I posted this as a reply in another thread but since this issue comes up all the time, I thought I would reprint the post in its very own thread. Any time theists visit and bring up the moral argument, they can be pointed to this thread.

1. (Perhaps most important) Theistic morality confuses the issues of what morality is and what is moral.

By its nature, religion will be concerned with gaining more followers and gaining increased obedience with its established followers. This is why when you read through the Bible or Koran, often what is described as "evil" are such victimless crimes as idolatry, blasphemy and apostasy. Other moral issues and labeled "abominations" have to do with failure to adhere to rituals and traditions, like not working on the Sabbath or not eating certain kinds of food.

Read the 10 commandments if you don't have time to read the whole Bible. You'll notice that the first four, the one's that Yahweh thought of first and foremost, have to do with religious adherence and not real moral issues. A few deal with how we treat others (don't murder, don't steal, etc) but the majority prohibit victimless crimes. This muddying of the waters is not helpful to our understand of what is moral or what morality is.

By contrast, secular morality focuses on the issue with laser-like precision. Morality is a function of how we treat our fellow sentient beings.

2. Theistic morality provides an "easy out"

When you do wrong in theism, you pray to a god to forgive you or perhaps perform some useless rituals of penance that do nothing to clean up the mess.

When you do wrong as a secularist, you apologize to those you've wronged and seek to make direct amends.

Jesus sacrificing himself on a cross and other blood sacrifice rituals do nothing to clean up any messes.

Newt Gingrich is a great example of how twisted this system of morality and atonement is. He says he doesn't have to answer for his adultery despite being a professed "family values" politician. Jesus forgave him and that's that. Has he apologized to any of his ex-wives?

3. "GodWillsIt" is not an answer

Just as "GodDidIt" doesn't satisfy our curiosity about science, "GodWillsIt" does nothing to help us understand morality. This is an appeal to authority, little better than "Cause I said so".

Compare this with secular morality where things labeled "wrong" or "evil" are activities that involve a victim. Morality can be explained in terms of such useful tools as "the social contract" or in term of our sense of empathy and community. Saying, for example, that slavery is wrong because it violates the rights of others and we would not wish to be treated this way is far more elucidating than "cause big daddy in sky says so".

4. Euthephro's Dilemma

Does GodWillIt because its good or is it good because GodWillsIt?

If GodWills what is good, than goodness exists outside of and independent to God. That which is evil would thus remain so without God.

If things are good in accordance with what GodWills, than this is little more than a might-makes-right system of justice. The rules are just as arbitrary as with any human imposed system. Therefore, GodWillsit wouldn't solve the problems Elunico frets over.

Apologists, typical of their style when in a conundrum, try to make it "both and yet neither". They babble about goodness being ingrained in the very nature of their god. Beyond the fact that this is a bare assertion, it's also viciously circular. "We know that God is good because God is good and so we know that God only wills what is good because God is good."

5. Read the damn Bible already!

Yahweh can't seem to answer no-brainer moral issues that humans have long since solved. Issues like rape, slavery and genocide are ones that Yahweh can't seem to provide a correct answer to.

6. Christianity is a dangerous belief system

Any religion that proposes a good god vs. evil devil system is going to demonize any who are not part of the religion. By process of elimination, any who do not serve the defined good god must be in league with or at least duped by the devil. If you believe your enemy is in league with the devil, you are capable of doing anything to him.

Worse, any religion that proposes a faith-based scheme of salvation is going to push atrocity. After all, if killing a few heathens saves thousands of souls for all eternity, isn't that a good thing. The stakes are as high as they can be if there's a real danger of your children going to Hell for all time. No wonder Christianity has such a violent history.

7. Look at the results

Secular societies do not explode into a fireball of mayhem and murder when they lose their religion. Quite to the contrary, social studies have shown that crime rates fall along with teen pregnancy and other social indicators show that secular societies are happier and better adjusted.

Neither do individuals lose their morality when they lose their religion. I can tell you this from all the ex-Christians I've known.

OK, did I miss anything?

It's not just that the bible didn't solve those issues, they are things that that yahweh the malevolent character actively endorses.

I don't know Greek orthography, so I can't be more precise, but it's usually transliterated as Euthyphro's dilemma.

Other than that, good job!

(Though it could stand some quotes and references to other documents, and, um, more words.)

Plato started off wrong when he wrote about socrates and euthyphro. He didn't know his creator and therefore grouped all "gods" under the same category. There is no dilemma for those who know the biblical God.

Psalm 96:5
For all the gods of the nations [are] idols: but the LORD made the heavens.

Does anyone know the difference between Christianity and all other religions, including humanism and naturalism?

The LORD does not command morality because it exists outside of him.
Cain murdered his brother Able in Gen 4 before God gave the command not to murder (Gen 9). Cain already knew he did wrong without God telling him after the fact. The reason is Cain and all human beings are made in the image of God and have a conscience (con - with/science - knowledge) given by him to know good. (Gen 1)

The biblical God does not randomly command morality either just because he likes or loves it.

Going back to Gen 4 the first murder by Cain. No command was ever given to not murder, yet Cain and Abel are both made in the image of God and therefore Cain is responsible to his maker for his actions. With the biblical God no commands need to be given by him in order for us to know not to murder. that's why there is no "euthyphro dilemma".

How do I know that God is good?
Without the biblical God you can't have morality make sense. Nor any type of human experience. Sin wouldn't exist nor make any sense.
There is no vicious circular argument. It's a virtuous one and it comes from the bible as my ultimate standard for truth.

The "might equals right" is an evolutionary dilemma. The weak die out and the strong survive even if it means murder. But murder shouldn't even be considered evil according to evolution. This would cause a descriptive process to be prescriptive and make it impossible for morality to exist and a need for justice to be served.
In an evolution worldview acting like animals should be expected yet there is a behavioral inconsistency between humans and animals.
Do we put the lion in jail for killing the antelope? Why do we kill the cannibal in Florida for eating the homeless man?

Who thinks they can tell me why murder is wrong apart from the biblical God?

I just got past where the stupid overwhelmed my brain and shut it down temporarily...

(August 31, 2012 at 8:00 pm)elunico13 Wrote: He didn't know his creator and therefore grouped all "gods" under the same category.

Logical Fallacy: Special Pleading

Quote:The LORD does not command morality because it exists outside of him. ...all human beings are made in the image of God and have a conscience (con - with/science - knowledge) given by him to know good. (Gen 1)

Great. We all have a conscience. You are free to believe these are telepathic messages from God if you like but unfortunately for your team, this means atheists can be good without religion.

Quote:How do I know that God is good?
Without the biblical God you can't have morality make sense. Nor any type of human experience.

Logical Fallacy: Bare Assertion

Quote:The "might equals right" is an evolutionary dilemma. The weak die out and the strong survive even if it means murder. ...

Logical Fallacy: Strawman

Morality is strength. Building a community is strength. Acting with integrity so others do business with you is strength. Working with a system of just laws is strength. Relying upon one another is strength.

This is why humans rule the world and not lions even though the latter are better killing machines.

Our conscience may be telepathic beams from God ...or they could be the result of evolution since we'd have died off if we couldn't have worked together.

Quote:Who thinks they can tell me why murder is wrong apart from the biblical God?

Ooooo! Oooooo! Pick me, teacher. (Hand goes up)

Because it violates the will of another, breaks the social contract, creates pain for the surviving loved ones and tears at the fabric of a functioning society.

How'd I do? Better than "duh, cus big invisible sky daddy sez not to."?

Morality is morality IMO. A Christian and an unbeliever can both do the moral thing and IMO, it does not make a difference where they got their morality from because if they are doing the right thing, then they are doing the right thing.

many Christians I have talked to though greatly downplay the secular morality (a very condescending and arrogant attitude) and many Atheists (as opposed to simply unbelievers) claim that Christians can't be moral because their morality is derived from their religion and they are only moral because of God....as a Christian, I call that bullshit because my morality did not come from religion, but from simply living my life...sure I later incorporated some of my beliefs into my moral code (really just not drinking so much and not dating divorced women), but my base morality did not come from the Bible...but then again, even then that is hard to prove because I can't be certain how much of the Bible impacts secular laws.

Quote:1. (Perhaps most important) Theistic morality confuses the issues of what morality is and what is moral.

Perhaps some of them weren't meant to be laws of morality? They're more like guidelines for living for God.

Remember what Christians today believe. They don't care about sticking to old rituals too strictly, rather accepting Jesus.

There is a verse in the Bible(I'll look it up later) where Jesus says something about there is no "greater sin". Every sin is the same. A murder is the same as calling someone a fool. It's more based on conscious of what is right and wrong. If you conscious tells you it's wrong, it's wrong.

Quote:2. Theistic morality provides an "easy out"

Do you know what the word "repent" means? That is what you're supposed to do when you commit a sin in Christianity. You ask for forgiveness and promise to never do it again.

Quote:3. "GodWillsIt" is not an answer
4. Euthephro's Dilemma

Idk what you're saying there? Care to explain?

Quote:5. Read the damn Bible already!

I'm pretty sure it said no adultery. As for slavery, it says "obey your master". I know that sounds harsh but get this, slavery back then more like being a servant. It was nothing like the trianglular trade African slavery we think of. Genocide? Do not murder?

Quote:6. Christianity is a dangerous belief system

Exactly, so have faith and believe.
Err Idk but I'm a Christian and I don't kill.

Quote:7. Look at the results

People who call themselves Christians aren't neccassarily Christians. Just cause they celebrate Christmas doesn't mean they follow the teachings. My school is full of Christians, and they're the nicest people I have ever met, no joke.

(August 31, 2012 at 8:41 pm)CBA222 Wrote: People who call themselves Christians aren't neccassarily Christians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Quote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

You obviously don't get it do you? So a person who just celebrates Christmas without ever going to church just celebrating that holiday and not praying or not trying to have any connection to God is a Christian? No, these guys don't even try to be Christians. They just call themselves one cause they celebrate Christmas and maybe go to church one or twice a year. No True Scotsman doesn't apply here.

(August 31, 2012 at 9:58 pm)CBA222 Wrote:

Quote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

You obviously don't get it do you? So a person who just celebrates Christmas without ever going to church just celebrating that holiday and not praying or not trying to have any connection to God is a Christian? No, these guys don't even try to be Christians. They just call themselves one cause they celebrate Christmas and maybe go to church one or twice a year. No True Scotsman doesn't apply here.

Seems Jesus began the no True Scotsman in its implication for Christians.

Matthew 7
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’