8th Commandment -- Stealing Prohibited

 

Stop, thief! Think old-time TV crime drama – Adam-12, or Dragnet – and you get the picture. The grandma cries out in despair as the purse-snatcher makes off with her bag. Enter Officers Reed and Malloy to nab the malefactor, and all is made well when this criminal runs head-first into the criminal justice system. Before this fellow made his felonious move, you could have seen the look of wariness and a smirk on this miscreant’s face, as he furtively checked all directions to make certain his next few moments were unobserved (like what you can see in this 1931 image, The Cunning Thief, by Paul-Charles Chocarne-Moreau). He knew it was wrong, as his own cautious approach testified. “You shall not steal.” (Exodus 20:15; Deuteronomy 5:19) That four-word divine directive seems pretty brief and understandable, doesn’t it? God wasn’t really making up something new for His chosen people, and Rubel Shelly indicates in his work on the Ten Commandments (Written in Stone: Ethics for the Heart, p. 215) that a concept of ‘minimal civility’, common in most cultures, guides a prohibition against crimes like theft. So why does the thief proceed anyway? One’s avarice can smother any ethic that says otherwise.

 

Stealing in politics…what’s that look like? Here are some examples among historical political figures, and they need little explanation, although two of them are stealing of a different sort – theft (at least attempted) of information during the Watergate scandal, and identity theft. The others are generally rooted in an ages-old issue – love of money, which leads to all sorts of evil (1 Timothy 6:10).

 

·         Watergate began with burglars at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Watergate scandal

·         Spiro Agnew, former vice president, and tax fraud Spiro_Agnew

·         Donald Trump Trump Tax Fraud and Trump Civil Tax Fraud

·         Interior Secretary Albert B. Fall and Teapot_Dome_scandal (Harding presidency)

·         Bribery and other crimes Bob Menendez - Wikipedia

·         Identity theft/wire fraud George Santos - Wikipedia

 

The question is kinda like the chicken and the egg dilemma: Does the political environment breed or coax corruption, including the temptation to steal; or are these people crooked before they enter the political landscape? Which came first? But, whatever else is involved, and it’s worth repeating -- this particular sin most often involves money. Even in the Watergate scandal, at one point during the newspaper reporters’ investigation of all the complicated activities they encountered, they were told to ‘follow the money’, in order to get at the root of what had been going on. Deep Throat told the reporter Woodward that he and Bernstein should keep at their task, like hound dogs sniffing the trail of greenbacks (All the President’s Men clip Bing Videos). In the identity theft issue (George Santos) listed above, he likewise apparently committed this as part of a fraud (i.e. theft) scheme.

 

Is there a way that this issue could be headed off, before it even gets started in politics? It is a difficult prospect, because money is involved in so much of life, and especially among a bunch of public officials who talk about funding projects, budgets, campaign financing, etc. etc. So, how about beginning with this: transparency by candidates regarding their personal taxes?  Presidential Tax Transparency | Yale Law & Policy Review (and see the link to a PDF document at the top of the article here). There may be other methods, but we all pay taxes, so why not go straight to the heart of the matter? Tax transparency (as is pointed out in the article) has been voluntarily practiced for decades by political candidates. If someone refuses to share, should that not be a yellow warning light for we who must decide how to mark a ballot? Financial disclosure is a must, for trust to be present between humans involved in a common enterprise. Consider what happened when a couple named Ananias and Sapphira tried to hide some money from others in their community (Acts 5:1-10): Death took them. You might think you can keep something like money hidden, but history shows that is a myth. Be transparent, or don’t pretend to be serving the public while you’re really trying to be clandestine in other ways. The conflict will eventually be exposed.

  

File:Paul-Charles Chocarne-Moreau The Cunning Thief.jpg - Wikimedia Commons …This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or fewer. {{PD-1996}} – public domain in its source country on January 1, 1996 and in the United States

Adultery -- A Peek at Trustworthiness

“You shall not commit adultery.” (Ex. 20:14; Deut. 5:18) “If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.” (Mark 8:38) He was speaking about physical betrayal, and then later spiritual untrustworthiness. What distresses God most of all, it seems, is a people who make a promise and then break it. And yet, if God so chose, he could pardon someone, as in the case of the woman that the Pharisees brought before Jesus (John 8:3-11; see 19^th Century reproduction of a painting of this incident here [Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld, Jesus and the woman taken in adultery]). He could also choose to pardon a nation for this sin (see multiple episodes throughout the book of Judges, for example), if they repented and returned to Him. In the same vein, Jesus concludes by instructing the woman, “Go now and leave your life of sin.”(John 8:11B) Evidently, God is sovereign, and knows what is best for individuals, and for a nation that enters into a covenant with Him. Promise-making with God is serious business, so a people should take note when adultery is present. What if a leader has a tendency for straying this way – consider David’s episode with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11-12, esp. 12:10)? It can lead to serious consequences, ones that last for generations. Don’t overlook the 7th Commandment, if you are a nation seeking what is best.  

 

Just how common is the problem? Rubel Shelly indicates (Written in Stone: Ethics for the Heart, p. 150) that a Gallup poll (early 1990s?) showed the vast majority of married couples are faithful to each other – 90 percent. Other more recent surveys suggest that adultery in the U.S. is more common – perhaps up to 25% of men, and 15% of women Prevalence of Adultery in U.S. - Wikipedia. This can affect attitudes among the general population, especially among those with little or no commitment to God and His warning to His image-bearers in the 7^th Commandment. What of the impact when it mingles with American politics? These, because of the public spectacle, are especially lurid and can even impact the business of government. Most notably, this happened in Bill Clinton’s presidency Bill Clinton episodes when he was impeached (but not convicted in a Senate trial), and has also been spotlighted in Donald Trump’s life Donald Trump episodes , even leading to his criminal conviction. John F. Kennedy was likewise purportedly guilty of this sin, and was perhaps the most egregious, and even dangerous of all presidents in this regard JFK episodes. If these three presidents appear to have ‘gotten away with it’, social mores on this issue – though some might consider the 7^th Commandment old-fashioned and irrelevant – have derailed other candidates, like Gary Hart in 1987-88 Gary Hart episode. So, given these examples, how costly is disregard for the 7^th Commandment?  

 

What is at the heart – in the heart, really – of an adulterer? God thinks of it as a violation of trust, and since He made me, I should listen to the One who knows me better than I know myself. If I see someone I want, despite what God thinks about it, I’m really elevating my ego above what He wants for me. Admittedly, obedience is hard, especially when physical desires are present. But, evidence of someone’s violation of, and ill-discipline for, the 7^th should be a big yellow light for we who are being asked to entrust someone with high office – presidency, vice presidency, or other elective offices in the U.S. Congress, and federal judicial appointments, for example. Can such a person be trusted to administer his/her office with integrity? Across the U.S. (and around the world, in fact Oaths Around the World), thousands and even millions of people take an oath to serve – employees of federal agencies, members of the armed forces, for example. Here’s the one I took:  I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]  Those last four words mean the most to me, as a believer in God, the one to whom I owe my ultimate allegiance. He instituted governments and even leaders of states. We decent-hearted citizens, God-believers, should hold these leaders accountable, as God would.   

 

See information about the image here: Jesus judges a woman caught in adultery (John 8) …This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 100 years or fewer. {{PD-1996}} – public domain in its source country on January 1, 1996 and in the United States.

Murder/Assassination, and Other Considerations

 

You shall not murder. (Ex.20:13; Deut. 5:17) That was pretty clear, but perhaps in the mind of the first murderer, he had not yet been so instructed by God … Now Cain said to his brother Abel, “Let’s go out to the field”. While they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him. (Genesis 4:8). (See image of 17^th Century masterpiece artwork Cain slaying Abel, by Peter Paul Rubens.) This episode just illustrates that sinners – even ones guilty of murder, which is one of, if not the most, grievous crimes in most civilized states, worthy of capital punishment – do not appreciate the gravity of their crimes until God confronts them with the penalty. See how Cain responded in the aftermath? Embrace ignorance, divert attention from oneself, try to get others to empathize with your way of thinking; or, muddy the issue – that’s how people, including 21^st Century inhabitants, approach their sin in this area. Not much has changed since Genesis, though in the last 50 years in America, the issue has become particularly charged. Abortion is a hot potato in American politics, with some believing it is murder, while others see it as women’s health care. Are there other considerations with regard to the Sixth Commandment?

 

To be blunt, abortion is intentionally terminating a pregnancy with premeditation – therefore murder, if the fetus is in fact alive. Rubel Shelly in his book Written in Stone: Ethics for the Heart, cites a statistic (p. 130) that according to Planned Parenthood, not more than 7 % of abortions are ‘hard cases’ – in which the mother’s life or health is at risk, the baby’s health is at risk, or a rape caused the pregnancy. Abortion statistics in the United States - Wikipedia (This link indicates something like 600K-900K abortions in 2019 in the U.S.) The question for God-believers, however, is how best to dissuade pregnant women from making the choice for abortion. Consider this: How many lives can one save by merely filling in an oval on a ballot? Is it certain what will happen in the political windstorms? The author of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade in 1973 was Harry Blackmun (Harry Blackmun), a Richard Nixon (Republican) appointee, who was expected to be a conservative adherent. So, surprises can happen. Why not choose a more certain path? CareNet, one faith-based counselling center, offers an alternative/additional way for voters to address moral outrage against abortion, and it estimates that over one million unborn babies have been saved since 2008…Care Net - A Pro-Abundant Life Ministry (care-net.org)).

 

So much more could be written on this subject – whole books, in fact – but consider another facet of the issue – another ‘A’-tion’ word. Adoption. Adoption statistics in the U.S. indicate that all of the number of aborted babies annually in U.S. could satisfy (many times over…3-4 times more) the demand among parents/families for adoptions (150K adoptions annually)…and that ‘The number of adults who would like to adopt a healthy infant or toddler significantly exceeds the number of infants available for adoption.’(footnote 10 of Wikipedia article, Adoption in the United States - Wikipedia)  Also, many thousands of adoptions in the U.S. annually are from international sources (which are also more expensive, reportedly), indicating the U.S. could easily supply and replace these international adoptions each year if women chose to give up babies for adoption vs. practicing abortion. And, what about China’s recent move to prohibit adoptions of Chinese babies to other nations? (see article here re: this --Hundreds of families in limbo after China ends overseas adoptions : NPR) This makes the adoption vs. abortion choice still more relevant in America. The choice for women to go the adoption route still would not be as easy as substituting ‘dop’ for ‘bor’ in the operative word…see some discussion here -- Comments renew debate over adoption as abortion alternative | PBS News.

 

In conclusion, two other things surrounding the 6^th Commandment, particularly in our political world, should be raised, spawning several questions. First, do Jesus’ words in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:21-26) matter, or is the murder issue confined to an Old Testament-Mosaic Law interpretation? Jesus’ words broaden the interpretation of murder, so that a person is prohibited from verbally condemning another person because of anger, rage, or malice. (Shelly, p. 122). How many candidates running for office are guilty of this when they falsely – and this is key, the information is false, meaning slanderous -- characterize an opponent in order to instill fear/revulsion of said person among voters, thus trying to assassinate a person’s character? Secondly, should anyone be immune from justice, just because of one’s position? Should a candidate who brags that he/she is immune from prosecution for physical murder, because of presidential immunity, be upheld in this view? (See link to discussion of  this claim here: Trump and Immunity Claim). If a person were found to be complicit in a murderous act, what would be the public reaction to a legal system that meted out unequal justice? How credible would that system be? Compare how King David responded to and was judged by God in aftermath of the Bathsheba-Murdering Uriah episode (2 Sam. 12:9-14)….or how about the episode with Nabol, when David was dissuaded from taking vengeance on this surly man by Abigail (1 Sam. 25:25-33), because Abigail was concerned for the king’s well-being and reputation?

 

So here’s the bottom line: listen to what God says in scripture, both Old and New Testament. Seek alternatives to doing what he forbids; in fact, one alternative –adoption -- might actually be a blessing to some others who are desperate. And, don’t consider yourself above others, and speak the truth about each other. We are all human, and therefore must be subject to the same civil and legal standards in a judicial system that is based on fairness and equal justice for all. Any deviation from that axiom would breed distrust and a breakdown in a rule-of-law society. There are nations on planet Earth where that is true, and despotism is the norm. Do citizens, including Christians, want to live in such a place?    

 

Image of Cain murdering Abel information: File:Peter Paul Rubens - Cain slaying Abel (Courtauld Institute).jpg - Wikimedia Commons…This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 100 years or fewer. {{PD-1996}} – public domain in its source country on January 1, 1996 and in the United States. (Rubens was a Flemish painter…the painting is among the collection of the Courtauld Institute of Art at the University of London.)