“You can be a cheat, rape, murder , lie and embezzle. In many cases it will open up more time and more opportunity to procreate and thats all Evolution “cares” about.” – ABlacksmanagain
you may be on to something here, seeing as how the rapists, murder’s and thieves end up siring the most children of the human species….
except that’s not true. and except that evolution may not care as much about numbers as it does about numbers that lead to more numbers – in other words, overall survival success.
but really, who cares? You’re trying to make the point that god made morals and that we know them through the bible – except the moral precepts taught in the bible were all taught by others before the bible… and except that many bible-believers are morally corrupt while many non-bible-believers are ethical.
so the bible wasnt needed to get an idea of right and wrong and having the bible doesnt mean a person will do right instead of wrong.
“Morality is defined by the culture and the times. Even in Judeo-Christianity one can see the change in moral standards. At one time a husband could have his wife killed on their wedding night if he found her hymen to not be intact. ”
Gary conduct an experiment. See if for once you can not go of into babbling nonsense. You continue to babble about what Christianity teaches and are totally and absolutely clueless at just about every turn. Christianity has never had a time where it taught the “moral standard” was to kill anyone on their wedding night no matter what culture you point to.
Now I sense if you embark upon it the experiment will fail but upon repeated attempts it may tend to diminish the stupidity you break out with.
meanwhile morality is the sense of some action being wrong or right. Once you claim that wrong or right is based on culture or points in time then it becomes meaningless to object to immoral actions. the person may merely be just ahead of their times and vindicated by future generations. Your humanism rationals fair no better than the rest of your merry band here
Raping five year olds becomes neither right nor wrong good nor evil
Nazis should not have been punished because killing Jews was fine and dandy in their culture
Killing homosexuals for their orientation would be fine and dandy because that was the time for it
and why bemoan slavery or racism to even change it since it was the morality of the day.
Your distinction is without merit. It falls down unable to get up when it makes any claim of morality for itself.
ablacksmanagain, slavery was the word of god in the OT and jeezzzuuusss was the same god in the flesh in the NT. it wasn’t the morality of the day it was the will of god. can’t argue that
“and if helping each other out aids in the fitness to procreate, then evolution seems to explain it.”
and how would that explain the immorality of murder (just for starters). It helps to procreate as well (kill of the competitors and you genes dominate) so do many wrong actions. Stealing can make you richer and aid procreation. Rape a twelve your old and she may procreate. in fact using an evolutionary argument the more years the female will have to procreate the younger she starts. Evolution doesn’t even begin to explain it. Sorry
@ ablacksmanagain says That secularists do not adhere to a hard and fast objective morality yet can judge which actions is more moral than another is the very kind of gibberish you all should be embarrassed to utter but have to in order to save face from the logical consequence of your atheism.
Moral and immoral sentiments such as the practice of distinguishing right from wrong, exercising moral awareness, and recognizing moral taboos are nearly universal. Where you go wrong is pretending that there is a particular moral code or standard to which you believe your God is responsible for creating. These particulars can and do change across populations and time… including the blessed recipients of this ‘objective’ god-approved code and the institutional dogmas and doctrines built in its various names… but the sentiments are the same across all cultural, linguistic, gender, age, religious, and ethical boundaries. Moral sentiments I describe above without question even cross the species boundary.. not that you care.
As for innate moral values (sorry that may appear to be a negative pun, Nate), we often encounter the really bad argument about no biological reasons for altruism or its widespread approval. So it’s interesting to note that a survey of 60 ‘traditional societies’ (like the Dogon, Hopi, Tzeltal, and so on) found that of seven key moral values specified in advance (obligation to kin, loyalty to group, reciprocity, bravery, respect, fairness, and recognition of property rights) most were held by nearly all societies, and every one was found in six ‘cultural regions’ also identified in advance. That’s interesting because these values appear consistently across what we consider very early social units. When you add in the responses (in their millions) to the trolley problems, we find a very consistent picture that demonstrates morality to be linked first with ‘feelings’ and only secondly with reasons and learned behaviour. Neurological studies estimate not only a vast majority of moral considerations are actually instantly selected without any directed thought but actually precedes frontal cortex activity altogether (the bit used for such higher cognitive functioning like… oh, let’s just pick one randomly… say, religious apologetics).
All of this mutually supportive physical evidence points us in the direction of biology to be the root of moral considerations and not organized thinking subject to various environmental influences (like culture, religion, and so on).
Mind you, this actual research (we’ll mis-characterize it as ‘atheist’ because it doesn’t osculate the rump of faith properly) is almost too embarrassing to utter in response to the most excellent and rational one offered by theists like ablacksmanagain: a ‘sense’ of objective rules transmitted to us (because we’re the special primates on this hunk of rock) by the mechanism of POOF!ism from an agency quite accurately described as OogityBoogity!
I get the sense, ablacksmanagain, that irony is not your strongest suit.
“ablacksmanagain, slavery was the word of god in the OT and jeezzzuuusss was the same god in the flesh in the NT. it wasn’t the morality of the day it was the will of god. ”
Sorry……..Slavery in the OT was not based on racism and nothing like what we usually reference today . It was almost exclusively military or a voluntary financial arrangement (that you could subsequently be freed from)
and no despite your usual no study babbling the OT Torah which the jews lived by never demanded as the will of God people to have slaves.
Also, fitness in evolutionary understanding means reproductive fitness and this doesn’t mean what you think it means. It means successful reproduction. That’s it.
Mike you are trying to prove that atheism and the process of evolutionary natural selection have no standards of morality. I agree with you. There must be something more.
That is why mankind invented gods and religion.
I believe that Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism are definitely major improvements over the behavior of our primordial ancestors. But I believe that humanism is the next (and better) step in our collective evolutionary development.
We humans have always made the rules when it comes to morality. We may try to attribute them to invisible gods, but in reality, we made the rules. I believe that Christianity was a major improvement over ancient Judaism…in principle, but Christianity in practice has many flaws. In practice, Christians have used the idea that “Jesus is the only way” and that those who don’t choose to believe/obey him are sinners (evil) as justification for all kinds of horrific behavior.
Secular Humanism has refined and expanded upon the better principles of religion, and abandoned the racist, bigoted, and violent features of religion. Yes, many of the principles of humanism are derived from Christian principles. We secular humanists should acknowledge that and be grateful to Christians for these contributions. But humanism is better; an advancement, in my opinion.
“Raping five year olds becomes neither right nor wrong good nor evil
Nazis should not have been punished because killing Jews was fine and dandy in their culture
Killing homosexuals for their orientation would be fine and dandy because that was the time for it
and why bemoan slavery or racism to even change it since it was the morality of the day.” – ABlacksmanagain
what does this have to do with anything?
the bible claims god ordered the israelites to kill men, women and children so that they could like in their houses and eat from their fields. sounds immoral, but I guess the bible-believer’s idea of morality has nothing to do with specific actions, but with whether or not god approved at a given time.
at times, god wanted them to kill everything and babies except for virgin girls, which they were to keep for themselves. yay, morality.
slavery too – not condemned in the bible. a christian slave owner in the NT wasnt commanded to free his slaves, but to be a good master. Bible morality, yay.
I never said slavery was based on racism you ignorant jackass. clearly just like every other dumbass Christian you deny what is in the bible.
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.’ If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
It was almost exclusively military or a voluntary financial arrangement (that you could subsequently be freed from)
“and how would that explain the immorality of murder (just for starters). It helps to procreate as well (kill of the competitors and you genes dominate) so do many wrong actions. Stealing can make you richer and aid procreation. Rape a twelve your old and she may procreate. in fact using an evolutionary argument the more years the female will have to procreate the younger she starts. Evolution doesn’t even begin to explain it. Sorry” – ABlacksmanagain
do you feel safe when a murderer is on the loose? many people do not. They dont like it, because they fear they, or someone they know, could be next. They usually eliminate the perceived threat.
when eliminated, the body cant produce sperm or eggs as good as when they were alive, thereby reducing the chances of passing along genes to new generation.
you’re trying to make it out as though evolution has mind is creating a perfect species – that’s a misunderstanding. and deviations do arise at times.
but deviations in biblical morality change as well. nothing iron clad there.
and how would that explain the immorality of murder (just for starters). It helps to procreate as well (kill of the competitors and you genes dominate) so do many wrong actions. Stealing can make you richer and aid procreation. Rape a twelve your old and she may procreate. in fact using an evolutionary argument the more years the female will have to procreate the younger she starts. Evolution doesn’t even begin to explain it. Sorry
Are you serious? Do you truly not see how a number of evolutionary pressures would select against such behavior?
There would be pressures in both directions. As you say, if you murder someone to get what you want (your neighbor’s wife, perhaps), then you’ll father children with her and he won’t. However, the rest of society will quickly end your life when the opportunity arises, which keeps you from fathering as many children as you would. Thus, in our history, we’ve seen people who have gotten away with this behavior (like powerful despots), but we’ve also seen movements toward greater equality and protection of the weak.
And just as we would expect from such a history, humans have developed both qualities: sometimes we’re selfish and even take advantage of others. But most of us also have empathy that motivates us to be fair and do what’s “right.”
“Moral and immoral sentiments such as the practice of distinguishing right from wrong, exercising moral awareness, and recognizing moral taboos are nearly universal. ”
Yes along with the nearly universal presence of religion with them.;)
or did you fall on your head and miss that little factual nugget? Whenever are you going to make a good point?
“All of this mutually supportive physical evidence points us in the direction of biology to be the root of moral considerations and not organized thinking subject to various environmental influences (like culture, religion, and so on).”
The vast and obvious stupidity of your argument is betrayed by the evidence you point to. Lets take a gander at it because the problem is never with the data its with your analysis and lack of any depth..First
“found that of seven key moral values specified in advance (obligation to kin, loyalty to group, reciprocity, bravery, respect, fairness, and recognition of property rights) most were held by nearly all societies, and every one was found in six ‘cultural regions’ also identified in advance.
almost all these are learned cognitive abilities. We learn who to have loyalty to, we learn respect and the very concept of property. We do not pop out with a sense of who owns what property and what rights those bestow. Your toddler will invade space and property at will. To wit saying Biology sans environmental influences is the root is just VAST vacant blithering nonsense. learning IS an environmental influence and in almost all cases that teaching did in fact come with religious education of some sort as well
Second
“Neurological studies estimate not only a vast majority of moral considerations are actually instantly selected without any directed thought but actually precedes frontal cortex activity altogether .”
So? Since you seem so totally unaware most neurological studies and particularly those that monitor frontal cortex activity are adults. Well trained and exposed to environmental factors as even first year babies are. How you think that is going to get your biology “is the root of moral considerations” argument on solid ground is amusing but not the least bit substantive.
Its more akin to begging that they point where they do not.
Please come back when you learn the scientific method of research. You cannot claim to have isolated a particular cause in any study unless you have isolated various other causes. In the alleged proofs you point to environmental causes complete with religious training in most ancient cultures cannot and were not isolated.
i still await for you to post something that is not totally and obviously bogus.
21 The Lord gave Moses the following laws for his people:
2 If you buy a Hebrew slave, he must remain your slave for six years. But in the seventh year you must set him free, without cost to him. 3 If he was single at the time you bought him, he alone must be set free. But if he was married at the time, both he and his wife must be given their freedom. 4 If you give him a wife, and they have children, only the man himself must be set free; his wife and children remain the property of his owner.
5 But suppose the slave loves his wife and children so much that he won’t leave without them. 6 Then he must stand beside either the door or the doorpost at the place of worship,[a] while his owner punches a small hole through one of his ears with a sharp metal rod. This makes him a slave for life.
7 A young woman who was sold by her father doesn’t gain her freedom in the same way that a man does. 8 If she doesn’t please the man who bought her to be his wife, he must let her be bought back.[b] He cannot sell her to foreigners; this would break the contract he made with her. 9 If he selects her as a wife for his son, he must treat her as his own daughter.
10 If the man later marries another woman, he must continue to provide food and clothing for the one he bought and to treat her as a wife. 11 If he fails to do any of these things, she must be given her freedom without cost.
” ‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.
“If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, 21 but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.
“If a man lies sexually with a woman who is a slave, assigned to another man and not yet ransomed or given her freedom, a distinction shall be made. They shall not be put to death, because she was not free;
Now these are the rules that you shall set before them. 2 When you buy a Hebrew slave,[a] he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. 3 If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out alone. 5 But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ 6 then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever.
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ,
Gary: How any Christian can excuse the slavery condoned in both the Old and New Testaments is beyond me. It gives the term “a seared conscience” a new meaning.
I never concern myself with what you said poor chap. I concern myself with what I said (which you responded to). I spoke of Slavery and racism together. Try and keep up
“However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)”
And? lol…You think you are informing me that people in the OT had slaves or what were sometimes called bondservants. Thats actually funny
Go read what I wrote. The law does not command anyone to keep slaves. Saying someone may do something is not a command for them to do it. Divorce for social reasons was allowed for in the OT as well but it was never God’s original intent as Jesus explained. Israel was never supposed to have a human king but God allowed it after pretty much indicating it was a sin for them to want a human king. None of these were commands.
If you can’t read what I write thats your problem bro. I can’t improve your literacy 😉
“It was almost exclusively military or a voluntary financial arrangement (that you could subsequently be freed from)”
That is what you said, Mike. You have been proven wrong. If you deny it, then you are a liar. If after seeing the evidence you continue to condone your God’s toleration of slavery then you are not only a liar but immoral.
“I never concern myself with what you said poor chap. I concern myself with what I said (which you responded to). I spoke of Slavery and racism together. Try and keep up” – ABlacksmanagain
…so, you dont think slavery itself is immoral, just slavery resulting from racism? Do you have book chapter and verse for that?
or… what are you talking about?
and his response, is something he said… so shouldnt you “concern yourself with it” when engaged in a conversation with him? I think we just discovered one of the biggest problems here.
Finding Truth 
“Evolution cares about one thing – long term fitness to procreate.” ABlacksmanagain
and if helping each other out aids in the fitness to procreate, then evolution seems to explain it.
you’re not suggesting that ethical behavior has no rational benefit are you?
and an organism’s sense of self preservation also aids in that end.
LikeLike
“You can be a cheat, rape, murder , lie and embezzle. In many cases it will open up more time and more opportunity to procreate and thats all Evolution “cares” about.” – ABlacksmanagain
you may be on to something here, seeing as how the rapists, murder’s and thieves end up siring the most children of the human species….
except that’s not true. and except that evolution may not care as much about numbers as it does about numbers that lead to more numbers – in other words, overall survival success.
but really, who cares? You’re trying to make the point that god made morals and that we know them through the bible – except the moral precepts taught in the bible were all taught by others before the bible… and except that many bible-believers are morally corrupt while many non-bible-believers are ethical.
so the bible wasnt needed to get an idea of right and wrong and having the bible doesnt mean a person will do right instead of wrong.
but evolution is dumb..
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Morality is defined by the culture and the times. Even in Judeo-Christianity one can see the change in moral standards. At one time a husband could have his wife killed on their wedding night if he found her hymen to not be intact. ”
Gary conduct an experiment. See if for once you can not go of into babbling nonsense. You continue to babble about what Christianity teaches and are totally and absolutely clueless at just about every turn. Christianity has never had a time where it taught the “moral standard” was to kill anyone on their wedding night no matter what culture you point to.
Now I sense if you embark upon it the experiment will fail but upon repeated attempts it may tend to diminish the stupidity you break out with.
meanwhile morality is the sense of some action being wrong or right. Once you claim that wrong or right is based on culture or points in time then it becomes meaningless to object to immoral actions. the person may merely be just ahead of their times and vindicated by future generations. Your humanism rationals fair no better than the rest of your merry band here
Raping five year olds becomes neither right nor wrong good nor evil
Nazis should not have been punished because killing Jews was fine and dandy in their culture
Killing homosexuals for their orientation would be fine and dandy because that was the time for it
and why bemoan slavery or racism to even change it since it was the morality of the day.
Your distinction is without merit. It falls down unable to get up when it makes any claim of morality for itself.
LikeLike
ablacksmanagain, slavery was the word of god in the OT and jeezzzuuusss was the same god in the flesh in the NT. it wasn’t the morality of the day it was the will of god. can’t argue that
LikeLike
“and if helping each other out aids in the fitness to procreate, then evolution seems to explain it.”
and how would that explain the immorality of murder (just for starters). It helps to procreate as well (kill of the competitors and you genes dominate) so do many wrong actions. Stealing can make you richer and aid procreation. Rape a twelve your old and she may procreate. in fact using an evolutionary argument the more years the female will have to procreate the younger she starts. Evolution doesn’t even begin to explain it. Sorry
LikeLike
@ ablacksmanagain says That secularists do not adhere to a hard and fast objective morality yet can judge which actions is more moral than another is the very kind of gibberish you all should be embarrassed to utter but have to in order to save face from the logical consequence of your atheism.
Moral and immoral sentiments such as the practice of distinguishing right from wrong, exercising moral awareness, and recognizing moral taboos are nearly universal. Where you go wrong is pretending that there is a particular moral code or standard to which you believe your God is responsible for creating. These particulars can and do change across populations and time… including the blessed recipients of this ‘objective’ god-approved code and the institutional dogmas and doctrines built in its various names… but the sentiments are the same across all cultural, linguistic, gender, age, religious, and ethical boundaries. Moral sentiments I describe above without question even cross the species boundary.. not that you care.
As for innate moral values (sorry that may appear to be a negative pun, Nate), we often encounter the really bad argument about no biological reasons for altruism or its widespread approval. So it’s interesting to note that a survey of 60 ‘traditional societies’ (like the Dogon, Hopi, Tzeltal, and so on) found that of seven key moral values specified in advance (obligation to kin, loyalty to group, reciprocity, bravery, respect, fairness, and recognition of property rights) most were held by nearly all societies, and every one was found in six ‘cultural regions’ also identified in advance. That’s interesting because these values appear consistently across what we consider very early social units. When you add in the responses (in their millions) to the trolley problems, we find a very consistent picture that demonstrates morality to be linked first with ‘feelings’ and only secondly with reasons and learned behaviour. Neurological studies estimate not only a vast majority of moral considerations are actually instantly selected without any directed thought but actually precedes frontal cortex activity altogether (the bit used for such higher cognitive functioning like… oh, let’s just pick one randomly… say, religious apologetics).
All of this mutually supportive physical evidence points us in the direction of biology to be the root of moral considerations and not organized thinking subject to various environmental influences (like culture, religion, and so on).
Mind you, this actual research (we’ll mis-characterize it as ‘atheist’ because it doesn’t osculate the rump of faith properly) is almost too embarrassing to utter in response to the most excellent and rational one offered by theists like ablacksmanagain: a ‘sense’ of objective rules transmitted to us (because we’re the special primates on this hunk of rock) by the mechanism of POOF!ism from an agency quite accurately described as OogityBoogity!
I get the sense, ablacksmanagain, that irony is not your strongest suit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“ablacksmanagain, slavery was the word of god in the OT and jeezzzuuusss was the same god in the flesh in the NT. it wasn’t the morality of the day it was the will of god. ”
Sorry……..Slavery in the OT was not based on racism and nothing like what we usually reference today . It was almost exclusively military or a voluntary financial arrangement (that you could subsequently be freed from)
and no despite your usual no study babbling the OT Torah which the jews lived by never demanded as the will of God people to have slaves.
LikeLike
@ ablacksmanagain
Also, fitness in evolutionary understanding means reproductive fitness and this doesn’t mean what you think it means. It means successful reproduction. That’s it.
LikeLike
Mike you are trying to prove that atheism and the process of evolutionary natural selection have no standards of morality. I agree with you. There must be something more.
That is why mankind invented gods and religion.
I believe that Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism are definitely major improvements over the behavior of our primordial ancestors. But I believe that humanism is the next (and better) step in our collective evolutionary development.
We humans have always made the rules when it comes to morality. We may try to attribute them to invisible gods, but in reality, we made the rules. I believe that Christianity was a major improvement over ancient Judaism…in principle, but Christianity in practice has many flaws. In practice, Christians have used the idea that “Jesus is the only way” and that those who don’t choose to believe/obey him are sinners (evil) as justification for all kinds of horrific behavior.
Secular Humanism has refined and expanded upon the better principles of religion, and abandoned the racist, bigoted, and violent features of religion. Yes, many of the principles of humanism are derived from Christian principles. We secular humanists should acknowledge that and be grateful to Christians for these contributions. But humanism is better; an advancement, in my opinion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Raping five year olds becomes neither right nor wrong good nor evil
Nazis should not have been punished because killing Jews was fine and dandy in their culture
Killing homosexuals for their orientation would be fine and dandy because that was the time for it
and why bemoan slavery or racism to even change it since it was the morality of the day.” – ABlacksmanagain
what does this have to do with anything?
the bible claims god ordered the israelites to kill men, women and children so that they could like in their houses and eat from their fields. sounds immoral, but I guess the bible-believer’s idea of morality has nothing to do with specific actions, but with whether or not god approved at a given time.
at times, god wanted them to kill everything and babies except for virgin girls, which they were to keep for themselves. yay, morality.
slavery too – not condemned in the bible. a christian slave owner in the NT wasnt commanded to free his slaves, but to be a good master. Bible morality, yay.
what are you talking about?
LikeLiked by 2 people
I never said slavery was based on racism you ignorant jackass. clearly just like every other dumbass Christian you deny what is in the bible.
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.’ If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
It was almost exclusively military or a voluntary financial arrangement (that you could subsequently be freed from)
mikey you’re a goddamn liar.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“and how would that explain the immorality of murder (just for starters). It helps to procreate as well (kill of the competitors and you genes dominate) so do many wrong actions. Stealing can make you richer and aid procreation. Rape a twelve your old and she may procreate. in fact using an evolutionary argument the more years the female will have to procreate the younger she starts. Evolution doesn’t even begin to explain it. Sorry” – ABlacksmanagain
do you feel safe when a murderer is on the loose? many people do not. They dont like it, because they fear they, or someone they know, could be next. They usually eliminate the perceived threat.
when eliminated, the body cant produce sperm or eggs as good as when they were alive, thereby reducing the chances of passing along genes to new generation.
you’re trying to make it out as though evolution has mind is creating a perfect species – that’s a misunderstanding. and deviations do arise at times.
but deviations in biblical morality change as well. nothing iron clad there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Are you serious? Do you truly not see how a number of evolutionary pressures would select against such behavior?
There would be pressures in both directions. As you say, if you murder someone to get what you want (your neighbor’s wife, perhaps), then you’ll father children with her and he won’t. However, the rest of society will quickly end your life when the opportunity arises, which keeps you from fathering as many children as you would. Thus, in our history, we’ve seen people who have gotten away with this behavior (like powerful despots), but we’ve also seen movements toward greater equality and protection of the weak.
And just as we would expect from such a history, humans have developed both qualities: sometimes we’re selfish and even take advantage of others. But most of us also have empathy that motivates us to be fair and do what’s “right.”
LikeLike
“Moral and immoral sentiments such as the practice of distinguishing right from wrong, exercising moral awareness, and recognizing moral taboos are nearly universal. ”
Yes along with the nearly universal presence of religion with them.;)
or did you fall on your head and miss that little factual nugget? Whenever are you going to make a good point?
“All of this mutually supportive physical evidence points us in the direction of biology to be the root of moral considerations and not organized thinking subject to various environmental influences (like culture, religion, and so on).”
The vast and obvious stupidity of your argument is betrayed by the evidence you point to. Lets take a gander at it because the problem is never with the data its with your analysis and lack of any depth..First
“found that of seven key moral values specified in advance (obligation to kin, loyalty to group, reciprocity, bravery, respect, fairness, and recognition of property rights) most were held by nearly all societies, and every one was found in six ‘cultural regions’ also identified in advance.
almost all these are learned cognitive abilities. We learn who to have loyalty to, we learn respect and the very concept of property. We do not pop out with a sense of who owns what property and what rights those bestow. Your toddler will invade space and property at will. To wit saying Biology sans environmental influences is the root is just VAST vacant blithering nonsense. learning IS an environmental influence and in almost all cases that teaching did in fact come with religious education of some sort as well
Second
“Neurological studies estimate not only a vast majority of moral considerations are actually instantly selected without any directed thought but actually precedes frontal cortex activity altogether .”
So? Since you seem so totally unaware most neurological studies and particularly those that monitor frontal cortex activity are adults. Well trained and exposed to environmental factors as even first year babies are. How you think that is going to get your biology “is the root of moral considerations” argument on solid ground is amusing but not the least bit substantive.
Its more akin to begging that they point where they do not.
Please come back when you learn the scientific method of research. You cannot claim to have isolated a particular cause in any study unless you have isolated various other causes. In the alleged proofs you point to environmental causes complete with religious training in most ancient cultures cannot and were not isolated.
i still await for you to post something that is not totally and obviously bogus.
LikeLike
Hebrew Slaves
21 The Lord gave Moses the following laws for his people:
2 If you buy a Hebrew slave, he must remain your slave for six years. But in the seventh year you must set him free, without cost to him. 3 If he was single at the time you bought him, he alone must be set free. But if he was married at the time, both he and his wife must be given their freedom. 4 If you give him a wife, and they have children, only the man himself must be set free; his wife and children remain the property of his owner.
5 But suppose the slave loves his wife and children so much that he won’t leave without them. 6 Then he must stand beside either the door or the doorpost at the place of worship,[a] while his owner punches a small hole through one of his ears with a sharp metal rod. This makes him a slave for life.
7 A young woman who was sold by her father doesn’t gain her freedom in the same way that a man does. 8 If she doesn’t please the man who bought her to be his wife, he must let her be bought back.[b] He cannot sell her to foreigners; this would break the contract he made with her. 9 If he selects her as a wife for his son, he must treat her as his own daughter.
10 If the man later marries another woman, he must continue to provide food and clothing for the one he bought and to treat her as a wife. 11 If he fails to do any of these things, she must be given her freedom without cost.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exodus 21:44
” ‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exodus 21:20
“If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, 21 but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Leviticus 19:20
“If a man lies sexually with a woman who is a slave, assigned to another man and not yet ransomed or given her freedom, a distinction shall be made. They shall not be put to death, because she was not free;
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Yes along with the nearly universal presence of religion with them.;)” – ABlacksmanagain
yes, and nearly all of them throughout history were not christian ;(
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exodus 21:1-6
Now these are the rules that you shall set before them. 2 When you buy a Hebrew slave,[a] he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. 3 If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out alone. 5 But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ 6 then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost. And his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ,
Gary: How any Christian can excuse the slavery condoned in both the Old and New Testaments is beyond me. It gives the term “a seared conscience” a new meaning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I never said slavery was based on racism”
I never concern myself with what you said poor chap. I concern myself with what I said (which you responded to). I spoke of Slavery and racism together. Try and keep up
“However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)”
And? lol…You think you are informing me that people in the OT had slaves or what were sometimes called bondservants. Thats actually funny
Go read what I wrote. The law does not command anyone to keep slaves. Saying someone may do something is not a command for them to do it. Divorce for social reasons was allowed for in the OT as well but it was never God’s original intent as Jesus explained. Israel was never supposed to have a human king but God allowed it after pretty much indicating it was a sin for them to want a human king. None of these were commands.
If you can’t read what I write thats your problem bro. I can’t improve your literacy 😉
LikeLike
mike, is killing babies moral?
I mean god killed david’s baby for a crime david committed and god commanded his people to slaughter nations along with their babies and toddlers…
I guess the baby boys had to die for their wickedness, but the virgin girls could be forgiven?
LikeLiked by 1 person
“It was almost exclusively military or a voluntary financial arrangement (that you could subsequently be freed from)”
That is what you said, Mike. You have been proven wrong. If you deny it, then you are a liar. If after seeing the evidence you continue to condone your God’s toleration of slavery then you are not only a liar but immoral.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“I never concern myself with what you said poor chap. I concern myself with what I said (which you responded to). I spoke of Slavery and racism together. Try and keep up” – ABlacksmanagain
…so, you dont think slavery itself is immoral, just slavery resulting from racism? Do you have book chapter and verse for that?
or… what are you talking about?
and his response, is something he said… so shouldnt you “concern yourself with it” when engaged in a conversation with him? I think we just discovered one of the biggest problems here.
learning.
LikeLiked by 1 person