I can agree one's conscience (compass guide) can be trained by supplimental upbringing, etc. as stated ^ above ^.
But as I stated above, and as research has shown, children all over the world are born with the moral instincts I listed; and with a conscience, and with the capacity for empathy. Exceptions like psychopathy are exactly that, exceptions.
A person can choose to violate or listen to one's in-born conscience / innate knowledge.
But that has nothing to do with religion, except religion viewed as a kind of regimentation.
People of the nations, who do Not have the Law, still do the things of the Law because of in-born conscience.
Other way round. The bits of the law that reflect the list I gave you are there because their writers had instincts of that kind. Which is why decency and kindness to strangers and so on are found in all societies in one form or another regardless of religion.
The more a person allows himself to be influenced by badness the more like Satan that person becomes.
Have you traced the history of Satan through the bible? He begins as one of the courtiers in Yahweh's court, and enters into the appalling bet which Yahweh makes with him at the start of Job. It's only later that he gets pressed into the roll of archvillain, a particularly Christian notion that even pretends to identify him with the (actually blameless) snake in the Garden story. In other words, a thoroughly human invention of a convenient embodiment of what the church doesn't like.
I find one's morality / conscience did Not evolve in the animal realm.
Correct me if I'm wrong but you appear to have read none of the research.
No dog has empathy to apologizes for stealing another dog's bone.
In canine packs the rights to the bone are determined by the peck order, and the 'apology' takes the form of submission to the higher-ranked canine; or else a fight to determine a new rank. And of course child protection and nurture are found throughout nature, and with mammals and birds are with very few exceptions essential.
Man was made in God's image whereas animals have instinct.
So you say God is a being like a human male, with Middle Eastern features, and humans, being in [his] image should engage in invasive wars, massacre populations, sacrifice their firstborn sons to [him] and accept human sacrifices from lower down the chain, should engage in murderous religious intolerance, trade in slaves, practice polygamy, demean the status of women, and so on as the bible says?
That's certainly not my view.