The commandments of the Decalogue: between history and universality
When we read the Ten Commandments, an essential question quickly appears:
“Are these cosmic commandments, valid for all human beings in all times, or are they historical commandments, tied to a specific people and a specific context?”
The answer—if we seek it carefully in the text and in history—is surprising and forces us to look with new eyes at what the Decalogue actually is.
The “you shall not” commandments are only limits placed on abuse
The first thing we notice in the Decalogue is that the commandments are formulated negatively:
“You shall not kill,”
“You shall not steal,”
“You shall not covet”…
These “shall nots” define a moral minimum, a lower boundary. We are not speaking of love (which has no upper limit), but of a minimum of respect—a “fence” meant to stop abuse. It is about putting an end to exploiting the other: “do not kill him,” “do not lie to him,” “do not use him as a possession.” This is the red thread of the commandments: respect, not love.
This becomes clear when we look at the fourth commandment (the Sabbath) and the tenth commandment (coveting what belongs to another).
The Sabbath is not only a gift, but also a barrier: “you shall not work,” “neither you, nor your son, nor your servant, nor your animals…” Likewise, the tenth commandment: “you shall not covet… your neighbor’s wife, his male servant, his female servant, his ox…”
It is an explicit acknowledgment that those persons (or animals) were then treated as property. Thus these commandments do not arise from a “cosmic” vision of the human being, but from a concrete social reality: “That is how things were—and God placed limits.”
The commandments and the legitimization of slavery?
Some say:
“If the commandments are universal, then slavery must be a cosmic principle.”
But the text is clear: the tenth commandment includes the male and female servant as the master’s “possessions.” Slavery cannot be a cosmic truth—it cannot be God’s will for all ages.
Rather, it shows that the commandments of the Decalogue are adapted to a world in which slavery was a fact. God did not “approve” slavery as an eternal value by mentioning it in the Decalogue—He set clear limits on it instead: “your servant shall not work on the Sabbath.”
Here it is not about “the rights of the master” but about the right to rest of the weakest—the servant.
The Decalogue—a historical contract, not a cosmic principle
The Decalogue begins with a clearly historical reference: “I am the Lord who brought you out of the house of slavery, out of Egypt.” This shows that the commandments are part of a historical covenant—a “contract” between God and the people freed from slavery. It concerns Israel, not all humanity. Their meaning is eternal (respect is always valid), but their form is historical, adapted to a particular people.
For example, the fourth commandment concerning the Sabbath is directly tied to the memory of deliverance from Egypt—“Remember that you were a slave…” So the Sabbath as a command is linked to the history of the Jewish people.
But the Sabbath as a “cosmic gift” (the seventh day of creation) is beyond Israel.
Thus, it is important to see the difference: the command in the Decalogue is for Israel, the cosmic Sabbath is for all creation. These are two different levels, often confused.
Moses and his version of the commandments
Another essential point is directly tied to Moses:
“Jesus said: Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses gave you this command…”
Here it becomes clear: not everything written in the Law of Moses is God’s final will. Some commandments, such as the one regarding “the certificate of divorce,” are concessions for harsh realities (such as the abuse of women by men at the time).
Jesus took things back to Eden—to “what was from the beginning.” Thus, even if Moses’ commandments were “given by God” in the sense of the covenant, they are not “cosmic”—they are an adaptation to the “hardness of heart” of people.
The same idea appears in the commandments concerning “the servant” or “the foreigner in your household.” They are a step forward compared to the surrounding culture, but not God’s “final truth.”
Jesus shows a better path: love, not merely respect. “Love your neighbor as yourself” is not a commandment of the Decalogue—but Jesus said it is the summary of the entire Law. Thus the ideal is not “do not kill the other,” but “love him as yourself.”
The respect in the Decalogue is just the red thread, not the final ideal
If we look closely, we see that all the commandments of the Decalogue share a common denominator: respect.
You shall not kill—because the other is alive and has dignity.
You shall not steal—because the other has the right to what is his.
You shall not force him to work endlessly—because he too is created by God.
But respect is only the beginning. Jesus showed that love is greater than respect. The Decalogue is a minimum, a limit—but the ideal is “without limits.”
The Decalogue and… “in the beginning it was not so”
Another major point is the comparison between the Decalogue and the reality “from the beginning.”
“In the beginning,” there was neither slavery nor the possession of the wife as “property.” There was equality and dignity. So the commandments mentioning “your wife, your servant” are not part of creation—they are part of a world where good and evil coexist.
Therefore, when Jesus says “in the beginning it was not so,” He rejects the idea of turning the Law of Moses or the Decalogue into an absolute moral code. Jesus calls us back to what was “in the beginning”—love and partnership, not domination.
Conclusion: The Decalogue is valuable, but it is not the ideal
The commandments of the Decalogue are important—they are a moral minimum that limits violence and abuse. But they are tied to a historical context: Israel freed from slavery. Their form is not “cosmic”—it is not eternal in every detail. Jesus shows that the ideal is much higher: love.
“In these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”
Thus the commandments are a mirror: they show us how far we are from love—but they are not love itself.
Recognizing this is not “throwing away the Law”—it is understanding it at its true value.
The commandments are good—but love is greater.
And this is Jesus’ call: to live not only respect, but love. Not to remain at “you shall not…” but to reach “love your neighbor as yourself.”