# The Moral Argument for God's Existence



## cih1355 (Apr 22, 2007)

I was listening to a lecture on DVD entitled, "Right & Wrong as a Key to the Meaning of the Universe", given by J.P. Moreland. 

The following are my lecture notes:

I. Introduction

C.S. Lewis argued that there cannot be objective moral values if there is no God. 

There are four features of the moral life that cannot be explained by a naturalistic worldview, but they can be explained by the Christian worldview.

People know that there is objective morality. People who claim that there are no absolute moral values do not really believe that. Find what people care deeply about, relativize it, and watch what happens. J.P. Moreland was witnessing to a person who claimed to be a moral relativist. Moreland said that he and his buddies would go to a lake, put some money in pot, and dump some sulfuric acid into that lake. Each of them would guess how many fish would belly up to the surface. Whoever guessed correctly would get all the money in the pot. The moral relativist was furious; He thought that it was an absolute moral value that no one should dump sulfuric acid into a lake.

What scientific naturalism teaches:

1. Knowledge only comes from the hard sciences like physics and chemistry. If you cannot experience it with either one of your five senses, then you cannot know it. 

2. The big bang creation story. Matter rearranges itself. Matter becomes larger chunks of matter.

3. Ultimately, everything is physical. Carl Sagan said, “The cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be.” 

II. Four features of the moral life that cannot be explained by a naturalistic worldview

A. The sheer existence of the moral law itself.
-The moral law comes to us in the form of commands or imperatives.
-Commands or imperatives come from something that has a will.
-Matter does not have a will. All you get from matter is a rearrangement 
of matter or larger pieces of matter.
-Matter cannot issue commands or imperatives. Matter cannot create
moral values.
-There are certain things that have intrinsic worth or value and matter 
cannot create intrinsic worth or value. 

B. Existence of equal human rights.

-Equal things should be treated equally and unequal things should be treated unequally.

-Human beings have equal rights because they share something in common that is equal.

-What do all people have in common? Some people say that we have equal human rights because we are human. If there is no God, then what is a human being? If there is no God, then a human being is just a kind of an animal. A human being would be only a set of molecules. According to the naturalistic worldview, since human beings are just animals, then they should be treated just like any other animal. Animals and human beings have the same rights. 

-Some people say that we have equal human rights because we are persons. What is a person? Naturalists say that a person is someone that has an IQ and self-consciousness. Naturalists think that personhood is a set of degreed properties. If personhood is a set of degreed properties, then a human being can be a person to a greater or lesser degree. Hence, this would lead to the conclusion that some human beings have more human rights than others. There would be no equal human rights.

-According to the Christian worldview, every human being is created in the image of God. Being created in the image of God provides the basis for having equal human rights. 

C. Proper function vs. dysfunction

-When people say, “This is functioning correctly”, implies that it is working the way that it ought to function. The notion that something ought to function in a certain way implies that there is a designer who gave it a certain function. 

-When naturalists say that something is functioning properly, they mean the following:

1. Something is functioning properly when it falls within the statistical norm.
-If something falls within a statistical norm, then this would be a fact, but this does not mean that it ought to fall within the statistical norm. 

2. Something is functioning properly when it enhances survival value.
-The fact that something enhances survival value does not mean that it should enhance survival value. 

D. Why should I be moral?

-If you deny God’s existence, you cannot adequately answer this question.

-If there is no God, there are no absolute moral principles to live by and there is no purpose in life. Moral rules are just conventions of society. 

-If there is no God, there is nothing wrong with acting only in accordance with your own self-interest. You can do anything you want as long as you don’t get caught. If an atheist denies this, then he is assuming that there are absolute moral values, but his worldview cannot account for absolute moral values. 

-Stephen J. Gould was asked the question, “Why are we here?”. He said that we are here because lower forms of life evolved into human beings. His answer to the question had to do with efficient causes, but the question was asking for a final cause. According to the naturalistic worldview, there are no final causes, only efficient causes. Hence, there is no ultimate purpose in life.


----------



## Staphlobob (Apr 23, 2007)

trevorjohnson said:


> C.S. Lewis's first chapter in Mere Christianity was a bombshell in my playground of scepticism as a teenager.
> 
> If all is amoral, why do people feel guilty and want to say that Hitler is evil rather than merely inconvenient to many people.



The same moral arguments apply to the heresy of universalism. If all are saved then Hitler and the 6 million Jews he killed are gathered together in heaven rejoicing because what happened here on earth was insignificant. 

I also found Lewis' position to be quite convincing.


----------



## Dieter Schneider (Apr 23, 2007)

I would warmly recommend John Blanchard (Does God Believe In Atheists?). It'sa tome, but I have read it and found it difficult to put down. He is forceful, winsome and convincing. Also see http://www.eden.co.uk/shop/can-we-be-good-without-god-1004255.html (which is suitable for an unconveretd friend).
Dieter


----------



## JohnV (Apr 23, 2007)

C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity was quite instrumental in my thinking as well.


----------

