Christians, do you realize that you concede to a falsity when you insist an unbeliever can't be moral?

Question

Galations 3:12 tells us that the Law is not based on faith.

The post-modern world is telling Christians, "You can't force your faith on me," when what they really mean is "You can't force your morality on me." If we were smart we'd simply reply, "Morality is not a matter of faith, it is what it is no matter what you or I think." Why don't we answer this way more often? Why do we try to fight by conceding to the underlying falsity?

I'm a Lutheran. We teach, according to the Bible three uses of the God's Law. The first is like a gift to both believers & unbelievers in the secular realm. It gives God's servant in Romans 13:4, "the power to punish the wrongdoer." Why wouldn't we want to share this truth even with unbelievers?

Matthew T, I am talking about civil morality or civil obedience (1st use of God's Law) as opposed to spiritual morality or what pleases God (3rd use of God's Law--which only believers in Christ are able to do). Here's the question & my answer that prompted my question:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Al6dTa6zWCVylpLmrfbdxnPty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070928164433AAOoHjB&show=7#profile-info-Fp7HHAElaa. I think you'll agree.

n9wff, I think you misunderstand my statement about "God's servant". I am indeed using it in the context in which it's meant. "God's servant"=the civil government (e.g. civil police, military, etc.). I would agree with you I think. Again, I'm speaking only of the first use of the Law. There are two others I intentionally left out for brevity's sake.

In the Romans passage I cite, the doctrine of Two Kingdoms (https://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/WRHC/134_The%20Two%20Realms%20in%20the%20Lutheran%20Confessions.PDF)--see especially "5" & Vocation (https://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/WRHC/076_Masks%20of%20God.PDF) are clear as I think you are saying & I would agree.

Answer 1

Good thoughtful question.

In the debate, it would be wise if Christians not imply that unbelievers can't do good works. This approach gives the unbeliever ammunition to show that Christians are irrational.

I agree that law is not based upon faith. I don't think though that just obeying the law makes us moral. Moral has to include motive. If I do my good deed because of fear of punishment, I don't think that is a moral act, for example. The Pharisees did their good deeds for love of praise.

Morality is doing the right thing for the right reason. The right reason involves a moral authority to Whom we owe allegiance. That is the element missing from secular morality.

I agree that morality is what it is no matter what you or I think but the unbeliever would say that morality is relative and therefore IS whatever we think it is. This is the rejection of moral authority.

My personal understanding is that our good works, if done with just our own power, ultimately would all turn out to be evil if God did not intervene. That is a hard concept to grasp but I think that when we build our self pride through our own accomplishments, that ultimately we do more harm than good.

I'm a Lutheran also.

Answer 2

Excellent question.

For example, Christians generally have no problem conceding that at least some other religions (or version of their religion) can be moral. This is despite the fact that they nevertheless believe that said religion is a man-made false belief.

It is as if all one has to do is insert the word "god" into any ethical structure and that somehow justifies that moral code....regardless of whether or not that "god" is valid or not.

In short, Christians (in general) would prefer that people believe in a non-existent god (meaning one they do not believe actually exists) then to take the position that those gods do no exist. They prefer a Hindu (false god - according to them) to no god (atheist or agnostic)...that is completely non-nonsensical.

For example, if I were to come around the corner of a dark alley and witness a young girl being raped, I would not need to consult any book to determine if that was a moral action I was witnessing or not. I wouldn't have to pull open my bible or any other religious text to find reference to the idea that perhaps that girl was being harmed. I KNOW that inherently as a member of the human race, and I know I should move swiftly to help. I need not reference the bible to know that.

Now some may say my inherent knowledge of that fact is proof that some "god" gave it to me. Fair enough. That is worthy of a different discussion. But to claim that I, as an atheist, do not HAVE those feelings, is ignorantly close-minded.

Darn this was a long answer...my apologies.

Answer 3

the Law has nothing to with faith. The Law was established by God apart from faith.

Anyone can have good morals, but it still won't get you into heaven alone.

As far as Romans 13:4, please read the previous verse. The government and authority God ordained in place are the only one to "punish." Not any servant of God has that right, so get that thought out of your head.

Answer 4

I think thats a good question and you gave a good answer but when it comes to the fourth commandment (many christains) do not even think thats morally binding to anyone, why? It is apart of the whole Law as the rest but it is the most rejected by church and civil powers. Remember the sabbathday.....but the seventhday is the sabbath. exodus 20:8-11. So, if it is not a matter of faith but just being moral then you deny its divine decrees to uphold morals.

Answer 5

surely, when you consider that i don't have faith in any of that, then no, i don't have faith you're being blessed. inspite of the shown fact that, in case you think of harsh words on the information superhighway = persecution or something worth of being "blessed".... i'd hate to make certain what would take place in case you have been truly persecuted. So, grow to be I being "blessed" while the bitties at my college tried to get me fired for being an atheist? have you ever had your interest or babies threatened because of the fact of what you have faith? Even been disowned because of the fact your very family members won't be able to settle for what you're? I even have. i'm not attempting to a minimum of one-up or something, yet that's not often "persecution", and particularly some the time, what some Christians evaluate hate and mockery is many times purely opposing perspectives they don't accept as true with.

Answer 6

Nice post. Morality is innate. Those who stray too far from the norm of morals are ill humans, like serial killers for example. They feel the same about murder as they do about eating. There's no emotional connection to evil acts for them.

Candice, we do not "wing it". Morality is simple. Pretty much anything that brings pain, is bad and needs to be avoided. Things that have good results, are to be encouraged. You mean to say that if you didn't have your book to tell you not to, that you could kill someone and not feel bad? Or that you could tell a devasting lie to your parents? That you could let a child go hungry even though you have food to spare?
And you think us Atheists are immoral...

Answer 7

Most Christians do not insist that unbelievers (atheists) cannot be moral, they simply say that most unbelievers cannot articulate intelligently what the basis is for their morality. As you point out, Christians understand the morality of unbelievers better than unbelievers - it is the law of God written in everyone's heart - natural law.

Answer 8

I agree with the first person that answered...We have a book that is a guide to morality...An atheist does not have a book to go by..They just wing it...

Answer 9

I dont think they cant be moral. I think they cant have the same morals I have because mine are based upon the teachings/guidance of God.