Seen on twitter. I think what actual atheists say (or would say) is that “morality is common to all men as a survival instinct not as a proof of a god”… But I get what this is trying to say. Morality has to have a basis, and that morality demands a theistic worldview.
Categories: Atheism
“We must therefore reverse the axiom of the Enlightenment [to live by only those truths that would be true even if God did not exist] and say: even the one who does not succeed in finding the path to accepting the existence of God ought nevertheless to try to live and to direct his life veluti si Deus daretur, as if God did indeed exist. This is the advice Pascal gave to his non-believing friends, and it is the advice that I should like to give to our friends today who do not believe.”
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Christianity and the Crisis of Cultures
This might be a good argument if Christians could agree on what their god wants.
Pascal’s Wager depends on having the right god and the right way to worship it. Christians can’t show that they have either. It is arrogance that makes them think they have both. However, walking around a city full of churches of various sects shows that there is little reason to believe them.
” I think what actual atheists say (or would say) is that “morality is common to all men as a survival instinct not as a proof of a god”… But I get what this is trying to say. Morality has to have a basis, and that morality demands a theistic worldview.”
Morality does need a basis. It doesn’t need your god or any one else’s god. Morality happily changes as humans mature. The claim from Christians that their god is the source of an “objective” morality doesn’t work for a couple of reason. And when an atheist says that morals are subjective, no, they aren’t saying “murder isn’t wrong”. You really must be terrified of people who don’t need your or your god when you have to lie so poorly about us.
Christians don’t agree on what morality this god supposedly wants. None of you can show that your version is any more true than the next Christian’s version. All of you claim that yours is the “truth”. The rest of us are waiting for you to show how to tell which one of you is right. You all do love to claim that each other aren’t really Christians, and you’ve happily killed each other over that dispute.
The second problem is that many of you seem to be quite okay with a god that does things like murdering children, commanding genocide, demanding that believers abandon their families, etc but you have a problem with a human saying/doing the same thing. If there were an objective morality, acts would always be good or evil. If your determination of them depends on what is performing the action, and not the action itself then your morality is subjective. The power of the being is what is important to the Christian, a morality of nothing more than “might equals right”.
> Morality happily changes as humans mature
Which means that it’s subjective, that there’s no intrinsic reason why a particular moral judgment should be the correct one.
Yep, human morality is subjective. And of course it has an intrinsic reason why one is better than another: one is less hurtful than another.
Now, please explain why subjective morality is not as good as objective morality, especially when that objective morality that Christians claim they ahve comes from a god that advocates for murdering children, having slaves and committing genocide?
And do please explain what objective morality you follow and how you know it is objective.
Morality comes from God. It is his will for us. As an atheist your morality is skin deep. It has no ontological foundation.
What is this morality, Paul? Which version of what Christians believe is the “right” one? The Christians who claim that homosexuals should be killed? Those who think adulterers should be killed? Those who think that this god loves everyone equally and there is no sadistic fantasy of a “hell”? Please do show how you know you have the right one. The bible says that all true Christians can heal others of sickness and injury. Can you? If not, I’m sorry but I have no reason to believe you are a representative of those TrueChristians.
Morality doesn’t need an ontological foundation. That’s just your excuse since you need to pretend there is a need for your god.
And please do show that it is your god giving these objective morals.
Tell me a civilisation which prized cowardice in battle; unfaithfulness in marriage; dishonesty in trade.
@ club
And what if someone doesn’t care if one is “less hurtful” (which comes from Christianity btw)? What if I believe might is right? You have no basis to say I’m wrong (and can’t stop me)
Also, no one cares what Christians and their genocide filled text of lies states. Has no basis to us.
@ Paul
Does club think you’re a Christian? He keeps referencing them as if they matter in the discussion.
Understandable. I have a Muslim friend who thinks all white guys are christians
@ Paul
Fair enough.
Also, for the Muslim who thinks all white guys or Christians just have him research Coptics and Beta Israel. Also, tell him to get out more.