/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>609198

Hope this helps.

>>609198

They can, see natural law.

>>609204

lmao

yl yl thread?

>>609198

Yes, but they have a weakness: They can easily be corrupted and adopt ideas that aren't doing any good by things disguised as good. The most blatant example being homosexuality.

Of course they can. However, there is no reason for them to, it's completely illogical. Imagine there's a club in school that requires that its members eat raw eggs every morning and memorize poetry. Someone who is not part of the club could incidentally or even purposefully do so, there's nothing that would stop him from doing that. However, there is no reason for him to do that.

>>609198

As individuals yes, but there is no reason for the minority of atheists with a defective or absent conscience to behave morally since they don't believe they will be judged for their actions unless other humans catch them. Also a lot of moral behavior atheists practice comes from the influence of living in what was until recently a Christian society. I.e. pederasty was common in pagan Greece, infanticide was accepted in pagan Greece and Rome, etc. Atheists think injunctions against these things are just 'common sense', they fail to see Christianity is responsible.

No. Atheism is itself a mortal sin, and the worst sin possible to commit besides the One Unforgivable Sin, worse than genocide.

Atheism is a violation of the First Commandment of course, but moreover a violation of the Great and Foremost Commandment that includes that commandment. The Great and Foremost Commandment is the most important commandment of all, and infinitely eclipses all prohibitions against sins committed against one's neighbor. Both of these commandments are part of the Noahide Covenant, binding on all of humanity, not just Hebrews or Christians. All atheists are thus by definition gravely immoral in the worst way that it is currently possible to be in this world. God forgive and have mercy on them.

Besides those sins, I've never met an atheist who shunned every other sin and vice and embodied every virtue (things like Faith obviously excepted which is by definition impossible for them to embody). And I've known well perhaps fifty or so atheists in my life. None of them are as righteous as they could conceivablely be while still remaining atheists. I can't think of a single one who didn't engage unrepentantly in some particularly odious sin either privately or unashamedly.

Thus I answer, no, atheists are not and cannot be moral people unless they cease to be atheists. Atheism is evil in itself. Nor are atheists moral people apart from their atheism. They aren't, which can be seen from their public behavior, but could they conceivably be? You might as well ask if anyone can be a moral person, then. The answer to that might surprise you.

Thank God a good number of atheists are in a state of ignorance and subject to other mitigating factors. They are not beyond God's mercy and ability to save. A good number of atheists will convert. I am a convert from atheism myself. Praise God. We must show love and kindness and mercy to our atheist neighbors. They are sinners, but so are we.

>>609235

>No. Atheism is itself a mortal sin, and the worst sin possible to commit besides the One Unforgivable Sin, worse than genocide.

This. Non-Christians can be moral despite their religion, but atheists cannot. There is absolutely no morality in one who rejects God.

>>609198

Of course they can, human morality is based on respect and empathy, God's morality is alien to humans is based on God's likes and dislikes which we cannot even fathom (not even angels can, they do it because is their nature)

There is stuff that for the law of man is innocuous, innocent or even inane, yet for God is something as bad as mas baby rape.

And that's the whole point of "the world will hate you" because the world will see you as insane.

>>609235

>Thank God a good number of atheists are in a state of ignorance and subject to other mitigating factors.

What constitutes a "state of ignorance"? Having never heard of the bible or Christianity is one thing, I assume, but is there something else?

What mitigating factors could there be?

>>609198

Not in any meaningful sense, they tend to run into the problem of how one defines what constitutes good and evil. They say that they don’t need a God to tell them what is right and what is wrong, that all they need is their mind, but that idea creates a relative morality where good and evil is whatever they feel like. This leads to a breakdown where you can’t denounce anything as evil because of its relativity and vice versa. If you look at prominent atheists, they denounce the existence of evil because the foundations of their beliefs do not allow for it to exist. Basically, no moral law giver = no moral law. No moral law = no good or evil. When good and evil don’t exist how can one be moral?

>>609202

>equality is a moral value

>racial discrimination is always wrong

Pretty good summary of the argument from morality though.