Conversations with an Atheist, Part 2

My atheist friend told me the main reason he doesn’t believe in God has to do with all the evil he sees in the world. “A good God,” he says, “would not allow all kinds of evil to exist. Because evil exists, there can be no God.”

The question I asked my friend was this, “How do you know evil exists? By qualifying God as good is to make a moral judgment. Defining evil based on the notion of good is to admit that God also exists!”

Atheist: “How so?”

Me: “Because your definition of evil assumes moral goodness. Otherwise, how would you define evil? You had to have some idea in your mind what is good to declare something evil.”

Atheist: “Not really! As we evolved into mental creatures, our survival depended on what is better for our continuation as a species; and good is better than evil.”

Me: “But who determined what was better? Darwinism teaches the survival of the fittest. If the stronger, healthier, and more robust is fitter, they survive. If they are also more evil, they will still survive. Isn’t this what Nazi Germany tried to do? Hitler wanted to eliminate what he thought were the weaker link in a strong nation. And I think you would agree that Hitler was evil! So, please tell me how you define good, for evolution is not the answer.”

Atheist: “Good is doing that which is right for our species; and trying to eliminate a part of it, a certain people group, is wrong. It only brings war and war kills people, which is bad.”

Me: “You can’t mean that all war is bad. Otherwise, how would Hitler have been stopped?”

Atheist: “In that case, it was good people rising up against evil to stop evil from continuing.”

Me: “But Hitler did not think he was evil. He thought he was right. So, now we have your view and Hitler’s view in contrast. What made you right and Hitler wrong? For you to contrast what is good and evil means that you have within you some innate moral fiber, which allows you to make a determination. And that moral fiber had to come from somewhere.”

Atheist: “Yeah, it comes from me knowing right and wrong.”

Me: “No, it comes from something in your makeup that evolution cannot explain with any precision. Just by saying that something is good points to something bigger than you, and that something is Ultimate Goodness.

Atheist: “Come on, you know that I don’t believe in an Ultimate Goodness, which you are going to tell me is God.”

Me: “I’m saying any determination of good is a moral decision and morality points to something greater than you. To conquer evil, good must exist. And to have the moral courage to fight evil must come from within, not from some evolutionary process. Evolution doesn’t explain why there are certain moral fundamentals, which crosses all cultures.”

Atheist: “Like what?”

Me: “Like not killing off your own species or clan. Like honoring the ones who brought you into the world. Like not stealing from those you love. Like doing good for those who help you. And if goodness doesn’t evolve, then it must point to a Being who instills a moral fiber it into his Creatures.”

Atheist: “So what happened to Hitler? Did he have any good moral fiber?”

Me: “Absolutely; but even then it can be overcome by evil if we let it. That is why we need reminders of what is good; and that comes from the 10 commandments. But even then, we need something more that restrains evil in the world—otherwise evil will win out. And that something is an Ultimate Morality that gives grace to people whether they believe in an Ultimate Goodness or not in order for them to recognize the true and exercise courage to fight the wrong.”

Atheist: “There you go again with the religious stuff. I still believe that all this can be explained by evolution.

Me: “If that is the case, then anything goes. Survival of the fittest tells us that those who are stronger, better situated, and more politically motivated can take what they want, including life, in order for their group to survive. Evolution would then sanction what Islamic extremists are doing—even what Hitler did. Yet, the reason most of the world dislikes what they do is evidence that there is a greater good that desires to overcome the dastardly killing of those who oppose such terrorists.”

Atheist: “There are certain things that are just plain wrong—certain actions that are basically evil!”

Me: “Can’t you see that by admitting evil exists, you have just proven that God exists. By saying ‘some things are just plain wrong’ is evidence of an absolute within your psyche that you didn’t put there. You were born with it, which means you were favored with a morality that is greater than you. Because you don’t understand why evil occurs is no reason to deny the existence of a Being who endowed you with a sense of right and wrong. Because you say there is evil in the world proves that there is a God who evidently instilled the definition of right and wrong within your soul. To argue there is no God is to argue there is no good. And that is untenable!”

Conversations with an Atheist

"Can a person be good without believing in God?" asked my atheist friend. He said that human beings need not believe in a deity or belong to any religious group in order to be good or act morally. He continued to say that the idea of the doing good preceded belief in a god, for religion evolved from the imagination of ancient man. In fact, he believed that the concept of god is alien to the algorithm of human goodness and morality. Humans already have a sense of moral right or wrong, for moral rectitude is innate within the human spirit.

I agreed with his last sentence, but disagreed with the origin. It is true that human beings have an innate sense of moral goodness. But where did that come from? Did it develop from monkeys or other genetics within the evolutionary chain of human kind? Or did a Greater Power place it within the human spirit? Probing deeper, I asked him to define good. I wanted to know his definition of good and if every human being had the same definition. What my friend failed to realize is that an atheist's morals are not absolute. Not every atheist would agree with what “good” is. Islamist extremists, for instance, believe that good is killing infidels, i.e. everyone who does not accept or conform to Islam. A secular humanist in all likelihood has no problem eliminating a child from the womb. They believe it is good for the woman to choose what is best for her. The sanctity of life people believe that killing the unborn is murder.

 

In other words, there are no absolutes when it comes to morals and ethics among an atheistic community. They do not have a set of moral laws upon which they agree. Therefore, social contracts or compacts are desirable to govern with a semblance of peace and order. Legislation is needed in order to prevent chaos within the community. Even a codified set of laws, however, are not absolute, for the legal system of what is right and wrong may change when the majority in society believes something different. Then new laws are made to reflect contemporary attitudes. For instance, in one century abortion is wrong; in another, it is right.

If there is a God, killing the unborn in a Christian society is wrong. If there is no God, then man decides the issue? If killing serves the best interest of society, then it is determined good. This is none other than situational or temporary ethics. It is tentative morality that promotes, “whatever works best at the moment is morally correct.” If humans have the innate ability to determine what is ethically right, then why is the world in such a mess? Defining good by individual atheistic standards is dangerous in that the majority determines what is good at the moment. If a totalitarian political system is established (as we see with Islamic Jihadists), then a mandate to kill dissenters, the mentally and physically handicap, or Christians and Jews become morally feasible. Atheists who may disagree with such a government will nonetheless tacitly join forces to preserve their self-interest because that is what their inner morality tells them to do. Atheistic morality therefore becomes a standard of convenience, of self-preservation and cannot be deemed an absolute.

Although people, including Christians, are inconsistent in applying their value system to life, a world and life view is based on ethics and morals. If morals are relative, then behavior corresponds. Doing that which is right in one’s own eye is quite dangerous, for it is the way of death (Prov. 14:12), not only for the individual, but also for society. Something bigger than the individual has to exist in order to bring order to chaos and judgment to evil. Atheistic thought cannot provide the answer, for there are no absolutes upon which to build consistency and order. Only God who is absolute can provide absolutes—a reality unacceptable to atheists but the hope of all Christians.

The Story of Valentine's Day

Numerous early Christian martyrs were named Valentine, one being Saint Valentine of Rome who was a priest martyred about AD 269 and buried on the Via Flaminia, the Roman road that led to and from Rome over the Apennine Mountains. His relics are said to be at the Church of Saint Praxed in Rome and also at Whitefriar Street Carmelite Church in Dublin, Ireland—the result of a gift by Pope Gregory XVI.

One legend contends that Valentine was a priest who served during the third century in Rome. When Emperor Claudius II decided that single men made better soldiers than those with wives and families, he outlawed marriage for young men — his crop of potential soldiers. Valentine, realizing the injustice of the decree, defied Claudius and continued to perform marriages for young lovers in secret. When Valentine's actions were discovered, Claudius ordered that he be put to death.

According to one legend, Valentine actually sent the first 'valentine' greeting himself. While in prison, it is believed that Valentine fell in love with a young girl — who may have been his jailor's daughter — who visited him during his confinement. He had healed her of her blindness. Before his death, it is alleged that he wrote her a letter, which he signed 'From your Valentine,' an expression that is still in use today. Although the truth behind the Valentine legend is murky, the stories certainly emphasize his appeal as a sympathetic, heroic, and, most importantly, romantic figure. It's no surprise that by the Middle Ages, Valentine was one of the most popular saints in England and France.

While some believe that Valentine's Day is celebrated in the middle of February to commemorate the anniversary of Valentine's death or burial — which probably occurred around 270 A.D — others claim that the Christian church may have decided to celebrate Valentine's feast day in the middle of February in an effort to 'Christianize' celebrations of the pagan Lupercalia festival. In ancient Rome, February was the official beginning of spring and was considered a time for purification. Houses were ritually cleansed by sweeping them clean, and then salt and a type of wheat called spelt were sprinkled throughout the interior. Lupercalia, which began at the ides of February (i.e. February 15) was a fertility festival dedicated to Faunus, the Roman god of agriculture, as well as to the Roman founders Romulus and Remus. To begin the festival, members of the Luperci, an order of Roman priests, would gather at the sacred cave where the infants Romulus and Remus, the founders of Rome, were believed to have been cared for by a she-wolf or lupa. The priests would then sacrifice a goat, for fertility, and a dog, for purification.

Boys then sliced the goat's hide into strips, dipped them in the sacrificial blood and took to the streets, gently slapping both women and fields of crops with goat hide strips. Far from being fearful, Roman women welcomed being touched with the hides because it was believed the strips would make them more fertile in the coming year. Later in the day, according to legend, all the young women in the city would place their names in a big urn. The city's bachelors would then each choose a name out of the urn and become paired for the year with his chosen woman. These matches often ended in marriage. The Roman 'lottery' system for romantic pairing was deemed un-Christian and outlawed by the Roman Catholic Church. Pope Gelasius declared February 14 as St. Valentine's Day around 498 A.D as a feast day in order to superimpose Christianity on a pagan holiday.

Valentine may have been a symbol of love, but no truer love can be found than in the person of Jesus Christ who gave his life for his bride, the Church. This is why he gave his disciples and by extension us a commandment of love.


“This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you. No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you. You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you. These things I command you, so that you will love one another.” John 15:12-17