And this would also have been contended just as vigorously by your co-religionists when they set fire to you for being a heretic.
I would have suggested to apply the biblical principle that ''A goof tree produces good fruit'' I guess.
What I'm saying is that even though each person has his own view of what is morality, in a christian worldview there is a common ground, the Bible, that we all agree does contain the right moral absolute.
Well, there's that "absolute" of yours again. What do you mean by it? If by "absolute morality" you just mean "that moral system which is preferred by God over all other conceivable moral systems", then it is trivially true that an atheist does not believe in absolute morality, and that at least one supernatural being, namely God, is necessary for there to be "absolute morality". (Just as if you used "absolute bicycle" to mean "God's favorite bicycle".)
If you mean something else by it, then this is not so clear.
By absolute I mean that it applies to every human being no matter what they think/believe, and that on any given disagreement on morality one person will be wrong and the other right (even if in some situations it will be difficult to know which is which), and that this will not be the result of popular voting or fighting contests.
But the same would seem to apply in your system: one arrangement of atoms, or indeed of supernatural entities such as souls and angels and demons, is not intrinsically more valuable than another --- rather you seem to suppose that this value is in the mind of God, and if you took him away, while leaving everything else the same, no value would remain.
Within a God-creating worldview, one arrangement of atoms can have more intrinsic value then another. For example, God created humans in his image, and this gives them higher value then anything else.
The moral value of (for example) me hitting you over the head with a brick is (according to you, if I have understood you correctly) not inherent or intrinsic to that situation in itself, but rather depends on whether there is a God and if so what he thinks of it.
You hitting me on the head is wrong because, as a human being, I am made in God's image and this is what makes it intrinsically different then hitting a fly.
Atheism, rather can give value to human life, but this will be relative. ANd if so one day we all decide that asian people have no more value then dogs, then it is so. And this becomes no more, or no less, right or wrong then before.
Try thinking of this strictly from the worldview you claim to have, and go on from there. The reason I say this is because most of the times, atheist come down to ''well I too think that stealing is wrong, see, I can be just as moral as you''. But this is a red herring; the issue is not if an atheist can have the same moral views as me, but rather, if he has the basis to justify this from his worldview. This is particularly true in countries with a christian heritage, because people will take for granted things such as human rights, private property, etc. when in fact these are things that came from the christian worldview, that they were simply brought up to believe to be 'the right thing to do'.
™ Version 4.2
