Anarchy X: The First Commandment


“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”

Before I get rolling on the whole Ten Commandments thing, I need to make a few clarifications and disclosures. First, for the record, I am not a member or believer in any Judeo-Christian religions or traditions. My personal beliefs (or lack thereof) are not relevant to the discussion at hand, except insofar as to establish that I am not speaking as a believer. Second, I was not raised “in the Church” as it were, but my parents didn’t keep me away from it either, and my sister and I did go to Sunday School whenever we wanted. My parents let us find our own beliefs, and I grew up with the King James Bible, so that’s the version of the Ten Commandments I’ll be looking at.

Now that I’ve gotten all of those provisos out of the way, let’s move on to the easy stuff, shall we? I mean, unlike the Bill of Rights the Ten Commandments are pretty straightforward, right? Well… actually no. Setting aside any controversy about their use, the Commandments themselves have a long and interesting history of not being as clear as they could be.

For this first commandment, what throws me is that I hear a lot of people try to defend the idea of “One True God” using this, even though a proper reading of this Commandment doesn’t lend itself to any such interpretation. Far from it; every reading I can make of it suggests multiple gods, in multiple possible configurations. If you are willing to completely abuse the English language I suppose you could make that reading, and I’ll include that one in order to let folks judge it for themselves, but I’d love to hear someone explain to me how you honestly get to a non-tortured version of “one god” from this.

So here’s what I’m reading: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me”; sounds like an acknowledgement of other gods. How to interpret that in the context of Judeo-Christian belief? Like so:

Polytheism – Reading it as “there are many gods, I am just the most powerful and most deserving of worship.” You can actually envision a full pantheon of deities that includes one superior figure demanding to be held in full respect above the others quite easily. Odin All-Father, Zeus, or even Osiris (before that whole death-rebirth thing, but that’s a whole other Christian mythology comparison) could handily fit into this role, although in fairness I don’t see this being likely in the full context of the other writings and material around the Commandments.

Kathenotheism – Reading it as “there are many gods or spirits, I am just the most powerful/the others are simply aspects of my glory.” While it would take a little bit of stretching to get it within either the strictest bounds of the definition of kathenotheism or else the strictest interpretation of the Commandment, I still think it takes fewer mental gymnastics than the idea of using this to support monotheism. So imagine it with me: there are still gods or spirits of fields or seasons or what have you, but they are all subservient to the One True God. This isn’t strictly polytheism in that a migrating/herding culture would only worship one subservient spirit at a time and would still always be worshiping the highest deity as the supreme being. Another possibility would be seeing each of these lesser spirits merely as manifestations of the One True God, which takes us into functional monotheistic territory, but is still very different from what is typically described as the monotheism that is derived from the Ten Commandments.

Henotheism – Reading it as “Maybe there are other gods, maybe there aren’t, but I am YOUR god, and there aren’t any others worth bothering with.” This is the one that I think is most likely, and I think a lot of scholars have probably trod a lot of this ground already to be perfectly honest. Henotheism basically is the idea “I worship my god, you worship yours”. Henothesists don’t deny the existence of other gods (or at least the possibility of them), the just don’t particularly care. Considering the origins of Judeo-Christianity in a part of the world that had multiple other, older, much stronger pantheons in existence, I find it difficult to believe that any new religion would have evolved and declared right out of the gate “oh, and by the way, no god exists except for the one we worship, and it’s not the fantasy creatures you’ve been making sacrifices to, because seriously? Animal heads?” Having the stones to say “my god can beat up your god” when you’re on the wrong end of the slave lash is already pretty impressive.

Monotheism – Reading it as “There are no other gods. I am the only one. Don’t notice the man behind the curtain.” As promised, I shall now explore this possibility. While as previously mentioned I find it difficult to believe any new religion would declare right out of the gate that everybody else’s beliefs are completely false, it’s not like it hasn’t happened before in history, so that’s not a complete stopper. The big issue I take with this interpretation is that it doesn’t make sense in terms of the text. If you drop the last clause entirely the Commandment becomes “thou shalt have no other gods”, which is what the assertion of monotheism is. The existence of that clause has to be accounted for, and it can only happen one of two ways, either temporally or through precedence. I’m fairly certain there is no one making the argument that the tribes that eventually became the people of Jerusalem had no religion of any kind before the events described in Exodus. So then the only remaining possibility (as I understand the proper use of the English language) is one of precedence. One does not have to acknowledge that other gods DO exist, only that if they did, they wouldn’t be worth bothering with (see Henotheism above).

I realize that invoking “the usage of the English language” in this case is pretty weak considering the number of translations that the source material has been through, but as long as people insist on using interpreted texts as the basis of their arguments and politics, I’m going to be a stickler. And that’s what it’s all about in the end for me: there are people in America who rely on the Bible to make political decisions, and even want to hang the Ten Commandments in public spaces. But these same people have radically different interpretations of what these texts mean, not just in terms of their personal beliefs but the public sphere as well.

Consider for example my most-likely interpretation of this, what may fairly be considered from a religious perspective the most important Commandment (hence why it comes first): the henotheistic perspective says there may or may not be other gods, but they aren’t worth worrying about. “I worship my god, you worship yours”. Sounds so perfectly American. Shoving your beliefs in the public square and insisting “that’s what America was founded on, and you should thank us for it”? Not so much.

Advertisements

5 Comments on “Anarchy X: The First Commandment”

  1. I prefer not to. says:

    The only issue with the the reading of “before me” implying the existence of other gods is the source language. If you look at it in the original Hebrew it is literally “Not you shall have gods other before my face.” You could still look at the phrase “before my face” and still think “this still sounds like the acknowledgement of other deities.”

    To counter this remember, in Judeo-Christian tradition the Lord is omnipresent, so you can read the line “You shall not have other gods”. Also, the Lord is a jealous, it is not out of character to think the Lord would be deeply offended by someone worshiping, or even acknowledging a power other than his own, this brings the “before my face” into a sharper light. This is the Lord saying “I cannot stand to watch you idolate/pray/revere any others.”

    While neither of those are alone a stellar refutation of other gods, it does make it much clearer that the Lord doesn’t like the idea of other gods. And in Judeo-Christian tradition the Lord is the three O’s, omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent. And lets assume that the rest of the bible does not exist, so we do not have the context of repeated statements of the Lord being the only creator, and there being no other gods, if the Lord dislikes other gods, why would he allow them to be? You can get into a giant argument about sin and the Lord letting it happen, but if he feels the need to mention his status and/or how he feels about other gods 7-11 times (translation and Deuteronomy vs Exodus) don’t you think he would of done some behind the scenes maintenance?

    While it is fun to think of how Judeo-Christianity would’ve turned out with a more polytheistic bent, this doesn’t really point to it.

    • Bob Bonsall says:

      You make some excellent points, but I would like to emphasize that as I mentioned above I don’t see polytheism being very likely in light of the other writings surrounding the Commandments. Also going back to “the original Hebrew” is arguable, since there are a few different languages that could be considered “original” for the time and place, which kind of goes to my point about multiple translations.

      Regarding the three Os, I don’t necessarily think they trump the henotheism argument. Even taking as given a jealous, all knowing and all-powerful deity, so long as His Chosen People are not actively worshiping another power, he has no reason to waste his time on them. I can be aware of Canada, even dislike Canada, and have the power to wipe Canada off the face of the Earth, but as long as Canada isn’t doing anything to trouble me, why should I care? Besides, it’s always possible I have a use for Canada. For a case in point, consider the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. There’s no reason to put it right in the middle of the Garden of Eden and say “don’t touch this” if you *really* don’t want them to touch it and are powerful enough to make it not happen; there was a purpose and design to it.

      I realize none of this goes to say “the Bible never explicitly refutes the existence of other deities”, but then I am not specifically aware of passages were it does (not being a biblical scholar, and having read the whole thing through maybe once). Even if it doesn’t, that’s kind of like proving a negative: I don’t have to go around explicitly stating I’m not from Mars every day either. However if it doesn’t go out and explicitly say so, it weakens the case for the idea that there are none, can be none, never were and never will be none, end of story.

      • I prefer not to. says:

        I agree that the three Os do not immediately negate henotheism, however in Deuteronomy and Isaiah there are several verses that state that there is only one God, but if you want to play the game of finding bible quotes to push one way or the other you can pick out several from Exodus that state that “he is greater than other gods”. This leads to fun questions like “is the bible admitting the existence of other deities, or is this just a matter of historical context?” The issue with quote grabbing is that it is quote grabbing. You can easily find inconsistencies in the bible, and you can find various refutations, but the reading of the first commandment* is not a good place to find one, and requires a forceful misinterpretation.

        As far as language not being Hebrew, I’m going to have to put the kibosh on that. The old testament, or Torah, was in Hebrew except for a few passages in Daniel and Ezra that were in Aramaic. Both Exodus and Deuteronomy were very much in Hebrew originally (the books where the 10 commandments appear).

        I’m all for finding quirks and inconsistencies that can lead to interesting conclusions, but I am against it when it is the result of a misunderstood grammar.

        **I’ve always been taught the first commandment was “I am the Lord thy God”, it turns out that various groups lump graven images along with no other gods. Fun times.

  2. Bob Bonsall says:

    I don’t necessarily agree that henotheism requires a “forceful misinterpretation” of the First Commandment. The reason there are several books in both the Old and New Testament (or the Torah and the Bible, if you prefer) id that these are the collected stories of several different groups, all with their own versions of what happened, passed down through oral tradition long before it was written down. That being the case, there is no definitive “one true version”, which is part of what I’m arguing against.

    As for the language not being Hebrew, I will concede that the Torah was written down in Hebrew, but (recalling as best I can) it was a temple language in much the same way that Latin was the Church language right up through Vatican II. That doesn’t mean that the original stories that were transmitted via oral tradition were transmitted in Hebrew. Aramaic, Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, Latin, and a few other Mediterranean languages can all have a fair shot at that title if I remember my history at all. Going even further, who’s to say that Jehovah writes in Hebrew? If the Commandments were written by Him on stone tablets, why should they be in any specific human language?

    Bear in my mind henotheism doesn’t require the acknowledgement of other gods, it simply doesn’t allow for the outright denial of or worship of other gods. I realize that seems like a fine hair to split, but for me it is the basis between a comfortable pluralistic society and a theocratic one.

  3. […] I know I’ve had this argument before (see the comments from my discussion of the First Commandment), but I’m still not convinced from this passage or many others that at this point in time or […]


What's Your Not So Humble Opinion?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s