Yesterday I introduced the moral argument and why it is a good argument for God’s existence. What I did not say is that anyone had to believe in God for them to be moral or live in a morally upright position. What is said is that for them to reject God they then reject any reason to live the way they do.

Paul Copan has stated that if morality is severed from its theological roots the secular ethical system cannot sustain itself. He stated further that it will wither and die (Evidence for God 20). It will do so because there is no foundation for believing that anything is right or wrong, good or bad. It all falls back to the individual and what they feel is good or not.

When the apostle Paul wrote, “whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things” (Phil. 4:8), it had to have a foundation to fall on for any of that sentence to make sense. If all that list is subjective, which is the only logical end for those without God, then anything could go as true, honorable, just, pure, lovely, commendable, excellent, or worthy of praise.

Many do not want to believe that moral statements are true. They just want to think that when we say murder is wrong, they just think themselves “I hate Murder.” They do not see it as wrong or bad but it is something they do not like and think they want no part of it. But, again Paul Copan stated, “When a person says, maybe murder or rape isn’t wrong, he does not need an argument. He is self-deceived” (Evidence 21).

If one does not accept objective morality they are just self-deceived. So, most of them make objectivity to be accomplished by the method of evolution. The problem with this line of reasoning is that evolutionary theory is all about survival. This means it is not centered on true belief. This means that objectivity and rational thoughts are undermined in this system. Moral beliefs in it may help one survive but there is no reason to think they are true.

Another point of naturalism, evolution, is a system that has no rational thoughts. It is hard-wired for survival. It is all about making it. With a good and truthful God in the equation, we can lean into the moral assumptions we all have and trust that they are founded on something true and trustworthy. As with evolutionary naturalism, we have no reason to believe our thoughts are rational. The morality we think we have is only there for survival. So, faculties cannot be trusted in this system. Evolutionary naturalism is circular and vicious. One has to rely on cognitive faculties that are unreliable to conclude that they can trust or not trust their faculties. They have no basis for the belief that anything is good or bad, right or wrong.

C.S. Lewis clarifies this thinking when he said, “Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It’s like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can’t trust my own thinking, of course, I can’t trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.” (The Case for Christianity, 32.)

Isn’t it great that we have a God who designed us and gave us the capacity to think? We can know things with certainty so we are not walking around in confusion. We know that things are objectively right or wrong, good or bad because there is a God on who we can found these beliefs. It is of Him who will be seen tomorrow.