Creationism and Morality, Part 4

Morality is a constant theme with creationists. Because they have no science, they often prattle about the evil consequences of science — especially evolution. Their claim is that only religion — their religion — can provide morality.

We’ve posted often about this — see Creationism and Morality, Part 3, which wrestled with the issue of whether creationists think scriptural morality is God’s personal, subjective preferences, or is based on an objective moral absolute. We never did get a straight answer. That post also links to parts 1 and 2 in the series.

We also wrote Ken Ham: The Sole Source of Morality, in which Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia, famed for his creationist ministry, Answers in Genesis (AIG) and for the infamous, mind-boggling Creation Museum — argued that secularists have no basis for deciding what is right or wrong. We were left with the notion that Hambo and his religious viewpoint are the only source of moral guidance.

Before that we wrote Klinghoffer: Creationism and Morality, about a chaotic Discoveroid post in which it was suggested that “an intelligent being designed life and accordingly provided a tradition describing transcendent standards of right and wrong.” A bit later we wrote Discoveroids: The Designer Gives Us Morality — they were complaining that Darwin’s theory is bad because it isn’t about morality.

Now we have another creationist article on the same old topic. This one is at the AIG website, and it’s by ol’ Hambo himself: Does Religion Make You Moral? Hambo doesn’t say anything new, but because he’s the world’s holiest man, and the only one who truly understands Christianity, his writings are always of supreme importance.

Hambo is complaining about an article he saw which “suggests that religious people are no more moral — or immoral — than non-religious people.” Predictably, ol’ Hambo is outraged. Here are some excerpts from what he says, with bold font added by us:

It’s important to understand that even though atheists and agnostics can be “moral,” they have no ultimate authoritative basis for their morality. When an atheist or agnostic calls something “right”or “wrong”or “good”or “evil,” they are borrowing from a biblical worldview in order to make that statement.

Uh huh. Right. How does Hambo come to that conclusion? He explains:

Think about it: If we are simply the by-product of evolution and no better than animals, then why should anyone behave morally? In that case, what or who defines right from wrong? … The only reason that anyone can be moral is because God’s law is stamped on their hearts: [scripture quote].

See? You can be moral, even if you’re a wretched evolutionist — but of course it’s gotta be difficult for you. Let’s read on:

This moral law is often masked or darkened because of our sin nature, but the remnant of God’s law is still visible on the hearts of all. Just as everyone knows — whether they admit it or not — that God exists [scripture reference], so do they also know God’s moral law. That’s why even those who reject God can lead “moral” lives — God’s law is written on their hearts.

Aha! Hambo’s religion is running the show even if you think it’s not. We assume that’s his solution to the ancient Virtuous pagan dilemma. Here’s our last excerpt:

So why do we have a concrete standard for morality? Because we have a Creator who made us and everything else. And, since He made us, He alone has the right to define good and evil. The basis for right and wrong is God and His Word.

That’s the “concrete standard for morality” — whatever God says it is. But you can’t figure it out unless you see things the way Hambo does. That’s all you need to know about morality.

Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

14 responses to “Creationism and Morality, Part 4

  1. > “Hambo is complaining about an article he saw which
    > ‘suggests that religious people are no more moral —
    > or immoral — than non-religious people.’ ”
    Published studies have shown this. Another case of Hamster denying reality.

    Hemant Mehta, in his “Friendly Atheist” web log, has recorded a depressingly long list of outrageous acts by chronically immoral faithheads over the years (starting in 2006).

    We’re all human, but religious types make themselves out to be superior in many ways. That ain’t so, Hamster. Unambiguously.

  2. If an atheist or agnostic acts ethically, you can be sure it’s coming from the heart. But with the Christian, moral behavior might be driven more by fear — fear of not attaining heaven or fear of the Lake of Fire.

  3. If Ham thinks god provides such an important standard of morality I’d be interested to hear how he explains all the ghastly massacres and genocide, down to the level of farm animals, that appear in the bible. The bible contains a verse that states that “he who dashes out the brains of infants should be happy”. Ah yes, christianity is a very important source of morality!

  4. Egad — that was a mess. I just cleaned up a bunch of typos.

  5. “If we are simply the by-product of evolution and no better than animals, then why should anyone behave morally?”
    Just one example: when your morality includes treating your kids well this increases their chances to get offspring when they’re grown up …..

    “This moral law is often masked or darkened because of our sin nature.”
    No chance that Ol’ Hambo will ever tell us what sins he committed during his life, I suppose. So we can safely replace “our” by “your” – that’s what Ol’ Hambo means.

  6. Hambone opines “…everyone knows — whether they admit it or not — that God exists…”. Tell us, good Hambone, what are the data that support that claim? I, for one, am essentially certain that none of the various gods folks have liked exist. Although I rather wish Ganesh were real — he’s so cute.

  7. Hey! Old Hamboney!
    Show me any moral code in the buyBull that you follow AND is not stolen from an older source. Like ‘don’t kill’ which is older then the bunch of dudes who invented your gawd.

  8. Charles Deetz ;)

    Morality is baked in to us from god… a proofless factoid that covers up any comeback that Hammy gets. My agnostic dog doesn’t eat our cats, but killed two squirrels this year, did god give her the morals to decide that cats shouldn’t be killed? Or was it on the dog-commandments that have been passed down from dog generation to dog generation. What a punt Hammy is making, downright silly.

  9. If we are purposefully designed to show so many features as animals, and in particular to be most like chimps and other apes, among all the ways that live can exist, why shouldn’t we take the clue that our designers want us to be like apes?

    On the other hand, if my great uncle were a horse thief, that means nothing about me being one,too. The fact that I am related to Torquemada does not suggest that I should act like him. And the fact that my body was developed by the naturalistic processes of reproductive biology does not mean that I have no values.

  10. Kanny Humbug crows thrice—

    “… God’s law is stamped on [everyone’s] hearts…

    … the remnant of God’s law is still visible on the hearts of all.

    … God’s law is written on their hearts [i.e., those who reject God].”

    Hmm, I’ve never heard any cardiologist, radiologist, cardiothoracic surgeon or similar confirm such a thing. Must be one of them conspiracy thingies. Then again, Kanny Humbug could be speaking metaphorically, which would be a most bizarre thing to do for such a calcified literalist.

  11. The only reason that anyone can be moral is because God’s law is stamped on their hearts

    Hambo’s right, you know — at least in my case. I had a triple bypass a few years ago, and after I’d recovered consciousness the surgeon told me that he’d been startled to find just this: God’s law, stamped right there on the pulsing muscle. He said it was as awe-inspiring as finding Our Savior’s image on a slice of toast.

  12. “… God’s law is stamped on [everyone’s] hearts…
    Really??? Like lots of ignorant people, you don’t seem to know that the heart IS NOT the reactor to morals or emotion, but the Brain is and if you want a lower organ then go to the LIVER as it also responses to stimuli before the heart does. But you would have to know science to know that.
    OHHHhhh! It is metaphor!! Really than why isn’t everything else in the book O’schite not metaphor?? Or is it that only what YOU say is metaphor is metaphor????

  13. Character is defined by what you do when no one is watching. Ham believes someone is watching him all the time, so he will never develop character, or perhaps he will never discover what his true character is.

    I, for one, do not want to be nearby if he ever does.

  14. What kind of ink do you need to write on a beating heart?

    Is this the same god who created us only to condemn us a few days later? And he then wrote on our hearts … oh, my brain, it hurts … stop the nonsense!