Tell me the difference between Christianity's view of Morals and Atheisms view of morals?

Question

For example: sex before marriage, homosexuality, adultery, pornography, abortion, etc

Answer 1

Well ..you see thats just it isn't it ?

Atheists are people who, whether they like it or not, have the law of God written on their hearts (Rom. 2:15). They are subject to the same laws of our country (and other countries) and they have a sense of right and wrong. They often work with people who are religious and have ethical standards as well as non-believers who are don't. So they are exposed to all sorts of moral behavior. In addition, they often form their own moral standards based on what suits them. Besides, robbery, lying, stealing, etc., can get you imprisoned, so it is practical and logical for an atheist to be ethical and work within the norms of social behavior. How ever you want to look at it, atheists, generally, are honest, hardworking people.

Nevertheless, some Christians raise the question, "What is to prevent an atheist from murdering and stealing? After all, they have no fear of God and no absolute moral code." The answer is simple: Atheists are capable of governing their own moral behavior and getting along in society the same as anyone else.

At the risk of labeling the atheist as self-centered, it does not serve the best interests of an atheist to murder and steal since it would not take long before he was imprisoned and/or killed for his actions. Basically, society will only put up with so much if it is to function smoothly. So, if an atheist wants to get along and have a nice life, murdering and stealing won't accomplish it. It makes sense for him to be honest, work hard, pay his bills, and get along with others. Basically, he has to adopt a set of ethics common to society in order to do that. Belief in God is not a requirement for ethical behavior or an enjoyable life.

On the other hand
Atheists' morals are not absolute. They do not have a set of moral laws from an absolute God by which right and wrong are judged. But, they do live in societies that have legal systems with a codified set of laws. This would be the closest thing to moral absolutes for atheists. However, since the legal system changes the morals in a society can still change and their morals along with it. At best, these codified morals are "temporary absolutes." In one century abortion is wrong. In another, it is right. So, if we ask if it is or isn't it right, the atheist can only tell us his opinion.

If there is a God, killing the unborn is wrong. If there is no God, then who cares? If it serves the best interest of society and the individual, then kill. This can be likened to something I call, "experimental ethics." In other words, whatever works best is right. Society experiments with ethical behavior to determine which set of rules works best for it. Hopefully, these experiments lead to better and better moral behavior. But, as we see by looking into society, this isn't the case: crime is on the rise.

There are potential dangers in this kind of self-established/experimental ethical system. If a totalitarian political system is instituted and a mandate is issued to kill all dissenters, or Christians, or mentally ill, what is to prevent the atheist from joining forces with the majority system and support the killings? It serves his self-interests, so why not? Morality becomes a standard of convenience, not absolutes.


But, to be fair, just because someone has an absolute ethical system based on the Bible, there is no guarantee that he will not also join forces in doing what is wrong. People are often very inconsistent. But the issue here is the basis of moral beliefs and how they affect behavior. That is why belief systems are so important and absolutes are so necessary. If morals are relative, then behavior will be too. That can be dangerous if everyone starts doing right in his own eyes. A boat adrift without an anchor will eventual crash into the rocks.


The Bible teaches love, patience, and seeking the welfare of others even when it might harm the Christian. In contrast, the atheists' presuppositions must be constantly changing, and subjective and does not demand love, patience, and the welfare of others. Instead, since the great majority of atheists are evolutionists, their morality, like evolution is the product of purely natural and random processes that become self serving.


Basically, the atheist cannot claim any moral absolutes at all. To an atheist, ethics must be variable and evolving. This could be good or bad. But, given human nature being what it is, I'll opt for the moral absolutes -- based on God's word -- and not on the subjective and changing morals that atheism offers.

Answer 2

For xians they for some reason believer that morals only come from their holy books which is kind of funny because people had laws before the bible existed and societies which have never heard of xianity manage to have morals. As do atheists, but we realise that they're derived from the society we live in (morals are relative didn't you know) and an instinctive drive not to harm others.

I don't think there is anything immoral about sex before marriage, homosexuality or abortion.

I'm not keen on pornography but that's mainly because i don't think the people who participate in are always well treated..

I frown upon adultery because as far as I'm concerned you can do what the hell you like as long as no one gets hurt. Adultery will inevitably hurt someone. You would be very hard pushed to find an atheist who thinks there's nothing wrong with adultery and I'm baffled that anyone would think that we (atheists) would be okay. We have the lowest divorce rate you know.

Answer 3

You are particularly speaking of Jewish Mythology, which is the old testament for Christianity. Jews are very keen on their origins, the thought of birthright and inheritance is a predominant one in Hebrew culture. Hence it can be important to demonstrate your lineage, which is why a lot of the Bible is a file of generations and lineages. The Hebrew oral culture traced a lineage again to an ancestor named Noah, who witnessed the nice Flood, and whose descendants formed the peoples of the fertile crescent subject. The pleasant Flood is a long-established theme amongst basically each culture that may trace that a long way. A cataclysmic upward thrust in sea stage on the finish of the last Ice Age worn out a lot of civilization, inundating it beneath 200-300 feet of water. That is old and geologic truth. The testimonies of this flood were instructed to successive generations who had no frame of reference on which to understand it, and the story used to be embellished because it was re-told by means of individuals who did not understand it, to people who understood it even much less. Likewise the tower of Babel is more often than not pure fable, on the grounds that with out a written report nobody could recognize how languages float over time. However it's an explanation of why different persons communicate in a different way. The biggest change in the Hebrew myths is that they stress righteousness as entertaining to God, and an absence of righteousness as a cause for God's wrath. The God of the Hebrews used to be steady, and had a deep, considerate understanding, whereas, many other gods either didn't well known humans any longer than whatever else alive, or had been imperfect beings of best vigor who dealt capriciously with people. Just right question, valued at further exploration.

Answer 4

The Christian view is not made up by self but by God. Athiests view comes from their own thinking. Every man knows that when morality comes from one's own heart there will always, without fail, be a part that is evil. Example: A man may not steal or cheat and be faithful to his wife and treat others respectfully and fairly, but still have the desire to bully his wife and children around or need to stay stoned to block out everything. This is a man whose morals come from himself.
A man who believes in Christ believes that we must always walk in Christ's laws and in his ways and his words and they dictate how we treat others including our wife and children and thus, we are more apt to follow them since we know our Lord knows all. When we fail we are repentant and try our best to turn from our failure.
The difference?
You will never control something out of control without exterior forces helping you. This is what God's law does for the Christian, but there is nothing to stop the Athiest.

Answer 5

Christian live by the morals given to us in the Bible and from our parents...sex before marriage is a sin...homosexuality is a sin by choice...adultery is a sin...pornography is a sin...and abortion is murder...Atheisms morals seem to be...sex before marriage is ok if they want to...homosexuality is ok they were born that way...adultery is ok it is their business...pornography is ok, it is their right...abortion is ok it is the woman body to do with whatever she wishes...

Answer 6

The difference is that Christians think they own all the stock in morality. The reality is - they don't.

I do think Christianity is about repressing sexuality (being inhibited) and hiding from reality, and being judging and condemning.

Whereas Atheists are the opposite. They're not repressed or inhibited, they like reality just fine, and they don't think judging and condeming others is a productive use of their time.

Answer 7

There's no way to make a laundry list of those things for all/most Atheists or all/most Christians, since people's views about ALL of them vary, regardless of religious beliefs.

Christians need a god, book, and list to tell them not to do things like lie, steal, and kill people. Atheists are NATURALLY good and know that these things are wrong WITHOUT a fairy telling them.

Christians generally believe they can get magically forgiven for any wrongdoing. Atheists don't believe in mass-forgiveness, so we try not to do wrong things in the first place.

Christians generally believe in a devil that they can blame for all of their wrong thoughts and actions. Atheists don't have a devil - we believe in personal responsibility.

My personal views (I happen to be an atheist):

I don't concern myself with the sex lives of other consenting adults, since it would be perverted to do so. Love is love, whether it is between two men, two women, or one of each. People who oppose love are dangerous.

Consensual pre- or un-marital sex is much better, smarter, and less destructive than getting married just so you can get laid.

Adultery is the business of the parties involved, and nobody else's. Some people prefer that their spouses satisfy sexual needs outside of the marriage, and there is nothing wrong with that. If people didn't feel pushed to get married so they could have sex, there would probably be much less adultery.

Pornography is harmless, as long as the actors consented to being filmed, and the viewers are watching willingly. It can actually be very helpful to couples with sexual problems or ignorance.

Abortion is nobody's business but the woman's, and if she feels safe enough to include him, her partner. The US Government has NO legal obligation to a fetus - rights are granted as of BIRTH (14th Amendment). Roe v. Wade protects a woman's right to choose to give birth, as well. Chinese women DON'T have the right to choose, which is how they can be FORCED to have an abortion. In PP v. Casey, the Supreme Court ACKNOWLEDGED that without Roe, the US Government could FORCE abortions, as well. Women who think abortion is wrong have the CHOICE not to have one, thanks to Roe v. Wade.

Answer 8

Well, Christianity typically pegs all of those as sinful, and atheism is usually more liberal and accepting. Minus the adultery, not sure why that's even there.

Answer 9

These are mostly not moral issues, but religious ones. Morality has to do with causing harm to other people.

Sex before marriage: no problem, between consenting adults
Homosexuality: : no problem, between consenting adults
Adultery: This is immoral; you are violating a trust.
Pornography: no problem, between consenting adults
Abortion: unfortunate, but not immoral

Answer 10

The difference lies in the standards by which we judge actions. If we invent our own standard and judge our own actions, then we will always be able to justify and rationalize any behavior. We will be able to do what we feel like doing because we will delude ourselves that what we feel like doing is the right thing to do. That is why even criminals plotting their next crime think of themselves as basically good.