17. The Moral Argument

Ah yes, the Moral Argument for God—that classic philosophical cocktail of ethics, theology, and “don’t murder people or God will be mad.” It’s been served warm at Sunday schools, apologetics debates, and awkward dinner tables for centuries. But what is it, really? And does it hold up when you poke it with a logical stick?

Let’s do what we do best—grab it, unwrap it, roast it, and maybe learn something deep about human nature along the way.

First, What Is It?

The moral argument, in its simplest Sunday-best form, goes like this:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.

2. But objective moral values and duties do exist.

3. Therefore, God exists.

Tidy. Elegant. As convincing as a motivational poster taped to a brick wall. It’s been championed by theologians and philosophers like William Lane Craig, who argue that unless there’s a divine moral lawgiver, there’s no real right or wrong—just preferences, like pineapple on pizza or the Oxford comma.

In other words:

Without God, you’re just a meat puppet with feelings. With God, you’re a meat puppet with a moral compass.

But Wait—Whose Morality Are We Talking About?

Here’s where things get juicy.

If the existence of God is what makes morality “objective,” then… whose God? Yahweh? Allah? Vishnu? Zeus? That one dude from your uncle’s WhatsApp group who started his own church in Chitungwiza?

The moral codes of religions are wildly different.

1. In some traditions, eating shellfish is an abomination.
2. In others, not eating your enemies is the real crime.
3. In some, it’s noble to die a martyr.
4. In others, martyrdom is just a fancy word for peer pressure and bad decisions.

If morality is rooted in God, then why does God seem to have so many regional accents?

And let’s be honest—if the source of “objective morality” was dropping commandments from the sky, you’d expect a bit more consistency. Instead, we’ve got divine silence and human debates over everything from abortion to gay rights to whether women should be allowed to drive, speak, or exist without a male chaperone.

The Evolutionary Roast: What If Morality Is a Biological Hack?

Let’s turn the tables. What if morality isn’t divine at all, but a beautifully evolved social glue?

Picture this: You’re a caveman. You have a tribe. You notice that when you don’t kill or steal from your tribe members, you’re less likely to be murdered in your sleep. You also notice that when you share your mammoth meat, people like you more. This is the birth of moral instincts.

Empathy. Reciprocity. Guilt. Shame. Gratitude. These aren’t just religious concepts—they’re neurochemical survival hacks.

We evolved a conscience because it helped us live longer and reproduce. In fact, many social animals show signs of proto-morality:

1. Elephants grieve.
2. Bonobos share snacks.
3. Dolphins protect the weak.
   
4. And none of them pray. At least not out loud.

But What About “Objective Morality”?

Here’s the trap: People hear “without God, there’s no objective morality” and panic.

“What do you mean there’s no objective right and wrong?! That means murder is just… a suggestion!”

Relax.

Just because morality is shaped by humans doesn’t mean it’s meaningless. It just means it’s contextual. The same way language is. Or culture. Or fashion (God help us all).

We can build rational, evidence-based ethics rooted in human well-being, empathy, and mutual survival. You don’t need a divine lawgiver to say murder is wrong. You just need to not want to be stabbed.

And anyway, most religious people already ignore large chunks of their sacred moral laws:

1. Ever eaten bacon? Leviticus says no.
2. Worn poly-cotton blend? Straight to hell.
3. Disrespected your parents? Get ready for a stoning.

Modern morality is already filtered through reason, culture, and common sense—not divine command.

So Why Does This Argument Still Hit?

Because it taps into a deep human fear:

“If there’s no cosmic judge… does anything matter?”

It’s existential vertigo. The fear that, without God, good and evil are just floating abstractions. But maybe—just maybe—that’s an opportunity, not a threat.

If morality isn’t dictated from above, then it becomes our responsibility.

Not to please a sky-dad.

Not to earn heaven points.

But because we care.

Because we feel.

Because we’re here...sharing this fragile, ridiculous, beautiful world.

Final Thought: The God of Morality or the Morality of God?

If you need a God to know that torturing babies is wrong, maybe the problem isn’t atheism—it’s empathy.

And if your morality requires an eternal reward or punishment, are you really being good… or just obedient?

Morality without God might be harder to explain. But it’s also more honest. More human. Less about fearing hell—and more about choosing to build a better life for each other, right here.

Because at the end of the day, the real moral argument isn’t for God.

It’s for us.