It’s important to understand that even though atheists and agnostics can be “moral,” they have no ultimate authoritative basis for their morality. When an atheist or agnostic calls something “right”or “wrong”or “good”or “evil,” they are borrowing from a biblical worldview in order to make that statement. Think about it: If we are simply the by-product of evolution and no better than animals, then why should anyone behave morally? In that case, what or who defines right from wrong? Ultimately, this kind of thinking leads to “everyone doing what is right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25), which is exactly where our culture is rapidly sliding.
So he’s willing to concede that atheists can act morally, but he has to say something to salvage his sense of superiority. He has two arguments.
But they don’t have a higher authority telling them to be good!I would think having an autonomous sense of right and wrong would be superior to requiring someone else to tell you what you should do. I would especially think it superior when there isn’t actually anyone else — it’s just a voice in your head that you use to justify any of your actions.
What morality they have they borrow from the Bible!That makes no sense at all. If my morality comes from the Bible, how come I think the Bible is so wrong about so many things? Why does Ken Ham make moral decisions — opposing gay rights, maintaining the inferiority of women, denying science and reality — that he claims are biblically based, but that I disagree with categorically?
He’s also wrong about it leading to
everyone doing what is right in his own eyes. It leads to everyone doing what is right in the eyes of their community — other people — and trying to do what makes life better for themselves and others.
Unless, of course, you’re some kind of libertarian dork. You have the option to be an entirely selfish jerk, and no god is going to stop you, but I think that position is ultimately self-defeating.