Many people seem to think that moral end ethics would be unknown if it weren’t for the Bible. The moral of the Bible when examined thoroughly is to say the least, extremely relative. Looking at the Hebrew Scriptures it becomes clear that moral and law was pretty much a tribal and ethnic phenomenon.
Looking at the Ten Commandments it is pretty clear that these were exclusively for the Jews.
“You shall not kill” didn’t include killing non-Israelites. Moses was a murderer, but this was no problem since his victim was an Egyptian. Coveting other men’s wives was only wrong if the other man was an Israelite.
People from other Semitic tribes could be killed and the women they did not kill were used for sexual pleasures by their Hebrew conquerors. Adultery was said to be evil, but both Abraham and Isaac tried to pass their wives off as their sisters, even though this meant having them sexually used by Abimelech, king of Gerar. Adultery also seems to have been wrong only when women did it. Judah treated his daughter in law Tamar as a prostitute and then proposed to kill her when she became pregnant. The commandments also prohibited “bearing false witness”, but Moses lied as best he could to Pharaoh, a good example of what the Watchtower Society call “Theocratic war strategy”. “Do not steal” is another one, but that didn’t stop the Israelites from robbing the Egyptians blind when they left Egypt. All the gold they stole was used to make the “Golden Calf” later. Killing and robbing other tribes was considered legitimate by the Israelites.
So the law’s and the morals of those days were pretty much reserved for the Israelites. To do anything wrong was only “wrong” when done to another Israelite. No wonder the Watchtower Society have adopted this attitude today, when certain actions is only wrong when others do them but perfectly all right when the Watchtower Society do the same thing. Jesus also applied this double standard. Jesus of Nazareth seemed to be as narrow-minded, vindictive, and even hypocritical as the next man. Bishop Spong touches upon this when he observes:
“Jesus exhorted people to love their enemies and to pray for their persecutors (Matt. 5:44) and never to call others by demeaning or hurtful names (Matt. 5:22), yet he called his enemies a "brood of snakes" (Matt. 12:34), "sons of vipers" (Matt. 23:33), "blind fools" (Matt. 23:17). He called gentiles "dogs" (Matt. 15:26). He said he had come to set a man against his father and a daughter against her mother (Matt. 10:35). He disowned his own family (Matt. 12:4650), hardly obeying the commandment to "honour your parents." These do not appear to be the words of one dedicated to preserving and strengthening the family, as the fundamentalist preachers have constantly asserted.
Are we drawn to a Lord who would destroy a herd of pigs and presumably a person's livelihood in order to exorcise a demon (Mark 5:13)? Are we impressed when the one we call Lord curses a fig tree because it did not bear fruit out of season (Matt. 21:18, 19)? How divine is the message that says for your finite failings you will be cast into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 25:30)? If the Bible is read literally, it must be said that Jesus seems to have accepted without question the language of hell employed by his religious contemporaries. Is eternal punishment the plan of the all merciful God? Was Jesus mistaken? Was the interpretation of Jesus given in these passages, which come primarily from Matthew, untrustworthy?
No matter how this question is resolved, the literal authority of the Gospels is compromised. Was belief in hell so common that Jesus simply reflected the values of his time unquestioningly? Hardly, since the Sadducees did not believe in any life after death, either as a reward or punishment. We know only that someone was convinced that Jesus did believe and teach that eternal punishment in a fiery hell was an appropriate sentence to pronounce on sinners.”
Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism” 1991, page 21.
There is absolutely no reason to be impressed by Biblical morals; it is a very relative “moral” we can easily do without. History teaches us the lesson of what happens when fundamentalist Christians and Muslims rule a society. In Europe we have the dark ages, and we have seen what “theocratic” rule has brought Iran, and we are seeing what happens in Afghanistan which is currently under control of Taliban, an ultra fundamentalist Islamic movement.
In the United States there are movements who are working very hard to bring America back to those “Christian values”. According to Steve Allen one of those called/call themselves “Christian Reconstructionists”. Allen states:
The Reconstructionists are quite frank about their social prescriptions. They believe that Christianity should be the official religion of the United States and that American laws should be specifically Christian.
As Bill Moyers put it, in a fascinating and strangely ignored program aired on public television December 23rd, 1987:“The Reconstructionists would want to invent America all over again, with the Bible as its primary charter, and Washington, D.C., as a new kind of government where God's will is done on earth as it is in heaven . . . [they want] every institution of society for Jesus Christ. Their leaders include learned scholars, articulate speakers, and prolific writers. They represent a cross section of faiths. They disagree on many things, but on this they agree: every area of American life, law, medicine, media, the arts, business, education, and finally the civil government must one day be brought under the rule of the righteous.”
Steve Allen on the Bible, Religion & Morality, 1990. pages 32-35.
Allen looks at what would happen if such a movement should actually be able to take over the US and implement their Christian rule:
“ Let us now consider specs. As regards the question of homosexuality, it is clear that most Americans regard the sexual preference for a member of one's own gender as a problem. Some people have fascistic and heartless attitudes on the issue; others strive to be fair.The Christian Reconstructionists are perfectly clear about a solution to the problem. That solution is nothing more complex than the prompt imposition of the death penalty.
To those unfamiliar with the recent drift of the public dialogue on this and related questions, what I have just said will sound like a libelous distortion. Would that it were. The Reconstructionist movement, which is chiefly Protestant although it has interested a few Catholics, absolutely insists that homosexuals ought to be killed. I do not mean that individual Reconstructionists consider themselves at liberty to arm themselves to the teeth and travel about their communities in vigilante bands, shooting or stabbing homosexuals on sight. That would, obviously enough, be a horrifying spectacle to witness. I refer to something worse.
The Reconstructionists insist that the slaughter of millions of their fellow citizens is to be conducted in strict accordance with the law. They argue, in other words, that homosexuality must simply be added to the list of capital crimes punishable by execution.“ Steve Allen on the Bible, Religion & Morality, 1990. pages 32-35
As we know “true Christians” would like to kill many more people than homosexuals so who else would be exterminated under their wonderful loving rule? Allen comments:
”What other crimes would the new fascist movement like to see added to the list of capital offenses? Habitual juvenile delinquency, for one. Please do not take my word for this; consult the public statements and writings of leaders of the new movement. It should take only a few days of investigation to establish that yes, the group at present is working very hard to do nothing less than take over the administration of the local, state, and national affairs of the United States. It insists that swiftly imposed death is the proper punishment for the kind of lamentable and sometimes criminal behavior engaged in by millions of young men and women in our presently troubled society.If, as is commonly believed, about 10 percent of Americans have homosexual leanings, it inescapably follows that if the Reconstructionists ever do take over control of our country, some 25 million Americans will shortly be executed. Statistics about juvenile delinquency may be variously interpreted, but let us say that in that category perhaps another 20 million young men and women would be killed, and this, bear constantly in mind, by those who consider themselves Christians. It is obviously impossible to get precise statistics concerning that percentage of the approximately 250 million American population who have committed the moral and sometimes legal offense of adultery. Most of us would be pleased if no one ever was unfaithful to a marriage partner, and the American home would clearly be a more secure institution if this were the case. But, as the scriptures constantly remind us, humans have apparently as much a gift for wrong doing as for virtuous conduct. So let us arbitrarily say that 75 million Americans have offended the moral law in this way. Add that to the other arithmetic.” Steve Allen on the Bible, Religion & Morality, 1990. pages 32-35
As we all understand the US would immediately become quite a paradise if you could execute a 100 + million Americans immediately, it would be a very Christian thing to do. I know that atheists and a lot of scientists would probably be executed too. The US would be transformed into an ideal Christian society, under the true Christian goal, Christian or dead.
We should all be grateful to those who have fought against slavery, against discrimination of race, women. Fought for human rights and equality. Those who have fought for all of these rights, rights that many take for granted today, was opposed every step of the way, by Bible thumping morons, screaming for a “return to Biblical morals”. I can only wish that all those who rant on about the good old days of “Biblical morals” one day should have the opportunity to live in a society like that. I bet all but the totally insane would have had more than enough after a few months.
Norm.