Replies

You still did not clear the subject for me. Yes, you said that sins are not inherited, and the sons should not be punished for the sins of the father, but that was my initial argument. I am essentially saying that the Semitic tribal culture carry the grudge for years. The concept of "his blood is on us and our children after us", and the concept of Jesus came to wipe away the sins of Adam and Eve?

First, it appears that bible has a lot of contradictions. Second, Our contemporary morality of today is far superior to the barbaric desert tribal morality of two thousands years ago.

The concept of "his blood is on us and our children after us", and the concept of Jesus came to wipe away the sins of Adam and Eve?

I don't know how to respond to this, as it does not appear to be a complete sentence. :)

First, it appears that bible has a lot of contradictions.

I would disagree, but I think that's a separate issue.

Second, Our contemporary morality of today is far superior to the barbaric desert tribal morality of two thousands years ago.

LOL... The idea of comparing the relative worth of two moral codes is unavoidably a moral judgment in itself -- how shocking that using the modern morality to evaluate the ancient one would result in finding it to be inferior!

I believe that the only moral code that has legitimacy is one that originates from God, since as Creator only He has the authority to establish such a framework. Furthermore, I would say that identifying this Divine moral code cannot be done by evaluating the morality itself because there is no objective standard to measure it against. We can examine whether it is internally consistent, the credibility of its proponents & so on, but calling it 'good' or 'bad' doesn't mean much.