How would you answer this atheist's question?

[rose.gold]

One time an atheist asked me if I would kill a child if God commanded me to. Obviously I just said it was an absurd question. There’s no reason to answer it since God would not command me to do that. But he kept telling me to answer and I didn’t really know what to say. Of course my immediate reaction was no. Duh. Obviously not. But then I remembered the Abraham and Isaac story. So maybe it wouldn’t be that obvious of an answer? What would you respond to this atheist’s question?

 

[Freddy]

One time an atheist asked me if I would kill a child if God commanded me to. Obviously I just said it was an absurd question. There’s no reason to answer it since God would not command me to do that. But he kept telling me to answer and I didn’t really know what to say. Of course my immediate reaction was no. Duh. Obviously not. But then I remembered the Abraham and Isaac story. So maybe it wouldn’t be that obvious of an answer? What would you respond to this atheist’s question?

If God commanded it then it would be the right thing to do. God couldn’t command you to do evil so there would be something in the scenario that would make it acceptable.

Now how you actually know that it’s God commanding you is another thing. Tell your friend that you could never know so you couldn’t do it.

 

[0Scarlett_nidiyilii]

LOL at the “gotcha” question.
How would the atheist “know” it was God commanding this?

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

I think you’ve hit on the two components of the imagined scenario. Starting with the second, we know from experience that people think they’ve heard from God when they haven’t. Even leaving out things like killing another we can point to when pastor A says God is for X and pastor B says God is against X.

Tackling the first point, I’m going to have to disagree. Even if one could say it’s God speaking to them I’m not sure (in my personal opinion) that it’s necessarily good if God prescribes it. It’s that age-old question: Can God only do good, or is something good simply because God does it?

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

I wouldn’t necessarily say it’s a gotcha question. It allegedly really happened to Abraham. I guess the question could have been rephrased to take that factor out of the equation (e.g. adding “You are as certain that it’s God asking you to do this as Abraham was certain that God asking him to bind Isaac.”) In that case the only factor to consider is whether to do what the actual God asks you to do.

 

[Freddy]

Tackling the first point, I’m going to have to disagree. Even if one could say it’s God speaking to them I’m not sure (in my personal opinion) that it’s necessarily good if God prescribes it. It’s that age-old question: Can God only do good, or is something good simply because God does it?

I’m going with the usual Christian argument that God is all good. Therefore he cannot command evil. Therefore if He does command something which one would consider to be evil, it cannot, by definition, be so.

 

[Freddy]

In these kinds of questions, I would substitute God for “absolute logic.” Since God is the source if all logic and rationality, any command would be 100% logically and ethically coherent. Therefore the question can be rephrased:

if the only rational choice is to kill a child, would you do it?

That’s not a requirement for either the person putting forward the question or the person who might be getting the command. If God commands something then does one get into a deep and meaningful discussion with Him as to the pros and connns? Maybe you expect God to explain Himself…

 

[Justin_Mary]

There’s no reason to answer it since God would not command me to do that. But he kept telling me to answer and I didn’t really know what to say. Of course my immediate reaction was no. Duh. Obviously not. But then I remembered the Abraham and Isaac story. So maybe it wouldn’t be that obvious of an answer? What would you respond to this atheist’s question?

No.

Ten characters

 

[27lw]

Even with Abraham, he was willing to try, to be obedient to God, but he didn’t actually need to go through with it.

 

[Gorgias]

I wouldn’t necessarily say it’s a gotcha question. It allegedly really happened to Abraham.

In a much different context, though. Abraham didn’t have the benefit of the knowledge of God that we do. Abraham lived in a culture in which his contemporaries really did sacrifice their children to their gods.

The point of the story is that Abraham had a history of wanting “to do it his way”, and this narrative is trying to show that, having started to receive the fulfillment of God’s promises, he was now willing to do it God’s way.

I’m going with the usual Christian argument that God is all good. Therefore he cannot command evil. Therefore if He does command something which one would consider to be evil, it cannot, by definition, be so.

Yep. Which sounds different on the face of it from the first way you put it (“God commands it; therefore it’s good.”)

 

[Benadam]

God didn’t command Abraham to sacrifice his son without providing support to strengthen his faith.

God revealed the Incarnation to Abraham. Knowing how Divine Revelation is received, that is, void of
timing, Abraham may have thought sacrificing Isaac assured that His Son would be resurrected soon.

 

[Eric_Hyom]

God couldn’t command you to do evil so there would be something in the scenario that would make it acceptable.

When God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son; God stopped Abraham at the moment Abraham was about to strike.

Abraham had faith in God, because his wife Sarah conceived Issac at an old age well past child baring. Abraham had been tested in many ways before he was asked to sacrifice his son. Abraham knew that God would not let his son die.

I don’t believe that God would test us in the same way as he tested Abraham, so we would not be asked to sacrifice a life for God.

 

[Dan_Defender]

I don’t believe that God would test us in the same way as he tested Abraham, so we would not be asked to sacrifice a life for God.

Exactly. It was a unique one-time episode in salvation history.

 

[redcatholic]

My response.
“If God commanded it I would do it”
“By the way my atheist friend, what is it that you rely on to not rape or kill another person?”

 

[Dlee]

The example of Abraham and Isaac had to do with sacrifice - at that time, the shedding of blood was required for the remission of sin. (Recall when Isaac asked - Abraham said God would provide the sacrifice, which He did upon Abraham’s obedience) Jesus, on the cross, satisfied that sacrifice once and for all. He was the perfect sacrifice. God no longer asks for blood sacrifice - so He would not ask anyone to kill a child.

 

[1normal]

n. There’s no reason to answer it since God would not command me to do that. But he ke

Understanding genesis 18 1-18. And Sodom and Gomorrah two cities mentioned in the Book of Genesis and throughout the Hebrew Bible, the New

 

[Dan123]

“By the way my atheist friend, what is it that you rely on to not rape or kill another person?”

Empathy.

Are you saying you’d do those things if you were convinced God was instructing you to?

 

[Gorgias]

redcatholic:

“By the way my atheist friend, what is it that you rely on to not rape or kill another person?”

Empathy.

So, in other words, since you don’t want to be raped or murdered, you’re not gonna rape or murder? Well, that’s a start, at least…

Are you saying you’d do those things if you were convinced God was instructing you to?

So, what’s the basis of your morality, then? If it’s personal opinion, then it’s merely subjective, so basically, what you’re saying is that everyone does what they want. Is that the basis for a system of morals?

 

[Dan123]

So, in other words, since you don’t want to be raped or murdered, you’re not gonna rape or murder? Well, that’s a start, at least…

I’m not really sure how much else is needed. I also don’t want to live in a society where rape and murder are prevalent or condoned, as it vastly increases the chances I or someone I care about, or by extension anyone, will be raped or murdered.

So, what’s the basis of your morality, then? If it’s personal opinion, then it’s merely subjective, so basically, what you’re saying is that everyone does what they want. Is that the basis for a system of morals?

I’d personally content all morality is subjective when you get to the deeper levels. Even if you want to rebut that you adhere to God’s morality there’s still subjectivity in deciding which God, which source, which interpretation of that source, and how to deal with conflicts between them. E.g. do you prioritize the written scriptural word over the teachings of the Church, or vice versa? Whichever one you choose, there’s a large number of people who go the other way. Even if all those points were agreed upon you’d still have the question, “Why is it ‘good’ to do what God wants us to do?”. Even if you have a perfect understanding of a perfectly objective moral system, as a creature who appears to have free will it will always rest on your subjective opinion to follow that system and not another (or none).

So far the principle I found most readily fits not just my ideas of morality but what society seems to embrace is well being. That is, the things that improve the wellbeing, in particular of sentient creatures and even more in particular human beings, are labeled ‘good’ or ‘moral’. And things which reduce the wellbeing of those creatures are the types of things we label ‘evil’ or ‘immoral’. When the wellbeing of one creature is in conflict with another is where we find moral quandaries; finding the balance between the which benefits one and harms another is where we’ll always find the ‘battlegrounds’ of morality.

As to ‘everyone does what they want’, I mean that’s basically what happens in a pluralistic society isn’t it? We create laws and social norms based on those nearly universally agreed on harms to wellbeing like rape and murder, and we leave things like taking the Lord’s name in vain out of the law as it does not correlate to wellbeing (well in the demonstrable way we prefer when adopting laws). Of course laws are only related to and not indicative of morality but they do tend to show prevailing thoughts.

 

[redcatholic]

See, these are the common atheist arguments. Relying on empathy doesn’t work with human nature. Child sexual exploits of Ancient Greece to present day bear that out as does any isolated prison culture.
The arguments tend to be

1. Societal. The norms of society dictate personal morality. So your morality is contingent on the time and place you were born and live in. If a society dictates rape, then rape is ok.
2. Do unto others. Ironically this atheist argument is “borrowed from judeo Christian philosophy. But it also has a problem. An atheist could not tell a Sado masochist they were acting inappropriately. It’s all personal and dependent on your personal whims and likes.
3. Punishment. I don’t want to go to prison, get killed, get hurt so I make moral deciIons on a risk reward equation. This is the most logical atheist argument. It’s also basic. But I respect the honesty of it.
4. Higher animalistic. This appeals to natural law but really doesn’t deal with murder of the weak or rape.

Atheistic morality is the most “freedom” and selfish oriented from any belief system.