In an atheistic worldview why not lie? I watched a ted talk, I cannot remember the person, but it was this atheist who titled his talk: “why not lie?” I remember he spoke of the myth of George Washington and the cherry tree. His point was why didn’t George just lie to save himself? Even though George’s father hugged him and said “your honestly is worth more than a thousand trees.” His point was on the off chance George Washington’s father were to beat him or to give some other punishment to him, a lie would be a great way to save himself from that punishment. It is very rare for someone in this real world to hug you after you destroyed something they loved just because you did not lie to them. His point was that it is more beneficial to your survival to lie than tell the truth. I hear atheists all the time say, “I do good things because they are the right thing to do.” But what defines the right thing? Your own subjective feelings towards it? Or what is more beneficial for you to keep? If morality is ultimately reducible to survival, society, preference, or evolutionary conditioning, what makes a genuinely self-sacrificial moral obligation objectively binding when violating it would benefit you?
I know a lot of people who do not know God nor wish to know God who lie every single time it benefits them, chronically. Saints do not lie because God said “you shall not lie.” or “you shall not bear false witness.” Some do not lie because of the fear of hell, but most of us Christians we do not lie out of love. We love our God with all of our heart, soul, and strength, even though this love at times hides as the sun. If we love our God, we must love the ones in His image, which are all people dwelling here on earth and those who have departed. Even our enemies we are called to forgive, and even to love. We must bless those who persecute; rejoice with those who rejoice; weep with those who weep; mourn for those who mourn; love the unloved; care for the uncared for. Atheists do not lie because at times it is more beneficial for themselves not to lie, while other times it is more beneficial to lie.
So then, to the point of this ted talker, why not lie as an atheist if it benefits you? Let us say you work as a physician. You accidentally leave a tool in a patient’s body after an open heart surgery and stitch them up. Why not lie to save your medical license as long as you do not get caught? You have no obligation in the atheistic worldview. What makes confession morally obligatory even when lying produces the better outcome for the surgeon? From a natural selection point of view, it is the patient versus my entire life. One must do what it takes to survive, it is me or him. But for a Christian, they are obligated to confess their sins, work and do what they can to fix it, and repent. Repentance means to change the heart and mind and work to never do it again. This is what is commanded to us by God, and if you love Him, you’ll do what He commands (John 14:15). An atheist has no obligation to confess, work to fix it, nor repent. Such things are a subjective, relative choice. What makes confession morally obligatory even when lying produces the better outcome for the surgeon? But they then could say: “Yes, I do have an obligation. I recognize that obligation through my reason, empathy, virtue ethics, etc.” But what ultimately grounds that obligation? What is reason? Why do we have empathy? If these are just evolutionary byproducts for survival, then my previous statement stands, it is “me or him.” This is how animals survive, if you are just an advanced animal why not seek survival over virute?
Many times in history we see thousands upon thousands of martyrs who refused to lie about the truth of the risen Son, even if it costed their very life. It is because of this repeated refusal to lie they were martyred for the Lord Jesus Christ. The Christian martyr provides us an example of someone treating truth as more valuable than survival itself. Of course, in the atheistic worldview this is completely incomprehensible and idiotic. If they were to lie and bow before the false gods, they were to live. But also how incomprehensible is it that many people who surrounded these martyrs saw the other worldly bravery and the utterances of a Kingdom and a God of love. In this refusal, even when faced with death, they converted many around them when they saw a God who brings life out of death, and a God who Himself suffered as they suffered, and conquered death by death.
Moving on from lying, why should an atheist have any morality at all, if this morality is unbeneficial to them? Well, even now, we see that many atheists support the murder of unborn babies because it is more beneficial in their view. An atheist gives to the poor because of the incentive of that good little feeling. But why should an atheist do the hard virtues such as forgiving his enemies? An atheistic worldview is that anger is natural, grudges are natural, hate is natural, and it feels good, why not submit to your evolutionary inclinations? Why not fight with people who wrong you? Why not lust like a dog? In their view they are merely an animal like a dog, why not hump the leg of anything that moves like a dog? Well it seems most atheists do, because they would call it a natural evolutionary inclination and again it gives them a good feeling, no matter how many babies need to die to protect their moment of ecstasy. If your morality is subjective, and the other person’s morality is subjective, who are you to say to the other that their subjective morality is wrong if it is all subjective? It is just a matter of opinion then. You subject morality to arguing if ketchup belongs on a Hot Dog. But Christians say no, it is not a matter of opinion, vice is wrong objectively because the objective source is God. The interpreter and the upholder of the objective law is the Church which he founded, and the hell of this world and its opinions shall not prevail against it.
An atheist would say: “There is no subjective morality due to the laws of the country in which we live.” This country was founded by Deists and Christians who framed this country’s laws on Christian morality. But let us say that this country believed that rape was a right, apart from the current law which is still tentative by nature, would you still believe that was indeed not a right and wrong inherently? If so, then you have no objective morality and these laws are subject to the opinions of the majority, which we can see is falling deep into a depraved mind.
Not to slip down the slope here. But I would not be surprised that in a hundred years, if Christ is not to return then, more and more depraved acts will be legalized by the utilitarian atheistic cancer. Currently the unthinkable act of murdering an unborn child for the utility and the beneficiality is seen as a right, when just 50 years ago that was found unthinkable. I fear for what is next, and the result of subjective morality. So I will end with this. Why not lie? The Christian answer is not, “Because lying might have bad consequences.” Nor is it merely, “Because society disapproves of lying.” Nor even, “Because I personally dislike lying.” Rather: We do not lie because truth is good. And why is truth good? Because God is Truth, and the nature of the law of God is grounded in objectivity. Why do we owe truthfulness to other people? Because they are made in the image of God. There the Christian has an objective ground for moral obligation: God Himself. The atheist may sincerely believe that morality is objective, and may even live a profoundly moral life. But the question remains: what, within an atheistic worldview, ultimately makes that obligation objective rather than merely a product of preference?