It is rare for animals to kill thier own kind too, you seem to think it is standard.... it really isn't. I'm sure you have heard of the "food chain"

Regarding your quoted question, humans have developed to a point where killing other humans is not neccessary for survival. Not to mention, being a social animal, it is -EV for one to kill other humans.

Intersting that they resemble humans the most.... looks like they may be evolving into close to what an early homosapien would have been like.

It seems obvious that the relevant difference is that lions don't have courthouses and jails, and probably lack the mental capacity to even define murder.

I know you're trying to make a point but you're not getting through so please just say what you're trying to say.

But they dont have a set of rules/system that they follow and must obey, you dont see a monkey put in prision or fined for their behaviour only humans have this type of system and that tells you that "killing" is moraly wrong because of feelings, we evolved from the same place? Whats the difference.

I'm going to invoke Poe's Law and give you the benefit of the doubt that this post is a level. If not... oh my.

it is not really "wrong." in fact, nothing is "wrong," it just "is." humans have created societies in which people can live peacefully and happily (or at least some/most of them). in order for this to happen, we all have to have guidelines or "morals" (which are actually just arbitrary human constructions) on how to live so that society functions and we can maximize peace/prosperity/happiness/whatever. religion comes in because in order to get some people to act "good" and "moral" they need to have some kind of incentive to be "good" (i.e. chance of an afterlife in a wonderful place) and an incentive to not be "bad" (i.e. chance of going to a very bad place after death).

lions don't get arrested and go to jail because they don't have a society that sets up guidelines to live, they just live as best they can.

now in addition, to make society function more smoothly on earth we need to create an incentive for people to do good and not bad (i.e. if you do "bad" you will go to jail and lose out on precious time you could spend doing things you want to do outside of prison) and also to separate the "bad" people who can't function properly in society from those that can play by the rules and live peacefully/happily/ with as little conflict as possible.

so in summary, what separates humans from lions or other animals is that we have evolved to be smart enough to live in societies (also we are a social creature by nature because we function safest in large numbers because we have little to no natural defenses from predators). we then create laws and rules and morals to live by so that our societies remain peaceful so that we can live happily because it is not as harsh as living in caves or bushes and picking over the scraps of animal carcasses left over when lions get full from eating so that we can survive. (run on sentences ftw imo)

Is it that we have morals that god gave us?

Did I win the prize?

So you study his unfounded claims further, hold them up to an unflinching faith in a man other questionable writings have mislead you to beleive is the Lord, then do a background check to see if the author of the original text in question seems like a nice enough chap.

I love how you then go on to compare this process of yours with science. Good effort but overwhelmingly flawed.

first of all, we ARE animals.

second...natural does not equal moral

and if we want to ignore morals, still...natural does not equal beneficial (not for all nor some nor one)

we are intelligent enough to develop concepts regarding behavior

for the benefit of ourselves, our neighbors, society as a whole perhaps, we agree to (by some means or another) try to prevent behavior that we largely agree is damaging, including murder

depending on a person's ideas of morality, some natural actions can be either immoral or moral (or legal or illegal (i prefer legitimate or illegitimate))...same with "unnatural actions" if there is such a thing

How can you fine a monkey or put him in jail, they have not developed a monetary system, and have not developed the capability to build a jail???? WTF????

Maybe as monkies evolve over the next 10 million years they will.

Regarding the big bang theory, you have to suspend disbelief to realize that every bit of matter in the universe as we know it today was contained in an a point smaller than an atom. Something happened that scientists still cannot explain (call it God if you want) and this point suddenly started to expand at an incredible rate. So the very fabric of space and time (which are woven together, can't have one without the other) started to stretch, so on and so forth. Just read the theory rather than continuing to spout things about voids and atoms bouncing around.

sigh

first, you don't seem to understand the big bang theory

but in any case, your question is legitimate...that is, it is appropriate to ask where "stuff" came from (although it's not necessarily that simple...ie, it is not apparent that the "stuff" was ever "created")

I have no clue...no one really knows and it's ok to admit this...it's simply honest.

some people claim that they know, saying God created it, etc...or course this begs the question of what created God...and no, saying God is eternal doesn't help this, since there is no evidence of this (or that God exists at all)...

and even if we accepted this line of reasoning, saying that "anything" is eternal is just as effective (ineffective?) and has just as much evidence as anything we typically label God

it's probably better expressed as the more common, seemingly unsolveable qustion...

"Why is there something instead of nothing?"

this is the real question we should be brought to by any questions like yours concerning existence

unfortunately, "I don't know" seemed to be the only honest answer at this point

Way to step on ants with this one. lol.

Of course I understand how easy it is to respond to this and say what your saying, but I also understand that its a step by step process that can't be understoodinstantly and without faith , so it's all good.

BTW, faith is anything but unflinching, faith should be tested and tried as it will if you keep challenging things, faith in truth always grows with the more truth you have faith in, this again, is a personal perspective and understanding of the world around you.

Many people look at animals and see something beneath them and useless, I see myself in them, and am amazed by them. Of course, to gain my perspective you first have to believe that animals are special or good or whatever, then you have to learn about them, read about what was been revealed or discovered through science and observation and let it enrich your own perspective on your life and the world around you.

I try to do this will all aspects of life.

This. Evolution is actually a survival game of genes where only the fittest ones survive/reproduce. At some stage being altruistic was the way to go and it became part human nature. In other words it is better for a single being when we work together for a common goal or are not beating the crap out of each other all the time.

This isn't actually a human privilege. For example chimpanzees pick leeches/fleas/whatever crap from each others hair. When a monkey picks fleas from others hair maybe some day that other will also remove all those nasty bugs from the first one's hair...

I love it when Christians denounce the big-bang theory by saying 'OK so God did the bang'. Well, yes, he may well have banged that bang, but if you believe that then it's sure as hell obvious the earth is NOT 6000 years old and evolution must exist. You would have to admit the earth is billions of years old and that dinosaurs and other cool things roamed the earth before the evolution of man, there was no Adam and Eve and no talking snake in the garden of incest. If you believe the big-bang on the basis that 'god did it' you'd pretty much have to throw out the whole bible. Genesis has to be wrong, so it's probably that the rest is crap too.

There's also many hundreds of gods to choose from, so how the hell do you know you've lucked onto the right god? You'd have to be running real well to pick that one. Sorry, but i'd rather just try and live my life as well as I can and not worry about trying to appease all these crazy deitys, all of which amazingly seem to be more than willing to condemn every man and his dog to a fiery eternity in hell-fire simply for not having the forsight to 'know' that HE exists.

I agree with you, let science figure out science stuff.

But I don't think there are 100s of Gods to choose from, I mean, can't you boggle down the choice to like 10 or so really?

Since the beginning of man you do not think there were over 100 gods?

Of course there were, but I thought you were talking about a choice today. Surely, if you were looking for a God to believe in, we can boggle down the choice to less then the amount there is to choose from.

Of course we can. Just choose from the major religions of your own geographic region. Most people don't need to go that far, they were born into the one true religion!

A choice today? You mean they eventually moved on from the first gods.

How would you propose doing that?

What I am saying is this, take the mainstream Christian view of God and the way Mormons believe in God. I see the Mormon view as a more complete view so why believe in one that has so much less info.

Same with a lot of other Gods, there are different variations, but usually there is one that has all the good from the others into one evolved believe.

So take the best of different types, and we can weed em down dramatically.

Just to clarify the Mormons have the complete view?

Nobody can agree on what the "best" is. In fact, everyone more or less thinks their own sect is the "most complete." I guarantee that most Christians in the US don't consider the LDS view to be "more complete" than others.