Can Atheists Claim Any Kind of Morality?

I had a conversation with an atheist the other day. He basically believes that the Moral argument for the existence of God is false, because he believes that morals have evolved, in order for survival.

The problem with this is that in order to believe morals have evolved, one has to posit that morals are evolved, but morals have never changed.

When people burned witches at the stake, they were burning them not simply because they were witches, but because people believed that these “witches” could murder other people through spells and hexes. Likely frequently and highly mistaken, the townsfolk were simply bringing judgment on a murderer. The point is, people then were trying to rid the world of murder, because they knew it was wrong. Morals do not change.

Secondly, the peacock, for example is not a moral creature, yet still survives even though it is one of the world’s most fragile creatures. It does not take morals in order to survive.

On top of all of this, the 20^th century was the deadliest century in the history of humanity! If we are supposed to be getting more civilized and our morals are evolving, then why were so many people murdered in the 20^th century? If everyone has their own idea of what is good, then how can we be sure what good really is? Goodness transcends time and space. I elaborate on this below.

He believes that people try to make things right by not doing wrong again.

The purpose of religion is to eradicate guilt. Let me explain. Even the atheist does it. He tries to make things right by not making the same mistake again; the mistake of committing adultery, or the mistake of lying, or the mistake of stealing, for instance. The problem is, however, he will find that if he reflects on his life, he cannot carry this out. He knows what good is, but constantly fails.

All religions seek to eradicate guilt. Even Buddhism, if one can even call that a religion. Buddhism’s four noble truths starts with the Dukkha. The dukkha is basically suffering. We suffer because we cling to things in our lives. Therefore, stop clinging to things. The way to do this according to Buddhists is to follow the eight-fold path. Once this is completed, one has reached Nirvana. When in nirvana, one is guilt free (Through suffering, we sometimes do things because we are unsatisfied. Dissatisfaction frequently motivates us to do things we know we shouldn’t. Doing things we shouldn’t do causes guilt. Therefore, not being satisfied [suffering] can ultimately cause guilt). The problem is that one must cling to the eight-fold path in order to reach nirvana and eradicate guilt! In any event, Buddhism is essentially saying, “you can be guilt free if you let go of absolutely everything impermanent, except the eight-fold path.” When in Nirvana, one does not require the eight-fold path anymore, thus making the eight-fold path itself, impermanent.

It seems that the best way to tackle this type of argument is to show the atheist that the worldview he or she has, allows him or her to do anything, without consequences. Why is rape wrong? Because someone once said it was? Who cares? If we are merely “dancing to our DNA,” as Richard Dawkins so famously put it, then it seems rape would be the natural thing to do. Why is anything wrong through the eyes of the atheist? For that matter, why is anything right?

Even if atheists say that morals are for the survival of mankind, why does this even matter? Eventually (in seven billion years) the Sun will become a red giant, leaving a scorched Earth, and nothing but debris will exist. Charred garbage and dust floating around in outer space, and eventually, even that will burn up. Therefore, who cares what happens? Who cares what we do now? Show him or her that without a transcendent Moral Law Giver, there are no set moral absolutes which will regulate humanity. Conclusively, the atheist frequently borrows the Christian worldview by claiming goodness or wrongness of any kind.

Feel free to reply or ask questions to this post, or on the ATC facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/ApologeticalAndTheologicalCommentary

Written by Nace Howell through the grace of the Lord Jesus

Comments

How to Show a Mormon the Difference Between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus

I find that Mormons frequently claim that they are Christians, and that they want to be referred to as Christians, and that they have even recently sought to distance themselves from the word “Mormon.” The problem is, they worship another Jesus, and here is how to show them the difference between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus. Before we get to that, some clarifications are necessary. Specifically, that they cannot even distance themselves from being called "Mormons." The Mormon President Russell Nelson said, “What’s in a name or, in this case, a nickname? When it comes to nicknames of the Church, such as the “LDS Church,” the “Mormon Church,” or the “Church of the Latter-day Saints,” the most important thing in those names is the absence of the Savior’s name. To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan. When we discard the Savior’s name, we are subtly disregarding all that Jesus Christ did for us—even His Atonement.” [1] ...

Objectivity is the Language of Heaven

NDErs (i. e. people who have claimed to have had a Near Death Experience ) often report that when they go to Heaven, they frequently see and recognize people such as friends and family members. It is often also reported that when they were communicating with friends and relatives, they realized that they weren’t speaking English, but that they were telepathically speaking to one another. It seems it would be impossible to have communication with others without learning every language that has ever existed under the sun, but since heaven is a perfect place, [1] then communication should be perfect as well. In other words, it seems unlikely that there are barriers to communication. So, I should be able to communicate with the Apostles, upon my arrival for instance, but how? I personally only really know how to speak English fluently. My Spanish, Japanese, German, Russian, Chinese, and Latin is like that of a child, and my Greek is only in reading and writing. If ...

The Dividing Line of Doctrine

How and Where to Make Divisions... Sometimes, I get asked “Why do you get so up at arms about other religions?” or, “Why do you pick on other religions so much?” I think the following will help you see where I’m coming from, before I spill the beans on such. We have difficulty sometimes in discovering where to make divisions when considering where to spend our money, and who to support, where to make purchases, and where not to do such. We also often have difficulty on how to know if a church or a congregation is a place where someone can actually become saved. Like, how can we know that a Mormon is likely not saved but we can know that a regular church attender at a gospel sound church is likely saved? What is it that would make my church attendance at a specific body no longer appropriate? Both answers to these questions deal with doctrine. If a company is pushing false doctrine using their influence and power to push a heretical doctrine or teaching, this is often when the red...

The Highest Virtue

A virtue is a trait of excellence. What is the highest virtue? It seems that based on the nature of truth, that truth itself is perhaps the highest virtue. For instance, I could say that love is the highest virtue, but then I could ask the question of whether that is true or not. If it is or isn’t true, this places truth virtuously higher than love, at least in some sense. The fact that I can question love through the lens of truth seems to place truth above love in height of virtue. On the other hand, if I said that truth is the highest virtue, then it seems that it would be loving to tell others the truth! Perhaps truth and love go hand in hand, but this also concerns the nature of what truth is. Truth is a requirement for love, which I argue here , but is love a requirement for truth? Love must contain truth in order to be true love. But truth does not have to contain love in order to be true truth. Take for instance, mathematics, or numbers in general… Sometimes, t...

Self-tests of Some of the World's Religions

It is fairly common for a religion of the world to give itself a sort of test for truth, since this is one question that is asked of any religion: “Why should I believe what you are telling me is true?” After all, the answer to such a question will ultimately result in followers of specific beliefs and doctrines, let alone religions, or will result in a lack of followers. If a religion can answer this question posed by seekers and thinkers, and therefore train its adherents to be able to answer why a religion is true, this will inevitably help people believe in such, even if the claims are false. If there is no answer, this is where a religion will perhaps find more trouble for itself. Many religions make an appeal to a higher authority, namely, God , for the veracity of their existence and as a result, no one can question the truth from such an authority. This is correct in a sense, that if in fact God is making such a claim, then what is said or stated is true ...

Who Made God? Identifying Categorical Errors

A category is simply a distinct class to which something belongs… A set of objects that can be treated as equal in some way. A Macintosh apple belongs to the category, apple, and not what we categorize as an orange. Similarly, colors are in a different category than taste. When we say, “apples and oranges” what we mean is that there has been a confusion of categories. Sure, they are both fruit, but when you examine both, there is an obvious difference. An apple is not an orange, and an orange is not an apple. Macintosh, Granny Smith, and red delicious are all apples. Navel, blood, and Valencia are all oranges. To mix the two, for instance, to call a navel orange an apple, would be a categorical error, sometimes referred to as a category mistake. How Identifying Categorical Errors can Help with Apologetics It seems that simply learning about or being reminded of categorical errors can help us be more aware of them. We have all heard or thought of ourselves, the...

The Evidence and Power of Testimony

What to say to People who Demand more Evidence for God. Why is there something rather than nothing? Glacier National Park. © Nace Howell, 2018. The question is, how much evidence do you require? Would Jesus have to come back and slap you in the face with evidence that He is God? It seems to me that there is a line we must draw. We do this in all other areas of our lives, so why would we treat theism any different? When a court convicts, they do so “beyond a reasonable doubt.” I would like to take a few moments to explore this a bit. But before we get to that, I want to pose a question, which is… why are you the standard? What makes you think He has to prove His existence to everyone individually? He already created the universe from nothing. In the beginning, there was a big bang. Seriously… do you believe your mom when she tells you a story about her day? Did you believe the reports of 9/11 when they were happening? Do you accept the testimony of anything you hear on social ...

The Two Systems: A Confused Definition of Love

A couple years ago I wrote an article called the Jehovah’s Witness training videos . The article was meant to be humorous in a sense, because there are likely not any actual training videos, but it seems that they have all watched them. We can suspect this because they all often have the same points of conversation. When you talk about the Trinity, they will use the Bible like a machine gun and shoot you with verses. The verses are always the same: Colossians 1:15, Mark 10:18… So, there is an implication that they all have the same information. There is one source from where they gather their patterns and behaviors. Similarly, I think we can see the power behind the system of the world as well. We can see what this power is like by the tracks he leaves behind. The contrast of the two systems is really seen in Revelation 14:8. “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she who made all nations drink the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality.” John is using the word Bab...

Two Problems Jesus has with the Mormon Doctrine of Eternal Families

Mormonism teaches that those who are married in a temple can be married for eternity. In Doctrine and Covenants 132:15–20, we find the following: 15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word , and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead , and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world. 16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory. 17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God for...

Baptism is Not Necessary for Salvation According to the Early Church

Let’s dive right in. The Bible says in Acts 2:37-41, Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. The phrase in Acts 2:38 that reads, “for the forgiveness of your sins” modifies the word repentance, not the word baptism. See more about this Here . What is interesting is that those who translate the above verse as meaning that baptism is a requ...

Apologetics and Evidence

Search This Blog