Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I can think of something worse than the washing of hands that causes a 'very high infant mortality rate'.
When I say that animals have no morality, I would point first to the animals closest to us in evolutionary terms, which are chimpanzees. While Hollywood may portray them as cute and cuddly, they're actually savagely violent. They will attack humans, other chimps, and other animals, for no apparent reason. They'll even eat their own kids. You may remember the unfortunate story of Travis, the pet chimp in Connecticut that attacked and almost killed a woman before being shot by the police. Well, that is normal chimp behavior. There's no reason for it other than that chimps and chimps.The problem I have with the idea that we wouldn't know right from wrong without God or our humanity or our souls comes from observing my cat. She is 18 years old, 6 & 1/2 pounds, very intelligent and adorable. When we're playing, I touch her and she tries to scratch my hand before I can pull it away. She seems to know there are boundaries when playing this game; she would never swipe at my FACE for example. Even when she does scratch me on my hand or forearm, she makes sure not to scratch me too hard (although I have had visible scratch marks from this game!). She knows there is a limit to how deep she can claw into my skin (not very!). When I'm laying on my couch watching TV she is usually resting right beside me with her head less than a foot from mine. I have never been afraid that my cat, with her sharp claws, would scratch me in the eye in an attempt to start a game. She knows that the proper way to start a game is to swipe at my arm with her paw, nails retracted. She also knows that it is unacceptable to lick my food when I'm out of the room but she does anyway (Grrr!).
She seems to know the principles or rules of right conduct and make the distinction between right and wrong very well. In other words, she seems to have morality. This leads me to believe that any animal with a large enough brain can figure out the golden rule through extrapolation (although my cat probably doesn't think about it in those terms!). I reckon my cat, using her apparent, feline version of common sense, knows that she wouldn't appreciate me scratching her eye out and thus refrains from doing this to me (thankfully!)
People have spent their whole life to study the genealogies in the Bible. So I tend to put more credibility with the people who are experts in a subject. Compared to someone who wants to offer an opinion on something he knows nothing about. But that is just me, you can listen to whoever you want to listen to if they are qualifed or not. I know that atheists tend to listen to other atheists because it reinforces what they believe, even if they offer no evidence or proof for what they are saying.
How many grandfathers do you have? do their names match literally?Yeah, that's nice.
You said they match literally. They simply don't. They don't give the same name of Jesus' grandfather, so you have to resort to non-literality straight off the bat.
How many grandfathers do you have? do their names match literally?
Cabal, they got the genealogies correct.So you're saying the gospel writers couldn't even figure out who Jesus' actual grandfather was?
I beg your pardon?Either way, the point still stands - you can't read the genealogies literally and have them agree, you have to start resorting to nonliteral excuses, sorry, interpretations.
Cabal, they got the genealogies correct.
Jesus had two grandfathers -- both names given.
Do I really have to spell this out for you?
I beg your pardon?
Who can't read the genealogies literally? you?
what's stopping you?
You mean people like Timothy Luke Johnson? "The question of historicity is in this case futile and even fatuous. A better question concerns the function of the birth list." (From his commentary on Luke, in the Sacra Pagina commentary series.)People have spent their whole life to study the genealogies in the Bible. So I tend to put more credibility with the people who are experts in a subject.
You mean people like Timothy Luke Johnson? "The question of historicity is in this case futile and even fatuous. A better question concerns the function of the birth list." (From his commentary on Luke, in the Sacra Pagina commentary series.)
When I say that animals have no morality, I would point first to the animals closest to us in evolutionary terms, which are chimpanzees. While Hollywood may portray them as cute and cuddly, they're actually savagely violent. They will attack humans, other chimps, and other animals, for no apparent reason. They'll even eat their own kids. You may remember the unfortunate story of (link) the pet chimp in Connecticut that attacked and almost killed a woman before being shot by the police. Well, that is normal chimp behavior. There's no reason for it other than that chimps and chimps.
When a human being attacks another human being, we can make moral judgments about it. Generally we'll say it's morally wrong unless there's a mitigating circumstance such as self-defense. But I've never heard anyone applying the concepts of moral right and wrong to what Travis did. He attacked that woman because it was his nature as a chimpanzee to be violent.
As for cats, just consider cat behavior in the wild. Tom cats will fight each other to the death over control of territory and females. They'll also kill any kittens other than their own. Are these actions morally right or wrong? I would say that morality simply doesn't exist in the animal world. Some animals we can train to not bite and scratch. (Others we can't even do that.) But then again we can also train cats and dogs to fight. If an animal is trained to be violent, does it ever put a paw to its chin and contemplate the moral ramifications of being violent?
Actually, the idea of getting a 'soul' is not biblical. The bible states both humans and animals are souls (Gen 2;7, 2:19). Also the notion that people having an immaterial soul is simply not found anywhere in scripture. The bible speaks about a resurrection, not immortality of the soul.
Does morality exist without God? Why would it?
OR/
Why would it not?
First, you would have done better to post this in the Origins forum under General Theology. You will find most of the Christians there.UPDATE - NEW TOPIC: Were the authors of the books of the Bible that follow the book of Genesis literalists with regard to the Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel and Noah stories in Genesis or did the authors of post-Genesis books consider these particular stories allegory?
It was common at that time to make up geneologies. Aeneus had a geneology going back to Apollo. Does that make Apollo a real god? In this case, there is a theological reason to make such a geneology: to tie the "father" of the Israelites back to the supposed first man.1 Chronicles 1:1-27
(Genealogy from Adam to Abraham)
So are humans sometimes. As it turns out, apes have morals:When I say that animals have no morality, I would point first to the animals closest to us in evolutionary terms, which are chimpanzees. While Hollywood may portray them as cute and cuddly, they're actually savagely violent.
This is different from whether chimps have morals. Now you are saying that humans will not impose our morals on chimps. That is smart on our part. We are not about to make a moral judgement on the behavior of a chimp. But do you see that this is separate from whether chimps have moral behavior?When a human being attacks another human being, we can make moral judgments about it. Generally we'll say it's morally wrong unless there's a mitigating circumstance such as self-defense. But I've never heard anyone applying the concepts of moral right and wrong to what Travis did. He attacked that woman because it was his nature as a chimpanzee to be violent.
Actually, AV, the grandfather is the only name in the 2 genealogies that is the same between them. All the other names, such as the father of Joseph, is different between the lists. One of the genealogies (Luke I think) has 7 more generations than the other.Cabal, they got the genealogies correct.
Jesus had two grandfathers -- both names given.
Do I really have to spell this out for you?
You mean the father?Actually, AV, the grandfather is the only name in the 2 genealogies that is the same between them.
It's different in my genealogy as well.All the other names, such as the father of Joseph, is different between the lists.
Try 36 -- source.One of the genealogies (Luke I think) has 7 more generations than the other.
I don't read.Did you ever read the genealogies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?