Saturday, October 20, 2007

Are Believers More Likely to be Hypocrites Than Atheists?

Are Believers More Likely to be Hypocrites Than Atheists?

Link. In my opinion this is demonstrably true.
Posted by John W. Loftus
at 10/16/2007

Short answer: yes. I agree with Loftus on this one.

You see, it’s far easier to be a hypocrite if you have high standards than if you have no standards. By definition, an amoralist cannot be a hypocrite; only a moralist can be a hypocrite.

So it’s easy to be a consistent amoralist, but difficult to be a consistent moralist. Since atheism has no foundation for moral absolutes, there is, indeed, sense in which believers are more likely to be hypocritical than atheists. An atheist can never violate his code of conduct, since there’s nothing to violate.

Put another way, it’s remarkable how often you can win the pole-vaulting championship when you set the bar one inch to the ground.


  1. Good call, Steve!

    It's intuitive that Atheists are less likely to be hypocrites, because they have little incentive to conceal their sin.

    But flaunting one's sin is not better than hypocrisy, it's worse.


  2. Integrity. Man, I find this a difficult struggle, and yet it is so worth it, when we know it's the Lord who is working in us by His graciousness to will and to do His will.

  3. OTOH, it's quite hypocritical for Loftus to go on his tirades about the immorality of this or that biblical story while professing atheism.

    So you may have forgotten that detail in your evaluation.

    Besides, I'm/believers are only hypocrites SOMEtimes...when I/we don't confess my/our sin. Alot of the time I DO confess it and own up to it.

  4. OTOH,

    The numbers could be equal, or more on the atheist side. To have an amoral worldview, and then constantly make moral judgments, is hypocritical.

    For example, is Loftus just trying to give us an interesting statistic? Or, are his comments intended to be an indirect argument against believers (however bad an argument it is, hypocrisy actually confirms our worldview, it doesn't disconfirm it)?

    If the former, why blog about it? Might as well point out that Christians generally have more money than atheists too. If the latter, then isLoftus hypocritical in the very acts of commenting about our immoral status as hypocrites?

  5. Loftus is a liar when he says he doesn't believe in God. All the articles on his website are deliberate lies that he publishes because he's depraved and he hates God.

    It makes you sick.

  6. Steve's been reading C.S. Lewis:

    'It is mad work to remove hypocrisy by removing the temptation to hypocrisy. The frankness of people sunk below shame is a very cheap frankness.'
    - Problem of Pain, ch 4, pg 50

  7. I'm really afraid of hell. It sounds so hot.

    How can I be saved?

  8. What would be the motive for an atheist to be moral? A better life? It seems the only motivation that atheistic governments such as the former USSR or present day China, North Korea, or Cuba can offer to the masses is fear. Fear of death. But what is to fear in death if there is nothing after death?

  9. You equate atheism with amoralism. The atheists I've seen have a sense of morality in that they spend their philosophical energy trying to morally justify their pet amoralisms. That's hypocritical. At least earnest Christians are honest about their hypocrisy - not that it justifies the hypocrisy, but it is something to consider. You can't be a Christian and try to be obedient without having first admitted that you haven't been and admitting that you too often still aren't obedient to the morality we recognize and encourage in others.

  10. Looks like Loftus just got owned.