Resolved: The Bible does NOT present an acceptable moral standard

Infact if you actually read the bible you can see how it comes together morally. Maybe in independent books it would not make sense to you - but together it does.Take the Ten Commandments for example, a lot of people look at the events in the Jewish bible and immediately throw it down. I would ask you to look at the teachings for a change. The new commandments spoken of by Jesus are very moral and they show that if we love each other we will fulfill the law as love works no ill to anyone else. Unfortunately, people would rather point to G-d's actions as spoken of in the Jewish written Torah with no vowels included, and try to judge what he done instead of concentrating on what he says do. They miss the fact that if you look at the Ten Commandments for example, well, how more moral can you get?
Thou shalt not kill - Would you say that's a wrong teaching?
Thou shalt not commit adultery - Would you say that's a wrong teaching? Would you say it is moral?Could someone SHOW me how the bible does not meet an acceptable moral standard if we concentrate on the parts mentioning us?Case closed.

Forgive me, but I would hope that I would thoroughly smite that man in pieces and dash him to bits, though I don't encourage such activity, I love babies and children and cannot abide them being hurt. Nevertheless, I am talking about murder, not smitage of the wicked in bizarre circumstances. Also, I suppose we could just stop the evil child-killer without killing him, but then even if you did kill him there are examples in the bible that G-d forgives, G-d is not a fool that he cannot discern a situation, afterall - we all fall short of the commandments. Either way, the Commandment - as Schraff' usually points out is to do with murder for no reason. I suppose you have a bit of a situation here - I still think the teaching is mainly a good and moral one though. I agree partially, that is why I say that the full bible gives us a complete teaching.

Paul, did you miss what I said about people concentrating on events in the bible rather than what concerns them?Quote: "Could someone SHOW me how the bible does not meet an acceptable moral standard if we concentrate on the parts mentioning us?"

Yes, you are right, I was only saying that the Ten Commandments are moral. How can a saying like Thou shalt not kill not be moral?
Is such a thing relevant to a human moral perspective? - I think so!Infact, in Acts they tell the gentiles to only observe a few Jewish laws and ofcourse Jesus's teachings apply to his followers. Infact my only point about the Commandments is that they are moral, and if you were a sojourner or stranger in the land of Israel then you would have to obey the law - that is what is said in leviticusNow what do you see what's happening here? I'm starting to include books - a few of them, and they add up and make a full moral wisdom. Now I will us Galatians. Even if we are to follow the Commandments despite us being Gentile, the fruit of the spirit fulfills the law, working no ill to it's neighbour. Including christs teachings to gentiles also then we can see the moral logic involved.An event in Numbers in which an atonement of Israel took place seems to bare no relevance to what pertains to US. It does however fit what I said earlier nicely - judging G-d and throwing the book away because of events that happened, not teachings.

I still think the Commandment is sound.For me, the fact that the story seems to have what you would call exceptions makes the events all the more real to me. Infact, if it was all fake then it would be seemingly perfect to an unbeliever, yet to an unbeliever it is not perfect. You see, if it was fake then surely you would alter the story, it seems to agree well with the reality of life.You are talking about the Commandment to the Jews and putting an event under that Commandment. However, G-d has also said , again when you take the full bible into consideration, that he that even gets angry with his brother is in danger of the Commandment. So, for you to say that there are exceptions to the rule is for me a half-truth. Yes, if a kiddy is getting hurt like Sidelined suggested, I could see the sense in that. BUT, saying G-d makes exceptions because of an event in the OT is not solely acceptable because Christ said things like:" In the past it was an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, but now I say turn the other cheek " -(similar words)
He also says he who is without sin can cast the first stone. Infact, he makes it impossible to justify violence, have you considered the full teaching Paul?

Well it depends on how you esteem the Commandments, if you think this one event gats rid of the Commandment, that's up to you. I however, do not look to events in the OT that do not seem to be teachings.Okay Paul, I admitt when I read the text it seems to be a unsettling thing. Thrusting a spear through the woman is not my idea of a correct and good thing. I have to be honest, other things concern me aswell, like a woman being burned in Leviticus. If it wasn't for the Father Christ spoke of and christ's teachings, I would not be a believer.But atleast realise that I am not a Jew and therefore I take heed of the New Testament as a teaching mostly.

Maybe if I was touting that the one teaching was the only thing to adhere to I would agree, but I am not. I am saying if we take a full bible teaching (including christ's) - which you are eager to avoid, then we can see that it is a moral teaching, if you consider the new Commandments of Christ which ARE IN THE FULL BIBLE, you cannot justify violence, therefore you are picking the bad parts and trying to attach those events to the teaching. Remember the yellow words I highlighted? Those teachings which pertain TO US> Does God say to go out and do a similar act to that one in numbers - as a teaching to us? - NO HE DOESN'T, he says Thou shalt not kill, there is a crucial difference between a teaching to us and an event with the ancient Hebrews.