Morality based in Scripture

[Pontifex Maximus]

Most of the major world religions claim that their teachings, usually grounded within a sacred text, lay the foundation for a divinely mandated, absolutist ethical theory. While for some cultures this assertion of moral certainty found in Scriptures offers a clear outline for expected behavior, stability, and the framework for a functioning society, a plethora of problems arise from strict adherence to these texts. Sacred texts tend to offer conflicting rules or laws by which the faithful must live; the historical and cultural context has changed since the time the documents were originally penned. Finally, these texts, some of them several thousand years old, have lost meaning over time due to ideological and situational differences between the original audience and modern readers. Although some texts have been rendered more useless than others in this sense, it must be acknowledged that over several hundred years language has the tendency to evolve and thereby distort the original meaning. Scripturally based ethical theories served as a basis for law codes and behavior for long periods of time in ancient cultures, but ultimately these rigid, dogmatic codes and the theocracies or religiously based societies associated with them have failed the test of time and have no place in the present.

The Quran, Torah, and Christian Scriptures prohibit the taking of innocent life. This proscription of murder outlines a trend of morality that transcends solely cultural, historical, or geographic spheres since so many different texts outlaw murder. Murder carries a penalty of varying severity outlined in each of these works because the perpetrator has violated one of God’s laws. Depending upon the religion, this penalty may have temporal and spiritual ramifications. Offenders could receive a punishment such as execution or banishment if discovered by the civil authorities. However, scripturally based ethical theory almost always provides a spiritual punishment that an omniscient God can hand down to someone that has broken the law whether it be damnation in the afterlife or earthly affliction. God’s wrath reaches everybody regardless of rank, wealth, or martial prowess. If a society as a whole adhered to this belief, the punishments for bad behavior as defined by the holy scriptures act as a deterrent regardless of whether or not the civic authorities can deal out punishment. This makes the job of governing and maintaining order easier, especially in a neolithic or pre-modern civilization, town, or tribe. A judicial mechanism exists independent of but theoretically not divorced from government. If a majority of society adheres to the moral laws set forth in scripture a harmonious environment should result. Hindu texts provide Indian society with a hierarchical framework that sets forth how each individual in the society should behave depending upon their class. This guideline has served as a behavioral guideline for centuries, provided order, and encouraged members of different classes to behave in such a way that has perpetuated the survival of Indian civilization to the modern era.

The Vedas and Upanishads dictate how each class in Indian society should behave and interact with one another in clear terms, but how do other doctrines compare to other works? The Bible in particular sheds light upon the negative aspects of scriptural ethical authority. Biblical morality has shaped the values of modern western society, but as time goes on the expansion of progressive thought has led to secularization and ultimately a detachment from scriptural law. The bible cannot be the sole arbiter of moral authority in the modern age because contemporary man simply cannot justify the brutality and prejudicial biblical laws and the punishments described therein for those who do not subscribe to Christian beliefs or laws.

Europeans emerging from the Middle Ages rejected the bible as sole moral authority and opted instead to form their own theories based on their observations and analysis of past events. As the pall of fear and superstition was slowly lifted, western thinkers of the enlightenment concluded that every man, and later women, has certain rights and freedoms. These codified rights of man found their way into various constitutions and governmental documents and were in direct conflict with the laws set forth in scripture.

Western society’s rejection of scripturally based moral theory perpetuates to the present. The bible dictates that sodomy should be punished by death. God himself destroyed whole towns for the sin of sodomy in the old testament. Tolerance has begun to legally replace discrimination as society evolves, but why has this taken place? Condemnation of homosexuality simply because the bible condemns it has decreased steadily since the 19th century and even late 20th century. Hundreds of old sodomy laws based on the biblical stance towards homosexuality have been repealed across the United States since the late 1990s. When the old testament was written sometime between four thousand and three thousand years ago, prohibition of sodomy may have been essential for survival and the propagation of offspring to keep the clan strong or for other reasons that a nomadic desert people valued. This has lost all meaning in the modern day. Society has moved on, and laws set into scripture for a specific time and place in history no longer have much if any relevance. Some aspects, such as the prohibition of murder or rape, remain relevant. These actions have almost always been perceived as immoral across all times and culture and not necessarily because a holy text also describes those behaviors as wrong.

Another negative aspect of scripturally based ethical theory arises when holy texts undergo translation. The process of transliteration from one language to another creates problems of meaning. Different language groups have unique meanings, connotations, and feelings associated with individual words. In addition to this problem, a single language tends to adjust over time, and words that had a particular meaning the century before may have a completely different meaning in the next. This underscores the myriad of problems that arise when trying to read and comprehend a work like the bible which has been translated from the original Hebrew and Aramaic to Greek, Latin, and eventually English. Even after the damage of these translations has been done, six hundred years of linguistic evolution must be addressed in the English language alone. An Elizabethan living in the time of the first English translation of the bible undoubtedly read very different English words than the modern English speaking Christian does today.


Another problem that needs to be addressed is the shameless hypocrisy most Christians indulge themselves in. Whether you like it or not, the old testament is part of your bible and you cannot simply ignore that. Too many people, when faced with the undeniable fact that the old testament embodies bigotry, backwards thinking, and immorality, commit the intellectual error of claiming the old testament has nothing to do with their religion. Unfortunately it does, so stop ignoring it and address the issue directly. The ten commandments are a laughably reduced code of behavior. The other 306 laws are being ignored, but why? Divinely mandated, absolutist morality demands that the bible is either wholly right or wholly wrong. Parts of it can't be correct and others incorrect, if you want to call yourself a christian.

"And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.
Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you." Lev 11

Why is this any less valid than "You shall not take the name of the Lord, Your God, in vain?" It isn't, if you actually adhere to a universal moral standard and that standard is the bible. Why don't people more closely observe the various laws of the bible? Because they do not believe those laws apply to the modern day. We can clean pork now and make it safe to eat, but wandering around in the desert 4,000 years ago some livestock may have been a bit more risky to eat for various reasons including disease, rotten meat etc. Well if that is your answer, where does the line get drawn? Whose to say other laws should no longer apply because they are out of date? The fact that christians mince their own holy text to justify essentially anything they want is a known fact, but more attention needs to be given to the hypocrisy of the situation. If the bible is the sole arbiter of morality most christians certainty don't act like it is.

Holy texts do not normally undergo any redaction or updating. The rigidity of the documents condemns them to become increasingly useless to society as a universal and absolute standard of morality. These archaic scriptures served the needs of a specific group of people that lived in a different reality than our own. Moral progress cannot afford to be stalled by the dogmatic approach of holy scriptures. In the modern understanding of morality old holy texts should be classified as amoral and irrelevant, not the source and only provider of ethical theory.

[Primo]

Most of the major world religions claim that their teachings, usually grounded within a sacred text, lay the foundation for a divinely mandated, absolutist ethical theory. While for some cultures this assertion of moral certainty found in Scriptures offers a clear outline for expected behavior, stability, and the framework for a functioning society, a plethora of problems arise from strict adherence to these texts. Sacred texts tend to offer conflicting rules or laws by which the faithful must live; the historical and cultural context has changed since the time the documents were originally penned. Finally, these texts, some of them several thousand years old, have lost meaning over time due to ideological and situational differences between the original audience and modern readers. Although some texts have been rendered more useless than others in this sense, it must be acknowledged that over several hundred years language has the tendency to evolve and thereby distort the original meaning.

While that is true, it is tried to solve by interpreting them on today. The translators will surely have thought while translating, to make it more fitting for todays´times while not changing the original meaning. Quite hard, of course, and that is way theologians have to study the ancient languages, too - So that they can understand the original. Also, if something is that important to shape millions of lives, it will never be meaningless.

Scripturally based ethical theories served as a basis for law codes and behavior for long periods of time in ancient cultures, but ultimately these rigid, dogmatic codes and the theocracies or religiously based societies associated with them have failed the test of time and have no place in the present.

Who should define that? They don´t have failed the test of time, or they wouldn´t be anymore. The greek gods, for example have failed the test of time. Yet they still have a place in the present, even if a minor one.

The Quran, Torah, and Christian Scriptures prohibit the taking of innocent life. This proscription of murder outlines a trend of morality that transcends solely cultural, historical, or geographic spheres since so many different texts outlaw murder. Murder carries a penalty of varying severity outlined in each of these works because the perpetrator has violated one of God’s laws. Depending upon the religion, this penalty may have temporal and spiritual ramifications. Offenders could receive a punishment such as execution or banishment if discovered by the civil authorities. However, scripturally based ethical theory almost always provides a spiritual punishment that an omniscient God can hand down to someone that has broken the law whether it be damnation in the afterlife or earthly affliction. God’s wrath reaches everybody regardless of rank, wealth, or martial prowess. If a society as a whole adhered to this belief, the punishments for bad behavior as defined by the holy scriptures act as a deterrent regardless of whether or not the civic authorities can deal out punishment. This makes the job of governing and maintaining order easier, especially in a neolithic or pre-modern civilization, town, or tribe. A judicial mechanism exists independent of but theoretically not divorced from government. If a majority of society adheres to the moral laws set forth in scripture a harmonious environment should result. Hindu texts provide Indian society with a hierarchical framework that sets forth how each individual in the society should behave depending upon their class. This guideline has served as a behavioral guideline for centuries, provided order, and encouraged members of different classes to behave in such a way that has perpetuated the survival of Indian civilization to the modern era.

This is - from a political point of view - true, assuming no god exists.

The Vedas and Upanishads dictate how each class in Indian society should behave and interact with one another in clear terms, but how do other doctrines compare to other works? The Bible in particular sheds light upon the negative aspects of scriptural ethical authority. Biblical morality has shaped the values of modern western society, but as time goes on the expansion of progressive thought has led to secularization and ultimately a detachment from scriptural law. The bible cannot be the sole arbiter of moral authority in the modern age because contemporary man simply cannot justify the brutality and prejudicial biblical laws and the punishments described therein for those who do not subscribe to Christian beliefs or laws.

The 10 laws - maybe sometimes apart from those concerning god - are the base of every moral, every law and the human rights. Said are extended, i.e. updated, but basing on the 10 laws. And punishment for breaking laws are another matter - we at the moment prefer to throw people in jail, but there are still those punished by dead. And in 20-30 years this will be completely reformed, I am completely sure - I just don´t know in what direction.

Europeans emerging from the Middle Ages rejected the bible as sole moral authority and opted instead to form their own theories based on their observations and analysis of past events. As the pall of fear and superstition was slowly lifted, western thinkers of the enlightenment concluded that every man, and later women, has certain rights and freedoms. These codified rights of man found their way into various constitutions and governmental documents and were in direct conflict with the laws set forth in scripture.

This is not true. Martin Luther stand up against the corruptness of the middle age church, not against what it stood for. The limitations of freedom by the church weren´t written in the bible, they were imposed on believers for the sake of power for a few. This has nothing to do with the bible itself.

Western society’s rejection of scripturally based moral theory perpetuates to the present. The bible dictates that sodomy should be punished by death. God himself destroyed whole towns for the sin of sodomy in the old testament. Tolerance has begun to legally replace discrimination as society evolves, but why has this taken place? Condemnation of homosexuality simply because the bible condemns it has decreased steadily since the 19th century and even late 20th century. Hundreds of old sodomy laws based on the biblical stance towards homosexuality have been repealed across the United States since the late 1990s. When the old testament was written sometime between four thousand and three thousand years ago, prohibition of sodomy may have been essential for survival and the propagation of offspring to keep the clan strong or for other reasons that a nomadic desert people valued. This has lost all meaning in the modern day. Society has moved on, and laws set into scripture for a specific time and place in history no longer have much if any relevance. Some aspects, such as the prohibition of murder or rape, remain relevant. These actions have almost always been perceived as immoral across all times and culture and not necessarily because a holy text also describes those behaviors as wrong.

The bible was written in a time without condoms. They simply noticed that men loving men lead to dead men. Ancient Greeks encouraged homosexuality, as a "warriors-bond". I don´t clasify sex with condom as real sex, thus got no problem with those homosexuals. And those who do it without certainly are punished - if not by god, then by biologie.

Another negative aspect of scripturally based ethical theory arises when holy texts undergo translation. The process of transliteration from one language to another creates problems of meaning. Different language groups have unique meanings, connotations, and feelings associated with individual words. In addition to this problem, a single language tends to adjust over time, and words that had a particular meaning the century before may have a completely different meaning in the next. This underscores the myriad of problems that arise when trying to read and comprehend a work like the bible which has been translated from the original Hebrew and Aramaic to Greek, Latin, and eventually English. Even after the damage of these translations has been done, six hundred years of linguistic evolution must be addressed in the English language alone. An Elizabethan living in the time of the first English translation of the bible undoubtedly read very different English words than the modern English speaking Christian does today.

See above.

Another problem that needs to be addressed is the shameless hypocrisy most Christians indulge themselves in. Whether you like it or not, the old testament is part of your bible and you cannot simply ignore that. Too many people, when faced with the undeniable fact that the old testament embodies bigotry, backwards thinking, and immorality, commit the intellectual error of claiming the old testament has nothing to do with their religion. Unfortunately it does, so stop ignoring it and address the issue directly. The ten commandments are a laughably reduced code of behavior. The other 306 laws are being ignored, but why? Divinely mandated, absolutist morality demands that the bible is either wholly right or wholly wrong. Parts of it can't be correct and others incorrect, if you want to call yourself a christian.

"And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.
Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you." Lev 11

Why is this any less valid than "You shall not take the name of the Lord, Your God, in vain?" It isn't, if you actually adhere to a universal moral standard and that standard is the bible. Why don't people more closely observe the various laws of the bible? Because they do not believe those laws apply to the modern day. We can clean pork now and make it safe to eat, but wandering around in the desert 4,000 years ago some livestock may have been a bit more risky to eat for various reasons including disease, rotten meat etc. Well if that is your answer, where does the line get drawn? Whose to say other laws should no longer apply because they are out of date? The fact that christians mince their own holy text to justify essentially anything they want is a known fact, but more attention needs to be given to the hypocrisy of the situation. If the bible is the sole arbiter of morality most christians certainty don't act like it is.

I never heard of any christian refusing to accept the old testament. Also, It is no "known-fact" that christians do that, it is a common prejudice. Now, while you are right that Christians don´t always act moralic, they almost always act more moralic than others - So you do accuse Christians of not being perfect. The hypocrisis in that apparently never got your attention.

Holy texts do not normally undergo any redaction or updating. The rigidity of the documents condemns them to become increasingly useless to society as a universal and absolute standard of morality. These archaic scriptures served the needs of a specific group of people that lived in a different reality than our own. Moral progress cannot afford to be stalled by the dogmatic approach of holy scriptures. In the modern understanding of morality old holy texts should be classified as amoral and irrelevant, not the source and only provider of ethical theory.

The "moral progress" of today which stand against the bible, are, for example, that you are not allowed to experiement on unborn children, or mix Humans and apes. If that is moral progress, ancient people were way smarter than the "Homo Sapiens Sapiens".

[Pontifex Maximus]

While that is true, it is tried to solve by interpreting them on today. The translators will surely have thought while translating, to make it more fitting for todays´times while not changing the original meaning. Quite hard, of course, and that is way theologians have to study the ancient languages, too - So that they can understand the original.

It is far from perfect, no matter how talented the translators are. We do not have any first edition bibles, and that should be enough to suspect inaccuracy while reading the good book.

Also, if something is that important to shape millions of lives, it will never be meaningless.

If millions of people jumped off a cliff, I wouldn't be more inclined to do it.

Who should define that? They don´t have failed the test of time, or they wouldn´t be anymore. The greek gods, for example have failed the test of time. Yet they still have a place in the present, even if a minor one.

I'm not talking about god(s), I'm talking about scripturally based ethics. And every christian theocracy has failed.

The 10 laws - maybe sometimes apart from those concerning god - are the base of every moral, every law and the human rights. Said are extended, i.e. updated, but basing on the 10 laws. And punishment for breaking laws are another matter - we at the moment prefer to throw people in jail, but there are still those punished by dead. And in 20-30 years this will be completely reformed, I am completely sure - I just don´t know in what direction.

I would argue that the ten commandments or any scriptural code of law are derived from the laws of the civilization that created the holy text. Men wrote the bible, not god.

This is not true. Martin Luther stand up against the corruptness of the middle age church, not against what it stood for. The limitations of freedom by the church weren´t written in the bible, they were imposed on believers for the sake of power for a few. This has nothing to do with the bible itself.

"1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35*

34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Sexism, advocated by the bible, which took approximately 400 years to dissemble after Luther died.

The bible was written in a time without condoms.

Not necessarily true.

They simply noticed that men loving men lead to dead men.

How does men loving men lead to dead men, exactly?

I never heard of any christian refusing to accept the old testament.

Why do so many of them eat pork without thinking twice then?

The "moral progress" of today which stand against the bible, are, for example, that you are not allowed to experiement on unborn children, or mix Humans and apes. If that is moral progress, ancient people were way smarter than the "Homo Sapiens Sapiens".

Or that women can vote. Or that children can't be forced to work. Or that slavery no longer exists. Or that everyone should be free to practice their own religion without fear of persecution. I think you might not understand what moral progress means.

[Primo]

It is far from perfect, no matter how talented the translators are. We do not have any first edition bibles, and that should be enough to suspect inaccuracy while reading the good book.

Suspecting inaccuracy can be quite healthy.

If millions of people jumped off a cliff, I wouldn't be more inclined to do it.

But than you wouldn´t want to understand those people. Then you would want to keep being ignorant.

I'm not talking about god(s), I'm talking about scripturally based ethics. And every christian theocracy has failed.

After what definition of failure, exactly? Because they were at least extremely succesfull, both in the good things it resulted in and the many who believed in it. Doesn´t fit my definition of failure.

I would argue that the ten commandments or any scriptural code of law are derived from the laws of the civilization that created the holy text. Men wrote the bible, not god.

Than the 10 Laws, originated out of the Israelic laws, did what I said. Doesn´t really change anything, as the Israelites were gods people.

"1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35*

34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Sexism, advocated by the bible, which took approximately 400 years to dissemble after Luther died.

It took - most important - two world wars. Both strengthened the position of the women. Now, noone would think the world wars to be a good thing.

Not necessarily true.

I never saw any mentioning of ancient condoms. As long as you don´t provide a source which deproofs it, it is true.

How does men loving men lead to dead men, exactly?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuall...mitted_disease

Why do so many of them eat pork without thinking twice then?

Because it isn´t dangerous anymore. The animals forbidden to eat by the bible were in ancient times dangerous if eaten. God saved the people who believed in him at those times many suffering. The ancient pork isn´t the today´s pork, so I think it to be justifiable to eat it. Every other animals mentioned, like Snakes, I don´t eat.

Or that women can vote. Or that children can't be forced to work. Or that slavery no longer exists. Or that everyone should be free to practice their own religion without fear of persecution. I think you might not understand what moral progress means.

Note that nothing of this is achieved, at least not completely. Also note that the Church isn´t blocking them.
You complained above that sacred textes don´t update. Yet if there are signs of it to be updated, you accuse them of that. If that isn´t Hypocrisis, I never saw one.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Suspecting inaccuracy can be quite healthy.

When I am reading a handbook to how I should live my life I don't want it to be inaccurate.

But than you wouldn´t want to understand those people. Then you would want to keep being ignorant.

I have no idea what you are trying to say. Maybe my wording has confused you. Your argument is an appeal to majority, which is not a logical argument.

After what definition of failure, exactly? Because they were at least extremely succesfull, both in the good things it resulted in and the many who believed in it. Doesn´t fit my definition of failure.

The Puritan colony of Massachusetts. I also suspect you don't know much about the subject.

Than the 10 Laws, originated out of the Israelic laws, did what I said. Doesn´t really change anything, as the Israelites were gods people.

That makes absolutely no sense, but ok.

It took - most important - two world wars. Both strengthened the position of the women. Now, noone would think the world wars to be a good thing.

Women were granted the right to vote in the US in 1920. And the world wars weren't fought for women's rights. The fact that women indirectly benefited from the wars was an unforeseen and accidental result. But what has this got to do with anything? Does not pertain to this discussion.

I never saw any mentioning of ancient condoms. As long as you don´t provide a source which deproofs it, it is true.

Deproof is not a word, and no, my inability to prove something false would not make it right because that makes no logical sense whatsoever.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Birth control and infanticide are well documented in Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. One of the earliest documents explicitly referring to birth control methods is the Kuhn gynaecological papyrus from about 1850 BC. It describes various contraceptive pessaries, including acacia gum, which recent research has confirmed to have spermatocidal qualities and is still used in contraceptive jellies. Other birth control methods mentioned in the papyrus include the application of gummy substances to cover the "mouth of the womb", a mixture of honey and sodium carbonate applied to the inside of the vagina, and a pessary made from crocodile dung. Lactation of up to three years was also used for birth control purposes in ancient Egypt.[38]

Ancient silver coin from Cyrene depicting a stalk of Silphium.
Plants with contraceptive properties were used in Ancient Greece from the seventh century BC onwards and documented by numerous ancient writers on gynaecology, such as Hippocrates. The botanist Theophrastus documented the use of Silphium, a plant well known for its contraceptive and abortifacient properties. The plant only grew on a small strip of land near the coastal city of Cyrene (located in modern day Libya), with attempts to cultivate it elsewhere failing. Its price increased due to high demand, leading to it being worth "more than its weight in silver" by the first century BC. The high demand eventually led to the extinction of Silphium during the third or second century BC. Asafoetida, a close relative of siliphion, was also used for its contraceptive properties. Other plants commonly used for birth control in ancient Greece include Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota), willow, date palm, pomegranate, pennyroyal, artemisia, myrrh, and rue. Some of these plants are toxic and ancient Greek documents specify safe dosages. Recent studies have confirmed the birth control properties of many of these plants, confirming for example that Queen Anne's lace has post coital anti-fertility properties. Queen Anne's lace is still used today for birth control in India. Like their neighboring ancient Greeks, Ancient Romans practiced contraception and abortion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_c...#Early_history

http://www.avert.org/condoms.htm

go to "the history of condoms" page. And remember that just because you don't know something doesn't make it untrue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuall...mitted_disease

Oh how silly of me to forget, heterosexual intercourse can't lead to STDs.

Because it isn´t dangerous anymore. The animals forbidden to eat by the bible were in ancient times dangerous if eaten. God saved the people who believed in him at those times many suffering. The ancient pork isn´t the today´s pork, so I think it to be justifiable to eat it.

God told Moses eating pork was against his holy law and he hasn't made any correction to that. According to the bible God still considers eating pork a sin.

Every other animals mentioned, like Snakes, I don´t eat.

Doesn't matter.

Note that nothing of this is achieved, at least not completely. Also note that the Church isn´t blocking them.

Actually all of those are facts. Please show me where, in a developed nation, where slavery is legal.

You complained above that sacred textes don´t update. Yet if there are signs of it to be updated, you accuse them of that. If that isn´t Hypocrisis, I never saw one.

Hypocrisis is not a word. All I did was point out that scripturally based ethic codes are in an impossible position.

This debate is much less intellectual than I had originally hoped.

[Phier]

The problem is a fundamental one that has little to do with morality directly.

Its the very core of religion. IF the 'holy' books are truly gods word, then there is no room to modify the scriptures based on modern sensibilities. If you modify the morality to fit what we believe is correct now, then it basically invalidates the whole scripture. Once you get into that territory you get into the more spiritual, pick and choose, your own personal jesus feel good religion which in the end really doesn't satisfy many peoples desire for what they want god to be, an uber mind.

Personally I think either you accept it for what it is, or ditch the whole thing (as I have done). Personally I am always amused by those who claim to believe in god and then are just so bad at following the 'rules', I know if I really believed, I'd sure as hell not be cheating on my final exam to the afterlife.

[Pontifex Maximus]

The problem is a fundamental one that has little to do with morality directly.

Its the very core of religion. IF the 'holy' books are truly gods word, then there is no room to modify the scriptures based on modern sensibilities. If you modify the morality to fit what we believe is correct now, then it basically invalidates the whole scripture. Once you get into that territory you get into the more spiritual, pick and choose, your own personal jesus feel good religion which in the end really doesn't satisfy many peoples desire for what they want god to be, an uber mind.

Personally I think either you accept it for what it is, or ditch the whole thing (as I have done). Personally I am always amused by those who claim to believe in god and then are just so bad at following the 'rules', I know if I really believed, I'd sure as hell not be cheating on my final exam to the afterlife.

Nice summary there, I agree with you.

[Lord Romanus III]

Ponti, I don't think English is his first language. And his mistakes aren't that far off (strictly speaking about wording)...... please, continue.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Ponti, I don't think English is his first language. And his mistakes aren't that far off (strictly speaking about wording)...... please, continue.

Unfortunately the errors in logic are just as woeful.

[AJStoner]

A perfect example of what is wrong with the bible and the selective way its adherents do their adhering is the book of Leviticus. Christians love the bits about killing gays in Leviticus but ignore every other thing in it, like how wearing mixed fabrics (like polyester) should be met with death by stoning. Some other fun examples of the bible’s excellent advice on being a swell guy include:

*One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the LORD's name. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother's name was Shelomith. She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. They put the man in custody until the LORD's will in the matter should become clear. Then the LORD said to Moses, "Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD's name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD's name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)

*Now, our God, what shall we say after this? For we have forsaken Your commandments, which You have commanded by Your servants the prophets, saying, "The land which you are entering to possess is an unclean land with the uncleanness of the peoples of the lands, with their abominations which have filled it from end to end and with their impurity. So now do not give your daughters to their sons nor take their daughters to your sons, and never seek their peace or their prosperity, that you may be strong and eat the good things of the land and leave it as an inheritance to your sons forever." (Ezra 9:10-12 NAS)

* But then the Jewish leaders came to me and said, "Many of the people of Israel, and even some of the priests and Levites, have not kept themselves separate from the other peoples living in the land. They have taken up the detestable practices of the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Ammonites, Moabites, Egyptians, and Amorites. For the men of Israel have married women from these people and have taken them as wives for their sons. So the holy race has become polluted by these mixed marriages. To make matters worse, the officials and leaders are some of the worst offenders." (Ezra 9:1-2 NLT)

*Do not clip your hair at the temples, nor trim the edges of your beard. (Leviticus 19:27 NAB)

*Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

*The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

*At the wrath of the Lord of hosts the land quakes, and the people are like fuel for fire; No man spares his brother, each devours the flesh of his neighbor. (Isaiah 9:18)

*(Moses) stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come over here and join me." And all the Levites came. He told them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Strap on your swords! Go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other, killing even your brothers, friends, and neighbors." The Levites obeyed Moses, and about three thousand people died that day. Then Moses told the Levites, "Today you have been ordained for the service of the LORD, for you obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. Because of this, he will now give you a great blessing." (Exodus 32:26-29 NLT)

*Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

*You shall not delay the offering of your harvest and your press. You shall give me the first born of your sons. You must do the same for your oxen and your sheep. (Exodus 22:28-29 NAB)

*Give no woman power over you to trample upon your dignity. (Sirach 9:2 NAB)

*Every city and province, without exception, that does not observe this decree shall be ruthlessly destroyed with fire and sword, so that it will be left not merely untrodden by men, but even shunned by wild beasts and birds forever. (Esther 8:24 NAB)

*Why are your clothes so red, as if you have been treading out grapes? "I have trodden the winepress alone; no one was there to help me. In my anger I have trampled my enemies as if they were grapes. In my fury I have trampled my foes. It is their blood that has stained my clothes. For the time has come for me to avenge my people, to ransom them from their oppressors. I looked, but no one came to help my people. I was amazed and appalled at what I saw. So I executed vengeance alone; unaided, I passed down judgment. I crushed the nations in my anger and made them stagger and fall to the ground." (Isaiah 63:2-6 NLT)

*Who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, God's love endures forever (Psalm 136:10 NAB)

*The men of Israel withdrew through the territory of the Benjaminites, putting to the sword the inhabitants of the city, the livestock, and all they chanced upon. Moreover they destroyed by fire all the cities they came upon. (Judges 20:48 NAB)

[Veliky Kaiser Theos]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

A perfect example of what is wrong with the bible and the selective way its adherents do their adhering is the book of Leviticus. Christians love the bits about killing gays in Leviticus but ignore every other thing in it, like how wearing mixed fabrics (like polyester) should be met with death by stoning. Some other fun examples of the bible’s excellent advice on being a swell guy include:

*One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the LORD's name. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother's name was Shelomith. She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. They put the man in custody until the LORD's will in the matter should become clear. Then the LORD said to Moses, "Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD's name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD's name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)

*Now, our God, what shall we say after this? For we have forsaken Your commandments, which You have commanded by Your servants the prophets, saying, "The land which you are entering to possess is an unclean land with the uncleanness of the peoples of the lands, with their abominations which have filled it from end to end and with their impurity. So now do not give your daughters to their sons nor take their daughters to your sons, and never seek their peace or their prosperity, that you may be strong and eat the good things of the land and leave it as an inheritance to your sons forever." (Ezra 9:10-12 NAS)

* But then the Jewish leaders came to me and said, "Many of the people of Israel, and even some of the priests and Levites, have not kept themselves separate from the other peoples living in the land. They have taken up the detestable practices of the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Ammonites, Moabites, Egyptians, and Amorites. For the men of Israel have married women from these people and have taken them as wives for their sons. So the holy race has become polluted by these mixed marriages. To make matters worse, the officials and leaders are some of the worst offenders." (Ezra 9:1-2 NLT)

*Do not clip your hair at the temples, nor trim the edges of your beard. (Leviticus 19:27 NAB)

*Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

*The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

*At the wrath of the Lord of hosts the land quakes, and the people are like fuel for fire; No man spares his brother, each devours the flesh of his neighbor. (Isaiah 9:18)

*(Moses) stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come over here and join me." And all the Levites came. He told them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Strap on your swords! Go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other, killing even your brothers, friends, and neighbors." The Levites obeyed Moses, and about three thousand people died that day. Then Moses told the Levites, "Today you have been ordained for the service of the LORD, for you obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. Because of this, he will now give you a great blessing." (Exodus 32:26-29 NLT)

*Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

*You shall not delay the offering of your harvest and your press. You shall give me the first born of your sons. You must do the same for your oxen and your sheep. (Exodus 22:28-29 NAB)

*Give no woman power over you to trample upon your dignity. (Sirach 9:2 NAB)

*Every city and province, without exception, that does not observe this decree shall be ruthlessly destroyed with fire and sword, so that it will be left not merely untrodden by men, but even shunned by wild beasts and birds forever. (Esther 8:24 NAB)

*Why are your clothes so red, as if you have been treading out grapes? "I have trodden the winepress alone; no one was there to help me. In my anger I have trampled my enemies as if they were grapes. In my fury I have trampled my foes. It is their blood that has stained my clothes. For the time has come for me to avenge my people, to ransom them from their oppressors. I looked, but no one came to help my people. I was amazed and appalled at what I saw. So I executed vengeance alone; unaided, I passed down judgment. I crushed the nations in my anger and made them stagger and fall to the ground." (Isaiah 63:2-6 NLT)

*Who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, God's love endures forever (Psalm 136:10 NAB)

*The men of Israel withdrew through the territory of the Benjaminites, putting to the sword the inhabitants of the city, the livestock, and all they chanced upon. Moreover they destroyed by fire all the cities they came upon. (Judges 20:48 NAB)

A sound way of life. I'm sure society would function if everyone paid attention at least a tenth of the bible.

[Denny Crane!]

Most of the major world religions claim that their teachings, usually grounded within a sacred text, lay the foundation for a divinely mandated, absolutist ethical theory. While for some cultures this assertion of moral certainty found in Scriptures offers a clear outline for expected behavior, stability, and the framework for a functioning society, a plethora of problems arise from strict adherence to these texts. Sacred texts tend to offer conflicting rules or laws by which the faithful must live; the historical and cultural context has changed since the time the documents were originally penned. Finally, these texts, some of them several thousand years old, have lost meaning over time due to ideological and situational differences between the original audience and modern readers. Although some texts have been rendered more useless than others in this sense, it must be acknowledged that over several hundred years language has the tendency to evolve and thereby distort the original meaning. Scripturally based ethical theories served as a basis for law codes and behavior for long periods of time in ancient cultures, but ultimately these rigid, dogmatic codes and the theocracies or religiously based societies associated with them have failed the test of time and have no place in the present.

The Quran, Torah, and Christian Scriptures prohibit the taking of innocent life. This proscription of murder outlines a trend of morality that transcends solely cultural, historical, or geographic spheres since so many different texts outlaw murder. Murder carries a penalty of varying severity outlined in each of these works because the perpetrator has violated one of God’s laws. Depending upon the religion, this penalty may have temporal and spiritual ramifications. Offenders could receive a punishment such as execution or banishment if discovered by the civil authorities. However, scripturally based ethical theory almost always provides a spiritual punishment that an omniscient God can hand down to someone that has broken the law whether it be damnation in the afterlife or earthly affliction. God’s wrath reaches everybody regardless of rank, wealth, or martial prowess. If a society as a whole adhered to this belief, the punishments for bad behavior as defined by the holy scriptures act as a deterrent regardless of whether or not the civic authorities can deal out punishment. This makes the job of governing and maintaining order easier, especially in a neolithic or pre-modern civilization, town, or tribe. A judicial mechanism exists independent of but theoretically not divorced from government. If a majority of society adheres to the moral laws set forth in scripture a harmonious environment should result. Hindu texts provide Indian society with a hierarchical framework that sets forth how each individual in the society should behave depending upon their class. This guideline has served as a behavioral guideline for centuries, provided order, and encouraged members of different classes to behave in such a way that has perpetuated the survival of Indian civilization to the modern era.

The Vedas and Upanishads dictate how each class in Indian society should behave and interact with one another in clear terms, but how do other doctrines compare to other works? The Bible in particular sheds light upon the negative aspects of scriptural ethical authority. Biblical morality has shaped the values of modern western society, but as time goes on the expansion of progressive thought has led to secularization and ultimately a detachment from scriptural law. The bible cannot be the sole arbiter of moral authority in the modern age because contemporary man simply cannot justify the brutality and prejudicial biblical laws and the punishments described therein for those who do not subscribe to Christian beliefs or laws.

Europeans emerging from the Middle Ages rejected the bible as sole moral authority and opted instead to form their own theories based on their observations and analysis of past events. As the pall of fear and superstition was slowly lifted, western thinkers of the enlightenment concluded that every man, and later women, has certain rights and freedoms. These codified rights of man found their way into various constitutions and governmental documents and were in direct conflict with the laws set forth in scripture.

Western society’s rejection of scripturally based moral theory perpetuates to the present. The bible dictates that sodomy should be punished by death. God himself destroyed whole towns for the sin of sodomy in the old testament. Tolerance has begun to legally replace discrimination as society evolves, but why has this taken place? Condemnation of homosexuality simply because the bible condemns it has decreased steadily since the 19th century and even late 20th century. Hundreds of old sodomy laws based on the biblical stance towards homosexuality have been repealed across the United States since the late 1990s. When the old testament was written sometime between four thousand and three thousand years ago, prohibition of sodomy may have been essential for survival and the propagation of offspring to keep the clan strong or for other reasons that a nomadic desert people valued. This has lost all meaning in the modern day. Society has moved on, and laws set into scripture for a specific time and place in history no longer have much if any relevance. Some aspects, such as the prohibition of murder or rape, remain relevant. These actions have almost always been perceived as immoral across all times and culture and not necessarily because a holy text also describes those behaviors as wrong.

Another negative aspect of scripturally based ethical theory arises when holy texts undergo translation. The process of transliteration from one language to another creates problems of meaning. Different language groups have unique meanings, connotations, and feelings associated with individual words. In addition to this problem, a single language tends to adjust over time, and words that had a particular meaning the century before may have a completely different meaning in the next. This underscores the myriad of problems that arise when trying to read and comprehend a work like the bible which has been translated from the original Hebrew and Aramaic to Greek, Latin, and eventually English. Even after the damage of these translations has been done, six hundred years of linguistic evolution must be addressed in the English language alone. An Elizabethan living in the time of the first English translation of the bible undoubtedly read very different English words than the modern English speaking Christian does today.


Another problem that needs to be addressed is the shameless hypocrisy most Christians indulge themselves in. Whether you like it or not, the old testament is part of your bible and you cannot simply ignore that. Too many people, when faced with the undeniable fact that the old testament embodies bigotry, backwards thinking, and immorality, commit the intellectual error of claiming the old testament has nothing to do with their religion. Unfortunately it does, so stop ignoring it and address the issue directly. The ten commandments are a laughably reduced code of behavior. The other 306 laws are being ignored, but why? Divinely mandated, absolutist morality demands that the bible is either wholly right or wholly wrong. Parts of it can't be correct and others incorrect, if you want to call yourself a christian.

"And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.
Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you." Lev 11

Why is this any less valid than "You shall not take the name of the Lord, Your God, in vain?" It isn't, if you actually adhere to a universal moral standard and that standard is the bible. Why don't people more closely observe the various laws of the bible? Because they do not believe those laws apply to the modern day. We can clean pork now and make it safe to eat, but wandering around in the desert 4,000 years ago some livestock may have been a bit more risky to eat for various reasons including disease, rotten meat etc. Well if that is your answer, where does the line get drawn? Whose to say other laws should no longer apply because they are out of date? The fact that christians mince their own holy text to justify essentially anything they want is a known fact, but more attention needs to be given to the hypocrisy of the situation. If the bible is the sole arbiter of morality most christians certainty don't act like it is.

Holy texts do not normally undergo any redaction or updating. The rigidity of the documents condemns them to become increasingly useless to society as a universal and absolute standard of morality. These archaic scriptures served the needs of a specific group of people that lived in a different reality than our own. Moral progress cannot afford to be stalled by the dogmatic approach of holy scriptures. In the modern understanding of morality old holy texts should be classified as amoral and irrelevant, not the source and only provider of ethical theory.

I'll supply a counter and answer since the religious side is woefully under-represented in this thread. One possible argument that is used to defend ethical interpretations of Christianity and the gestalt of the bible is to favor the early churches allegorical method of interpretation of the OT. This was a feature of the infallible church of the middle ages that made itself the ultimate arbiter of what were correct interpretations of biblical texts and what were allegorical and what was gods written revelation.

It was a nice counter to any acts or attitudes which might be seen as unChristian and still used today but was somewhat firmly dispelled by Luther who coined the term antinomianism, the belief that faith alone is necessary and you could hold strict allegorical views of Gods law and the holy scriptures.

So the New Convenant Theory (one amongst many but the most prominent I feel) was introduced and that whilst they hold that Gods law is sacred God just somewhat randomly to my mind changed his opinions and created a new covenant that must be adhered to in place of the other sacred covenants.

Allegory is by far the weaker of the two arguments since the New Testament holds 695 references to the OT and many passages strongly suggest that they are not allegorical (the bible is actually quite clear when it is being allegorical).

There is still a massive weakness here though, it rides on the assumption that Jesus came here and bought us forgiveness with his suffering, which to me sounds an awful lot like someone mitigating for us in the face of an evil bastard god who'd been playing a giant game of lets see how we can with people. Not exactly comforting or suggestive of divine love (for god so loved the world....) It is also chock full of historical inconsistency since there is little to back up this idea in the actual bible itself to my mind but it is the strongest candidate for doing away with the OT immorality and crazy laws that plainly can't possibly fit in with modern society (or even large parts of earlier society).

Disregarding the OT is a quandry. This has been quite rambly but then again it is 2.20 in the morning.

A perfect example of what is wrong with the bible and the selective way its adherents do their adhering is the book of Leviticus. Christians love the bits about killing gays in Leviticus but ignore every other thing in it, like how wearing mixed fabrics (like polyester) should be met with death by stoning. Some other fun examples of the bible’s excellent advice on being a swell guy include:

*One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the LORD's name. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother's name was Shelomith. She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. They put the man in custody until the LORD's will in the matter should become clear. Then the LORD said to Moses, "Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD's name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD's name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)

*Now, our God, what shall we say after this? For we have forsaken Your commandments, which You have commanded by Your servants the prophets, saying, "The land which you are entering to possess is an unclean land with the uncleanness of the peoples of the lands, with their abominations which have filled it from end to end and with their impurity. So now do not give your daughters to their sons nor take their daughters to your sons, and never seek their peace or their prosperity, that you may be strong and eat the good things of the land and leave it as an inheritance to your sons forever." (Ezra 9:10-12 NAS)

* But then the Jewish leaders came to me and said, "Many of the people of Israel, and even some of the priests and Levites, have not kept themselves separate from the other peoples living in the land. They have taken up the detestable practices of the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Ammonites, Moabites, Egyptians, and Amorites. For the men of Israel have married women from these people and have taken them as wives for their sons. So the holy race has become polluted by these mixed marriages. To make matters worse, the officials and leaders are some of the worst offenders." (Ezra 9:1-2 NLT)

*Do not clip your hair at the temples, nor trim the edges of your beard. (Leviticus 19:27 NAB)

*Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

*The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

*At the wrath of the Lord of hosts the land quakes, and the people are like fuel for fire; No man spares his brother, each devours the flesh of his neighbor. (Isaiah 9:18)

*(Moses) stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come over here and join me." And all the Levites came. He told them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: Strap on your swords! Go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other, killing even your brothers, friends, and neighbors." The Levites obeyed Moses, and about three thousand people died that day. Then Moses told the Levites, "Today you have been ordained for the service of the LORD, for you obeyed him even though it meant killing your own sons and brothers. Because of this, he will now give you a great blessing." (Exodus 32:26-29 NLT)

*Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

*You shall not delay the offering of your harvest and your press. You shall give me the first born of your sons. You must do the same for your oxen and your sheep. (Exodus 22:28-29 NAB)

*Give no woman power over you to trample upon your dignity. (Sirach 9:2 NAB)

*Every city and province, without exception, that does not observe this decree shall be ruthlessly destroyed with fire and sword, so that it will be left not merely untrodden by men, but even shunned by wild beasts and birds forever. (Esther 8:24 NAB)

*Why are your clothes so red, as if you have been treading out grapes? "I have trodden the winepress alone; no one was there to help me. In my anger I have trampled my enemies as if they were grapes. In my fury I have trampled my foes. It is their blood that has stained my clothes. For the time has come for me to avenge my people, to ransom them from their oppressors. I looked, but no one came to help my people. I was amazed and appalled at what I saw. So I executed vengeance alone; unaided, I passed down judgment. I crushed the nations in my anger and made them stagger and fall to the ground." (Isaiah 63:2-6 NLT)

*Who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, God's love endures forever (Psalm 136:10 NAB)

*The men of Israel withdrew through the territory of the Benjaminites, putting to the sword the inhabitants of the city, the livestock, and all they chanced upon. Moreover they destroyed by fire all the cities they came upon. (Judges 20:48 NAB)

[Pontifex Maximus]

From an ethical law standpoint they only follow 3.1% of the rules god gave them. Makes me wonder how angry god is that 97% of what he told them to do mostly go ignored in the modern day.

[Sphere]

Personally I think either you accept it for what it is, or ditch the whole thing (as I have done). Personally I am always amused by those who claim to believe in god and then are just so bad at following the 'rules', I know if I really believed, I'd sure as hell not be cheating on my final exam to the afterlife.

On the contrary, when people are told they are born poor sinners and destined to sin, but can have the responsibility for all their sins washed away by the grace of God (and a little human sacrifice), I am not suprised at all when they indulge in sin. At least back when the Catholic Church charged for "indulgences" the get out of jail free card came at some cost, like a bribe for a judge. Now they just open the cell door.

[MaximiIian]

Morality based on scripture is, to me, silly. Morality needs to be based on something rational; something that logically will benefit everyone. Not the subjective writings of a bunch of fundies. From my point of view, morality is the rational structure of treating others the way one wants to be treated, and not treating others the way they don't want to be treated. Or, put another way, attaining the happiness of oneself and others. I believe, very strongly, for that to be the highest moral good. It makes yourself happy, but not at the expense of others' happiness, and everyone treats each other like good people ought to.

[Pontifex Maximus]

There's a problem in that line of thinking because the people who buy into scripturally based ethics demand that others do as well. Its at the core of every evangelist christian sect and most of them are evangelical because there are elements of that in the bible. On this forum, recently, Orthodoxy is the worst. In my geographic location there are pentacostals and baptists. There's always this undercurrent of trying to recruit people, trying to get people to conform to your beliefs, either explicitly or implicitly.

[Bregil]

I don't have the time to get into a full-fledged rebuttal at the moment but as no one has covered this yet, this is the reason why most christians do not have a problem with pork and other food condemned by Old Testament law.

Acts 10
9 The next day, as they went on their journey and drew near the city, Peter went up on the housetop to pray, about the sixth hour. 10 Then he became very hungry and wanted to eat; but while they made ready, he fell into a trance 11 and saw heaven opened and an object like a great sheet bound at the four corners, descending to him and let down to the earth. 12 In it were all kinds of four-footed animals of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and birds of the air. 13 And a voice came to him, “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” 14 But Peter said, “Not so, Lord! For I have never eaten anything common or unclean.” 15 And a voice spoke to him again the second time, “What God has cleansed you must not call common.” 16 This was done three times. And the object was taken up into heaven again.

Now certainly, this vision showed Peter that salvation wasn't just for the Jews any more but also for the Gentiles but it has also been interpreted by many over the years as repealing the dietary restrictions.

[boofhead]

Pontifex you totally ignore the fact that 99% of Christians are not Jews, but gentiles, and that the customary laws of the OT (as opposed to the moral laws which are obviously universal) were directed only at Jews.

As a gentile and a Christian I do nothing wrong if I eat pork, or shellfish, or don't get circumcised.

[Blau&Gruen]

I would say wisdom can come from books, whether moral can come from, seems hard to know before you fail. I guess if you have the wisdom to understand what you read, you may have also a chance to do sometimes the right, yet without guarantee. Overstated moral optimism is a disease. That's probably why people lie despite the fact that they have read books.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Pontifex you totally ignore the fact that 99% of Christians are not Jews, but gentiles, and that the customary laws of the OT (as opposed to the moral laws which are obviously universal) were directed only at Jews.

As a gentile and a Christian I do nothing wrong if I eat pork, or shellfish, or don't get circumcised.

Then why were they included in the Christian scriptures if they were not important for Christians? Maybe just because 99% of christians don't consider them important doesn't mean god doesn't.

At best it just demonstrates christian hypocrisy/inconsistency.