(July 19, 2019 at 11:03 pm)BryanS Wrote: The Bible is quite explicit about morality coming from the authority of god (Moses's tablets delivered from Mt Sainai, and Jesus's sermon on the mount delivered in homage to that act). Indeed, if there is a morality that is independent from what any god says (as atheists argue) then what need for god? A Christian such as you describe has essentially decided to do away with any need for god.
Often times, such a Christian who has their own morality separate from their faith will selectively call on authority of their faith to insist on a morality that is in conflict with society's evolving mores. Everyone knew homosexuality was morally wrong, and the Bible seemed to agree. From the Bible, one can learn just how a master is to treat his slaves. And the Bible is quite clear about the subservient roll wives must have to their husbands. The religiously devout are often the last to acknowledge changing morality, and the Bible and resulting Christian faith deserves much of the blame.
Another way to look at this is that if morality is a work product of society rather than religion, then any religion whose morality is very much different from societal morality will be deemed ... wait for it ... immoral. So no religion can afford to be wildly different in its moral code. Generally, the religious morality just has some bolted-on add-ins that society is willing to tolerate, such as "saving yourself for marriage". And this implies that each religion, despite its pretenses to being the protectors and keepers of an unchanging morality, is obliged to evolve morally.
The way religion generally handles this is to change, but to always be at least a couple of generations behind the rest of society. That way by the time a few of the old folks notice the sleight of hand going on, no one pays any attention to them. To the current young and adult working cohorts, the current regime is all they've ever known. The claim that morality is black and white and immutable seems plausible.
This also explains why religion tends to be conservative relative to developments in society, why it resists new insights, particularly when those insights move certain persons or classes of persons from pariah to being embraced -- or certain activities or trains of thought from forbidden to accepted. It's because religion has never innovated or invented anything. It is society that does that, too. Religion is always trying to Keep Things the Same. It's not above borrowing ideas or tropes from other cultures / religions, but even that is testament to its utter bankruptcy when it comes to truly new ideas.
