5

As the Ten Commandments were written in stone and writing had hardly developed anywhere else to that time, are those the first laws of civilization?

  • 4
    For those of us without a PhD in Theology, what year ("that time") were the Ten Commandments written? – jimsug Oct 3 '15 at 3:41
  • 3
    Jewish tradition has the ten commandments handed down about 1450 BC, and first transcribed no earlier than 922 BC. – feetwet Oct 3 '15 at 4:11
  • I think the people on History.SE might be more likely to have the relevant expertise for this question. – Nate Eldredge Oct 3 '15 at 14:24
  • @NateEldredge: what's the scope of this site, just law or also jurisprudence (which then would include legal history)? I get an error message from law.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic – Steve Jessop Oct 3 '15 at 20:23
  • 1
    @SteveJessop: Link works fine for me, and mentions "historical legal applications" as on topic. I'm not saying this question is out of scope for this site, just that History.SE might give better answers. – Nate Eldredge Oct 3 '15 at 20:37
21

Nope. Even if we were to accept this definition of law as some written decree, and I'm unsure that's the case1, there are civilisations with written law that predate the Ten Commandments.

Babylonian Law (c.1800 BC) predates the Ten Commandments. Also, the Code of Ur-Nammu predates even that (c.2050 BC).


1. Most definitions of law don't require that it be written, but rather that it is some system of rules that govern the behaviour of some group of people.

  • 2
    And while the code of Ur-Nammu happens to be the oldest of which there's an extant copy, the existence of older codes is suggested both by specific references and by the expectation that earlier kings similarly laid down formal rules. So the answer to the logical next question, "is the code of Ur-Nammu the first?" is, "almost certainly not but the evidence is less direct". – Steve Jessop Oct 3 '15 at 20:13
  • I would also say that existance of civilization itself implies that there is a law. That is precisely what distinguishes civilization from the other side. As we evidently know, civilization existed long before the Ten Commandments were written and in a great variety. Man had always been a highly social animation so it is likely that the Law of Civilization exists as long as the term "man" can be defined for a living being. It does not change because it is the law of how a greater living thing can be composed of individual humans. That's almost physics. Physics exists since the beginning. – noncom Oct 3 '15 at 21:58
9

Not with your age estimate of the Ten Commandments (3000-3750 years ago). The Code of Hammurabi dates to around 1750 BC, which would make it over 3750 years old, which is older.

0

First, is the issue that, to the best of my knowledge, there's no actual evidence the ten commandments are real (in the form of stone tablets anyways -- obviously some form of them exists in literature). So it's hard to call "fair" about something that's quite possibly a fairy tale.

Second, even in the Bible story, it's not like God invented the concept of law then and there. The pharaoh obviously had his own laws, and the gods of those guys the Hebrews were partying with during the first writing of the commandments obviously had their versions of law.

Third, and most importantly, "law" isn't about written words, and never has been. Law is an abstract concept that represents the relationships between actions and consequences. The laws of physics existed long before we did, and law of the jungle existed between then and now.

The laws of society were an evolution from the right of might to what we have today, not some specific event. While it might be interesting to determine the first written law, the law itself existed long before then. Many societies have legal systems but no writing system at all.

  • 1
    The history of the Jewish people is a fairy tale? – user900 Oct 3 '15 at 7:29
  • 1
    Well you're baiting in a passive but inflammatory way so I'm not going to bother. Congratulations on your PhD in Egyptology, although I'm not sure how you got it without knowing anything about the droves of semitic settlements they've been excavating which reside in the best parts of ancient Egypt, you know, exactly where this "fictional" document says. Or about the unearthed tomb of the semite given a pharaoh-like burial with his 11 brothers buried in surrounding tombs. But hey, congrats anyway. – user900 Oct 3 '15 at 7:49
  • 5
    My point being that you're injecting your opinion on something that wasn't even asked just for the sake of doing so. It reads like a rant against the Bible, rather than answering whether or not the given date for the Ten Commandments predates other established written legal systems. – user900 Oct 3 '15 at 8:02
  • 3
    "The pharaoh obviously had his own laws, and the gods of those guys the Hebrews were partying with during the first writing of the commandments obviously had their versions of law." Citations needed. – Nate Eldredge Oct 3 '15 at 9:15
  • 2
    @MichaelS The tablets that the Ten Commandments were written on were placed inside of the Ark, an object that is firmly established to have existed and was kept in the Temple. For your assertions to be true, you'd have to suggest that a thousand year long conspiracy was undertaken by the Jewish people to trick the Jewish people into believing the Ark was in there when in fact there was nothing. Dozens of High Priests over the ages would have perfectly kept the secret of this conspiracy, and the Romans who saw it when the veil was torn at Christs death were also liars. Who is trolling? – user900 Oct 3 '15 at 23:16
0

Of course the first law are given to Adam, the same is true with Noah with a little modification and those are the same with the laws given to Moses. Shortly after The Great Flood, God directed Noah and his descendants to observe the following seven commandments, which are parallel or the same as that of the commandments given to Adam;

  1. Do Not Worship a False Deity
    Genesis 2:16 states: “And the Lord God commanded the (man) Adam, saying…” This Divine command to Adam implies that only the One True God, the Creator, should be obeyed and honored as the Deity, and the greatest honor is to serve and worship Him. Thus, one should serve and worship only the One True God, and not any idol.

  2. Do Not Commit Blasphemy (Against your God).
    Leviticus 24:10-17 relates the incident of a Jew who violated the injunction of Exodus 22:27 and blasphemed in anger. Moreover, it states in Leviticus 24:15, “ishish” (any man) who curses his God shall bear his sin.” Why the double expression of “ishish” (literally: “a man, a man”)? This includes all mankind, Jews and Gentiles. This demonstrates that blasphemy is thus prohibited to Gentiles even as it is for the Jews.

  3. Do Not Commit Murder or Injury
    The edict against murder, and the punishment for this transgression, is stated in Genesis 9:6: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, among man, his blood shall be shed; for in the image of God, He made man.”

  4. Do Not Have Forbidden Sexual Relations
    Five of the six types of relations that are forbidden by God to Gentiles are covered in Genesis 2:24: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and cling to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” This verse explicitly forbids relations with one’s mother, with a woman who has ever been his father’s domestic partner or certified wife, with a woman who is currently a domestic partner or certified wife of another man, with another male, or with an animal. A Gentile is also forbidden to have relations with his maternal sister, who is learned from Gen. 20:13: “Moreover, she is indeed my sister, my father’s daughter, though not my mother’s daughter; and she became my wife.” (Note that Abraham said this to appease Abimelech. It was actually only figuratively true in his case, since Sarah was the daughter of Abraham’s brother. So they had the same paternal grandfather, who people often referred to as “father.”)

  5. Do Not Commit Theft
    The prohibition of theft is contained within the permission which God granted to Adam and Hava (Eve) in Genesis 2:16 to eat from the trees of the garden. This implies that if the permission had not been granted, they were forbidden to do, because the property did not belong to them. This applied specifically to the fruit of the Tree of “Knowledge of Good and Evil” which was forbidden for them to take, under penalty of death (Genesis 2:17). This Noahide commandment was cited explicitly by Abraham in Genesis 21:25.

  6. Don’t Eat Meat that was Taken from a Live Animal
    Adam and Hava (Eve) were not given permission to kill animals for food, and this remained in effect until after the Flood. God permitted the eating of meat for the first time to Noah and his family after they left the Ark, the reason why God at that time added the seventh commandment, which prohibited the eating of meat that was severed from a living animal (even if it was stunned and insensitive). This commandment given to Noah is recorded in Genesis 9:4: “But meat, with its soul [which is in] its blood you shall not eat.”

  7. Establish Laws and Courts of Justice
    God commanded Noah regarding the trial and punishment of a murderer, as it says in Genesis 9:6, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, among man; his blood shall be shed…” This refers to a Noahide commandment to judge and penalize a murderer. This is explained as follows by the Talmudic Sages: “Whoever sheds the blood of man” (referring to the murderer), “among man” (i.e., he is to be prosecuted in a court by a man who is qualified to testify as a witness), “his blood shall be shed” (if convicted, he is liable to capital punishment by the court).

    The Noahide Code specifies that Gentile societies are obligated to abide by justice through establishing a system of righteous courts of law.

  • 2
    This question is focused more on the historic aspect, and thus, relying on the chronology given by religious texts seems a bit inappropriate. – Maroon Oct 3 '15 at 13:46
  • This answer is difficult to read. This is a yes or no question. There should be a yes or no answer, or something that explains clearly why you can't give a yes or no answer. – jimsug Oct 3 '15 at 14:37
  • 8
    I guess the preamble to this answer should read, "No, even Judaic theology/history recognizes laws that far predate the ten commandments." – feetwet Oct 3 '15 at 15:46
  • @Maroon Since when did it become true that if a document has theological implications, it must therefore be unreliable? To show that I'm not just playing a side I favor, I'll admit that this answer seems to veer off-topic. The original question was simply whether or not Mosaic Law is the origin of established, written, governing law. I think the answer is attempting to show that these Laws are the origin as they date back to Creation, but there is no known empirical evidence we can show to establish this concretely to external observers. – user900 Oct 4 '15 at 3:07
  • 1
    @TechnikEmpire: What I'm trying to get at (perhaps not very well) is that from a "scientific" perspective I cannot be reasonably certain that the relevant ideas were not retroactively written in, particularly when I might read the relevant portions of Genesis figuratively (which is something that is fine!). (And no, documents with "theological implications" aren't inherently bad -- e.g. one can discuss the political aspects of the content of a monk's diary without issue. The key thing is that the context would feel significantly more grounded in history than the beginning of Genesis does.) – Maroon Oct 4 '15 at 4:03

protected by jimsug Oct 3 '15 at 13:43

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.