There’s still no shortage of Christians making metaethical arguments for Christianity, or at least for theism. Sure, such arguments should be dead—they should always have been dead, evo psych or no evo psych—but alas, what should be and what is are quite different things.
The argument from metaethics was outdated from the beginning, at least for Christian apologetic purposes.
Moral laws of all tribes and civilizations are compatible and are completely opposed to message of Jesus.
Natural law says: love your family. Jesus says: abandon them and follow me. Natural law: love your friends, hate your enemies. Jesus: love everyone. Natural law: defend yourself. Jesus: do not resist. Natural law: defend your property. Jesus: give up everything etc, etc....
There’s still no shortage of Christians making metaethical arguments for Christianity, or at least for theism. Sure, such arguments should be dead—they should always have been dead, evo psych or no evo psych—but alas, what should be and what is are quite different things.
The argument from metaethics was outdated from the beginning, at least for Christian apologetic purposes. Moral laws of all tribes and civilizations are compatible and are completely opposed to message of Jesus.
Natural law says: love your family. Jesus says: abandon them and follow me. Natural law: love your friends, hate your enemies. Jesus: love everyone. Natural law: defend yourself. Jesus: do not resist. Natural law: defend your property. Jesus: give up everything etc, etc....
Without evo psych, they’re flawed. With evo psych, they’re entirely destroyed.