The Ten Commandments and Human Rights

Rating:
Summary: Moses for the Nation-State
Review: Harrelson's scholarship I do not question. He exegetes each of the ten commandments with quite a degree of skill. His knowledge of the Hebrew grammar is impressive, and his grasp of Christian theology is adequate to his task.

What I object to is Harrelson's setting up of Moses as a sort of Thomas Jefferson figure. He bucks mainline scholarship by attributing much of the decalogue to Moses, but he does not go so far as to say the God of the Hebrews told him to say these things. The result is that Moses emerges as a sort of religio-political genius who set about to establish a new civilization. While this in itself is not objectionable as a story, it does lead to some misguided conclusions.

First of all, Harrelson "translates" the first commandment for the pluralistic masses, saying that for it to do work in our world it ought to read something like "You shall have only one ultimate master." This seems utterly misguided. The commandment comes in the context of a God rescuing a people from an oppressor. That God is not talking to the folks back in Egypt. I'm sure that there were plenty of single-minded folks back in Egypt. That's not the point of the commandment. By abstracting "principles" from the commandments, Harrelson strips them of their ability to speak to concrete historical situations. What we need is an act of imagination, not a disposal of history.

On the exegetical end I give Harrelson thumbs up. When he tries to make Moses head of the UN I have to object.

Rating:
Summary: Moses for the Nation-State
Review: Harrelson's scholarship I do not question. He exegetes each of the ten commandments with quite a degree of skill. His knowledge of the Hebrew grammar is impressive, and his grasp of Christian theology is adequate to his task.

What I object to is Harrelson's setting up of Moses as a sort of Thomas Jefferson figure. He bucks mainline scholarship by attributing much of the decalogue to Moses, but he does not go so far as to say the God of the Hebrews told him to say these things. The result is that Moses emerges as a sort of religio-political genius who set about to establish a new civilization. While this in itself is not objectionable as a story, it does lead to some misguided conclusions.

First of all, Harrelson "translates" the first commandment for the pluralistic masses, saying that for it to do work in our world it ought to read something like "You shall have only one ultimate master." This seems utterly misguided. The commandment comes in the context of a God rescuing a people from an oppressor. That God is not talking to the folks back in Egypt. I'm sure that there were plenty of single-minded folks back in Egypt. That's not the point of the commandment. By abstracting "principles" from the commandments, Harrelson strips them of their ability to speak to concrete historical situations. What we need is an act of imagination, not a disposal of history.

On the exegetical end I give Harrelson thumbs up. When he tries to make Moses head of the UN I have to object.

Rating:
Summary: An interesting look at the role of the Ten Commandments
Review: Harrelson, a scholar that exhibits expert knowledge of the 10 Commandments, offers valuable insight into the role of the guidelines in modern society. According to the author, these ten commandments can provide "ground rules" that may stabilize society. He offers clear definition of the intent of each commandment and looks at the implication that each could have in social ethics. Harrelson demonstrates excellent knowledge of the topic and a sensitivity to pluralism. This is not an evangelically driven text. This text centers on this issue of human rights ... not theology. He offers historical and cultural anecdotes that clarify his appreciation of the commandments and their role in society. In general, this is a great conversation piece that offers insights to people everywhere. The only caution I have is that the language used in the book, at times, gets somewhat complex. This is not leisure reading by any extent of the imagination.