I take great issue with your assertion that morality is informed by religion. Let’s dissect this:
Micah Blu
22

Ok, let’s start unpacking that response.

morality is informed by religion

Can we redefine that statement and say our hypothesis is morality can or cannot be informed by your worldview? From a philosophical point of view, I consider atheism a “religion” per se (they just don’t got no song — gotta love Steve Martin). The problem is, at least within Christianity, “religion” has a different meaning. And it’s not like all non-religious or anti-religious dogmas are automatically better (Marxism, socialism, communism?).

Humanity does have its own virtues and they’re far better than those exemplified from within the doctrines of religion.

Here, what “scales” are you using to evaluate a worldview is better or worse than another? How are defining “better”?

I’m going to list some biblical verses below as references of its inherent immorality

Immoral compared to what standard or dogma? Where are the goal posts?

one has to do to ensure a good afterlife is accept that religion’s version of God and all will be forgiven

That’s probably a little over-generalised. Not all religions that I’m aware of teach that. Christianity doesn’t strictly teach that but we have some ground to cover before we can explain why.

Religious dogma allows a serial killing rapist on death row to at the last moment accept its God and he will be awarded a lifetime of eternal bliss

Not all do but Christianity is one of them. Why? It’s because Romans 3:23 says that all have sinned. It’s not about doing enough “right” things to earn eternal favour with the Christian God. In Christiantity, nobody is good enough on their own merits. In Christianity there is no scale to sin, like there are some sins that are kind of not as bad as others. That said, there are some cases in the Old Testament where God’s patience reaches a tipping point, but I’m not sure that’s relevant to the conversation yet.

It is quite the opposite, religion does not inform our moral intuitions it demonstrably abandons them at whim.

Does everyone have the same moral intuition? If not, who decides which one is better or worse? Why can’t a religious dogma, per se, be a valid expression of ones moral intuition?

Morality is a subjective understanding of acceptable behavior that has evolved with us as a species and continues to…

If we now discover that morality is subjective, who are you to judge that religions have a better or worse understanding than you? Haven’t we just collapsed into relativism? Or to put it another way, why are you so offended, when being offended is merely a subjective response?

Even dogs and other animals display moral behaviors, how is that possible from your perspective if they can’t even understand

I don’t see how that’s relevant, nor is it consistent across the entire animal kingdom. From a Christian perspective, some animals are considered to be soulish (those animals that appear to have the ability to express empathy, seems mostly confined to parts of Mammalia, I’ve never seen a crocodile express empathy, hehe), but my understanding is they act completely from instinct and whether or not they “go to heaven” is neither here nor there.

our morality is somehow informed by these antiquated and sadistic dogmas that we risk losing the progress we’ve made

Yet, you offer no basis for why your statement, or more to the point, your particular dogma is true, or at least better (in fact, I honestly have no idea what you believe other than religion is all bad).

No matter how you slice it, you do have an idea of what morality is, but it’s hard to debate that because you aren’t revealing your cards. All you are saying thus far is yours is better than mine, and that’s just that.

Now...

Kill Man, Woman, Infant

I have yet to find a good commentary on this passage. I suspect it had something to do with when the Israelities didn’t follow God’s instructions to the letter, they ended up getting into more trouble. If I was evaluating this humanistically, I would say it was a tactical move to ensure that present and future generations of enemies were wiped out.

The other thing to consider is were the Amelekites morally upright people (according to God’s standards)?

But if you are trying to judge this command on its merits, if morality is truly subjective, what does it matter? I can tell you why killing of infants is uncomfortable from a Christian perspective, but I’m at a loss to cast a definitive judgement using any form of subjective morality. For example, it’s legal in many places to abort a human baby just because you don’t want it (some utilitarians would even argue that decision should be available to you up to one month after birth). If that’s “ok”, why judge God more harshly?

Moses’ Mass Murder & children sex slaves

Where on earth do you get the idea that the children became sex slaves? Sex outside of marriage was expressly forbidden in the Israelite culture.

Nail His Head!

Huh, this is a story I should use when people are complaining about female ordination :) I digress.

What’s your problem here? The opposing general was taken out in a time of war. There are headlines to that effect every other day in the war against terrorism.

Raping And Killing (children included)

Not quite sure what your point is here because this is a prophecy that the Medes were going to overthrow the Babylonians (which subsequently happened). This is different from the other verses you cite because it’s not an instruction to the Israelites (they were in Babylonian captivity at the time).

Like what you read? Give Andrew Eddie a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.