Recently I have been thinking about morality and its relationship to the Torah. Now I know there are many people who look at the Torah and say it isn't moral because of various reasons. For example, there are many passages which describe that the Jews are obligated to kill off every person of certain ethnic groups. Today when many frum Jews are confronted with this challenge there is the tendency to rationalize it. To explain that first off there are no Amalekites or Canaanites around anymore so we don't have to kill them off. Secondly they claim the situation was different back then so it was OK to kill innocent civilians, children, infants, etc.
Not only do I currently reject these apologetics, but the whole rationalization process seems nonsensical to me. For those who claim that without a completely good omnipresent being out there to tell us what is absolutely right and wrong there is no morality, in other words there is either absolute unchangeable morality or no morality, why in the world are you trying to apply your weak human reason to rationalize this absolute unchangeable morality in the first place? I thought the point of the Torah was to open it up, it tells you what is moral and what isn't, and you just accept that.
The reason, in my opinion, is that there is no such thing as an objective morality, there is only an internal morality we all develop over the course of our lives and then many try to explain their actions and cultural documents to fit their preexisting morality, sometimes in a very contrived manner. For example, when a person picks up a Torah they don't read it and follow it blindly, they examine it to see if it fits with their worldview. If the literal version doesn't do that they result to apologetics and contrived rationalizations, but if all you are doing is trying to fit this book to support your already existing worldview what point is having the book in the first place?
Comments, objections, corrections are all more than welcome.