Your Morality or mine?

Question

Defenders of the Bible, such as fundamentalists, never cease criticizing the evils and immoralities of modern society. And environment, a return to the "Bible" movement is hardly the answer. The Bible is definitely not the fountain from which truth, goodness and purity spring as its proponents would have us believe. Many Biblical verses are permeated with corruption, degeneracy and immorality. Awakening our children on Sunday morning to participate in Biblical readings could easily to that which is being opposed. Much of the Bible dwells on immorality, fasters profanity and honors corruption. If children were not diverted from various parts of scripture, they could easily be influenced by such negative language as the following:

Gen. 38:9 "...and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground."

Lev. 21:20 "... a man that is brokenfooted or...hath his stones broken."

2Sam. 16:21 "... and Absalom went in unto his father's concubines in the sight of all Israel." Ezek. 23:20 "..Yet she increased her harlotry, and doted upon her (RSV) paramours there, whose members were like those of asses, and whose issue was like that of horses. Thus you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when the Egyptians handled your bosom and pressed your young breasts." Song 5:4 "My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him." I don't think many people need to be told what "it," "stones," "went unto," "members," and "issue," and "by the hole of the door," are referring to.

One school of apologists alleges that some of these verses are to be understood figuratively, not literally. But what does it matter? The words are equally disgusting and should be kept away from impressionable people. Children, for example, are not going to make subtle distinctions as to intent and meaning. Other apologist contend:

"When it (the Bible-ed.) speaks of sin, it describes it in its ugliness, so that disgust and horror enter the heart of the reader. Not once, for a moment, does it leave the high moral level of stern opposition to unrighteousness in all its forms." Bible Difficulties, W. Arndt, p. 63

"Disgust and horror" are clearly produced but where is the "high moral level;" where is the opposition to profanity. The context of each verse shows they have nothing to do with moral teachings.

Why are Chrsitians supposedly moral?

Answer 1

Old testament.

Answer 2

The scriptures you take is from the old testament. Jesus came so we wouldn't have to be slaves to the law or old testament.

Your also being hypocritical. Your only taking scriptures that sound bad while some Christians only want you to see the good ones.

Most of my Arab friends say the United Arab Emirates is one of the most beautiful places on earth and that I have to go there. Well, Real Sports on HBO earlier this year showed that their government allows for child slavery so that these kids are used for camel racing which is there biggest sport by far; Millions of dollars go into this sport. They use 3-10 year olds to race their camels. Many are maimed, or even killed while others are abused, raped and not allowed to eat to keep them skinny.

This country has 2/3 of it's people being Islamic and the rest of the country is mostly Muslim. Does that mean that all people that are Islamic or Muslim are evil? No. It does mean that child slavery is wrong and that this is a black eye to them.

If you hate Christianity don't expect your beliefs to be changed on Yahoo answers. Your answers need to be answered within. Good luck.

Answer 3

Every scripture depicts the culture of the age. Some of these bitter truths may sound out of place. However it is essential to grasp the reality before we set course on the path of reform. Children need to be properly guided. Such passages occur in scriptures of other religions too and not only in Bible.

Answer 4

Why can't you people understand Christians are living and following The New Testament! How come I never see any verses out of the New Testament that you claim are immoral. Why do you only quote Old Testament verses?

Jesus and the Mosaic Law


Many Christians are perplexed when they confront the issue of the Mosaic Law. How binding is the Law on the Christian? Some have said that Jesus abolished the Law of Moses. I would have to disagree, based on the following passage spoken by Jesus Himself:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (Matthew 5:17)
Some have suggested that by "fulfil," Jesus meant "abolish." Indeed, "abolish" is one meaning of "fulfil," but it is also the only meaning of "destroy." So if He had meant "abolish," He might as well have said, "I am not come to abolish, but to abolish." We can assume, therefore, that Jesus meant, "to develop the full potentialities of" when He said "fulfil."

So why then do Christians not observe the Mosaic Law? The answer is that they do observe parts, but not all of it. Some parts of the Law were meant to be temporary, while others were intended to be permanent. This is seen in the fact that before Moses, the ancient Jews were not bound to the ritual commands (except circumcision). If the Mosaic Law was not meant to be temporary, then either God changes or the God of the righteous men and women before Moses was a different god. But this is absurd. We know that the God of Abraham was the God of Moses, and that He is our God today. The coming of Christ made parts of the Mosaic law unnecessary.


In order to understand this, we must realize that the Law is made up of three parts: ceremonial, civil, and moral.


The ceremonial law related specifically to Israel's worship. Since its primary purpose was to point to the coming Savior, Jesus made it unnecessary. He did not abolish it, in the sense of destroying it; He fulfilled it. Nowhere do we read that Jesus thought that the ceremonial law was wrong. The principles behind the ceremonial law are still applicable to us today, that is, the principles of worshipping and serving a holy God.


The civil law prescribed rules for the Israelites' daily living. These laws separated the Jews from the Gentiles, and gave the Gentiles the example of how a holy people should live. Since much was given to the Jews, much was expected. But God gave a new covenant in Christ, and there is now no distinction to be made between Jew and Gentile. We are still to follow the requirements of this law as God's people, but the punishments are not for any nation to impose on its people, because we are no longer separated by nations but by God's grace (Christians and non-Christians).


The moral law is basically the Ten Commandments. We are still bound by these laws, not for salvation, but to live a holy life. Jesus not only desired that His followers adhere to these commandments, He wished that they would go above and beyond them. He said, "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: but I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment..." He desired not only an outward observance of these laws, but an inward observance as well.


So we see that the parts of the Law that have been rendered obsolete are those that contain ordinances. An ordinance is either a memorial of something that has already passed or a type of something in the future. The Old Testament laws containing ordinances were not meant to be permanent. There are no ordinances in the Ten Commandment Law.


Now, we must remember that following rules and regulations will not get us into heaven. It is only through the blood of Jesus that we can see heaven. But if we love Him, we will keep His commandments.

Answer 5

Are you really that prissy and prudish? I can assure you that God is not, and I see no reason to hide these things from children (or others) just because somebody's refined and delicate sensibilities might be offended. Many of the passages you quoted were ones which were talking about incidents of sin that the people involved were committing, and disgust is a quite proper reaction to that.