Internet Christians commonly claim that without "God" there is no morality.
If God commanded people to start eating babies, what would you do?
There are three possible answers:
1) "No, it would still be immoral." That one's easy, and the best answer, and of course it demolishes the idea that God dictates what is moral.
2) "God would never do that, because God is moral." In order for this statement to have any meaning, morality must exist independent of God -- otherwise we could not decide whether God would do a particular thing based on whether or not that thing was moral, because that would be synonymous to asking ourselves whether God would do a particular thing based on whether God would do a particular thing.
3) "Knives out and start the rotesserie!" This, and only this, preserves the idea that morality comes from God, and only from God.
POTW for sure...
subscribe to PTET
4 comments:
Isn't that pretty much what happened with Abraham and Isaac? If God didn't stop him, and he had killed Isaac based on God's command, that would have been right, even though it doesn't seem like it. The Bible already covered this issue, whether or not you agree with it.
Your logic for #2 is correct, if you word it that way, but I don't think most people would. We can say that God probably wouldn't do that based on everything we know about Him. But, if He did say that, then yes, move on to #3.
Hey Anonymous. i'll call you "Steve".
"We can say that God probably wouldn't do that based on everything we know about Him."
In order for that statement to have any meaning, morality must exist independent of "God".
"But, if He did say that, then yes, move on to #3."
You have just sanctioned every whackjob who thinks God talks to "him" to do all sorts of crazy things.
Most amusing, is the way you blindly assume that every non-Christians understanding of what "god" is is false or delusional or mistaken - and that yours is true and justified and real.
You know how I can tell Chrisitanity is a crock? Because if it wasn't, Christians wouldn't have to base their beliefs on such ridiculous foundations.
Morality doesn't have to exist independently of God to make that claim. I'm not saying He wouldn't do it because He's moral, I'm saying He probably wouldn't do it because He hasn't given us any reason to believe he would, though admittedly it's still possible. The rest of your comment is based on the assumption that God doesn't exist. If God does exist, your argument is completely invalid. Like most of your arguments, this only supports atheism if you are already an atheist. What's the point in that kind of discussion?
" I'm not saying He wouldn't do it because He's moral..."
And there you admit that morality exists independently of claims of "God's command". To order others to "love your neighbour as yourself" and to "do unto others as you would have them do to you", and then claim exemption from those rules, is hypocrisy. You are claiming that "God" is not subject to his own commands.
" The rest of your comment is based on the assumption that God doesn't exist."
You are completely wrong. "God" could exist and not have the properties you claim "He" does. Even worse for you, "God" could exist and have the properties you claim - and you would still be wrong. Morality clearly and demonstrably exists in all cultures - and it has existed for tens of thousands of years - without anyone having to ask Steve what he thinks God would do.
"If God does exist, your argument is completely invalid."
As ever, you blindly assume that every non-Christian's understanding of what "god" is is false or delusional or mistaken - and that yours is true and justified and real.
Nowhere in this discussion am I arguing for "atheism". I am simply pointing out that your understanding of "God" and "morality" is demonstrably wrong on its own terms.
"What's the point in that kind of discussion?"
You tell me. Are you trying to convince me that I should be a Christian and that if I don't your "loving" "moral" "god" will burn me in hell for all eternity?
Post a Comment