What evidence would you accept? Atheists throughout this thread have said what they believe and why and yet that is not enough?That’s a nice claim, but show me the evidence.
I think the answer is incredibly obvious - the atheist "bothers" because to identify and implement a code of morality promotes the well-being of humanity in general. It is beyond obvious that a sense of morality does not need to be grounded in belief in the existence of a god - we should not need to discuss this.Certainly atheists would argue they are moral. The question is why? Why bother at all?
Who said morality was subjective? You appear to believe that something cannot be objective without God. I see no reason to believe such a thing.Furthermore, how can they claim to be moral, when morality is subjective?
For the sake of argument, let's say I agree with you that there is not a strong consensus on what constitutes a moral framework. Even if that were so, there is every reason to believe that there are a set of principles, which if transformed into a moral code, would indeed be an entirely legitimate moral code. Perhaps humanity has yet to finally converge on such a set of principles. But that certainly does not mean, it does not exist.Can you really back up your claim that all humans share some collective sense of values to create a universal moral framework? I think history would disagree with you.
This didnt make sense to me. Just how are you defining MoralsThe more atheistic you are the more incapable you are to judge moral ideas, because there's no morality to be found within atheistic worldview.
Atheists will want to protect their family, their homes, their communities and will want everyone to live in peace and security because that is how we want everyone to live.
No, you want these things. There are plenty of atheists who do not want or care about such things. You are way overreaching here.
You’re right, in the modern world it is the non-religious doing the forcing on the religious.
That depends on whether or not those actions violate the worldview someone is claiming to hold. The Christian murderer is in violation of their own belief system. The atheist murderer has simply rejected your moral system in favor of their own.
I can't help but notice that you keep ignoring what atheists on this thread are telling you in regards to how they find and define morality. You then go back and hoist up your straw man atheist and continue to argue that your straw man atheist is amoral. All you get for winning your argument is a pile of straw.You are not explaining morality, but utility. Utility is amoral, void of moral, it's just something that's useful to you.
There are many atheists who want their family, home and community safe, but don't care at all about other 99% of the world, as long as it doesn't disturb their comfort. That's also not morality, that's utility.
But that's perfectly fine in atheistic universe. That's what I'm saying all along.
On the other hand, Word of God says:
- Love your neighbour like you love yourself
- If you only love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount.
- Love those who hate you and bless them
jayem said:What's your hang-up with "nothingness?" Is it so hard to understand that matter and energy aren't nothingness?
jayem said:We give our lives meaning and purpose in how we live them. Our lives are validated through loving our families, and companionship with good friends, and having productive and satisfying careers.
jayem said:History is full of atrocities that have been committed by people thinking they are doing God's will.
I can't help but notice that you keep ignoring what atheists on this thread are telling you in regards to how they find and define morality. You then go back and hoist up your straw man atheist and continue to argue that your straw man atheist is amoral. All you get for winning your argument is a pile of straw.
Some floating unconscious matter is nothing, yes. Not absolutely nothing, but nothing in terms of
fullness of existence we are capable to experience. If when you die your conscious dissolves, ceast to exist, but something of you get to become some other matter and energy, by some chance, that's nothing. You just got back to nothingness. Mostly to some dust and other stuff for soil, which will further dissolve too.
As I wrote previously, you are not explaining morality, but utility. Some other atheist don't agree with you, and they are perfectly fine too. You are not better human then them, nor they are worse than you. You are both living out your own pleasure.
And that's in line with OP.
This is ridiculous argument.
...You then go back and hoist up your straw man atheist and continue to argue that your straw man atheist is amoral.
I've never seen this.I've seen many atheists claim that God can't possibly exist.
It's a fact. And it's in scripture.This is ridiculous argument.
Have you even read OP? In second sentence I wrote: "That doesn't mean that individual atheist is amoral. But he or she is moral for reason outside of atheism, not because of atheism." And I kept repeating it.
I don't claim an atheist is amoral, but that atheistic worldview does not provide any morality.
God provides morality.
It's a fact. And it's in scripture.
Morals are simply an agreed upon social contract that describes what is right or wrong.
No it's not a fact, because that statement was not quantitative nor had comparisons in it. If "history is full of atrocities that have been committed by people thinking they are doing will of Abraham's, Isaac's and Jacob' God" then it's a fact that "history is much much fuller of atrocities that have been committed by satanists, worshippers of false gods and atheists."