Moral Argument For God - Part 2 - William Lane Craig

00:42:44
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwUUmjkfSh8

Summary

TLDRIn this lecture, Dr. William Lane Craig explores the moral argument for God's existence, emphasizing the distinction between moral values (what is good or bad) and moral duties (what is right or wrong). He argues that without God, objective moral values and duties cannot exist, as they are traditionally anchored in God's nature as the highest good. Craig critiques atheistic perspectives, particularly naturalism, which he claims reduces morality to subjective illusions shaped by evolution. He discusses the implications of atheism on moral obligations and the nature of good and evil, ultimately defending the necessity of God for objective morality. The lecture also addresses common objections, such as the Euthyphro dilemma, and clarifies that belief in God is not necessary for morality, but God's existence is essential for objective moral values and duties.

Takeaways

  • 📜 Moral values vs. moral duties: Values are about good/bad; duties are about right/wrong.
  • ⚖️ Without God, objective moral values and duties do not exist.
  • 🔬 Naturalism leads to the conclusion that morality is a subjective illusion.
  • 🐒 Atheistic views reduce humans to accidental byproducts of evolution.
  • ❓ The Euthyphro dilemma questions the nature of good in relation to God.
  • 💔 Morality on atheism lacks objective grounding and is seen as socially conditioned.
  • 🌍 Speciesism suggests humans are not morally special compared to other animals.
  • 📖 Romans 2:14 indicates an innate moral law written on all hearts.
  • 🛑 Moral duties without God are seen as mere societal taboos.
  • 🔑 God's nature defines what is good, making morality not arbitrary.

Timeline

  • 00:00:00 - 00:05:00

    In this session, Dr. William Lane Craig discusses the moral argument for God's existence, emphasizing the distinction between moral values (what is good or bad) and moral duties (what is right or wrong). He introduces the premise that if God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist, and explores the implications of this claim.

  • 00:05:00 - 00:10:00

    Dr. Craig argues that traditionally, moral values are anchored in God, who is considered the highest good. He questions the basis for objective moral values in the absence of God, suggesting that without a divine anchor, moral values may be seen as subjective illusions, particularly from a naturalistic perspective.

  • 00:10:00 - 00:15:00

    He critiques naturalism, which posits that science alone determines existence, arguing that moral values cannot be derived from scientific inquiry. He suggests that on a naturalistic view, human beings are merely accidental products of evolution, leading to a bleak assessment of human worth and moral values.

  • 00:15:00 - 00:20:00

    Dr. Craig further explores the concept of moral duties, asserting that without God, there is no basis for objective moral obligations. He compares human moral duties to animal behavior, arguing that animals do not possess moral obligations, thus questioning the existence of moral duties in a purely atheistic framework.

  • 00:20:00 - 00:25:00

    He addresses the idea that societal norms shape moral values, arguing that societal taboos do not equate to objective moral truths. He emphasizes that without a moral lawgiver, moral duties may be seen as mere social constructs rather than objective truths.

  • 00:25:00 - 00:30:00

    Dr. Craig anticipates objections to his argument, clarifying that he does not claim atheists cannot lead good lives, but rather that objective moral values and duties cannot exist without God. He emphasizes the distinction between living a good life and the foundation of moral values.

  • 00:30:00 - 00:35:00

    He discusses the Euthyphro dilemma, arguing that it is a false dilemma. He proposes that God's commands are expressions of His good nature, thus providing a coherent basis for morality that is not arbitrary or independent of God.

  • 00:35:00 - 00:42:44

    Finally, Dr. Craig concludes by asserting that the existence of God is necessary for objective moral values and duties, and he invites further discussion on the implications of this argument.

Show more

Mind Map

Video Q&A

  • What is the moral argument for God's existence?

    The moral argument posits that if God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist.

  • What is the difference between moral values and moral duties?

    Moral values pertain to what is good or bad, while moral duties relate to what is right or wrong.

  • How does naturalism affect the concept of morality?

    Naturalism suggests that moral values are subjective illusions, as they are not required by science.

  • What is the 'Euthyphro dilemma'?

    The Euthyphro dilemma questions whether something is good because God wills it or if God wills it because it is good.

  • Can atheists be moral?

    Yes, atheists can live good lives, but the argument focuses on whether objective moral values exist without God.

  • What is speciesism?

    Speciesism is the bias in favor of one's own species, suggesting that humans are morally special compared to other animals.

  • What does Craig say about moral duties on an atheistic view?

    Craig argues that without God, moral duties are subjective and lack objective grounding.

  • How does Craig respond to the claim that morality can be derived from evolution?

    He argues that deriving morality from evolution would sanction immoral behaviors and is therefore inadequate.

  • What is the role of God's nature in determining morality?

    God's nature is the standard of goodness, and His commands reflect His moral character.

  • What is the significance of Romans 2:14 in the discussion?

    It suggests that moral law is written on the hearts of all people, indicating an innate sense of morality.

View more video summaries

Get instant access to free YouTube video summaries powered by AI!
Subtitles
en
Auto Scroll:
  • 00:00:00
    [Music]
  • 00:00:03
    welcome to Defenders the teaching class
  • 00:00:06
    of Dr William Lane Craig today the
  • 00:00:08
    existence of God part 20 and for more
  • 00:00:11
    information and resources go to
  • 00:00:13
    reasonablefaith.org we're looking at the
  • 00:00:16
    moral argument for God's existence and
  • 00:00:19
    we saw last time that there is a
  • 00:00:22
    difference between moral values and
  • 00:00:24
    moral duties moral values have to do
  • 00:00:27
    with what is good or bad the moral worth
  • 00:00:31
    of something moral duties have to do
  • 00:00:34
    with what is right or wrong it has to do
  • 00:00:37
    with our obligations and our
  • 00:00:40
    prohibitions and then we also saw
  • 00:00:42
    there's a difference between being
  • 00:00:44
    objective and being subjective something
  • 00:00:46
    is objective if it's independent of
  • 00:00:49
    people's opinions if it holds or is true
  • 00:00:53
    independently of what anybody thinks
  • 00:00:56
    then it's objective it's subjective if
  • 00:00:59
    it's depend dependent upon people's
  • 00:01:02
    opinions and after illustrating this
  • 00:01:04
    then we now want to turn to a an
  • 00:01:07
    examination of premise one in the moral
  • 00:01:10
    argument which is as you'll recall that
  • 00:01:12
    if God does not exist then
  • 00:01:16
    objective moral values and duties do not
  • 00:01:20
    exist let's talk first uh about moral
  • 00:01:24
    values traditionally moral values have
  • 00:01:28
    thought to be Anchored In God who is the
  • 00:01:32
    Supreme good traditionally God has been
  • 00:01:35
    thought in theology as the greatest good
  • 00:01:38
    or the highest good or in Latin the
  • 00:01:41
    summum bonum God is the summum bonum the
  • 00:01:45
    greatest or highest good and then other
  • 00:01:49
    goods are determined by how they relate
  • 00:01:51
    to God as the the anchor or the yard
  • 00:01:55
    stick or the moral Plum line for
  • 00:01:57
    Value but suppose God does not
  • 00:02:01
    exist then what is the basis for
  • 00:02:05
    objective moral values what Plum line or
  • 00:02:09
    anchor remains in the absence of God for
  • 00:02:12
    moral values in particular why think
  • 00:02:15
    that human beings would have objective
  • 00:02:19
    moral worth on an atheistic view the
  • 00:02:23
    most popular form of atheism is a
  • 00:02:27
    philosophy called naturalism
  • 00:02:31
    naturalism is the view that science and
  • 00:02:35
    science alone determines what exists
  • 00:02:39
    what exists is what our best scientific
  • 00:02:43
    theories of the World require and if
  • 00:02:46
    something is not required by our best
  • 00:02:48
    scientific theories of the world then
  • 00:02:51
    that does not exist but you see this is
  • 00:02:54
    devastating for ethics because moral
  • 00:02:58
    values are not required ired by science
  • 00:03:01
    science is morally neutral you can't
  • 00:03:03
    find moral values in a test tube so it
  • 00:03:07
    follows immediately from the perspective
  • 00:03:10
    of naturalism that moral values don't
  • 00:03:13
    really exist they're just
  • 00:03:16
    subjective illusions of human beings so
  • 00:03:20
    on naturalism morality that we
  • 00:03:23
    experience in our lives is really just
  • 00:03:25
    in a subjective illusion of human beings
  • 00:03:30
    now suppose The Atheist isn't a hardcore
  • 00:03:33
    naturalist suppose he's willing to go
  • 00:03:35
    beyond the confines of science to see
  • 00:03:39
    what exists still we could ask why given
  • 00:03:43
    atheism are human beings objectively
  • 00:03:46
    morally valuable after all what are
  • 00:03:48
    human beings on an atheistic worldview
  • 00:03:51
    they're just accidental byproducts of
  • 00:03:53
    nature which have evolved relatively
  • 00:03:56
    recently on an infinitesimal Speck of
  • 00:03:58
    dust called the planet Earth and which
  • 00:04:00
    are doomed to perish individually and
  • 00:04:03
    collectively in a relatively short time
  • 00:04:06
    Richard Dawkins assessment of human
  • 00:04:09
    worth may be depressing but why on
  • 00:04:11
    atheism is he wrong when he says and I
  • 00:04:14
    quote there is at bottom no design no
  • 00:04:18
    purpose no evil no good nothing but
  • 00:04:23
    pitiless indifference we are machines
  • 00:04:26
    for propagating DNA it is living
  • 00:04:30
    object's sole reason for being this is
  • 00:04:34
    what on an atheistic view human beings
  • 00:04:37
    are reduced to so what are moral values
  • 00:04:40
    on an atheistic view well it seems that
  • 00:04:43
    moral values are just the spin-offs or
  • 00:04:46
    the byproducts of
  • 00:04:49
    sociobiological evolution just as in a
  • 00:04:52
    troop of baboons you will see uh
  • 00:04:55
    self-sacrificial Behavior exhibited by
  • 00:04:59
    members of The Troop they will look out
  • 00:05:02
    for each other's interests because
  • 00:05:04
    natural selection has determined that
  • 00:05:07
    this is going to be valuable in the
  • 00:05:09
    struggle for survival and just as you
  • 00:05:11
    see that in a troop of baboon so their
  • 00:05:14
    primate cousins Homo sapiens has
  • 00:05:17
    similarly evolved a kind of herd
  • 00:05:19
    morality which is useful in the
  • 00:05:22
    perpetuation of our species the illusion
  • 00:05:26
    of morality has survival value you and
  • 00:05:30
    therefore is perpetuated among Homo
  • 00:05:33
    sapiens but there isn't anything about
  • 00:05:36
    Homo sapiens to make you think that this
  • 00:05:38
    morality is objectively true it simply
  • 00:05:42
    is conducive to the survival of our
  • 00:05:44
    species and to think that human beings
  • 00:05:48
    are somehow morally special is to be
  • 00:05:51
    guilty of the fallacy of
  • 00:05:54
    speciesism which is an unjustified bias
  • 00:05:59
    uh in favor of One's Own species and so
  • 00:06:03
    to think that human beings are morally
  • 00:06:05
    special different from other animals is
  • 00:06:08
    just to succumb to the the natural
  • 00:06:10
    temptation to
  • 00:06:12
    speciesism so if there isn't any God
  • 00:06:15
    it's very difficult to see why the
  • 00:06:18
    morality that has evolved among Homo
  • 00:06:21
    sapiens on this planet is in any way
  • 00:06:24
    objectively true if you take God out of
  • 00:06:27
    the picture then all we seem to be left
  • 00:06:31
    with is an aplike creature on this
  • 00:06:34
    planet who is beset with delusions of
  • 00:06:38
    moral Grandeur he thinks that somehow
  • 00:06:40
    he's the uh the snc of objective moral
  • 00:06:45
    values secondly now let's talk about
  • 00:06:47
    moral
  • 00:06:48
    duties traditionally our moral duties
  • 00:06:51
    were thought to Spring from God's
  • 00:06:54
    Commandments for example The Ten
  • 00:06:57
    Commandments God has given certain moral
  • 00:07:00
    commands to us which constitute our
  • 00:07:03
    moral
  • 00:07:05
    duties but take away God and what basis
  • 00:07:10
    then remains for objective moral duties
  • 00:07:14
    on the atheistic view human beings are
  • 00:07:17
    just animals and animals don't have
  • 00:07:21
    obligations toward one another when a a
  • 00:07:25
    lion for example kills a zebra it kills
  • 00:07:29
    the zebra but it doesn't murder the
  • 00:07:33
    zebra right the lion kills the zebra but
  • 00:07:37
    it doesn't murder the zebra or when a
  • 00:07:40
    great white shark forcibly copulates
  • 00:07:43
    with a female shark it forcibly
  • 00:07:46
    copulates with her but it doesn't rape
  • 00:07:49
    her because you see none of these things
  • 00:07:52
    have any moral Dimension to them uh they
  • 00:07:56
    are uh neither forbidden nor obligatory
  • 00:08:00
    there just are no moral duties to
  • 00:08:03
    fulfill with regard to these things now
  • 00:08:07
    if God doesn't exist why think then that
  • 00:08:10
    we have any moral duties to fulfill who
  • 00:08:13
    or what lays these moral obligations and
  • 00:08:17
    prohibitions upon us where do they come
  • 00:08:20
    from it's hard to see that moral duties
  • 00:08:24
    would be anything more than a kind of
  • 00:08:26
    subjective illusion that been ingrained
  • 00:08:30
    into us by societal and parental
  • 00:08:34
    conditioning so certain actions say
  • 00:08:38
    incest and rape are not advantageous in
  • 00:08:43
    human society and so in the course of
  • 00:08:46
    societal
  • 00:08:47
    Evolution uh rape and incest have become
  • 00:08:50
    generally taboo among human
  • 00:08:56
    cultures so there are certain tabos that
  • 00:08:59
    exist in human society but this is not
  • 00:09:02
    to say that these actions are
  • 00:09:05
    objectively morally
  • 00:09:08
    wrong such actions go on all the time in
  • 00:09:12
    the animal kingdom actions which look
  • 00:09:14
    very much like rape and incest and
  • 00:09:17
    murder happen all the time among
  • 00:09:19
    animals so with respect to human beings
  • 00:09:23
    the child pedophile or rapist who tort
  • 00:09:29
    and kills a little girl on atheism
  • 00:09:32
    doesn't really do anything morally wrong
  • 00:09:36
    it's just socially unacceptable he's
  • 00:09:40
    kind of like the man who belches loudly
  • 00:09:43
    at the dinner table uh violates rules of
  • 00:09:46
    etiquette or like the person who wears
  • 00:09:48
    white socks with a tuxedo it's just
  • 00:09:51
    socially
  • 00:09:53
    unconventional but if there isn't any
  • 00:09:55
    moral
  • 00:09:57
    lawgiver then there isn't any objective
  • 00:10:00
    moral law which we're obligated to
  • 00:10:03
    fulfill so it seems to me that on
  • 00:10:06
    atheism there really aren't any
  • 00:10:09
    objective moral values or duties which
  • 00:10:13
    is exactly premise one now is there any
  • 00:10:16
    comment or question that you would like
  • 00:10:18
    to make about that defensive premise one
  • 00:10:21
    all right anyway what it amounts to is
  • 00:10:23
    um you said a minute ago that all these
  • 00:10:25
    behaviors such as rape or um incest you
  • 00:10:28
    could probably see in the natural world
  • 00:10:30
    in the animal world and therefore the
  • 00:10:32
    atheists say well it's no big deal the
  • 00:10:34
    animals doing it but I think this is one
  • 00:10:36
    thing that is not true I don't think
  • 00:10:37
    anywhere in the animal world they have
  • 00:10:40
    homosexuality now that correct me if I'm
  • 00:10:42
    wrong but I heard someone say that one
  • 00:10:44
    time and you have you ever seen heard
  • 00:10:47
    about that I am not expert enough to to
  • 00:10:50
    make a biological pronouncement
  • 00:10:52
    certainly there are animals that are
  • 00:10:56
    they're either sex certain kinds of
  • 00:10:58
    animals like worms and other types are
  • 00:11:02
    bisexual and I'm talking about mammals
  • 00:11:04
    like you've never seen two male lines
  • 00:11:05
    getting with it so to speak
  • 00:11:07
    or yeah you know I mean I don't really
  • 00:11:09
    think that happens in the Maman world
  • 00:11:12
    I'm not sure yeah but anyway that's one
  • 00:11:14
    where there argument would fall apart I
  • 00:11:16
    think well all right let me let me
  • 00:11:20
    respond to that by saying that in the
  • 00:11:23
    first place as we'll see in a minute
  • 00:11:26
    most atheists want to affirm the object
  • 00:11:29
    ity of moral values that I think it's
  • 00:11:31
    the brave minority who have the courage
  • 00:11:35
    to face the implications of their
  • 00:11:37
    worldview and draw these conclusions but
  • 00:11:39
    I think the vast majority inconsistently
  • 00:11:42
    I would say want to affirm that certain
  • 00:11:45
    things are really right or wrong or good
  • 00:11:47
    and evil and so they wouldn't try to
  • 00:11:50
    read moral values out of the
  • 00:11:52
    evolutionary process nature is read in
  • 00:11:55
    tooth and Claw and if you tried to read
  • 00:11:57
    your morality out of what
  • 00:11:59
    evolution inculcates in animals to
  • 00:12:02
    survive then you would sanction all
  • 00:12:06
    sorts of atrocities so whether or not a
  • 00:12:09
    certain type of behavior is observed
  • 00:12:11
    among animals I think is really morally
  • 00:12:15
    irrelevant you it it um animals aren't
  • 00:12:19
    moral agents so what they do or don't do
  • 00:12:22
    is just no guide to morality at all it's
  • 00:12:25
    it's morally neutral so whether there
  • 00:12:27
    are mammals that practice
  • 00:12:31
    homosexual copulating is really just I
  • 00:12:34
    think morally irrelevant uh because
  • 00:12:38
    nobody's trying to read moral values out
  • 00:12:41
    of nature okay another question um you
  • 00:12:44
    said that that the societal values have
  • 00:12:48
    evolved to the point where they've
  • 00:12:50
    determined as beneficial for uh some of
  • 00:12:54
    these acts to to not further the society
  • 00:12:57
    okay yeah but but so where do you come
  • 00:13:01
    back to say that there is a God that has
  • 00:13:03
    established you know this is right and
  • 00:13:05
    wrong to me the conversation typically
  • 00:13:07
    just goes that well hey so that Society
  • 00:13:10
    is the one that determines or has
  • 00:13:12
    determined that that's bad that in no
  • 00:13:15
    way means that there's a living God no
  • 00:13:17
    it doesn't this is just the first
  • 00:13:19
    premise of the argument it will be in
  • 00:13:21
    conjunction with the second premise that
  • 00:13:24
    it will lead to God's existence so just
  • 00:13:26
    hang on to that question as your right
  • 00:13:29
    some of you may feel a little
  • 00:13:30
    uncomfortable with what I've been
  • 00:13:31
    arguing here because it sounds so much
  • 00:13:34
    like the kind of atheistic or
  • 00:13:37
    naturalistic propaganda that you read
  • 00:13:39
    about in in magazines and newspapers
  • 00:13:43
    namely there is no God and therefore
  • 00:13:44
    everything is relative well I think
  • 00:13:46
    these folks are right I I think they are
  • 00:13:48
    right if there is no God everything is
  • 00:13:51
    relative and there are no objective
  • 00:13:53
    moral values and I I I admire those
  • 00:13:55
    naturalists who have the courage to face
  • 00:13:57
    up to this and own it so I think that
  • 00:14:00
    the writings of atheists Like Richard
  • 00:14:02
    Dawkins and philosophically Russell sart
  • 00:14:06
    nche and the rest are very helpful in
  • 00:14:10
    understanding the human predicament
  • 00:14:11
    apart from God What would life be like
  • 00:14:15
    if there were no God to Anchor moral
  • 00:14:17
    values and duties and I think the
  • 00:14:19
    picture is grim indeed there was a
  • 00:14:21
    question over here yes well even when
  • 00:14:23
    they even when they try to be honest
  • 00:14:25
    with that in the case of Dawkins who
  • 00:14:27
    said there's any moral obligation for
  • 00:14:29
    the species to reproduce maybe if I'm
  • 00:14:31
    the first human or the first gorilla I
  • 00:14:33
    like being the only human in gorilla who
  • 00:14:36
    says I should propagate the species
  • 00:14:39
    exactly why think you have any
  • 00:14:41
    obligation to perpetuate your species
  • 00:14:44
    why not look out for self-interest there
  • 00:14:47
    again you can't read morality out of the
  • 00:14:50
    evolutionary uh process because you have
  • 00:14:53
    no obligation to to do those things so
  • 00:14:56
    if you feel for example Instinct uh
  • 00:15:00
    pressuring you to engage in some
  • 00:15:03
    self-sacrificial act for the sake of
  • 00:15:05
    others maybe even to sacrifice your life
  • 00:15:09
    well it seems to me on atheism that the
  • 00:15:11
    intelligent thing to do would be to look
  • 00:15:14
    out for your own
  • 00:15:15
    self-interest and uh there's just no
  • 00:15:18
    reason that you should obey those
  • 00:15:20
    instincts those are just ingrained into
  • 00:15:22
    you by evolution in society there is no
  • 00:15:25
    objective reason to uh to follow the and
  • 00:15:29
    so you ought to look out for
  • 00:15:30
    self-interest and and uh and resist
  • 00:15:34
    these these instincts so on atheism what
  • 00:15:37
    happens is there's a a a huge clash
  • 00:15:40
    between what our moral conscience tells
  • 00:15:43
    us to do and what Prudence sometimes
  • 00:15:46
    tells us to do prudence and morality are
  • 00:15:49
    often at
  • 00:15:51
    loggerheads and the question for the
  • 00:15:53
    atheist would be well why act morally
  • 00:15:56
    rather than out of self-interest why not
  • 00:15:58
    just act out of
  • 00:15:59
    prudence some other comment or question
  • 00:16:03
    yes so sorry this is about 10 minutes
  • 00:16:04
    too late but I just wanted to uh to I'm
  • 00:16:07
    not trying to like be rude to you I'm
  • 00:16:09
    sorry um but homosexuality is very very
  • 00:16:12
    common in the animal kingdom and
  • 00:16:14
    especially among higher primates there
  • 00:16:16
    are several species of monkeys that
  • 00:16:17
    regularly engage in homosexual acts and
  • 00:16:20
    even engage in heterosexual acts like
  • 00:16:22
    with no purpose of procreation just
  • 00:16:24
    because it's fun um and it's more common
  • 00:16:27
    among uh higher animals really I've
  • 00:16:29
    never heard that do you have any kind of
  • 00:16:31
    a source or anything that you could give
  • 00:16:33
    us where where you got that information
  • 00:16:36
    School in Biology class or something so
  • 00:16:40
    but yeah all right thank you I I that's
  • 00:16:44
    that's news to me yeah Joe uh just a
  • 00:16:47
    comment I I'm sorry for the aside but I
  • 00:16:51
    dogs Mount your leg too I think they're
  • 00:16:53
    just being stimulated doesn't
  • 00:16:54
    necessarily mean that that's approval
  • 00:16:56
    for uh they also eat their young so
  • 00:16:58
    you're right we shouldn't read out of
  • 00:16:59
    the animal kingdom no any sort of yeah
  • 00:17:01
    moral could you uh most people if you
  • 00:17:04
    talk to a lay person on the street they
  • 00:17:06
    say something to the effect of look
  • 00:17:09
    morals are just innate they they don't
  • 00:17:11
    they don't go feel like they have to go
  • 00:17:12
    any further an explication of this sort
  • 00:17:14
    of thing it's just somewhere in there in
  • 00:17:17
    US somehow whether we get together
  • 00:17:19
    collectively and decide it or
  • 00:17:20
    individually decide it you know sort of
  • 00:17:22
    a conventionalism or an individual
  • 00:17:23
    relativism the question I I wanted you
  • 00:17:26
    to comment on that and also
  • 00:17:28
    the question I had could you turn this
  • 00:17:30
    argument that you're saying you're just
  • 00:17:31
    saying look it's hard to make sense of
  • 00:17:32
    these moral things these moral ideas on
  • 00:17:35
    a naturalistic perspective could you
  • 00:17:37
    turn it and say well wouldn't survival
  • 00:17:40
    the fittest or natural selection sort of
  • 00:17:42
    encourage some predatorial behavior in
  • 00:17:45
    some sense uh what we consider to be
  • 00:17:47
    traditionally immoral Behavior Uh
  • 00:17:50
    looking out for number one rape or or
  • 00:17:52
    murder in the sense of the more powerful
  • 00:17:54
    and getting the limited amount of goods
  • 00:17:55
    and resources all right that that is
  • 00:17:57
    what I said in response to Clare Joe
  • 00:17:59
    where I said that if you try to read
  • 00:18:01
    morality out of the evolutionary process
  • 00:18:03
    it will sanction all sorts of atrocities
  • 00:18:07
    because nature as I say is red in tooth
  • 00:18:10
    and Claud is the the the Predator who is
  • 00:18:13
    praying upon the weak and the infirm
  • 00:18:16
    there is no compassion of that sort in
  • 00:18:19
    nature survival of the fittest so you
  • 00:18:22
    nobody not even naturalists want to try
  • 00:18:25
    to say that we should read morality out
  • 00:18:29
    of the evolutionary process because if
  • 00:18:31
    you do it will sanction murder genocide
  • 00:18:34
    rape all incest
  • 00:18:37
    cannibalism killing innocent people you
  • 00:18:40
    you can't you can't try to read morality
  • 00:18:43
    out of the evolutionary process now with
  • 00:18:45
    respect to a couple of the other
  • 00:18:47
    Alternatives that Joe mentioned uh
  • 00:18:50
    individual relativism or he said maybe a
  • 00:18:53
    kind of social contract that we get
  • 00:18:56
    together and make a compact act for the
  • 00:18:59
    good of society those are both right in
  • 00:19:02
    line here Joe with premise one namely
  • 00:19:04
    that objective moral values don't exist
  • 00:19:07
    remember objective means independent of
  • 00:19:10
    human opinion so relativistic views of
  • 00:19:13
    morality and social contract views of
  • 00:19:16
    morality are subjective they are
  • 00:19:18
    dependent upon PS made by human beings
  • 00:19:22
    are dependent upon human opinion had we
  • 00:19:25
    chosen to make a different compact then
  • 00:19:27
    you could have a very different morality
  • 00:19:29
    such as in say African or South Africa
  • 00:19:31
    where blacks were disenfranchised or in
  • 00:19:34
    National Socialist Germany where Jews
  • 00:19:36
    and Gypsies and homosexuals were uh
  • 00:19:39
    regarded as fodder for the gas Chambers
  • 00:19:41
    in the oven so those social contract
  • 00:19:44
    views and personal uh Choice views are
  • 00:19:48
    right in line with premise one now we
  • 00:19:51
    will consider in a moment other points
  • 00:19:54
    of views that try to defend objective
  • 00:19:56
    morals without reference to God but at
  • 00:19:58
    least so far I'm simply arguing that um
  • 00:20:01
    on a naturalistic view human beings are
  • 00:20:04
    just animals and we have no grounds
  • 00:20:07
    objectively for thinking that they're
  • 00:20:09
    valuable or have any duties to one
  • 00:20:11
    another or anything else any other
  • 00:20:14
    question about the defense of premise
  • 00:20:15
    one so
  • 00:20:17
    far okay now if you share this argument
  • 00:20:22
    uh with somebody else I can almost
  • 00:20:24
    guarantee the response that you're going
  • 00:20:27
    to get somebody will say indignantly are
  • 00:20:30
    you saying that all atheists are bad
  • 00:20:33
    people how dare you say that atheists
  • 00:20:36
    cannot be good people that's arrogant
  • 00:20:39
    and immoral you're judgmental and
  • 00:20:41
    intolerant in saying that about atheist
  • 00:20:45
    and we need to help these folks see that
  • 00:20:47
    that is a complete misunderstanding of
  • 00:20:50
    the argument we are not arguing here
  • 00:20:53
    that atheists are immoral people or that
  • 00:20:56
    they can't live good and decent lives
  • 00:20:58
    lives or anything of the sort the
  • 00:21:00
    question that we're facing here is not
  • 00:21:03
    do you have to believe in God in order
  • 00:21:06
    to live a good and decent life that is
  • 00:21:09
    not the question do you have to believe
  • 00:21:11
    in God in order to live a good and
  • 00:21:14
    decent life that is not the question
  • 00:21:16
    there's no reason to think that
  • 00:21:18
    unbelievers cannot live what we would
  • 00:21:21
    normally call a good and decent life in
  • 00:21:23
    fact many of us come from families don't
  • 00:21:26
    we where we have family members who are
  • 00:21:28
    good decent loving people but they may
  • 00:21:31
    be unbelievers so clearly the the claim
  • 00:21:34
    is not that in order to live a decent
  • 00:21:37
    life you have to be uh a believer in God
  • 00:21:40
    again the question is not can we
  • 00:21:43
    recognize objective moral values without
  • 00:21:46
    believing in God we're not asking
  • 00:21:49
    whether we can recognize objective moral
  • 00:21:51
    values without believing in God you
  • 00:21:54
    don't have to believe in God in order to
  • 00:21:57
    recognize that you ought to love your
  • 00:21:59
    children rather than mutilate them and
  • 00:22:02
    and abuse them uh indeed the Bible
  • 00:22:05
    actually teaches that the moral law of
  • 00:22:07
    God is written on all people's hearts so
  • 00:22:11
    that it says in Romans 2:14 even
  • 00:22:14
    Gentiles who do not have the law do by
  • 00:22:16
    Nature what the law requires because
  • 00:22:19
    they show that the law is written on
  • 00:22:20
    their hearts so from a Christian point
  • 00:22:23
    of view there is a kind of innate moral
  • 00:22:26
    instinct or sense that all persons have
  • 00:22:29
    in virtue of being God's creatures and
  • 00:22:32
    uh we don't need to believe in God in
  • 00:22:33
    order to recognize that objective moral
  • 00:22:36
    values and duties exist or again the
  • 00:22:40
    question is not can we formulate an
  • 00:22:44
    adequate system of Ethics without
  • 00:22:46
    believing in God we're not asking can we
  • 00:22:49
    formulate an adequate system of Ethics
  • 00:22:52
    without believing in God if a person is
  • 00:22:55
    willing to grant that human beings have
  • 00:22:58
    intrinsic moral value given that
  • 00:23:01
    presupposition he can probably work out
  • 00:23:03
    a system of Ethics with which the
  • 00:23:05
    Christian will very largely
  • 00:23:08
    agree uh the question is however why
  • 00:23:11
    think that human beings have intrinsic
  • 00:23:13
    moral worth so the question that this
  • 00:23:16
    argument is Raising is simply this if
  • 00:23:20
    God does not exist do objective moral
  • 00:23:25
    values and duties exist
  • 00:23:28
    the question is not about the necessity
  • 00:23:30
    of belief in God the question is about
  • 00:23:33
    the necessity of the existence of God so
  • 00:23:37
    we're not claiming belief in God is
  • 00:23:39
    necessary for Morality we're claiming
  • 00:23:42
    God is necessary for Morality and I have
  • 00:23:46
    to say I have been shocked at how even
  • 00:23:49
    professional philosophers who ought to
  • 00:23:51
    know better uh make this confusion for
  • 00:23:55
    example several years ago I participated
  • 00:23:57
    in a debate on the subject U goodness
  • 00:24:00
    without God is good enough with the
  • 00:24:03
    humanist philosopher Paul ctz of the
  • 00:24:06
    American humanist Association at
  • 00:24:08
    Franklin and Marshall College in
  • 00:24:11
    Pennsylvania and I argued as I have this
  • 00:24:13
    morning that if God does not exist then
  • 00:24:15
    objective moral values and duties do not
  • 00:24:18
    exist and this is how Paul CTS responded
  • 00:24:22
    he completely missed the point this is
  • 00:24:23
    what he said and I quote if God is
  • 00:24:27
    essential then how is it possible for
  • 00:24:30
    the millions and millions of people who
  • 00:24:32
    don't believe in God to nonetheless
  • 00:24:34
    behave morally and ethically on your
  • 00:24:37
    view they could not and so God just is
  • 00:24:40
    not essential many people indeed
  • 00:24:43
    millions of people have been optimistic
  • 00:24:45
    about life have lived a full life and
  • 00:24:48
    find life exciting and significant yet
  • 00:24:51
    they don't ring their hands about
  • 00:24:53
    whether or not there is an afterlife
  • 00:24:55
    it's living here and now that counts
  • 00:24:58
    end quote now Curt's Point only shows
  • 00:25:02
    that belief in God is not necessary for
  • 00:25:05
    living an optimistic and full life it
  • 00:25:09
    doesn't do anything to respond to my
  • 00:25:11
    claim that if God does not exist then
  • 00:25:14
    objective moral values and duties do not
  • 00:25:17
    exist so to repeat again just to make it
  • 00:25:20
    absolutely clear belief in God is not
  • 00:25:24
    necessary for Morality God is necessary
  • 00:25:28
    for Morality that's the argument any
  • 00:25:31
    question or response to that
  • 00:25:34
    clarification of a very common confusion
  • 00:25:37
    yes Steve so actually if uh God does not
  • 00:25:40
    exist there is no bad or good
  • 00:25:43
    objectively right therefore now other
  • 00:25:46
    people even atheists can subjectively
  • 00:25:49
    believe they know objective moral values
  • 00:25:52
    but they're by definition subjective in
  • 00:25:55
    fact you would have to absolutely know
  • 00:25:57
    God completely to know if you know any
  • 00:26:00
    objective everything is subjective until
  • 00:26:02
    you know him well no now look if God
  • 00:26:06
    exists then there is objective morality
  • 00:26:10
    and that means for example that the
  • 00:26:11
    atheist is doing wrong things when he
  • 00:26:15
    commits sins that are against God's will
  • 00:26:18
    The Atheist is doing good things when he
  • 00:26:20
    does things that are in accordance with
  • 00:26:22
    God's Will and that is the case even if
  • 00:26:25
    the atheist doesn't believe in God so
  • 00:26:27
    again belief in God is not necessary for
  • 00:26:30
    objective morality The Atheist can do
  • 00:26:32
    evil and can do good if God exists even
  • 00:26:35
    though the atheist doesn't believe in
  • 00:26:37
    God so don't think that because he
  • 00:26:39
    doesn't believe in God everything
  • 00:26:40
    becomes subjective what matters is that
  • 00:26:43
    God exists not whether the atheist
  • 00:26:45
    believes in him go ahead what I was
  • 00:26:47
    saying is you can't know that what you
  • 00:26:50
    subjectively know is actually
  • 00:26:52
    objectively true until you know the
  • 00:26:54
    Creator because it all comes from him
  • 00:26:56
    people can obey they in fact it's
  • 00:26:58
    written on everybody's heart for the
  • 00:27:00
    large part most people all atheists
  • 00:27:03
    included believe the in the bulk and try
  • 00:27:05
    to obey the bulk of uh the objective
  • 00:27:08
    laws because they they're essential for
  • 00:27:09
    self-preservation a lot of them well I
  • 00:27:12
    just say that's that's a more of uh
  • 00:27:14
    knowing whether you can actually know
  • 00:27:15
    God yeah in taking this stand on this
  • 00:27:18
    argument Steve I'm not committing myself
  • 00:27:22
    to how we come to know about objective
  • 00:27:24
    moral values I'm inclined to think that
  • 00:27:27
    The Atheist can know that objective
  • 00:27:29
    moral values exist because I believe
  • 00:27:31
    Romans 2:14 and 15 says that it's
  • 00:27:34
    written on the hearts of all men and so
  • 00:27:36
    when the atheist sees that loving his
  • 00:27:40
    children is a good thing to do I think
  • 00:27:42
    that he has moral knowledge he has
  • 00:27:45
    knowledge of that truth but he just
  • 00:27:48
    doesn't understand the foundation for it
  • 00:27:50
    so uh that is neither here nor there
  • 00:27:53
    with regard to my argument I certainly
  • 00:27:55
    some moral duties we wouldn't be able to
  • 00:27:58
    apprehend without a knowledge of God um
  • 00:28:02
    because certain Commandments that God
  • 00:28:04
    gives us would be things that we might
  • 00:28:06
    not be able to read off of the the sort
  • 00:28:08
    of natural law um Sunday or Sabbath
  • 00:28:13
    worship for example would not be
  • 00:28:14
    something that you could read off of the
  • 00:28:16
    natural law the natural moral law but
  • 00:28:19
    that's a commandment God has given so
  • 00:28:21
    you wouldn't be able to know about that
  • 00:28:23
    moral duty to keep the Sabbath unless
  • 00:28:26
    you had some revelation from God so
  • 00:28:29
    there could be a variety of ways that we
  • 00:28:31
    can come to moral knowledge some could
  • 00:28:33
    be through the Instinct of written on
  • 00:28:36
    our hearts some could be through uh
  • 00:28:39
    intuition some could be through divine
  • 00:28:41
    revelation and I'm not making a
  • 00:28:43
    commitment on any of those all right yes
  • 00:28:46
    Jim but I'm assuming from The Atheist
  • 00:28:49
    argument standpoint they wouldn't agree
  • 00:28:51
    with you that the fact that they
  • 00:28:54
    naturally love their children isn't is
  • 00:28:56
    is anything other than than a subjective
  • 00:28:58
    decision would they now where they say
  • 00:29:00
    millions of atheists live good lives
  • 00:29:03
    wouldn't they argue those are millions
  • 00:29:05
    of individual subjective decisions that
  • 00:29:08
    result in a similar outcome well this is
  • 00:29:10
    the Paradox Jim that the fact is and
  • 00:29:13
    I'll say something about this when we
  • 00:29:14
    get to premise to the majority of
  • 00:29:18
    philosophers who are atheists believe in
  • 00:29:21
    objective moral values they they do
  • 00:29:25
    affirm the objectivity of moral values
  • 00:29:27
    moral duties um there are there are not
  • 00:29:31
    that many philosophers that I've run
  • 00:29:33
    into who are willing to take the kind of
  • 00:29:36
    NE nihilistic line which says that there
  • 00:29:40
    is no uh there are no moral values um or
  • 00:29:45
    there is no moral
  • 00:29:46
    knowledge most of them really do believe
  • 00:29:50
    in objective morality and I'll say
  • 00:29:53
    something more about that when we get to
  • 00:29:54
    the second premise so it it's a
  • 00:29:57
    misimpression actually that these
  • 00:30:01
    intellectuals are all relativists
  • 00:30:03
    actually they're
  • 00:30:05
    not that's more in pop culture than
  • 00:30:08
    among these academics Joe oh I'm sorry
  • 00:30:11
    I'll wait I'll wait to the next PR yeah
  • 00:30:13
    go ahead
  • 00:30:14
    Tom all right well we'll have Joe
  • 00:30:17
    then Dr Craig you've debated a lot of
  • 00:30:19
    people do you find the Contemporary
  • 00:30:21
    atheist is as honest about the moral
  • 00:30:24
    situation as say a nii or a Russell no I
  • 00:30:27
    I don't Joe I don't think they can face
  • 00:30:29
    the conclusions I have great admiration
  • 00:30:31
    for somebody like nche even though he
  • 00:30:33
    was in many ways a very pathetic and uh
  • 00:30:38
    unhappy man nevertheless nche had the
  • 00:30:42
    courage to face the death of God that he
  • 00:30:45
    proclaimed and to draw
  • 00:30:48
    unflinchingly the implications from the
  • 00:30:51
    death of God namely the nihilism that
  • 00:30:54
    results from atheism now it's
  • 00:30:57
    interesting Joel in his personal life
  • 00:30:59
    nii couldn't live like that uh you can
  • 00:31:01
    show in his personal life that he
  • 00:31:03
    couldn't live as though moral values
  • 00:31:05
    were purely subjective shortly before he
  • 00:31:09
    went insane and was uh had to be
  • 00:31:13
    institutionalized he was in I think it
  • 00:31:15
    was Torino Italy and there was a man
  • 00:31:18
    mercilessly beating his horse trying to
  • 00:31:21
    get it to move this wagon and nii in
  • 00:31:23
    tears threw himself around the neck of
  • 00:31:25
    the horse to try to protect it from the
  • 00:31:28
    blows of this cruel master who was
  • 00:31:30
    beating it even nii the so-called you
  • 00:31:34
    know person who was the uberman you know
  • 00:31:36
    declared living beyond good and evil
  • 00:31:39
    couldn't live that way but at least
  • 00:31:42
    intellectually he understood the
  • 00:31:44
    consequences of the death of God that he
  • 00:31:48
    uh proclaimed any other comment or
  • 00:31:50
    question on this point we'll go back to
  • 00:31:53
    Steve then I guess what I was getting at
  • 00:31:54
    is the your objective more values
  • 00:31:57
    depends on the God and by definition
  • 00:31:59
    there can only be objective moral values
  • 00:32:02
    if there is a God unless they're
  • 00:32:03
    changing what objective means or
  • 00:32:05
    something like that that's right you've
  • 00:32:06
    got to watch out for the terminology
  • 00:32:08
    folks boy that is really true Steve what
  • 00:32:10
    will happen is they will affirm
  • 00:32:13
    objective moral values but they will
  • 00:32:15
    quietly change the definition of
  • 00:32:17
    objective for example they will say now
  • 00:32:20
    that
  • 00:32:21
    objective um that values that are the
  • 00:32:24
    product of of evolution and
  • 00:32:28
    um of the societal conditioning are
  • 00:32:31
    objective in the sense that they're not
  • 00:32:33
    just sort of made up they're not just
  • 00:32:35
    made up by people in the way that we
  • 00:32:38
    have made up rules that in America we
  • 00:32:41
    drive on the right hand side of the road
  • 00:32:42
    whereas in Great Britain they drive on
  • 00:32:44
    the left-and side uh moral values aren't
  • 00:32:47
    like that they'll say they have an
  • 00:32:50
    objective reality or foundation in that
  • 00:32:52
    they are the product of
  • 00:32:55
    evolution rather than
  • 00:32:57
    inventions of human beings and so
  • 00:33:00
    they've changed the meaning of objective
  • 00:33:02
    in that sense certainly they're
  • 00:33:04
    objective in the sense that they can be
  • 00:33:06
    the products of evolution but they're
  • 00:33:08
    not objective in the sense that they're
  • 00:33:09
    valid and binding independent of human
  • 00:33:12
    opinion you still have to by choice say
  • 00:33:16
    well I'm going to agree that those
  • 00:33:18
    things that have been instilled into us
  • 00:33:20
    by Evolution are valid in binding and if
  • 00:33:22
    you care not to make that decision then
  • 00:33:25
    there's nothing wrong with that there's
  • 00:33:26
    no moral obligation to uh agree with
  • 00:33:29
    those things so you got to be very
  • 00:33:32
    careful how the the definition works
  • 00:33:34
    here all right any other comment on this
  • 00:33:37
    uh misunderstanding of the argument that
  • 00:33:39
    frequently occurs well there's one other
  • 00:33:42
    response that you can be sure to get
  • 00:33:45
    when you present this argument and this
  • 00:33:48
    is the so-called youth afro dilemma the
  • 00:33:52
    youth afro dilemma is named after a
  • 00:33:55
    character in one of Plato's dialogues uh
  • 00:33:59
    called
  • 00:34:01
    youif and the argument or the Dilemma
  • 00:34:04
    basically goes like
  • 00:34:06
    this is something good because God wills
  • 00:34:12
    it or does God will it because it's
  • 00:34:16
    good is something good just because God
  • 00:34:20
    wills
  • 00:34:21
    it or does God will it because it is
  • 00:34:25
    good and the claim is that either one of
  • 00:34:28
    those horns of that dilemma have
  • 00:34:30
    unacceptable consequences if you say
  • 00:34:34
    that something is good just because God
  • 00:34:37
    wills it then that makes morality
  • 00:34:40
    arbitrary it means God could have willed
  • 00:34:43
    that it'd be good that we hate one
  • 00:34:46
    another and kill and murder each other
  • 00:34:49
    that greed and rapacity and selfishness
  • 00:34:52
    be good and it would be actually evil
  • 00:34:55
    and sinful to love another person and be
  • 00:34:58
    compassionate uh and that seems crazy so
  • 00:35:01
    you can't just say that because God
  • 00:35:03
    Wills something that makes it good on
  • 00:35:06
    the other hand if you say well no no God
  • 00:35:09
    Wills something because it is good then
  • 00:35:12
    that means that the good is independent
  • 00:35:14
    of God now it means that God himself has
  • 00:35:17
    to look to some higher standard and what
  • 00:35:21
    he wills and commands will be in accord
  • 00:35:23
    with that higher
  • 00:35:25
    standard and therefore morality is not
  • 00:35:28
    based upon God after all morality is
  • 00:35:31
    independent of God indeed in a sense God
  • 00:35:34
    himself is subservient to uh the good he
  • 00:35:38
    himself has to make his life conform to
  • 00:35:41
    the good and he has to fulfill his moral
  • 00:35:44
    obligations and duties to the good um so
  • 00:35:48
    that uh moral values and duties in fact
  • 00:35:51
    do exist independently of God and that
  • 00:35:54
    contradicts premise
  • 00:35:55
    one now is there any comment or question
  • 00:35:59
    about that dilemma Before We Say
  • 00:36:01
    Something by way of response to it all
  • 00:36:04
    right well I don't think that we need in
  • 00:36:06
    fact to refute either Horn of the youth
  • 00:36:08
    afro dilemma because the Dilemma is a
  • 00:36:11
    false dilemma that is to say these
  • 00:36:13
    aren't the only two choices there's a
  • 00:36:16
    third alternative and that is God Wills
  • 00:36:21
    something because he is good God Wills
  • 00:36:26
    something because he is good now what do
  • 00:36:28
    I mean by that I mean that God's Own
  • 00:36:32
    nature is the standard of goodness and
  • 00:36:36
    his commands to us are necessary
  • 00:36:38
    expressions of his own moral character
  • 00:36:43
    so in short our moral Duties are
  • 00:36:45
    determined by The Commandments of a just
  • 00:36:49
    and loving God our moral Duties are
  • 00:36:52
    determined by The Commandments of a just
  • 00:36:55
    and loving God so moral values are not
  • 00:36:59
    independent of God because God's own
  • 00:37:02
    character defines what is good God is
  • 00:37:05
    essentially compassionate loving kind
  • 00:37:10
    just impartial fair and so on and so his
  • 00:37:14
    moral nature is the defining standard of
  • 00:37:18
    what is
  • 00:37:20
    good now God's commands then reflect his
  • 00:37:23
    essential nature they flow necessarily
  • 00:37:26
    out of of his nature and therefore
  • 00:37:28
    they're not
  • 00:37:29
    arbitrary so if the atheist uh asks you
  • 00:37:34
    for example well if God commanded that
  • 00:37:36
    we should all uh murder our children
  • 00:37:40
    would we be morally obligated to murder
  • 00:37:42
    our
  • 00:37:43
    children that question is like asking um
  • 00:37:48
    if there were a square circle would its
  • 00:37:51
    area be computed by squaring its
  • 00:37:54
    sides you see it's a it's a a
  • 00:37:56
    meaningless question because the
  • 00:37:58
    antecedent of the question is logically
  • 00:38:01
    impossible there is no such thing as a
  • 00:38:03
    square circle so there's no answer to
  • 00:38:06
    the question whether the area of a
  • 00:38:07
    square circle is computed by squaring
  • 00:38:10
    one of the sides in exactly the same way
  • 00:38:13
    to say well if God were to command that
  • 00:38:15
    everybody commit child abuse would we be
  • 00:38:18
    obligated is to deposit something like a
  • 00:38:21
    square circle it's a logical incoherence
  • 00:38:24
    so the youth ofro dilemma is a false
  • 00:38:27
    dilemma it presents us with a false
  • 00:38:29
    choice and you shouldn't be fooled by it
  • 00:38:32
    the morally good or bad is determined by
  • 00:38:35
    God's nature the morally right or wrong
  • 00:38:39
    is determined by his Commandments or his
  • 00:38:41
    will so his nature determines the good
  • 00:38:44
    and the bad his will determines the
  • 00:38:47
    right and the wrong God Wills something
  • 00:38:50
    because he is good and something is
  • 00:38:54
    right because God wills it
  • 00:38:57
    God Wills something because he is good
  • 00:39:00
    and something is right because God wills
  • 00:39:02
    it now this view of morality has been
  • 00:39:05
    defended in our day by very prominent
  • 00:39:07
    ethicists like Robert
  • 00:39:10
    Adams uh Philip
  • 00:39:13
    Quinn William
  • 00:39:15
    Alon and so on and yet atheists still go
  • 00:39:20
    on pressing the straw man erected by
  • 00:39:23
    this youth afro dilemma as though it had
  • 00:39:25
    never been answered
  • 00:39:27
    for example in the recent Cambridge
  • 00:39:29
    companion to atheism published in
  • 00:39:32
    2007 there's an article on God and
  • 00:39:35
    morality written by a very prominent
  • 00:39:38
    ethicist and in this article he refers
  • 00:39:41
    neither to the work of any of these men
  • 00:39:44
    nor to the view of ethics that I've been
  • 00:39:46
    explaining this morning but instead the
  • 00:39:49
    only view that he presents as a theistic
  • 00:39:52
    based ethics is the view that God just
  • 00:39:54
    arbitrarily made up moral values God
  • 00:39:57
    just made him up and that is a straw man
  • 00:40:00
    which nobody I knows uh defends so the
  • 00:40:05
    youth afro dilemma is very very common
  • 00:40:08
    in the literature it's commonly pressed
  • 00:40:11
    but in fact it's a false dilemma and you
  • 00:40:13
    shouldn't be misled by it again the
  • 00:40:15
    answer I think to the ufro Dilemma is
  • 00:40:18
    neither to say that God uh that
  • 00:40:20
    something is good because God wills it
  • 00:40:22
    or that God Wills something because it
  • 00:40:25
    is good the answer is to say that God
  • 00:40:28
    Wills something because he is good any
  • 00:40:31
    final question or comment on that before
  • 00:40:33
    we close yeah Ben uh you said um you're
  • 00:40:36
    saying would our moral obligation change
  • 00:40:38
    if you know God all of a sudden said
  • 00:40:39
    murder our children anything but that's
  • 00:40:41
    an o that couldn't happen because it
  • 00:40:43
    would be a self-contradictory or or
  • 00:40:45
    whatever what about um cases like when
  • 00:40:49
    God commanded Abraham to sacrific Isaac
  • 00:40:51
    like if that would have been that would
  • 00:40:53
    have been wrong would have been murder
  • 00:40:55
    had God not in instructed it but then
  • 00:40:58
    because he did he has and or Hosea
  • 00:41:01
    marrying the Harlot things like that if
  • 00:41:03
    he has a higher purpose for it things
  • 00:41:04
    that would have been wrong are no longer
  • 00:41:06
    wrong if he's they're directly
  • 00:41:07
    instructed or does the fact that he
  • 00:41:09
    never actually sacrificed Isaac maybe
  • 00:41:11
    make this whole point null in the first
  • 00:41:13
    place no I would say the former I think
  • 00:41:15
    that God is able to make exceptions to
  • 00:41:17
    certain moral commands that he gives in
  • 00:41:20
    general uh so that for example he can
  • 00:41:22
    command Abraham to do an act which had
  • 00:41:25
    Abraham undertaken it on his own
  • 00:41:27
    initiative would have been wrong it
  • 00:41:29
    would have been sin but given the
  • 00:41:30
    presence of a Divine command it now
  • 00:41:32
    becomes Abraham's duty to do it but what
  • 00:41:35
    I'm suggesting is it would be contrary
  • 00:41:37
    for God to go to God's moral nature for
  • 00:41:40
    there to be a sort of General command
  • 00:41:43
    that child abuse is good that that this
  • 00:41:47
    is the way we should behave and that
  • 00:41:49
    loving your children is evil that's what
  • 00:41:52
    I'm suggesting would be Condor his
  • 00:41:53
    nature but there could be the these
  • 00:41:56
    exceptional cases where God who is the
  • 00:41:59
    source of the moral law can make an
  • 00:42:01
    exception and command a person to do
  • 00:42:03
    something which in the absence of a
  • 00:42:06
    Divine command would have been wrong but
  • 00:42:08
    is in fact now his moral
  • 00:42:10
    duty that's worth talking about some
  • 00:42:12
    more and so I hope maybe next time we
  • 00:42:15
    can continue that discussion so um we'll
  • 00:42:19
    break it off there and then come back
  • 00:42:21
    next time and uh look at the argument
  • 00:42:23
    for uh atheistic moral platonism another
  • 00:42:26
    type of response to premise
  • 00:42:29
    one the copyright for the content of
  • 00:42:31
    this recording is held by Dr William
  • 00:42:33
    Lane cig for more go to
  • 00:42:36
    reasonablefaith.org
  • 00:42:37
    [Music]
Tags
  • moral argument
  • God's existence
  • moral values
  • moral duties
  • naturalism
  • Euthyphro dilemma
  • speciesism
  • objective morality
  • subjective morality
  • Romans 2:14