No, what’s honorable to man is not honorable to God. Honoring the one is dishonor to the other.
16 Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
17 But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face;
18 That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.
19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!
24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Bob Dylan wrote a song about it:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59R-DGXJqnw[/youtube]
Jesus said “He that doesn’t gather with me, scattereth abroad”.
Joshua said “Choose this day whom ye shall serve” (because you gotta serve somebody.)
And from the Freewill song by Rush, “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.”
If so, I suggest the commandment is badly worded.
That could be and it could be by intention because Jesus said “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.”
No doubt there has been much perversion of the texts through the ages. Some say it’s impossible to discern the word without the guidance of the Spirit. Other say the bible was veiled to hide meaning from the church (weird since the church compiled it). Idk, but it’s allegorical and contains deeper meaning like most philosophical works.
Anyway, the exact lettering of the commandment isn’t so important since faith is required for salvation and not adherence to a law; rather, the practicing of the law is evidence of the faith/salvation (like the fruit on a tree informs you of the kind of tree it is). One doesn’t “not murder” because he’s trying to be saved, but he finds he doesn’t have a desire to murder or, for some reason that he can’t really explain, finds he has a desire to fight the desire to murder, steal, whatever. That is where Judaism diverges from Christianity since the Jews still practice the law as a requirement for salvation. I can’t argue the Jewish position since I fundamentally disagree with it.
Aquinas said, “The law wasn’t given with the expectation that we would obey it, but to show us we could not.”
Paul said, “To will is present with me, but how to do good I find not. For the good that I would, I do not; and the evil that I would not, that I do!”
Further, I would suspect that if this is your point, then all commandments presumably have that extra clause, e.g. that a murder was committed in the eyes of all men, but if might not be in the eyes of God?
I think the idea behind the commandment not to murder is the presumption of who is worthy to be murdered; not so much that murder is inherently wrong. Man is simply not in the position to make the call.
Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
I feel no solace in the fact that rich people aren’t gonna end up in heaven, I am neither vengeful nor am I divorced from my worldly reality.
I’m not really a bible-thumper, I just happen to know a lot about it because I was raised in that environment.
Keep finding objections; this is fun!