The idea that morals come from the Bible.
Debate Rounds (5)
I'll be starting this debate with my argument being that morals do not come from the Christian Bible, and in fact are a basic human concept that we all use; basically, humans create their own morals, and some of these morals become accepted as a society, forming laws.
Also, just some info: this is my first debate on this site as I just created my account, so I may be a little rusty.
Just some ground rules:
I think I should provide some further ground work before we procede. I think we should start by properly defining what it is we are dicussing.
1. Idea- any content of the mind: an individual's conception of something.
2. Morals- Founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom: capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct: conforming to the rules of right conduct: a justified person.
3. Come- to move into view; appear: to extend; reach.
4. From- used to indicate source or origin.
5. Bible- any book, reference work, periodical, etc., accepted as authoritative, informative, or reliable: the sacred writings of any religion.
By these definitions our debate may procede.
Resolution: The idea of morals did not come from the Bible.
1. Opponent who makes the most convincong arguement WINS debate.
2. Sources must be provided.
3. Debate must stay on topic about where Morality came from and where started.
Since it is my opponents place to provide the arguement I will let him make his case first and I follow.
I thank you for the chance at debating such a great topic And Now with no futher wait- I turn the floor over to my new opponent.GL!(`;')
I'd just like to start out by thanking my opponent for agreeing to this debate.
Now I'd like to begin by saying that it seems like a relatively obvious fact that morals do not come from the Christian Bible, but are in fact a human creation. Let's start by looking at ancient civilization:
Back in Ancient Greece, as early as 620 BC (remember, this means 620+ years before Christ or the Bible were ever created) laws were created to govern the land. The first written law of Ancient Greece was that of Draco the lawgiver, who set that the punishment for homicide would be exile. Around 25 years later in 594 BC, Solon, who was appointed new lawgiver at this time, created laws with 4 categories: Tort, Family, Public, and Procedural Laws. The main one I'm going to focus on in this argument is Tort Laws. A Tort occurs "when someone does harm to you or to your property." These laws stated that, like previously talked about, the punishment for murder was exile. The Tort Laws also included a monetary payment of 100 drachmas for rape, and a varying amount for thievery (depending on amount stolen). These laws just go to show that society, even 600 years before Christ and the Bible, realized that killing, rape, and stealing were morally wrong and should be punishable. People weren't just wandering the streets killing and looting anything that moved. They were well aware of the idea of morals. People didn't kill others because they new they would be punished for it. The only way that man could have decided what was punishable and what wasn't is to have the ability to decide what is okay and what is evil, and, since this occurred 6 centuries before the Bible, it would seem that morals can and are created by man.
Resolution: The idea that morals come from the Bible.
Morality is the belief or recognition that certain behaviors are either "good" or "bad".
Morals can not be properly defined as such because this word and its meaning has been a ever changing theme throughout man's history. We today feel like we got a tight grip on what is moral and what is not. But I like to shed the light on many moral acts in the past that are atrasoties today. This assures us that in the future what we see as moral today will be immoral tomorrow. This was only a point I intend to make because it will play a role later. I have many questions for my opponent and I will ask them throughout the round.
Where did ethics, values or principles from which you live by, come from?
:Jesus made a distinction between the two types of moral viewpoints when He often criticized people who outwardly behaved well but were inwardly corrupt:
From my many discussions on this very topic I think it is safe to say that personnel decisions and conduct are our personnel morality. There are many types of defined morality to choose from. There is no doubt that man has a inner means that gives him a self evident code of conduct.
But is this personnel morality a correct version of it? Does this personnel code of conduct get to define what universal morality is? How do we know that socities morals are right or wrong? How do you know if your morals are right or wrong?
I personally think that the word moral can be nothing more than our own belief of what is right or wrong and therefore can never be used universally. That the word either is meaningless or is to rich in meaning to set a sole standard for man.
Problems with morality-
I have given three reasons why morality itself should be viewed as a evolving process and is handle through documentation. Therefore morality typically follows from a Bible or sacred book.
1. Ever Changing Morality description-Evolution of morality
There is no unversial code of morals for anyone to live by. We as people agree on alot of issues concerning morality but we have not put it to a deffinitive answer. And because of that it is hard to tell what is actually moral or not.
2. Personnel Morality-Moral intuition-
Everyone has a personnel morality of what they themselves feel is right and wrong. Even the worst of people on earth have a personnel code they live by. People generally follow their gut feelings and make up moral reasons afterwards.
3. Societies Moral Code-
Governments love to jump in and claim supreme authority over socities conduct. By the law and standard displayed by a governing body gives favortism to what people by the whole feel is proper. This gives no claim to what is right or wrong really but just what is popular or beneficial.
II. Ethics Law:
Ethics law typically regulates the moral conduct of people within a society. Businesses and governments usually must abide by certain ethical parameters or limitations that are spelled out in ethics laws. If they are violated, offenders could be held accountable for their actions and be punished by law. The word ethics generally relates to morality, philosophy, principles, or code of conduct considered as moral behavior. For instance, murder usually is viewed as both immoral and illegal. This ethics law is a general law that permeates the bulk of societies. It usually is unethical to steal from a company, which is punishable by law, as well.
III. Arguement & Rebuttal
Resolution- Basic morality originates from sacred texts.
My opponent started his arguement off in 620BC and affirmed that this was 620+ before Jesus Christ. He was right but this has no barring on the topic at hand because the Bible as defined above was around long before 620BC. My opponents entire claim from the resolution is about standard morality not deriving from a Biblical source. He has not proved His claim at all nor provided accurate sources for these assertions. I ask he properly define his position in the next round. I will define mine here.
A. Capable of conforming- Ethics law is created by humans to regulate shared ethical beliefs within a society.
C. Conforming to the rules of right conduct- We see if people do not comform to the rules they get punished. A punishment that by ethics and moral character despinses fair justice.
D. Appeared and reached- Moral conduct has been found to be the back-bone of civilized nations. And therefore a code or writing would have been falled for all generations.
E. Accepted as authoritative, informative, or reliable. I think many of our Laws to day as displayed throughtout ages have became were we derived our basic moral character.
F. Sacred writings of Ethics in any religion/Law. Ancient Egyptian law, dating as far back as 3000 BC, had a civil code that was probably broken into twelve books. Around 1760 BC, King Hammurabi further developed Babylonian law, by codifying and inscribing it in stone. Hammurabi placed several copies of his law code throughout the kingdom of Babylon as stelae, for the entire public to see; this became known as the Codex Hammurabi. Ancient Greek law contained major constitutional innovations in the development of democracy. Roman law, in the days of the Roman republic and Empire, was heavily procedural and there was no professional legal class. Instead a lay person, iudex, was chosen to adjudicate. Theodosian Code governed natives and Germanic customary law. After much of the West was consolidated under Charlemagne, law became centralised so as to strengthen the royal court system, and consequently case law, and abolished folk-right. Medeval European legal scholars began researching the Roman law and using its concepts, and prepared the way for the partial resurrection of Roman law as the modern civil law in a large part of the world. Today there are signs that civil and common law are converging. European Union law is codified in treaties, but develops through the precedent sat down by the European Court of Justice. The United States legal system developed primarily out of the English common law system. And we have continued to develop laws to better society today.
To close, I think my opponents whole case is dry and unfounded. I think I have properly negated that our moral standards have derived from previous scripture of various types as defined in Round 1. So I beg my opponent to provide the burden of proof that his resolution is sound.
Thanks back to Con!
http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.garlikov.com... http://www.wisegeek.com...
Envirted forfeited this round.
I ask my points be pulled down until resolved.
I request points for FF of Round 2 by my opponent.
I see no need to respond any further.
Thanks to all. God bless!
Back to Pro!
Envirted forfeited this round.
Points for FF.
I await a response.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Greyparrot 4 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||1|
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit?
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.