Is the fundamental gap between creationists and non-creationists...

[renniks]

Perfect sense? Think about it.
People rely on their social group, much
like other animals.
Monkeys, wolves etc have a complex social structure.
The proto- morality there is essential to survival.

If "fittest" is a term to use, it's fitness of the group, not
the individual. A queen bee cannot even move!

Imagine a tribe characterized by theft, robbery rape
and murder within the tribe. As if it would last long
enough for anyone to discover them.
BTW
"Survival of fittest" is a very inadequate phrase, never used
by those familiar enough with the science to understand it
is facile and misleading.

'Sin" is about pleasing a so- called God,
and ifn it pleses you to talk about it, fine,
but you don't get to impose your choice of
religious notions on others.

How convenient! It helps the tribe? How does that help your case? I can rape and pillage and kill as much as I like as long as it advances my tribes agenda. As far as wolves, etc, please! Yes, they have a system of who is boss and who is the subject. But they have no objective morality. A wolf tearing at a moose's tendons and eating it while alive knows nothing of compassion or morality. I'm not even trying to impose my system of morality on anyone. I'm just making the point that there has to be some objective standard, or it's whoever is the toughest and meanest who rises to the top and we certainly have seen that in every pagan empire.

 

[renniks]

The main reason is the golden rule.

Survival of the fittest doe not equal survival of the ruthless.

Sin is an offense against God

Humans learned from the time they were hunters and gathers that when there is cooperation there is more food for everyone.

The golden rule comes directly from Jesus' words. So thanks for agreeing with me.

 

[renniks]

Right and wrong is about what works best for
society, is it not? People have the brains to
figure out what works.

Ok, then, you approve of wiping out entire cities if that advances your society. It worked for Rome.

 

[Astrid]

How convenient! It helps the tribe? How does that help your case? I can rape and pillage and kill as much as I like as long as it advances my tribes agenda. As far as wolves, etc, please! Yes, they have a system of who is boss and who is the subject. But they have no objective morality. A wolf tearing at a moose's tendons and eating it while alive knows nothing of compassion or morality. I'm not even trying to impose my system of morality on anyone. I'm just making the point that there has to be some objective standard, or it's whoever is the toughest and meanest who rises to the top and we certainly have seen that in every pagan empire.

Quite the effort to avoid seeing
the sense in what I said.

There are no objective standards
beyond what proves to work.

There are no absolutes in morality.

Certainly the Bible is a big flop
at setting absolutes or even
consistent standards, and Christian-
based societies? Ha.

In the absence of any such standards as you
speak of either in theory or practice your
notion about what must be is a nothingburger.

 

[Astrid]

Ok, then, you approve of wiping out entire cities if that advances your society. It worked for Rome.

Making up falsehoods about me is how you display your sense
of morality?

If you wish a sensible exchange of ideas, plesse
abide by normal rules of civil conduct.

BTW, the wiping out of cities is approved practice in the
bible. Are you a Christian?

 

[Speedwell]

The golden rule comes directly from Jesus' words. So thanks for agreeing with me.

An ancient moral precept found in almost all societies. Jesus just reaffirmed it.

 

[Speedwell]

How convenient! It helps the tribe? How does that help your case? I can rape and pillage and kill as much as I like as long as it advances my tribes agenda.

That seems to be how it has always worked--even for Christians.

 

[Speedwell]

There is a standard. It's given in the Ten commandments. If the standard is whatever I want it to be, well, who made me the authority?

You are making the unsubstantiated claim that God did.

 

[Frank Robert]

The golden rule comes directly from Jesus' words. So thanks for agreeing with me.

Confucius: The Golden Rule

And five centuries before Christ, Confucius set forth his own Golden Rule: "Do not impose on others what you do not wish for yourself."​

 

[AV1611VET]

BTW, the wiping out of cities is approved practice in the bible. Are you a Christian?

Gideon had to pare his army down to 300 men.

I wonder today if Gideon could even find 300 men to assemble an army today, if he had to recruit them from our "moral" society?

Maybe if he offered them hazardous duty pay, counseling, air-conditioned barracks, and a nice retirement plan, he could find some willing to set their sissy morals aside and train some of them to recognize a real enemy when they saw one.

I once told my wife, "If I get called to go fight, don't you DARE let me see you on TV in front of some reporters begging and whining for you husband to come home. I'd better see you on TV talking about how proud you are he's over there fighting for your freedom."

 

[Astrid]

An ancient moral precept found in almost all societies. Jesus just reaffirmed it.

I would be surprised if one could find a society that does not have its own
version of it.

To me it appears that Jesus's rules were not in any sense original
but rather the folk wisdom of the society.

 

[loveofourlord]

Confucius: The Golden Rule

And five centuries before Christ, Confucius set forth his own Golden Rule: "Do not impose on others what you do not wish for yourself."​

Personally, I prefer this version, It's rather easy to justify a lot of harm with the phrase, "Well if I was X I would hope someone would love me enough to force me to change my mind."

"If I was gay I would want people to condem me in order to change me and make me Christian." or such.

"If I was a Muslim I would want someone to come to my town and try to forcibly convert me from my heathen ways."

Or any other form of torture or bigotry of harm done in the name of religion.

 

[dlamberth]

Humans can't even agree on what love is, let alone all express it equally.

Love is not a noun. It's something we do. It comes from the Heart.
That your unable to go there speaks volumes of what exactly I've been pointing towards. Namely instead of preaching Love, Christianity now days preaches rules, laws and order.

 

[dlamberth]

There is a standard. It's given in the Ten commandments. If the standard is whatever I want it to be, well, who made me the authority?

The standard I generally use for morals is Justice. So for instance, where's the moral justice with all of these billionaires with their mansions and yachts while at the same time the streets are filling up with the homeless?

 

[Frank Robert]

The standard I generally use for morals is Justice. So for instance, where's the moral justice with all of these billionaires with their mansions and yachts while at the same time the streets are filling up with the homeless?

But the billionaires earned earned their mansions and yachts. /s

 

[Astrid]

The standard I generally use for morals is Justice. So for instance, where's the moral justice with all of these billionaires with their mansions and yachts while at the same time the streets are filling up with the homeless?

I am not a billionaire, but still...
Here in HK so many live in such tiny sad little spaces,
work hard but can never get ahead. I have a pretty nice place.
The moral justice issue is a knotty one, I think about it
but see no solutions.
On an individual or small scale basis, sure.

I give our maid bonuses and twice the legal pay for her work.
She supports her family in Philipoines with her salary.
I've paid directly to send the kids to school.

Little things.

Thing is while my net worth is quite substantial, it is
illiquid. I can't just sell.

That said, sure, it's disgusting to see televangelist or
anyone else throw money at self indulgent luxuries while
others beg for scraps.

Yet few among us give our all. Minimum wage workers in
America live in material splendor compared to a billion or
more around the world.
So how does one come up with a unifying theory on moral
justice?

 

[Astrid]

But the billionaires earned earned their mansions and yachts. /s

Some did. You have a solution in mind?

 

[durangodawood]

Why should there be any standard of right or wrong if there's no ultimate authority?

Because we need them. Therefore nature has endowed us with them.

 

[Frank Robert]

Some did. You have a solution in mind?

Their are solutions but politics is a money game for both the Rs and Ds and most of the money comes from corporations and the elites.
Off the top:
A fair tax system
A livable minimum wage
Enforcement of safe working rules
Affordable health care
Realistic penalties for financial crimes
Close down tax havens

 

[renniks]

Making up falsehoods about me is how you display your sense
of morality?

If you wish a sensible exchange of ideas, plesse
abide by normal rules of civil conduct.

BTW, the wiping out of cities is approved practice in the
bible. Are you a Christian?

I'm just reaching the logical conclusion from what you said. If society makes the rules, morality can be anything any society approves of. It's an ever moving target.
Wiping out cities happened in the Bible. It was not among the moral values of Jesus, obviously, who said to love your enemies. God's desires are revealed progressively throughout the book. What was accepted in a world without grace was not accepted AD. Of course many still practice it, even using God's name at times, which only reinforces the Truth that we need rules that aren't negotiable from an supreme authority.