Misquoting the Commandments
“You know the commandments, ‘DO NOT MURDER, DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, DO NOT STEAL, DO NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS, Do not defraud, HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER.’” Mark 10:19 NASB
Do not defraud – Recently a reader asked the question, “Why doesn’t Yeshua quote the commandments as they are written? The commandment says, ‘Do not covet,’ but the text changes it to ‘Do not defraud.’ Is this just a translation issue?”
It seems unlikely that Yeshua would misquote even one verse from the Tanakh let alone such an important verse belonging to the Ten Words. That means either the translator who interpreted Yeshua’s Hebrew into Greek made a mistake or Yeshua altered the text for the occasion. Since there is no additional evidence that the text was mistranslated, let’s assume that Yeshua deliberately altered the commandment in order to make a point. The Hebrew World translation of the Greek “do not defraud,” (apostereses) uses the Hebrew verb ‘asaq, found in Genesis 26:20. While the Greek verb means, “to deny, withhold or cause someone to be disposed of something,” the Hebrew ‘asaq means “to quarrel, to contend.” It seems that there is no direct connection between these words. If we assume that Yeshua does not quote the commandment “Do not covet” but rather changes it to “Do not contend or quarrel” we must ask why He would make this change. The answer lies in the context of the verse.
This conversation occurs with the young man who asks, “What must I do to have eternal life?” The question reveals the young man’s mistaken understanding for it suggests that he believes eternal life is like a possession that can be acquired by deliberate action. Yeshua begins to unravel this man’s mistaken perspective by asking him if he knows the commandments. The answer of course, is “Yes.” But notice that Yeshua shifts the meaning of the commandment “Do not covet” from an entirely inward, and therefore unobservable, behavior to an outward display that reveals the core of covetousness. Coveting is the attitude of the heart that desires what belongs to another. When it bears fruit, the display is often seen in attempts to acquire someone’s possession through argument, dissension or quarrels. This young man’s focus is entirely on outward performance, so Yeshua picks those commandments that require outward observance except this one. Yeshua converts this commandment to another outwardly observable behavior. Notice that the young man does not object. He accepts this alteration as if it were the commandment not to covet. But his ready answer to this list of mitzvot reveals that he is interested only in those commandments that may be accomplished without a deep change of heart. This is why Yeshua does not press him on the first few commandments, all of which probe our deepest commitments. Instead, recognizing that the real issue is one of complete submission from the heart, Yeshua directs him to give away all his possessions and follow Him. In other words, the key to eternal life, so anxiously sought by this young man, lies in precisely the commandment that Yeshua alters. Possessions are the root issue in coveting and once the outward performance has been dealt with, the inner heart must also be changed. The young man does not object to the outward performance alteration, but his life collapses when the real commandment comes to the fore.
Yeshua employs derash, elucidating what lies beneath the surface of the commandment by first eliciting agreement to the outward implication and then pressing for the inward application.
This explanation helps us see why the text in Mark does not match the text in Exodus.
Topical Index: Mark 10:19, defraud, apostereses, ‘asaq, contend, derash, covet
Does not this passage describe the whole of religion and those who pursue such? Is it not an attempt to assuage guilt by human effort? Y’shuah aptly describes such as fraud, envying, wanting, striving…coveting. In order to gain that which can not be grasped, ought we not let go of the essence of a fallen condition, human pride? Certainly, Messiah sees through to the heart of the matter. Further, he is able to prescribe a remedy for healing. The challenge is a question that all of us have to answer. Do we truly covet the greater gift?
Rabbinc style of teaching.Worked really well in that culture.Today in the west it is not accepted,or understood.It seems we are not even allowed to quote the talmude without someone objecting to it.They have a lot more tools for teaching in Hebraic culture,than we do in the west.
The influence of “correct” thinking and its insistence on information accuracy strips us of creative enlightenment. The West is about conformity in thought and doctrine while the Middle East focused on dialogue and discussion. I can’t learn anything from a person who merely mimics what I already know.
Know your audience.
Jesus recognized the inner heart of this particular
young rich man, and He spoke to him singularly.
Even though all people may easily succumb to
being possessed by their possessions, Jesus delt
specifically with this one dead-locked soul, as it was
clearly his biggest hurdle.
Accordingly, the Master deals with each of our hearts
one on one, too!!!
Isn’t it amazing how information is captured, manipulated and controlled? Power, whether morally right or wrong, seizes upon translation of meaning. “Thus says, “Mr. So-and-So!” And so it is. No argument. No real searching to verify. No real understanding, except maybe a skewed surface enlightenment. Well, there may be some argument initially, but it is quickly squelched to preserve the health and welfare of the community. After a while, it becomes legend, lore, and written in stone. Or at least preserved in concrete and the local publishing companies overseen by the vetted, trained, and controlled fief-ettes.
Between today’s and yesterday’s TW, it was interesting to think about information in light of an article I just read about DNA.
Here is a link for those inclined to peruse it:
http://www.breitbart.com/system/wire/upiUPI-20131212-174536-3107
It seems some time ago someone deciphered some meaning of the DNA ‘language.’ It became accepted, normalized, and relied upon for human application. It was ‘science.’ One certainly can’t argue with science.
It seems, according to this article (can we believe it on the originator’s word?) that there is more. “They” are much smarter than me, so who am I to disagree or argue. It is science, after all.
Enter our beloved Scriptures. A Mr. So-and-So, famed of a renowned convention covering the southern posts of Christendom as well as other regions declares, from Scripture, and declares thusly . . .
And so it goes. The descriptive words he/they use are acknowledged, dissected for meaning and understanding, even immortalized in some creed-like cantor that finds it’s way in to songs and sayings repeated over and over again within the walls of his/their fief. Any other opposing saying or statement MUST be forced, pushed, and cajoled in to the accepted mold.
DNA apparently is, at least, bilingual. There’s one language with another beneath it, both speaking at the same time. (Could there be more?) Of all things!
I suppose some scientists will refuse to give up their previous understandings and beliefs about the mysteries of DNA. Traditions, even scientific, must be preserved, right? Truth be damned, as long as it fits the scientific paradigm. Long standing understandings must NOT be given up, changed, or altered. Peace and power must be maintained.
Yeshua knew and understood great wisdom. He doled it out appropriately, pointedly, and particularly within the language his subject spoke and grasped. He usually gave a choice as to what to do with it.
(Ramblings. My mind is mush today. Some things just leak out.)
Skip
This was excellent. Your really unpacked the story by describing the context and how defraud is at the basis of coveting! Wow I shall be passing this on.
Christine
“Yeshua employs derash, elucidating what lies beneath the surface of the commandment by first eliciting agreement to the outward implication and then pressing for the inward application.”
Doesn’t this somehow relate to what Abraham Joshua Heschel is intimating:
“Man’s most important problem is not being but living. To live means to be at the crossroads. There are many forces and drives within the self. What direction to take? is a question we face again and again.”
(WHO IS MAN? A. J. Heschel. Stanford Univ Press, 1965. p 68.)
Is what Yeshua was doing in “misquoting” the commandment simply attempting to help his audience get to the reality of not just being but living as a genuine human being? Human being consisting above that of mere being or existing.
Rather than rigidly being bumped and corralled by pseudo truth and doctrine by looking only at the surface and peripheral meaning of Torah, shouldn’t we be actively engaged in searching meticulously and frantically for the depth of life, the meaning of going beyond just being and performing empty cultic actions but rather fleshing out valid meaning and worth associated with being a human being, not just any being?
“A major difference between ontological and biblical thinking is that the first seeks to relate the human being to a transcendence called being as such, whereas the second, realizing that human being is more than being, that human being is living being, seeks to relate man to divine living, to a transcendence called the living God.”
(Ibid. p.69)
Does what Heschel say here reflect what Yeshua was doing in Mk 10:19 by employing the derash to incite some divine living in this individual (and us)? Acting out rules as what must be done is a beginning to living out Torah with meaning that transcends toward relating and reflecting the living Elohim.
Did I miss something, twist something, or did I get close?
Great post. Thanks
Thx.
Between reading your offerings and these people like Heschel, my mind is constantly being provoked toward action. You and these others will not allow my mind, heart and feet to be still.
If I’m understanding Heschel’s statements regarding being human, human being, and living human so far is right and if there’s any validity to it, things make a little more sense.
Simply being can be equated as no more or less with the being of an animal, a tree, a rock. Living, on the other hand, entails the reality of being human by experiencing meaning of being human – life! That life lost in understanding when sin was experienced. Less than what Torah demands is simply being, not human being as represented in life. Life being ultimate realty. Torah living is life at its fullest. It is freedom within the confines of real life.
Who is man?
Man is human only so far as life, as personified by Torah, the Tree of Life, is played out in all his existence.
The man Yeshua was speaking to in Mk 10:19 apparently resided in the satisfaction of only being. Yeshua sought to enlighten and elevate him toward human being in reflecting real life. Simple being satisfies itself in self satisfaction. Human beings satisfies itself in meaningful life. Meaningful life can be found only in Torah living.
Ah, you’re on the way. God is the God of life. Life is the expression of God’s character in His creation. The expression of God’s character in His creation is Torah. Therefore, Torah is life. What is not Torah is death. The creation without Torah is in a death spiral. Whenever Torah is not expressed, death takes over. God places His sovereign hand over the despoiled creation in order to prevent all that death would produce while the restoration process continues. When we live according to Torah, we produce life as found in God. When we do not live according to Torah, we produce death, even though God may withhold the true consequences of our mistake choices for a time. To be human is to be the life-bearer God intended us to be. To exist without bearing His life is to be part of the death spiral even if we don’t know it. It is only because of God’s graciousness that we do not immediately experience the full consequences of the life-death conflict. But we will experience it when the process is complete. In that day Torah will pour forth from Zion and those who are alive will embrace it as they always have. Those who are part of the death spiral will also experience the true results of their choices.
Well said. Clearly articulated. Thank you.
I’ve read Cross Word Puzzles. I’m ready to read it again. It makes much sense so far. I think it fits much, much better than what I’ve digested my previous 30 years of being spoon fed simplistic and rigid doctrinal frailties.
Strangely enough, I sense a much firmer foundation in my walk with these many “could it be’s?” and ‘”it’s possible that. . .'” and “there’s room for . . .” that you and others have shared than all the claims of the supposed “Thus saith the Lord’s” that I’ve heard via boxed in doctrines of my former denominational affiliations.
Delightful.
You might be the first to finish the book. Would you do me a favor and write a review on Amazon. Every review helps the book become better known.
Oh, and I’m almost done with WHO IS MAN? by Heschel.
I only wish I could have sat at his feet and listened to this man pontificate when he was alive.
I was still in high school when he died so I doubt I would have appreciated near enough of his
offerings back then. Even now, I think I would struggle to keep up with his thoughts. But, then again,
great writers seem to have the ability to make deep concepts simple for the simple folk like me.
Oh how I am appreciating your dialog back and forth with Skip as well as the original teaching today. I am learning so much!
I have just had a remarkable experience walking along side my mom in law as she was dying (which happened Dec 12th). I was living and not being as her journey neared completion and Y-H allowed me to participate with her to the end.
Simply being is tremedously over-rated and truly a death spiral. Doing makes for an amazing journey filled with all sorts of people and opportunity for growth and drawing ever closer to the Father. Not necessarily easy to do and will involve difficulties and suffering–necessary as part of the journey.
Peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of Y-H no matter the conflict.
🙂
Me, too, Dawn!
We have our study group meet at 10:30am every Sunday now. A handful of us are watching FFOZ’s HaYesod DVD’s and using them as a springboard for some pretty good discussion. These last two weeks we watched about 5 minutes last week and about 2 ½ minutes this morning and then went off of about an hour and a half discussion of some of Heschel’s words in WHO IS MAN? Good grief! It was fun and very interesting, but I was leading the discussion 🙂 so I think I had the most fun!
The fun part about being the facilitator is I can steer things wherever I’m interested at the time. I ask a lot of questions, too. Many times all I get back are blank stares. Then I start poking and prodding. It’s fun to me.