William Lane Craig: God Is The Best Explanation For Objective Moral Values: My Comments.

*This has just got to be not only the weakest but the most absurd of William Lane Craig’s arguments for God for two reasons. Morals are not objective and secondly God is the most immoral being ever conceived of in the annals of fiction (which the Bible is – a work of historical fiction).

*All manner of courtroom trials hinge of “extenuating circumstances”; there are nearly always shades of gray; things are not always what they seem. Thou shall not steal, but an unemployed father steals a loaf of bread for his starving children; thou shall not kill but a woman who has suffered decades of violent domestic abuse finally snaps and kills her abusive and often drunken husband. Further, one often makes special allowances for minors.

*There is no such thing as objective morals. As philosophers have pointed out with numerous thought experiments, "it depends". As human cultures and societies through the millennia have shown, "it depends". So, while each and every one of us would like to think that our set of morals are absolute and objective - they apply to all people at all times in all places under all circumstances - they are really only relative and subjective. In any event, the absolutely last entity we should be taking moral lessons from is God. If we behaved like God behaved, we'd be arrested in every country on Earth and executed in many. Hitler probably took lessons from God!

A Few Additional Thoughts

*We all know that William Lane Craig cites as a proof of God's existence the fact that there are objective moral values and if there were no God there wouldn't be objective moral values and therefore there is a God because we accept that there are objective moral values. William Lane Craig often uses the example that it is objectively immoral to torture a young child and that everyone would agree on that (quite apart from all of the torturing / child abuse and killing of young children in the Bible of which there is a lot, most being via the direct actions of God Himself - The Flood; Sodom & Gomorrah; The Tenth Plague, etc.) No, one could imagine scenarios where the torture of a young child might be required for the greater good - it just depends. For example, one could imaging that ISIS has brainwashed a young child into planting a bomb somewhere in a public school. The kid escapes but is caught. Only the kid knows where the bomb is and the bomb is due to go off within a few minutes. Are the authorities going to play good cop, or bad cop with the kid?

*If as William Lane Craig asserts that without God there are no objective moral values, but then with God there would be and there are objective moral values and therefore those objective moral values - which exist - must come from God and so therefore God exists. So therefore, given that long list of Biblical crimes and immoral actions / events which can be greatly expanded apart from children that suffer and who are abused (i.e. - God performs acts of, or condones acts of, or orders acts of murder & genocide; animal & human sacrifice; torture; animal abuse; theft; slavery; pedophilia; rape; incest; cannibalism; betrayal; and lying), are all objective 'morals' that come from and are sanctioned and even directly performed in many cases by The Almighty really objective? If so they must equally apply to God, otherwise God is a hypocrite - a being who says "do as I say, not as I do". Regardless, God indeed is the most immoral being ever conceived of by man, an indication that assumes that God was created in the image of man, or who in turn actually exists if the converse is true. No matter how you slice and dice things, God is pure evil if there are objective moral values.

*Since William Lane Craig states that there are God-derived objective morality or objective moral values, then one would assume that all predominately Christian nations would have adopted God's universal set of moral values - or human rights. There are God-given human rights. However, as George Carlin points out in his YouTube video "Swearing on the Bible" that is NOT the case. Different predominately Christian nations have differing lists of what they consider to be basic human rights. According to Carlin, the United States has ten (the Bill of Rights - which of course Americans have had to amend again and again) but that is not the case across the Christian board. The British have 13 Rights; the Germans 29; the Belgians 25; the Swedish 6; and some nations a big fat zero in the Rights department. As Carlin points out God forgot one really important Human Right that humans have had to add to God’s list – slavery.

*If morality is objective and if morality stems from God, then it should be morally A-OK to do what God does. So, if you see someone who is not of your own choosen kind, and they sort of stand in your way of achieving your goals, then by all means it is moral to kill them - that's what God would do, in fact did as related in the Bible.