Wir verwenden Cookies, um Inhalte zu personalisieren, Werbeanzeigen maßzuschneidern und zu messen sowie die Sicherheit unserer Nutzer zu erhöhen.
Wenn du auf unsere Webseite klickst oder hier navigierst, stimmst du der Erfassung von Informationen durch Cookies auf und außerhalb von Facebook zu.
Yet, here is where the beauty and wonders of human achievement, along with the moral dignity we ascribe to human beings (acts of benevolence and heroism) cannot fit with the claim that we are no different from animals.
The conclusion that humans are creatures uniquely made in the image of the benevolent and righteous God offers a better version of reality.
While vehemently denying God (especially the Christian version), they write as if an absolute standard of goodness and duty exists–one they have to and we are obliged to accept on their word (unless we wish to remain irrational idiots).
They want to tell us that such a standard is possible without God but they don’t offer a well-reasoned explanation for how this could be. Isn’t it fair after all to suggest that without God all moral conclusions are merely subjective human opinions without any binding authority beyond what people or cultures attribute to them?
Part of the passion animating the new atheists is their sense of themselves as ‘having overcome’ the foolish and destructive irrationalities of the past.They love to reject things in the Bible considered by them to be inhumane and then expect us to assume some basis for their moral conclusions without providing it for us.Worse yet, they use biblical categories of morality to reject the Bible.Will not God and theism therefore remain a necessary reference point?It may be possible to imagine a society in which the idea of God would not even have been a discarded image, never having been on offer at all.