Christians, why can't Atheists accept the fact that they have no reference for morality?

Question

If the Atheist says society is the reference for morality than the Atheist must explain the origins of society's morals.

If the Atheist says empathy and instinct than the Atheist must explain the origins of empathy and instinct.

If the Atheist says conscience and intelligence than the Atheist must explain the origins of conscience and intelligence.

If the Atheist says Evolution than the Atheist must explain the origins of life.

If the Atheist says the Big Bang than the Atheist must explain the origins of the Big Bang.

Once you reach the Big Bang, all of logic is thrown out the door for magic because Atheists believe something can come from nothing Lol. Obviously a logical contradiction.

If the Atheist tries to insite muti-verse than ask the Atheist for evidence. You will find out that there is no evidence to support the muti-verse theory.

Follow their Logic to it's final conclusion and you will see that it's inrefutable fallacy.

Answer 1

How about common sense? I doesn't take a myth to figure out that doing bad things is not good. And if the answer is truly God, then where did he get his morals from? If he made them up then passed them to humans, we're basing the moral foundations of humanity as a whole on the arbitrary rules of a being we don't even know exists. If he had said rape and murder are okay, does that make it okay? Smart people say "no". If he had to figure out for himself what is moral and what isn't, then we don't need God anyway when we can just figure it out ourselves.

Maybe the reason there are much more religious criminals than atheists ones is because atheists aren't relying on a 2000-year-old instruction manual.

On top of that, you say scientific theories involves magic and illogical contradictions, but the Christian god poofed the universe into existence in moments, but needed a week to build one planet. You're trying to build an argument off of an extremely dumbed-down description of the Big Bang.

Answer 2

What if the atheist doesn't say the exact things you require to reach your pre-determined answer? What if the answers are "we are born with it" or "learn it naturally"? Surely those end the chain of questions?

You also make the common Christian mistake "If the Atheist says Evolution than the Atheist must explain the origins of life". These two things are quite different. Evolution requires life to already exist and works to explain its change over time, abiogenesis attempts to explain where life comes from. You can believe in one or the other without having to believe both. Where the life comes from is irrelevant to a discussion on morality, the fact life exists is obvious so you are working forward from there not backwards. There is no need to bring the origins of the universe into a discussion about morality.

Answer 3

You don't need a reference for morality. It's personal and deals only with specific situations. That's what can often be wrong with it. Ethics, on the other hand, are external and deal with a clean-cut presented objective reality. They differ as well, but oftentimes they aren't pull-apart , customizable little label points of view. The Code is to be adhered to at all times, it's a lifestyle not a "Make up as you go along" type of thing.

Answer 4

Humans engage in behavior, and behavior has objectively measurable consequences. If you want to define morality as something that requires a "reference" (by which you almost certainly mean God), I suppose that's your prerogative, but I don't think it's terribly useful. Appealing to an entity whose existence can't even be demonstrated effectively leaves you in the same boat as the atheists you accuse of having no reference.



The only definition of morality that makes sense is one that establishes moral statements as universally binding. Anything else--including claims that morality comes from a deity--is going to be inconsistent and probably self-contradictory.

Answer 5

Japan has one of the lowest crime rates and is one of the safest countries on the planet. The level of morality shames most western countries. How do I know this? I live there.



Guess what? There is barely a single christian here.



And if you have to go through all that rationalization to know the difference between bad and good, that says quite a lot about you.



Wherever the morality of Japanese society comes from, it sure as hell ain't your sky daddy.

Answer 6

What a load of twaddle! All societies whether they are human or not have morals and ethics. Animals which want to live together in peace have to have rules to maintain peace and harmony. You see it in just about every species. Humans have morals and ethics because they evolved just as humans evolved.



Atheists do not believe in gods. That's it. If you want to change that, all you have to do is show some evidence for gods and there is none at all for any of the many thousands of gods that humans worship and have worshipped. Show me some evidence for your god and I will no longer be an atheist, it is as simple as that. You do not need to look at anything else. Morality, empathy, instinct, conscience, intelligence, evolution, the Big Bang and any other science have nothing whatsoever to do with atheism and atheists do not have to explain anything. You are the one making the claim - that god/s exist - so it is up to you to provide the evidence.



I won't hold my breath waiting.

Answer 7

Society, in any group a person who violates the norms of that society is a risk to all of that society. Obviously, a person who rapes, murders, or steals, will be dealt with according to the rules of the society he or she violated.



Empathy, instinct, conscience, and intelligence are inherent traits. Their "origins" don't have to be explained with a supernatural being to justify their existence.



Evolution does not deal with the origins of life. Now you're just displaying your ignorance.



Likewise with the Big Bang. It's a theory that explains the available evidence for the origin of the universe. It has nothing to do with life itself and certainly not with the origins of morality in humans. You might as well blame the color yellow for Donald Trump's white supremacist political campaign. "Something coming from nothing" isn't what the Big Bang explains, if you would do some research yourself you would know that already, but I see your intellectually lazy. It's easier to parrot narcissistic preachers and vomit their lies than it is for you to think for yourself.



When you get around to it, explain to me how an eternal, omnipotent, omniscient god doesn't violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Answer 8

Why can't Christians accept that the morality their religion teaches matches the morality of their society almost exactly? Or that Christian morals change all the time? If you say your morals came from God, why do God's morals change so often? They even change within the time frame of the Bible.

Answer 9

Fair enough. Now let's follow the logic of your own morality to its conclusion: you study the bible, collect a handful of verses, and put them together into a framework of belief that you call "objective morality".



Did God choose those verses for you? No, you chose them. You might tell yourself that you're following God's guidance in making the choices, but then millions of other Christians whose conclusions differ from yours believe that THEY are following God's guidance. It's obvious that you're all relying on your own intuitions about what verses to choose and how to interpret them. Even when you pray, in the end you're making your own judgments about the content of God's answers to your prayers. When you guys have disagreements about the interpretation, all you can do is fling your pet verses at each other, and neither side can demonstrate how their interpretation is any better than the other.



This is what we on Earth call "subjective". What is your reference? Your own moral intuitions. Your morality is no more objective than mine.

Answer 10

When I hear religious people like you, I find it disturbing, that the only thing standing between you and immorality is the threat of hell. Not reassuring to us atheists, if you are trying to suggest that you are arguing from a position of moral superiority.



There is only one set of ethics, one set of rules of morality, one code. That of individual behaviour in which the same rules apply to everyone.



Jesus, remember him, the founder of your religion knew that, both Matthew and Luke explain this; "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"



As an atheist, I believe that all life is unspeakably precious, because it is here for a brief time, then gone forever.



As Einstein said "if people are good only because they fear punishment and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot.



As for science, it is different to all the other systems of thought, you don't need faith in it, you can check that it works.

Answer 11

where exactly did you find an available sample of "nothing" to test whether or not something could or could not come from it? I'll wait...(and no, the space between your ears doesn't count, unfortunately)

Answer 12

Lol sounds like no matter what the atheist explains to you, you will not be able to understand it. It's above your head, apparently.

Answer 13

You dont need religion to have morality, we all know what is right and what is wrong. So manny people practice a religion but hurt, disrespect, hate and manipulate people. Just keep that in mind.

Answer 14

The Christian definition of morality is a shallow and trite one involving an aspect of sex. Morality runs far deeper, yet the Christian remains blind.

Answer 15

Just because we don't know doesn't mean it's ******* God.

Answer 16

Yes Atheists are always looking for a way out of Logic but it still ends up biting them on the butt

Answer 17

do you know the difference between "than" and "then" probably not.



However, your step regression is flawed.