- /There Are Many Different Traditional
There Are Many Different Traditional
There are many different traditional arguments such as ontological, moral, teleological and cosmological for God’s existence. In philosophy there are many different factors of why each person supports their own argument. The moral argument would be the one that makes the most sense to me because without morals you wouldn’t know right from wrong and without God, we wouldn’t have morals. Some people have reasons to support why they do or do not believe in God. People usually do not come to God through philosophical arguments but more thru their familial upbringing that influences the religion that a person adopts.
Can you be good without God? You can be good without believing in God, but the question isn’t, “Can you be good without believing in God?” The right question to be asked is, can you be good without God? To this question there are many answers from different view points. Atheists and some Philosophers such as Daniel Dennett or John Stuart Mill are people who don’t believe. If there is no God in this world, what basis remains for objective of good or bad? Right or wrong? If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist and we wouldn’t know right from wrong. Without God we wouldn’t know the difference between love or hate. Without some objective reference point, we have no way of saying that something is really up or down. God’s nature provides an objective reference point for moral values. Contrary to claims of atheists and philosophers, men can’t live without God. A man can have human existence without believing in God, but not without the fact of God. It’s the stand point from which all actions and decisions are measured, but if there’s no God, there’s no objective reference point, and all we are left with is one persons’ view point, which does not mean more than anyone else’s. This kind of morality is “subjective morality”, not objective. In the same way, subjective morality applies only to the subject, it is not valid or binding for anyone else. A world without God, there can’t be no evil and no good.
God has expressed his moral nature to us as commands, which provide the basis for moral duties. For example, God’s essential attribute of love is expressed in his command to “love your neighbor as yourself”. This command provides a foundation upon which we can affirm the object of goodness, humbleness, sacrifice, fairness, and love for all. We also can condemn as objectively evil as greed, abuse, and discrimination. This raises the following question, is something good because God allows it? Or does God allow something because it is good? The answer is, neither one because of moral duties.
It’s important for us to know that’s some of these arguments have older traditions than others. For instance, the cosmological and the teleological are rooted in ancient history, to where the ontological is medieval and the moral argument is the most recent one. With that being said, because the moral argument was the last one added it does not mean that morals didn’t exist before this by the ancient people. It’s helpful to us to realize that this moral argument tell us a number of things. It helps us to ground morality, it shows that it is grounded in the person of God. The moral argument appeals to the existence of moral laws as evidence of God’s existence. If there was no such thing as morals then people would think than since there is no God, everything would be permissible.
Morality is objective and helps us realize that none of us obtain it and that he is indeed a moral God. Moral laws do exist, not everything is permissible, which proves that God exists.
Where do good and evil come from? Atheist proposals are: evolution, reason, conscience, human nature and utilitarianism. None of these can be the ultimate source of morality. Not evolution because any supposed morality that is evolving can change for the good or the bad there must be a standard above these changes to jugde them as good or bad. An example of an evolutionary model of the ever-changing view of morality is when slavery was accepted – which did not make it acceptable. Slavery was once accepted and then condemned. But who says that slavery wont be acceptable again?
What about reasoning? Reasoning is a tool to help us discover and understand morality but it cannot be the source of morality. For example, criminals use reasoning to plan a murder. Without their reason telling them that murder is wrong. Reasoning is just a way to think with reason and atheists for example, choose not to believe in God.
Without God there would be no right from wrong, up or down, right or left. Who would know what the basis of morals would be without God? Some people do not believe in God because of the problem of evil. People suffering, pain, children dying, wars, holocausts, and genocides are only a few reasons on why some people don’t believe. Some people don’t believe because they think religion is bad for society and causes religious wars, religious crimes, etc. Earth’s natural causes is another reason why people don’t believe because of hurricanes, tsunami and other natural disasters. If you go around and ask an atheist if God is real they’re gonna say no. For example, I asked someone and he said he didn’t believe because if there was a God, there wouldn’t be so much evil in this world.
I’m a freelance writer with a bachelor’s degree in Journalism from Boston University. My work has been featured in publications like the L.A. Times, U.S. News and World Report, Farther Finance, Teen Vogue, Grammarly, The Startup, Mashable, Insider, Forbes, Writer (formerly Qordoba), MarketWatch, CNBC, and USA Today, among others.