Domillomew t1_iujflpq wrote
Morality is made by humans not by religion.
ohlooord t1_iujhzzd wrote
Made by yes, followed by without, hardly. Look at the shitshow outside our windows.
rity5yender t1_iujit48 wrote
LMAO. Looking out my window, it seems that some of the least moral people around are the ones that are the most vociferously religious.
ohlooord t1_iukc2b8 wrote
I’m not religious
InannasPocket t1_iujihu9 wrote
Oh, like the various religious groups around the world are so well known for even following their own definitions of morality consistently?
enginearz t1_iujixlh wrote
The Bible talks about how God wrote morals into our design. Lots of evidence for this in my opinion.
Domillomew t1_iujjlc9 wrote
The bible also talks about Adam and eve being the first humans and there's a mountain of actual evidence against that.
The bible also talks about Noah and the flood but once again it is contradicted by our reality.
Financial-Agency3322 t1_iujl0vw wrote
No, there's really not any evidence pointing against either of those things. The Great Flood was not a worldwide event. But it did happen.
Adam & Eve being the first humans does not go against the theory of evolution.
Top-Royal6249 t1_iujlvte wrote
>Adam & Eve being the first humans does not go against the theory of evolution.
Yes, it absolutely does. Given evolution, there is no such thing as "the first two humans from whom all others descend."
As humans evolved from our ancestors we share with gorillas and bonobos, etc. - by the time there were two people in existence, there were TONS of people in existence, all having more humans. Not just two.
>The Great Flood was not a worldwide event. But it did happen.
I can't believe you actually believe the nonsense about collecting two of every animal aboard a giant boat. Like how the fuck does a human brain still think that.
Domillomew t1_iujmfmp wrote
>Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.
Lol.... Guess God was just lying
Adam and eve being the first humans doesn't go against the theory of evolution lol? So Adam and eve were born from prehuman parents and then god plucked then out of their tribe and put them in Eden? This is why religious people hate education, it directly contradicts their beliefs.
Financial-Agency3322 t1_iujn3jt wrote
Text does not necessarily indicate a global flood. One which covers only the known world for the author would suffice.
Yep, the theory of evolution is fully compatible with the doctrine of our first parents. Adam and Eve were the first ENSOULED humans, not necessarily the literal first two hominids to ever exist on the face of the earth.
Domillomew t1_iujobef wrote
Once again the Bible is contradicting you. I like how when the Bible contradicts you you just make up a fan fic of what the Bible really means but when it doesn't contradict you it's taken as literally as possible.
Religious people are a joke. Bye
Top-Royal6249 t1_iujujxz wrote
> Adam and Eve were the first ENSOULED humans, not necessarily the literal first two hominids to ever exist on the face of the earth.
So what happened to all of the other hominids who were the same species as Adam and Eve? Did they all just suddenly die? Or did they stop reproducing, or what?
excusetheblood t1_iujmqqh wrote
Humans being created 6000 years ago is wildly against the theory of evolution. There is little evidence of even localized severe flooding, never mind flooding that covered the highest mountain tops
Financial-Agency3322 t1_iujobac wrote
Not one person in this entire thread has mentiomed humanity being 6,000 years old one single time. This is the definition of a strawman.
excusetheblood t1_iujp1ui wrote
The Bible says Adam and Eve were created 6000 years ago, that’s why it’s the year 5783 in the Hebrew calendar, the years since creation.
And since Romans 5 makes it quite clear that the sole reason for Jesus’ sacrifice was Adam’s sin, and we know Adam and the garden didn’t exist, we can safely conclude that Jesus wasn’t resurrected either (as if we needed an actual reason to not believe a ridiculous claim that was made without evidence in the first place)
Financial-Agency3322 t1_iujpbpo wrote
Your limited understanding of the single hardest book ever written to comprehend doesn't make your point more valid.
Let's presume that you're right. It is an absolutely licit position to hold that Adam & Eve were the first ENSOULED humans in a long line of hominids going through the process of evolution. Changes quite literally nothing about the timeline.
excusetheblood t1_iujqkc5 wrote
Side question: if avoiding eternal torture hinges on believing this book, then why did god make it so unbelievable? Or as you put it: “difficult to comprehend”?
To my main point: the Bible did not say “the universe was created 14 billion years ago, the earth was formed 4 billion years ago, microbiological life formed in the ocean, where it replicated and evolved over billions of years to eventually become land based apes, where at a certain point god decided to give these apes divine souls and made them humans”. The Bible said god created the heavens and the earth, and created man on the sixth day. Man got deceived by a talking serpent, god got angry, and from those two people came all civilization less than 6000 years ago.
Cognitive Dissonance like this is the reason Bronze Age myths have survived so long. People are so desperate to hold onto their ancient beliefs, that as science continues invalidating them, they come up with increasingly complex explanations to hold onto their faith. FYI I was raised an evangelical christian and have read the Bible several times so I do in fact know everything the Bible says and why it says it
Financial-Agency3322 t1_iujqyx4 wrote
First, the Bible is not the sole rule of Faith for Christians. It shouldn't be. Christians who believe that it is are in error.
Secondly, the Bible is not a scientific book. Not that it is opposed to science, but that it is not concerned with science. That is not the POINT of Scripture.
Yes, it makes sense that a heretical and schismatic group of Christians led another unfortunate soul away from God. Protestants are fond of doing that, sadly.
excusetheblood t1_iujseek wrote
The Bible does say it is the ultimate and final authority (Acts 17:11, 1 Corinthians 4:6, Mark 7:6-9, Revelation 22:18-19)
The Bible is very often opposed to science. It makes claims of creation, events, miracles, and resurrections all without evidence. This is antithetical to science, which requires evidence to prove a claim, especially such a grand claim of eternal torture, and the salvation from it. Every single biological and cosmological process has been observed without divine interference. The universe looks exactly as it would look if there was no god.
From the outside, all christian denominations are just pointing fingers at each other, failing to point the finger at the Bible that contradicted itself, made false promises, and threatened them eternal torture if they didn’t convince themselves of such unprovable nonsense.
Financial-Agency3322 t1_iujsopq wrote
No, it does not claim ultimate and final authority. Scripture did not even exist for the first 4 centuries of the Church's existence. Scripture is PART of Sacred Tradition, not the other way around.
No Biblical contradiction exists. You look for scientific argumentation: none exists. Every detail about the Faith is in perfect harmony with whatever truth about the universe exists that we would find from scientific inquiry.
excusetheblood t1_iujt1u7 wrote
Lol you got a long way to go if you think the Bible doesn’t contradict itself AND is compatible with science. I wish you well on your journey to deconstruction from brainwashing and childhood indoctrination.
Financial-Agency3322 t1_iujt8at wrote
Deconstruction of false spirituality is what led me to the one true Faith and profession of belief in Jesus Christ.
x2c4sale t1_iujkwq0 wrote
Bible also says way can rape women and still make it to the holy kingdom by paying her father in silver and marrying her. So….MORALITY
Top-Royal6249 t1_iujl0gk wrote
If God wrote morals into our design, why do humans disagree so much on what is moral and what isn't? Wouldn't we all universally agree on every moral issue?
enginearz t1_iujtavt wrote
I would argue that humans vastly agree more than they disagree when it comes to morals. Murder, theft, lies, indecent business practices, insubordination, etc. all very common amongst nations and cultures. The disagreements are in the nuances but get the most attention.
Top-Royal6249 t1_iujurh2 wrote
There are HUGE disagreements about human life itself: Abortion, death penalty, assisted suicide, "stand your ground" laws, war, on and on. These aren't small issues.
And even if it were only small issues we disagree on, why would we disagree at all, if God wrote morality into us?
enginearz t1_iujw9qt wrote
Not small issues, I agree, but different definitions of murder that satisfy a person's benefiting point of view. For arguments sake, the Bible talks about that too. Titus 3, sermon on the mount, etc.
0utlandish_323 t1_iujlhm1 wrote
What evidence? Elaborate
enginearz t1_iujtp7k wrote
(Copied from above) I would argue that humans vastly agree more than they disagree when it comes to morals. Murder, theft, lies, indecent business practices, insubordination, etc. all very commonly illegal or not decent amongst nations and cultures.
This is "evidence" for a common moral code in our design. That is all.
0utlandish_323 t1_iujudp7 wrote
And you think that this is god’s sway in his creation and not an evolved trait from us being extremely social pack animals?
0utlandish_323 t1_iujuf80 wrote
Oh, and also, that isn’t evidence. Not even close to it.
enginearz t1_iujv461 wrote
Theory: "humans have fairly common morals" (as described in the Bible)
Evidence: "humans have fairly common morals"
weirdoasqueroso t1_iujlsv0 wrote
Evidence? Like.. do you find evidence of god in our ADN? There is no evidence, there is faith
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments