The Moral Code

[Robin]

Many theists point to the moral code as an advantage of religion. Some even suggest that we are "Stealing from Churches" if we take advantage of this moral code but don't support religion.

But isn't it true that all the moral guidance contained in the Bible, for instance, could easily fit on the average fridge magnet?

Let's see - there are six of the ten commandments (the others relating to religious duty rather than morals). Besides that There is "Love your enemy", "Turn the other cheek" and "Sell all your possessions and give the proceeds to the poor".

That is about it. The Beatitudes sound great but don't really mean much from a moral viewpoint.

Of course I have left out the moral guidelines that are manifestly immoral, such as "brutally kill disobedient children", as well as the ones that are just plain silly.

But we can distinguish between the moral strictures of the Bible that really are moral and those that are indefensible. Doesn't that mean that we have a moral sense that has nothing to do with revealed religion?

 

[Anacoluthon64]

(Edit: double post!)

 

[Anacoluthon64]

...snip...

Doesn't that mean that we have a moral sense that has nothing to do with revealed religion?

Indeed, it strongly suggests so. The usual response I encounter when raising our inbuilt sense of right and wrong in debates with religionists on the origin of morality is blanket and unsubstantiated denial. This inbuilt sense may have been preferentially selected for because watching out for your fellows (e.g. against predators) is likely to result in your fellows looking out for you, thereby producing greater safety for all concerned. If so, animals that herd together can be thought of as having a rudimentary or incipient morality.

'Luthon64

 

[UndercoverElephant]

Many theists point to the moral code as an advantage of religion. Some even suggest that we are "Stealing from Churches" if we take advantage of this moral code but don't support religion.

But isn't it true that all the moral guidance contained in the Bible, for instance, could easily fit on the average fridge magnet?

No, that definately isn't true. The Bible is full of moral guidance. Unfortunately, much of it is applicable to a tribe of nomads living in the pre-industrial world. Leviticus is full of moral guidance, it just happens to be hopelessly out-dated and inapplicable to modern times, not that this stops certain groups of right-wing Christians quoting Leviticus against homosexuals and the like. But the new testament is very different. It is packed full of a very different sort of moral guidance - most of which is steadfastly ignored by people claiming to be Christians.

Let's see - there are six of the ten commandments (the others relating to religious duty rather than morals). Besides that There is "Love your enemy", "Turn the other cheek" and "Sell all your possessions and give the proceeds to the poor".

Yeah, you really shouldn't mix up the old law with the new law. There is no hint of "turn the other cheek" in the old testament. This is the whole point of the "Sermon from the mount"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sermon_on_the_Mount

But we can distinguish between the moral strictures of the Bible that really are moral and those that are indefensible.

Yes, we can.

Doesn't that mean that we have a moral sense that has nothing to do with revealed religion?

Yes, it does.

I am not a Christian, but I respect Christianity for its concepts of unconditional love and pacificism. The problem is that only a minority of Christians live according to the tenets of their own religion. Where is the unconditional love and pacificism in the US Christian right wing? GWB has turned Christianity into "Bomb your neighbour (and anyone else who does not submit to your total dominance over them), shaft your own people, line your own pockets and turn up to church on Sunday to prove you really are a Christian anyway." He is an embodiment of the hypocrisy of fake religion. If JC returned today I believe he would be appalled by modern US Christianity. He would not recognise those people as being influenced by his teachings. He would identify them as the problem, not the solution. The problem is not Christianity, but what has been done to Christianity - first by 1000 years of catholic hegemony and now by an American nation which proudly claims to be Christian but behaves in a manner which the diametric opposite to the teachings of Christ. No tolerance, no pacificism, no altruism, only unbridled greed, lust for power and total dominance over the entire world and a total disregard for the consequences of their actions on anybody other than themselves. These things have nothing to do with Christian morality and everything to do with what Christian morality was supposed challenge.

 

[Bikewer]

I don't imagine that there is (or was) a tribe or group of primitives anywhere in the world that didn't have a moral code of some sort. Taboos or whatever frequently defined behavior that was hardly different than the complex codes of more advanced societies.