Re: Arkansas 10 commandments law suit filed

On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 07:50:25 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Chris Thompson
<the_thompsons@earthlink.net>:
 

Bob Casanova wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jun 2025 21:42:38 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Chris Thompson
<the_thompsons@earthlink.net>:
>

Bob Casanova wrote:

On Thu, 12 Jun 2025 09:39:53 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com>:
>

On Jun 12, 2025, Bob Casanova wrote
(in article<gvpk4kt6f2mcrbivm2cn28qvknv8ojpvjm@4ax.com>):
>

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 19:53:19 -0500, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by RonO<rokimoto557@gmail.com>:
>

https://www.newwestrecord.ca/religion-news/families-file-suit-challenging-ar
kansas-law-that-requires-ten-commandments-be-posted-in-classrooms-10797734
>
The plaintiffs are Jewish, Unitarian Universalists, or listed as
nonreligious. The Jewish plaintiffs do not what their kids to have to
be forced to be exposed to the Christian translation of the 10 commandments.

I'm curious; any take on how the "Christian translation"
differs from the original, i.e., the Hebrew text?

>
Well, for one thing, there aren’t ten ‘commandments’; depending on how
you count, there are 12 to 15. For another, there are three seperate
listings, two in Exodus, one in Deuteronomy; see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments for more. For a third, there
isn’t even just one Xian version; the official versions of the OT according
to Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant bibles have differences. And none of
them are identical to the main Jewish version... and there are at least two
Jewish versions. The Wiki article noted above gives a quick look at some of
the main points. For details... well, way back in the depths of time I was
forced to take theology classes at the undergraduate level. I no longer have
the text, but it spent two chapters on the 10/12/15 commandments. Apparently
serious theologians find the differences to be significant.
>

Asked and answered; thanks. IMHO your last statement is the
most significant; while details may differ I wouldn't have
expected there to be "hill to die on" differences, but I'm
no theologian.

>
Don't be too sure. Jenny Geddes is always ready with her stool.
>

No idea who that is, or even why she didn't just provide a
sample.

>
Jenny Geddes was a Scottish woman in the 1600's. When King Charles (I
believe the 2nd) tried to unify the churches of England and Scotland
with a new Book of Common Prayer it was met with much unhappiness in
Scotland. Jenny Geddes threw her stool at an Anglican priest using the
new book in a service, and the resulting "unrest" helped spark the
Bishops' Wars, which led in turn to the English Civil Wars and a few
others. The Scots thought the new book too papist, and they were also
upset that a few Scottish saints had been omitted. To be fair there was
also politics involved, as the Anglican church had bishops appointed by
the King and the Church of Scotland had them elected by local elders
(the presbyters) but the Scottish Calvinists weren't about to put up
with anything that even remotely seemed like Catholicism.
>

OK; (original) point taken.
 Oy...

>

>

>
Arkansas wants to use the Protestant version. Catholics and Orthodox are
likely to be unamused.
>
I’d suggest using the main Jewish version of one of the three lists, just
to see how long it takes the theofascists to notice.
>

Sounds OK to me, for multiple reasons.

>