God is not the source of objective morality. He, by definition, cannot be. If God created morality, and He decided "human sacrifice is wrong" and "justice is good", then again, by definition, they are subjectively dependent on Gods views.
The only way morality can be objective, is if they are not created by anything, and stand as their own axioms. This is not an argument against God in any way. It is clear that God, who is the only being with absolute knowledge, and absolute understanding, would be able to ascertain without error, what is objectively good, and bad.
The same way a two-dimensional being could never hope to correctly know what is "thicker" or "thinner", as it takes a 3rd dimensional being to even have access to that information. So as it is with God, the only being able to observe from the ultimate vantage point what is objectively Good and what is objectively Evil.
This is why Genesis 3:22 has God saying, "Now they are like us, *knowing* Good and Evil."
I think even on your definition that God would still be the source of objective morality. If only he is knowledgeable and wise enough to discern what is right and wrong in any given case, we would have to depend on him for that knowledge. In that sense, he would still be the source of objective morality (not the ultimate source, but the only one who can interpret the source correctly). We would still have to depend on God to know what is moral or immoral.
The bigger issue, though, is that on the view you're suggesting, there exists a realm of reality that is co-eternal with God but not dependent on Him. This undermines the doctrine of God's aseity--that nothing exists independently of God. If moral truths exist independently of God, they would constitute a rival necessary being, undermining God's aseity.
Excellent article! Well thought-through and presented well. When you gave examples of how atheists often respond to the issue of morality, the words were exactly those of mine when I was an atheist. I pray many atheists will seriously consider what you have written. Well done!
Many thanks for the encouragement, Mark! It's been a while since I read the series you wrote for us, but I believe you described how you rejected objective morality as an atheist. I hope this piece will persuade some skeptics to consider the horrors of naturalism.
God is not the source of objective morality. He, by definition, cannot be. If God created morality, and He decided "human sacrifice is wrong" and "justice is good", then again, by definition, they are subjectively dependent on Gods views.
The only way morality can be objective, is if they are not created by anything, and stand as their own axioms. This is not an argument against God in any way. It is clear that God, who is the only being with absolute knowledge, and absolute understanding, would be able to ascertain without error, what is objectively good, and bad.
The same way a two-dimensional being could never hope to correctly know what is "thicker" or "thinner", as it takes a 3rd dimensional being to even have access to that information. So as it is with God, the only being able to observe from the ultimate vantage point what is objectively Good and what is objectively Evil.
This is why Genesis 3:22 has God saying, "Now they are like us, *knowing* Good and Evil."
I think even on your definition that God would still be the source of objective morality. If only he is knowledgeable and wise enough to discern what is right and wrong in any given case, we would have to depend on him for that knowledge. In that sense, he would still be the source of objective morality (not the ultimate source, but the only one who can interpret the source correctly). We would still have to depend on God to know what is moral or immoral.
The bigger issue, though, is that on the view you're suggesting, there exists a realm of reality that is co-eternal with God but not dependent on Him. This undermines the doctrine of God's aseity--that nothing exists independently of God. If moral truths exist independently of God, they would constitute a rival necessary being, undermining God's aseity.
Excellent article! Well thought-through and presented well. When you gave examples of how atheists often respond to the issue of morality, the words were exactly those of mine when I was an atheist. I pray many atheists will seriously consider what you have written. Well done!
Many thanks for the encouragement, Mark! It's been a while since I read the series you wrote for us, but I believe you described how you rejected objective morality as an atheist. I hope this piece will persuade some skeptics to consider the horrors of naturalism.