Im trying to make sense of this, can you help?

Question

I read that millions of years ago when apes hadn't evolved into humans yet, they would bite each others heads off and fight each other. There was obviously no right and wrong. You know...survival of the fittest. I want to know how it is possible that when one of the apes was about to kill another ape he said, "Stop...I think that killing is wrong. Maybe we should set up some rules. I feel like biting your head of because you were about to steal my girl is wrong.
If we are all "animals" and the lion is allowed to attack a gazelle and eat him. Why is it wrong for me to kill? Survival of the fittest…right? And for that matter, why do I know what’s right and wrong. I can feel it. I see someone who is hurt, I want to help. The lion sees a gazelle who is limping; he attacks it and eats it.
Where did the feeling of right and wrong come from?

Thank you for your thoughts.
I’m just trying to figure out what I believe or what I don't believe.

Answer 1

God gave us His Commandments...that is why we have right and wrong. There is nothing in "nature", "the natural world," or the theoretical "Evolution of species" that can explain love, and compassion, faithfulness and kindness, forgiveness, generosity, self sacrifice, patience...right and wrong...etc etc. Right and Wrong come from what is truth, what is absolute. Right and Wrong is not based on preference or perception, and is not relative.

What is Right to do is Right, and what is Wrong to do is Wrong, no matter what excuse might be given to the contrary. ..the excuses are rationalization and justification for willingly doing what is Wrong instead of what is Right.

If we were animals, we would be bound to our instinct, which Science and Nature also cannot explain sufficiently and logically. Animals know what to eat, how to build nests, when to sleep and when to hunt, they know their natural predators on sight and they know this without being taught, and instinct is something inherent within even the very first animals or they would not have survived....they would have eaten that poison berry and died...or walked up to that snake and been eaten, hence no more of that species as it is not logical to believe that more than one of any species happened to evolve at any given time. The idea that these simple goo based life forms simultaneously evolved into male and female compatible pairs...by random chance is impossible. What are the odds that goo would evolve randomly into many of the exact same creature? So many that they could avoid all the mishaps that a new "life form" fresh out of the muck would be able to survive and populate an entire species...how could the goo know to create male and female creatures so that they could procreate...and why wouldn't all animals just have stayed asexual? Would have made survival a great deal easier...

If one assumes that all animals, according to "evolutionary randomness" just happened to crawl out of the muck and evolve into different creatures at the same exact point in history in order to "witness" the mistakes of those poor doomed animals who ate the "poison berries" or wandered to close to their natural predator, so as not to repeat their mistake and also become extinct, then how exactly did that happen...if the goo randomly decided to evolve differently into all those different animal possibilities at the exact same moment in history...and only the smarter and more observant ones survived, then why do we have ferrets, and ostriches today...or cows...they have to be some of the dumbest creatures. One would think that only creatures like humans, ravens, dolphins, horses, pigs and dogs would have survived, but we have all kinds of dumb animals in existence that could not have survived the "battle of the fittest" as natural selection dictates...and yet they have survived throughout the hypothetical "millions of years of evolutionary change."
Granted, some are domesticated animals...but they had to survive long enough to be taken by humans to be made domestic. Since human beings have only been around for such a short time..."according to evolution," that really doesn't make sense either.

Additional info: If these animals are this dumb now, how dumb were they before they evolved? And how in the world did they survive long enough to become domesticated?


God created animals with the instincts within them for their survival, and God created human beings as flesh and spiritual beings, in His image, and gave us His rules for our lives so we could be above the natural world, and responsible stewards of the earth obedient to Him to do His will. He put the earth and all the animals in it under our authority and in our care. We are not animals and our knowledge of Right and Wrong as given to us within the Commandments of God establish us above the animals, and as is proven daily, capable of all things they are not because we are created in His image who is above all things.

His Laws...Right and Wrong are written on our hearts, in our conscience, and that is of course why we can discern what is right and wrong when we see it.

;o)

Take Care and God Bless!
Have a wonderful day and have faith in Christ!

Answer 2

Humans have evolved on an intellectual level more than the other animals, although it is often difficult to believe with so many morons running around. Anyway, if not for our intelligence we would have been killed off long ago. The only reason we have an advantage over lions and tigers and bears for example is because we invented weapons like guns. Physically, we are no match. Our feeling for right and wrong is innate as with most other mammals. This comes as a survival skill. It evolves with our intelligence into emotions such as love. You don't need to be religious to have good morals. In fact religion contradicts good morals. The lion is a carnivore. Humans are omnivores. The lion's survival instincts cause it to naturally kill other mammals to survive. People can actually live a healthier life by avoiding meat and dairy products. If you're interested, read a book by a philosopher called, "Animal Liberation." This is a good book for someone concerned with ethics and the killing instinct. Good luck in your quest for knowledge.

Answer 3

The development of human morals obviously didn't happen like that. It's been so slow it's more than reasonable to say that it hasn't finished happening yet. As for the biting off of heads, I don't know your source but that sounds ludicrous. No other apes are as intra-violent as that, most are very peaceable (chimpanzees are violent but only towards smaller monkeys; gorillas and bonobos are very mild-mannered). Few species kill fellow species members.

Socialization can be seen in ape communities and in communities much farther down the species hierarchy (do bees bite the heads off another over rivalry?). Socialization is in fact an evolutionary survival techniques. An ultra-violent ape would be such a threat to a species population if it thought it could rule by biting heads off that others would destroy it before it could do any more damage, removing, in classic Darwinian style, that trait from the gene pool.

You've obviously been hugely misinformed. It's very common with evolution. Get a few good books and find out for yourself. It's a fascinating subject if you look into it.

Answer 4

This is disturbing. Are you asking why you shouldn't kill people?
Are you saying you're more fit to live than someone else, so you should be allowed to just kill any old body you want to?

Apes still fight each other, but that's more of a male dominance thing. Lions need to eat, so they hunt and kill weaker animals. It's not a question of "allowed" - it just is. Animals have no high thoughts like "Oh jeez, let's be buddies" or "Maybe this is wrong." You have the ability to think and reason. Animals don't have that the way humans do. You cannot attribute human thought patterns or mannerisms to animals.

Answer 5

Have you been watching Animal Planet and Discovery Channel too much?
But seriously, I think that's what that whole Garden of Eden thing was about. At some point God took Man (and woman) and gave them abilities other animals could never have, such as to love, to hate, to be prideful and to believe (or not believe) in Him.
So then we had the responsibility to treat each other and animals with mercy and kindness. A shark isn't evil for killing and eating a fish - that's his job. We are evil for killing and brutalizing our fellow humans with no reason other than our own self-gain.
Hope this helps.
PS: I also don't think it means you have to be a vegetarian - bad idea. Just eat healthy.

Answer 6

i'm not sure what world you're living in but if you watch the news you'll notice that humans kill each other all the time and in the case of war it's often touted as the "moral" thing to do.
humans not only kill each other over mates, territory and resources but kill everything else too while striving for hierarchic dominion.

humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor which is why basic social behaviors are so similar tho gorillas and bonobos are certainly more peaceful and less destructive than humans.

Answer 7

I'm sure you realize that empathy is a paradox in a dog-eat-dog world. Why we value life when we have to consume in order to survive makes no sense. If I were truly being fair and empathetic, I wouldn't kill stinging insects, take antibiotics, or eat steak. But for some reason I have a sense that life is special. While I have a sense of self-preservation, I also have a belief that all life is sacred in some sense. Sometimes these things must come into opposition with one another. I would say its evidence of the 'image of God' in mankind.

Answer 8

I don't think apes just bit heads off right and left, they did what was necessary to survive...I think if someone was trying to kill me I would try to protect myself as well. I am not Christian but that's doesn't mean I don't have morals, I don't believe in hurting others but naturally I think I would have to defend myself in that situation.

The lion is allowed to attack a gazelle to eat it, just like we eat cows for meat. A lioness wouldn't just kill her sister for the sake of killing, just as I would never kill my sister. Unless of course you are vegetarian, you probably do hurt "others" the same way animals hurt other animals.

Answer 9

Don't give yourself a headache. It's better to study evolution, Darwinism, and Social Science to get an understanding of what troubles you rather than ask for a short answer that you may not be able to assimilate well enough to be satisfied.

BTW, Apes did not evolve into humans.

Answer 10

I believe you are confusing natural law and societal law. There is also emotional "law" if you will. Right and wrong did not come from nature. It came from humans. You know what YOU (emphasis only) think is right and what you think is wrong. I quite likely have a set of right and wrongs different from yours. There is, in my opinion, no religion to it. It is human. I beleive we are just another breed of animal. More advanced perhaps, but animals all the same.