Do God's Morals Change?

[POI]

The Bible states:

"A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death."

Is this law still binding for anyone today? If so, are such laws ever being carried out?

Or, is it no longer binding for anyone? And if not, why is it no longer binding? And furthermore, if it is no longer binding for anyone, who's to say God's law will not change again someday?

[nobspeople]

[Replying to 1213 in post #10]

Those priests that Bible is talking about do not exist anymore.

Prove it. Or it merely your opinion, as it was stated as fact?

So, even if the law is valid, there is no situation where that law would be required.

Convenient. Another case of morality changing with the times?
And what do you mean 'if'? Are you suggesting it wasn't at some point? Of there are caveats that make it invalid?

we don’t have the judges anymore that were set by God.

Prove it. Or it merely your opinion, as it was stated as fact?

So, even if someone brakes the law, there is no judge to give the judgment.

So, since there are no judges, it's OK to break the law? Can't be caught if there's no one to catch you! Good to know.

But, the law is still valid, what was wrong before, is still wrong.

Or, so it IS still wrong? So "A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death." is wrong, but there's no judge to carry out the sentence? So it's OK to do it, since you won't be caught. Convenient.

The law is not about judging, but about telling what is right and wrong.

Prove it. Or it merely your opinion, as it was stated as fact?

Your response seems to indicate it doesn't need to happen since there are no 'official judges'. But it's still wrong. So, it's wrong, and christians can look down on those that break the rule, but they don't have to burn them to death. Seems that's God's responsibility with hell and all.

So it seems God's morals don't change, he just neglected to appoint judges to carry out his death wishes on those who 'break the rules'. All praise, loving and understanding God!

[TRANSPONDER]

The Bible states:

"A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death."

Is this law still binding for anyone today? If so, are such laws ever being carried out?

Or, is it no longer binding for anyone? And if not, why is it no longer binding? And furthermore, if it is no longer binding for anyone, who's to say God's law will not change again someday?

Those priests that Bible is talking about do not exist anymore. So, even if the law is valid, there is no situation where that law would be required.

Also, we don’t have the judges anymore that were set by God. So, even if someone brakes the law, there is no judge to give the judgment. And if we would have, he still would have to go by these rules:

"Thus has Yahweh of Hosts spoken, saying, 'Execute true judgment, and show kindness and compassion every man to his brother.
Zechariah 7:9
I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brothers, and judge righteously between a man and his brother, and the foreigner who is living with him. You shall not show partiality in judgment; you shall hear the small and the great alike; you shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, you shall bring to me, and I will hear it.
Deuteronomy 1:16-17
"You shall not spread a false report. Don't join your hand with the wicked to be a malicious witness. You shall not follow a crowd to do evil; neither shall you testify in court to side with a multitude to pervert justice; neither shall you favor a poor man in his cause.
Exodus 23:1-3
At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he who is to die be put to death; at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.
Deuteronomy 17:6

But, the law is still valid, what was wrong before, is still wrong. For example people should not fornicate, even if no one is giving the judgment. And as Bible tells for disciples of Jesus ("Christian"):

"Don't judge, so that you won't be judged. For with whatever judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with whatever measure you measure, it will be measured to you."
Mat. 7:1-2

The law is not about judging, but about telling what is right and wrong. Judge is the one who tells the judgment when he has looked what is the case.

And please, when you show a scripture, show also from where it is.

That's a good effort. And it does point up something significant; morals remain pretty much the same. Though The Law changed when the 'New Covenant' was introduced (especially the way to deal with sinning) the questions of morality remained the same. Except in some matters like slavery. That's always a good one.

Bible -apologists try all ways of trying to get around that, but the fact remains - the Bible endorses the enslavement for life with few rights for non -Jews and only has a 7 year limit on enslaved fellow - Hebrews. To overlook or ignore that is a common piece of dishonesty in religious apologetics. And the NT does not a thing to show that it is against slavery.

There's also the morality of how to treat women. Inequality and disregarding women and treating them like property is a universal problem, with religion being in the forefront of keeping them property. But Slavery is the good one to bring up. Not that God changed His views on slavery from new to Old T. But more that Human views on that being acceptable have changed and we look oddly at God (or his spokesbods) as he either hasn't changed his views on that or he has but he needed humans to lead the way and then he quietly got on the emancipation bandwaggon.

[1213]

...Bible -apologists try all ways of trying to get around that, but the fact remains - the Bible endorses the enslavement for life with few rights for non -Jews and only has a 7 year limit on enslaved fellow - Hebrews. To overlook or ignore that is a common piece of dishonesty in religious apologetics. And the NT does not a thing to show that it is against slavery.

Please tell, what exactly is wrong in Biblical slavery. For example, if other nations sell own people, wouldn't it be better that they go to Jews than some other people who would treat them badly?

If person wants to be a slave, why should it not be allowed?

Why we still have people who must pay taxes, which is the same as slavery, if slavery is wrong?

There's also the morality of how to treat women. Inequality and disregarding women and treating them like property is a universal problem, with religion being in the forefront of keeping them property.

I think people are not equal, even without any religion. People have different abilities and some are better in different matters than others. I think denying that, or thinking that is bad, is not very wise. However, even if people are not equal, I think all people are as valuable, should be treated well and fairly.

Also, treating something as a property, what exactly is wrong about it? After all, normally people treat property well, take care of it and don't want anything bad to happen to it.

... But Slavery is the good one to bring up. Not that God changed His views on slavery from new to Old T. But more that Human views on that being acceptable have changed and we look oddly at God (or his spokesbods) as he either hasn't changed his views on that or he has but he needed humans to lead the way and then he quietly got on the emancipation bandwaggon.

I think the problem is not the slavery itself, but that how people treat other people. If people would live also otherwise as told in the Bible, they would not do anything evil to others.

[1213]

Those priests that Bible is talking about do not exist anymore.

Prove it. Or it merely your opinion, as it was stated as fact?

Ok, I can change it, by what I know, priests that Bible is talking in that scripture do not exist anymore. If you disagree, please show who and where are they?

we don’t have the judges anymore that were set by God.

Prove it. Or it merely your opinion, as it was stated as fact?

Ok, I can change it, by what I know, judges that God set, don't exist anymore. If you disagree, please show who and where are they?

So, even if someone brakes the law, there is no judge to give the judgment.

So, since there are no judges, it's OK to break the law?

No, it is not ok to brake the law. The law is good, and for example fornication is not right or good and people should not do it.

The law is not about judging, but about telling what is right and wrong.

Prove it. Or it merely your opinion, as it was stated as fact?

Isn't it obvious? The law tells what should not be done and tells how bad the wrong acts are.

[TRANSPONDER]

...Bible -apologists try all ways of trying to get around that, but the fact remains - the Bible endorses the enslavement for life with few rights for non -Jews and only has a 7 year limit on enslaved fellow - Hebrews. To overlook or ignore that is a common piece of dishonesty in religious apologetics. And the NT does not a thing to show that it is against slavery.

Please tell, what exactly is wrong in Biblical slavery. For example, if other nations sell own people, wouldn't it be better that they go to Jews than some other people who would treat them badly?

If person wants to be a slave, why should it not be allowed?

Why we still have people who must pay taxes, which is the same as slavery, if slavery is wrong?

There's also the morality of how to treat women. Inequality and disregarding women and treating them like property is a universal problem, with religion being in the forefront of keeping them property.

I think people are not equal, even without any religion. People have different abilities and some are better in different matters than others. I think denying that, or thinking that is bad, is not very wise. However, even if people are not equal, I think all people are as valuable, should be treated well and fairly.

Also, treating something as a property, what exactly is wrong about it? After all, normally people treat property well, take care of it and don't want anything bad to happen to it.

... But Slavery is the good one to bring up. Not that God changed His views on slavery from new to Old T. But more that Human views on that being acceptable have changed and we look oddly at God (or his spokesbods) as he either hasn't changed his views on that or he has but he needed humans to lead the way and then he quietly got on the emancipation bandwaggon.

I think the problem is not the slavery itself, but that how people treat other people. If people would live also otherwise as told in the Bible, they would not do anything evil to others.

Holistic morals today says slavery is bad. Owning other people as property is bad. Now you may want to argue that it's not a bad thing. Good luck with that. But the fact is that it is today regarded as bad.

Thus the Bible is going to come under question and another fact is that Bile apologetics don't argue that slavery (owning people as property) is ok; they argue that what is in the Bible is not really slavery (it is - and lifetime slavery for non - Hebrews) or that God didn't really agree with it but had to go along with it.

As to people wanting to be slaves, Exodus is based on the Hebrews not wanting to be slaves.
Now, you may argue that The Egyptians treated the Hebrews badly. But that rather knocks on the head the idea that owners will treat their slaves well. That has not been the case, where history has anything to say about it, and even where they do, slaves can't wait to buy their freedom.

Paying taxes in nothing like being enslaved, any more than having to work for a living is.

I agree that people are not equal in their abilities, but that does not mean they should (other thing being equal) be treated differently. A slave or a woman might be a lot smarter than their master or a man and, given equal opportunity, could outdo them. Not treating people equally means denying the equal opportunities.

I might argue that acting as the Bible says might not lead to people being nice to others as you suggest. But even if it did, that does not excuse slavery as it is endorsed in the Bible or the apparent disregard of women's rights.

[Tcg]

[Replying to POI in post #11]

Those who invented God have changing morals so the God they invented also has changing morals. The God of tomorrow will not have the same morals as the God of today. He, at least as created by his followers, is like a tree that bends one way or the other depending on the winds of theistic opinion.


Tcg

[nobspeople]

[Replying to 1213 in post #15]

Ok, I can change it, by what I know, priests that Bible is talking in that scripture do not exist anymore. If you disagree, please show who and where are they?
Ok, I can change it, by what I know, judges that God set, don't exist anymore. If you disagree, please show who and where are they?

So an opinion was stated as fact and when called out, you 'updated' it. Happens all the time to the best of us.

No, it is not ok to brake the law. The law is good, and for example fornication is not right or good and people should not do it.

So, God appointed judges to deal with law breakers but then, stopped 'having' judges. One can only discern, then, that the law isn't important. Yet, you're saying it is. So God, in all his infinite wisdom, decided to 'stop having judges' for the law, but is withholding judging altogether? That doesn't make any sense.
If the law's important, God should have judges like he did before (according to you). No judges means either God doesn't care anymore (aka has given up) or it's not that important. Or, I suppose, it could mean he's holding back judgement until one, big, final judgement. Which seems childlike: "Dang it all! I'm tired of this. They don't listen to my judges so I'm gonna' hold on to their judging until one last time then BAM I'm gonna hit 'em with it all at once!"

Isn't it obvious? The law tells what should not be done and tells how bad the wrong acts are.

But, without judges that (according to you) God appointed at one time but now doesn't seemed to be bothered to have, doesn't seem like it's important enough for him. Why should it be for anyone else?

[POI]

The Bible states:

"A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death."

Is this law still binding for anyone today? If so, are such laws ever being carried out?

Or, is it no longer binding for anyone? And if not, why is it no longer binding? And furthermore, if it is no longer binding for anyone, who's to say God's law will not change again someday?

Those priests that Bible is talking about do not exist anymore. So, even if the law is valid, there is no situation where that law would be required.

Let's explore this a bit...

I'm not suggesting that God changed His mind here, regarding "fornication" being a sin. For sake in brevity, let's just assume that God never thinks it's okay to commit "fornication". Moving forward...

At one point, the law stated that "A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death."

Other interlocutors have pointed out that the punishment for crime changes with the times. I think this is objectively obvious. Punishments for said crimes change all the time; usually depending on situation, circumstances, inflation, etc. --- As you have also pointed out... Moving forward....

Thus, we must ask ourselves honestly.... Was it ever 'morally' permissible to burn the daughter to death, as a means of acceptable punishment, for such said sin "fornication"?

If you think it was morally permissible to burn the daughter to death, during this era/situation, for identified "fornication", can you demonstrate why?

[1213]

...
Thus, we must ask ourselves honestly.... Was it ever 'morally' permissible to burn the daughter to death, as a means of acceptable punishment, for such said sin "fornication"?

If you think it was morally permissible to burn the daughter to death, during this era/situation, for identified "fornication", can you demonstrate why?

No one should have any good reason for fornication, therefore I think the penalty doesn’t matter really. If one is so evil that she does it anyway, maybe it is better for all that there is death penalty for evil person. If she would live, she would probably do even more evil and I believe that was the reason for the judgment and if so, I can accept it. However, if there would be such case, I think the judge should obey all the rules that were given to judges and not just hastily run to kill person.

[1213]

...So, God appointed judges to deal with law breakers but then, stopped 'having' judges. One can only discern, then, that the law isn't important. Yet, you're saying it is. ...

By what the Bible tells, the law is important, it teaches about good and right and helps to live a good life. That there is no judges tells only that the judgment is not that important, or that there are no humans who would be good enough to judge righteously.