Pitfalls of Atheist Rejection of Moral Absolutes

 

broken machines

Even if the Bible was no better than this the atheist cannot justly condemn it with a double standard.

 

Eager to be free from Moral Absolutes

One of the pitfalls the Atheist makes for himself is the rejection of Moral Absolutes. The common atheist I have met normally shuns Moral Absolutes because it then becomes tied to a metaphysical Morality-maker who everyone knows is God. In the atheists eagerness to make sure he cannot be brought under the compliance to any moral code, commandments from God or a Morality-maker he creates an abyssal that removes him from everyone else.

Justifications for morality in Atheism

To make matters worse for the atheist he then attempts to ground any moral conception or ethic in materialistic explanation. This explanation is supposedly the shield of defense against Christianity or any metaphysical authorship because it locates all morality in a variety of naturalistic explanations.  Darwinian naturalism, gets a few votes, materialism gets its votes, humanism gets it adherents, personal concoctions of newspaper, magazines, atheist blogs and YouTube commentary fill out the concept for many others.

The laymen resources

Some more sophisticated anti-theist propagandists refer to Dr. Dawkins, the late Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett or John Loftus. All of these men have written their books and debated various Christians (often with disastrous results) but they are the mainstay for new ideas, and for some the courage to attack Christians in all forms of media and public mocking.

The Atheist writers offer little help

Even with these PhD’s the inescapable conclusions reemerge in every atheist challenge. What conclusions? Morality does exist whether you claim it from God or from nature or from societal norms. What other conclusion? If there is no absolute morality there is no specific moral code binding on any one of us. I am not ruled by another’s conscience except by consent. If I am compliant without consent I am under moral constraint and seek to be free from it. It is in this mixed bag that some atheist will not admit to any morality, they are amoral and live according to their own dictates with all the internal modifications needed to interact with the world they live in. If there were any people group that need to comply the most it would be this group. Since everyone outside of themselves thinks tangental to their mental construct of morality they cannot say they have anyone agreeing with them in principle, only in terms of pragmatism…lets get along to live peaceably. The Atheist horsemen cannot set this atheist free in this world, they can only give credence to particular nuances in individual atheist ethic. For the rest who admit to morality whether its a mixture of moral absolutes or personal moral principles these people have the difficulty of preaching morality to others without the slightest authority to do so.

Read this short article taken from John Loftus website.

 http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2009/02/what-can-account-for-morality-were.html

What Can Account for Morality, We’re Asked?In David Eller’s excellent book, Atheism Advanced, Eller basically explains morality as those moral rules made up by people in order to define what it means to be part of any culture. They are usually based upon the religious myths each culture accepts. There is no morality then, only “moralities.”
He finds that there are moralities among animals like Chimps, so it shouldn’t surprise us when language bearing humans came up with more elaborate moral rules. And since we’re talking about human beings, it’s no surprise that our moralities have some major similarities since we are social animals who need to get along, to be loved and to love, to help and to be helped. Anyone who doesn’t accept the moral rules of a culture are not allowed in the group, or we banish them, ostracize them, imprison them, and kill them. Do you want the benefits of being in the group? Then obey the moral rules, or at least don’t get caught. Otherwise, you’re on your own. As such, there is nothing prohibiting someone from not accepting the moral rules of a culture if s/he doesn’t want the benefits of the group (which would be a Freudian “death wish”). Are acts like murder, rape, and theft objectively and universally “wrong” then? That’s probably a nonsensical question. 
Therefore, there can be no argument for the existence of God based on morality. Human beings make up their own moralities because we’re social beings who need to belong and get along. Morality is part of our survival instinct. We need other people to survive!
———-For a Christian who might be stunned by the conclusion that it’s probably a nonsensical question whether or not murder, rape, and theft are objectively and universally “wrong,” then think again. Look at your own Bible. There is plenty of that to be found in it, all sanctioned by your barbaric God. Elsewhere I’ve argued that rational self-interest can account for our morality.

Not so fast, there’s a problem

The Christian finds an inherent problem with this authors conclusion; namely, if that group creates its own morality that is for the purpose of a survival instinct, what makes them think that nature has not selected us to adopt a different morality that derives glory and honor from completely annihilating this other people group? We are completely with our moral right and without the slightest implied wrong-doing on our part we may conduct our warring as long as we exist. While the doomed to extinction people group may find us reprehensible we are naturally disposed to it and consequently beyond reproach. Transfer this same line of reasoning to God, the bible and Christians, how can the atheist possibly find Christianity, the bible or God morally wrong in any case since we have adopted our own moral code? It would not matter if the bible was a complete jumble of failing tic-tac-toe games or unfinished seduko games. It would not matter in the slightest if the numbers were wrong or the games were all ties. Its irrelevant. The atheist by his own admission has a morality that is only adopted by an agreeable society of atheists (if they wanted to form community) and that morality has no power to condemn or approve my morality no matter how different it may be to them.

The right to judge is rendered powerless by the atheist

The pitfall of the atheist moral relativism is that it has no authority to condemn God or the bible except among those who agree with them. The outsider need not concern himself in the slightest because their moral code is not founded upon anything other than their own personal proclivities and tastes. The atheist in his eagerness to declare himself free from moral absolutes has rendered his angry moralizing of God and the bible as irrelevant since I do not hold to their moral code…and cannot since it is not standardized.

Condemnations are no more than personal bias

There are a great many other things that can be said about atheist moralizing, but one thing is for certain, their condemnations are strictly personal and according to their own axioms I am free from any condemnation by them. Now, they spend alot of time bashing God, condemning the bible’s texts on slavery, rape or genocide, but all of that is mere bluster and grandstanding…and it has no relevance whatsoever unless the atheist is playing by the rules of the Christian where such actions would be condemned.

The double-standard renders their argument illogical

But, is this not the point? The atheist refuses to be constrained by a Morality-maker other than themselves, therefore the atheist is using a double-standard against the Christian and blatantly calling the Christian into account to the atheist…where in fact the atheist has claimed the Christian cannot condemn him because he does not believe in God or any Morality-maker.

This is the working of the power of sin in the atheist, it is the irrationality of the Void, a reigning of Sin in the heart.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Pitfalls of Atheist Rejection of Moral Absolutes

  1. eyeontheuniverse says:

    “One of the pitfalls the Atheist makes for himself is the rejection of Moral Absolutes.”

    Atheists do not, as your own argument points out, claim their are no moral absolutes. You seem to be trying to argue both that the atheist rejects absolutes and that he or she argues for the, (against slavery, for example) but has no authority. You can’t have it both ways.

    All atheists as a group share is a lack of belief in gods. They may believe all kinds of other things about the universe or have wildly differing ethics. Putting everyone in the same box may be convenient for you, but your own efforts here show it doesn’t work.

    • Atheists do in fact claim there are no moral absolutes. The problem with atheism is its fluidity, every atheist can nuance his own personal moral code according to his own tastes. In such cases atheism attacks their own, and in my case both of them have no authority over me, nor do their criticisms apply to me. I have a biblical authority for my moral code. It may be true that the atheist can claim I fail my own moral code, but he cannot do anything more than that. He may not legitimately condemn my personal moral code, nor my God or his actions for God and the scriptures have their own pronouncements of what is right and wrong, good and bad.

      Unless the atheist adopts the moral code of the scriptures and God, he may have a right to question me and God, but in doing so, he falls under the scrutiny of God and me too. This is the major reason atheism rejects scripture, he does not want to be under God’s judgment or under the Christians scrutiny. In seeking his own personal moral code he has by default removed God and me from any legitimate condemnations by the atheist. All of his blathering about slavery, rape and genocide fall outside of his jurisdiction thereby nullifying all his harping about God’s morality.

      But, the atheist generally wants to use a double standard, he wants to condemn God and me for moral failure, yet remove himself from any condemnations I or God have of his/her actions. This way the atheist pretends to some moral high ground but in fact does not exist.

      • eyeontheuniverse says:

        Seriously, your argument is that people adopt atheism so they can rape, enslave and commit genocide? Try taking a look at crime rates in the world’s most atheistic countries and get back to me.

      • armchairtheo says:

        Atheism is no friend to morality. It is no friend to anti-rape, as it has committed itself to de-humanizing the human race. It kills when in power, it destroys when in power and when in power it silences the opposition with prison, torture and death. The atheist regimes of Russia, China, East Germany, and anywhere else are red with blood of their own country men. Oh, you wanted to show that some countries where atheism is florishing is all kind and nice? Those countries have not decided yet to destroy Christianity from their midst. Those who have not conducted extermination of Christians are allowed to continue on. But, when you find a nation wiping out Christians you find a nation that has a short life-span. Atheism is a leech upon the Christian culture they have polluted with their insane ideologies. Its only a matter of time.

        My argument is not that atheists become atheists to commit rape and genocide, its because their own moral code permits them to live as they wish without their conscience bothering them. When they silence conscience its is easy to move from ‘Christians are wrong and idiots” as many atheists say. To “Its time to kill them and get rid of this pestilential people”. The move from anger to murder is so short its amazing. The history of humanism and atheism is a history of murder and killing that the world has never seen before in all history previous to it. But, for atheism, history is something to be repeated not read.

      • eyeontheuniverse says:

        Atheism isn’t a belief system, so I assume you are referring to communism, which like Buddhism, is often atheistic. Like many forms of Christianity, Islam and many other belief systems, some forms of communism have sought to eliminate competing belief systems. This has generally been a problem wherever it was done and has nothing specifically to do with atheism. You will find few atheists who ” live as they wish without their conscience bothering them”. Almost all atheist have ethical systems and moral reactions – many of which are based on simple human evolution, and others on more specific cultural norms. As for your magnitude of death claims, be sure you are looking at per capita numbers – people frequently make the error of forgetting that the soviet union was the largest “country” ever in existence and comparing absolute numbers. Amazingly enough, more people were killed in the Soviet Union than San Marino over the same period.

      • armchairtheo says:

        Communism has everything to do with atheism. There are no Christian-communists, Christian humanists that believe the way the soviets and Chinese do. Atheism was able to give full vent to its ideologies through the power of the gun, prison and intimidation. The mind police =KGB and every other kind of enforcement used was to enforce the power of the state. But the state was not without its beliefs.
        It was atheistic.

      • eyeontheuniverse says:

        I didn’t say atheism had nothing to do with communism (although there are a long history of both religious communisms and socialisms). What atheism is in this context is an attribute of soviet communism. This is no different than the authoritarianism that existed in most of Europe and the Americas until recently, restricting activities of non-Christians and imposing often tyrannical rule with persecution of Jews, Muslims and pagans. Christianity was an attribute of these governments, but not the definitive single cause of the problems with leadership. The acceptable norms varied by era, just as ethics also do in areas that have a strong atheistic presence.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s