The purpose of morality is not reward. The purpose is submission to and obedience of the Creator. Period. End of discussion.
All that "goodness, evil, and sacrifice" is meaningless in a meaningless universe. A meaningless universe cannot be given objective meaning no matter how much you pretend your hang-ups and eccentricities matter!
G-d is the Creator. Among the things G-d creates (by His decrees) is good and evil. Without G-d neither objective good nor objective evil can exist. So the "problem of evil" is not a problem for Theists as many think it is, but for atheists, since it is G-d who makes objective evil possible and without Whom it cannot be said to exist.
Is there any need for me to continue repeating these points?
No you needn't keep repeating the same flawed reasoning.
You refuse to address the fact that those who do not believe and do not "submit" before any celestial authority are capable of good, just as someone who takes his cues from a higher power.
You keep asking the same tired question that I hear from religious people all the time: If there's no god, then who's to decide what's good and what's evil.
You use this one point to hammer away over and over again without looking at the probable answers.
All it takes to understand this is ask yourself what you would do tomorrow if you found out there was no god. Would you still love your children, work hard, and live a righteous life? Or would you cash out all your stocks and spend it on cocaine and hookers and slit throats of perfect strangers. You do yourself a disservice if you assert that the only thing that makes murder abhorrent to you is because god says it is. Find in yourself what would make you still live a moral life after a realization that god doesn't exist, and you'll have taken the first step.
Existentialists and other philosophers have been talking about the nature of right and wrong for millenia, there's far greater answers out there if you want to do the looking.
The belief that god is necessary for good and evil to exist can be refuted with two main points.
First of all, no one can deny that faith in a higher power can never, ever under any circumstances be a guarantee of virtue. At the same time we can see virtue in people without faith.
Secondly, you cannot name for me one ethical action or statement that can only be performed by a believer and not a non-believer. Faith is not required to be an ethical and moral person, therefore, there's no need for a creator.
I assume your answer would be that with no god there's no ethics, which makes me wonder how Plato and Aristotle were able to write vast volumes on the subject without you there to remind them that their task was impossible, since they didn't have a Judeo-Christian creator in their repertoire.
In other words, you atheists (rightwing atheists, anyway) refuse to understand that morality isn't about "virtue" but, quite literally, about "mojo." It is from your perspective "primitive" and "cultic," not philosophical. Funny, but your leftwing brethren have no problem with cultic morality among the "oppressed indigenous pipples."
However "virtuous" I may be, if there is no G-d, then there is no "mojo." And the "mojo" is what morality is really all about. I'm afraid this is something you admirers of pagan Greek philosophy never seem to understand.
May I ask if you believe that in the absence of G-d pork is still forbidden to Jews? Or that animal sacrifices must be performed in precisely a certain way in order to avoid sacrilege? Or if Aristotle's rational morality told him it was forbidden (not "wrong," but forbidden) to castrate males of any species regardless of the animal population?
"Thou shalt not kill" is based the very same rationale and authority as "it is forbidden to eat the meat of the sacrifice before the blood has been sprinkled on the altar." The fact that one of those commandments is more intuitive to mankind ultimately has nothing to do with its validity.
Now do you understand that it's not about either "reward" or "virtue?"
The entire problem with Communism is that it is a non-Theistic moral/ethical system. It may have killed more millions of people than Randianism or certain other non-Theistic moral/ethical systems, but they're all at bottom wrong.