The Moral Argument

The Moral Argument:

first of all:i am going to use my own moral argument,which doesn't necessarily that morality is objective (even though i do believe it is),but it argues that God is the best explanation for why morality feels so objective.

The Theism-Examined moral argument for God's existence:

second of all: i am just putting this mostly because i don't want you as an atheist to believe that objective morality can exist without God existing:

so,as an atheist you do not have any standard for morality,all your moral values are some evolutionary processes which you are under no obligation to obey,and i am just gonna quote Ravi Zacharias over here:”no moral law giver=no moral law,no moral law=no good,no good=no evil,so you see,in order to have evil you need a moral law giver,but that’s who you are trying to disprove and not to prove” (this wasn't the exact quote but it was something like this)

The point is,with no standard you cannot really differentiate between good and evil and with no moral law giver you have no moral law,and if there is no moral law and no standard,how do you differentiate between good and evil?

And now my question is,where do you get the idea of good and evil from anyway?

Why is anything good or bad in the first place?

while i believe that the moral argument isn't really good because i feel that you are assuming there's a moral law (remember that you need a moral law giver in order to have a moral law) because of your emotions in order to call it a moral law giver,but i do believe that just morality in general (subjective or objective) is just better explained by God,because evolution is not a person,its not like evolution said "yeah i am just gonna give them some moral senses".

''Can't we just say that something is objectively good because it leads to human flourishing?''

well why is human flourishing good?and why only human flourishing?why not Elephant Flourishing?why not the flourishing of everything except humans?also,who decides what leads to human flourishing?Hitler thought he was good,he thought that by killing Jews and other people he would get rid of all the inferior people and therefore that would somehow lead to human flourishing,why was he wrong?

"well look,just as you pointed out,there are humans who believe that killing jews is good,if morality isn't subjective then why are there so many people with so many different views on morality and why are there so many people arguing on morality?"

1:if morality isn't objective what is the point of having moral disagreement?i mean if it's all just an opinion,why have moral disagreement?why argue?

2:we don't need everyone to accept that certain things are wrong in order for certain things to be wrong,just because most people agree on the claim ''bats are blind" for example,doesn't mean that bats are actually blind,so my point is,if most people believed that morality is subjective and all people would literally have completely different moral values (i am actually talking about completely different,in the literal sense,all the 7.6 billion people living on this earth having completely different moral values),that wouldn't show how morality is subjective.

also:from what i am aware of bats aren't actually blind and most people do believe that they are.

look,if one action is wrong God exists,and i explained in this whole article why that is.

and i think we can see that most people agree on some things to be actually wrong so we can see we actually have some common moral senses.

example:killing,stealing

i am not saying that hey,most people agree on some moral things therefore morality is objective, that would be a contradiction with this:''just because most people agree on the claim ''bats are blind" for example,doesn't mean that bats are actually blind.'',i am not trying to do that over here,i am not trying to prove objective morality,all i am saying over here is that if a certain thing is good or if a certain thing is wrong,God exists,and you cannot say ''there's too much evil in the world for there to be a God",that's the whole point of this article.

''i don't need God to know morality"

depends on what you mean by that,i mean you don't need to believe in God to know morality,but you need the existence of God to know morality,and it also depends on what you mean by morality,because i mean if you are saying ''i don't need God to know subjective morality" ok...i agree with that claim,but you do need God to exist to know objective morality.

"look,no God told me that certain things are wrong,i just recognize certain things are wrong"

i mean we can see that humans have common moral values (i believe that is best explained by a designer who gave us these moral values,again,i am not saying that most people agree on certain things and therefore morality is objective,i am just saying that this might be best explained by a moral law giver who made an objective moral law),and you are begging the question,how do you recognize certain things are wrong?

"There are things which are obviously wrong,for example,if i got my hand cut off,i wouldn't like that,it would hurt really bad"

Just because you don't like something that doesn't make it bad.

let's say i don't like atheism (it's not that i don't,i am just giving this as an example),let's say it hurts me emotionally really bad that people are atheists,would that be then a bad thing?

people being atheists?

well not,and now you might say it's not really the same situation,but i don't think it has to be.

but in order to make my answer even better i might have to find a better example.

For example let's say "My parents died,and that really hurts me,i don't like that and therefore it's bad"

How does that make it bad though?it's just you not liking the situation but that doesn't make the situation bad just as in the case where people being atheists hurts me and i don't like it isn't bad.

now you might say "well it's personally bad"

well there's no difference in this case between "It's personally bad" and "i personally don't like it",cause that's the actual situation,when you say something is personally bad,you are actually saying you personally don't like it.