• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Did Moses break the tablets with God's law on them?

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Overall yes, but if we're granting everything as given that we would need to to get to the point where Moses is walking down Mount Sinai carrying tablets carved by God's own hand, then we've granted enough that the weight of the tablets doesn't pose a fatal flaw for the story.
Maybe they were carved in pumice:p Light enough to float, but still a fairly tough rock.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Overall yes, but if we're granting everything as given that we would need to to get to the point where Moses is walking down Mount Sinai carrying tablets carved by God's own hand, then we've granted enough that the weight of the tablets doesn't suggest a fatal flaw for the story.

At this point, I'd just be nitpicking. ...:D
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member

My my my...

Where do I start... The video is missing Aaron since Exodus says Aaron went up the mountain with Moses, perhaps as a witness. Perhaps to keep the cast low in a scene, Hollywood decided Aaron was not sharing the stage with Charlton Heston!!!

In any case Moses broke all the law eventually and God made a complete new set
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
And yet we had a loose tribal confederation full with foreign worship for a damn long time after Moses.
And this foreign worship continued well into the time of Kings.


But if it doesn't fit the narrative it is best to be ignored.

Nonetheless this represents a tribal conflict among the tribes of the Canaanites. My God or Gods are better than your God or Gods.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
The biblical and the Quranic versions differ. The bible says he was so enraged on returning that he broke the tablets. The Quran doesn't say this. It is clear from the Quran the tablets are not broken. It is said that it would be outragous to claim that Moses would break the tablets. They are from God after all and they have God's law on them and Moses is not a man with a weak nature.

Thoughts?

In the Quran it does not say whether the Tablets were smashed or not. Some translations say Moses threw them down not put them down.

But the essence of both stories do not contradict but confirm each other that

1. Moses received a Revelation in the form of Tablets from God
2. While doing so His followers became idolatrous by worshipping an idol
3. Idol worship was condemned by Moses and they sought forgiveness.

In your post where you say “it is said that it would be outrageous”... are you quoting from the Quran? Which Sura? If you read that in a commentary then that has nothing to do with the Quran. The Quran nowhere states to my knowledge that it would be outrageous for Moses to have broken the Tablets so you need to provide a Sura number confirming that if you believe it was from the explicit text of the Quran not a commentary.
 

Remté

Active Member
In the Quran it does not say whether the Tablets were smashed or not. Some translations say Moses threw them down not put them down.
Yes but he lifts them up again and the story goes on without the slightest indication they were on any way broken.

In your post where you say “it is said that it would be outrageous”... are you quoting from the Quran? Which Sura? If you read that in a commentary then that has nothing to do with the Quran.
It is from the commentary - though I don't remeber how it was worded - and very much has something to do with the Quran. But whether you agree with it being outrageous or not is not relevant. I was only communicating the point that this is one Muslim view to the biblical story.
 

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
Nonetheless this represents a tribal conflict among the tribes of the Canaanites. My God or Gods are better than your God or Gods.

I didn't mention other Canaanite Tribes. I meant the Tribes of Israel who weren't united, not even Religion.

And yet you claim that there was some form of control by the priests when in reality the common folk went astray every other week.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Exodus 34 28
In that verse, there is a phrase, עֲשֶׂ֖רֶת הַדְּבָרִֽים, aseret had'varim. The root d-v-r is "thing" or "saying/word." The word דברים is used over 30 times in the 5 books of Moses. Are you saying that it means "commandments" in each of those cases? Strangely, most, if not all of the translations that have it as "commandments" at the end of the verse have it as "words" in the same verse, slightly earlier (and elsewhere, cf Gen 11:1).

What in its root refers to "command" and how would that work in cases such as Ex. 4:10? If you are referring to Strong's 1696/97 (though I don't know if you consider Strong to be an authority worth relying on) then he seems to point to the tz-v-h root (6680, through to 4687) as the word for a divine commandment.

If the issue has to do with the introductory prefix הַ, that word is used 30 other times textually and as early as Genesis 15:1 but doesn't seem to mean "commandments" there (also, cf Gen 44:6).

You had also said that "only one of the three is called the "Ten Commandments" in the text itself" and then you cited Ex 34. How does that relate to Deut 4:12 which also uses the phrase to refer to the 10 statements?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
In that verse, there is a phrase, עֲשֶׂ֖רֶת הַדְּבָרִֽים, aseret had'varim. The root d-v-r is "thing" or "saying/word." The word דברים is used over 30 times in the 5 books of Moses. Are you saying that it means "commandments" in each of those cases? Strangely, most, if not all of the translations that have it as "commandments" at the end of the verse have it as "words" in the same verse, slightly earlier (and elsewhere, cf Gen 11:1).

What in its root refers to "command" and how would that work in cases such as Ex. 4:10? If you are referring to Strong's 1696/97 (though I don't know if you consider Strong to be an authority worth relying on) then he seems to point to the tz-v-h root (6680, through to 4687) as the word for a divine commandment.

If the issue has to do with the introductory prefix הַ, that word is used 30 other times textually and as early as Genesis 15:1 but doesn't seem to mean "commandments" there (also, cf Gen 44:6).

You had also said that "only one of the three is called the "Ten Commandments" in the text itself" and then you cited Ex 34. How does that relate to Deut 4:12 which also uses the phrase to refer to the 10 statements?
Sorry, I do not play semantic games.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Yes but he lifts them up again and the story goes on without the slightest indication they were on any way broken.


It is from the commentary - though I don't remeber how it was worded - and very much has something to do with the Quran. But whether you agree with it being outrageous or not is not relevant. I was only communicating the point that this is one Muslim view to the biblical story.

Because the Quran confirms the Torah and Bible as from God I think that it just summarizes but doesn’t go into all the detail except it adds tgevbit about Moses grabbing His brother’s head.

It doesn’t deny what the Bible has stated.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I didn't mention other Canaanite Tribes. I meant the Tribes of Israel who weren't united, not even Religion.

And yet you claim that there was some form of control by the priests when in reality the common folk went astray every other week.

There was uniformity among the earliest Hebrew tribes in common with the Canaanites. Small clay statues of a female Canaanite God All tribes at the time had a hierarchy of a ruling class and priesthood. There is no such thing as 'just common folk.' There is specific evidence of Canaanite and Canaanite/proto- Hebrew written language among the Hebrews going back about 11,000 BCE.
 

Remté

Active Member
Because the Quran confirms the Torah and Bible as from God I think that it just summarizes but doesn’t go into all the detail except it adds tgevbit about Moses grabbing His brother’s head.

It doesn’t deny what the Bible has stated.
It confirmes the prophets from whom they came from. It doesn't agree with the current books. They have differences. Even the story of the golden calf is different in the Torah and in the Quran in that in the Quran Aaron has no part in the making of the golden calf.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
It confirmes the prophets from whom they came from. It doesn't agree with the current books. They have differences. Even the story of the golden calf is different in the Torah and in the Quran in that in the Quran Aaron has no part in the making of the golden calf.

The message though is the same in both Books that idol worship is deemed unacceptable by God.
 

Remté

Active Member
There were more than two tablets in the Quran. And I suppose (am not sure)it isn't suggested they were made of stone at all.
 
Top