numbered off as first, second, third, etc. The consequence is that different modes of division have been adopted. The Jews from an early period adopted the arrangement which is still recognized by them. They regard the words in Exodus xx. 2, as constitut- ing the first commandment, " I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bond- age." The command is that the people should recognize Jehovah as their God ; and the special ground of this recognition is made to be, that He delivered them from the tyranny of the Egypt- ians. These words, however, are not in the form of a command. They constitute the preface or introduction to the solemn injunc- tions which follow. In making the preface one of the command- ments it became necessary to preserve the number ten, by unit- ing the first and second, as they are commonly arranged. The command, " Thou shalt have no other gods before me," and " Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image," being regarded as substantially the same ; the latter being merely an amplification of the former. An idol was a false god ; worship- ping idols was therefore having other gods than Jehovah.
Augustine, and after him the Latin and Lutheran churches, agreed with the Jews in uniting the first and second command- ments ; but differed from them in dividing the tenth. There is, however, a difference as to the mode of division. Augustine followed the text as given in Deuteronomy, and made the words,
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife ; " the ninth, and the words, " Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house," etc., the tenth commandment. This division was necessitated by the union of the first and second, and justified by Augustine on the ground that the " cupido impurse voluptatis " is a distinct of- fence from the " cupido impuri lucri." The Romish Church, how- ever, adheres to the text as given in Exodus, and makes the clause, " Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house," the ninth, and what follows, " Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man servant, nor his maid servant," etc., the tenth commandment.
The third method of arrangement is that adopted by Jose- phus, Philo, and Origen, and accepted by the Greek Church, and also by the Latin until the time of Augustine. At the Reformation it was adopted by the Reformed, and has the sanc- tion of almost all modern theologians. According to this ar- rangement, the first commandment forbids the worship of false
YOU Hi. 18
274 PART m. Ch. XIX. — THE LAW.
gods ; the second, the use of idols in divine worship. The com- mand, " Thou shalt not covet," is taken as one commandment.
It is universally admitted that there are two tables of the dec- alogue ; the one containing the precepts concerning our duties to God, and the other those which concern our duties to our fellow- men. Philo referred five commands to each table, as he regarded reverence to parents, enjoined in the fifth, as a religious rather than a, moral duty. Those who unite the first and second, and divide the tenth, refer three commandments to the first table and seven to the second. According to the third arrangement men- tioned above, there are four in the first, and six in the second. The only objection urged against this is founded on the symbolism of numbers. Three and seven among the Jews are sacred and significant ; four and six are not.
Arguments for the Arrangement adopted by the Reformed.
There are two questions to be determined. First, should the commandments concerning idolatry be united or separated ? In favour of considering them two distinct commandments, it may be urged, (1.) That all the way through the decalogue, a new command is introduced by a positive injunction or prohibition : " Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain ; " " Thou shalt not steal ; " " Thou shalt not kill," etc. This is the way in which new commands are introduced. The fact, therefore, that the command, " Thou shalt have no other gods," is distinguished by the repetition of the injunction, " Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image," is an indication that they were intended as different commands. The tenth commandment is indeed an exception to this rule, but the principle holds good in every other case. (2.) The things forbidden are in their nature distinct. Worshipping false gods is one thing ; using images in divine worship is another. They therefore called for separate prohibitions. (3.) These offences are not only different in their own nature, but they differed also in the apprehension of the Jews. The Jews regarded worshipping false gods, and using im- ages in the worship of the true God, as very different things. They were severely punished for both offences. Both external and internal considerations, therefore, are in favour of retaining the division which has been so long and so extensively adopted in the Church.
The second question concerns the division of the tenth com- mandment. It is admitted that there are ten commandments.