The bible is immoral

I would argue that the claim that the Bible is immoral depends on how you define morality. But also, the claim of morality depends not only on who the reader is, but who the author is, who the intended audience is, and the cultural context of the writing. Many of the examples that you've extrapolated from the text are indeed examples of what we may consider immoral today, but in the cultural context of the writing, it was commonplace. This in no way means that I am making the claim that it is moral in today's day and age. My claim is that the Bible's morality is dependent on who is reading the text, also from a literary standpoint, it depends on the intentions of the writer. Now, since we cannot dig up the writers of the text and ask them, I say the later of the claims is difficult to ascertain, but I would say that my former claim stand true. If one is a Christian, specifically a North American Christian, the morality of the Bible would be more negative based on what you quote. On the other hand, there is good that one can pull from the text, just look at any Sunday school class for children and you can find the stories of David and Goliath concerning bravery and strength, the story of Daniel and the Lion's Den about being calm, patient, and faithful, the many pieces of life advice from Proverbs, etc. So, there is good and bad to be pulled from the text, but this depends on the reader and what they choose to pull. If you want to avoid spiritualizing the text, if you are someone who may be non-theistic, you can see that any text that has been so influential has been under heavy scrutiny and diverse interpretation. If you're an American, take the Constitution for example simply from a perspective of scrutiny, there are so many questions and debates over it that the meaning has been confused over the years; there is no one right way to construe it. This by no means devalues the text, be it the Bible or the Constitution but conveys the message that right and wrong are grey. I would say that any text that is highly regarded should be analyzed, but if one is religious and only reading the Bible for moral guidance, I would argue that they are not reading the text for it's full intent in the first place. I mean, there is poetry, narratives about war, love stories, figurative stories, proverbs, spiritual guidance, some historical context, and also mythological context (myth not meaning untrue but being a story of great importance to a group of people); there is just so much to read. Now, I agree that if you broad-stroke the Bible, it can be seen as immoral. In doing so, however, you have devalued all of the other components of the text and the meaning that the text has to people who read it for other things rather than morality. I disagree with your statement that the Bible is immoral, on the grounds that it is too broad of a statement and that it seems that you are attempting to reduce it, superimposing your own contemporary beliefs onto a text that was written outside of our own cultural context. I would also make that argument for someone who says that the Bible is entirely moral as well, or makes any claim that paints with such a broad brush. The Bible is neither one way or the other, concerning our contemporary context; the individual that pulls from the text is the moral or immoral agent in the equation, not the text itself. I would argue that it is immoral to make a claim one way or the other, claiming a sort of confirmation bias and ignoring the entirety of the book and the adherents of that particular faith. I like that you pull examples, but there is little substance outside of your bullet points. I can understand what you mean, and I can recognize that people on the other side may use the Bible to defend their morality, but I would disagree with them as well. You pull examples, but your argument rests only in the contemporary understanding and is weak even in that context. You assume that your own morality is correct and that no one else's is, which is presumptuous but also makes your argument from pathos even more unbelievable. You only look at things that could be construed as negative and that shows your ignorance and lack of understanding of the text and of the people that read it, as well as all of the context behind the text and writers themselves. I disagree with you and I would argue that you should reword your argument to say something like, "Contemporary Christians are immoral." instead of this vague, reductionist argument. If that were done, then perhaps clarity would come to the debate and people may understand your full meaning. But finally, if you think that the Bible, all in all, is immoral then I disagree, because morality rests in the conscience of the reader and how they apply what they read, not the text itself.