"In Good We Trust," says a humanist billboard. But can we really be good without God?

The American Humanist Association (AHA) is sponsoring a series of billboards in the Moscow, Idaho area in the United States to promote a new brand of atheism, one of which has just been unveiled last week, reports Jennifer Riley of the Christian Post.  As true of all the other billboards elsewhere around the world, it does not simply aim to entertain but it carries with it a message of its own for everyone to see and ponder upon: "In Good We Trust."

This billboard obviously seeks to replace the phrase "In God We Trust" found in the US currency.  The major agenda, of course, is to get rid of of the notion of God's existence and the implications that such a notion brings in the way we are supposed to live. 

"This billboard nicely sums up two of the main messages of the American Humanist Association," says AHA executive director Roy Speckhardt. "First, that you don't have to believe in God to be good – in fact, humanists and other non-theists see being good as one of the most important of responsibilities in our one and only life. Second, that church and state should remain separate for the benefit of us all."

Speckhardt further argues that the phrase "In God We Trust" in the US currency is a violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.  The motto "In Good We Trust," says he, is more inclusive than "In God We Trust.". 

But such a proposal has suffered a devastating blow last month when the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided to uphold the constitutionality of references to God on national currency and in the Pledge of Allegiance.  "The fact is that it always has been our position that while the First Amendment affords atheists complete freedom to disbelieve, it does not compel the federal judiciary to redact religious references in every area of public life in order to suit atheistic sensibilities," said the American Center for Law and Justice, which filed an amicus brief in the national motto case, representing nearly 50 members of Congress. "We’re delighted to see the appeals court reach that conclusion with both the National Motto and the Pledge."

More crucial to the issues at hand, however, is the ramification that it brings to human society at large.  More so, it raises a very important question that everyone of us cannot afford to ignore if we are to survive the intellectual crisis in this so-called 21st century postmodern world that currently threatens our built-in capabilities as human beings to think both rationally and morally: Can we really be good without God? 

Several attempts have been made to give a satisfactory answer to this very important question without any reference to God, and without even considering the issue of human depravity.  To the advocates of the new atheism, belief in the existence of God is necessarily false.  Not only so, it is also dangerous, and for that matter, it must be kicked out of all the corners of human society.  "The pundits of the new atheism are not content to nail discussion theses on the door of religion," says J.M. Njoroge, an associate of the Christian apologist and philosopher Ravi Zacharias.  "They are also busy delivering eviction notices to the allegedly atavistic elements of an otherwise seamlessly progressive atheistic evolution of Homo sapiens."

But can we really be good without God?  Where does it bring us if we follow the secular humanist proposal espoused by the likes of Speckhardt that you don't have to believe in God to be good?  Are we prepared to trust our own goodness?  And for goodness sake, are we not after all depraved at the very core and are in need of God not only to direct us towards what is truly good but also to make us good deep within our heart of hearts?

These atheists may insist on the validity of morality in a godless world.  But if we are to listen to Socrates' advice to "follow where the argument leads," we must conclude in the end, as Njoroge puts it well, that such a proposal logically amounts to a mere rejection of the cause of morality (which is God) while clinging to the effect (that which is deemed to be morally good).  In fact, it is a complete misunderstanding of what humanity is all about, which though made in the image of God is also finite and fallen, as the Judeo-Christian worldview paints for us.

"Without God, morality is reduced to whatever mode of behavior human beings happen to favor either because of their genetic makeup or conventional accords," adds Njoroge. "There is no action that is objectively right or wrong. Rape, hate, murder and other such acts are only wrong because they have been deemed to be so in the course of human evolution."

As Njoroge further argues, "Had human evolution taken a different course, these acts might well have been the valued elements of our moral code.  Even Nazi morality would be right had the Nazis succeeded in their quest for world dominance.  Unless the world contains behavioral guidelines that transcend human decisions and genetic determinism, there is no reason why anyone should object to such conclusions."

Let us not forget that only believers in God have the courage to take the journey in the least traveled road of self-sacrifice for the pursuit of that which is good without doing violence to their intellectual integrity.  "It is missionaries, and not atheists," says Njoroge, "who regularly give up their own comforts and accept unbelievable amounts of pain and suffering to better the lives of societal outcasts, not just through preaching but also through education, technology, and humanitarian relief."

References:

Hitchens, Christopher.  "An Atheist Responds."  The Washington Post, July 14, 2007.

Njoroge, J. M. "The New Atheism and Morality" in Just Thinking, an online publication of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.

Riley, Jennifer. "Humanists Unveil 'In Good We Trust' Billboard."  The Christian Post, April 13, 2010.