Can you name the Ten Commandments in order? Most Protestants may be surprised to learn that the enumeration of these commandments is debated. And that debate has implications on how we faithfully read and apply the commandment, “You shall have no other gods before me.”
Although the biblical text explicitly tells us that there are ten words, the Jewish, Catholic, and Protestant traditions have differed in enumerating them. The differences in itemization revolve around commands one, two, and ten, and debate is based on issues of cantillation in the Masoretic Text and on issues of form, meaning, and style. To add to this, there is the fact that the repetition of the Ten Words in Deuteronomy 5 entails some slight variations from the text in Exodus.
The Correct Order
Recent research on the enumeration of the Ten Words by Jason S. DeRouchie, however, supports the historically Catholic-Lutheran analysis, which lists the commandments as follows:1
1. See Jason S. DeRouchie, A Call to Covenant Love: Text Grammar and Literary Structure in Deuteronomy 5–11, Gorgias Dissertations 30 (Gorgias, 2007), 115–17, 127–32; and idem, “Numbering the Decalogue: A Textlinguistic Reappraisal,” paper presented at the Upper Midwest Regional Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, April 2007. This analysis is also supported by Daniel I. Block, “Reading the Decalogue Right to Left: The Ten Principles of Covenant Relationship in the Hebrew Bible,” in How I Love Your Torah, O Lord! Studies in the Book of Deuteronomy (Cascade, 2011), 56–60; and Block, Deuteronomy, NIV Application Commentary (Zondervan, 2012).
(1) No other gods
(2) No bearing the name deceitfully
(3) Sabbath
(4) Honor parents
(5) No murder
(6) No adultery
(7) No theft
(8) No false witness
(9) No coveting wife
(10) No desiring household members/objects
Why Number the Commandments this Way?
DeRouchie’s analysis is convincing because it is based on the grammatical structure of the text, which scholars call discourse grammar, macrosyntax, or textlinguistic analysis. This area of linguistic study pays close attention to features in the language that are grammatical markers above or beyond the boundary of individual sentences in the text as a whole. In particular, in the version of the Ten Words in Deuteronomy 5:6–21, the enumeration is clarified because commands 5–10 are joined by the conjunction waw (“and”) while commands 1–4 are set off from the last six by asyndeton (absence of the conjunction).2 Moreover in both Exodus 20:3–6 and Deuteronomy 5:7–10 God supports commands 1 and 2—according to the enumeration of the Protestant tradition—with only one ground: “for I the Lord your God am a jealous God” (Exod. 20:5, Deut. 5:9). This provides further corroboration that they should be considered a single command.
2. For description and evidence of asyndeton versus use of the conjunction waw as a macrosyntactic signal, see Stephen G. Dempster, “Linguistic Features of Hebrew Narrative: A Discourse Analysis of Narrative from the Classical Period” (PhD diss., University of Toronto, 1985).
The command to obey parents belongs with the first three so that we should divide the ten commands into two sections of four and six, respectively. This is clear from the fact that the command to obey parents, like the first three commands and unlike the last six, includes the phrase “Yahweh, your God.” Moreover, the first three commands are backed up by an explanation or reason while the fourth is motivated by a promise. The last six have no explanation or motivation clause supporting them. The command to obey parents, then, shows that the covenant community of the family is the linchpin that connects loving God to loving others in human society and creation in general. It is the foundation of human society and the community where we should first learn covenant love.
Why the Numbering Matters: You Shall Have no Other Gods
In the light of a correct enumeration, the command “You shall have no other gods before me” and the command “You shall not make for yourself images/idols” together constitute the first command. “You shall not bear the name of the Lord your God deceitfully” is now the second command.
According to the numbering scheme historically followed by Protestants, the second of the Ten Commands is as follows: “You shall not make for yourself an image and form which is in the heaven above and which is in the earth below and which is in the waters under the earth” (Exod. 20:4, author translation). As John Walton notes, popular prohibition of images has been influenced significantly by four factors: (1) Jewish interpretation, (2) controversies over icons in the Eastern Orthodox tradition, (3) statues of saints in the Roman Catholic tradition, and (4) debate over what constitutes art from a Christian perspective.3 In classical Jewish and Muslim traditions the second command led to a prohibition of the representation of any living creature. Christian interpretation up to the nineteenth century was dominated by the idea that since God was invisible and transcendent he could not be contained in an image. Others spiritualized the text, reducing idols to anything to which we devote our energy, money, and worth as deity.
3. John H. Walton, “Interpreting the Bible as an Ancient Near Eastern Document,” in Israel: Ancient Kingdom or Late Invention? ed. Daniel I. Block (B&H Academic, 2008), 309–13.
Such misunderstandings are due to a couple of factors. First is ignorance of the ancient Near Eastern ideas concerning the nature and role of idols, which Walton classifies helpfully into three categories. Walton’s categories help correct misunderstandings about idolatry in the ancient world.
One category is the manufacture of images. In the ancient Near Eastern mindset, only the god could approve and initiate the manufacturing process. At the end of the process, special ceremonies and rituals, in particular the mouth-opening ritual, allowed the god to inhabit the image and permitted the image to drink, eat food, and smell incense.
A second category concerns the use of the image. Walton notes that, “in the ancient world all formal and public worship revolved around the image.”4 Thus the image involved mediation. It mediated revelation from the deity to the people and also mediated worship by the people to the deity as they brought clothes, drink and food to honor it.
4. Walton, “Interpreting the Bible as an Ancient Near Eastern Document,” 311.
A third category has to do with ancient Near Eastern perceptions concerning the function and nature of images. According to Walton, “as a result of the induction ritual the material image was animated by the divine essence. Therefore, from now on it did not simply represent the deity but also manifested its presence. However, this does not mean that the image had thereby been deified. The deity was the reality that was embodied in the image.”5 When we correct these misunderstandings, we find that symbolic artistic depictions of God are not necessarily forbidden—although they can be.
5. Walton, “Interpreting the Bible as an Ancient Near Eastern Document,” 312.
Evidence in the Hebrew
Misunderstanding of the second command is due not only to ignorance of the ancient Near Eastern culture and worldview but also to faulty analysis of the grammar of this text. Let us consider closely the exact text of the second commandment in both Exodus and Deuteronomy. Below, the Hebrew text is provided as well as the translations of the KJV and NIV.
Exodus 20:4: לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה־לְךָ פֶּסֶל וְכָל־תְּמוּנָה
KJV: Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing . . .
NIV: You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything . . .
Deuteronomy 5:8: לֹא־תַעֲשֶׂה־לְךָ פֶסֶל כָּל־תְּמוּנָה
KJV: Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing . . .
NIV: You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything . . .
The translation of the KJV represents early Jewish rabbinic understanding, no doubt mediated through the Latin Vulgate of Jerome. This is the way orthodox Jews today understand the text and also the way in which Muslims have consistently understood the text.
The original text in Hebrew actually conjoins the objects of the verb with waw, a copulative coordinating conjunction that always means “and.” A series of alternative clauses may be joined by waw, but this does not mean that waw has the same value as “or” in English.6 Hebrew does have a conjunction “or,” i.e., ’ô, and it could have been used here to designate the alternative possibility. The text in Exodus 20:4 is difficult, but the early rabbinic understanding does not follow the rules of grammar in Hebrew. Note that the parallel text in Deuteronomy does not have the conjunction waw but instead employs a Construct Phrase, “a carved image/idol of any form . . . ” Certainly, the rendering by “or” is contrary to the syntax here. It seems that interpretive traditions have molded Deuteronomy 5:8 to suit their understanding of Exodus 20:4.
6. See Brown, Driver, and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, s.v. ו § 1d.
If we believe in the analogy of Scripture, however, where we interpret the unclear by the clear, the Jewish understanding cannot be the correct meaning of this text. Consider, for example, the art in the tabernacle and also in Solomon’s temple. Artwork in the construction of Solomon’s temple had representations of the creation with images of bulls, cherubim, lions, palm trees, and pomegranates (1 Kgs. 7:18, 25, 36). Since the grammar of the text in Deuteronomy 5:8 is clear, a better approach is to use the clear text there to interpret the unclear in Exodus 20:4. The construction in Exodus 20:4 could be understood as a hendiadys, a common figure of speech in Hebrew literature where one idea is communicated by two nouns or verbs joined by “and.” The first notable example in the Bible is Genesis 3:16. The Hebrew text has, “I will greatly increase your pain and your pregnancy.” This does not mean an increase of pain on the one hand and pregnancy on the other. The next sentence goes on to explain, “In pain you will bring forth children.” So the earlier expression must mean “pain in pregnancy”—an example of a hendiadys. In Exodus 20:4, “a carved image and any form” must therefore in the light of Deuteronomy 5:8 mean “a carved image/idol in any form.” This is the approach taken by the NIV and is one that accurately follows the grammar of the Hebrew language and uses the clear meaning of one text to assist the interpretation of the other rather than impose the faulty interpretation of Exodus on the clear text in Deuteronomy.
Conclusion: The Second Command Doesn’t Ban Art
Accurate exegesis of the command, then, shows that this text has nothing to do with art or the representation of aspects of the created order with images. Rather the command has to do with images used as mediators of the presence or revelation of the deity to humans, or mediation of the worship of people to the deity. As Walton observes, “the prohibition of images excluded in particular that sort of worship that understood cultic rituals to meet the needs of the deity through the image.”7 According to the correct numbering scheme, this is the second part of having no other gods but one.
7. Walton, “Interpreting the Bible as an Ancient Near Eastern Document,” 313.
From a practical point of view, the second commandment to serve and worship only one God teaches that there is a constant danger. This danger is that we will take a part of the created order God has made and absolutise it. It, and not God, imparts meaning for our lives. We treat it as the ultimate source of reality and truth and give all our adoration to it. This means that the veneration of icons practiced in Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches, in which the worship passes through the icon to God, would be condemned by the second commandment. Such practices give the image a mediating function in worship, which the text forbids. However, symbolic representations of God or pictures of Jesus in a child’s storybook bible (or in great works of art) are not condemned by the commandment, so long as the images are used properly.
In this article, I have acquainted the reader with a conversation. This conversation centers around the enumeration of the Ten Commandments and the nature and background of the commandment against idolatry. I have also reflected on what a proper understanding of the commandment against idolatry can teach believers. Let us all listen to its warning, and serve the Lord alone.
The first command, then, divided into two parts (no other gods and no images mediating revelation from God and worship to God) is focused on covenant loyalty to our one God, Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, What he wants in the covenant relationship is our pure and undivided loyalty. Are we 100% devoted to him? This is what it means to be holy.
