God: The Failed Hypothesis (26 page)

Of course, not everyone agrees on every moral issue. These disagreements can be very pronounced, especially within specific religious communities where the same scriptural readings are often used to justify contradictory actions.

For example, consider the opposing interpretations of the commandment against killing found within the Christian community.

Conservative Protestants interpret this commandment as prohibiting abortion, stem cell research, and removing life support systems from the incurable, among other actions. However, they do not view capital punishment as prohibited, pointing to the biblical prescription of an eye for an eye. Catholics and liberal Christians, on the other hand, generally interpret the commandment as forbidding capital punishment. But Catholics oppose while liberals allow abortion, the removal of life support, and stem cell research.

In all these cases, the Bible is evidently ambiguous.

As philosopher Theodore Schick Jr. points out, both sides of the abortion debate believe murder is immoral. Where they disagree is on the nature of a fetus—whether or not it is the sort of entity that can be murdered. In other words, moral disagreements are often not about what is good or bad but about some other aspect of reality
⁷
.

So how do Christians decide what is right or wrong? While they may look at the Bible, how they interpret what they read must depend on ideals that they have already developed from some other source.

Noble Ideals

The Judeo-Christian and Islamic scriptures contain many passages that teach noble ideals that the human race has done well to adopt as norms of behavior and, where appropriate, to codify into law. But without exception, the fact that these principles developed in earlier cultures and history indicates that they were adopted by—rather than learned from—religion. While it is fine that religions preach moral precepts, they have no basis to claim that these precepts were authored by their particular deity or, indeed, any deity at all.

Perhaps the primary principle upon which to live a moral life is the Golden Rule:
“Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.”
In our Christian-dominated society in the West, most people assume that this was an original teaching of Jesus from the Sermon on the Mount. For some reason, their preachers, who surely know better, perpetuate this falsehood. In fact, Jesus himself made no such claim. Here’s what he actually said, according to the Gospel: “So, whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law of the prophets” (Matt. 7:12, Revised Standard Version). Indeed, the phrase “Love thy neighbor as thyself” appears in Leviticus 19:18, written a thousand years before Christ.

But the Golden Rule is not the exclusive property of a small desert tribe with a high opinion of itself. Here are some other, independent sources showing that the Golden Rule was already a widespread teaching well before Jesus:

• In
The Doctrine of the Mean 13,
written about 500
BCE
, Confucius says, “What you do not want others to do to you, do not do to others.”

• Isocrates (c. 375
BCE
) said, “Do not do to others what would anger you if done to you by others.”

• The Hindu
Mahabharata,
written around 150
BCE
, teaches, “This is the sum of all true righteousness: deal with others as thou wouldst thyself be dealt by
⁸
.” In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus also urged his listeners, “Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matt. 5:39, Revised Standard Version) and “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matt. 5:43-44, Revised Standard Version). Again, these are generally regarded as uniquely Christian sentiments. But the call to “love your enemies” precedes Jesus and does not even appear in the Old Testament
⁹
:

• I treat those who are good with goodness. And I also treat those who are not good with goodness. Thus goodness is attained. I am honest with those who are honest. And I am also honest with those who are dishonest. Thus honesty is attained (Taoism
Tao Te Ching
49).

• Conquer anger by love. Conquer evil by good. Conquer the stingy by giving. Conquer the liar by truth (Buddhism.
Dhammapada
223).

• A superior being does not render evil for evil; this is a maxim one should observe; the ornament of virtuous persons is their conduct. One should never harm the wicked or the good or even criminals meriting death. A noble soul will ever exercise compassion even towards those who enjoy injuring others or those of cruel deeds when they are actually committing them—for who is without fault? (Hinduism
Ramayana,
Yuddha Kanda 115).

No original moral concept of any significance can be found in the New Testament. In the early twentieth century, historian Joseph McCabe noted: “The sentiments attributed to Christ are…already found in the Old Testament…. They were familiar in the Jewish schools, and to all the Pharisees, long before the time of Christ, as they were familiar in all the civilizations of the earth—Egyptian, Babylonian, and Persian, Greek and Hindu
¹⁰
.”

As with the Bible, the Qur’an contains many sentiments that most of us would classify as commendable. It tells Muslims to be kind to their parents, not to steal from orphans, not to lend money at excess interest, to help the needy, and not to kill their children unless it is necessary.

But, again, these are not original moral principles. In the scriptures and other teachings of the great monotheisms we find a repetition of common ideals that arose during the gradual evolution of human societies, as they became more civilized, developed rational thinking processes, and discovered how to live together in greater harmony. The evidence points to a source other than the revelations claimed in these scriptures.

The Good Society

Not only personal behavior but also societal behavior is supposedly regulated by God. But, once again, we can find no evidence for this. One of the prevailing myths in modern America is that the nation was founded on “Christian principles.” However, the United States Constitution is a secular document that contains no reference to God, Jesus, Christianity, salvation, or any other religious teaching. Most of the early presidents were not fervent Christians and based their commitments to freedom, democracy, and justice on Enlightenment philosophy rather than biblical sources.

We often hear, especially from American politicians, that our legal system is founded on the Ten Commandments. Attempts have been made to display the Ten Commandments in public facilities such as courthouses, which the courts have so far disallowed.

But, we need to read what the commandments actually say.

Since there are several versions, let me present a simplified wording with religious language omitted
¹¹
:

The Ten Commandments

1. Have no other gods before me.

2. Make no images of anything in heaven, Earth, or the sea, and do not worship or labor for them.

3. Do not use the name of your God in vain.

4. Do no work on the Sabbath.

5. Honor your parents.

6. Do not kill.

7. Do not commit adultery.

8. Do not steal.

9. Do not give false testimony against another.

10. Do not desire another’s wife or anything that belongs to another.

Only commandments 6, 8, and 9 (the numbering is different for Catholics and Protestants) can be found in the laws of any modern nation. Killing, stealing, and perjury are illegal—except when done by the government. While adultery is normally considered immoral, it is not generally illegal.

The Old Testament contains many examples of killings performed under God’s orders. The only way this can be reconciled with commandment 6 is to assume that the proscription against killing must be restricted, say, only to your particular tribe rather than all humanity.

And, how many believers realize they are breaking commandment 2 every time they take a photograph or draw a picture? How many would stop if that were pointed out to them?

The restrictions imposed by the Ten Commandments can be found in other civilizations predating the time of Moses. Furthermore, it is clear from the above list that most of these restrictions are irrelevant to modern life and hardly form the basis for any existing legal system. Indeed, the Code of Hammurabi (c. 1780
BCE
) represents a considerably more significant historical step in the development of laws of justice, containing not merely 10 but 282 detailed commandments
¹²
. Perhaps these should be displayed on courthouse steps.

Or, another option would be the Laws of Solon. Solon (d. 558
BCE
) was an Athenian who is regarded as the founder of Western democracy and the first man in Western history to record a written constitution. That constitution eliminated birth as a basis for government office and created democratic assemblies open to all male citizens, such that no law could be passed without the majority vote of all. (Equal rights for women were still a long way off.) American democracy owes far more to Solon than the crude rules of the Hebrews
¹³
.

Christendom and Islam have a long history of authoritarianism with little disposition toward individual freedom and justice. Nowhere in the Bible can you discover the principles upon which modern democracies and justice systems are founded.

Slavery provides another example where the Bible hardly forms a model for our modern free societies. The Old Testament not only condones slavery but actually regulates its practice:

When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. (Exod. 21:2, Revised Standard Version)

If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s and he shall go out alone. (Exod. 21:4, Revised Standard Version) Jesus had many opportunities to disavow slavery. He never did. St. Paul reaffirms the practice: “Bid slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect” (Titus 2:9).

Prior to the Civil War, the Bible was widely used to justify slavery in the United States. Baptist leader and slave owner Richard Furman (d. 1825) laid the foundation for the biblical arguments that would be made in support of slavery leading up to the Civil War. While president of the State Baptist Convention, Furman wrote to the governor of South Carolina, “The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example
¹⁴
.” Furman University in Greenville, South Carolina, founded in 1826, was named for Richard Furman; his writings can be found in its archives.

Another prominent churchman, Alexander Campbell (d. 1866) wrote, “There is not one verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many regulating it. It is not then, we conclude, immoral
¹⁵
.” It is to be noted that Campbell declared himself against slavery, so once again we have a Christian following his own conscience despite what the scriptures say.

Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederacy, claimed to follow what the scriptures said: “[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God… it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation
¹⁶
.”

While Christians in the South held onto their slaves as long as they could, secular humanist Richard Randolph of Virginia began freeing his in 1791
¹⁷
. Popes and other fathers of the Catholic Church owned slaves as late as 1800. Jesuits in colonial Maryland and nuns in Europe and Latin America owned slaves.

The Church did not condemn slavery until 1888, after every Christian nation had abolished the practice
¹⁸
.

Distinguished Catholic scholar John T. Noonan Jr. points out that the Church has traditionally denied that it has made any changes in the moral teachings of Jesus and the apostles
¹⁹
.

Slavery and other examples he presents amply illustrate that the Church’s teaching does indeed change with the times.

Now, the campaign to end slavery in the United States and elsewhere was led by Christians, to their everlasting credit. However, the abolitionists clearly were not guided by the literal words of scripture but by their own interpretations and innate senses of a higher good.

Finally, let me just briefly mention the historical oppression of women. St. Paul said, “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior” (Eph. 5:22-23, Revised Standard Version). Western societies finally have begun to recognize the irrationality and injustice of treating women as lesser human beings, providing a clear, recent example of how our notions of right and wrong evolve independent of and often contrary to religious teachings.

Holy Horrors

The Old Testament is filled with atrocities committed in the name of God. These are rarely mentioned in Sunday school, but anyone can pick up a Bible and read them for herself. I will just mention some of the worst: “Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves” (Num. 31:17-18, Revised Standard Version).

At another time, Moses orders three thousand men put to the sword on God’s authority: “And he said to them, ‘Thus says the Lord God of Israel, “Put every man his sword on his side, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his companion, and every man his neighbor”’” (Exod. 32:27, Revised Standard Version).

Most Christians dismiss this and other biblical carnage as anachronistic and imagine such orders were eliminated with the coming of Jesus. However, in the New Testament, Jesus frequently reaffirms the laws of the prophets: “Think not that I have come to abolish the law, or the prophets: I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them” (Matt. 5:17, Revised Standard Version). The theist may respond that the above quotation is not a law but merely the report of an event, but the stories of the Bible are supposed to provide guides to proper behavior.