>It strikes me that using snippits of the different biblical sources one could argue either way.

Yes - this is why it's important to study it for yourself to be sure you understand the correct interpretation. The Bible is not really that difficult to understand. One can probably argue several points their way by taking scripture our of context.

>
>If Hell is the cost for picking the incorrect passage I would just go the more conservative route and not add any small print to "Thou shalt not murder"*
>
>*only appies to murder out anger or personal gain, not valid in Tennesse, this commandment subject to change without advance notice.
>
>

I imagine to the original hearers in the original language that's what it sounded like (except for the Tennessee thing.) God is not trying to trick us or make His law so complex that we get confused trying to keep it. The purpose of the law was to point out man's complete inability to keep it - and thus - the need for a saviour (Jesus Christ.)