A response to the video "Why does every intelligent Christian disobey Jesus"?

[parallel]

Here's my opinion in response to the thread question.

Maybe the bible was not written by Jesus, but by his disciples. His disciples were humans after all. Maybe they misinterpreted the teachings of Jesus? That explains why the bible contains advocacy of slavery, sexism, and what not. Since it is not written by God himself, that's why the bible should be used as a guide. You should exercise common sense too. Hence the christians are not really disobeying Jesus per se.

I do not believe in God at all, its just that yesterday I was explaining the fact that the bible is repulsive to my mom. And that was the response she gave me. So how do I counter that?

[Agamemnon]

His disciples were humans after all. Maybe they misinterpreted the teachings of Jesus? That explains why the bible contains advocacy of slavery, sexism, and what not. Since it is not written by God himself, that's why the bible should be used as a guide. You should exercise common sense too. Hence the christians are not really disobeying Jesus per se.

If the bible has been "tainted" by erroneous human transcription then what good is it? How do we know which parts are actually god's words and which are man's screw-ups? How do we know who has enough "common sense" to extract the correct interpretation of the bible without dragging along some man-made garbage?

If god can't protect his primary communications mechanism--the bible--from being tainted and twisted into utter absurdity, then why does this god deserve worship? Such a god would be an utter failure.

That's how I would respond.

Edit: If the bible has been fouled by humanity then it's useless as a guide.

[Agamemnon]

Honestly, the bible is such a crazy mess... If that was god's plan for informing humanity of his existence and what he has in mind for us then he really needs to rethink that and come up with something a lot better because it's pretty much worthless. I mean, is that really the best the all-powerful creator of the universe can do??

If I were god and that was my best effort then I'd be ashamed of myself. I think I'd cause another world-wide flood just to wipe out any witnesses to my massive fuck up. Actually, I'd just dissolve the entire planet and start all over from scratch just to be sure Humanity v2.0  didn't find any stray copies of the bible or the Qu'ran or anything else that might give them crazy ideas.

[Narrow Mullen]

A question a couple people have been waiting for;

How do you determine what is literal, and what is a metaphor.

You said previously that you just used your logic. But that is YOUR logic. Different people interpret the passages differently. That's why there's thousands of sects of Christianity. Are you implying that, out of the 2 billionish Christians in the world, you know God's holy book better than all of them? After all, you seem to be able to confidently pick out passages that are for sure metaphors, and ones that are definitely literal.

What makes your logic better than everyone elses? What if your logic is flawed, and Jesus really did want you to cut off a hand?

[velkyn]

Here's my opinion in response to the thread question.

Maybe the bible was not written by Jesus, but by his disciples. His disciples were humans after all. Maybe they misinterpreted the teachings of Jesus? That explains why the bible contains advocacy of slavery, sexism, and what not. Since it is not written by God himself, that's why the bible should be used as a guide. You should exercise common sense too. Hence the christians are not really disobeying Jesus per se.

I do not believe in God at all, its just that yesterday I was explaining the fact that the bible is repulsive to my mom. And that was the response she gave me. So how do I counter that?

I'm guessing that your mom is sure that *she* knows what Jesus/God really meant. Ask her how.

[hickdive]

The metaphorical interpretation must be correct because the literal interpretation makes no sense.

You do realise the implications of this when applied to, say, jesus rising from the dead?

[parallel]

Honestly, the bible is such a crazy mess... If that was god's plan for informing humanity of his existence and what he has in mind for us then he really needs to rethink that and come up with something a lot better because it's pretty much worthless. I mean, is that really the best the all-powerful creator of the universe can do??

Maybe God doesn't want to spoon feed us? He wants us to find out for ourselves? It's like your lecturer asking you to read up and do your own research. You don't see him explaining every little detail, do you? He expects you to be independent.

Let me sidetrack a bit. Since there is no God and no after life, I guess it gives us a license to do whatever we want to huh? After all, once you are dead, you are dead. You don't go to hell nor heaven. Since we have no soul or conscience, what's stopping me from committing heinous crimes or doing whatever absurd things I want?

[blue]

. Since there is no God and no after life, I guess it gives us a license to do whatever we want to huh? After all, once you are dead, you are dead. You don't go to hell nor heaven. Since we have no soul or conscience, what's stopping me from committing heinous crimes or doing whatever absurd things I want?

You've answered your own question here. Since there is no afterlife, why would you want to screw up the one life you have? You commit heinous crimes your community will deal with you. You don't get the out of asking for forgiveness for every little act you commit.

[CutePuppy]

Honestly, the bible is such a crazy mess... If that was god's plan for informing humanity of his existence and what he has in mind for us then he really needs to rethink that and come up with something a lot better because it's pretty much worthless. I mean, is that really the best the all-powerful creator of the universe can do??

Maybe God doesn't want to spoon feed us? He wants us to find out for ourselves? It's like your lecturer asking you to read up and do your own research. You don't see him explaining every little detail, do you? He expects you to be independent.

It seems that research was and still is being done and we found out how the miracles in the bible are utterly baseless. Oops.

Let me sidetrack a bit. Since there is no God and no after life, I guess it gives us a license to do whatever we want to huh? After all, once you are dead, you are dead. You don't go to hell nor heaven. Since we have no soul or conscience, what's stopping me from committing heinous crimes or doing whatever absurd things I want?

Okay:
1. If the reason you are not doing these things is because you fear hell or want to go to heaven, maybe you should reevaluate your character a little bit.
1a. I am so happy to know that you are religious.
1b. Hint: don't use this line of reasoning among your smarter friends: they might not want to be friends with you any longer after you've revealed what you really feel on this issue to them.
2. Hearing you say this makes me feel that much better being an atheist and having no desire to harm people. Imagine that? (No, really, imagine it. Think about it...hard).

P.S. I also like how you undermine your first point about being "independent" and "finding things out for yourself" by advocating that people should just throw themselves at your god's mercy like good little sheep, doing whatever he asks without questioning the logic of it only because you fear his punishment. Good job.

[Agamemnon]

Maybe God doesn't want to spoon feed us? He wants us to find out for ourselves? It's like your lecturer asking you to read up and do your own research. You don't see him explaining every little detail, do you? He expects you to be independent.

Unfortunately, that doesn't fix it. First, he doesn't have to explain every detail in order for it to be an effective communications tool. The minimum standard, IMO, is that it make some kind of sense, be coherent, accessible and, most importantly, be believable by all of humanity. The bible fails on all counts. These should be easy goals for an all powerful god to achieve.

And you don't even have to get into the interpretation problems to see the failings of the bible as an effective communications medium. The vast majority of humanity has been completely illiterate. You can't do much interpreting if you can't even read the damn thing. Not to mention the fact that the bible didn't enjoy wide distribution until the invention of modern printing presses and distribution channels. You can't do much interpreting if you've never even SEEN a bible before. How many Pre-Columbian native Americans had access to the bible? Maybe they did, but I've never seen any convincing evidence of it.

And how are people with reading comprehension disabilities supposed to research and interpret the bible? How about people with visual impairment and no access to a braille copy? Braille wasn't even invented until 1821. And how long after that before the bible was widely available in braille?

I can't possibly conclude that the bible is the work of a supreme deity.

Let me sidetrack a bit. Since there is no God and no after life, I guess it gives us a license to do whatever we want to huh?

You still have to obey the laws of society.

After all, once you are dead, you are dead. You don't go to hell nor heaven. Since we have no soul or conscience, what's stopping me from committing heinous crimes or doing whatever absurd things I want?

What makes you think we have no conscience? You can have a conscience without god. I don't worry about heaven or hell, but that doesn't mean I act like a barbarian.

[Anfauglir]

Let me sidetrack a bit. Since there is no God and no after life, I guess it gives us a license to do whatever we want to huh? After all, once you are dead, you are dead. You don't go to hell nor heaven. Since we have no soul or conscience, what's stopping me from committing heinous crimes or doing whatever absurd things I want?

That's exactly why a "good" atheist is better than a "good" believer.  An atheist who does good (even when its hard) does it because its good.  A believer who does good does it - at least in part - knowing there is reward or punishment to come.

But it IS a fair question - with no external morality, why should any person not simply satisfy their own whims?  The answer for me is because this is the one life we all get - not just me, but you, and everyone.  If I agree it is ok to hurt others to please myself, then I have to also admit that it is okay for others to hurt me to please themselves. 

[plethora]

Let me sidetrack a bit. Since there is no God and no after life, I guess it gives us a license to do whatever we want to huh? After all, once you are dead, you are dead. You don't go to hell nor heaven. Since we have no soul or conscience, what's stopping me from committing heinous crimes or doing whatever absurd things I want?

Classic!

1) Morality is not dependent on the existence of a god, much less the christian god of the bible. Hence, atheists have morals (shock and awe!)

In fact, many social animals have developed morality  (i.e. Wolves and Chimpanzees) and they have not even concieved of a deity.

2) There are consequences in this life to the actions we take.
i.e. I murder someone, I get jailed for the rest of my life.

That's why we have laws and law enforcement. Duh!  

3) There are proportionally less atheists in prison than in the general population (in the U.S.) The vast majority of the U.S. prison population is .... wait for it ... you guess it! Christian!

Their beliefs don't seem to stop them from committing crimes.

I'm sorry but when I hear the same dumb theist argument for the million^th time and I refute it again and again and again... it gets ridiculous.

[Anfauglir]

Let me sidetrack a bit. Since there is no God and no after life, I guess it gives us a license to do whatever we want to huh? After all, once you are dead, you are dead. You don't go to hell nor heaven. Since we have no soul or conscience, what's stopping me from committing heinous crimes or doing whatever absurd things I want?

Parallel, you are also talking as if the afterlife, should it exist, is somehow seperate from this earthly life.  And yet, your point is both that there in that afterlife we experience consequences from our past actions, and also that there must be a continuity of consciousness between the earthly life and the afterlife.#

With that in mind, can you please explain the difference between me NOW, me twenty years later (alive), and me 20 years later (dead)?  In both cases there are consequences, in both cases I (presume) I have continuity of consciousness.  So where is the difference?

[lotanddaughters]

Hence when William Blake wrote:

Tiger, tiger, burning bright
In the forests of the night.

He did not actually mean us to infer that there was a tiger on fire in a nighttime forest; rather, the "burning" is a metaphor for the tiger's ferocity.

That's why poetry lovers love poetry. The poet's aim is to be artistic and colorful. Each reader gets his/her own unique feeling(and sometimes own unique message) from reading the exact same line of poetry.

Our books of law in today's modern society have absolutely no room for bullshit like "Tiger, tiger burning bright". We want to make certain that people know exactly what is legal and what is not. Our laws are written very clearly. We are just fallable humans creating these laws, and different people can read them and almost always end up with the same interpretation. If the Creator of the universe truly wrote a book of morals of the utmost life/death/salvation importance, NOBODY would misinterpret "His Word". Whatever you think the Bible says, believe me, there are hundreds of thousands of Christians and Jews who think different. 

[Agamemnon]

...If the Creator of the universe truly wrote a book of morals of the utmost life/death/salvation importance, NOBODY would misinterpret "His Word". Whatever you think the Bible says, believe me, there are hundreds of thousands of Christians and Jews who think different.  

Indeed. I mean, it isn't any small thing we are talking about here. In the case of the bible, if you misinterpret it, you could end up in hell for eternity. God screwing around with us and then condemning us to eternal damnation for getting it wrong... I mean, if that really is the hand we've been dealt by this being, then I want nothing to do with it. If that is the way it is, then humanity should be spending more effort trying to avoid or destroy this being, because it is pure evil.

[parallel]

2) There are consequences in this life to the actions we take.
i.e. I murder someone, I get jailed for the rest of my life.

That's why we have laws and law enforcement. Duh!

Not really true. Lets say someone murders a guy. He can frame an innocent guy to take the fall for him. He can also hire an excellent lawyer. He can use the insanity excuse. He can also go on the run. There are still many dangerous criminals who have not been caught after so many years. There are also bribery and corruption involved. OJ simpson was proved innocent, wasn't he?

The point that I am trying to make is that the law is not perfect. It's made by humans after all. So much so that even if someone commits murder, he still can get away scot-free.

But it IS a fair question - with no external morality, why should any person not simply satisfy their own whims?  The answer for me is because this is the one life we all get - not just me, but you, and everyone.  If I agree it is ok to hurt others to please myself, then I have to also admit that it is okay for others to hurt me to please themselves.

Who are we to say that we have to be good to others? The global world human population is billions. Do you expect every single of us to be good? It just doesn't work that way. Look at the animal kingdom. Why can't lions and deers live in harmony? Same for birds and worms, cats and mice. Lions even engage in infanticide, that is they kill cubs from rival prides. Some animals even eat their young. In fact, we are actually mammals.

What makes you think we have no conscience? You can have a conscience without god. I don't worry about heaven or hell, but that doesn't mean I act like a barbarian.

That's what I infer from Moderator_020's post in another thread. http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=10109.30
Post #57

He/she said that "A dualistic approach to consciousness is an illusion."

[Anfauglir]

But it IS a fair question - with no external morality, why should any person not simply satisfy their own whims?  The answer for me is because this is the one life we all get - not just me, but you, and everyone.  If I agree it is ok to hurt others to please myself, then I have to also admit that it is okay for others to hurt me to please themselves.

Who are we to say that we have to be good to others? The global world human population is billions. Do you expect every single of us to be good? It just doesn't work that way. Look at the animal kingdom. Why can't lions and deers live in harmony? Same for birds and worms, cats and mice. Lions even engage in infanticide, that is they kill cubs from rival prides. Some animals even eat their young. In fact, we are actually mammals.

Parellel, simple yes/no question for you. 

Are you good because for the potential reward, or for fear of the punishment if you are not?

[Agamemnon]

The point that I am trying to make is that the law is not perfect. It's made by humans after all. So much so that even if someone commits murder, he still can get away scot-free.

But, according to Christianity, someone can be a vicious murderer their whole life and repent at the last moment of their life and escape punishment. They get off scott free in god's justice system. How is that an improvement over man's justice system? Add the fact that you can spend an eternity in hell for minor sins and I'd say god's justice system is crap.

Who are we to say that we have to be good to others? The global world human population is billions. Do you expect every single of us to be good? It just doesn't work that way.

So?

Look at the animal kingdom. Why can't lions and deers live in harmony? Same for birds and worms, cats and mice. Lions even engage in infanticide, that is they kill cubs from rival prides. Some animals even eat their young. In fact, we are actually mammals.

So???

What makes you think we have no conscience? You can have a conscience without god. I don't worry about heaven or hell, but that doesn't mean I act like a barbarian.

That's what I infer from Moderator_020's post in another thread. http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=10109.30
Post #57

He/she said that "A dualistic approach to consciousness is an illusion."

Can you explain to me what he means by that?

[screwtape]

What makes you think we have no conscience? You can have a conscience without god. I don't worry about heaven or hell, but that doesn't mean I act like a barbarian.

That's what I infer from Moderator_020's post in another thread. http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=10109.30
Post #57

He/she said that "A dualistic approach to consciousness is an illusion."

I do not see how these ideas are in any way connected.  Are you confusing "conscious" with "conscience"?


edit:

OJ simpson was proved innocent, wasn't he?

No.  They failed to find him guilty.  There is a difference.

[lotanddaughters]

OJ simpson was proved innocent, wasn't he?

    If you use that same logic that led you to know O.J. Simpson was guilty and applied that logic to the Bible and Christianity, you would also know that the Bible was written by ignorant men. You would know that Christianity is a cult that sprouted from the Jewish cult, which sprouted from the Canaanite cult, etc.

    I wasn't there when O.J. killed those people, but I still know he did, just the same as if I actually witnessed it. If I was falsely accused of murder and locked up in prison, and I knew that the real killer was still at large, I would be furious. You wouldn't see me all smiley-faced when I was trying on those bloody gloves, knowing that the real killer was still out there. The DNA evidence wouldn't point to me either. After I was acquitted, and turned on the T.V. and saw a bunch of comedians making jokes as if I was the actual killer, I would probably spend my entire freedom searching until the real killer was found.

    Believe it or not, there are still idiots who believe O.J. was innocent. Why? Maybe some are retarded. Maybe some are huge football fans who just can't handle the reality that O.J. is guilty, no matter how immense the evidence is. Religion is not the only area where you find ignorant bias. I'm sure most people have sat next to someone at a sports event, and this someone expresses his/her disapproval of every call that is made by the officials. To this person, there is always some conspiracy either against their favorite team or for the other team. Maybe some of these fools, who think O.J. is innocent, don't even like football. The reality that a murderer could legally be set free with the potential to murder again is so frightening to them, that they simply refuse to believe it.

    If you read just a tiny portion of the arguments presented on this website that prove that the God of the Bible could not possibly exist, and you still wish to believe in a lie, you are no different than an ignorant juror at the O.J. Simpson trial.

    Hey, maybe there theoretically could be a Creator of the universe. But that Creator could have been created by another CREATOR, etc. You can bet 100% that if any of these "Creators" did write a book, it would be the greatest book ever written, unquestionably. Unless, of course, one of their CREATORS came out with a better book. :shrug

[parallel]

Parellel, simple yes/no question for you. 

Are you good because for the potential reward, or for fear of the punishment if you are not?

Neither. I have already stated in an earlier post that I am not a believer in any type/form of God at all. There's a 'Ask questions in the forum' link on GII.com so I decided to sign up because I felt that there were some aspects that were not discussed on GII and WWGHA. So here I am.

Back to the discussion. How do you define good? A law abiding citizen? Filial to parents? Not using a swear word? Let's just say that even if there were no laws and someone were to give me 1 billion dollars, I wouldn't kill a human being. Because it is simply not in me to do so. I just can't do it. It's not about the punishment or reward, you get what I mean? Which brings me to...

Here's my reply to Agamemnon. You asked 'so?' I will tell you so.

The main difference between us and the animals is that we have a higher level of intelligence than them, which enables us to communicate by speaking, inventing all sorts of things and whatnot. We humans are classified as mammals. Wikipedia's definition of mammal is 'Mammals are a class of vertebrate, air-breathing animals'

So to cut a long story short, we are animals.

I said in that post who are we to say we have to be good to others. I would like to add on. Who are we to say that what those murderers and rapists did are wrong? I know it is cruel but so? Lions kill deers. Cats kill rats. Birds kill worms. Are those animals wrong? You may say that they are different in the sense that they are killing for food. So? Lions kill baby cubs from rival prides. That is clearly not for food. You may say 'So? What has that to do with humans?' It has everything to do with us! As I have shown in the paragraph before, we are animals! From wikipedia - 'An estimated 520,000 people were murdered in 2000 around the globe.' The world population at the time was 6,070,581,000. That's 8.57%. That is not a small percentage at all. If it is not in our nature to kill each other, the percentage would be way way smaller, like 0.1% to 0.99% range.

Nature made those murderers the way they are, just like nature made the rest of us to be non-murderers. Just like there are breeds of dogs that won't hesitate to bite you if you provoke them, there are also gentler breeds of dogs who would simply bark at you and not attack.

Why do lions get away with murdering their own(cubs, rival lions) but it is wrong for humans to murder humans? I don't want to hear that same old reasoning of 'They are animals, we are not so it is different' I have already shown you that we are animals. That is not me talking out of my arse. That's science talking.

Have you watch Natural Born Killers? I recommend it if you haven't.

Some people are born to be murderers. How can you blame them? Just like how lions are born to be murderers. How are those murderers different from rival lions killing each other? In both cases, they are getting rid of whoever that they don't like. Isn't that what racism is mostly about? Asking the murderer to be good to others is like asking the lion not to kill the deers. Why do some murderers who get out of jail proceed to kill again? It's their nature. That is why some don't show remorse. It's like the lion analogy again. A lion will still kill after you set it free from the zoo.

As for the conscious thingy, my bad. I totally mistook consciousness for conscience.

But, according to Christianity, someone can be a vicious murderer their whole life and repent at the last moment of their life and escape punishment. They get off scott free in god's justice system. How is that an improvement over man's justice system? Add the fact that you can spend an eternity in hell for minor sins and I'd say god's justice system is crap.

I am talking in the context of not believing in God. Example - Let's say there's this guy who is an atheist. He hates his boss so bad. He knows the law is not 100 percent foolproof. So he begins planning the perfect murder. In the end, he got away scot-free because of insufficient evidence, and then living life as normal with no remorse whatsoever. Isn't he making full use of the only life he got? By getting rid of the boss he hates so bad, he can breathe easier at work. Plus he got away scot-free!

[Anfauglir]

Some people are born to be murderers. How can you blame them? Just like how lions are born to be murderers. How are those murderers different from rival lions killing each other? In both cases, they are getting rid of whoever that they don't like. Isn't that what racism is mostly about? Asking the murderer to be good to others is like asking the lion not to kill the deers. Why do some murderers who get out of jail proceed to kill again? It's their nature. That is why some don't show remorse. It's like the lion analogy again. A lion will still kill after you set it free from the zoo.

Indeed.  And for the same reason I would not want a lion walking the streets of my town, nor would I want a murderer who shows no remorse and is likely to do it again.

[parallel]

Some people are born to be murderers. How can you blame them? Just like how lions are born to be murderers. How are those murderers different from rival lions killing each other? In both cases, they are getting rid of whoever that they don't like. Isn't that what racism is mostly about? Asking the murderer to be good to others is like asking the lion not to kill the deers. Why do some murderers who get out of jail proceed to kill again? It's their nature. That is why some don't show remorse. It's like the lion analogy again. A lion will still kill after you set it free from the zoo.

Indeed.  And for the same reason I would not want a lion walking the streets of my town, nor would I want a murderer who shows no remorse and is likely to do it again.

Of course you wouldn't want a lion or a murderer in the streets. I wouldn't want that too. Why? Because we don't want to die. Deers would prefer their land to be free of lions and other predators too. It's all basic instinct, survival of the fittest stuff.

I would like to reiterate my main point, which is, who are we to say that murdering is wrong? Yes it is cruel and you don't want it to happen to you but so what? It is still within the 'rules' of nature. Do you see deers complaining to their fellow deers that the lions are wrong to murder them? Granted they can't talk but you get the idea. Say a basketball team is winning by a large margin, yet they continue to run up the score during the last few minutes. You may not like it but it is not wrong since the rules of the game did not say that it's not allowed. Please bare in mind that I am neither condoning or encouraging murder.

[Aaron123]

Of course you wouldn't want a lion or a murderer in the streets. I wouldn't want that too. Why? Because we don't want to die. Deers would prefer their land to be free of lions and other predators too. It's all basic instinct, survival of the fittest stuff.

I would like to reiterate my main point, which is, who are we to say that murdering is wrong? Yes it is cruel and you don't want it to happen to you but so what? It is still within the 'rules' of nature.

Sounds like you're answering your own question.  Murder is cruel, we don't want it to happen to us, and we don't want it to happen to others (at least those we care for), so we declare murder to be wrong.  Seems pretty simple and straightforward, really.

[parallel]

Of course you wouldn't want a lion or a murderer in the streets. I wouldn't want that too. Why? Because we don't want to die. Deers would prefer their land to be free of lions and other predators too. It's all basic instinct, survival of the fittest stuff.

I would like to reiterate my main point, which is, who are we to say that murdering is wrong? Yes it is cruel and you don't want it to happen to you but so what? It is still within the 'rules' of nature.

Sounds like you're answering your own question.  Murder is cruel, we don't want it to happen to us, and we don't want it to happen to others (at least those we care for), so we declare murder to be wrong.  Seems pretty simple and straightforward, really.

Oh, so it's okay for us humans to kill chickens, cows, etc for food but it is wrong to kill each other? Oh because they are not humans so it's okay to kill them? How do you think the mother of the cow that you just killed feels? Do you think that animals don't feel any pain when they are slaughtered?

Murder will always be part of nature. That's a fact. Aren't you killing the germs and bacteria when you wash your hands? Aren't you killing the grass by stepping on them? Don't give me that excuse that no species kill their own. The lions are doing it to baby cubs from rival prides(Youtube has clips of it), etc.

[screwtape]

Of course you wouldn't want a lion or a murderer in the streets. I wouldn't want that too. Why? Because we don't want to die. Deers would prefer their land to be free of lions and other predators too. It's all basic instinct, survival of the fittest stuff.

Really?  You think murder is natural selection at work?

I would like to reiterate my main point, which is, who are we to say that murdering is wrong?

Well, since murder is defined as wrongful or unjustified killing, and since we make up the meaning of words, then I would say we are the authorities on the matter.

Yes it is cruel and you don't want it to happen to you but so what?

So, we have come up with rules of behavior that we more or less all agree are practical allow us to function in groups.  Without these rules we could not trust each other enough to have society.  We find that there are much greater benefits to all of us by having societies, so we have found a way to do it.  Individuals who do not follow these rules are not to be trusted and are punished or excluded from the group.

It is still within the 'rules' of nature.

And?  Nobody is saying the universe cares whether one talking monkey kills another.  It only matters to the talking monkeys.

Do you see deers complaining to their fellow deers that the lions are wrong to murder them?

The plural of "deer" is "deer".  If deer could talk and comprehend morality, then yes, they would absolutely agree that deer being devoured by lions is a horrible injustice, just like we do when some kid jumps the fence at a zoo and is eaten by a polar bear.  My father thinks it would be a good idea to kill every alligator in the world just make sure no humans are ever killed by them. 

Granted they can't talk but you get the idea. Say a basketball team is winning by a large margin, yet they continue to run up the score during the last few minutes. You may not like it but it is not wrong since the rules of the game did not say that it's not allowed.

And?  What point are you trying to make? 

Oh, so it's okay for us humans to kill chickens, cows, etc for food but it is wrong to kill each other?

Some people argue that.  Some argue it is not okay to do that.  I say we are omnivores.  As such, we eat other animals and that is okay with me.  But I think it is important to recognize how special life is and not take it for granted.  Just because it is food does not mean it is worthless.

Murder will always be part of nature.

You are confusing murder with killing again.

That's a fact. Aren't you killing the germs and bacteria when you wash your hands? Aren't you killing the grass by stepping on them? Don't give me that excuse that no species kill their own. The lions are doing it to baby cubs from rival prides(Youtube has clips of it), etc.

I think there might be something wrong with you.

[plethora]

Killing is in nature. Agreed.

To Kill is merely "to cause someone or something to die".

Humans define Murder as "the crime of a person intentionally killing another person, particularly with premeditation".

There is also Manslaughter which is "the crime of killing a person by someone who did not intend to do it or who cannot be responsible for their actions".

Who are we to say Murder is wrong? Well we defined it and it matters to us... so I'd say only we are to say whether it's wrong or not.

If a rock falls on my head and kills me... too fucking bad. That's not 'wrong'.

If a lion eats me ... too fucking bad. That's not wrong because it can't act otherwise. It cannot be reasoned with now can it?

If a person murders me with a gun to take my wallet, that's wrong.
Why? Because we say so.

As a society we have evolved morals and values. To allow people to murder other people without negative consequences would be detrimental to society as whole.

Hence, we classify it as 'bad'.

[Aaron123]

Aren't you killing the germs and bacteria when you wash your hands? Aren't you killing the grass by stepping on them?

Now I know you're overanalyzing things...

Good grief.

[plethora]

Aren't you killing the germs and bacteria when you wash your hands? Aren't you killing the grass by stepping on them?

Yes.. and we have determined that these are not bad things. In fact, killing germs is something we've determined to be good (for us). So what?

If the grass or the germs had a sense of morality, from their point of view, these would be immoral things.

Instead, the grass doesn't care about us and it doesn't feel pain. Bacteria don't care about us and sometimes make us sick or kill us so we defend ourselves from them.

Big deal.