Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 49 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,222 Year: 5,479/9,624 Month: 504/323 Week: 1/143 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Morality without God is impossible
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 291 of 472 (874737)
04-08-2020 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 290 by GDR
04-08-2020 2:19 PM


Re: Morality and Empathy
GDR writes:
That's a bit low. I have never said anything that could remotely give you the idea that I would think that.
Feminists and the BAME community would say that what you did there was reveal a sub-conscious prejudice. But hey, I'm cool with it, just sayin' :-)

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by GDR, posted 04-08-2020 2:19 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by GDR, posted 04-08-2020 4:56 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 293 of 472 (874757)
04-09-2020 3:42 AM
Reply to: Message 292 by GDR
04-08-2020 4:56 PM


Re: Morality and Empathy
So where are we now?
I interpreted your original claim to be that we can't know what right and wrong is without there being a god to tell us. You actually said if we are the result of blind chance then it is my contention that there is no frame of reference for understanding morality.
It seems to me that we have agreed that our sense of morality is a naturally evolved trait but your position is that god somehow set this up so that it *would* evolve.
My position on that is pretty much a shrug. As there's no difference between a natural process that wasn't instigated by a god and one that was, it's purely a matter of belief that it is supernatural. I simply say that the argument then is a different one than we're having here - that's the issue of how there's something rather than nothing.
But I still feel that you're fluffing the real time intervention issue. You now seem to want to push the intervention back into what you call memes - cultural influences. That's fine, we all accept that they exist, though science calls them normative social behaviours and they too are perfectly natural.
So I'm really struggling to understand what it is you're thinking/believing about it. We have to make moral decision almost every moment of every day and they're rarely of the running into burning buildings type. Deciding to choose the slightly smaller slice of cake so that you partner can the bigger one is a moral choice, is god intervening there?
(Curiously - as RAZD would say - I see the running into a burning building action as more of a reflex than sacrificing the cake. Less conscious processing involved.)
It seems unlikely to me that you have god directly influencing all moral choices -whispering in our ears with this poetical 'still small voice', but you're settling more on god influencing normative behaviours somehow? Is this correct?

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by GDR, posted 04-08-2020 4:56 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by GDR, posted 04-09-2020 2:29 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 295 of 472 (874778)
04-09-2020 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 294 by GDR
04-09-2020 2:29 PM


Re: Morality and Empathy
GDR writes:
My best guess is this. God created a world that would ultimately create sentient moral creatures that would have a sense of right and wrong, and with the free will to make moral choices.
I wish you'd stop there. I haven't read the rest yet but I know I'm not going to like it.
However, the Bible tells me that in addition there the Holy Spirit of God, that still small voice or God meme that speaks, (not audibly, at least to me), to our hearts and minds and draws us to decisions that are moral and right for this world.
Hohum...
So, finally, in answer to that question I’d say OK, that works for me. It is basically trying to put in my basic simple human understanding what is going on and so it is a bit like me reading Brian Greene to understand science. I can maybe get a small understanding of scientific concepts,but that’s about it. As to the technicalities of how God works in this world I’m in about the same position there as well.
Well that got me no closer I'm afraid.
It seems to me that you're now between a rock and a rock. You seem to accept science's natural explanations but because of some fanciful ancient stories you are forced to belief something supernatural as well. Regardless of it being both unnecessary and unevidenced. I'm afraid that makes no sense to me and it concerns me that such primitive superstitions are still so prevalent.
I find that utterly bizarre.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by GDR, posted 04-09-2020 2:29 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by GDR, posted 04-09-2020 3:44 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 297 of 472 (874782)
04-09-2020 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by GDR
04-09-2020 3:44 PM


Re: Morality and Empathy
GDR writes:
I realize it makes no sense to you, in the same way that the idea that we have simply evolved as a result of a myriad of mindless chemical and biological processes is just a far fetched to me as my beliefs are to you.
It's really difficult trying to follow your thought processes, you're all over the place; a minute ago you told me that God created a world that would ultimately create sentient moral creatures that would have a sense of right and wrong, and with the free will to make moral choices. which is evolution with a different hat on.
You're a mess mate :-)

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by GDR, posted 04-09-2020 3:44 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 298 by GDR, posted 04-10-2020 11:27 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


(5)
Message 312 of 472 (912643)
09-21-2023 3:31 AM
Reply to: Message 310 by GDR
09-20-2023 11:14 PM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
I agree completely. So then, if they were wrong then how do we know we are right now?
We don't, we're quite literally making it up as we go along. Modern Western democracies believe that slavery is wrong because it harms a section of society and we've declared all men equal.
But we only go so far with that. We allow billionaires and poverty to exist in the same society even though we believe in that equality.
Other theistic societies are not even that evolved, they still suborn women, allow FGM, persecute and kill homosexuals etc.
Some societies persecute minority religious groups and don't allow free speech or even dress.
If it has always been wrong then there is a morality that exists that isn't simply the result of human evolution. It would have had to exist outside of human thought.
There is no morality that exists outside human thought, it's all a human invention, but it is all built around the concept that it's wrong to harm others. That's an evolved social trait and we stick to it only when it suits us.
There's no guarantee that Western values will beat all others, improve, and spread in an enlightened way around the globe, but those harmed will always also feel wronged and that's where morality comes from.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by GDR, posted 09-20-2023 11:14 PM GDR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 315 by Tanypteryx, posted 09-21-2023 10:44 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 321 of 472 (912663)
09-22-2023 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 320 by GDR
09-22-2023 5:03 PM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
but why do we even consider some things good or evil.
Because we have a brain. A pre-frontal cortex. It reasons. It's why we're called Homo sapiens. Wise Man. We figure stuff out.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by GDR, posted 09-22-2023 5:03 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 322 by GDR, posted 09-22-2023 6:19 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


(5)
Message 325 of 472 (912667)
09-23-2023 4:55 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by GDR
09-22-2023 6:19 PM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
is it something that we all, somewhat instinctively, know we "ought" to do?
So here we go again. It's an evolved trait.
Some animals are surprisingly sensitive to the plight of others. Chimpanzees, who cannot swim, have drowned in zoo moats trying to save others. Given the chance to get food by pulling a chain that would also deliver an electric shock to a companion, rhesus monkeys will starve themselves for several days.
Biologists argue that these and other social behaviors are the precursors of human morality.
Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior - The New York Times
It requires the emotion empathy which is instinctual and found in other primates. When combined with an ability to reason and imagine a future and the feelings of others the feeling is amplified and our early communal life reinforced it.
Our current high degree of organised society comes from the evolved instinct/emotion of empathy, an evolved, reasoning brain and an evolved set of social rules (laws and punishments for breaking them.)
If you want to believe that god put your 'still small voice' into our ape ancestors I guess I can't help any further. I would just ask why he left it (empathy) out some modern day people. Psychopaths.
They lack the instinct but because of their reasoning brain can learn the rules - they just don't feel the need for them. They don't understand 'ought' - but they do understand the consequences of not doing ‘should’.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by GDR, posted 09-22-2023 6:19 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 327 by Theodoric, posted 09-23-2023 10:09 AM Tangle has not replied
 Message 329 by GDR, posted 09-23-2023 11:06 AM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


(2)
Message 330 of 472 (912698)
09-23-2023 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 329 by GDR
09-23-2023 11:06 AM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
I have no problem with saying it evolved.
What?? You talk about 'the still small voice of god' and 'sacrificial love' and other religious gobbledegook. I show you that apes do it too and all-of-a-sudden, it's no longer a personal, human god-whispering thing and you're all right with that!? I'm confused.
The question is simply were they wrong 2000 years ago when slavery was the norm?
They were neither right nor wrong; they were following the rules of the society they had built. We say they're wrong now because one section of society was exploiting and harming another. But we do the same now just in different ways.
In Christian America we allow impoverished black ghettos. In Catholic Europe we try to prevent the immigration of persecuted and war damaged people. In Hindu India they have a class system that includes the Delta "untouchables". In Muslim Afghanistan they prevent women working and force them to wear Hijabs. And so on.
I think we can now make objective decisions about morality. I think it is perfectly possible to state that something is an immoral act, that something else isn't and that something is more moral than something else; we just measure harm. A country that harms the fewest people in the fewest ways is more moral than one that doesn't.
By that standard we say slavery is wrong. It was always wrong, but people at the time did not see, or want to see the harm and if they did, they didn't think it mattered. We forget - or actually have no comprehension of - how short and brutal life was in those days. It was objectively wrong, but they weren't enlightened enough to see it.
They still believed in gods and fate and superstition. It was god's will and fate that made someone a slave and someone else an emperor. Morality had nothing to do with it. Until you throw those stupid religious concepts away and note the harm to others you can't have a just society.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by GDR, posted 09-23-2023 11:06 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 332 by GDR, posted 09-23-2023 3:02 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 334 of 472 (912705)
09-23-2023 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 332 by GDR
09-23-2023 3:02 PM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
I have no reason to doubt that animal life can be impacted with it as well. They are conscious creatures. We can see that when humans interact lovingly with pets it changes their character and I have no reason to think that if God still small voice is a ubiquitous feature in our world that it couldn't have an affect on life other than humans.
Wow. So animals have souls too? Where is the biblical source for this? Isn't there something about man having dominion?
quote:
"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
God made only man in his image. This is new, are you sure you're not just making this up?
I understand your point that they were neither right or wrong as that was simply a part of their culture. However you also seem to agree that slavery itself was wrong regardless of the cultural understandings.
I, like you, know they were wrong. But we're both modern people with modern values. Our values weren't their values. We judge them from here, not there. If we judged them from there we would almost certainly not feel the same. But of course, no-one asked the slaves. I have no idea what they felt. Some may well have felt lucky, some certainly wouldn't. They probably all thought it was their fate regardless.
The Muslims involved in the recent horrendous flooding in Libya where at least 20,000 people died but whether they survived or died down to fate - the will of Allah.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 332 by GDR, posted 09-23-2023 3:02 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 336 by GDR, posted 09-23-2023 5:41 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 339 of 472 (912713)
09-24-2023 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 336 by GDR
09-23-2023 5:41 PM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
So yes, mankind is called to rule over other forms of life.
So man was created in god's image and has dominion over the animals. How does that result in animals having souls? It seems to me that the creation story separates man from the 'beasts' and makes mankind chosen and special.
If you believe that animals have souls you create an entirely new religion - animals in heaven? Animals in hell? All 'kinds' or just some? If so which? And on and on. You seem to be inventing your beliefs as you go along.
I get it that likely they didn't see anything wrong with it. However, that's not the point.
But that's exactly the point! What we think right and wrong is at any one point in time is what morality is.
We both agree that it is wrong now and was wrong then whether people 2000 years ago realized that or not.
The only objective yardstick of morality that I have is harm. 2000 years ago slavery was not an absolute harm, as you've pointed out it was a mixed bag. Killing people - the absolute harm - is not always judged wrong. We have wars and state executions, both justified by moral arguments that people disagree on. There is no freehanging absolute morality available to us. Our ideas of right and wrong vary by individual and by time and culture.
We may think now that some forms of slavery in the Roman empire was objective wrong but that's not relevant if we wouldn't have done so then.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 336 by GDR, posted 09-23-2023 5:41 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 342 by GDR, posted 09-25-2023 7:32 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 343 of 472 (912728)
09-26-2023 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 342 by GDR
09-25-2023 7:32 PM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
My personal belief, for what that's worth is consistent with quote from Paul I used earlier. It is about the ultimate renewal of all things. I know you disagree, but I see our consciousness, (soul if you like) as the real us that functions through our physical body, and continues on after this life. That would include animals.
It's not really that I disagree - there's nothing there to agree with - you've just created a personal fantasy. You might as well have said “I believe that lawnmowers will be found on mars.” I just don't know what to do with it.
Are you then saying that slavery, or infanticide was moral 2000 years ago? I would contend that it has always been immoral whether the culture saw it that way or not.
I'm saying that some forms of those practices were probably seen as immoral even then but some weren't. It's about balancing harms and a culture's view of those harms. It was only in 1967 that private homosexual acts between men aged over 21 was decriminalised here in the UK. Before that we put them in prison because we believed that it was wrong - probably based on a religious belief, but also because of a majority revulsion. We now know that to be wrong. Well most of us do, the unreformed religious fundamentalists - of which the Christian candle2 here is one - would probably still burn them at the stake as an abomination. What we think right and wrong is, is always individual, not universal.
We can say now that it was always wrong but that's just sophistry - we didn't know it then, it required an evolution of our society to see the harm; prior to that we thought that homosexuality was a great harm in of itself, and maybe it was? Moral thought is about the societal balancing harms.
What you're looking for is what philosophers call 'universal morality'. They've been arguing about it for millennia and getting further and further up their own backsides with it. There's no evidence for it, it's just mind games.
I have often thought of what I would have thought as a plantation owner in the American south 200 years ago. I'm pretty sure that I would have had slaves doing my bidding. However, that wouldn't have made it right IMHOL.
Why not? Right and wrong are human invented concepts so what we determine as right and wrong evolves as our society evolves. If there was an absolute or a universal (they're different concepts) right and wrong we all know about them throughout time and they wouldn't change.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 342 by GDR, posted 09-25-2023 7:32 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 345 by GDR, posted 09-27-2023 6:52 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


(2)
Message 346 of 472 (912736)
09-27-2023 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 345 by GDR
09-27-2023 6:52 PM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
Obviously the problem in all of this is that we start from completely opposite world views. As you being a materialist there is no real possibly of a universal morality. As a theist I am quite open to the idea.
I'm open to anything that can be evidenced. I'm not open to anything that starts with "I believe..." and goes no further.
With that 'world view' it's possible to believe absolutely anything at all.
So both you and candle claim to believe in the same god but are actually further apart from each other than you and I.
But you're not registering the problem If there is such a thing as universal morality, how come we don't all know about it? Regardless of the time we live in.
It seems to me that the god of the OT is not behaving within the concept of 'universal morality' and I think you agree.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by GDR, posted 09-27-2023 6:52 PM GDR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 359 by candle2, posted 09-30-2023 9:37 AM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 348 of 472 (912744)
09-28-2023 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 345 by GDR
09-27-2023 6:52 PM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
Obviously the problem in all of this is that we start from completely opposite world views. As you being a materialist there is no real possibly of a universal morality. As a theist I am quite open to the idea.
If you want some quite impressive evidence that there's no such thing as a universal morality, I just asked ChatGPT for a list of the most immoral acts in the Christian bible. It started, then stopped -
"This content may violate our content policy. If you believe this to be in error, please submit your feedback — your input will aid our research in this area."
It appears that even AI has a higher sense of moral values than the Christian Bible.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by GDR, posted 09-27-2023 6:52 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 349 by Percy, posted 09-28-2023 10:58 AM Tangle has replied
 Message 352 by GDR, posted 09-28-2023 6:12 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 350 of 472 (912748)
09-28-2023 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 349 by Percy
09-28-2023 10:58 AM


Re: The evolution of morality
I persevered and it finally gave me this:
The Old Testament, or Hebrew Bible, is a collection of diverse texts that encompasses law codes, historical narratives, poetry, prophecies, and more. Many stories within the Old Testament reflect the values, cultural norms, and challenges of the ancient societies in which they were written. Some of these stories might seem strikingly "immoral" or troubling when judged by modern standards. Here are some stories that are often singled out as particularly challenging:
1. The Binding of Isaac (Genesis 22): God commands Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, as a test of faith. Abraham is willing to go through with it, but God stops him at the last moment. This story raises questions about blind obedience and the morality of divine testing.
2. Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19): God destroys the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah due to their wickedness. Before the destruction, the men of Sodom surround Lot's house, demanding to rape his angelic visitors, and in response, Lot offers his virgin daughters to the mob. The themes of mass punishment and the value placed on women in the narrative can be troubling to modern readers.
3. Judah and Tamar (Genesis 38): Tamar, after being widowed twice (by Judah's sons), disguises herself as a prostitute to seduce her father-in-law, Judah. She becomes pregnant, and when her condition is discovered, she is almost executed for adultery.
4. The Levite's Concubine (Judges 19): A Levite gives his concubine to a mob to prevent them from attacking him. The concubine is raped and left for dead. The Levite then cuts her body into twelve pieces and sends them to the tribes of Israel.
5. The Plagues of Egypt (Exodus 7-12): God sends ten plagues upon Egypt, culminating in the death of the firstborn of every Egyptian household. This mass punishment affects not just the Pharaoh and his officials but also innocent civilians.
6. The Killing of the Canaanites (Deuteronomy 20, Joshua 6-11): The Israelites, under divine command, are instructed to conquer the Promised Land and destroy its inhabitants completely.
Jephthah's Vow (Judges 11): Jephthah makes a vow to God that if he's victorious in battle, he'll sacrifice the first thing that comes out of his house upon his return. Tragically, it's his daughter who greets him first, and he feels compelled to fulfill his vow.
These stories (and others) are often challenging for readers who approach the Old Testament from a modern perspective. However, many religious scholars and theologians emphasize the importance of understanding these texts within their historical, cultural, and literary contexts. Additionally, different interpretations and readings can shed new light on seemingly "immoral" actions or decisions, especially when considering allegorical or metaphorical interpretations.
It reeled off another list when I asked for more. It seems to have got over it's initial fright.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by Percy, posted 09-28-2023 10:58 AM Percy has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9539
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 353 of 472 (912760)
09-29-2023 3:04 AM
Reply to: Message 352 by GDR
09-28-2023 6:12 PM


Re: The evolution of morality
GDR writes:
Sure, if you are going to understand it as C2 does. You know that I completely disagree with his views on that.
Sure, you say this….
GDR:
Well firstly the Bible isn't simply a book, but is a collection of ancient texts written by an unknown number of authors over numerous centuries and in different circumstances.
….which is a sentence that I, as an atheist, could have written (and have written many times.) As you say, the Bible is a human construct, clearly reflecting the values of time and the individual's political motivations of those that wrote it and the editors that eventually collated it.
GDR:
Personally I understand the Bible as a narrative outlining the progressive understanding of God by the Jewish people with the narrative come to a climax in Jesus.
The thing that you call a 'progressive understanding' is correct and works completely without the addition of 'of god'. It's a progressive understanding by societies as they evolve and learn to value individuals more.
If there is such a thing as a universal morality, you really have to explain why previous societies were not aware of it and some societies today still aren't.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 352 by GDR, posted 09-28-2023 6:12 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 354 by GDR, posted 09-29-2023 5:38 PM Tangle has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024