The Cohesion and Overlap of the Commandments

A Review of Patrick D. Miller's "The Ten Commandments"

(All right, buckle up! This is a revised and restructured form of a book review I recently submitted for the Biblical Ethics seminar I am taking this semester [Spring 2025]. As such, this post is longer than my usual. I hope it will be enlightening nonetheless! Try listening to my audio voice over version to pick up some speed.)

Photo by Levi Meir Clancy on Unsplash

What Is the Book, and What Is Its Thesis?

Patrick Miller’s The Ten Commandments¹ stems from years of study and teaching on the Decalogue. It is the culmination and expansion of several journal articles on related topics and applying knowledge gained from years of teaching Old Testament ethics (pp. xi, xiv). The fundamental function of the work is “to probe deeply into the meaning and complexity of the Commandments and the way they are developed, elaborated, and specified in the whole of Scripture” (p. xiii). Miller analyzes the commandments with a “trajectory” lens whereby he traces explicit and implicit examples of them throughout the biblical corpus. The trajectory lens reinforces the centrality of the commandments in both the Old and New Testament, fortifying the importance of the Decalogue for the person of God individually and the people of God communally. “There is,” Miller notes, “a continuing tension between the universality and the particularity of the Commandments and their simplicity and complexity” (p. 4, italics removed). The Ten Commandments are not an end in themselves but instead are foundational to the whole of life, and they therefore require faithful interpretation and application like the rest of Scripture.

How Does Miller Organize His Book?

Each of the Ten Commandments gets their time in the spotlight, though each does not likewise receive its own chapter. Miller acknowledges the Jewish, Catholic, Lutheran, and Reformed approaches to the commandments but sticks with the Reformed tradition’s particular numbering. For the most part, he addresses the commandments individually and in sequential order. That said, he groups the prologue and the first two commandments together into one chapter to reinforce the cohesion they have and their importance for the remaining commandments. At the other end of the Decalogue, he notes that the final three commandments could have likewise been treated in one large chapter instead of three separate ones (p. 317). Granted, he quickly notes that such a decision would have clouded the three commands’ individuality—reinforcing his opening comments about the tensions seen in the Decalogue commands.

A Christian canonical structure underlies Miller’s work. While the chapters are not structurally identical, each typically addresses (1) the meaning of the commandment under discussion, (2) any differences between the Exodus and Deuteronomy instances, and (3) the “story” or “trajectory” of the commandment throughout the canon. The depth of the section on a commandment's meaning depends on the commandment being discussed. For example, the sixth commandment receives more attention than several others due to the scholarly debate over whether to gloss רצח as “murder” or “kill” (p. 223). Similarly, the way a given commandment differs in the Exodus and Deuteronomy instances is often negligible and Miller’s discussion typically quickly turns to the Book of the Covenant and the Deuteronomic Code. However, the Sabbath command has explicitly different motivational clauses in Deuteronomy than in Exodus, and therefore Miller spends more time in that section exploring the differences in the two rationales for Sabbath keeping (pp. 124–30).

Although the work contains ethical elements throughout, Miller’s appendix on “The Ethics of the Commandments” explains what he envisions a biblical ethics to be. Miller discusses how he understands divine command theory and its application to the preceding chapters. Divine command theory draws attention to the “givenness” of the commandments and the obedience that is required by their divine origin. The fact that the commandments are not random fortune cookie ideals but rather “grow out of a shaping narrative” means that they (a) require interpretation, (b) are presented in the narrative mode, and (c) exemplify “an ethic of correlation or correspondence” with one another (pp. 425–27). The appendix’s content could have been helpful as introductory material rather than an afterthought. However, the existence of such a chapter at all makes Miller’s work a helpful reference on biblical ethics generally and the Ten Commandments specifically.

Although the work is not intended to be highly technical (as shown by the absence of in-depth footnotes/endnotes), it is clear at several points that Miller is aware of the general critical scholarship. For example, he incorporates studies related to the different perspectives on the structure of the Deuteronomic Code (pp. 5, 359) and refers in several of his analyses to the Yahwistic and Priestly sources of the Pentateuch (e.g., p. 279). Miller’s scholarly engagement, however, is not especially exhaustive. For instance, Miller does not delve too deeply into the debates around the proper translation of the Shema. Though, I suppose one could validly say that is tangential to the specific thesis of the book! After his survey of the trajectory of the first commandment, he concludes on the basis of Jesus’s example in the Gospel of Mark that “the Markan account legitimizes both translations and makes clear that both interpretations were a part of appropriating the Shema in that time. God is one and only” (p. 45).

While his bibliography provides a helpful overview of the scholars he engages, readers should be aware that the subject index occasionally omits them. For example, if one were interested in where Moshe Weinfeld’s Social Justice in Ancient Israel and the Ancient Near East (which is noted in the bibliography) was discussed, the index would be of no use since Weinfeld’s name is absent. Additionally, when Miller discusses the pragmatic side of the commandments, his primary conversation partners are John Calvin, Martin Luther, and Karl Barth. These three voices occur again and again to bolster Miller’s applications for the commandments as well as his emphases on the commandments’ positive and negative characteristics.

Why Should You Consider Reading This?

The strongest point of Miller’s argumentation is his focus on the interrelationship between the commandments and its subsequent reinforcing of Scripture's cohesiveness. This emphasis is reflected in his combined treatment of the prologue and the first two commandments in a single chapter. Miller consistently points the reader back to the first table of the law, as when he draws attention to the fifth commandment acting as a bridge from the Sabbath command into the more explicitly neighbor-oriented commandments (pp. 167–68). The centrality of the family seen in the Exodus and Deuteronomy narratives reinforces the crucial role that parents play in instruction and overall guidance (cf. Deut 6:7–9, 20–25).

Miller’s canonical focus supports the interplay and commonalities among the commandments. Often, multiple chapters incorporate the same biblical narrative as part of their discussion of a commandment’s trajectory. For example, the story of Joseph and Potiphar’s wife exemplifies the adherence to the seventh commandment and the breaking of the ninth. As a stronger example, the story of Naboth’s vineyard appears in several chapters, illustrating the breaking of the sixth, eighth, ninth, and tenth commandments! The repetition of several biblical narratives to illustrate the relationship and commonalities among the commandments helps readers recognize the high expectations of the commandments and the dire need the people of God have for God’s grace.

It is no surprise that Miller takes Scripture as his study’s primary authority in the analyses. He nonetheless feels comfortable using extrabiblical materials to make a point or to pique interest. For example, in discussing the ninth commandment, Miller uses an example from a seventh-century Hebrew letter. In the letter, a servant pleads with his master that he has been wrongly accused of lazy work. For Miller, the letter illustrates the relationship between compassion and justice when it comes to evaluating witnesses (the servant’s testimony and the testimony of the witness who claimed the servant was not doing his due work). Subsequently, to draw attention to the eighth commandment’s connection with the ninth commandment, Miller quotes a Seymour Shubin crime novel (p. 362). The extrabiblical materials are not the authority for Miller’s argument, but they still assist in making various points or drawing connections to other dimensions of life.

What Are Some Points of Contention from My View?

Miller’s study is relatively comprehensive, due mainly to the strong focus on the interconnection of the commandments, but it is not exhaustive. Several of Miller’s points may leave the reader wanting more or wondering why particular tensions were not mentioned, especially since the “tension between the universality and the particularity of the Commandments and their simplicity and complexity” is one of Miller’s main emphases (p. 4, italics removed). Several examples will help clarify.

First, while one of Miller’s strong suits is his intentionality in showing how the commandments are seen in the narratives of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation, more discussion of potential pitfalls would have helped his discussion of certain examples. For example, Miller helpfully points out the book of Ruth as an exemplar of the commandment to honor one’s father and mother. Although there are differences between in-law and immediate parental relationships, the book of Ruth provides one biblical illustration that in-laws are included in this commandment’s reach (cf. Micah 7:6). Yet the book of Ruth is not without its controversial moments. Ruth 3 often comes up in scholarship on the morality of Naomi’s instruction and of Ruth’s and Boaz’s actions. Whether or not Naomi’s instructions to Ruth were wise is pertinent to the commandment to honor one’s parents. Toward the end of the Ruth example, Miller notes that “the patriarchal structure of family life is reflected [in Boaz redeeming Naomi and Ruth]. But that rescue is accomplished solely by Naomi’s planning and Ruth’s actions” (p. 188). By drawing attention to Naomi’s planning in this way, Miller appears to consider her instruction to be without flaw.

What makes the Naomi and Ruth example more striking is considering how the chapter opened. Miller’s chapter on the fifth commandment opens with a note from one of his colleagues who concludes that (1) honoring one’s parents does not equate to simply obeying them and (2) the Decalogue addresses the whole community, not children (p. 168). Throughout the chapter Miller addresses these two concerns in various ways. Notably, Miller has a section for the question as to whether honoring one’s parents means obedience and one on whether disobedience is ever valid. The Ruth example, although present in the trajectory section, is absent from these sections. If Miller had drawn any connection to the scholarly disagreements over Naomi’s instruction, it might have provided another example of the tension found in obeying the commandments. Although the book of Ruth plays a major role in the chapter, it is noticeably absent from any of the discussions which try to resolve the question of obedience and disobedience to parental guidance.

Second, Miller’s conclusions regarding same-sex relationships in relation to the Levitical holiness codes and the seventh commandment might strike the reader as surprising unless he or she has read Miller’s earlier publication “What the Scriptures Principally Teach.”² Much of the discussion on the seventh commandment revolves around how it seeks to protect the marriage covenant between man and woman, the procreative purpose of marriage, and the family itself.

Similar to the other commandments, the command to flee the snares of adultery is communal (cf. p. 303, where Miller notes Psalm 51 as being a community psalm in relation to the sin of David and Bathsheba). Yet in an aside on same-sex relationships, Miller draws particular attention to the holiness code “having to do with a particular kind of sexual act, not with the gamut of affections, feelings, acts, and commitments that belong to a relationship of two persons that is intimate and permanent, characterized by love and faithfulness” (p. 295). The context-oriented focus comes after Miller draws attention to various reasons the code might not relate to same-sex relationships as we see them today. For example, Miller says, the “statutes [say] nothing whatsoever about female same-sex relationships” (p. 293). The caveats within Miller’s discussion of the holiness code are surprising considering his focus elsewhere in the book on the content of the Decalogue being primarily addressed to adult males yet being taught and applied to the women and children in Israel too.

Miller takes inspiration from Paul Lehmann to argue that in the case of relationships, “the creation stories can be understood as foundational rather than limiting or restrictive” (p. 294, emphasis original). It is unclear whether this foundational versus limiting/restrictive typology could be applied elsewhere to other passages and commandments. The creation narrative also lays the framework for the first commandment; however, what the narrative teaches about there being only one God of heaven and earth who is its creator is clearly both foundational and limiting. If Miller is using Lehmann’s foundation versus limiting distinction only in the case of human relationships, then on what grounds does this limitation come?

Third, most of Miller’s discussions on the trajectory of the commandments into a modern context focus on clear connections to the biblical principles he laid out earlier. However, a few places might be confusing due to their brevity. For example, when concluding discussion on the ninth commandment to not bear false witness, Miller gives attention to what constitutes the command on truth-telling. Having concluded his discussion on the sixth commandment against murder enveloping hateful desire of any kind, one might presume truth-telling would be a simple and straightforward principle.

Instead, Miller concludes that there is “freedom to lie” insofar as it might be the moral choice in a given situation (p. 384). He gives as examples the story of the Hebrew midwives (Exod 1:15–22) and Rahab’s protecting of the spies (Josh 2). But like the situation with Naomi, does the fact that God brought about a positive end in these narratives give us permission to repeat those actions today? In discussing the command against adultery, Miller was clear that Abraham’s and Isaac’s lies regarding their wives being their sisters was wrong (p. 298). Yet when he addressed same-sex relationships, the Old Testament-New Testament distinction of love and charity seemed to come to the fore. Certainly, there are differences in these scenarios, but the careful reader might come away being somewhat confused on where the line should be drawn.

Concluding Thoughts

Miller’s The Ten Commandments is a valuable resource on the Decalogue, its place within Scripture, and the role it ought to have in the community of faith. Miller’s generally careful exegetical work and canonical awareness makes the book a valuable resource when it comes to the Decalogue’s depth and breadth across the Scriptures. While Miller’s conclusions will not find universal agreement (e.g., the aforementioned note on human sexuality), the work as a whole remains insightful. The negatives and shortcomings by no means negate what Miller has accomplished. Ultimately, the nontechnical character of The Ten Commandments (albeit with scholarly parenthetical citations) makes it profitable for laypeople, pastors, and scholars alike.

1. Patrick D. Miller, The Ten Commandments, Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2009).

2. Patrick D. Miller, “What the Scriptures Principally Teach” in The Way of the Lord: Essays in Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 286–96.