An Atheist’s Amoral Manifesto. Joel Marks.


Just ‘Liberated this from ‘Philosophical Theist’

“..I became convinced that atheism implies amorality; and since I am an atheist, I must therefore embrace amorality. I call the premise of this argument ‘hard atheism’ because it is analogous to a thesis in philosophy known as ‘hard determinism.’ The latter holds that if metaphysical determinism is true, then there is no such thing as free will. Thus, a ‘soft determinist’ believes that, even if your reading of this column right now has followed by causal necessity from the Big Bang fourteen billion years ago, you can still meaningfully be said to have freely chosen to read it. Analogously, a ‘soft atheist’ would hold that one could be an atheist and still believe in morality. And indeed, the whole crop of ‘New Atheists’ (see Issue 78) are softies of this kind. So was I, until I experienced my shocking epiphany that the religious fundamentalists are correct: without God, there is no morality. But they are incorrect, I still believe, about there being a God. Hence, I believe, there is no morality.” ~ Joel Marks, An Amoral Manifesto (Part I)

I post the following You tube vid in memory of an old atheist wastrel associate who mocked my faith… and ended up shooting himself

Read more… Francis Schaeffer ‘Materialism renders Man Nought. Meaning-less, Value-less, Right-less’

And…. ‘Poster child for Atheism…Hannibal Lecter.’

And…. Hiding in the Dark….

8 thoughts on “An Atheist’s Amoral Manifesto. Joel Marks.”

  1. Wow, Tim.

    It could have been me who said that.

    Except that the last bit would read, “But they are correct, I still believe, about there being a morality. Hence, I believe, there is a God.”

    Sorry to hear about your old atheist wastrel associate. At one time, my best friend was an atheist wastrel (as was I). He died of a drug overdose. Shit. It happens. But it’s still shit. RIP James. I still miss you. 🙁

  2. This is honest Atheism… the admission/ confession that a purely Materialist reality has no foundation for objective morality.

    This is a pernicious part-truth … brother Tim, I rebuke you! 😉

    (Please follow the proper protocol.)

    Back in the day … when I believed in a purely Materialist reality … I simply took it for granted that somewhere in that reality there was a foundation for Objective morality. Fast forward to today … and it’s obvious to me that there is no foundation for Objective morality in a purely Materialist reality. But it’s not obvious to most people … it’s not even obvious to most people in meta-ethics … it’s still a minority view.

    Not all sins of ignorance are sins of culpable ignorance.

  3. Jesus … A fictional character loosely based on someone who may or may not have actually existed.

    No historians think this. But, hey, atheism isn’t an academic discipline. It’s probably more like the Catholic Church prior to the Reformation. No one bothered to question anything that was said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *