Scripture Tried by Common Morality
Can a book be God's word if it holds up as holy what every people calls a crime? Whatever all nations share is true, the preacher rules, and whatever divides them is false, so a scripture that offends common morality fails before its history is even weighed.
Two charges are brought, in order: perversity, then falseness. First the Hebrew books are read for the conduct they consecrate rather than merely report, massacres, deceptions and thefts done by God's order and in his name. Only then comes probability, the prodigies and the dates that contradict each other. The Gospels get the same treatment, their accounts of Jesus disagreeing on nearly every fact. Meanwhile Jews and Christians, reading the same prophets, fight each other with the same weapons.
- biblical criticism
- scriptural interpretation
- biblical interpretation
- historical criticism
- evidence
- prophecy
- miracles
- scripture
- early christianity
- morality
- justice
Enter a dialogue
- If God himself came down and demanded that people approve the Old Testament's massacres, your preacher would answer No. Can conscience refuse God?
- Scripture reports many crimes without praising them. Why does your preacher insist the Hebrew books consecrate their massacres rather than merely record them?
- Christians read the prophet Isaiah's child called Emmanuel as a prophecy of Christ. What makes your preacher read it instead as a sign for a besieged king?
- Your preacher holds that whatever all nations agree on is the centre of truth. Could the whole world not agree on an error?
- Two Gospels give Jesus family trees that do not match. Must one disagreement like that sink a whole sacred book, as your preacher holds?