A major flaw of atheism is that, whether atheists like it or not, it reduces moral opinions to the level of ice cream opinions. That is, if there are no moral legislators, there can be no moral laws. There is no such thing as a good action, nor is there such thing as a bad action, though of course one might have their own opinions.
There are two kinds of opinion a person might have. The first, as we have alluded to, is a subjective opinion. A standard dictionary definition of subjective would be "Dependent on or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world".
Your favorite ice cream flavor is an example of a subjective opinion. Lemon ice cream is good in my mind, but it isn't good in reality. Other people might hate it, just like I hate just about anything that has a hint of cranberry flavor. My hatred of cranberries does not make them bad.
The second kind of opinion is an objective opinion. A standard definition of objective would be "Existing independent of or external to the mind; actual or real." We could also just flip the definition we gave for "subjective": "Existing in the external world, rather than being dependent on, or taking place in, a person's mind".
The presence of a tree is an example of an objective fact. If I say "there is a tree in the middle of that garden", that is either a true or a false statement. If there really is a tree in the garden, it is true for everyone. If they subjectively believe in the tree, they are correct. If they subjectively reject the tree's existence, they are in error. Similarly, if the tree doesn't actually exist, then it is the ones who subjectively believe in the tree who are in error.
From the above description, you can see that an objective opinion can actually blend into a subjective opinion. The mere presence of a mind does not render an objective opinion subjective. The key elements are dependence and reality. If an opinion depends on a mind and does not affect reality, it is subjective, whereas if it is based on reality regardless of a mind, it is objective.
But the more astute among you might spot a problem here. Morality, being an intangible concept, does not have a physical existence, like the tree. It's not like we can open our eyes and see morality. Nor can we reach out our hands and touch it, as we can with a tree. There is not a single sense we have with which we can experience morality.
To that, I say that reality goes beyond physics. Let's say we plant two more trees. It is now objectively true that there are three trees. But the number 3 is intangible. You cannot see, hear, smell, taste, or touch, the number 3. But you can see that there are 3 trees. Math, an intangible concept, is nevertheless an objective topic. You can be right about math, you can be wrong about math, you can have no impact on math at all.
As we pointed out, if atheism is true, then morality is subjective. With no real foundation on which to base our moral views, "good" and "evil" become as neutral as our ice cream preferences. This leads us to the cringeworthy implications that there is no real good in things like charity, honesty, or wisdom. Nor is there any real evil in dishonesty, theft, or murder. If you feed a homeless person, that is morally equal to killing a homeless person. You can have your own personal opinions on these things, of course, but then, so can your fellow atheists. You can have two polar opposite opinions on morality, but ultimately, the one who is right is the one with the biggest gun.
But Christians seem to have our own problem here. Yes, we believe in God, and we ground our moral views in Him, but He has a mind, does He not? More to the point, morality is dependent upon His mind, correct? Thus, strictly speaking, Christians have no foundation for objective morality either. God's moral views are as subjective as our own.
This apparent problem is surprisingly easy to solve. First, remember that intangible concepts can still be objective purely because they can be real, like math. What that means is we can objectively assess effects, not simply concrete existence.
Now, consider the two photos in the header image. One of them is a pocket watch, the other is a compass. Both of these objects are designed for a purpose. The pocket watch is designed to be a portable time telling device, whereas the compass is designed as a navigational device. How good or bad these objects are can be objectively assessed by how well they serve their intended purposes.
A good pocket watch, as stated, must be portable. Thus, if a pocket watch weighed twice as much as its owner, it would be a very bad pocket watch. Similarly, if it was so spikey that it injured its owner no matter which pocket he places it in, it is bad. It's a good pocket watch, however, if it is portable, and accurately tells the time. It's 12:03, I pull out my pocket watch, it tells me it's 12:03. 25 minutes go buy, I pull out my pocket watch, it correctly tells me it's 12:28. Objectively good pocket watch.
The same can be done with a compass. Unlike the pocket watch, it is functionally useless at telling the time. But this doesn't make it a bad compass, it makes it a bad pocket watch. But because it's not supposed to be a pocket watch, it is ludicrous to judge it by this measure. But what if, instead of pointing North, the compass attempts to be a pocket watch? At 12:00, the compass points North, but for some inexplicable reason, at 3:00, it points East. At 6:00, South. At 9:00, West. Well, now, you're looking at a very bad compass. Rather than performing the function for which it is designed, it is performing a function it is not designed for. In this case, even if it is doing a fantastic job at the function it is not designed to do, it is an objectively bad pocket watch.
From this, we see that there is one scenario in which a subjective opinion, i.e. the purpose for which an object is designed, can become an objective measure for that object to live up to.
Perhaps you already see where I'm going with this. God, by nature, is our Creator. In fact, He is the Creator of all things. As we read in Scripture, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1). "All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." (John 1:3).
Scripture even goes further and uses the exact same kind of analogy I am currently using. In Jeremiah 18:1-6, for example, we read "The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: “Arise, and go down to the potter's house, and there I will let you hear my words.” So I went down to the potter's house, and there he was working at his wheel. And the vessel he was making of clay was spoiled in the potter's hand, and he reworked it into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to do. Then the word of the Lord came to me: “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter has done? declares the Lord. Behold, like the clay in the potter's hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel."
Notice how God compares Israel - a nation He raised up with His own hand - to clay in the hands of a potter. In fact, this passage adds another layer. What right does a creator have when their creation becomes marred in their hands? Well, it's actually the Creator's sovereign choice. This is why moral objections against the Bible do not work. If a creator intends to make a good thing, but the thing turns out to be bad, he has a range of options. He can remake the good thing so it is good after all. He can re-purpose the thing, like when I use broken coffee mugs as flower pots. He can even flat out destroy the bad creation, even using his other creations should he so desire. A creator has full rights over his creation, and so God has full rights over us.
From this, we see the full scope of the issue. God's subjective moral views form objective morality for us because He isn't judging us on a whim. Rather, He judges us based on how well we perform the purpose for which He created us. This is why even when we see certain things as good, He can still say they are bad.
An obvious example in today's culture is sexuality. When questioned on divorce, Jesus replied "...Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." (Matthew 19:4-6).
Notice, first, Jesus appeals to the original creation, specifically citing Genesis 1:27 and 2:24. When we look back at Genesis 1 and 2, we see literally the ideal world. "And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day." (Genesis 1:31). At this point, the only sexuality was the permanent, one flesh union of one adult man, and his one adult wife. There was no divorce, Adam and Eve were permanently united. There was no polygamy, Adam had one Eve, and Eve had one Adam. There was no adultery, there wasn't even anyone for them to lust after. There was no fornication, their relationship literally became the model for marriage. There was no homosexuality, each spouse possessed the complementary parts the other lacked (hence "one flesh"). There was no pedophilia, Adam and Eve were functionally mature. According to God, this was very good, and is the standard for sexuality even in our world today.
And it is the standard by which He will judge us. We are told very clearly, "Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge." (Hebrews 13:4), and "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).
In today's world, we don't hold marriage in very high regard at all. We have even invented new methods of fornication and adultery by way of internet porn and creepy chat rooms. As God says in Romans 1, as we do not like to retain God in our knowledge (v28), we become inventors of evil things (v30). And of course, we attempt to justify these things! We ask, "what harm is our fornication doing, since we are in love?" "Love is love!", we chant, as we wave our pride flags. "I'm only looking, I'm not actually doing anything", we assure ourselves as we load up another naughty website.
But twice the book of Proverbs warns us, "There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death." (Proverbs 14:12; 16:25). And that's the same trap we've been falling for since that dreadful day in Eden. "So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate." (Genesis 3:6). As the saying goes, "Sin fascinates before it assassinates."
Of course, sexual immorality is not the only example of sin. In reality, we have all sinned in some way, shape, or form. We might be covetous. We might be blasphemous. We might be gluttonous. All of these things separate us from our Creator, because our moral compass does not point North. So what does He say? "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 6:23).
Remember how we talked about the rights a creator has over his creation? How he has several options, ranging from repair to destruction? Destruction is an option. In fact, this destruction is so absolute that the Bible speaks about what is called the "second death". A place of eternal torment, in which the just penalty for our sins is meted out forever.
But this isn't the ideal outcome for anybody. For us, of course, it isn't nice because it isn't supposed to be nice. We are supposed to hate the very idea of Hell, to the point where we should have a great fear of Him who can send us there (Matthew 10:28). But also, for God, this is not His good pleasure. Scripture repeatedly tells us that God has no pleasure in death (Ezekiel 18:32; 33:11), that He wants no one to perish (2 Peter 3:9), and that He wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:1-4).
All of this means that even though Hell is the just reward of all who go there, it is not a good thing. It's not a bad thing, because it serves the purpose for which it was designed, but when we go there, it is because we failed to perform the purpose for which we were designed. Hell is good because it makes the best of a bad situation, but the objectively better outcome for all involved is if we don't go.
So what can we do here? Well, first, we have the problem of God's innate desire for justice. Scripture actually tells us "If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself." (2 Timothy 2:13). This means justice must be done. If the wages of sin is death, those wages must be paid. But who pays it is optional. Christianity has a doctrine known as "penal substitutionary atonement". That is, there is one scenario in which the sin can be punished, but the sinner themselves are safe. The innocent can take their place!
And He did.
Jesus Christ, Son of God, entered creation through the womb of a virgin woman, lived His entire life without sin, yet died on the cross to receive Sin's full penalty. Scripture actually says "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." (2 Corinthians 5:21). Therefore, though we are guilty, we can be judged as blameless, because He, being blameless, was judged as guilty. The criteria for this is faith. "...if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved." (Romans 10:9).
AI usage
No AI tools were used in the production of this article.
コメント