Thou Shalt Not Murder!

73 posts / 0 new
Last post
jonthecatholic's picture
Sheldon, you believe that

Sheldon, you believe that morality is subjective yes? If that's the case, to be consistent, you'll have to accept that during the time the Bible was written, these acts were probably seen as justified and fair. You can't "impose" that what they did was wrong. The most you can say is that they were different and that we've changed away from that.

You can't even say "better" as that would imply that one culture's morality could be superior to another's. By what standard are you measuring this? Your own? You own culture's?

Disclaimer: I'm no way implying any of those acts are acceptable. I'm just pointing out your inconsistency.

Sapporo's picture
The point about morality

The point about morality being subjective is that it is fatal to the notion of an objective morality.

Tin-Man's picture
@JoC Re: "'ll have to

@JoC Re: "'ll have to accept that during the time the Bible was written, these acts were probably seen as justified and fair. You can't "impose" that what they did was wrong. The most you can say is that they were different and that we've changed away from that."

Oh, boy. This was too good to pass up....

So, those acts that are referred to are acts that were sanctioned/condoned by your God during those times. And supposedly, this is a God that is "never changing" and ALWAYS "objectively morally right". Meaning that whatever he ordered and/or accepted THEN should be just as equally acceptable NOW. After all, God is NEVER wrong, and he is NEVER CHANGING. However, in your own words, you stated that you personally do not agree that those acts were acceptable, and then further stated that WE have changed away from those ways. Now, with that in mind, logic dictates that either:

A. The "never changing" God must have changed his mind about some of that horrendous shit somewhere along the way. Or...

B. WE (Mankind, I suppose) perhaps realized one day on our own that, "Whoa! Hey, some of this shit God is telling us to do seems a little fucked up. Maybe we should come up with better ways to handle things." Or...

C. *whispering* Psssst.... there is no god. shhhhh.... don't tell anybody.

So, which inconsistency would you prefer? A. or B.?

Sheldon's picture
I have explained again and

I have explained again and again, that the basis for my morality is subjective but that does not mean we can't make objective claims about what is moral, all we need do is agree that the basis for morality is 'X' then we can agree on the best objective behaviour to achieve 'X'.

" You can't "impose" that what they did was wrong."

I can once we agree on the basis of our morality. You can't though, as you have to accept that anything your deity did is moral and remains objectively moral. So you'd have to accept that murdering everything on the planet in a global flood is morally acceptable, and that torturing a new born baby to death is objectively moral. Now do you accept those actions are objectively moral?

"You can't even say "better" as that would imply that one culture's morality could be superior to another's. "

That depends again what I think morality should be based on, and what it wants to achieve. It's you who can''t make this assessment, the best you can say is god wants it, and if that involves torturing babies to death you have to accept it's moral. You think blind adherence to a deity is moral, I think it necessarily involves preventing suffering, and that it should be based on the precept that all humans must have the same basic rights.

Now if you want to talk inconsistency, then your claim for objective morality needs you to state that torturing a newborn baby to death over 7 days is morally acceptable because it was conceived in an adulterous affair, can you do that? If not it is you who is being inconsistent.

I note you didn't attempt to answer my questions, not I have answered yours candidly, so we can only infer you know you're claim for objective morality is nonsense, or the bible is nonsense, which is it, and why?

Sheldon's picture
Where does global genocidal

Where does global genocidal floods fit into this commandment exactly? How about torturing newborn babies to death? It must be the most hypocritical deity ever invented.

Sky Pilot's picture


The stories about killing new born babies illustrate the 4th Commandment about how all that open the womb are Yahweh's and must be redeemed. If the parents didn't redeem the kids the kids were killed. It was a perfect Mafia style extortion racket.

chimp3's picture
Killing when god orders you

Killing when god orders you to kill vs. not killing when he tells you not to is not morality. It is obedience. Obedience does not involve morality. Morality involves choice. Obedience does not absolve you of moral culpability.

Sheldon's picture
Precisely correct, concise,

Precisely correct, concise, pithy and cogent reasoning, I love it.

Sapporo's picture
"Well, when the president

"Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal." - Richard Nixon

Nyarlathotep's picture
JoC - Remember, the Bible isn

JoC - Remember, the Bible isn't a book.

Really? Than maybe you should stop referring to it as a book:

JoC - As it is, God didn't just leave a book for us to do what we want (this is what happened but not what he wanted us to do). He left us an infallible book and together with it, an infallible interpreter in the form of the [church].

JoC - The point I'm driving at here is unless you go to the source of the Bible, the RCC, you won't ever get a clear picture of what the entire book means.

chimp3's picture
Re: Divinely inspired. I do

Re: Divinely inspired. I do not think the writers of the Bible meant for it to be taken in that context. If they did, why are so many of God's sayings in quotation marks. The books were written to be taken literally. The 6 day creation story was not an allegory. They believed it.

Sushisnake's picture


I'm feeling a little slighted, here but perhaps you missed my last post. I'll ask my question again and add another one.

1. Do you believe other religions' holy books were divinely inspired, too, eg the Quran?

2. a)Which parts of the Christian Bible are absolute truth and fact and applicable to us now,
b) which are metaphor only
c )and most importantly, how do you tell the difference ?


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.