Atheist can't have objective morals.

In an atheistic worldview, lying, cheating, and stealing are neither right or wrong. They are phenomena to which, if the atheist so decides, moral values can be assigned. Sure, the atheist might say that we all should want to help society function properly and it does not benefit society as a whole to lie, cheat, and steal. But, this is weak intellectual reasoning. As an atheist I agree to this and I would ask you to explain 1."why this is a weak intellectual reasoning." What if there were a global economic meltdown and social turmoil ensued so that robbing people at gunpoint to get food became common place. Robbery would then be a social norm. Would such a norm be wrong? If it is not wrong, then you affirm situational ethics and canï¿½€™t complain when the situation suits somebody elseï¿½€™s fancy and you get robbed at gunpoint. Of course, this would lead to anarchy. If you say such theft is wrong, then why is it wrong? If it is your opinion that it is wrong, that is nice, but opinions dont make ethical standards. If you said it is wrong because it is wrong, you are just begging the question. Besides, that would mean there was a moral standard outside of yourself to which you must answer and that would imply a Moral Law Giver.some atheists maintain that the best moral system is that which brings the greatest happiness, the least amount of suffering, and the greatest freedom for as many people as possible. That is a nice sentiment, but it doesn't work. Take a look at slavery, for example. The greatest happiness for the greatest number of people means that a minority of people should suffer in bondage. This way, the greatest amount of freedom for the majority is ensured. But if the atheist says that it is wrong to enslave a minority to benefit the majority, then why is it wrong? Because he said so? If he says it's wrong because the minority is suffering, so what? Why is suffering wrong? It may be unpleasant. It may not be nice. But, from an atheistic worldview, why is it morally wrong to oppress a minority to benefit the majority? Atheism can't help us here. It just isn't up to the task of providing solid answers. As I stated earlier atheism offers a subjective moral system that is based on human experience, human conditions, and human reason. By its very nature, such moral evaluation is relativistic, dangerous, can change, can become self contradictory, and can lead to anarchy. True morality is not merely a collection of concepts agreed upon because it helps stop the guy with the gun from taking your food. There is something more, and the Bible offers us more. It offers us an objective set of morals: do not lie, do not steal, do not commit adultery, do not bear false witness, etc. These morals don't change depending on your opinion, your situation, or your personal preferences. They are based on God's character and since God doesn't change, these morals don't either. Therefore, it is always wrong to lie, to steal, to commit adultery, and to bear false witness, but not so in atheism's empty moral vacuum because morality is formed in a subjective manner. So, after an economic meltdown when an armed stranger is approaching you on a dark road and you are taking food home to your hungry family, who would you rather the stranger be: a Christian who believes stealing is wrong and that God is watching, or the atheist who sees a need and points his gun at you as he adapts his ethics to suit the moment? 2."Either you mean objective or you're wrong because this is the same with christians/muslims whatever religion you're part of." The Bible offers us an objective set of morals: do not lie, do not steal, do not commit adultery, do not bear false witness, etc. These morals don't change depending on your opinion, your situation, or your personal preferences. They are based on God's character and since God doesn't change, these morals don't either. Therefore, it is always wrong to lie, to steal, to commit adultery, and to bear false witness, but not so in atheism's empty moral vacuum because morality is formed in a subjective manner. 3. As I stated on the previous question we have commandments that do not change no matter how the world around us changes. Now to answer your arguments.. 1.If there is no God it is difficult to see how there could be any objective foundation, any universal standard for good and evil. How do you get ethics from only different arrangements of space, time, matter and energy? A purely materialistic universe would be morally indifferent. We would have only individual or cultural opinion, but no objectively binding moral obligations. 2.Morality is based in the unchanging character of God, which is always perfectly good. God doesn't create the objective moral standard with his thoughts or whims, he simply has it inside of him in the form of a holy genetic code. The Christian God embodies all that is perfectly good because he has the holy morality gene. God's actions and commands cannot be anything but perfectly holy and perfectly good at all times. Simply atheism has no foundation for objective morality.