I have heard some atheists entertain the idea of the existence of an objective morality, however I haven’t heard one come down hard in favor of it. I would venture a guess that most atheists are more or less agnostic on this topic since there very well could be one, we just haven’t found it yet. I would consider myself to hold that view.
Christians often claim that there is an absolute objective morality. In fact, CS Lewis bases his argument in Mere Christianity on that assumption. However if you compare the sense of morality that most Christians have with what you would find in the Bible, especially the Old Testament, that would be a difficult position to support. Believers often claim objective morality based on a divine source, however if that morality is defined and dictated by that being then it would be subjective to that being as its likes and wishes are good and its dislikes and prohibitions are evil, possibly at a whim.
The God of the Old Testament commanded execution for blasphemers, disbelievers, witches, adulterers, homosexuals, thieves, and sabbath breakers, to name a few. That same God also commanded the murder of babies and the rape of teenage girls who just happened to be born to the wrong tribe. Christians claim that this same God is all loving and promises an eternal life in paradise for those follow him, but will condemn and deprive of that same opportunity those who based on the dictates of conscience cannot believe. If this is the source of your “objective” morality, then you have my sympathies. I’m sorry if that’s a bit condescending, but it is a rather brave position to defend someone who makes Stalin look like an amateur.
From history we know that murder is a fluid term that has generally broadened to include more and more people as society has gotten more complex. Initially it was the unjustified killing of a member of your immediate family, then expanded from the family to the tribe, then to the nation, then eventually to the species. But even that isn’t universal.
Inuits would leave babies in the tundra to die if the family was too large for the food supply to support the family through the winter. This seems horrific by our standards, but the alternative would be for the whole family to starve. Which is worse?
We have limited medical resources, including a shortage of doctors and nurses, yet we expend an exorbitant amount of human and material resources keeping old people alive for just a few more years.
I work in an industry that produces products that keep a very small number of people with congenital defects alive. Without the treatments they would die, with them they can live full, healthy lives and in the case of a few of the conditions, pass their curse to the next generation. In the most extreme cases this is at a cost of more than a million dollars a year, for just one patient.
How many people in impoverished, developing countries could have a chance to live a few more decades with those human, material, and financial resources that are currently spent on the very elderly and those with rare congenital defects?
I am proud to be able to be a part of the process that gives people a chance to live healthy normal lives. Last year I had the privilege to hear the mothers of some of the patients who receive our product and one of the patients himself talk about how much what we do means to them. I can honestly say that I don’t think there was a dry eye in the room, myself included.
My grandparents passed away over the last few years, and when my grandpa was in his final few days I was able to see him with the hospice nurse. I will forever be grateful for the work that she, and the rest of the hospice staff, did to keep my grandpa comfortable at the end of his life.
Objectively we would have to say that these are wasted resources that could be better spent to help more people and for longer periods of time. Subjectively we can see the benefit of these efforts.
A true objective morality would result in a society where the elderly, terminally ill, and people diagnosed with incurable conditions would be denied medical care and simply allowed to die. An objective morality would require forced sterilization or abortions when families get too large to be supported by the resources. An objective morality would require that people serve in the job they are best able to promote the greater good, not the one that they find most satisfying. A true objective morality would produce a world that looks a lot like Nazi Germany or Maoist China.
I am glad that we live in a world where morality can and does adapt to the situation. One where people can rationally decide how best to act. One where we don’t accept divine commands to commit atrocities. One where saving the lives of the less fortunate is a good thing. I’m glad that we have a subjective morality.
Permalink
It seems as though you are making a judgment about God's actions in the Old Testament without having all the facts. You mention that entire tribes and nations were executed in the name of God. While I am not discounting that, I feel that your conclusions is wrong. Take for instance Deuteronomy 9:4-6:
"After the Lord your God has driven them out before you, do not say to yourself, 'The Lord has brought me here to take possession of this land because of my righteousness.'No, it is on account of the wickedness of these nations that the Lord is going to drive them out before you. It is not because of your righteousness of your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations, the Lord you God will drive them out before you, to accomplish what he swore to your fathers to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Understand then, that it is not because of you righteousness that the Lord your God is giving you this good land to possess, for you are a stiff-necked people."
This passage indicates that the people living in the promised land before the Israelites took over were evil people. The Bible does not say how these people were wicked, just that they were. For all we know, they deserved to be destroyed.
My point is that of all the "atrocities" described in the Bible, the only information that we have is that it happened. We are not told why. Who are we to judge God for something he did or commanded when we do not have all the facts?
Permalink
There is at least one example where there is an explanation of why the atrocity was ordered.
"The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, "Avenge the People of Israel on the Midianites" (Num 31:1-2a).
So the army was sent out to destroy Midian. They killed all the men but took the women and children as captives. When they returned to the camp, "Moses said to them, 'Have you let all the women live? Behold, these, on Balaam's advice, caused the people of Israel to act treacherously against the Lord in the incident of Peor, and so the plague came among the congregation of the Lord. Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by laying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man by laying with him keep alive for yourselves'" (Num 31:15-18).
So what was the offense of Midian at Peor?
"While Israel lived in Shittim, the people began to whore with the daughters of Moab. These invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods. So Israel yoked himself to Baal of Peor. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel…And behold, one of the people of Israel came and brought a Midianite woman to his family…" (Numbers 25:1-3,6a).
Since the story of Balaam involves an apparent close relationship between Moab and Midian, I would be willing to accept that the Midianites joined in with Moab. The wickedness of Moab and Midian was to accept the sexual advances of the Israelites and invite them to join in with their sacrifices. Yet, somehow Moab was spared…
So apparently raping Midianite virgins is morally preferable to sex with consenting Midianite women and genocide is an appropriate punishment for inviting your sister's new boyfriend to church.
Permalink
As I have read this story again, I liken it to a father protecting his daughter. If you had a daughter who started dating a guy who wanted nothing more than two keep her away from you and to have sex with her, wouldn't you want to kill that guy? Wouldn't God want to do the same for his children?
I don't know if this is what God was thinking or not. All I can say for sure is that there are some things about God that I do not understand, and probably will never understand until I get to heaven and can have a chance to ask him face to face.
The God that I have come to know is a God who loves me very much and will do anything to protect me.
And by the way, the Israelites who partook in worshiping Baal were also put to death along with the leaders of Moab.
Permalink
It was the kings of Midian, not the kings of Moab who were killed. If you to act on the emotions you suggest in your analogy you would be charged with either aggravated or premeditated first degree murder and be locked up for life in prison.
To make your analogy fit better with what it represents you would have to go into the guys house and kill him then line up his wife and his seven year old son to place bullets in the back of their heads. Then drag his 13 year old daughter home to lock in a the basement where you can rape her whenever you want.
If you want historical equivalents to what is depicted by the Old Testament atrocities, all we have to do is look at the slaughter commanded by Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Milosevic, as well as the genocides in Rwanda and Dufur.
We condemn people for those kinds of actions now, but if it's found in a "Holy" text then we praise it?
Permalink
It was the kings of Midian, not the kings of Moab who were killed. If you to act on the emotions you suggest in your analogy you would be charged with either aggravated or premeditated first degree murder and be locked up for life in prison.
To make your analogy fit better with what it represents you would have to go into the guys house and kill him then line up his wife and his seven year old son to place bullets in the back of their heads. Then drag his 13 year old daughter home to lock in a the basement where you can rape her whenever you want.
If you want historical equivalents to what is depicted by the Old Testament atrocities, all we have to do is look at the slaughter commanded by Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Milosevic, as well as the genocides in Rwanda and Dufur.
We condemn people for those kinds of actions now, but if it's found in a "Holy" text then we praise it?