Modern Christianity, the bible and God's laws

Are some of the commandments in the bible no longer applicable these days?

How do you tell which ones no longer apply and which ones are still important?

 

Doesn't the bible have God's law?

 

Is that something Jesus said?

 

Yes, of course.

For example, the bible says death is the appropriate punishment for cursing a parent (Exodus 21:15,17), for disobeying a parent (Deuteronomy 21:18-21), for witchcraft (Exodus 22:18, Leviticus 20:27, Deuteronomy 13:5, Samuel 28:9), for doing work on the Sabbath (Exodus 31:14, 35:2, Numbers 15:32-36), for homosexual acts (Leviticus 20:13), for blasphemy (Leviticus 24:14,15,23), for false prophecy (Deuteronomy 18:20), for refusing to obey a judge or a priest (Deuteronomy 17:12), for falsely claiming a woman is a virgin at the time of marriage (Deuteronomy 22:13-21), for sex between a woman pledged to be married and a man other than her betrothed (Deuteronomy 22:23-24).

There are also numerous instances recorded in the bible of God personally carrying out the death sentence for various innocuous "crimes". I can go on, if you need me to.

 

Here are some examples of God's personal killings, from the bible:

• God punished the Israelites for complaining about food and water during their wilderness journey. He sent fiery serpents to bite them, causing death. Later, He provided quail until it came out of their noses, resulting in more deaths. (Numbers 21:4-6
• When 250 men rebelled against Moses and Aaron, God caused the ground to open up and swallow them. Their crime? Offering incense without authorization. (Numbers 16:35)
• Samson, empowered by God, killed thirty men for their clothes, slaughtered a thousand with the jawbone of an ass, and carried out a suicide terrorist attack that killed three thousand civilians.
• Uzzah died instantly for trying to prevent the Ark of the Covenant from falling. Fifty thousand and seventy people were also killed for merely looking into the ark. (2 Samuel 6:6-7)
• God rejected King Saul for not completely annihilating the Amalekites as commanded, leading to his eventual death. (1 Samuel 15:3, 15:8-9)
• God punished King David for committing adultery with Bathsheba by allowing their child to die slowly. (2 Samuel 12:14-18)

 

Some might. Many do not. Many choose to disobey (often by simply ignoring) the "rules" in the bible that don't sit well with modern morality.

If Christians are cherry picking the parts of the bible they approve or and ignoring the parts they disapprove of, what can really be said about the bible being the authoritative word of God? Did God get some things wrong in the past? If so, why? Does the bible need an update? How do Christians decide which parts of the bible they can ignore and which parts are the core, important stuff that must be taken as Gospel? Is this choose your own religion?

 

Which Christians cherry pick from the bible? Practically all of them.

You're a Christian, right? That's what you're doing, right here.

The bible is still more or less the same 2000 year old book written by people that it always was. It is full of faulty morality and bad moral examples - often involving the deity himself.

You are correct that many modern Christians conduct themselves more morally that they would if they followed the bible's teachings to the letter. Western Christians, in particular, have been strongly influenced by the Enlightenment and its resulting secular morality.

Don't get me wrong. I applaud the Christians who are more moral in their own lives than the God in their Holy Book ever was. But no credit goes to the religion for that.

 

davewhite04:

It's not the end of the story, though. Many of your fellow Christians are intent on getting their interpretations of biblical morality enacted into enforceable laws of the land, for example. In some cases, they have succeeded, to the general detriment of human wellbeing.

Atheism does not come with any morality attached. Atheism is only about not being convinced that any God exists; that's all.

My personal morality is most closely aligned with secular humanist values which are demonstrably more moral than most of biblical morality, in that they value human wellbeing above devotion to an arbitrary set of supposed commands from an invisible man in the sky.

Let's assume that your God is real. Your argument is that God's morality is good because God can do whatever the hell he wants? Might makes right? That's a lousy basis for morality, if you ask me.

Isn't it you who is arguing for the applicability of the 2000 year old book, not me?

Sure, you think you can pick and choose the parts you like from that book, but you still want to claim moral authority based on what the book says. You just want to ignore all the bad bits.

I appreciate that there is a huge variety of different Christians. Christians differ wildly in their morality, across different denominations and across individual members of those denominations.

I can tell you for sure that there are large groups of Christians whose behaviour is not okay by me, davewhite. If you read the news, you'll see a lot of appalling behaviour from self-proclaimed Christians and the organisations they run. Of course, there are also examples of praiseworthy moral behaviour on the part of many Christians.

Am I okay with child abuse in the Catholic Church - carried out exclusively by self-declared Christians? No, I'm not okay with that. How about you, davewhite? Am I okay with Christian sects that oppress and control their members in harmful ways? No, I'm not okay with that. How about you, davewhite? Am I okay with Christians making laws to ban access to abortion, even in cases of rape or incest? No, I'm not okay with that. How about you, davewhite?

What are you talking about? Be specific if you're going to accuse me of something.

You don't know me very well, do you?

That would require a very lengthy explanation, because as far as I can tell you haven't really given much consideration to the question of where people, in general, get their morals from. It seems like you believe - wrongly - that you get yours from a book.

I'll give you a very brief overview of where my morals come from. I value human wellbeing and human flourishing - not exclusively, mind you. Because I value those things, I feel like I have a duty, first and foremost, not to impede or hinder or harm human wellbeing or flourishing through my own actions. I agree with the maxim "Do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you."

I also recognise that I live in an interconnected society that I share with 8 billion other human beings. In a general sense, I support the idea of the "greatest good for the greatest number", but the moral calculus that I apply in practice is not just a matter of counting heads.

I am partial to certain ideas about virtues and living a good life. Those incorporate a lot of ideas about how one should act with respect to other people, as well. One should be honest. One should not set out to gain personally from another's misery. One should lend a hand to others who are in need. And so on.

My morals do not come out of a fear that I will be punished if I'm not a good boy. I don't have the threat of a Hell hanging over my head.

I hope that helps you to some extent to begin to understand.