The modern man or woman says, “We can know nothing about whether there’s a God, what the meaning of life is, whether human nature is sinful or not, the nature of moral absolutes, life after death. We can’t know these things,” and then says, “But racism is wrong, violence is wrong, but sexually you can do whatever you feel is right for you.” In other words, morality is not based on a therefore. Morality is not based on any convictions about the nature of things. Therefore, all modern moral prescriptions are baseless.
For example, if you say racism is wrong and violence is wrong but sexually you can do pretty much what you want, why are we allowed to follow our sexual instincts but not follow our aggressive instincts? If you don’t know anything about human nature, and if you have really no moral basis or any philosophical basis for differentiating a tree or an animal or a stone from a human being because you don’t know anything about the ultimate nature of reality, how do you have the right to pick and choose which instincts we can follow and which instincts we can’t?
Woody Allen, at the end of Crimes and Misdemeanors … The guy is dancing with his daughter at the wedding, and you hear Woody Allen’s voice, and basically it says, “We don’t really know answers to the big questions. We don’t know if there’s a God. We don’t know what the meaning in life is. We don’t know about moral absolutes. We don’t know the meaning of the big questions. We don’t have the answers. Therefore, all you can do is love your family and just try to do good to others.”
Wait a minute. If we don’t know any of the big questions, if we don’t know what the meaning of life is, life after death, what is right and wrong, how does it follow we should be good? Why not rob, murder, and pillage? One is as logical as the other. But you never find that in Christianity. Ever. Do you see? There’s always a therefore.