RE: if you say God’s intervening to guide selection why couldn’t he intervene to give us a moral code?
That is exactly what I’m trying to drive at. If Moral codes are absolute and binding to humans, like the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, it cannot come from Darwinism (as espoused by many of them, Richard Dawkins comes to mind).
However, if the materialistic Darwinists are right, then I can’t see how morality can be objectively real. Murder is just as natural as a lion devouring a lamb. There would also be no objective moral basis for calling slavery wrong.
You use "materialistic Darwinists" as if scientists deify other scientists. That's not how it works. And Darwinism is something that only exists in the minds of religious opponents to the TOE.
Murder is just as natural as a lion devouring a lamb. There would also be no objective moral basis for calling slavery wrong.
Murder is unquestionably natural - just ask Abel.
It's what we think of it and how we react that's important. Every functioning society has figured out that that murder isn't good and has come up with moral arguments against it.
Not just Judeo-Christian societies.