Inconsistency is a lesion, an error precursor and a sign of biases, that defeats any research and slanders the integrity of the researcher.

Its inconsistent to conveniently use different metrics and yardstick for dealing with similar topics. That's why, consistency is a core value in Islam as demanded by the 7th century Qur’an.

{یَـٰۤأَیُّهَا ٱلَّذِینَ ءَامَنُوا۟ كُونُوا۟ قَوَّ ٰ⁠مِینَ لِلَّهِ شُهَدَاۤءَ بِٱلۡقِسۡطِۖ وَلَا یَجۡرِمَنَّكُمۡ شَنَـَٔانُ قَوۡمٍ عَلَىٰۤ أَلَّا تَعۡدِلُوا۟ۚ ٱعۡدِلُوا۟ هُوَ أَقۡرَبُ لِلتَّقۡوَىٰۖ وَٱتَّقُوا۟ ٱللَّهَۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ خَبِیرُۢ بِمَا تَعۡمَلُونَ} سورة المائدة الآية ٨.

"O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah and be just witnesses and let not the enmity and hatred of others make you avoid justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety, and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is Well-Acquainted with what you do." [Surah Al-Māʾidah: 5/8]

Overturning and upholding something at the same time is a sign of inconsistency. I read an article this morning, wherein the agnostic writer inconsistently overturned what he considered the 'outdated' morality of the 7th century (he clearly meant Islam), yet he in the same article unconsciously upheld the 'outdated' Roman morality of the 2nd century.

Seriously?!

The writer overturned the 7th century Islamic morality and wrote:

"We must struggle with difficult questions using our conscience & evolving understanding of the human condition. It may not always be easy and we may not always agree (& it should be noted that those who claim to follow objective moral standards don’t always agree either,) but it allows humanity to keep striving to improve rather than remain bound to the morality of the 7th century."

And then he upheld the 2nd century Roman morality when he wrote:
"A statement often attributed to Marcus Aurelius puts it well"

Question: Who is Marcus Aurelius?
The answer: A Roman emperor from 161 to 180 AD (2nd century) and a Stoic philosopher.

Rejecting the Islamic morality for being from the 7th century and then upholding a 2nd century Roman morality is a symptom of inconsistency, which is a lesion, an error precursor and a sign of biases, that defeats such writer's articles and slanders his integrity as a writer.

In the 1980s, my brother or uncle (I am not sure) was a student in Miami Florida. During a religious course, a non Muslim student criticized Qur'an for being old. The non Muslim instructor replied "Son! That's a plus!" Bravo.

So don't get me wrong, I am not against ancient teachings. I am just against inconsistency!