How the existence of similar morals across cultures makes a case for the Bible

[Rambozo]

It's been pointed out that morals such as ones forbidding murder and theft have existed across many cultures, and aren't exclusive to the Bible.

I've never heard anyone say that the Bible is the only text in existence which contains such moral rules. Just as how, while our common law may have developed out of older sources of law, such as those of the Bible, it also contains moral rules which forbid murder and theft.

Regardless, I would argue that the fact that many cultures have also had laws which forbid actions such as murder and theft further affirms the validity of such rules. Similarly to how being able to observe the laws of gravity regardless of what nation or culture one is from further makes a case for them being objective and universal.

 

[Logician Man]

It's been pointed out that morals such as ones forbidding murder and theft have existed across many cultures, and aren't exclusive to the Bible.

I've never heard anyone say that the Bible is the only text in existence which contains such moral rules. Just as how, while our common law may have developed out of older sources of law, such as those of the Bible, it also contains moral rules which forbid murder and theft.

Regardless, I would argue that the fact that many cultures have also had laws which forbid actions such as murder and theft further affirms the validity of such rules. Similarly to how being able to observe the laws of gravity regardless of what nation or culture one is from further makes a case for them being objective and universal.

Did the biblical rules/morals play a significant role in your becoming a "communist"?

 

[KingLeo]

No it doesn't

 

[Rambozo]

Did the biblical morals play a significant role in your becoming a "communist"?

I'm not a communist. So I just changed that to avoid any confusion.

Do you want to address the point?

 

[multivita-man]

It's been pointed out that morals such as ones forbidding murder and theft have existed across many cultures, and aren't exclusive to the Bible.

Makes the case for the idea that we all evolved more or less the same way - hundreds of thousands of years before we came up with writing systems

 

[Logician Man]

I'm not a communist. So I just changed that to avoid any confusion.

Do you want to address the point?

Ok. So you were a self-declared communist before I responded to your OP, but you are now no longer a communist. - Got it. -

 

[Loulit01]

It's been pointed out that morals such as ones forbidding murder and theft have existed across many cultures, and aren't exclusive to the Bible.

I've never heard anyone say that the Bible is the only text in existence which contains such moral rules. Just as how, while our common law may have developed out of older sources of law, such as those of the Bible, it also contains moral rules which forbid murder and theft.

Regardless, I would argue that the fact that many cultures have also had laws which forbid actions such as murder and theft further affirms the validity of such rules. Similarly to how being able to observe the laws of gravity regardless of what nation or culture one is from further makes a case for them being objective and universal.

So, many cultures not familiar with the Bible have laws against murder and theft, therefore the Bible is true.

Is it me?

 

[Rambozo]

So, many cultures not familiar with the Bible have laws against murder and theft, therefore the Bible is true.

Is it me?

I'm tempted to argue that it's proof these laws are grounded in objective realities about human nature.

 

[Loulit01]

I'm tempted to argue that it's proof these laws are grounded in objective realities about human nature.

What does that have to do with the Bible?

 

[Individual]

It's been pointed out that morals such as ones forbidding murder and theft have existed across many cultures, and aren't exclusive to the Bible.

I've never heard anyone say that the Bible is the only text in existence which contains such moral rules. Just as how, while our common law may have developed out of older sources of law, such as those of the Bible, it also contains moral rules which forbid murder and theft.

Regardless, I would argue that the fact that many cultures have also had laws which forbid actions such as murder and theft further affirms the validity of such rules. Similarly to how being able to observe the laws of gravity regardless of what nation or culture one is from further makes a case for them being objective and universal.

Hammurabi was most likely the source for Moses, though belief in the existence of supernatural God beings made it impossible to attack the law maker.

 

[Loulit01]

Hammurabi was most likely the source for Moses, though belief in the existence of supernatural God beings made it impossible to attack the law maker.

Yet Jesus refuted "an eye for an eye" in Matthew 5:

38; Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

39; But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

 

[Daisy]

Humans were created with a conscience, so it is inherent in man...that is why Paul could say...

"For when people of the nations, who do not have law, do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves. They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them, and by their own thoughts they are being accused or even excused." Romans 2:14,15

 

[Loulit01]

Humans were created with a conscience,

Not all humans.

so it is inherent in man...that is why Paul could say...

What is inherent in man depends on the man and has changed drastically across time and nations. Look at how women were thought of through the centuries. Property, basically, with the Bible as a guide.

"For when people of the nations, who do not have law, do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves. They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them, and by their own thoughts they are being accused or even excused." Romans 2:14,15

 

[Luce]

It's been pointed out that morals such as ones forbidding murder and theft have existed across many cultures, and aren't exclusive to the Bible.

I've never heard anyone say that the Bible is the only text in existence which contains such moral rules. Just as how, while our common law may have developed out of older sources of law, such as those of the Bible, it also contains moral rules which forbid murder and theft.

Regardless, I would argue that the fact that many cultures have also had laws which forbid actions such as murder and theft further affirms the validity of such rules. Similarly to how being able to observe the laws of gravity regardless of what nation or culture one is from further makes a case for them being objective and universal.

It's a good thing people don't murder or steal.

 

[Rambozo]

It's a good thing people don't murder or steal.

Again, while you can find examples of people doing those things, you'll find social prohibitions on such things spanning a wide variety of societies, from ancient to modern.

 

[Loulit01]

Again, while you can find examples of people doing those things, you'll find social prohibitions on such things spanning a wide variety of societies, from ancient to modern.

Proving the Bible isn't necessary for societies to prohibit these things.

 

[Rambozo]

Proving the Bible isn't necessary for societies to prohibit these things.

No, I'm saying that the fact that such things exist across a wide variety of cultures makes a case for the Bible being valid.

 

[Luce]

No, I'm saying that the fact that such things exist across a wide variety of cultures makes a case for the Bible being valid.

It's exactly the opposite.

 

[NotreDame]

It's been pointed out that morals such as ones forbidding murder and theft have existed across many cultures, and aren't exclusive to the Bible.

I've never heard anyone say that the Bible is the only text in existence which contains such moral rules. Just as how, while our common law may have developed out of older sources of law, such as those of the Bible, it also contains moral rules which forbid murder and theft.

Regardless, I would argue that the fact that many cultures have also had laws which forbid actions such as murder and theft further affirms the validity of such rules.

Similarly to how being able to observe the laws of gravity regardless of what nation or culture one is from further makes a case for them being objective and universal.

There isn’t any “similarly” to the “laws of gravity.” Laws of gravity exist independently of the existence of Homo Sapiens. Homo Sapiens may never have existed but the laws of gravity will have existed.

“Laws” forbidding human conduct are human constructs. These laws do not exist without the existence of Homo Sapiens.

Regardless, I would argue that the fact that many cultures have also had laws which forbid actions such as murder and theft further affirms the validity of such rules.

Validity is not a popularity contest. The validity of mores and norms isn’t ascertained by conducting a census of the number of cultures codifying into law some morality or norm.

Your view seems oblivious to the fluidity of validity by cultural popularity. Today, many nations have laws criminalizing pederasty but the ancient world was significantly different. Ancient Rome, Ancient Greece, and other ancient cultures pederasty was not criminalized/forbiden by law, and the fact it isn’t the du jour legally today dilutes your logic of a validity by popularity of laws among cultures.

 

[Rambozo]

There isn’t any “similarly” to the “laws of gravity.” Laws of gravity exist independently of the existence of Homo Sapiens. Homo Sapiens may never have existed but the laws of gravity will have existed.

“Laws” forbidding human conduct are human constructs. These laws do not exist without the existence of Homo Sapiens.

The laws are constructs, but the objective realities behind these laws, such as the objective reality that rape causes its victims, aren't.

Validity is not a popularity contest. The validity of mores and norms isn’t ascertained by conducting a census of the number of cultures codifying into law some morality or norm.

Your view seems oblivious to the fluidity of validity by cultural popularity. Today, many nations have laws criminalizing pederasty but the ancient world was significantly different. Ancient Rome, Ancient Greece, and other ancient cultures pederasty was not criminalized/forbiden by law, and the fact it isn’t the du jour legally today dilutes your logic of a validity by popularity of laws among cultures.

I would say that people can make objective arguments against pederasty, and that these arguments could have been made in ancient times just as much as they could have been made today.

Similar to arguments against slavery, for example.

 

[tosca1]

It's been pointed out that morals such as ones forbidding murder and theft have existed across many cultures, and aren't exclusive to the Bible.

I've never heard anyone say that the Bible is the only text in existence which contains such moral rules. Just as how, while our common law may have developed out of older sources of law, such as those of the Bible, it also contains moral rules which forbid murder and theft.

Regardless, I would argue that the fact that many cultures have also had laws which forbid actions such as murder and theft further affirms the validity of such rules. Similarly to how being able to observe the laws of gravity regardless of what nation or culture one is from further makes a case for them being objective and universal.

Since mankind is made in the image of God - humans have been "hard-wired" with a sense of right and wrong - as shown how Adan and Eve felt guilt after disobeying GOD - which therefore shows they knew disobedience to God, is wrong.

Science now even says, children are born with a sense of morality.
Of course they point it to evolution.

Our Brains are Wired for Morality: Evolution, Development, and Neuroscience

Psychological and neuroscience research both tell us that morality, our mental ability to tell right from wrong in our behaviors and the behaviors of others, is a product of evolution. Morality has been passed on through the course of evolution because it helps us to live in large social groups...

kids.frontiersin.org

However - it's been in the Bible - long before science even knew about it!
We are created in His image!
We have an "instinct" for His morality - thus, there is a similarity all over the world.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Given that the result of the first sin in the Bible was Adam and Eve defining good and evil for themselves, I am not sure this is a great argument. Humans are capable of compassion and love, but also are very easily able to frame the evils of oppression, war, death, violence, and other sin using the language of morality. On top of that, the morality that Jesus expressed is beyond that capability of just about anyone and does not look like the typical morality that people express. For example, human nature very typically organizes into hierarchies, which Jesus directly defied. Another example is that Jesus instructed us to pray for people who persecute us, which people do NOT typically do.

 

[tosca1]

Given that the result of the first sin in the Bible was Adam and Eve defining good and evil for themselves, I am not sure this is a great argument. On top of that, the morality that Jesus expressed is beyond that capability of just about anyone and does not look like the typical morality that people express. For example, human nature very typically organizes into hierarchies, which Jesus directly defied. Another example is that Jesus instructed us to pray for people who persecute us, which people do NOT typically do.

Adam and Eve were not "defining" good and evil.
Good and evil was already defined by GOD.
They have a sense of it.
BIG DIFFERENCE.


Adam and Eve instinctively knew they done wrong by their disobedience!


Furthermore - the morality of Jesus is the morality of GOD. EXACTLY!

We're not talking about hierarchies or cultures.
We are talking about a sense of it. The Morality of GOD.
Evolutionists would call it "instinct." It's in us.......................just like the instinct to survive.

We're talking about the foundation for right and wrong.


Additional instructions by Jesus, are given for a reason (many times it's about helping you make a better life, living easier in this world, in a situation you're in).
Such as advising slaves to obey their masters. It doesn't mean He's promoting slavery.
Since slavery was into their culture - it would make life easier for the slave to obey his master as they would obey GOD. The master holds their life in his hand.
Thus He also admonished masters to be fair since they'll eventually answer to GOD.


Do you commit a sin if you do not pray for your persecutors? NO!
But if you pray for your persecutors - your persecutors might be inspired by God to ease up on you (as an answer to your prayer).
Who benefits if your persecutors stop persecuting you? YOU!


I just read from Proverbs on feeding your enemy if he's hungry.
The explanation for it, is:
By doing so, may bring a pang of shame to your enemy..........and it could lead to a reconciliation.
A reconciliation will lead to peace for both of you!

But, is it a sin if you do not feed your enemy? NO.

 

[bomberfox]

It's been pointed out that morals such as ones forbidding murder and theft have existed across many cultures, and aren't exclusive to the Bible.

I've never heard anyone say that the Bible is the only text in existence which contains such moral rules. Just as how, while our common law may have developed out of older sources of law, such as those of the Bible, it also contains moral rules which forbid murder and theft.

Regardless, I would argue that the fact that many cultures have also had laws which forbid actions such as murder and theft further affirms the validity of such rules. Similarly to how being able to observe the laws of gravity regardless of what nation or culture one is from further makes a case for them being objective and universal.

The code of Hamurabi predates the bible and it had prohibitions of bearing false witness. This is not everyone basing their morality on the bible.

 

[bomberfox]

The laws are constructs, but the objective realities behind these laws, such as the objective reality that rape causes its victims, aren't.


I would say that people can make objective arguments against pederasty, and that these arguments could have been made in ancient times just as much as they could have been made today.

Similar to arguments against slavery, for example.

Which the bible never forbade nor abolished.