Prophets or sinners?

[Godistruth1]

Two positions 'may' be argued in defense of claimed 'objective morals' (A or B):


A) Murder is wrong because these moral's are built into humans from God - (we already know right from wrong, because we were built in god's image). This proposition does not claim humans will not murder, but that humans inherently know it's 'wrong' to murder.


(OR)


B) Murder is wrong because god says so, as ordered from the Bible.


Position A):


If murder is wrong because most agree, then there is no need for a god to instruct as such; because the knowledge is already built within us to distinguish an absolute 'right/wrong' position. But then the theist will respond stating that god still does need to instruct such a command in the Bible, to present an absolute standard, or 'objective morality'. Humans that don't agree, are then instructed that murder actually is objectively wrong.


But.....


If something like slavery is wrong, because most agree, then there is no need for a god to instruct as such; because the knowledge is already built within us to distinguish an absolute 'right/wrong' position. But then the theist will respond stating that god still does need to instruct such a command in the Bible, to present an absolute standard or 'objective morality'. Humans that don't agree, are then instructed that slavery actually is objectively wrong.


But wait....


This logic is flawed. God instructs that murder is wrong, via the sixth commandment. However, no such instruction exists for slavery. A matter of fact, many verses allow slavery, instruct how to use slavery, and also instruct how one may or may not beat human property. But nowhere does the Bible state not to own another human as property and not to beat human property.


By using the above logic...


Murder is immoral because most agree, and the Bible re-affirms the same position, making murder objectively immoral. Even though God commanded killing, which is another topic I will not discuss; as it is not necessary.


Slavery is immoral because most agree, and yet the Bible does not re-affirm the same position? (making slavery objectively moral or immoral)? If opinions mostly agree slavery is immoral, because we were built in god's image and possess god's knowledge to absolute moral values, but the Bible allows slavery and never rebukes it, this is not rational. Is slavery moral or immoral?


In conclusion, to use position A) as a basis for objective morals is illogical.


So what about position B)?:


If claimed 'objective morals' are 'absolute', because god says so, then the word 'morality' is now irrelevant. When arguing this position, it does not matter what the human thinks or feels, and simply uses the Bible to instruct 'right/wrong'. The claimed human compass carries no weight, as the human is merely following commands.


God commands not to murder. God commands how to enslave and how to beat slaves.


In conclusion, using position B), murder is wrong, because god says so, and slavery is acceptable, because god says so. Our personal justifications, positions, and arguments don't matter. Therefore, pure divine command would be the only answer and our personal thoughts or opinions have no use. If this is the case, if we don't have the Bible memorized, and we are presented with a moral dilemma, and we only have our brains to distinguish a conclusion, how might one proceed?


Either position is flawed in logic and reason.

Murder is not wrong when a criminal who has done severe crime like rape or murder any other innocent person. Although bible does teach murder of innocent children, women & livestock I would just question the authenticity of bible. Not every religion preaches same and all religions contradict the other. So either one is from God or none. Using basic moral logic we can figure out what's fake & what's real.

 

[HypnoToad]

Are the prophets of God sinners and if they were prophets how come in bible they commit immoral crimes?
Shouldn't they be righteous men of example?

No. Being a prophet does not preclude being a sinner. The Bible is clear that no man other than Jesus was ever sinless.

As for your examples, Noah wasn't a prophet, Lot was not a prophet, Onan was not a prophet, Solomon was not a prophet.

If they are not good example, why would people listen to them & follow them?

One doesn't have to be sinless in order to be a good overall example. As far as "following" them, the Bible never points out one of those people and says, "do everything they did." At best, it will point to one single attribute and suggest that we emulate that attribute, not copy everything they ever did.

Its ironic how holy men of God do such crimes according to bible. They are supposed to be an example since God chose them but it does not fit in mind how people who communicate directly with God with no doubt would do such things. That's makes me question the reliability of Bible.

God HAD to use sinful men because all men were sinful. It's not like there were a bunch of sinless people sitting around that God ignored.

Murder is not wrong when a criminal who has done severe crime like rape or murder any other innocent person.

Executing a murderer is not "a murder that is ok to commit", it's that it is NOT "murder" in the first place. "Murder" is by definition unjustified killing. If there is a justification, then it is not "murder".

Although bible does teach murder of innocent children, women & livestock

No, the Bible NEVER condones the murder of any innocent person. In the history of the world, only one innocent person ever died, and He volunteered for it.

 

[Ken-1122]

Are the prophets of God sinners and if they were prophets how come in bible they commit immoral crimes?

Shouldn't they be righteous men of example?

History is written by those who win the war. Had Moses lost the war, history would vilified him as equal to Hitler by those who defeated him.
Had Hitler won the war, history would have been written in a way that he be praised and honored like the Prophets.

 

[cvanwey]

Murder is not wrong when a criminal who has done severe crime like rape or murder any other innocent person. Although bible does teach murder of innocent children, women & livestock I would just question the authenticity of bible. Not every religion preaches same and all religions contradict the other. So either one is from God or none. Using basic moral logic we can figure out what's fake & what's real.

When you state 'basic moral logic', who's 'basic moral logic' are you referring to?

Maybe unfortunately, unless one can demonstrate 'proof' that an 'above human objective standard' exists (for starters), it is simply one opinion versus another opinion, with no absolute standard of 'basic moral logic'.

 

[Godistruth1]

When you state 'basic moral logic', who's 'basic moral logic' are you referring to?

Maybe unfortunately, unless one can demonstrate 'proof' that an 'above human objective standard' exists (for starters), it is simply one opinion versus another opinion, with no absolute standard of 'basic moral logic'.

My view is that only God can decide what's moral and what's immoral. We as humans can never come to an understanding on morality. Now I don't believe in Bible because I believe its been changed looking at the murder of children and innocent women and donkeys. I believe in Quran being the word of God

 

[cvanwey]

My view is that only God can decide what's moral and what's immoral. We as humans can never come to an understanding on morality. Now I don't believe in Bible because I believe its been changed looking at the murder of children and innocent women and donkeys. I believe in Quran being the word of God

If you openly admit humans are incapable of objective morality, then by what standard where you then able to conclude the Qur'an possesses objective morality?

 

[Godistruth1]

If you openly admit humans are incapable of objective morality, then by what standard where you then able to conclude the Qur'an possesses objective morality?

Because God knows what's right & wrong for humans and because he created us! Quran is the direct word of God & not in any way word of man.

 

[cvanwey]

Because God knows what's right & wrong for humans and because he created us! Quran is the direct word of God & not in any way word of man.

How do you know this?

 

[Godistruth1]

How do you know this?

I know because I know Quran cannot be from other than God. There are many reasons and since we are discussing morality, I'll speak in that context.
Quran teaches us to altogether keep away from alcohol, interest, gambling, sexual immorality all of which are the greatest reasons for problems in the world as a society. Only God knows what's best for society and if we keep away from above life would be lot better

 

[Barney2.0]

I know because I know Quran cannot be from other than God. There are many reasons and since we are discussing morality, I'll speak in that context.
Quran teaches us to altogether keep away from alcohol, interest, gambling, sexual immorality all of which are the greatest reasons for problems in the world as a society. Only God knows what's best for society and if we keep away from above life would be lot better

Quran didn’t teach alcohol was forbidden in the beginning, most of the “moral” teachings and commandments in the Quran weren’t revealed in a single go, but rather in periods of years. Also the prophets weren’t perfect they were sinners and lived according to their times, to reffer to Biblical prophets as sinners, but leave out the immoral actions of Mohammed in his life where he violated the Quran itself is quite hypocritical.

 

[Barney2.0]

The Bible states that after the flood, Noah became a farmer, (Gen. 9:20-23). He planted a field of grapes. Noah made wine and drank it. He became drunk and lay naked in his tent. Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his naked father. He told his brothers outside the tent. Then Shem and Japheth got a coat. They walked backwards into the tent, so they did not see their father naked. The wine made Noah sleep. But when he woke, he learned what Ham had done. He cursed Ham, and prayed that he be the slave of his brothers.
The book of Numbers narrates story about Moses. He asked his army to get even with the Midianites. The Israeli army killed all the Midianite men and burned all their towns and villages. They took the women, children, and animals and brought them to Moses. Moses was very angry with the leaders of the army. Moses said to them "Why did you let the women live." "Now kill all the Midianite boys and women and spare the women who had not sexual relations with any man" Numbers 31:15-17. The women who were spared were 32,000! Now imagine how many men, women and boys were killed by the command of Moses.

Genesis 19:30-36 tells us Lot took his two daughters to live in a cave in the mountain. The daughters conspired to use their father to grow a family by getting him drunk and then having sex with their father each in one night. They did that, and they became pregnant. The older daughter gave birth to a son called Moab, and the younger daughter gave birth to a son called Ben-Ammi

In Jacob’s family Judah was one of his sons. Genesis 38 tells his story. This patriarch of the Judaism got married and God granted him three sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah. When the first-born was old enough, Judah had him married to a lady called Tamar. "But Er, Judah’s first born was wicked in the sight of the Lord; and the Lord slew him." Gen. 38:7. Following the Jewish tradition, if a brother died and left no offspring, it was the duty of the other brother to give "seed" to his sister in law, so that the deceased’s name might be perpetuated. Judah, in honor with this custom, ordered his second son Onan to do this duty. But jealousy entered his heart. It would be his seed, but the name would be his brother’s. "He spilled it (sperms) on the ground...and the thing he did displeased the Lord: wherefore He slew him also." Gen. 38:9-10

According to the Bible, (I Kings 11:3-10), Solomon had 700 wives. He also had 300 slave women that were like wives to him. When Solomon was old, his wives forced him to follow theirs gods. Solomon worshipped Ashtoreth, the Cananite goddess of love and war. And Solomon also worshipped Milcom, the god of the Ammonite people. Solomon built a place on a hill next to Jerusalem for worshipping Chemosh, the idol of the Moabite people. Solomon also built a temple for Molech, the idol of the Ammonite people. Solomon did the same thing for all of his wives from other countries. The Lord came to Solomon and told him that he must not follow other gods. But Solomon did not follow the Lord’s command.

There was no command against incest during Lots time it was considered marriage between close relatives. Old Testament prophets could have multiple wives also multiple wives and concubines were common back then, didn’t Mohammed have 11 wives one of whom was a child, not to mention his numerous concubines. Also you do know the Bible reports stories without actually supporting them if God himself was actually commanding or condoning the immoral actions of the prophet then you can say whatever you want however this isn’t the case.

 

[cvanwey]

I know because I know Quran cannot be from other than God. There are many reasons and since we are discussing morality, I'll speak in that context.
Quran teaches us to altogether keep away from alcohol, interest, gambling, sexual immorality all of which are the greatest reasons for problems in the world as a society. Only God knows what's best for society and if we keep away from above life would be lot better

Then this, again, only circles me right back to one of my prior questions:

'If you openly admit humans are incapable of objective morality, then by what standard where you then able to conclude the Qur'an possesses objective morality?'

You are stating you 'know' what God morally wants for us. You see how this becomes viciously circular, when you already admitted humans do not possess the capacity to make an objective moral standard?

 

[cvanwey]

There was no command against incest during Lots time it was considered marriage between close relatives. Old Testament prophets could have multiple wives also multiple wives and concubines were common back then, didn’t Mohammed have 11 wives one of whom was a child, not to mention his numerous concubines. Also you do know the Bible reports stories without actually supporting them if God himself was actually commanding or condoning the immoral actions of the prophet then you can say whatever you want however this isn’t the case.

Though it might be very interesting to see such an exchange... This might be getting severely off the OP topic...? If this category was to 'debate' between Islam and Christianity, then yes....

I do not want this thread to get blacklisted, as the OP topic may be very productive for all whom are interested.

Just my opinion

 

[Barney2.0]

Though it might be very interesting to see such an exchange... This might be getting severely off the OP topic...? If this category was to 'debate' between Islam and Christianity, then yes....

I do not want this thread to get blacklisted, as the OP topic may be very productive for all whom are interested.

Just my opinion

I was just showing it’s an invalid question if you believe your prophet did such deeds aswell.

 

[Godistruth1]

Then this, again, only circles me right back to one of my prior questions:

'If you openly admit humans are incapable of objective morality, then by what standard where you then able to conclude the Qur'an possesses objective morality?'

You are stating you 'know' what God morally wants for us. You see how this becomes viciously circular, when you already admitted humans do not possess the capacity to make an objective moral standard?

We can analyse the moral objectives and see if they practically make the life better or no. That would mean checking what we have been forbidden from, does it really make life better and also checking if what's encouraged does that also make life better! And if we leave the things I mentioned above life will be better. If you think one of them is not really bad, im happy to debate it

 

[cvanwey]

We can analyse the moral objectives and see if they practically make the life better or no. That would mean checking what we have been forbidden from, does it really make life better and also checking if what's encouraged does that also make life better! And if we leave the things I mentioned above life will be better. If you think one of them is not really bad, im happy to debate it

My point is, you are making an objective statement, after admitting you are a flawed human, whom states only God knows what is right/wrong.

The debate on objective moral values and duties becomes a futile and dubious process, when an 'objective moral standard' has not been 'objectively' established. (i.e.) You are a Muslim that states the Muslim conclusion is 'right' because it aligns with your own 'moral standards.'

 

[Godistruth1]

My point is, you are making an objective statement, after admitting you are a flawed human, whom states only God knows what is right/wrong.

The debate on objective moral values and duties becomes a futile and dubious process, when an 'objective moral standard' has not been 'objectively' established. (i.e.) You are a Muslim that states the Muslim conclusion is 'right' because it aligns with your own 'moral standards.'

You are not understanding my point maybe. I said the moral standards in Quran prove that they are right because we can understand doing good will reap good and doing wrong will reap wrong or something bad. So because God makes the claim that alcohol is wrong we can debate if it actually is good bad or OK. So we are not just claiming something is good or bad because it claims to be and that's it. I'm saying we can analyse if it really makes sense to avoid alcohol, gambling etc. We can look at its effect and that's not something unknown to us!

 

[cvanwey]

You are not understanding my point maybe. I said the moral standards in Quran prove that they are right because we can understand doing good will reap good and doing wrong will reap wrong or something bad. So because God makes the claim that alcohol is wrong we can debate if it actually is good bad or OK. So we are not just claiming something is good or bad because it claims to be and that's it. I'm saying we can analyse if it really makes sense to avoid alcohol, gambling etc. We can look at its effect and that's not something unknown to us!

I get what you are saying...

Now let me demonstrate why this does not hold up as 'objective':

'Huge studies have found a 25 percent lower risk of heart disease in people who drink from one-half to two drinks daily, compared to abstainers. And alcoholic beverages that are rich in polyphenols — think beer! — may be especially good for the heart, according to a 2012 research'

 

[Godistruth1]

I get what you are saying...

Now let me demonstrate why this does not hold up as 'objective':

'Huge studies have found a 25 percent lower risk of heart disease in people who drink from one-half to two drinks daily, compared to abstainers. And alcoholic beverages that are rich in polyphenols — think beer! — may be especially good for the heart, according to a 2012 research'

Yes there is some good. That's something Quran admits to too.

They ask you about wine and gambling. Say, "In them is great sin and [yet, some] benefit for people. But their sin is greater than their benefit." And they ask you what they should spend. Say, "The excess [beyond needs]." Thus Allah makes clear to you the verses [of revelation] that you might give thought.
[Quran 2:219]

There are drugs used in medicine too but too much of it is harmful. Practically speaking no one drinks little. It always goes beyond than little. Maybe some time one may drink little but practically speaking when one starts drinking he drinks a lot. It may lead to unwanted sex or violence. If we abstain from it altogether and never touch it as Quran forbids it we don't have unwanted wastage of money, can avoid unwanted sex and violence.

 

[cvanwey]

Yes there is some good. That's something Quran admits to too.

They ask you about wine and gambling. Say, "In them is great sin and [yet, some] benefit for people. But their sin is greater than their benefit." And they ask you what they should spend. Say, "The excess [beyond needs]." Thus Allah makes clear to you the verses [of revelation] that you might give thought.
[Quran 2:219]

There are drugs used in medicine too but too much of it is harmful. Practically speaking no one drinks little. It always goes beyond than little. Maybe some time one may drink litre but practically speaking when one starts drinking he drinks a lot. It may lead to unwanted sex or violence. If we abstain from it altogether and never touch it as Quran forbids it we don't have unwanted wastage of money, can avoid unwanted sex and violence.

Your response further demonstrates subjectivity, however... In your prior response, you stated 'avoid alcohol', and then make a subjective rationalization regarding well being. This is fine, and I fully agree. However, my point is, we are both appealing to a subjective, and maybe even vastly majoritive, standard.

It is later 'justified', again, by rationalizing. In which, I again, agree with the rationalization portion to an extent. However, there is no standard 'objectively.' Unless you can demonstrate, that not only your specific God is the true God which presented the assertion, but furthermore, that the assertion is actually objective. This appears where the true battle begins.