UNDERSTANDING THE SCRIPTURES IN THE BIBLE REQUIRES MORE THAN BELIEF. Too Many People Have A Belief Based On Misinformation And Religious Dogmas Rather That Seeking The Truth. When individuals who do not a personal relationship with Lord Jesus Christ are confronted with inconsistencies in the Bible and they have been taught that it is the infallible word of God then they find what conviction they have is shaken to its core.

 How do the inconsistencies in the Ten Commandments texts affect the belief in their divine origin?

Happy Riches

Answers

The inconsistencies between the various biblical versions of the Ten Commandments—mainly found in Exodus 20, Deuteronomy 5, and the lesser-known list in Exodus 34—have long prompted discussion and debate among scholars, theologians, believers and non-believers. While these differences do raise important questions, they do not necessarily invalidate the acceptance of their divine origin. Instead, they challenge us to think more deeply about how divine revelation is communicated, transmitted, and understood, prompting us to ask questions—an injunction proffered in Isaiah 1:18.

Here's a breakdown of how these inconsistencies affect belief in the divine origin of the Ten Commandments:

1. The Nature of the Inconsistencies

There are several types of inconsistencies between the main texts:

• Wording Differences: The Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 versions of the Ten Commandments differ slightly in language. For example:

1. The Sabbath commandment in Exodus says, “remember the Sabbath day,” while in Deuteronomy it says, “observe the Sabbath day.”
2. The rationale for the Sabbath also differs: in Exodus, it is grounded in God’s rest after creation; in Deuteronomy, it’s based on Israel’s deliverance from slavery in Egypt.

• Order and Emphasis: Some commands, such as the prohibition against coveting, vary in structure and emphasis between the two texts.
• Exodus 34 Version: In Exodus 34, after Moses breaks the original tablets, God gives a new set of laws, also called the "Ten Commandments" (Exodus 34:28). But this list is quite different and includes cultic or ritual laws, such as the command not to boil a young goat in its mother’s milk, which don’t appear in the traditional moral Decalogue.

2. Interpretive Responses

A. Literalist or Fundamentalist Challenges

For those who hold a strictly literalist view of Scripture—believing every word is directly dictated by God and should be perfectly consistent—these differences can be troubling. Variations in wording or content may be seen as problematic because they seem to contradict the idea of a single, unchanging divine author.

In this view, the inconsistencies raise questions like:

1. Which version is the “true” Ten Commandments?
2. Did God change His mind or offer multiple versions?

Such questions can lead to theological discomfort or prompt attempts to harmonize the texts very rigidly.

B. Theological and Literary Approaches

For many other believers and scholars, the inconsistencies do not negate divine origin but rather reflect the human dimension of Scripture. This view accepts that:

• Revelation is mediated: God’s message comes through human authors, each with their own historical context, theological emphasis, and audience.
• Multiple traditions: The Bible preserves different traditions that were passed down and eventually written into the texts we have today. Exodus and Deuteronomy represent different theological emphases.
• Dynamic understanding of law: The differences encourage a view of God's law as dynamic rather than static, adaptable to the needs of the people over time.

In this approach, the inconsistencies enrich rather than diminish the message. They suggest that God's will was not limited to a single frozen formulation, but was expressed in ways that allowed for cultural application and theological depth.

3. Implications for Belief in Divine Origin

A. Challenges to Simple or Literal Belief

The inconsistencies do challenge naive or simplistic views of divine dictation. If one believes that God gave Moses one exact set of unchanging words etched in stone, then the presence of multiple lists—especially with differences—requires some rethinking.

For example:

1. Why would a divinely dictated law vary in different books?
2. If Exodus 34 contains a completely different list, why do most traditions treat Exodus 20 or Deuteronomy 5 as the "real" Ten Commandments?

These issues push readers to consider how divine authority operates through scripture.

B. Affirmation of Divine Communication through Human History

However, many believers reconcile these differences by affirming that divine truth can be communicated through human language and context, which naturally leads to some variation. This belief holds that:

1. God's will is perfect, but human reception and articulation of it is conditioned by time, culture, and purpose.
2. Multiple versions may serve different purposes (e.g., Exodus for covenant formation, Deuteronomy for national renewal).
3. The core moral and theological messages—such as the call to worship God alone, honor others, and live justly—remain consistent.

Thus, for many, these differences do not weaken belief in the divine origin, but rather deepen it by highlighting the relationship between God’s revelation and humanity’s ongoing engagement with it.

4. Jewish and Christian Responses Historically

Both Judaism and Christianity have historically acknowledged these variations and incorporated them into their traditions:

• Jewish tradition includes both versions of the Ten Commandments in liturgy and study. The Talmud and rabbinic writings reflect on the differences without rejecting the texts' divine authority.
• Christian denominations often harmonize the commandments into catechisms (e.g., Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed versions), showing that the list has been adapted for teaching and theological purposes.

This long-standing tradition of thoughtful engagement suggests that faith in divine origin does not require rigid textual uniformity.

5. Summary: A Paradox, Not a Problem

The inconsistencies in the Ten Commandments texts may appear to challenge belief in divine origin at first glance, especially for literalist readers. But a broader, more nuanced theological view sees these variations as consistent with how divine revelation has historically functioned: not as a mechanical dictation, but as a living word conveyed through human language, culture, and community.

Rather than disproving divine origin, the inconsistencies invite deeper reflection on what it means for a text to be “inspired.” They push believers to move beyond a surface-level reading of Scripture and toward a more integrated understanding of divine-human interaction in the formation of sacred texts, the essence at the heart of Psalm 1.

In this light, the multiplicity of texts doesn’t weaken the authority of the Ten Commandments—it enhances it, showing how God's moral and covenantal will continues to speak through the rich and diverse voices of Scripture.

The Law Of The Lord Is Perfect Reviving The Soul Of Those Who Meditate It