• Kevin

Knowing Good vs. Bad like Red vs. Blue?


In my previous blog post, I shared Part 1 of the Religion and Cults Debate, where I responded to a JS’s claim that there is “…no difference between a religion and a cult.” Other than JS’s unreasoned “No” response to one of my two replies, I did not see any more responses from him. One other humanist, AH, jumped into the debate thread. Below is the transcript for Part 2 of what I call the Religion and Cults Debate. As always, I abbreviate other people’s names for privacy.

 

AH:

Humans don't need religion to know the difference between good and bad any more than we need a scientific understanding of electromagnetic wavelengths to know the difference between red & blue


Kevin:

By what ultimate standard do you judge something to be good or bad? If humans and even collective human societies can decide good and bad by their own reasoning without a transcendent ultimate standard (i.e. God’s Word), then how is that not mere arbitrary opinion? Wouldn’t you disagree with other humans, even other humanists, regarding how they judge right and wrong? The opinion of one human or a group of humans is arbitrary and ever-changing. Wouldn’t you say that the society of Nazi Germany had a bad standard of right and wrong since they believed it was “right” to murder Jews? Yet, within your worldview, by what ultimate standard can you even make such a judgment against that society’s standard? I make that judgment by looking to the Ultimate Standard of God’s Word which says that murder is wrong (Exodus 20:13). Moreover, what is “good” and “bad” in a purely evolutionary, materialistic worldview? If this universe is just material, then how do you account for the immaterial concepts of good and bad? Within your worldview, would not “good” and “bad” be simply chemical reactions in our brains? Yet, God’s Word accounts for the immaterial concepts of right and wrong because God created the universe (Gen 1:1, John 1:3, Psalm 24:1), and He set the rules of morality (Exodus 20:1-17, Matthew 22:37-40). When humanists judge anything as “good” or “bad,” they borrow biblical presuppositions that are not supported by their own worldview, whether they realize it or not.

Even in your example regarding electromagnetic wavelengths, only the biblical worldview makes that kind of scientific study possible. In the purely evolutionary worldview in which this universe is simply an accident, why should we expect uniformity of nature – that the observed laws of physics of yesterday and today will be the same tomorrow? If the laws of physics changed tomorrow so that red and blue are defined by new sets of wavelengths, then why would that be unacceptable in purely evolutionary worldview of a random, by-chance universe? Evolutionists might say “we can reasonably expect that based on consistent past observation” but how can we actually *know* that the laws of physics of tomorrow will be the same as today? God’s Word accounts for the uniformity of nature -- that we have an actual basis for knowing that the laws of physics will be the same tomorrow as they are today (Jeremiah 33:25). Moreover, the fact that we can study the universe only makes sense because the Bible is true. We can study the universe because we are made in God’s image (Gen 1:26) and he gave our minds the capability to study the universe. Otherwise, within a purely materialistic, evolutionary worldview, our minds are by-products of random chemical processes over eons of time, and if that were the case, then how can we ever trust our own conclusions to ever be accurate?

 

After several days of checking, I have not seen any more comments from AH. My prayer is that my response helps him to know that no matter what argument he attempts to use, that he will always be forced to borrow a biblical presupposition. This is like attempting to argue against the laws of logic while using logic to make that argument…it’s self-refuting. When people argue against the Bible and use biblical presuppositions, in a sense they know that the Bible is true, despite their lack of faith. This reminds me of the following passage in scripture:


For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. – Romans 1:18-21 (ESV)


I pray that many humanists like AH will come to realize that God’s Word is absolutely true, and therefore, realize that the Gospel[1] is true.


#UltimateProof #Gospel

[1] See https://answersingenesis.org/gospel/ to learn more.

12 views

Recent Posts

See All
"We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ"
--2 Corinthians 10:5
"But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect"
--1 Peter 3:15