Is the bible a good moral compass?

[Zep]

Personally, I think not! Why? because reasons are not given for why something is wrong, and sometimes the bible doesn't address certain issues well enough. So, if you depended on the bible for all your morals, you would have gaps, and with gaps comes interpretations and conflict. I believe people come to the bible with their moral codes, rather that people coming to the bible for their moral codes. Thats why some Christians can't agree sometimes on whether or not the bible is more for pacifism or for war. They all dig up scripture that fits their personal interests and ignore any that contradicts it.

Is it wrong because the bible says its wrong, or does the bible say it is wrong because it is wrong. Personally, I would adopt the latter over the former. At least we can begin searching for answers with the help of reason, rather than following a statement blindly and depending on the bible as a crutch.

I also think the bible supports a potentially dangerous mentality. This mentality? a fideistic mentality! There is no way to reason with someone with this form of mentality.

 

[GwynApNudd]

Welcome to CF, Zep.

This is a very good, well thought out post. Unfortunately there are a couple of things in it that will draw down the "righteous anger" of few of the regular posters here. It is like waving a red flag in front of a bull.

I happen to believe most of the same things as about the inspiration and purpose of the Bible as they do, but in my case, it was a conscious decision after examining a lot of other philosophies, and so I can understand and sympathize with other viewpoints.

They have grown up drinking in the Bible as "God's Word" along with their mother's milk, and so they take any deviation from their inbred understanding as a personal insult. (I think what I'm trying to describe is what you call "a fideistic mentality, but I'm not entirely sure.) It's a pity. If they weren't so angry, so eager to fight and condemn, I'm sure that there would be things we could learn from them.

 

[Yggdrasil]

I don't think it is, but then again all religions create divides among people.

 

[BlueAfgani]

By itself, of course not. But with rational analyzing, the Bible can become a good source of what to do, and what not to do once the person is able to decide right from wrong on their own.

 

[Phred]

By itself, of course not. But with rational analyzing, the Bible can become a good source of what to do, and what not to do once the person is able to decide right from wrong on their own.

Once a person is able to decide right from wrong on their own they have no need of the Bible.

 

[Arnold_Philips]

As good as the person reading it.

 

[CSmrw]

Not any more. We have progressed far enough beyond it that we re-interpret it on a near constant basis. We create it's morals, not the other way round.

If you will excuse me I have to beat my slave not-quite to death.

 

[ebia]

Personally, I think not! Why? because reasons are not given for why something is wrong, and sometimes the bible doesn't address certain issues well enough. So, if you depended on the bible for all your morals, you would have gaps, and with gaps comes interpretations and conflict. I believe people come to the bible with their moral codes, rather that people coming to the bible for their moral codes. Thats why some Christians can't agree sometimes on whether or not the bible is more for pacifism or for war. They all dig up scripture that fits their personal interests and ignore any that contradicts it.

Is it wrong because the bible says its wrong, or does the bible say it is wrong because it is wrong. Personally, I would adopt the latter over the former. At least we can begin searching for answers with the help of reason, rather than following a statement blindly and depending on the bible as a crutch.

I also think the bible supports a potentially dangerous mentality. This mentality? a fideistic mentality! There is no way to reason with someone with this form of mentality.

If one treats it like a rulebook then you would be right, but that's not a reasonable nor intended way to treat it.

 

[Beanieboy]

The devil used it to tempt Jesus to turn a rock to bread (thus, breaking his fast), offered him the world to simply bow down to him, and told Jesus that if he jumped from a high height, that God would protect him, all using the bible.

I think that some christians (small c) listen to the devil, and use the bible to justify their anger and hatred. One christian once told me that God hates his enemies (while ironically, Paul says that we are to love our enemies in Romans), and therefore, she, too, could hate any nonChristian, for they are enemies of God. You are either for God or against him (according to scripture, she said.) I argue that one can claim to be chrisitan and be against God, as Satan was in quoting scripture.

What better way to lead people astray from within?

The bible is also full of a number of stories that make you go "hmmm." I love when people claim that S&G was burned to the ground because of homosexuality (not rape, but homosexuality, despite the many sins listed, but who has time to really read the bible when ignorance can support your beliefs?) I ask them what they think of Lot going into a cave and getting drunk on two nights and having sex with his daughters. (It never says that it is wrong or evil. Just reports it.) Most people don't read that far.

I've asked if they believe it is right to call out to God and have children mauled by bears because they were teasing you, or to slaughter worshippers of other religions, as Elijah did with worshippers of Baal?

Most of them had never learned these stories. They can read Harry Potter in a weekend, but have never read the bible cover to cover.

It is certainly full of some beautiful truths, but also, some questionable ones, and to suggest that some of the "truths" were manmade is like pushing the first domino.

Truth is much stronger than that.

So, the response?
"They will hear and not understand."
I ask them to help me understand, and they claim that they are unable.

Interesting - a bible written to help save mankind, but you won't understand it unless you are already saved.

Kind of a paradox, eh?

 

[Defcon]

Personally, I think not! Why? because reasons are not given for why something is wrong, and sometimes the bible doesn't address certain issues well enough.

So what moral standard are you using that states that ethics should be explained to be valid?

So, if you depended on the bible for all your morals, you would have gaps, and with gaps comes interpretations and conflict. I believe people come to the bible with their moral codes, rather that people coming to the bible for their moral codes. Thats why some Christians can't agree sometimes on whether or not the bible is more for pacifism or for war. They all dig up scripture that fits their personal interests and ignore any that contradicts it.

You contradict your point here. That some people bring their moral standard to the Bible and ignore contradictory Scripture is in itself a contradiction of Scripture. So Scripture still stands as the standard that all men are commanded to submit to.

Is it wrong because the bible says its wrong, or does the bible say it is wrong because it is wrong. Personally, I would adopt the latter over the former. At least we can begin searching for answers with the help of reason, rather than following a statement blindly and depending on the bible as a crutch.

Wait a second, how have you determined that 'reason' is the standard to submit to?

I also think the bible supports a potentially dangerous mentality. This mentality? a fideistic mentality! There is no way to reason with someone with this form of mentality.

First, I don't think fideism is the mentality of God's Word, as if God somehow operates in contradiction to Himself. (1 Cor. 14:33) Second, again you make an appeal to reason - what standard are invoking that enlists men to bow down to reason? You are presupposing its authority, my question is 'why'?

 

[Isambard]

Personally, I think not! Why? because reasons are not given for why something is wrong, and sometimes the bible doesn't address certain issues well enough. So, if you depended on the bible for all your morals, you would have gaps, and with gaps comes interpretations and conflict. I believe people come to the bible with their moral codes, rather that people coming to the bible for their moral codes. Thats why some Christians can't agree sometimes on whether or not the bible is more for pacifism or for war. They all dig up scripture that fits their personal interests and ignore any that contradicts it.

Is it wrong because the bible says its wrong, or does the bible say it is wrong because it is wrong. Personally, I would adopt the latter over the former. At least we can begin searching for answers with the help of reason, rather than following a statement blindly and depending on the bible as a crutch.

I also think the bible supports a potentially dangerous mentality. This mentality? a fideistic mentality! There is no way to reason with someone with this form of mentality.

As good as any other moral standard, unless of course you've discovered some magical perfect ethical model...

 

[elcapitan]

As good as the person reading it.

I agree.
Sure, there's a lot of good teachings in the bible, but if you assume that every part is infallible then you logically have to support slavery and the execution of disobedient children, adulterers, those who work on the sabbath, and others.

 

[MarcusHill]

We each have out own "moral compass", some of which is built in as an instinct for survival as a social animal, and some instilled by the cultural norms we absorb from an early age. Various scriptures and philosophical texts can act as catalysts for the development of our compasses - but, in deciding how to interpret these words, it's out own compasses that are brought to bear.

 

[uberd00b]

Good grief no!

We've advanced a lot in the past 2000 years. Ok, some of us have.

 

[TheManeki]

Just remember that a compass is only of limited use by itself.

They work much better with maps. And even a compass and map won't tell you everything, like when to cross a busy street.