The Evolution of Morality

[AV1611VET]

Witches were a part of African society until the Evangelicals came and fomented hatred and intolerance.

Right --

Prior to missionaries (not evangelicals) showing up, African society knew no hatred and intolerance, did they?

 

[Ginger123]

In my opinion, your disgust against Christians is fake.

In this Christian nation, the first ten amendments to our constitution insure no pogrom will occur legally; yet you still rail against Christianity.

If you are living in a country where Christians would like to kill you for being an atheist,* then the United States of America should seem like a pearl of great price to you.

Over here, even the Muslims know better than to harass you.

Instead you view U.S. Christians the same, I take it?

* Makes me wonder how smart you are.

The only thing stopping US Christians from running riot is the constitution and the police.
Give Christians their head and they would kill every Atheist out there just because they don't believe as they do.

 

[Ginger123]

Prior to missionaries (not evangelicals) showing up, African society knew no hatred and intolerance, did they?

The missionaries just gave them more reasons to kill.

 

[AV1611VET]

Who is to judge which church is heretical?

Ya -- hate 'em all across the board and let God sort out His own ... right?

 

[AV1611VET]

But Christians love to kill especially US gun totting Christians when they go to war,

If you go to war, you'd better want (not love) to kill, or you have no business being there.

And if you're pinned down in crossfire, I'd bet you'd be relieved if a squad showed up and blew your enemies back into the jungle where they came from, wouldn't you?

they even call on Jesus to help them do it better,

Better, safer, quicker.

every war the US fights is virtually a holy war with their God firmly behind them.

Then stay out of our way and don't fly any planes into our buildings, or we'll show you the difference between "want" and "love."

 

[AV1611VET]

I wonder what other US citizens think of your assessment of their actions.

They're more than welcome to come here and live with us if they want to do so.

They're even allowed to spout their rhetoric among us.

I'll tell you this:

I'll bet if they had their choice, they'd rather come and live next to us than mzungu.*

* (QV 630)

 

[EternalDragon]

The only thing stopping US Christians from running riot is the constitution and the police.
Give Christians their head and they would kill every Atheist out there just because they don't believe as they do.

What?? That's the weirdest claim I have ever heard.

The last thing any born again Christian wants to do is kill (murder) someone. In fact it is a violation of scripture.

 

[Oncedeceived]

They're more than welcome to come here and live with us if they want to do so.

They're even allowed to spout their rhetoric among us.

I'll tell you this:

I'll bet if they had their choice, they'd rather come and live next to us than mzungu.*

* (QV 630)

The unwarranted hatred of Christian and Christianity is growing. Look up.

 

[mzungu]

Ya -- hate 'em all across the board and let God sort out His own ... right?

No AV I do not hate! Hate is like a cancer. It will eventually consume you. My only peeve with religions in general is when they transgress upon human rights and try to replace science with religion. You know me better than that AV. I respect all people's right to believe in their faith. I will even fight for them to have that right.

As for America? I did visit in 1984. Beautiful country but definitely not my cup of tea.

 

[AV1611VET]

The unwarranted hatred of Christian and Christianity is growing. Look up.

 

[AV1611VET]

Beautiful country but definitely not my cup of tea.

I think I can understand why.

 

[nuttypiglet]

You can't disown them as christians because you don't agree with their actions, it doesn't work that way.

You see, people who believe in many of the same things you do, aren't always good people.

Really? says who? I keep seeing quotes regarding punishment by death in the Bible, but they are aimed at the Jews, not Christians. Jesus said that many will CLAIM to know him, but he will not know them. I could call myself a Neuro surgeon, but at some time you have to prove it. We can basically call ourselves anything we like, but the actions reflect that title.

 

[nuttypiglet]

The only thing stopping US Christians from running riot is the constitution and the police.
Give Christians their head and they would kill every Atheist out there just because they don't believe as they do.

Then I repeat, they are NOT Christians. LOVE YOUR ENEMY, LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOUR, DO TO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD WANT THEM TO DO TO YOU.
These are Christian values, NOT KILLING.

 

[Ginger123]

The unwarranted hatred of Christian and Christianity is growing. Look up.

Unwarranted? tell that to the people of Nigeria being burnt as witches.

Google 'who is the most hated group of people in the US', thankfully Christianity is declining rapidly in the US,
it will barely get a mentioned in the next presidential election that's how quickly it's declining,
if candidates even mention their religion they will not go on to be nominated for president.

The Republican party will keep religion at a distance in the next Presidential election.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Not consciously guided, but again it doesn't need to be conscious. I'll revisit my earlier metaphor - a cold day can 'guide' you to put on warm clothes. There are elements of chance to it - environment can change, mutations can modify traits, etc. But its not entirely random and it happens without conscious reason. It doesn't need one.

I am so sorry, I meant to come back to this and totally forgot.

No, a cold day doesn't guide you, that is most certainly survival. Finding warmth and being moral are two distinctly different things.

Personally, I find life in all its forms from simple to complex to be remarkable. From what I've read, the earliest known form of life appears in the fossil record some 3+ billion years ago. In the same way that the eye is thought to have originated as a cluster of cells slightly more sensitive to light than others around them and gradually growing in complexity towards something like the human eye (or other better animal eyes), I can imagine the brain and nervous system developing from similar modified cells.

So tell me how you feel this light sensitivity could evolve to the point when the nervous system would be connected to it and how it would then evolve so many different eyes in such a short time? We are looking at about a half of a million years to develop all the necessary refinements to come to the complete and complex eyes seen in so many lifeforms in the Cambrian.

We appear to have gone on some kind of tangent - I confess I'm not sure what we're discussing on this point.

W were reducing the morality we see today in humans back in time to see if it could have evolved. I want to ask you something here. Do you agree that most evolutionary traits are universally stable and can be seen running through the entire current species? I also want to ask if you believe in free will.

When you get living creatures who band together into groups for mutual benefit. Then you need to work out ways of behaving towards one-another and getting along.

I don't disagree, but I don't see this being something that creates morality.

To be clear, we're looking at these other life-forms through the lens of our own preconceptions and ideas about morality. We can see some behaviors that we regard as moral, and others that we might not. Humans might consider their own ideas to be 'right' morally, and so regard animals acting differently to be morally 'wrong.' But again as I've mentioned, nature isn't deliberately aiming for any specific idea of morality.

Exactly. Would you also say that an individual such as the neanderthal would consider the long term success of his species?

I mentioned in earlier posts that banding together in groups is a good survival mechanism, but it is not the only one. In a world with as many different environments, ecological niches, and living creatures as Earth, all of them in flux and ever-changing, there is of course no guarantee that any specific trait will necessarily be expressed - certainly not in everything. While plants do react to stimuli, producing natural pesticides or unfolding blossoms to absorb sunlight etc., they've done all right without intelligence.

Are they?

I do not see it as evident that the amount of water on Earth is 'fine tuned'. Ditto for the universe. I can ask why it is that way, but I don't see it as evidence of the miraculous in and of itself. God could miraculously produce life regardless of the universe's 'tuning', couldn't He? If He wanted to there could be redwoods growing out of deserts without any water at all, or whales flying through the air feeding on clouds. Humans could live alone on a planet of glass and just soak up sunlight in defiance of all known physical laws. Nothing like that happens.

This is a false dichotomy.

Why should I consider it evidence of God's existence for the universe to be 'tuned' exactly as it would need to be to allow for life that isn't supported by any violations of that tuning?

What?

Why did it have to be precise to any degree? Couldn't God have made things work anyway?

Again, false dichotomy. It is obvious that this is the way life could form on earth. To claim that it could be something different but we know that the precise tuning of the universe is just what it needs to be for us to be here.

I'm saying they would be objective - they would always be true. There might be some lunatics who think differently, but we can ignore them as wrong. This is why I brought up the math - the solution is evident and we don't have to listen to people who disagree.

So are you saying that you think they are universal?

That's why I've been saying there are certain truths we can discover about how we behave towards one another.

If we discover them how are they evolved?

Not in the slightest. I ask almost every time I come this site. I remain ever-open to communication from Him.

IF that is true then I know that you will be answered.

People can know what is real, but they can also be mistaken. I have seen comments from people who claim nothing could change their minds - to me, that would not seem to be the position of someone who is truly interested in whether or not what they believe is true, but wants to believe it is no matter what.

You have to understand that once someone knows something is true they are not going to change their minds. Do you think you would ever be led to believe that evolution is not true?

Nope. They're entitled to their dumb opinion.

Ok.

No question. Is it more or less harsh than 'your spirit is dead and you're going to Hell?'

No. That is why Christians try to reason with non-believers.

I'm not quoting anyone from this forum in particular - this is a sentiment often expressed by theists. "Our deeds are as filthy rags", etc. What we do doesn't matter one way or another. Any crime can be forgiven and wiped away at death - except atheism. No amount of valor matters should one die an atheist. And there's a place for atheists when they die that is not considered very pleasant.

Well, we are all sinful which is what they should be pointing out. I would be joining you in hell if I had not found that God was real.

Do Christians not believe that all people are born with original sin? So that even one who lives without sinning will still have this original sin through being born?

We are born with sin. However, we are not judged for that sin until we are old enough to make a choice. At least that is what some verses support.

That the only way to be free of sin is to believe that the Christian God exists and pledge themselves to Him by accepting Jesus as their lord and savior?

Yes, but the first step is not always the end result. All one must do is ask god to show Himself and earnestly try to be open to Him. Which is what you said you have done. the accepting Christ as your Savior is something that comes about from (unless you believe do to some other reason) knowing that God exists and who He is. Which is getting away from the questions about morality as per this forum.

That any who die without being free of sin are condemned to an afterlife of torment in Hell?
That anyone in Hell deserves to be there?

We don't make the rules. The choice is between God and the individual. Like I said, I would be headed that way myself if God had not revealed Himself to me.

If they don't, then I have been grossly misinformed by a great many people claiming to be Christians.

I could be the best atheist who ever lived and it wouldn't do me any good if I died an unbeliever, would it?

No. Good is not good enough. We can never be good enough on our own. I can't either.

Anyway... point of all this was that if you think it's all wine and roses on the side of the atheists when it comes to dealing with hurtful rhetoric, you're mistaken. Calling someone a sinner is an infinitely (literally, infinitely) more poisonous sentiment than calling someone stupid, even if neither party realizes it.

Being a sinner is not fault of our own, it is in our ancestry. Ignorant is something that is due to the person him or herself.

 

[biggles53]

That is completely ridiculous.

No it's not.....

This is EXACTLY what happens when we encourage people to form their world view on the basis of faith.......ANY faith..!

I don't particularly care what you consider to be a "true" Christian, because your version wil be based on YOUR faith, as those Nigerians base it on theirs, as the Westboro nuts base it on theirs, as Hitler based it on his........and so on and so on.....

The bottom line, for ALL of you, is the poisonous influence of faith itself...!

Sam Harris in his End of Faith makes the comment that 'it is not Islamic fundamentalists that cause the problem, it is the fundamentals of Islam'...

I'd like to broaden that observation....its not faith-based fundamentalists we have to address, it's the fundamentals of faith....!

 

[AV1611VET]

I am an Atheist, I don't hate anyone ...

With respect to your Atheism, or in spite of your Atheism?

Atheist regimes are some of the worst on earth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

With respect to your Atheism, or in spite of your Atheism?

Atheist regimes are some of the worst on earth.

Yes, they can be. They are almost as bad as Christian regimes can be.

 

[biggles53]

With respect to your Atheism, or in spite of your Atheism?

Atheist regimes are some of the worst on earth.

Such a tired and discredited argument....

But then, look who's proffering it...........

 

[Golden Yak]

I am so sorry, I meant to come back to this and totally forgot.

I've been following the thread, I understand how your mind might be on other things.

No, a cold day doesn't guide you, that is most certainly survival. Finding warmth and being moral are two distinctly different things.

Metaphorically, Once, metaphorically. Behaving a certain way, a way we might interpret as moral, is a survival strategy too.

So tell me how you feel this light sensitivity could evolve to the point when the nervous system would be connected to it and how it would then evolve so many different eyes in such a short time? We are looking at about a half of a million years to develop all the necessary refinements to come to the complete and complex eyes seen in so many lifeforms in the Cambrian.

The Cambrian era was some 500 million years ago. If life has existed for over 3 billion years, that's much more than half a million years of development. I would imagine that the nervous system would already be connected to elements of it that become refined and specialized - eyes, brain, etc.

W were reducing the morality we see today in humans back in time to see if it could have evolved. I want to ask you something here. Do you agree that most evolutionary traits are universally stable and can be seen running through the entire current species? I also want to ask if you believe in free will.

Depends on what you mean by universally stable traits. For the most part, I see humans as generally comparable physically and mentally, and that differences in culture are the main reason for different behavior. And yes, I do believe in free will.

I don't disagree, but I don't see this being something that creates morality.

Do you agree that if you have sufficiently intelligent creatures working out ways of behaving towards one-another and getting along, they'll develop ideas about what the best ways are?

Exactly. Would you also say that an individual such as the neanderthal would consider the long term success of his species?

Probably not. I think there are very few creatures of any species, including humans, who conciously think in those terms.

Are they?

Are they... reacting to stimuli? Certainly. Are they doing well? Grass is e'erywhere.

This is a false dichotomy.

No. I'm not saying He can't be real because all that doesn't happen, I'm saying I don't see it as evidence of His existence that the universe is made in such a way that nothing like that does happen.

What?

God's power isn't restricted based on how the universe is tuned - he could make life here that thrives regardless of how it's tuned, even if life functioned purely on miracles. The universe could be tuned in a way that is utterly inimical to all life and yet still have life that survives through miraculous intervention, in defiance of every scientific principle.

The fact that life functions here without any apparent miracles powering it is not, to me, evidence that a supernatural creator must be responsible for it.

It could still be true that there is a supernatural creator - for me, though, the tuning of the universe being what it is does not make me think that.

Again, false dichotomy. It is obvious that this is the way life could form on earth. To claim that it could be something different but we know that the precise tuning of the universe is just what it needs to be for us to be here.

See above. If God's doing the creating, why does He need it to be precisely this way, or any way?

If He has done it, then to me it looks like He's done so in such a way as to hide His intervention completely.

So are you saying that you think they are universal?

As universal as 2+2=4. I think it's 4, I can't imagine the circumstances where it would be 5, and I feel like I can dismiss anyone who thinks it is 5.

If we discover them how are they evolved?

The behavior is evolved - the truths about how the best way to behave is, I think, an emergent property of the behavior.

IF that is true then I know that you will be answered.

Super. I take note of the all-caps 'if.' Is my sincerity in question, or did you just hold down the shift key too long?

You have to understand that once someone knows something is true they are not going to change their minds. Do you think you would ever be led to believe that evolution is not true?

It certainly wouldn't be easy at this point. The problem I have with relying upon God alone to change someone's mind is that, if there is no God, their mind will never change. If they're wrong they will never allow themselves to be correct. I feel that level of certainty, that level of faith, can be dangerous... as evidenced by certain links in this thread. Faith trumping reason and evidence shouldn't be encouraged or regarded as a virtue.

No. That is why Christians try to reason with non-believers.

That wasn't a yes or no question - do you think the sentiment 'you're stupid' is more harsh or less harsh than 'your spirit is not alive and you are going to Hell when you die.'

Well, we are all sinful which is what they should be pointing out. I would be joining you in hell if I had not found that God was real.

That doesn't really soften the issue for me, Once - "You're horrible, but so am I, and so is everyone else!" is a terrible sentiment to express.

We are born with sin. However, we are not judged for that sin until we are old enough to make a choice. At least that is what some verses support.

So I understand. Which would mean that even newborns deserve hell, but are let off the hook for being underage.

Yes, but the first step is not always the end result. All one must do is ask god to show Himself and earnestly try to be open to Him. Which is what you said you have done. the accepting Christ as your Savior is something that comes about from (unless you believe do to some other reason) knowing that God exists and who He is. Which is getting away from the questions about morality as per this forum.

I would certainly have plenty of questions I'd want answered beyond simply whether or not He really existed before taking any further steps.

We don't make the rules. The choice is between God and the individual. Like I said, I would be headed that way myself if God had not revealed Himself to me.

Which I find to be an appalling state of affairs, if true. It's a shame we don't make the rules - I think we could do much better. I can't imagine inflicting eternal torment on someone because they hurt my feelings by not knowing I existed.

No. Good is not good enough. We can never be good enough on our own. I can't either.

So I am told.

Believe me, I'd rather just be called 'stupid.'

Being a sinner is not fault of our own, it is in our ancestry.

That is why I find the notion of anyone being eternally condemned for it to be a repugnant one.