Craig on God and Morality

European Journal for Philosophy of Religion

Sophia, 2012

Many theists who identify themselves with the Abrahamic religions maintain that it is perfectly acceptable to have faith that God exists. In this paper, I argue that, when believing that God exists will affect others, it is prima facie wrong to forgo attempting to believe that God exists on the basis of sufficient evidence. Lest there be any confusion : I do not argue that it is always wrong to have faith that God exists, only that, under certain conditions, it can be.

Morality, 2024

William Lane Craig’s moral philosophy, is based on the argument that theism provides the best explanation for objective moral values and duties. Consequently, it delves into Craig’s argument for objective moral values and duties grounded in God’s nature and commands. It also analyses Craig’s version of the Divine Command Theory (DCT) and his perspective on moral objectivism in contrast to moral relativism. Furthermore, it explores Craig’s response to the Euthyphro dilemma and his stance on moral absolutism, moral rules and duty. The essay concludes by assessing the strengths and weaknesses of Craig’s concept of morality and its relevance to contemporary moral debates.

The paper can be read from the publisher's website: https://rdcu.be/cUdVv

In recent years, William Lane Craig has vigorously championed a moral argument for God’s existence. The backbone of Craig’s argument is the claim that only God can provide a ‘sound foundation in reality’ for morality. The present article has three principal aims. The first is to interpret and clarify the account of the ontological foundation of morality proposed by Craig. The second is to press home an important objection to that account. The third is to expose the weakness of Craig’s case for saying that without God morality would be groundless and illusory.

2012

I argue that William Craig’s defense of the moral argument is internally inconsistent. In the course of defending the moral argument, Craig criticizes non-theistic moral realism on the grounds that it posits the existence of certain logically necessary connections but fails to provide an adequate account of why such connections hold. Another component of Craig’s defense of the moral argument is an endorsement of a particular version of the divine command theory (DCT). Craig’s version of DCT posits certain logically necessary connections but Craig fails to provide an adequate account of why these connections hold. Thus, Craig’s critique of non-theistic moral realism is at odds with his DCT. Since the critique and DCT are both essential elements of his defense of the moral argument, that defense is internally inconsistent.

Do we need God and religion to be moral? This paper supports the claim that we do need God and religion to be moral. The paper discusses Darwinian morality and rational ethical theories and criticizes them as not sufficient, rather lacking and even harmful, to become and remain moral. The paper also discusses why God and religion are needed to be moral and also addresses the issue of violence in the name of God and religion. The paper proposes a policy that God and religion must be taught to the society at various levels to adopt morality and develop individual and social morality. The research has been based on both analytical and statistical studies.

2022

In 2022 the New Zealand apologetics organization Thinking Matters ran a “Confident Christianity Conference” in Auckland. I was asked to speak at this conference on the topic. Does Morality Need God? Below is a slightly streamlined version of the talk I gave.

The relation of religion to morality is a theme well known to every student of Ethics or history of religion. Not only has it been the subject of much discussion within the various religious traditions themselves, it has been at the center of the Philosophical discussions of Ethics in Western culture since the period of enlightenment. Those that argued from religious perspective insist that religion provides adequate basis for morality while others insist that morality will always be a part of the human culture. It is one of the major factors that separate humans from other earthly creations. Hence, the interdependency of religion and morality has been the subject of more general philosophical analysis, as distinct from its treatment at the hands of theologians working within the Christian framework. This paper attempts to bring to the fore the conflicting and evolving considerations and arguments for or against by making apparent the dialectic of the problem. This paper argues that we do not need religious conception to support our moral convictions; hence, there can be a morality without religion.

A new reading of C. S. Lewis' moral argument for the existence of God.