I have asked you, numerous times, if you can or cannot determine what makes murder wrong. Or theft, or rape, or deception, or any of a number of actions that we deem immoral or wrong.
Of course I can, and you can too. The question is why can we do that?
The idea that we cannot determine what is right or wrong without god fails the moment we admit that we can explain why certain actions are good or bad.
That's ridiculous. You are saying that because we can determine right from wrong, that explains why we can do it.
If you and I were trekking through the jungle in the Congo and came across a 747 jet airplane in the forest, you would never tell yourself because its here, that explains why its here. And if you tried to write a peer reviewd paper using that reasoning, you'd be laughed away as a nut.
And that is just exactly the kind of "logic" you are trying to employ here. It makes no sense. Why should chemicals care what reaction they have? In the atheist paradigm that’s pretty much all we are right?
One chemical reaction goes fizz, another one goes bang. Who cares? That’s how atheists describe their formation right? It’s all just chemicals and chance.
So, even if we grant the miracle of everything appearing from nothing (which is a huge grant) your burden is to explain how rocks, electricity, primordial soup, chemicals, poisonous gases, predation, and blind chance can provide any kind of basis whatsoever in determining that murder is wrong.
So, go ahead, try to do it.
The reality is that blind, random chance gives every reason to doubt that we could be sure about anything morally.
But atheists do not treat their moral certitude as something coming from chemical reactions. They parade their morality as something that is rock solid and logically unassasilable, because they have it. But how can accidents provide anything other than more accidents? How can you be sure that your moral certitude about murder is anything other than just another roadstop along happanstance highway?
If atheists were honest, they would have to conclude that their certitude about murder is.... just another accident.
But they don't treat it that way do they? They must borrow from the Christian worldview and claim that they just "know it". And again, this claim of just knowing it is a dead giveaway that atheists don't really believe their own made up story about accidents, chemical reactions, lightning bolts in a primiordial soup, etc, etc, etc.
The bible gets it right, and the rabbit hole atheists crawl in to try and hide from God in won't work:
Romans 2 - Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man—you who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourself—that you will escape the judgment of God?.......
When Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.
Even the most remote tribes who have been cut off from the rest of civilization observe a moral code similar to everyone else’s. Although differences certainly exist in civil matters, virtues like bravery and loyalty and vices like greed and cowardice are universal.
If man were responsible for that code, it would differ as much as every other thing that man has invented. Where, then, do we get these laws of what should be done?