The origins of the 10 commandments

It would appear that after spending time in Egypt the Israelites plagerised the 10 commandments (and other parts of Hebrew law) from the Egyptian book of the dead, (Papyrus of Ani), (The Papyrus of Nu, Brit. Mus. No. 10477, Sheet 24) and (The Papyrus of Nebseni). After reading the book of the dead I was surprised to discover that the rules and laws contained in them are almost identical to the 10 commandments, apart from obviously the first commandment that refers to God (i.e there's only one God).

The book of dead was a guide on how to enter the after life used by ancient Egyptians. For example these are some of things that must be said before being allowed to enter the afterlife: "I have not committed sin" , "I have not committed robbery with violence", "I have not stolen", "I have not slain men and women", "I have not uttered lies", "I have not committed adultery", "I have not lain with men", "I have not blasphemed", "I have not cursed God", "I have not opposed my family and kinsfolk", "I have not borne false witness". The language it is written in is very similar to the old testament and Torah.

This is proof therefore that these laws do not originate from Exodus and God but actually predate it. In fact these type of laws have probably been around since the very first civilizations.

What are the 10 commandments?

A silly question you might think, they are the set of rules that can be found in Exodus 20. Well you would be partly right, after Moses came down from Mount Sinai to find the Israelites worshipping the golden calf Moses smashes the stone tablets on which the commandments were written and is then told by God to re-write the commandments on another stone. Moses does this but the result is not an exact reproduction as Deuteronomy 5 is a similar but not exact copy of the 10 commandments for example the reason given for keeping the Sabbath is that after creating everything in 6 days God had to rest. But in Deuteronomy the reason given is that God freed the Israelites from Egypt.

Also there is disagreement between Catholics and Protestants as the exact numbering and interpration of the commandments:

Catholic commandments:
1. "... You shall have no other gods before me...e.t.c
2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain...
3. Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy...
4. Honor thy father and thy mother...
5. You shall not murder
6. Thou shalt not commit adultery
7. Neither shall you steal.
8. Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbor.
9. Neither shall you covet your neighbor's wife
10. "You shall not covet your neighbor's house"....."Or anything that is your neighbor's."

Protestant commandments:
1. "...Thou shalt have no other gods before me..."
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image...
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain...
4. Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy...
5. Honor thy father and thy mother...
6. You shall not murder
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery
8. Neither shall you steal.
9. Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor's house...

So which set of commandments are correct Exodus or Deuteronomy and how do you interpret them the Catholic or Proestant version.

Is it possible to evolve into a god?

As a follow up the last post I am now asking if it is possible to evolve into a god?
Evolution supposedly starts with bacteria and develops from there, but is there any limit to evolution? And have we reached it?

Evolution normally takes place over many generations, but as the human spices becomes more advanced both medically (advances in cloning e.t.c) and through technology (advances in nano-technology e.t.c), is it possible that we could "engineer" our own evolution.

This then leads to the question how much can we evolve or how advanced can we become? How advance can any spices become? Is it possible that a species could reach a perfection and in a way become a god?

There are a number of factors that influence evolution: the environment in which the species lives and other species (normally the predator and the prey) being just two. The only predator that humans have left to fear is itself (both through conflict and through the polliution of it's enviroment).

The only way that humans are ever going to survive let alone evolve is to stop killing itself through conflict and pollution.

The Atheist dilemma

Just so this blog is not too one sided I will now present a dilemma for some atheists

If you consider the size of the universe (at least 10 billion light-years in diameter) and the number of stars within the universe (recently estimated to be 70 sextillion), there is huge amount of planets that will revolve around these stars. What are the chances that only one planet in the entire universe has life on it, and not just a single life form but billions of different life forms on the same planet. I agree that it is a possibility that this is the only planet that has or had life on it. There is the other possibility that life exists on other planets, even if it is just in the form of bacteria. Also as some recent theories suggest if life was brought to this planet by chemical elements present in comets, then consider the number of planets and the number of comets, there are great deal of impacts happening.

If you accept that other life forms (bacteria) exist on other planets, then you must also accept that it is possible for higher forms of life to exist. It is certainly possible that there are more highly evolved life forms than humans, that humans would consider to be almost godlike just as a snail might consider humans to be godlike (if of course they could consider).

Now we get to on science-fiction-like scenarios such as these higher life forms creating their own artificial worlds with life on as an experiment. Is it not possible that we are part of such an experiment or similar scenario (I'm sure you've all seen the Matrix). I know that this sounds far fetched and I'm not saying that it is true, but what I am saying is that it is a possibility. In fact humans are already creating their own artificial worlds on computer and can already artificially create biological life.

Now of course we have come full circle because if you accept that all this is at least a possibility then you must also accept that this world and maybe this universe has been created by a higher life form.
The only difference between this and the traditional Judo-Christian God is that this life-form has not always existed and did not create everything, but had to evolve with its environment and so therefore is not quite perfect. So maybe this is not such a dilemma after all.

The purpose of a God is pointless

Most people at some stage in their life ask questions such as what is the meaning of life? And what is my purpose in life? Well here's an even more interesting question, supposing for the moment that God exists and that God is an all powerful, all knowing, perfect entity. My question is: what is God's purpose in life? I know that this is a question that will probably never be answered but after thinking about it for some time it struck me that the existence of an all powerful, all knowing, perfect entity is pointless.

What is a god supposed to do with it's existence? Unlike humans God's existence is not about learning and gaining more knowledge because God already knows everything. Unlike other animals God's existence is not about survival because God is all-powerful so there can be nothing as powerful that can threaten God's survival. Unlike most species God can not evolve and adapt over time because God is already perfect. We can not claim that God exists just to protect and guide us humans because God existed long before we humans did. More specifically God (supposedly) has always existed, which is a long time to exist and personally if I were God I might get slightly bored and lonely during that time.

This is one possible answer to the question:

God could go round creating things such as galaxies and planets to pass the time but even that could wear a bit thin after a time. So God then makes humans and because God's existence is apparently pointless because of his limitless power God decides to give up some of his power i.e. Giving freewill to humans in order make his own life more meaningful. God then offers humans eternal life so they can keep him company and he will never get bored again. This would mean of course that God depends on us more than we depend on God because if God suddenly did not exist then us humans would carry on as if nothing had happened (i.e. People would still go round worshipping the non-existent God), but if humans suddenly stopped existing then God would be left all alone once again.

Another plausible story is that God became so bored and lonely with his eternal existence with nothing much to do that he killed himself.

These are just two possible answers both probably incorrect (maybe there is no correct answer), the question however is still an interesting one. Also if as some people claim God is out-side of time then God probably will not experience boredom, this doesn't however mean there is any more point to his existence.

God rewards liar's

"You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor" - Exodus 20:16

Genesis 27:
This is an account of God rewarding not punishing people for lying. Isaac wishes to bless E'sau his eldest son because he is getting old and his eye sight is failing him so he tells him to go and catch some game and make him some tasty food. However Rebekah Isaac's wife overhears and tells Jacob the younger son what his father had said, so they both come up with a plan to fool Isaac. They put the skins of goats and kids on Jacob so that his farther would mistake him for his brother when his farther touches him, he also wore his brothers cloths. The plan worked and Jacob gets blessed instead of his brother.

Jacob and his mother lied in order that Jacob would receive his brothers blessing. God blesses Jacob and makes him fruitful, Jacob isn't punished for lying, instead God rewards him for it.

The 8th commandment: broken by Jesus

"You must not steal"”

"He's not the messiah he's a very naughty boy"-Monty Python (The Life of Brian)

This passage (Luke 19, verses 29 -– 36) is set just before Jesus enters Jerusalem, it describes how Jesus obtains a donkey in a less than lawful way. Jesus tells his disciples to go into a nearby town and take a colt (donkey) that no man has ever sat on. He tells them that if the owner asks why they are taking it they should say "“the lord needs it"”. They do this and tell the owner that the Lord needs it. At no time do they ask the owner for permission to use the donkey and at no time afterwards is there any mention of it being returned to it's owner. Telling the owner that the lord needs it is explaining why they are taking it, it is not asking for permission and it is not giving the owner any choice in the matter. This basically amounts to the breaking of the 8th commandment: do not steal. This is robbing a (probably) hard working citizen of a valuable resource and livelihood, who knowns how much work it would have done in the future for it's owners.

Maybe I'm being too pedantic and maybe I shouldn't expect the word of God to be perfect and unambiguous. However one explanation might be that the bible writers did not regard such details as to how the donkey was returned very important so did not put it in the Bible. However the way in which it was taken is more tricky to explain.