Thousands of tribes through history and prehistory had never heard of the God of Abraham, yet those tribes developed moral codes and a system of jurisprudence.
Archaeology shows they made some of the children walk into fire for sacrifice. That's moral for sure.
And in the original telling, Abraham may have killed Isaac: \ Francesca Stavrakopoulou has speculated that it is possible that the story "contains traces of a tradition in which Abraham does sacrifice Isaac.[17] Richard Elliott Friedman has argued that in the original E story Abraham may have carried out the sacrifice of Isaac, but that later repugnance at the idea of a human sacrifice led the redactor of JE to add the lines in which a ram is substituted for Isaac.[18]
Richard Dawkins wrote about the ' binding of Isaac ', " A modern moralist cannot help but wonder how a child could ever recover from such psychological trauma. By the standards of modern morality, this disgraceful story is an example simultaneously of child abuse, bullying in two asymmetrical power relationships, and the first recorded use of the Nuremberg defence: ' I was only obeying orders ' Yet the legend is one of the great foundational myths of all three monotheistic religions."[19]
Last edited by antelope_sniper; 05/24/13.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
