(September 11, 2015 at 4:40 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: A Moral Lawgiver is required when raising the question of evil. If there is no moral lawgiver, then there is no good, no evil. If we are created in the imago dei, then our very being/essence has intrinsic worth.
If our intrinsic worth is not exterior or from God, and it has instead evolved without God, then the value or worth of each individual is forever changing. It is therefore not permanent but ever changing. And if it is changing, then who will give it value, what value, and when? Is it a person or persons that gives each person intrinsic value? Is it a creed? Is it a king? Is it a nation or government? If this is so, then anyone at any age may change the meaning as they please. This is then crucial. Intrinsic human value has to come from God, God who transcends us. Only then will our value be eternal and never up for the whims of change, the winds of change. Only then will it be anchored. Evolution cannot give value to human beings because it is always changing and that means no absolutes, no anchor. Essential worth means not conveyed worth or secondary worth. We are all created equal.
No, a Moral Lawgiver is NOT required when raising the question of evil. See my editing of your previous post.
You are quite correct, when you say, "If our intrinsic worth is not exterior or from God, and it has instead evolved without God, then the value or worth of each individual is forever changing. It is therefore not permanent but ever changing." This fact is trivially easy to prove, simply by pointing to the fact that we now have changed from the Biblical position, found in Leviticus 25:44-46, which says that it's okay to own human beings, to recognizing that each person has individual worth, making it not okay for one person to own another human being.
There are dozens of other ways in which our values have changed, "by the whims" of different leaders over time, and in which secularist morality is demonstrably superior to that of your alleged "Moral Lawgiver". A quick visit to the Skeptic's Annotated Bible or The Evil Bible Website can give you a couple of hundred references to demonstrate this.
Because our perspective on the worth of human beings is so easy to change, and has so obviously changed over time, it's essential that we develop a secular (and thus agreeable to all, regardless of their faith-traditions) concept of the inherent worth of mankind. That's what the Founders of the United States did, when they told King George III of England that our rights did not stem from the "Divine Right of Kings", but were inherent to our nature and that our worth did not come from the government or any other ruler, but from the will of the people and their inherent, "unalienable" rights.
Evolution has made us into a social animal, what some call the "moral animal", because of our ability to see our own inherent worth and to fight for same, even if various leaders (both governmental and religious) would have us believe that they hold the keys to the only definition that is valid, that only they can determine our worth, and some have succeeded in that endeavor by force or coercion.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
