The Nine Commandments
Historically we have always been taught of the Ten Commandments in almost every work pertaining to the subject reference is always made to Ten Commandments, but do we really have anything from a credible source that says specifically how many commandments were given on the two tablets? Only 3 times in the King James Bible does it say specifically Ten Commandments and is this credible considering the many revisions and translations by supposed educated men? Although there are hundreds of Commandments we will only focus on the supposed Ten.
In looking at the accepted versions of Ten Commandments we have;
1 AND God spake all these words, saying,
2 I [am] the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth:
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me;
6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
8 Remember the rayish day, to keep it holy
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day [is] the rayish of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates:
11 For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the rayish day, and hallowed it.
12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
13 Thou shalt not kill.
14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15 Thou shalt not steal.
16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that [is] thy neighbour’s.
Seems pretty cut and dry doesn’t it? In the Catholic Bible they have simply removed the second commandment for reasons so very obvious and divided the 10th commandment to keep the appearance of the traditional ten when in fact it has always been nine, regardless of the many translations... But let’s look at it from another perspective in which does not take away from the content or meaning. Let’s look at this from the perspective of sin. What is the sin associated with the Commandment? From the accepted list above we have;
# 1, Sin, Worship of another God other than THEE God.
#2, The sin is the same as #1, be it a false God, wrong God or one made with our hands it is the same and therefore constitutes One commandment given in 2 parts.
# 3 Sin, Taking the Lords Name in Vain. Not cursing, but using the Lords name to get gain.
# 4. Sin, Not Remembering the Sabbath.
# 5 Sin, Not glorifying thy Father and thy Mother ABOVE.
#6 Sin, Shedding of “Innocent” blood.
#7 Sin, Adultery, Giving your love to another who has no right to it, it has nothing to do with sex.
#8 Sin, Stealing, taking what does not belong to you.
#9 Sin, Bearing False witness of which you were no witness to.
#10 Sin, Coveting that which does not belong to you, which is given in 2 parts.
Number one and two are part of the same commandment. Having no other God before him includes every form of God out there whether it be a false God, graven image, or the wrong God.
I have heard some argue that they are two separate commandments because each starts with “Thou Shalt Not” and if this is the case are we saying Verse 5 above is a new and separate commandment? Are we saying those which do not have “Thou Shalt Not” preceding them are not commandments? It is suspect by me that the first Commandment is a creation of man long ago as the 2nd covers the same, and the purpose of this creation was to eventually eliminate the second part to justify themselves and leaving the first in its place.
Now I don’t know what school you went to, But I was taught that Jesus Christ is a God, part of the Godhead, and that our Father put him before himself, of his own doing, as a Savior to the world who agreed to give the glory to his Father, and that we do be it by prayer, ordinances, covenants etc, done in the name of Jesus Christ. If this isn’t putting a God Before God the Father I don’t know what is, so is our Father a Hypocrite or is it more likely that someone didn’t think this through? If the first commandment as we know it were from God, what Gods was he referring to?
We know there are other Gods out there who have their own creations but we have never been taught of them other than their existence or come to know any of them in any way whatsoever, and if you made the choice to worship one of these Gods you know nothing about, do you think they would in anyway acknowledge you, being a true God? So if our God is the creator of this so called first commandment, what would he have meant? Well the only Gods left are false Gods, creations of our minds and are usually manifest by those who create them in the form of Statues, Idols and the creations of their hands and is this not covered in what we know as the second commandment? The first commandment is pointless unless you needed a scapegoat. What we know as the first commandment is a fabrication of man in ancient times; it is not needed and does not change the fact that we should have no other false God before him or what we know as the Trinity of God.
There are only nine commandments and why have I brought this up? The reason is to give credibility to the Los Lunas Stone in the following section in that it does not have mistakes as so many supposed experts and students of Hebrew have said, it is THEM who is in error and mistaken not the scribe of the stone and I intend to show you this is true which hopefully in the end we will have just one more evidence of ancient Hebrew in the Western regions and to show that someone in the past knew what the scholars of today do not. And there is another reason which will shortly come, the Puerco River Glyph which we will come back to…
The Los Lunas Stone…
before some idiot ground out the first line thinking this somehow
was going to change things…
yet long after another idiot of the past added in the second line
I really try to avoid the use of the word idiot when I write even when the shoe fits... simply because it is often used by those who are the idiots… I am amazed at all the various groups who have in the last few years since the Los Lunas Stone was put on Youtube, who have stepped up out of pure ignorance to claim the title of the previous mentioned word… I suppose I am a candidate as well…
The Los Lunas Decalogue Stone is said to have been originally discovered in the 1880’s but not officially until it was shown to Frank C Hibben an archaeologist and anthropologist of New Mexico, the very archaeologist who wrote the document called Frozen Muck which I included in the book Nephite North. It is said that it was heavily covered in Lichen and patina when Hibben first saw it; many have discredited the find as a hoax of course because of things such as the repeated cleaning of it and re scratching of the characters and chalking for photos, but more so because of the so called Mistakes and errors found within the text that according to the so called experts, would not have made, but I think mostly because it upsets the academics orthodox boat load of crap. I would agree 100% that a Levitical Scribe or a scribe with knowledge of the Paleo Hebrew would not have made the so called mistakes and errors pointed out by supposed educated…? scholars. The difference is, I don’t think the scribe made any mistake and it is those who think they have a clear understanding of the Paleo Hebrew or Hebrew who is in error.
“The archaeologist Ken Feder points out that “the flat face of the stone shows a very sharp, crisp inscription...”. His main concern however is the lack of any archaeological context. He argues that to get to the location of the stone would have required whoever inscribed it to have “stopped along the way. Encamped, eaten food, broken things, disposed of trash, performed rituals, and so on. And those actions should have left a trail of physical archaeological evidence across the greater American Southwest, discovery of which would undeniably prove the existence of foreigners in New Mexico in antiquity with a demonstrably ancient Hebrew material culture...” and states that “There are no pre-Columbian ancient Hebrew settlements, no sites containing the everyday detritus of a band of ancient Hebrews, nothing that even a cursory knowledge of how the archaeological record forms would demand there would be. From an archaeological standpoint, that’s plainly impossible.”
Wow, I couldn’t even begin to show the blindness of this man, No Hebrew settlements? Does this man read or just listen to all he was taught by his piers? So who were these Indians with more knowledge of the Hebrew ways than anyone ever expected and documented by dozens of the earliest explorers long before Feder’s G G Great Grand Father was even a thought. Encamped, eaten food, etc…? And of the 50 billion acres surrounding the site Mr. Feder has personally search all of it? Didn’t anyone show him the ruins on the hill above? If this was the landing place of a certain band of Hebrews by a sea faring ship how are we going to find their trash along the way? Ignorance is not proof of intelligence…
One only need take a close look to see that whoever the scribe was had knowledge that the supposed experts of today do not have. For this reason I am going to talk about the supposed commandment # 5 Thou Shalt Honor thy Mother and Father. In a video that my good friend Alan sent to me some years ago, a student of Hebrew points out a few mistakes according to him but never really expounds upon what exactly the mistake was but most if not all were pertaining to the second inserted line, except for the 5th commandment. When he is asked what it actually says he struggles trying to tell us what it Should say until the host of the video asks him specifically what it actually says. Again he tries to tell us what it should say… the host again asks, what does it ACTUALLY SAY?… With this the student of Hebrew again struggles and says, it says Honor thy Father and thy Mother…. ABOVE! THIS is NO MISTAKE…
When I heard this I knew that our understanding of the scriptures for near 2000 years is what is in error. At this time I would point out one other mistake which has existed for a very long time, the words are not Honor your, it is Glorify you. In other words, YOU glorify (Give Glory To) Father and Mother above. Why do men always suppose they know more about the ancient writings than those who wrote them? It is what it is…. Now the problem is, who is our Mother above, and did the ancients know her? Why don’t we? The reasons I have been given my whole life just make no sense, and I am sure that many will come to my rescue to save me from my fallen state and explain to me what the scripture “really mean.” So why is it my Father above, who has commanded me to put NO OTHER God before him, like Jesus was put before him by him… and instruct me to give glory to my earthly Father?
My friend and I talked about this for some time, the question was brought, if the scripture meant honor OR glorify thy earthly father and mother then we have a problem. Now my father has also instructed me by way of commandment to forsake ALL evil, so, hypothetically speaking if my earthly father was a foul dishonest man, a thief, a murderer and oppressor of the poor and the week, and I did not honor him because of his evils, am I now guilty of the sin of Commandment #5? I don’t think so. And if I did Honor or Glorify him, in other words, worship him or give glory to him, am I now guilty of commandment #1? In looking at the meaning of the word Honor or Glorify among the many implicating words which describe it, is to Worship. Although this seemed very convincing, it wasn’t completely to me until I stumbled upon a couple of scriptures from the lips of Christ himself that I knew the ancient scribe who carved the Los Lunas Stone was not only authentic, but knew more about Paleo Hebrew and his scriptures than the so called experts of today.
In the following Jesus shows the Pharisees and scribes the error of their ways without telling them what it actually means. He shows them by their own understanding they contradict themselves but it is the fact that Jesus himself says in the following, God Commanded.
4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
Interestingly enough the Greek translation for the above does not say Honor thy father and mother, it says, Be valuing THE Father and Mother. And again he says the same basic thing in Mark 7:10, the point being, what kind of God would condemn me to death for worshiping a false God, putting another God before him? What kind of God would put me to death for cursing an earthly father or mother whether I had reason or not? I know the answer, do you? This doesn’t sound like a God I want to worship. Who are these so called scolars of the past to place themselves in the position of the Father and the Mother… ABOVE, STEALING the Glory intended for our Heavenly parents? And I assure you without going into it, it was for the purpose of getting gain…
God is a title, not a name, and my God encompasses my Father and Mother above and including my Lord and Savior. I have no doubt that My Father above wants me to Honor him, and glorify him as in worship, and my Mother in Heaven also who are among the only ones who are “Honorable” and worthy of glory, PERIOD. Are we here to give glory to our earthly parents?
The scribe who wrote the inscription of the Los Lunas Panel knew exactly what he wrote. Mistakes are made with pens and by the quick action of them, the mistakes the scribe is accused of simply do not occur, do they mean for me to believe the scribe carved the entire character and then OOPS?.. I don’t think so. However I will admit the scribe DID make one mistake in that he began to write the second part of the first commandment, or was it a mistake? And the scribe supposedly had to “Insert” the missing potion between the first and second line of the inscription?
It is said that the earliest known use of an insertion mark or caret is 1681, my question is, why didn’t anyone question the one found in 1681? Is its use in the Los Lunas stone evidence of the very earliest known use of the Caret? Evidence of a fraud, or evidence of someone in recent years attempting to change what an original inscription said because it did not fit their agenda or to render it a hoax and not understanding that the use of the Caret is likely a modern invention? It is my belief that the second line “Thou Shalt have no other God before me” was added in at a more modern date as it was not necessary to even be a part of the commandment as the commandment would have been complete without it. It is my opinion that the second line was added by someone in modern times, meaning Roman Colonies or even the Spanish. It was NOT included by the original scribe, because at the time it was originally inscribed, the so called commandment DIDN’T EXIST.
Second Line Lamed Original Lines Lamed
If you look close at the method of application of the glyphs there is a difference in style for a lack of better words, between the 2nd line and the rest of the panel, look closely at the Lamed (L) symbol. In the entire panel all of the Lamed symbols either join at the point of the vertical and horizontal line, or a small gap is left BELOW the vertical line and ABOVE the horizontal. In the second line suspect of being added at a more modern date, the gap is not below the vertical line, but to the side in two of the three occurrences. This difference although week, implies a different author. Now why would someone do this? Interestingly enough two of the mistakes mentioned would have been done by the author of the added line. Another interesting observance is, that some time in 2007, someone visited the site with a portable grinder and removed the first line, why only the first line? I hate to point this out to those responsible but isn’t this like tearing the pages from the scriptures so that it no longer applies? Regardless, it did not change a thing.
It is my opinion due to common sense, if I approached a rock face with the intent to scribe something as important as the commandments and not knowing how exactly it was going to fit on the rock, I would not just sit down and start chiseling away. I would however plan what I was going to do and I would grab some charcoal from one of those nonexistent Hebrew debris piles, and lay the whole thing out first, then chisel the lines, do you think the scribe might have noticed mistakes if there were any? The following picture is what I truly believe the panel once looked like before someone got to it and took offense or saw the threat of exposing a little plot; Manifest Destiny takes upon new meaning.
I am Jehovah Elohim your God who has brought you out of the
land of Egypt from the house of slaves.
You shall not make idols. You shall not use the name Jehovah in vein.
Remember the day of the Sabbath and keep it Holy.
Give glory to THE Father and Mother above that your days will be long on the earth that
Jehovah Elohim your God has given you.
You must not murder, you must not commit adultery, you must not steal, you must not give false testimony, you must not covet your neighbors wife, nor that which he has.
It says what it says, and means what it means; it is what it is…
The possibilities are many, but I guess no one is willing to look at the other possible perspectives. If there are mistakes, they are from modern man, just my two cents.
Next up the... Puerco River Glyph, Ark of theCovenant
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment!