Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Not from a religion who's gods book says you can own slaves and beat them, kill rebellious kids, kill apostates, and that women are not to "usurp authority" from a man. All men are created equal came from the enlightened ideas of natural law. Not Jehovahs law that allows women to be killed if they aren't virgins on their wedding night.
The "enlightened" natural law that the strongest survive? I find it quite odd that your arguing about the lack of morality of the Bible when random chance processes can not explain morality. You can argue the evolving social morality I hear so much about but there have been millions murdered this century on the idea that morality is relative. And from that world view there is no objective way to say those murders were bad.
The theory of evolution does not claim that only the strong survive.
Morals in the Bible are not constant either. If you study the book you will find that they (pardon the expression) evolve.
I have actually studied the Bible a bit, the laws evolved because God took His people out of bondage from a foreign land. They were in culture shock and I'm assuming laying His entire plan on them all at once would've at best been difficult.
You're right, I misspoke. The fittest, most adaptable, favorable would've all been better choices of words. My point however still stands.
It is that the best adapted to the current environment is more likely to pass on their genes. Quite a mouthful and people often prefer to oversimplify. Morals are largely a result of evolution and not from God. In fact secular morals tend to be superior to religious morals regardless of religion.
I don't actually, there's way too many factors shaping America right now to blame everything good or bad on any one issue. I believe it is a factor... And maybe a large factor. Since 1960 violent crimes are up 200%, murder is actually the same, take is up around 32%, robbery is up about 25%, and assault is up around 60%. Those don't sound like improvements. I also don't think the millions of babies killed every year is inspiring either.
It's a reason not an excuse, t's my personal opinion based upon my hours of study. Why is it ok to point out a discrepancy but then say the response to that is an excuse? Have you actually studied the events in the Torah, because I have. If you asked why I wasn't responding to your sign language and I replied because I'm blind.... Would that too warrant the phrase excuses excuses? Just because I disagree in no way means I'm contriving rescue devices.
I think that abiogenesis, and the majority of the theory of evolution as it pertains to origins is unfalsifiable, unprovable, and unrepeatable. Therefore we have left science and entered into philosophy. Insisting it is a fact is not proof and assuming it true is to the detriment of attention inquiry.
Abiogenesis is not a theory yet, rather there are a series of hypotheses covering different steps but not the whole process. Each hypothesis is falsifiable, but there is no overarching theory of abiogenesis yet. And you could not be more wrong about the theory of evolution. It is falsifiable, but like gravity, has not been falsified in millions of tests. There are numerous ways to falsify the theory.
No. It includes things like "consent of the governed," "natural state of man," and other philosophical concepts that changed the world, including even finding their words echoed in the UN Charter of human rights.
Unless God changes their mind, which - according to the Bible - they do.
That depends what the standard is that you use. For example, my basis for morality is based on the concept of well-being. I.E: if something negatively affects an individual's (or a group's) well-being, it is morally bad. Using this standard, it is actually quite easy to determine an objective moral value for our actions. After all, it is not "in the eye of the beholder" that decapitating my neighbour negatively impacts their well-being.
So do you believe Christainity endorses slavery and the subjugation of women?
1) All forms of slavery are immoral. Are you suggesting that the slavery found in the Bible is moral?
False. The Bible specifically instructs that a slave is somebody you own as property, can be beaten as punishment by you, and can even be inherited as property. It even specifies how you can keep Hebrew slaves for six years but then must let them free, but if they have a wife and children by the end of those six years you get to keep them indefinitely. It also instructs that fathers are allowed to sell their daughters into slavery, and that they have less, and more restrictive, rights to freedom than male slaves.
Actually, it's not. You're wrong on this issue.
So you believe the Torah promotes slavery, too?
Then you are demonstrably wrong. Evolutionary theory is falsifiable.
