Don’t look at the context when the stuff is written. Look at the context of political interests now when the religion is actually practiced. That fits the dot most.
Should we drink alcohol? In the context of christian mongols that love beer, they would gladly show that Jesus’ first miracle is producing alcohol and enjoy the fact that drinking alcohol is part of a holy sacrament.
Obviously the puritan in US have very different view.
Sticking a knife to someone will cause him die. People don’t want to die. So they come up with some arrangements. Let’s not kill each other. But people are selfish. So they said, okay, those who kill, we kill. Tada…. We got laws and justice. Then we don’t kill each other. That would be the scientific explanation of morality. Interests of the powerful.
Still… Religious answers maybe more correct than liberal. Religious people know that you need to kill to prevent murder. Liberal that understand evolution theory doesn’t.
That’s basically the essence of western sexual morality. Anyone can bang your wife but you (marital rape is illegal), and any kid deserve your money, except yours. Okay that’s a joke. But if you interpret lack of reward as punishment, and anything punished as prohibited, and consider marriage as a form of prostitution, it won’t be too far of to accept.
It’s not that bad considering the alternatives though. It all comes from what I call, inevitability of power.
So, basically different people favor different ideologies. Different cultures are controlled by different people and hence tend to have different values. Interests of the people that are in control decide the prevailing morality in a society.