Morality

Human beings have wrestled with specific ideas and viewpoints since the dawn of time, and because people wrestle with these questions, they inevitably come out on different sides. Some of the topics people wrestle with are not cosmic in nature but involve small decisions that primarily affect individual lives, such as a career path or what to name a baby. Other topics, however, break through the walls of individuality and have an immense impact on society as a whole. One of these topics is morality. The aim of this paper is to give the reader a clear understanding that human beings have value and worth and that this worth comes not from anything within the human mind but from the heavenly Father who created humanity.

Cosmic Purpose

Often, people travel through this world in their day-to-day lives on autopilot, rarely addressing anything that is not immediately practical. With the lives people live now, this is understandable. Many do not believe they have time to stop and think about anything other than putting food on the table and getting their children to baseball practice. As understandable as that may be, it is not the correct approach. Human beings need to consider what Tim Mulgan, in his book Purpose in the Universe: The Moral and Metaphysical Case for Ananthropocentric Purposivism, calls “cosmic purpose.” Taking time to contemplate essential questions such as “How did I get here?” or “What happens when I die?” is important because the answers shape how people understand themselves and the world. When people stop and think, another question may arise: What does it mean to be a “good” person or a “bad” person? This is a question of morality.^[1]

What Is Morality?

The most basic way to describe this complex topic is to say that morality is the roadmap, beliefs, and values that guide an individual's understanding of right and wrong. It is the framework by which people judge whether something is good or bad, right or wrong. These judgments are commonly called morals. Having defined morality, the question more directly related to this paper is: Where do these morals come from? The answer to that question is the purpose of this paper. In a secular society—a society not governed by God's revealed law—the moral or ethical code may be constructed through human reasoning, social convention, law, and culture, and those judgments can change over time. Slavery provides an important example. Although slavery was defended and legally protected in parts of the United States in the nineteenth century, its legality did not make it morally right. The same distinction between legality and morality is evident in contemporary debates such as abortion. Law can reflect moral judgments, but law itself cannot serve as the ultimate standard of morality.

The “Good Thing” about the Secular View

Secularists face significant challenges when the issue of objective morality is raised, but their position should be considered fairly. From a secular perspective, are there good things to say about morals and ethics? Certainly. From a Christian perspective, believers operate under God's moral law revealed in His Word. Secularists do not appeal to that same revealed authority, so they seek moral knowledge through sources such as reason, human experience, empathy, and ethical reflection. In practice, many secular people genuinely care about others and seek human flourishing. That concern may manifest itself very differently from the Christian point of view, but the secularist often intends to convey a form of love. The deeper worldview question is whether those moral commitments can ultimately be grounded objectively without God.

Is “Love” What They Are Displaying?

The word love is defined differently depending on the worldview from which it is considered. For the Christian, love is grounded in God's character and holiness. For the secularist, love can be understood without reference to God and may instead be explained through human capacities, relationships, reason, and emotion. In Enrico Gnaulati’s book Flourishing Love: A Secular Guide to Lasting Intimate Relationships, the author describes a secular approach that draws upon human psychological resources, scientific information, common sense, intelligence, and ethical sensitivities. This raises an important worldview question: What ultimately grounds those ethical sensitivities? That question deserves closer examination.^[2]

Innate Ethics, or Given Ethics

Having discussed the secularist's position on morality in more detail, the argument can now be tested. Gnaulati's approach does not ground love in God but in capacities human beings possess and develop. The important question is not whether secularists can recognize moral duties or behave morally; clearly, they can. The question is whether a purely secular worldview can provide an ultimate, objective foundation for moral obligations. Calling ethical sensitivities “innate” describes their presence but does not, by itself, explain why they are objectively authoritative. If moral standards are ultimately products of individual preference or changing social convention, they remain contingent upon human judgment. The Christian worldview instead grounds objective morality in the unchanging character of God. Thus, the Christian critique is not that secularists have no morals, but that secularism cannot adequately account for the objective moral standards that secularists themselves regularly affirm.

Christian Perspective

Having examined the secular view of morality, the Christian perspective can now be considered. Christian morality is grounded in the Christian worldview. In Tawa J. Anderson, W. Michael Clark, and David K. Naugle’s book An Introduction to Christian Worldview: Pursuing God's Perspective in a Pluralistic World, they define a worldview as “the conceptual lens through which we see, understand, and interpret the world and our place within it.” This definition is helpful because a worldview functions as a lens through which reality is interpreted. For Christians, Scripture provides the authoritative framework for understanding God, humanity, and morality. The Bible is the living and active Word of God (Hebrews 4:12), and God's revealed character and commands provide an objective standard by which right and wrong can be judged. Because this moral standard does not originate in changing human preferences, Christians can appeal to an authority beyond themselves when making moral judgments.^[3]

Objective Truth

What makes a statement objectively true? There must be a reality or standard by which the statement can be judged. One way to explain this is to imagine a bicycle race. There are established rules in the race, and one rule is that a rider cannot cross a particular boundary line. If a rider crosses that line, the rider can be disqualified because an established standard has been violated. The rider's personal belief about whether the rule is fair does not change what the rule requires. Thomas Pölzler, in Moral Reality and the Empirical Sciences, examines the question of whether objective moral truths and objective moral facts exist independently of what people think about them. If objective moral facts exist, then moral claims are not made true merely by individual or cultural preference. From the Christian worldview, the ultimate ground of those objective moral truths is God's unchanging character. This allows Christians to put their own preferences about right and wrong aside and submit to a moral standard that transcends them.^[4]

Purpose and Meaning

Understanding that objective morality is grounded in the God who created humanity gives human life both purpose and meaning. From the Christian perspective, the problem is not merely intellectual; Scripture teaches that fallen human beings suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18). The Christian's understanding of identity is therefore rooted in being created in the image of God rather than in occupation, status, or personal achievement. In The Covenant Life: Find Your God-Given Purpose in Life, David D. Cho connects life's purpose with knowing God and Scripture. Simply put, humanity's purpose includes loving God and loving one's neighbor. When morality is understood within that larger purpose, ethical obligations are not arbitrary rules but expressions of the character and will of the Creator.^[5]

Conclusion

Can the secularist truly claim morality? The answer requires an important distinction. Secularists can make moral judgments, live morally consistent lives, and recognize genuine moral obligations. The Christian worldview critique is that secularism cannot ultimately ground objective moral obligations in an unchanging authority beyond humanity. Michael Shermer, in his article “If There Is No God, Is Murder Wrong?,” argues that morality is part of human nature and that human beings possess moral emotions about which they can reason. The deeper question remains: if there is no Creator and human moral judgments are entirely the products of nature and human development, what makes a moral obligation objectively binding rather than simply strongly preferred? Christianity answers that human beings are moral creatures because they are image bearers of God and possess consciences capable of recognizing moral realities, even while sinners suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18). Therefore, the existence of moral behavior among secularists does not contradict the Christian worldview; rather, Christians can understand such moral awareness as consistent with humanity's creation in God's image. Christians should respond to those with whom they disagree not merely with argument but also with prayer and love. As C. S. Lewis writes in the preface to Mere Christianity, “If they are wrong they need your prayers all the more; and if they are your enemies, then you are under orders to pray for them.”^[6][7]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Mulgan, Tim. Purpose in the Universe: The Moral and Metaphysical Case for Ananthropocentric Purposivism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.

Gnaulati, Enrico. Flourishing Love: A Secular Guide to Lasting Intimate Relationships. London: Karnac Books, 2023.

Anderson, Tawa J., W. Michael Clark, and David K. Naugle. An Introduction to Christian Worldview: Pursuing God's Perspective in a Pluralistic World. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2017.

Pölzler, Thomas. Moral Reality and the Empirical Sciences. New York: Routledge, 2018.

Cho, David D. The Covenant Life: Find Your God-Given Purpose in Life. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2020.

Shermer, Michael. “If There Is No God, Is Murder Wrong?” April 11, 2017. https://michaelshermer.com/articles/if-there-is-no-god-is-murder-wrong/.

Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: HarperOne, 2001.

[1]Tim Mulgan, Purpose in the Universe: The Moral and Metaphysical Case for Ananthropocentric Purposivism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 343–72.

[2]Enrico Gnaulati, Flourishing Love: A Secular Guide to Lasting Intimate Relationships (London: Karnac Books, 2023), introduction.

[3]Tawa J. Anderson, W. Michael Clark, and David K. Naugle, An Introduction to Christian Worldview: Pursuing God's Perspective in a Pluralistic World (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2017), 14.

[4]Thomas Pölzler, Moral Reality and the Empirical Sciences (New York: Routledge, 2018), introduction.

[5]David D. Cho, The Covenant Life: Find Your God-Given Purpose in Life (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2020), 2.

·         [6]Michael Shermer, “If There Is No God, Is Murder Wrong?,” April 11, 2017, https://michaelshermer.com/articles/if-there-is-no-god-is-murder-wrong/.

[7]C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: HarperOne, 2001), xv–xvi.