If you don't think there are any moral absolutes, how can you be critical of passages of the Bible?

Question

First of all, I recognize the possiblity of there being a sense of absolute morals but for the purpose of this question I am assuming that doesn't exist.

At least once a day someone posts a question that highlight some passage of the bible which allows for behavior that by today's standards are viewed as morally wrong.

However, if there is no moral absolutes, how can you say that the Bible's morality is any more or less wrong than your sense of morality or the current cultural sense of morality of wherever you may live?

Tricia G28: what about self defense?

Monica: That is a good question but it is essentially the same one I asked. Do you have any ideas as to the answer?

mooseback333 the very first sentence in my additional comments addresses your point. I am not going to argue whether moral absolutes exist, that is not the topic of this question. But I think there is a legitimate argument to be made for either side.

Answer 1

I think this is part of the reason so many get upset when Christians quote parts of the Bible that they feel are Absolute, but ignore the rest, claiming they've been done away with while still trying to maintain that the Bible is Absolute in all of its morals. This shows that even Christians do not rely on the Moral Absolute reasoning they try to sell to others. Example: Why isn't it ok to own slaves when the Bible clearly shows that owning other humans is alright so long as you are treating those slaves with some respect. Many people today will tell you that owning slaves is morally wrong, but this does not hold up in the Bible, so it would be hard to use the Bible to show that slavery is morally wrong. (It also begs for the question to be asked - Are we more moral than God because we view slavery as immoral?) That's why people ignore the pick-n-choose verses that get thrown out in order to use as evidence to show a loving God, when the rest of the Bible shows that very same God doing things that He claims is morally wrong. If it were Absolute, even God would uphold those things. But even then, it tells you it is intent behind the actions, not that "thou shalt not kill" is Absolute, but to say that premeditated murder without justification is morally wrong. Too many though use the Bible as an Absolute moral guide only when it comes to those they deem as "outsiders". Never for themselves.

Answer 2

Very interesting question. And the second answer, "There are no moral absolutes" avoids it entirely. Saying that there are no moral absolutes IS a moral absolute! You simply cannot have it both ways. The real question is WHAT is an absolute for you and those who claim there are none always have at least one.

Answer 3

I agree with Monica. If there are moral absolutes, then the Bible should be living up to them. Either that, or those values should still be around.

How can I be critical of the Bible? Because it isn't self-sufficient (at least to it's followers). You either skip the pork and stone the kids who sass their parents, or you must throw the Bible's "abosulte morals" out the window. You choose.

Answer 4

If an action causes pain or harm to others it is morally wrong. Nothing changes that.

Obviously there are levels of right and wrong as there are levels of pain but if you are talking about absolutes, it's wrong if it inflicts pain.

Monica - that was VERY well said!

What morally questionable actions in the bible stem from self-defense? I think you'll find the bible is more interested in revenge.

Answer 5

I don't believe there are any Universal moral absolutes.
Morality is often based far more on the times, and the culture in which it exists.
Only rare individuals seek to discover what is moral for themselves, these individuals while perhaps better than there fellow man have shown little consistency, usually because they had access to different information on which to base their moral behavior.
As for the Bible, it's over 2,000 years old and the morality it expresses belongs to those times and that culture.

Answer 6

There are some moral absolutes, and other moral decisions that may involve cultural or regional considerations that can change.

Those who believe the bible to be the word of god are of necessity moral relativists, and they demonstrate it whenever questioned about OT law.

Answer 7

There are no moral absolutes.
Killing leaves someone dead and someone not dead. The reason for the killing may be consider justified or heinous depending on the context. The end result is the same.
Explain that in "absolutes".
Even if it were "justified" it likely caused some innocent person, say a family member of the deceased, pain and anguish. Does that make it right?
How about the question of "stealing" food to survive? Theft is wrong, right?
Let's just try not to hurt each other excessively and live and let live.

Answer 8

Turn that around.


If there are no moral absolutes *separate from the Bible*, then how do you know which passages are outdated? Why do you no longer stone children for disobeying their parents? Why do you no longer considering clothing made from two different kinds of cloth to be an abomination?



Edit: The answer is simply that there is a moral code separate from religion, used by both Christians and non-Christians. Without appealing to our evolved sense of morality, we *woudn't* be able to tell that the Bible is immoral in place, but we also wouldn't be able to tell if it *is* moral. After all, even if we grant that there are good rules in the Bible, why follow them if we have no moral sense?

Without our moral sense, there are no grounds to criticize the Bible, but there are no grounds to praise it, either.



Edit: joe_citizen_66, I think you are attacking a strawman morality. One can say that killing is in general wrong without saying it's wrong in *every* case. (Kant might disagree, but I don't think many people hold to the categorical imperative anymore.) Rather, we say that killing is usually wrong for other reasons, such as a utilitarian principle or something similar.

Answer 9

What you have done is set parameters to meet your own ends. There are moral absolutes. Murder is always morally wrong. Rape is always morally wrong. Racism is always morally wrong. There are moral absolutes so your question is pointless.

Answer 10

You bring up a very interesting point. I wonder how many will get it?