Vogon poetry reading, lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysb-TwA7JCQ

Why do you have so much trouble believing that human culture can adopt and pass on rules of moral conduct? That draw a line between good and evil. Do you think the Bible is the origin of "Thou shalt not kill"?

We call bits of genetic information "genes," and bits of cultural information are known as "memes." The forces of natural selection work on both genes and memes. If a group of human beings did not bar killing other members of the group, the group would quickly descend into anarchy and barbarism, and would die out as members died themselves or fled to more civilized tribes.

So "Thou shalt not kill" becomes part of the social rules, a meme, in successful cultures. Those cultures survive, while any culture that countenanced murder would go extinct. (Note: I'm talking about murder of a group member. Many societies in the past considered outsiders enemies, and therefore killing them would have been a plus, not a minus, for survival.)

Yes, my hypothesis (not mine, but I'm conveying it here) is based on evolution theory. Evolution works on both genes and memes.

There is a way the hypothesis can be tested. We can see if there are any thriving (as opposed to dying-out) cultures that do not have a law or societal norm that bans murder.

Can you think of one?

And can you think of any test for your own hypothesis that the difference between good and evil must be learned from a deity? If there is no test for your hypothesis to pass, it can't be considered a valid hypothesis.

Jim

PAskinner

Jim, in your hypothesis, murder is not inherently evil, it is only banned because of it's negative effect on culture. Do you really believe that can be applied across the board? It would mean that child abusing for example is not necessarily wrong, but only detrimental in certain cases.

I haven't read any of his other works. I will have to check them out.

PASkinner, murder was just an example. You could do the same analysis for theft and other crimes, which as children we learn (most of us) as a line between "good" (what helps other individuals and the group) and "evil" (what hurts other individuals and the group).

If you were right that only God can instill a moral code, and does so with humans, then why don't babies know the difference between right and wrong?

The answer is that they have to learn it from their parents and people around them.

Jim

The equivalent of "I prefer the .270 WSM" and "I prefer the Mathews Triax."

Witness, be a good one and becareful who you witness for.

Douglas Adams had five novels and one short story (I misspoke earlier when I said six novels) published in the "Hitchhiker" series. They are:

The Hitcherhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979)

The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe (1980)

Life, The Universe And Everything (1982)

So Long And Thanks For All The Fish (1984)

Young Zahoid Plays It Safe (1986) This one is a short story never published by itself but attached to other novels.

Mostly Harmless (1992)

Adams also had many other novels in addition to the Hitchhikers series published.

Well, good and evil don't really have any bearing on creation vs evolution. Good and evil could exist in a vacuum. Or in your head. They are concepts or constructions having to do with after the mater was created and life forms were either created or evolved.
I'll give that argument to James, he makes a reasonable point.

The evolutionist still has nothing to evolve. The best they ever came up with was some big bang reaction and the stuff that banged is explained only by something to bang; it predisposes that matter had already been created. And anti-matter?
A thought, who/what/Them that caused matter in the "void" was on a roll; why stop with matter? Snap a finger BANG and go on with fixing up some basic life forms. Let the imagination run and the forces flow.

Reread the the two creations found in Genesis and note the chronology of life forms and development; I see a remarkable similarity to the sequence espoused by evolutionists. But, and this is astonishing, this story including the sequence of life progressing form simple to complex to the finale stage of Man, was compiled 6 or 7 or many thousands of years before science had a glimmer or an inkling.

I have long thought that christians who get upset when I tell them I'm not a believer, are themselves unbelievers, but lack the courage to tell anybody. Else why the anger?

I can tell folks argument for argument why I CAN"T believe their fairy tales but it does no good. For whatever reason they insist I should at least pretend to believe to avoid hellfire. To me that is so ridiculous it isn't even worth discussing.

Danny, I'm not sure I ever met anyone who did believe the Bible. Always with the "that's a literary construction" "a simile" "a metaphor" "a parable" "an analogy" etc.
Confusion grows when two versions of the same story appear as with Goliath. Probably caused by reuniting branches of Hebrew groups after long captivity.
But is a big bang any less a "fairy tale"?

Danny my personal beliefs are at the opposite end of the spectrum from yours.

But your beliefs are your own and I will respect them. And I firmly believe in your right to hold those beliefs.

If we were in a remote jungle and you had never heard of Christianity mentioned I might press you to give me audience...

But we both know that you are aware of the gospel so I will not pester you except to say that the invitation is always there.

That's it.

Mike

the difference between the big bangers and the creationists is big bangers will admit they could be wrong. That its just another theory. An expanding universe suggests some sort of big bang but isn't proof.

Creationists were created, Evolutionists evolved .

Since we're on the topic of "hard to swallow." I read an article (NatGeo) the other day...

The article explained that our coal seams originated with vegetation from the Carboniferous period. Trees were tall and thin with shallow root systems. They would fall over easily and often and pile up on each other. Over the years the piles would press the lower trees into the soil and after a long enough time... Voila! Coal.

The article further explained that this doesn't happen today because we have bacteria that digest wood and break it down before it can transform into coal... And that these bacteria did not exist during the Carboniferous... A period where the world was swimming in flora and fauna.

But not this one particular strain of bacteria when trees abounded?

Mike

Mike I can without any doubts at all say ,"there is more we humans don't know than what we do know".

Humans figured out how to make diamonds. Wonder if anybody has tried to turn a chunk of pine into coal?

We agree.

And a lot of what we don't know isn't worth finding out or fighting about.

Whether coal came from the handiwork of God or the slow march of the evolutionary process has no bearing on its usefulness to me.

Mike

I read another article years ago about the demolition of a railroad trestle somewhere ( Germany, I think. ) And when they dug the pilings out of the ground, the portion under the soil had already begun turning into coal.

Mike

Something had to be created period