Does God Exist? A Look at the Moral Argument
Introduction
Let me ask you a question. How do you feel about morality?
Are moral values relative and subjective? Do they depend on the situation, and are they a matter of opinion?
Or do you believe that some things are just absolutely right or wrong no matter what anybody thinks?
Well, Christianity says that there does exist, at the very least, a core of moral values that are true for everybody everywhere, no matter what. This moral code stands alone and totally independent of anyone’s opinion, and in fact all of humanity.
If such an objective moral law does mysteriously exist, then it begs the question: where did it come from? This question brings us to a compelling argument for the existence of God.
The Moral argument goes like this.[1]
- All people are aware of an objective moral law.
- An objective moral law implies a moral lawmaker.
- Therefore, there must be a moral lawmaker.
All people are aware of an objective moral law
Let’s consider what it means for a truth claim to be subjective or objective.
I like chocolate ice cream and will argue all day long that it is the best. But that’s only my opinion. Others have different opinions, and that’s okay. A claim is subjective if it depends on the subject or person thinking about it.
Two plus two equals four. This has nothing to do with my opinion. I could say all kinds of creative things to try to convince otherwise. But I would be wrong. A claim is objective when it is factually true or false for everybody.
Christianity claims that some moral principles are objective, not just a matter of opinion. There are quite a few ways we know this. I will explain three.
Some moral principles are true despite anyone’s opinion
All people in all cultures know that certain moral principles are good; for example, generosity, sacrifice, and equality. On the other hand, all people know that some are bad; such as greed, child abuse, and racial discrimination.
Consider the statement, “it is wrong to torture babies to death for fun.” We all know that this is true for everybody everywhere. In fact, if anyone claims otherwise, they have serious problems! This is an objective moral truth. And I bet we could identify a lot more examples.
If we have just a few of these moral principles that are true despite anyone’s opinion, then we have established that an objective moral law exists.
We can’t make moral comparisons without a standard
Who is morally better: Adolf Hitler or Mother Teresa? This may be a silly question, but think about it. How can we really say without some independent standard that we are all aware of? C.S. Lewis explains this well as follows[2]:
“The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard, saying that one of them conforms to that standard more nearly than the other. But the standard that measures two things is different from either. You are, in fact, comparing them both with some Real Morality, admitting that there is such a thing as a real Right, independent of what people think, and that some people’s ideas get nearer to the real Right than others. Or put it this way. If your moral ideas can be truer, and those of the Nazis less true, there must be something—some Real Morality—for them to be true about.”
Consider this. If we remove the moral standard by which we measure our actions, then we lose any moral grounds for judging other people. If somebody steals something from you, you might say “that’s not fair!” When you say this, you are appealing to an independent standard. But If there is no standard, then the thief could say, “who says? That’s your opinion!”
Let me ask you this. In a society that denies an independent, objective morality, whose opinion becomes policy? Could it be the ones who have the most power? Maybe the loudest voice?
One of the reasons I believe our country is so divided is that since the early 1960s, there has been a powerful movement among some to destroy the moral standard of the world war 2 generation. With that standard gone, it is now a question of who’s morality becomes the law of the land. Thus, the culture war.
We know the moral law by our reactions, not our actions
Suppose I lost my job, life got really tough, and my family got hungry. Then suppose I went out and stole a loaf of bread. If a thief came later in the night and stole that bread from me, then I would be very angry about how wrong that was.
I may have justified my actions, thinking I was in the right because I had to feed my family. But when the same thing happened to me, my reaction revealed that stealing was still wrong, and I knew it.
You see, we find that moral laws are not defined by us. As with math or physics, moral laws are discovered. In fact, what we really discover is a standard of moral perfection.
There must be a moral lawmaker
It is self-evident that any law requires a lawmaker. Now if we know that an objective moral law exists independent of humanity, then again we have to ask: where did it come from?
Does it simply exist, and God is somehow subject to this law? No. That would mean something other than God is supreme.
Did God arbitrarily create this moral code for all of us to live under? No. Christianity has a different answer.
Christianity says that the moral code is actually a reflection of the very character of God. God is morally perfect and pure. God is the very standard of moral perfection that we all know exists, deep down in our hearts.
What then, does the Moral Argument say about the Lawmaker? The Lawmaker must be:
- Absolutely morally pure. For example,
- Perfectly just.
- Perfectly loving.
- Perfectly good.
This is a good start in describing the God of the Bible. Among so many other passages to choose from, we read, “Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good! His faithful love endures forever.” (Psalm 107:1)
There comes a time in life when every one of us must decide which side we are on. Are we on God’s side? Or are we going to turn away? If God is perfectly just, loving, and good, then I don’t know why anybody would want to live any other way, but with Him. What do you think?
Be sure to watch this excellent animated video!
[1]There are different forms of the argument. This particular form is taken from Norman L. Geisler and Ronald M. Brooks, When Skeptics Ask, A Handbook on Christian Evidences (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2013), 16.
[2]C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1952), 25.