100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Is the Bible a reliable moral guide? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
As we prepare for Thanksgiving - the secular version of a religiously inspired offering of humility, kindness to our fellow human beings, and gratefulness to God for the world and our sustenance in all ways... I would like to say that I enjoyed the following part of the article: =-=-=-=-= David Lose Author, 'Making Sense of Scripture' Is the Bible a Reliable Moral Guide? Thanks for reading the article. 
I'm actually sorry now that I posted this at all. This has now just become another argument going nowhere. This was supposed to be a discussion about the article, but as often happens, people are only responding the title. 
I wouldn't say the arguments were going nowhere. Believe me. I have had lots of arguments. I really can't remember winning any. Since I have been on the forums I have tried to figure out the differences of arguments and discussions. Like there must be something different in arguing with someone and discussing with someone. The closest thing I have came up with was pros and cons. In writing we learned it contrast and comparison. At my meetings we call it a moral inventory. What made me sad was the begat section because I am a real tree lover. They would tear down the groves then build them back up.   Why take it out on the poor defenseless trees? Trees just stand there giving people shade; A home for animals and a great place to carve your initials. They don't even mind if you throw a rope on one of their limbs so one of your kids can have a swing. Trees even have fruit on them. Every once in a while I will even go outside and tell one, "I love you, tree."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What would be the point in reading an article that is addressing a question that has already been answered? I could go read the article, but I'm quite sure that the article cannot change the things in the Bible that I consider to be immoral. So what would be the point to it? Unless the article has already concluded that the Bible is not a reliable source of morality. In that case, I agree with that conclusion. So you don't read articles that might offer a different viewpoint than yours. Why does that not surprise me? Anyway, the article does conclude that Bible is not only NOT a reliable moral guide, but that it was never intended to BE a moral guide. You just assumed the article stated otherwise because I posted it. You think you have us all pegged and you put people into categories so you don't have to actually listen to what anyone is saying. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
jrbogie
on
Wed 11/23/11 09:30 AM
|
|
ruth, does any human on the planet read every article that has a different viewpoint from their own? we all have limited time at this rodeo and i don't see it as unreasonable to spend time searching for answers where we think the there's a likelihood that we'll find them. for instance, if a person has read the bible, as i and many have, and concluded that the answers regarding the beginnings of the universe cannot be found there based on what i've learned from theoretical physics and other science disciplines then i'm not about to waste what i consider to be my valuable time reading yet another viewpoint on creation. and i'm sure many faithful are not wraped up in the latest information coming from wmap and the hedron collider as am i. why? simply because they don't see science providing correct answers if they conflict with genesis. perhaps you've read every viewpoint differing from your own of every scietinst or any other religion for that matter. if so, then you are to be commended for what i'd call a superhuman deed. but if not, your lack of doing so is no more or less humanly acceptable as abra's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ruth, does any human on the planet read every article that has a different viewpoint from their own? we all have limited time at this rodeo and i don't see it as unreasonable to spend time searching for answers where we think the there's a likelihood to find them. for instance, if a person has read the bible, as i and many have, and concluded that the answers regarding the beginnings of the universe cannot be found there based on what i've learned from theoretical physics and other science disciplines then i'm not about to waste what i consider to be my valuable time reading another viewpoint on creation as i'm sure many faithful are not wraped up in the latest information coming from wmap and the hedron collider as am i. You missed my point entirely. I posted an article to discuss. Of course no one reads every single article. However if your going to participate in a conversation about an article you should probably read it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is the Bible a reliable moral guide? For me, the key term in that question is indeed the word "reliable". As some others have suggested, if the Old Testament is included (which is must necessarily be), then my answer would be no, it is not a reliable moral guild. I personally feel that the very notion of a God who solved his problems using via punishing people with suffering and sorrow (such as in the case of cursing women with sorrowful childbirth for having disobeyed him), is an extremely poor moral message. For me that teaches us that violence and punishment are divine solutions to problems. I also feel that placing women (as part of Eve's punishment) to be ruled over by their husbands, is also a poor moral standard, IMHO. I could continue with other objections. But I think I've made sufficient points thus far concerning the God of the Old Testament. ~~~~ Concerning the specific teachings of Jesus, I don't see anything immoral there, but the teachings of Jesus most certainly do not equate to the teachings of the entire Bible, so that's moot point. ~~~~ Finally, I'd like to rephrase the question of the thread slightly differently just to make a point. Is the Bible a reliable moral guide more so than other religious or spiritual texts? As soon as the question is phrased this way my answer would be that there are many other religious and spiritual texts that I personally feel are more reliable in terms of teaching high moral values. Some of the texts associated with various Eastern mystical religions such as Buddhism, and Taoism come to mind. I would even venture to say that something like the Wicca Rede is a more reliable source of moral values. It may be brief, but the point is to not harm others, including the environment. Well, if that simple ideal was followed that would already represent the highest moral values possible IMHO. So what would be the point in having a God model and condone violent punishments for disobedience, and endorsing inequality in marriage, if the only true morality that is required is to simply love another and not harm each other or our planet? ~~~~ The best morals possible are quite simple, and simply do not require a large historical cannon of stories to convey. That's my view on that. Ah yes, reliability... From the colored words above, I can reliably state that your reliability concerning the Bible's reliabilty is severely unreliable. Care to show me where it says that Eve was "punished" for "disobedience"? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh i understand your point well, ruth. but anybody can answer YOUR original question, "Is the Bible a reliable moral guide?" without reading yet another article. and from the huffington post no less. we all assign credibility individually. i don't come by my thinking based on anything that anybody else on tha planet thinks no matter how much i might admire a person. but still, i can factually state that it is my opinion that that the bible is not a reliable moral guide and base that opinion on more than six dacades of MY learning experiences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This diagram is total bogus. In the first selection, it has - wives subordinate to their husbands - Interfaith marriages forbidden - marriages generally arranged, not based on romantic love - bride who could not prove her virginity was stoned to death And has verse Genesis 2:24 as the reference. Genesis 2:24 24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. This verse supports absolutely nothing said. On the 3rd one of Genesis 16, it says - man could acquire his wife's property including her slaves. When two are married they become one with one another. What is the man's is the woman's and what is the woman's is the man's. When a married couple buys a house. Who's house is that? The woman's? The man's? Neither, it is both their house. Same with all things under ownership. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
oh i understand your point well, ruth. but anybody can answer YOUR original question, "Is the Bible a reliable moral guide?" without reading yet another article. and from the huffington post no less. we all assign credibility individually. i don't come by my thinking based on anything that anybody else on tha planet thinks no matter how much i might admire a person. but still, i can factually state that it is my opinion that that the bible is not a reliable moral guide and base that opinion on more than six dacades of MY learning experiences. It wasnt my question, it was the title of the article I found interesting. No one is obligated to read it. It just seems pointless to discuss it without reading it. But you guys go right ahead and do whatever you want. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This diagram is total bogus. In the first selection, it has - wives subordinate to their husbands - Interfaith marriages forbidden - marriages generally arranged, not based on romantic love - bride who could not prove her virginity was stoned to death And has verse Genesis 2:24 as the reference. Genesis 2:24 24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. This verse supports absolutely nothing said. On the 3rd one of Genesis 16, it says - man could acquire his wife's property including her slaves. When two are married they become one with one another. What is the man's is the woman's and what is the woman's is the man's. When a married couple buys a house. Who's house is that? The woman's? The man's? Neither, it is both their house. Same with all things under ownership. In response to the square in the top right about marrying the brother in-law. This is specifically said to a specific person to do. This is not a "law" or a "command" for the general group of people. Merely told Er to do this. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liable and Reliable. Now there is two unlikely words. Especially if you put 'un' in front to them. Unliable and Unreliable. Imagine you are an alien wondering if there is any intelligent life on this planet. And the first book you stumble across is Bible. It is an alien artifact so, of course, you have your best science team go over it. That is after the quarantine period over. After all it might be infected with some kind of germ warfare or have some kind of triggering device that could be timed delayed or remote controlled for a bomb like weapon. After a safe time period or a reasonable facsimile thereof you have your best language decoders try to decipher it. And they come to the part where there was this flood and this little boat. Next, they read of this little dove who is supposed to be the symbol of peace with this olive branch in its mouth. I would be one scared alien.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liable and Reliable. Now there is two unlikely words. Especially if you put 'un' in front to them. Unliable and Unreliable. Imagine you are an alien wondering if there is any intelligent life on this planet. And the first book you stumble across is Bible. It is an alien artifact so, of course, you have your best science team go over it. That is after the quarantine period over. After all it might be infected with some kind of germ warfare or have some kind of triggering device that could be timed delayed or remote controlled for a bomb like weapon. After a safe time period or a reasonable facsimile thereof you have your best language decoders try to decipher it. And they come to the part where there was this flood and this little boat. Next, they read of this little dove who is supposed to be the symbol of peace with this olive branch in its mouth. I would be one scared alien. I would be one confused alien, wondering what happened between the writing of that book and the invention of nuclear weapons, semi automatic weapons, and paper used as money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure it has been for may, but for me? No. I've not needed the bible to tell me how to live my life or handle tough situations. I've also not needed the bible to teach me how to treat people. If it has helped others, great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/morality.html
...................The purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live................... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The most reliable moral guide is intelligence.........
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The most reliable moral guide is intelligence......... The ability to think and act! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The most reliable moral guide is intelligence......... The ability to think and act!
Not exactly. What one person "THINKS" to be good, may not be what another person "THINKS" to be good. What one "KNOWS" is moral, another may "KNOW" differently. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a book that that allows the reader to their own interpretation is not such a good thing when held within the hands of idiots.. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a book that that allows the reader to their own interpretation is not such a good thing when held within the hands of idiots..
It is their choice to interpret things that way, they have to live with the consequences. Giving us something that we interpret ourselves makes it more of a relationship rather then a drill sargent giving orders. Puts it on deeper thought when one has to decipher what it means. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
as christian one is called to take heed of the teachings of jesus in the new testament
he came to banish many of the old ways the whole marriage chart is silly & distracting in a serious discussion - fact is jesus taught a new and different way in the new testament and that is what one must abide by to be called a christian also much of the old testament is historic & people's habits are a reflection of the times more so than religious teaching & God was often angry with the people for immoral behavior ( a precondition for the arrival of john & jesus) but when a practice conflicts between the old & the new - a christian must follow the teachings of jesus - the new I don;t think I have even opened an old testament in 25 yrs and really do not take it all that seriously |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
as christian one is called to take heed of the teachings of jesus in the new testament he came to banish many of the old ways the whole marriage chart is silly & distracting in a serious discussion - fact is jesus taught a new and different way in the new testament and that is what one must abide by to be called a christian also much of the old testament is historic & people's habits are a reflection of the times more so than religious teaching & God was often angry with the people for immoral behavior ( a precondition for the arrival of john & jesus) but when a practice conflicts between the old & the new - a christian must follow the teachings of jesus - the new I don;t think I have even opened an old testament in 25 yrs and really do not take it all that seriously The old testament "now" is more or less history. In the day those scriptures were written, those were their "new testament" so to speak. Those were their laws, their way to Heaven in that covenant. Jesus completed/fulfilled that covenant and has given us a new, which is what we are to follow to get into Heaven. |
|
|
|
|
