Morality

[Deborah]

You cannot have both a fundamentalist faith built on biblical literalism and science at the same time.  I tried that once and there is too much mental discord involved in trying to simultaneously believe two things that are mutually exclusive.   So do some study on both and you will come to realize what is true and what is not.     I do not find it difficult to retain a belief in God.  As I've written elsewhere, God is as valid an explanation for some of my life experiences as any other explanation.  But I did have to abandon any notion of biblical literalism.  That's not such a huge step either.  Christian writers from nearly 2000 years ago were doing the same thing. 

Anyway, if being created in the image of God refers to the intellect, as Christian theology has always proposed, then it seems foolish to me to abandon the intellect in order to appear pious.

For me, none of this has anything to do with a fear of death.  It did at one time but not any more.  Ceasing to exist simply means the pain in this life is finished and that's nothing to fear.  So at some point in the future I will close my eyes and either find out that the spirit continues in some fashion or all cognizance will cease and there will be the peace of nothingness.

[Dee Marshall]

Aren't human beings the only creatures capable of believing in a higher power?

Humans also seem to care about the survival of other animals too, which I don't think I've seen in other animals

Animals long associated with us as partners and companions such as dogs and cats do as well.

[Kylo]

I like to keep an open mind and would like to know where the concept of good and evil comes from. I am having difficulty seeing things differently, any insight would be greatly appreciated. Is there a scientific reason, is it human nature?

I would suggest the concept of good and evil is ideology, which is informed by culture, and culture is informed by basic biology.

What is good and conducive to human survival and harmony (harmony being conducive to survival) is considered to be good. So there would be the origin of "thou shalt not kill (indiscriminately)", "thou shalt not_____" (steal, rape, abuse children, etc.) because what all of these things have in common is that they lead to psychological damage, physical harm, social disharmony, therefore are bad/evil. The concept of the seven deadly sins is almost self explanatory in that all of these psychological states are states that can precede bad decision making, obsession, or are otherwise unhealthy in excess, so we discourage them.

There are many caveats but on the most basic and fundamental level what almost all cultures consider to be evil are indeed bad for humans and their society if overindulged, and most religions promote the idea of temperance, turning the other cheek, charity, fidelity, family etc. because these things tend to have been good for our health on the whole.     

The origin of "good and evil" appears to be directly derived for the most part from what has been good for the human animal's survival, proliferation and social cohesion.

Sometimes it goes off the rails and becomes detrimental (i.e. original sin, pathological and unwarranted fear of hellfire etc.) but for the most part most things we think of as good, or as "goodness" are actually good for us.