The Go-To Argument Many Christians Use in the Face of Losing Ground



As the faith gets smaller and Christians experience people they know and respect leaving, there is search for an argument that holds up. I've found the favorite one, the one the faithful think is always a winner, is that Christianity is the source of objective moral values and there is no other such source. This is completely bogus in so many ways. Because they define the term "objective" they erroneously conclude they have a point.

I engaged on-line with a retired professor of religion, a believer, about this issue. He wrote in his blog he has never seen a non Christian source of morality. Thus, he concluded, non believers have none. I posted on his discussion page that what non believers consider moral rules are the rules that allow a productive and successful society the flourish. These are adopted in our laws. It includes don't kill, rob, lie or other such behavior harmful to others except as limited circumstances require. Self defense, for example, is allowed.

The professor came back that I had still not provided a "source" of morality. There is no place, he replied, where these moral standards are published and approved. Here, he decided for himself the definition of what constitutes a "source." It seems obvious to me all of human history has more or less given us guidelines as to acceptable moral behavior and what falls outside. The professor is so programed to think of the Bible the only other legitimate source has to be another "Bible." Thus, it's a waste of time to discuss the "objective source" of moral standards when one side has already set the rules in their favor. 

Another word that works its way into the argument of "moral standards" is "sin." I suppose sin is the violation of moral standards, though I'm not sure if most Christians would agree with that. What behaviors or thoughts are considered sin changes over time. To me, this defeats the case that the faith is a source of moral standards. 

When it comes to "moral standards," I don't seem them in the religious right. Anti gay, trans, abortion and equal rights seem like inferior more standards.  

Comments

  1. Ardy BSeptember 26, 2025 at 12:13 PM

    “Goodness is not good because it is loved by the gods – rather, it is good whether or not the gods know or care.”
    https://bigthink.com/thinking/do-you-need-religion-to-be-a-moral-person/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jon LindgrenSeptember 27, 2025 at 9:44 PM

      Thanks for the comment, Ardy B. It's so easy to say, "Society needs a set of moral values from an 'outside' or 'objective' source." If that source is human beings, there will be doubters. Since the Bible was written by humans, count me as a doubter.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient God, Bel (Baal), the Main Character in an Ancient Play

Image
In a British museum is a preserved stone tablet from Babylon. It dates to about 2,000 BCE. Someone labored patiently to inscribe an entire passion play featuring the god Bel. I reiterate this is a stone tablet, not a recopied papyrus. The play begins with the god Bel arrested by soldiers and taken off the stage. He reappears at a trial in the Hall of Judgement. Bel is innocent but is sentenced to death. In the next scene Bel is accosted by a mob. He is despised and rejected. The actor playing Bel is then taken by guard to a hilltop in a sacred grove. Two criminals are taken with him. One of these is released. The the audience then leaves the theater and follows the actor Bel and his guards to the top of a hill where the death scene is enacted by hanging from a tree. The audience returns to the theater for the dramatic final scenes. The dead Bel is stripped and prepared for burial. On a theatrical hill to the side of the stage is a tomb where the body is placed. A stone is rolle...
Read more

What Was the "Argument" in the Election

Image
I hate to add my blog to the piles of blogs and pundits analyzing and pondering the meaning of the just passed election. But that's what I feel like doing today. I've always like Senator Ted Cruz's summary of politics. He once said, "First, win the argument. Then, win the election." I think there is a way of applying that to anti abortion Catholics and Protestants. The link talks of Catholics who now feel they have no political home because Republicans let them down with Trump but they remain against abortion rights. Taking Cruz's win-the-argument thesis, I'd call the past election about an argument between two groups. One group's argument was, "Trump's a jerk." The other's argument was, "Abortion is wrong." The group, "Trump's a jerk," won the argument and then the election.  While one can argue the election, or any election, it about more complex issues, I believe in the end elections hinge on very simple ar...
Read more

Time to Forget the Christian Nation Thing

Image
While women are forbidden from being priests/preachers in some branches of Christianity thank goodness they are not forbidden from writing and lecturing about Christianity. A great article about the "Christian nation" notion shows us the U.S. is not a Christian nation and hopefully never will be. It is written by a woman with nerve and was published on a very Christian site, Christian Post.  Among the pilgrims were a few that wanted to establish a utopian Christian society. Some of their brethren stayed behind in Europe hoping the push aside worldly forces there and bring sinners to God. Today, whether it is the anti abortion, anti gay/trans, anti immigration or the put prayer back in schools branch there are those who want a version of what some pilgrims wanted, a utopian Christian society. The pilgrims were disappointed. Today's Christian utopians will be also. Here is why. The children of pilgrims did not believe the same things as their parents. Parents were roundly d...
Read more