I Agree: You Don’t Need to Believe in God to Be Moral… But That’s Not the Point
Greg addresses the claim that atheists can be morally good without God. They argue atheists miss the point, because true morality isn’t just about actions but about objective standards set by God. Without God, morality loses its meaning, making true goodness impossible for anyone.
#StandtoReason #Apologetics #Christianity #Morality
––––– CALL IN TO THE SHOW –––––
Have a question or comment? Call Greg Koukl, live Tuesdays 4-6pm Pacific Time, at (855) 243-9975.
––––– SUBMIT YOUR QUESTION –––––
If you’d like to submit your question ahead of time for the broadcast, or if you’d like to submit a question for the #STRask podcast, fill out our form at https://www.str.org/broadcast.
––––– FIND MORE FREE TRAINING –––––
Website: https://www.str.org/
Stand to Reason University: https://training.str.org/
Stand to Reason Apps: https://www.str.org/apps
––––– CONNECT –––––
Twitter: https://twitter.com/STRtweets
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/standtoreason93
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/standtoreason
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/stand-to-reason/
source
What you said makes absolutely no sense, if morality depends on god then morality is by definition subjective. We absolutely don’t have to take God’s goofy stance, we can just reject his bs, he said therefore it’s moral? Why? And who says so? You? God? That’s circular reasoning.
I define Morality as judgment on actions, like increasing/reducing harm is morality. Is it objective? Nope, but are the rules objective absolutely, it is.
This is for atheists, but in the case of mine, even I as atheist do believe in the transcendental abstract world, and we can access it through rational intuition. It exists necessarily, and god is not required.
What you said is jumbo jumbo, god said he wants to us lick his balls, therefore that’s moral, who says so? He says so? Therefore it’s moral, what kinda of stupid thinking is this. Morality by definition is subjective. Because it depends on mind.
In my case it’s objective because it’s not mind dependent but it’s subjective depending on how much you can access it. And anyone can access it.
Just say unicorn said it’s moral to eat beans therefore it’s moral. Haha. Because that’s literally what you just said.
Get a grip of yourself old man.
Summary:
-Morality does not depend on belief in God. Not to be confused with dependence on God's existence. One can not believe in God yet still be behave morally, maybe even better than one who who believes in God.
-God is necessary for an act to be objectively "good" in the first place.
-Objective moral standard is necessary in order for the Problem of Evil to exist, otherwise there would hardly be a distinction between a good or evil act. It would just be different acts.
-Therefore, whether or not you believe or follow God is not the point. The point is that the standard of good and evil depends on a Higher Authority that is capable of designation of objective morality, and atheists and theists alike can be closer or farther from that standard.
False equivocation AGAIN. You can't love what you don't believe to exist.
Do you love Unicorns????
The writer’s example is a terrible one too. You are missing the whole concept of morality.
You see!!! As long as you don't define Morality, you can use buzz words like "other things"
Again, you are setting unreasonable circumstances, you just described a Mad Max scenario.
This is a clear example of you talking NONSENSE.
Your speed limit is not a good example, the reason is because we can know when we would be speeding. In your imaginary god world, there are just empty words, basically you are saying things into existence.
Define objective morality.
It seems you are throwing buzz words without explaining their meaning.
So, what is your definition of morality??
I am an atheist and you got it wrong, it must feel nice talking nonsense to yourself.
Thank you for a beautiful analysis of morality and God, and the need for a legitimate authority.
God created the universe. God made the first human couple. God owns everything he made, therefore God owns all of us.
If I hurt another person I hurt God's property. God doesn't want his property hurt, so hurting people is a crime for us according to God. If there is no God, there is no objective reason for us to not hurt other people. Atheists should be glad that there is a Creator who discourages us from hurting others, including the atheist.
Most of us have some kind of morality. The question is: what is it based on or grounded in?