Tablets containing the full story, however, date to approximately 650 BC, or well after the Genesis account (c.
1450
-1410 BC). These Chaldean tablets, from the city of Ur (modern-day southern Iraq), describe how the Babylonian God Ea decided to end all life except for the ark dwellers with a great flood. Ea, believed by the Babylonians to be the god who created the earth, selected Ut-Napishtim (or Utnapishtim) to construct a six-story square
ark
.
Complete
"Epic of Gilgamesh" (from 650 BC) was unearthed
During the mid-nineteenth century, this complete
"Epic of Gilgamesh" (from 650 BC) was unearthed in some ruins at
Nineveh's great library, and the depth and breadth of similarities and differences became evident. Here is a more extensive listing of the similarities and differences:
God
(or several gods in the Gilgamesh account
God (or several gods in the Gilgamesh account) decided to destroy humankind because of its wickedness and sinfulness (Genesis
6:5
-7).
A righteous man (Genesis 6:9) was directed to build an ark to save a limited and select group of people and all species of animals (Noah received his orders directly from God, Utnapishtim from a dream).
Both arks were huge, although their shapes differed.
Noah
's was rectangular;
Utnapishtim's was square.
Both arks had a single door and at least one window.
A great rain covered the land and mountains with water, although some water emerged from beneath the earth in the biblical account (Genesis 7:11).
The Noahic flood was the result of a storm lasting 40 days and nights (Genesis 7:12), while the Gilgamesh storm was much shorter:
"Six days and seven nights / came the wind and flood, the storm flattening the
land" (from Tablet XI, trans. by Maureen G. Kovacs)
Birds were released to find land (a raven and three doves in the biblical account,
Genesis
8:6
-12; a dove, swallow, and raven in the other).
After the rains ceased, both arks came to rest on a mountain,
Noah
's on Ararat (Genesis 8:4);
Utnapishtim's on Nisir. These mountains are about 300 miles apart.
Sacrifices were offered after the flood (Genesis 8:20).
God was (or gods were) pleased by the sacrifices (Genesis 8:21), and Noah and Utnapishtim received blessings.
Noah
's blessing was to populate the earth and have dominion over all animals (Genesis
9:1-3);
Utnapishtim's was eternal life.
God (or the many gods) promised not to destroy humankind again (Genesis
8:21
-22).
How
the stories remain consistent over time
Perhaps most interesting is how the stories remain consistent over time. Although the complete Epic of Gilgamesh was discovered in the mid-nineteenth century, much earlier segments (before the writing of Genesis) have been discovered and dated. Yet most significant is the greater fidelity of the Hebrew account. This is attributed to the importance of Jewish oral tradition and the possibility that some of the story was recorded by Noah or from his time, which would make the Hebrew account precede the Babylonian version.
Some scholars hypothesize the Hebrews borrowed the Babylonian account, but no conclusive proof has been offered to support this. Based on the many and varied differences and details within these stories, it seems unlikely that the biblical version depended upon an existing Sumerian source. Further, given the
Jews
' reputation for passing down information scrupulously from one generation to another and maintaining a consistent reporting of events, Genesis is viewed by many as far more historical than the Epic of Gilgamesh, which is regarded as mythological because of its numerous gods and their interrelationships and intrigues in deciding the fate of humankind.
For
those who believe the Bible is God's Word
Certainly, for those who believe the Bible is
God
's Word, it is sensible to conclude He chose to preserve the true account in the Bible through the oral traditions of His chosen people. By
God's providence, His people kept this account pure and consistent over the centuries until Moses ultimately recorded it in the Book of Genesis. The Epic of Gilgamesh is believed to contain accounts which have been altered and embellished over the years by people not following the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Moses vs Hammurabi
The theory that
Moses
' Law is simply a rewording of
Hammurabi's has largely been abandoned today, due to the fact that similar law codes, even older than
Hammurabi's, have been found in various other places. These would include the Cuneiform laws, written as early as 2350 B.C.; the Code of Urukagina, 2380 B.C.; the Code of Ur-Nammu, 2050 B.C.; and others.
Most critics accede to the fact that the Babylonian laws were probably well-known to the Hebrews of
Moses
' day. When God communicated His Law, He used language that the Israelites were already familiar with, and this would explain similar wording for similar laws.
Both Hammurabi and Moses recorded a complex system of laws that were unique to their times. Hammurabi claimed to receive his code from the Babylonian god of justice, Shamash. Moses received
God
's Law atop Mount Sinai directly from Yahweh, the God of the Israelites. There are some similarities between the Mosaic Law and the Code of Hammurabi, as would be expected from two legislative systems. However, their significant differences demonstrate the baselessness of the charge that Moses copied from the Code of
Hammurabi.
Hammurabi
was a Babylonian king
Hammurabi was a Babylonian king who reigned from 1795 to 1750 B.C. He is remembered today for promoting and enforcing an organized code of laws. The Code of Hammurabi, discovered on a stele in 1901, is one of the best preserved and comprehensive of ancient writings of significant length ever found. The Hammurabian Code is divided into 12 sections and consists of 282 laws, 34 of which are unreadable. The Code is primarily a case-by-case formula of customary law covering administrative, civil, and criminal issues. The complexity of the laws and their subject matter reveal much about ancient Babylonian culture.
About 300 years after Hammurabi, in 1440 B.C., Moses recorded the Law for the Israelites. Because the Mosaic Law contains some similarities to
Hammurabi
's Code, some critics of the Bible believe that Moses copied from the Hammurabian Code. If
they're right, and Moses simply stole from the Babylonians, then the whole episode at Mount Sinai is false (Exodus 34), and the inspiration of Scripture is suspect.
Both Levitical law and
Hammurabi
's Code impose the death penalty in cases of adultery and kidnapping (Leviticus 20:10; Exodus 21:16; cf. Statutes 129 and 14). Also, there are similarities in the law of retaliation, such as
"an eye for an
eye" (Leviticus 21:23-25; cf. Statute 196). Statute 206 of the Hammurabian Code says,
"If during a quarrel one man strike another and wound him, then he shall swear,
"I did not injure him
wittingly," and pay the
physicians." The Law of Moses is comparable:
"If people quarrel and one person hits another with a stone or with their fist and the victim does not die but is confined to bed, the one who struck the blow will not be held liable if the other can get up and walk around outside with a staff; however, the guilty party must pay the injured person for any loss of time and see that the victim is completely healed? (Exodus 21:18-19).
There
are other examples
There are other examples, but in all truth, such resemblances do not demonstrate that Moses plagiarized
Hammurabi
's Code. What the similarities do show is that murder, theft, adultery, and kidnapping are problems in every society and must be addressed. Even today, countries throughout the world have similar laws. Such parallels certainly
don't prove plagiarism.
Similarity in penal codes should be expected in civil societies. Both Babylon and Israel had laws against murder, but it
doesn
't follow that one stole the idea from the other. Should one country not prosecute a crime simply because another country has a similar law?
The differences between Mosaic Law and the Hammurabian Code are equally significant. For example, the Law of Moses went far beyond the Code of Hammurabi in that it was rooted in the worship of one God, supreme over all (Deuteronomy 6:4-5). The moral principles of the Old Testament are based on a righteous God who demanded that mankind, created in His image, live righteously. The Law of Moses is more than a legal code; it speaks of sin and responsibility to God. The Hammurabian Code and other ancient laws do not do this.
The Code of Hammurabi focused exclusively on criminal and civil laws and meted out harsh, and sometimes brutal, punishments. In this way, Hammurabi has more in common with Draco than with Moses. The Law of Moses provided justice, but it also dealt with spiritual laws and personal and national holiness. As a result, the Mosaic Law dealt with the cause of crime, not just its effects. The Mosaic Law elevates the value of human life, and its whole tenor is more compassionate than that of the Hammurabian Code. The spiritual dimension is what makes the Law of Moses unique.
Highlights
of Archaeology in Bible
In his book Highlights of Archaeology in Bible Lands, Fred Wight writes,
"The Mosaic Law gives strong emphasis to the recognition of sin as being the cause of the downfall of a nation. Such a thought is entirely lacking in
Hammurabi's Code. . . . The great fundamental principle of the laws of God in the Hebrew Bible may be summed up in the words:
"Be ye holy, for I am
holy" [Leviticus 11:45]. Such a principle as this was utterly unknown to the Babylonians as seen in their law
code."
There is a dramatic difference in perspective between Hammurabi and Moses.
One
's focus is horizontal, while the
other's is vertical. Archaeologist Alfred Hoerth, author of Archaeology and the Old Testament, says,
"The Old Testament law code is religiously oriented, while others are civil. The Mesopotamians believed the god Shamash gave Hammurabi his law code so people could get along with one another. In the Bible, the law code was given primarily so people could get along with
God."
This
is what sets the Mosaic Law apart
This is what sets the Mosaic Law apart from all the other law codes of antiquity: its strong emphasis on spiritual matters. The closest the Hammurabian Code comes to effect such spirituality is its proclamation that those who stole from the gods would be put to death. Unlike the Mosaic Law,
Hammurabi
's Code had no provision for forgiveness.
The theory that
Moses
' Law is simply a rewording of
Hammurabi's has largely been abandoned today, due to the fact that similar law codes, even older than
Hammurabi's, have been found in various other places. These would include the Cuneiform laws, written as early as 2350 B.C.; the Code of Urukagina, 2380 B.C.; the Code of Ur-Nammu, 2050 B.C.; and others.
Babylonian
laws were probably well-known to the Hebrews of Moses' day
Most critics accede to the fact that the Babylonian laws were probably well-known to the Hebrews of
Moses
' day. When God communicated His Law, He used language that the Israelites were already familiar with, and this would explain similar wording for similar laws.
Both Hammurabi and Moses recorded a complex system of laws that were unique to their times. Hammurabi claimed to receive his code from the Babylonian god of justice, Shamash. Moses received
God
's Law atop Mount Sinai directly from Yahweh, the God of the Israelites. There are some similarities between the Mosaic Law and the Code of Hammurabi, as would be expected from two legislative systems. However, their significant differences demonstrate the baselessness of the charge that Moses copied from the Code of Hammurabi.
The Instruction of Ptah-Hotep is probably the earliest, and a good starting point. It mentions
"God" a lot, (a sort of shorthand for all the relevant(Egyptian ) gods. Dated to Old Kingdom Egypt around 2500 BCE. Maybe the Sumerians got there around the same time, with laws that culminated in the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi.The Ptah-Hotep laws were
"re-edited" by Amenemope in New Kingdom times in Egypt around 1500BCE. Maybe they influenced Akhenaten and Moses.
What are the similarities and differences between the 10 Commandments, the Code of
Hammurabi
What are the similarities and differences between the 10 Commandments, the Code of Hammurabi, the Vedas, the Egyptian Negative Confessions and the Book of Change?
The key differences between Mosaic Law and the Hammurabian Code are equally significant. The Law of Moses covers more than the Code of
Hammurabi. The Law of Moses is more than a legal code; it speaks of sin and responsibility to God. The Hammurabian Code and other ancient laws do not do this. The Code of Hammurabi focused exclusively on criminal and civil laws and meted out harsh, and sometimes brutal, punishments. The Law of Moses provided justice, but it also dealt with spiritual laws and personal and national holiness
Both Hammurabi and Moses recorded a complex system of laws which were unique to their times. Hammurabi claimed to receive his code from the Babylonian god of justice, Shamash. Moses received
God's Law atop Mount Sinai directly from Jehovah, the God of the Israelites.
Coming to Vedas, it has both what Hammurabian code and 10 commandment talks about but in much more detail. They are comprised of a huge collection of information which includes material, religious as well as spiritual knowledge. From a superficial point of view, the Vedic scriptures may appear to be unsystematic and even contradictory, but this impression can easily be reconciled by finding out how each step is connected with the goal.
Rig mostly covers ritual, and it contains mainly hymns and prayers in the worship of the universal forces called the demigods. Yajur highlights the ceremonies, and it mainly describes how to perform the rituals. Sama is mostly singing; the scriptures of these categories contain many other mantras as well as strict rules how to chant these mantras according to mystic vibrations. Atharva is more from a priests eye of view who knows the secret lore; these scriptures describe many different kinds of worship and invocations. In a broader sense, many other scriptures of material knowledge are also counted in the
Atharva, like the Ayurveda.
I read through all the answers with much interest. I only have this to offer on the ancient Veda.
Firstly, it is a compilation of old songs, not a book by an author, a council or committee or any such.
Second, there are over 500 poets or poet dynasties to which the contents of the Veda are attributed.
Third, the songs were composed over a very, very, very long period of time. Only now, with modern astronomical tools (software) are we able to decipher the dates (astronomical observations, descriptions of the geography) of some of the songs.
Fourth, the text is not religious in nature. In fact, it is simply (and mostly) an exploration into the roots of human behavior, attitude, thoughts and values.
Fifth, human fascination for the mysteries of the night sky (the visible cosmos) led to an understanding of an abstract
"organizing
principle" of the universe with seemingly three abstract functions -
creation, preservation of the essence, and maintenance
of the cycles of birth, dissolution and rebirth -
"the trinity" (if you will).
Sixth, then someone put Items 4, 5 above together and stumbled upon the greatest secret ever revealed to humans - the secret of happiness, fulfillment, eternal youth and immortality (to name just a few).
Overview: According to Wikipedia:
