Sorry, I know this is from a while back in the thread, but thought it might still be interesting to pursue.
Falvlun said:
here are two problems with your claim that morals come from God, making them absolute, in contrast to morals created by humans, making them relative.
The first problem is that the Bible has supported killing disobedient children, human sacrifice, slavery, genocide, racism, the subjugation of women, etc. Most Christians do not believe that any of these actions previously (or sometimes, currently) condoned by God to be moral.
If you claim that God doesn't require those things now, that they were based upon the culture and era of the people at the time, you are admitting that the morals that God gives us to follow do in fact change, and are not absolute. They change with culture, or with the plans of God.
The second problem is that it doesn't appear that anybody, including the vast majority of religious people, fully get their morality from religious scriptures. Various moral lessons are considered to be allegorical now, as opposed to literal; other moral rules are completely ignored. What allows you to choose between passages? Are you not using some other criteria, besides God's word, to decide what is moral or not?
Less than 100 years ago, people found passages in the Bible to support their subjugation of people of other colors. Today, they find passages to support the idea that all men should be treated equally. So, even if the claim that God's morals never change is true, it does not appear that Christians (or humans in general) can be relied upon to consistently interpret what they are. We are using something else besides the scriptures to drive what we consider moral or not.
morals haven't changed. Requirements have.
How do you distinguish between what is moral and what is merely a requirement?
bribrius said:
i dont recall god condoning slavery. I dont recall any comment at all on it other than masters treat your slaves well and slaves be good to your masters. Not exactly condoning but stating a necessity in a already existing relationship that wasnt changing during the time, to avoid abuse of slaves perhaps. Didnt god free slaves? yeah, he led him through that desert......
God never condemns slavery; he merely gives laws concerning its regulation. This seems to be a pretty glaring moral misstep on behalf of God.
But that wasn't my main point in regards to the slavery example. The point was that
people have used the Bible to support slavery, and have used the Bible to condemn it. Interpretation is variable; so even if God does give absolute moral laws, it does not appear that
people are able to consistently decode what those laws are.
bribrius said:
i actually have no opinion on slavery however. I dont even believe in rights. You have the rights you are able to have, fight for, keep. Just gods law and natural law is my primary beliefs. Perceived human rights i dont really consider. You could say you have a right to a cupcake every day at four in the afternoon. Doesnt mean much.
Rights are irrelevant to this discussion. We are talking about morality, how humans should act. Do you believe that humans should enslave other humans? How does slavery compare to the Golden Rule? Would you like to be a slave for life, and have your wife and children be some other man's property? If not, then neither should you condone slavery, according to Jesus.
bribrius said:
killing of disobedient children as in the passage already posted? example of capital punishment. I dont think most children refuse to listen to any discipline, are sluggards and drunkards. consider that closer to a adult or adult, who faced a trial in front of the elders for whatever sins had been committed.
Generally, capital punishment is reserved for the most horrendous of crimes, like murder (particularly gruesome, serial, or rape-based ones.) Are you claiming that we should kill people for minor crimes as well? And for things that aren't even crimes at all, like disobeying your dad? How many of us would make it past childhood in such a world? How brutish must we become before we can harden our hearts so far that we can kill our children for being children?
Is this, by the way, a viewpoint based upon your understanding of the Bible? If so, I highly doubt that the majority of people, including Christians, would find such a viewpoint to be moral.
bribrius said:
I actually believe in the subjugation of women as done biblically in a loving way. For example in corin "love your wife as jesus loved the church". People seem to stray from that which leads to issues...
I was thinking more specifically of verses that indicated that women are property, that a women should marry her rapist, and that generally indicated that women were worth less than men, such as when Lot offered his daughters to the mob instead of his male guests.
bribrius said:
sacrifice .. well it is a blood religion. Burnt offerings etc.. But we dont do that now.
Are you seriously supporting human sacrifice?
You say you don't do that now, but of course, that's my point. At some point, God did want it, asked for it. And I'm not just talking about Jesus. I'm talking about Isaac (who was spared) and Jephthah's daughter (who wasn't).
What changed? Does this mean that God thinks human sacrifice is fine, and just hasn't had a hankering for it in a while? (What an abhorrent idea!) Or did God say it was okay at some point in time, but not okay for another time? (Meaning, God's morals aren't absolute, but change with culture and eras.)
bribrius said:
Genocide.. well it is a vengeful God as well as a loving one. If you make a car do you have the right to take it apart again? Well God feels he has a right to take the car apart again. Who am i to say he doesnt?
Are you seriously saying that genocide is a moral thing to do? This really scares me, to be honest.
We aren't talking about a car. We are talking about thousands of people, including kids, who can think, feel, love. To equate the two is astounding.
And regardless of your own acceptance of God's condoning of genocide, again, most people, including Christians, do not see genocide as a moral action. Where do we get the sense that genocide is evil, truly evil? Not from the Bible.
bribrius said:
Most of my values are from church upbringing. So most of my idea of morality is probably found in Gods word.
Which interpretation of God's word? And how did you choose which?
bribrius said:
Societal standards mean little to me other than that i hope bell bottoms dont come back in style again. I think you would find the opposite of what you say, that most of your morals may actually come from Gods word and religion, as many laws are carried from early religous law. Morality becomes law, and since the primary forces of law was in the religous circles this is where most of our laws could come from. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not....
Isn't it strange that the first 4 of the 10 commandments weren't made into laws, and in fact, we have laws against forcing people to have to follow those laws? In fact, I think only 3 of the 10 are actually laws: Don't murder, don't steal, and don't bear false witness. That's not a very good track record for someone who is claiming that morality is coming from his religion.
And also, what's up with the 3rd commandment? Exodus 20:5 "...I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me."
Is that an example of justice? Punishing children for the crimes their parents commit? Amazing that we haven't picked that one up too.
bribrius said:
it was ways of people living together, as you describe...The old testament has many rules and regulations for societal living. But these are of course separate from moral standards. These are living standards. Moral standards havent changed for God.
Again, how do you know which is which? If the Bible is the source of morality, should not the entire book be a shining example of that? Should not all the good guys in the old stories be good examples for us to follow?