How would you improve the Ten Commandments?

So because of God’s failure to properly establish a relationship with everyone for thousands of years and allowing them to go to war and enact genocide against each other, he finally realized that he screws up so bad that he had to send his son to be sacrificed (a wholly immoral act) to rebuild his failed relationship, and create a loophole for rules that he put in place, and correct the problems that he caused. And you actually believe in this shit!

That which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. And there is no evidence or reason supporting your conclusion (which is why no biblical scholars espouse it).

He was not executed by the state, he was killed by a murderer seeking vengeance with no due process (in violation of God’s actual commandment thou shalt not kill). You are using that to suggest that god somehow has a problem with rape (despite so scriptural reference for that).

So if we juxtapose those with my equivalent commandment:

Do not hinder free thinking or impose any religious dogma on any member of society. Embrace logic, reason, and the scientific method for learning and the advancement of society.

We find no real contradictions. Perhaps an amalgam of the these would be best to address all related issues of "faith"?

I concur.

Four is technically keep that Sabbath Holy. But yes, I can see scrapping that one as unnecessary. Regarding honoring parents, my alternative would be:

Honor your fellow law abiding citizens who behave with honor and contribute value to society.

This way, only people who deserve to be honored are actually honored. Only those who are honorable based on their actions and behaviors should be honored. Relation to the individual should be completely irrelevant to this.

I assume you're referring to thou shalt not kill (commandment 6). My alternative is this:

Do not kill another person except in self-defense, legal defense of the innocent, lawful combat during war, or when enacting state sanctioned capital punishment.

That seems to be consistent with your interpretation I think?

So I've consolidated some of the personal offenses here: Do not cheat or steal from another person, company, or government agency, except in an emergency situation where stealing is required to prevent the loss of innocent life.

Adultery is nobody's concern except the couple, and like you said some have open, or semi-open relationships.


If we're talking about bearing false witness, I don't think that rises to the importance of needing a "commandment". I mean, that might be the 16th or 17th commandment if they went that high. But in the grand scheme of things, meh.

Not only that, but in some cases "coveting" may actually be a good thing. Coveting can often inspire people to improve their current situation by working harder to achieve what someone else has, rather than simply settling for less.

So, most of those are summed up in my last few added commandments as well:

- Do not kidnap, unlawfully imprison, or ENSLAVE your fellow human. Lawful arrest and confinement must be enacted by the state, after due process, and without cruelty or prejudice.

- Do not mutilate, torture, physically assault, sexually assault, or rape your fellow human.

- Do not marry, sexually molest, or engage in sexual relations with any animal or child under 16 years of age since they cannot competently consent.

All jokes aside, how about people who bring crying babies to the movie theater! Like, you couldn't find a sitter for the evening? (And if you can't, then don't go to the movies!)

How can it possibly be blamed on "humanity" when A) God created humanity, and then cursed humanity to act in a way that he'd predict? And B) God intentionally chose NOT to have a relationship with anyone except one group of people (whom he commanded annihilate the others)? How can that be anyone's fault except God's?

How do you figure? You just said that God sent Jesus to be a sacrifice for mankind. That is God's act, not humanity's! Human sacrifice is the thing that is immoral.

Yeah, but the point is there was insufficient reason to believe in any of it because it is not a reasonable belief (as I'm demonstrating). Forget the fact that it is not based on any evidence whatsoever, but it's not even consistent with logic (kettle logic doesn't count). It's also a morally incorrect thing to believe in.

Again, that is your FORCED interpretation of it (which is inconsistent with how any biblical scholars actually view it and unsupported with any verse in scripture), that is completely contradicted later in the same book where God allows them to have slaves!

There is no evidence that he committed any "crime" at all. You still haven't established "rape" as a crime according to God. Saying that someone who committed rape later died at the hands of a murderer doesn't establish rape as a crime, much less one punishable by death!

Oh, I actually didn't see his post. You tagged me so I saw to respond to you, lol. I'll change it to reflect him instead. Thanks.

Do you really think that I wouldn't be familiar with the typical Christian attempt to get around the morality of God's actions? You already acknowledge that you are aware that I used to be a Christian. So you don't have to give me the standard, tired lines of reasoning that don't actually address my point. I'm interested in having another "free will" debate because free will is irrelevant. I'd argue that there is actually no free will even possible in Christianity at all. So we come to an immediate impasse once we inject the red-herring of free will into the discussion. We are talking specifically about the actions of God. And the reason it's important to not get sidetracked with other things is because no amount of human free will can ever subvert the will of God. According to Christianity, EVERYTHING happens according to "God's will" and his will will be done. So free will (even if I were to accept that there was such a thing) is now an irrelevancy! Whatever exists in the universe is ultimately the responsibility of God alone if you believe that he created everything. This would include "free will" (and anything that results from it)!

When it comes to the Egyptians, or the Greeks, or the Romans (or all of the other races existing in other parts of the world that the bible conveniently ignores like the Chinese, and the Mayans, and Aztec, etc), does "free will" explain in any way why the Hebrew God never interacted with any of them for thousands of years? And if your answer is yes, then explain how free will could have even been a factor with people who had no evidence of God's existence, despite it being within his power to interact with them.

Does "humanity" include the Hebrews, whom you believe are God's chosen people? Did they also choose to sin? Were they also the descendants of sinners?

So the answer to that is YES, I say it's unreasonable and I'm using my argument to demonstrate WHY it is unreasonable. I don't care that a lot of people have traditionally accepted something that is demonstrably unreasonable for thousands of years. That is an appeal to popularity, or an appeal to tradition (both logical fallacies). Neither the truth, nor reasonableness of a claim is impacted in any way by how many people accept the claim as true.

It is neither simple, nor logical for aforementioned reasons that I gave.

What I consider is irrelevant! The question is, is there any evidence that GOD considers it a crime. The fact that he ended up being murdered says nothing about whether that act was criminal. Able was murdered by Cain for having a better offering; that doesn't imply that having the better offering is against God.