Did it arise from human conscience as a product of evolution or an implant of God? Maybe instead it didnt come from either, but from a pragmatic need for order within the earliest civilizations. This order needed a basis or justification, which came from religion (pagans then). Overtime, these pragmatic laws, justified by religious suspertsion became normative views. For example, the rule "dont kill someone", Thor hates an evil doer. This is our law, we recognize its nessesity to establish an order, we therefore adopt it or agree with it. This agreement over time gets recaste as a moral view or conscience. Later religious traditions merely try to codify these better under a different God.
208911
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ap7PPCydHfSPqjBeHer54Izsy6IX?qid=1006040715823\n\ncheck this my Question and people's answer on it.
639683
A better title for your question would be "What is the basis for 'moral values' in a society that doesn't pay attention to God?"\n\nThis kind of question encourages a "rant", but I'm not going to do that.  I believe that we, as children, learn what is "right" and "wrong" from our parent(s) as we grow up.  We accept their rules because that's all we can do - children have no power to "change the rules".  But what happens when we get older and reach adulthood?\n\nBeing an "adult" means more than just accepting rules for what they are - rules made by someone else.  Being an "adult" means knowing the "reason" for the rules.\n\nCollege showed me that many of our governmental laws were inherited from English Common Law.  They, in turn, partly inherited it from the Romans.  The Romans partly got it from the Ancient Greeks.  Where did the Greeks get it?  I believe they got it from God.\n\nIn the book of Romans, Paul claims that God showed his power and divine nature to all of us.  That divine nature was imprinted onto our minds.  We recognized it, knew that it came from God, but we chose, instead, to follow our own ways.  We try our "own" ways for a while, find it doesn't work, and then come back to God's ways.  However, we still don't want to acknowledge God as the source of those ways.  Instead, we make laws.\n\nSo the basis for morality, the origin of how we know what is right and what is wrong, is God.  Are we "ignorant" if we ignore that?  Perhaps.  However, God still lets us go our own ways if we want.  He's being the patient parent, waiting for you to return to Him and His ways.
543449
The laws you are quoting are from Levitical law.  We wouldn't understand them in our 21st century culture, but they were necessary is keeping the society that was present more than three millennia ago in check, as all laws do.  If you could see what was permissable in societies surrounding the Israelites, you'd probably be horrified; infant sacrifice, for instance.  \n\nThe New Testament, being composed 1200-1400 years later, takes a different view of the law; as society has changed, it needed more than laws to keep it in check, but someone to embody and fulfil the law; hence Jesus.  Even with that, though, sin is still there and certain practices (homosexuality and witchcraft, for example) are still forbidden.  But they don't have the same command of death as a result.\n\nWhat you're referencing is Levitical law without the presence of Jesus to atone for the sins of the people.  Since I assume you didn't invent this list yourself, I would hypothesize it's actually used as a criticism of Jewish culture; or a particular figure like Dr. Laura.
465351
I'm not sure I exactly understand the supposition you're making.  In general, however, I would argue that moral and legal can be viewed as a Venn diagram - an act can be both, one of the other, or neither.  We probably wouldn't want it any other way, actually - hence the saying that "you can't legislate morality."
660274
you are posing the same idea that Lucifer did to Eve. That God had some evil intent in His edict. Why or why not eat of the tree is not the issue. God could have just as well of said "Do not pee where the grass does not grow" The real issue is whether to obey God or not. The exercise of free will as according to Gods plan was initiated here so that after the full consequence of self interest is evident and the world is impacted as it has been God could then show that the exercise of the will by choosing to Love God through Christ would be possible, to the intent that the manifold wisdom of God might be known by the church to the principalities and powers in heavenly places.
194572
None, it was created by man for several reasons - to control and conquer, to explain things that man can't explain yet, for reasons of hope and to use God to teach moral values.
331748
I agree with the first answer; some Christian beliefs go hand in hand with morals and ethics.  So getting a term for murder or theft isn't based on the Christian beliefs of thievery and murder is wrong, it's based on the moral belief.  And I think the separation of Church and State is just there so that certain laws don't ostracize or oppress members of different religious points of view, so that, say for example, there's a law that is passed that says women of Islamic beliefs aren't permitted to wear the shawl and the traditional dress that goes along with some people who adhere to tradition.  \n\nAnd I wouldn't say that they are really that "influenced" by Christian beliefs.  Like I said before, it really is just because it's moral in its nature.  Religious doctrines may say that killing is wrong because God gave each of us life, and that no man has the power to destroy that gift; whereas moral truths say that killing a man is just plain wrong.
20085
Well, humans are amazingly adept at holding mutually incompatible beliefs simultaneously.  The religious like to ascribe to God good motives, so they feel perfectly justified in giving him the credit for saving them from a plane crash, but don't generally assign him blame for the crash itself or ask why the heck he let all the other people die.  \n\nThe most consistent viewpoint is that everything happens according to God's plan, and we mere mortals just don't understand what it is that makes the suffering necessary.  Unfortunately, that leaves little room for free will.
520963
I hope you don't mind, but I'm just going to copy and paste a previous answer I posted to a similar question:\n\nIt's called a social contract. Morals and integrity do not come from religion at all. Religion preaches about morals, but from the example of many religious leaders, it's not always the priority.\n\nA social contract is basically not doing to someone what you don't want to be done to you. I'm not going to kill people because I don't wish to be killed. I don't damage property because I know I wouldn't want my property to be damaged. \n\nPeople who have no morals are "sociopaths", getting the "socio" from the "social" from social contract and getting the "path" from the Greek word "pathological," meaning "uncontrolled or unreasonable".
615780
I sin every day, and I'm not so insecure about death that I have to go sit in a box with some priest, and beg for forgiveness while he reads a magazine on the other side. Everyone tells lies... It's human nature. Organized religion, the bible, and the ridiculous concept of a deity was created by man for the sole purpose of control. The same reason why Santa Claus was created for children to be on their best behavior. Out of all the religions, I'd have to say through personal experience that Christianity is quite possibly the worst with tolerance, and the acceptance of others with differing beliefs. In their mind, they see their "way" as the only way, and they'll refuse to see differently, so they'll spout rhetoric and scripture as a means to intimidate, and convert others. Hence, why the word "Christianize" exists.
89469
To me it is quite obvious that religions are man made.. all history and facts point to that. For example, the Bible is so scattered. It was written by different people over a long period of time. Anyone could justify an action or belief with a passage in it. \n\nLife is scary and strange and there is a big unknown out there. The idea of a monotheistic male creator and judger seems so silly. However, the interrelatedness of all life is apparent, and that connection with the godlike can happen to anyone, whether religious or not. Of course, those who believe will tell you it's merely a question of faith. Therefore, no consensus can happen. There is no arguement available in response to that.\n\nWhat I find funny is that a lot of typical religious teachings about how to behave in society make logical sense for the survival of the species. We don't need religion to teach us to be "good" people. In fact, many people are killed in the name of "God."
141747
It's not amoral, but a lower level of morality. Are you familiar with Kohlberg's stages of morality. It states that people first develop morality by being told what is right and wrong, then are able to make the distinctions themselves, which is at a higher level. Therefore, by simply following a god's orders, it would be a low level of morality.\n\nHowever, most religious people are able to develop morality using logic, not simply what their god says, and so they have higher developed morality.
514255
Hi Gorgeous,\n\nYou just did a straw man argument.  Hell is a Christian theological concept.  In fact, it is generally a new testament concept.  It is impossible to discuss it without referring to how it came to be defined.  I’ll do my best to minimize any references and use reason and common sense. \n\nA common religious and cultural concept is “punishment” for bad people.  I think it is a just concept.  Buddha say, if you are bad, you will have bad karma in your next life.  Bad Karma is hell.   The Greek Gods had Hades, in the underworld.  \n\nOr, Jesus says, Good = love God (faith) and love others as yourself (action).   “ON THESE 2 COMMANDMENTS HANG ALL THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS”.  (Read Matt 22:34-40).   So Ted says, if you read something that contradicts this, then check your premises, you will find one is wrong.  Everything in the bible has to (it must) logically align with this statement.  So, what is the interpretation basis to align with this one statement?  That’s a longer answer, and not part of your question.  \n\nHowever, what is the GOOD that will be the basis of judgment?  Most people say, “got to have faith”.  What is faith?  They then start prescribing rules and beliefs.  Now can you prove that these rules and beliefs 100% align with loving God?  Not usually.  There are many main religions, and then 100’s of sects.  Carl Jung says, “The shoe that fits one person, pinches another.”  So I also am skeptical.    \n\nNow do not forget this one dynamic of human nature that exists.  A religion (versus personal belief in God), as any and all organizations, always tries to grow and sustain itself.  It is pure human nature, in fact, it is good, for without it there would not be progress.  As for all human organizations, belief is based on some dogma or “Vision Statement”, loyalty to the organization, and growth thru product sales (corporations) or people or faith (religion).  In a sense, it is survival of the fittest.  The religion with the best message and the one that meets the most human needs, or aligns with an inspiring spiritual message the best, wins.   So they are all competing and believe they are right.   But they do say a lot of different things.  From the outside, this does not sound spiritual.   From the inside, it can be very spiritual.   Religion and church is a choice, and can be a very satisfying choice, if it meets your needs.  \n\nBack to what Jesus, is said to have said, [paraphrased]:  to be good, to pass His judgement, “feed the hungry, give water to the thirsty, shelter the stranger in need, clothe those who need it, help the sick, and visit those in prison.”  (Matt 25:35-36).  How else can it be known that you have loved others as you love yourself?  It is your actions.  Think about it, there is not one single word on belief, just actions.  This aligns with love others as yourself.  This is a good statement.     \n\nDo not forget, that in a solely materialist universe, which is cause and effect only, this leads to nihilism on a grand scale.  That is why philosophy and politics and much more is so nihilistic today.  If we are random quirks of nature, then in the grand scheme of nature, neither purpose, nor the sanctity of life can be justified.  This has and will have increasingly terrible implications to civilization.  Inherently, most people are not nihilistic, they are good people, with or without religion.  But if you are brilliant person without a conscience, heaven help us. \n\nRead the parable of the talents (Matt 25:14-30).  If you do not work to reach your human potential, and thus contribute your potential to mankind, then “cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness”.   This seems to align with loving others as yourself, and proving it by action, and being judged specifically on this aspect of your life.   What is the outer darkness?  It is not explained.  \n\nTo me it seems that religions try to make having faith the critical issue, in their
330923
The story of Adam and Eve was just that ... A story. It was told to make a point in spiritual truth, not as a real history. The point being that when we follow ego we seem separated from Deity. The writer of Genesis simply used Satan as a metaphor for that portion of the human mind that forms the illusion of separation, which thing we call ego. Its just a difference in terminology based on language and culture. The principle truth remains the same. God loving people in no way negates cause and effect. We do things. That's the cause. If we make bad choices we suffer the consequences. That's the effect. Cause and effect is a simple Universal law. Its not a punishment, its just the way things work. If we make good choices we can put that law of cause and effect to work for us rather than against us and instead of suffering the consequences of our actions we can reap the rewards. Which things are a matter of perception. But understanding this helps keep ego (Satan, our own "lower" nature) in check and make appropriate choices in life. ;-) ~ Peace & Blessings ~
162790
The answer to this question is difficult because humans tend to interpret things differently and then when you add religion to the mix it just gets that much more difficult.  Christianity comes in many "flavors" Not all believe exactly the same and some may allow for more personal interpretation of their doctrine than others.  One sect for example may view premarital or extramarital sex as a sin, but view abortion as an even worse sin because it is the shedding of innocent blood.  Others may view both acts as equal on the sin level.  In any case each person has their agency to do as they wish and it sounds like she made the decisions that she was comfortable with at the time.
622058
Morally? No-God permit this with the people. Until he changes things to a new way people were allowed to judge of earthy things just not the heart. it was a protection to the people.
550940
Even if God doesn't exist, a code of ethics still would. You can't just do anything you want, because if we all did that, we'd make each other miserable.\n\nFor instance, if I felt like driving somebody down in my car [ALA Grand Theft Auto], the same fate could be awaiting me. God or no, a code of ethics is needed for maintaining civilized society.