Can Murder be Wrong if there is no God?

Defining the Question

We are not exploring the legality of murder, for that is an arbitrary decision of a given government, whether local or national. The laws of man are not in question here, for man can decide to make anything legal or illegal with enough votes or enough guns. The laws of man therefor, in the grand scheme of things, do not weigh on the question at hand. And, that question is this:

Can murder be considered inherently WRONG if there is no God nor His revealed truth in the Bible? And, if so, by what authority is it considered, not merely unlawful, but inheretly wrong?

Narrowing the Focus

If the Bible were deemed, falsely so, to be unreliable and therefor not to be used as a gauge for human action and interaction, would murder still be considered inherently wrong? Let us suppose that "Thou shall not commit murder" was removed from our collective vocabulary. And, that the Bible itself, as the inerrant word of God, disappeared tomorrow. That all references to this commandment and the Bible itself were gone. Assume that all the "religious" words against murder, by any god or gods, were instantaneously removed from our bookshelves and collective memory. Would there be, outside of arbitrary laws made at the whim of man, any reason to assume murder is wrong?

Now, we are not concerned with whether it is "nice" to do from the perspective of the one being murdered or even their families. We are only concerning ourselves with the ability to still call murder inherently WRONG. Does the wrongness transcend the man-made laws that are passed by a vote. For, if they are only laws because of a vote, then they can also pass out of law by a similar vote. If it is not wrong and only unlawful, then what keeps a society or government from making it legal. Why not institute a survival of the fittest, Darwinian law that states "Do unto others as you see fit" and "If you can take it by whatever means necessary, then do so"? This cannot be answered with a generic "I don't FEEL it's OK to do that.", as feelings are neither the proper foundation for truth or a universal qualifier...someone else may FEEL that it is OK. Universally wrong indicates that it is wrong regardless of how anyone (or everyone) feels about it.

The Conclusion and the Ramifications

It is clear that without a transcendent God and His revealed word, there is no basis to assume the inherent wrongness of murder. If we are left to our own devices and stripped of a transcendent law that supersedes our own, we are free to justify anything simply by passing a law of man. Atheistic neo-Darwinism has justified the killing of millions of people around the world. Stalin, Hitler and their kind were bent on the destruction of entire peoples because they were playing God. Whether through the law or the gun, man can decide who owns what, who has freedom and even who survives. If the law of God is not held in highest esteem and taken as the basis for all of man's laws, them what stops us from this path again?

Now, to those that will argue that Christianity has been responsible for many death, as in the dark ages, I give you this. Those that killed in the name of Christ, killing those that would not convert, were and are in direct conflict with what Christ taught and the reason He came. On the other hand, those that kill under the Atheistic neo-Darwinism banner (under any name) are fulfilling the mindset of survival of the fittest. This is the natural outcome of this world view. And, if this world view is right, which I reject, then we are free to take what we want, when we want it. This would include life itself...assuming we had the votes or the guns to secure the "law".

What are your thoughts?

Is Murder Inherently Wrong or Just Illegal?

See results without voting

More by this Author


29 comments

Nicole 5 years ago

If God is the reason we do good. Then yes it is wrong because God says so. Now if we have free will then it is wrong because we say it is wrong


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Hi :)

Interesting question.

Is murder inherantly wrong?

Generally, I feel that it is.

Life is such a precious thing that it seems totally wrong to take it away from someone ~ without very good reason.

Of course, people kill for a variety of reasons that are not classed as murder ~ in wars, for example, and in self-defence.

In some societes, babies are left out to die, and in others, they are not allowed to be born.

It seems that society decides what kind of killing is acceptable and what is not ~ and, of course, religion is part of society.

Social ideals inform religious belief and religious belief informs social norms.

The Bible has some examples of horrific killings, which would be classed as murder in modern society, but which were, supposedly, agreed by God:

~ The Amalekite slaughter

~ The killing of Job's family

~ The killing of David's child

~ The order that any insolent son should be stoned to death

~ The order that any girl, who could not prove herself a virgin at marriage, should be stoned to death.

~ Etc.

The Bible assumes that God ordered, or condoned, all of this, but, of course, the writers may well be wrong.

However, since the Bible is the only real authority that we apparently have regarding God, then it appears that God condones murder, rather than forbidding it ~ in spite of the commandment.

But, if we disregard the horrors that can be found in both the Bible and in Christian history, and just look at whether morality is possible without a belief in God, which is what, I think, this question is really about, then yes, of course there can be morality without Christian or other beliefs.

Morality is about respecting others, not harming others, being fair to others, etc, etc, and respecting oneself, etc. People can do that without a belief in God. Many do. Most people have a conscience.

I'm not sure that I understand exactly what you mean by 'Atheistic neo-Darwinism' and how has it 'justified the killing of millions of people around the world'?

Atheism and a belief in evolution do not make people immoral or into mass murderers. As you say, Christian beliefs have been to blame for some terrible atrocities, so atheists cannot be blamed for such ills.

I am not aware of anyone particularly killing to 'fulfill the mindset of survival of the fittest'. 'Survival of the fittest' does not mean this. (I have written about this in my evolution hubs.)

People who believe in God can be immoral and commit murders and people who do not believe in God can be very moral and peaceful.

Generally, societies make murder illegal ~ and most people agree with that and have no desire to kill their fellows. Sadly murder still happens, because there are people with problems of one sort or another.

Yes, murder can be wrong ~ is wrong ~ with or without God ~ but, in certain circumstances, it seems that it can be accepted as right ~ again with or without God.

I don't think that the existence of ~ or belief in ~ God makes murder inherantly wrong; I think that it simply is inherantly wrong.


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

People have, without doubt, misused Christianity to commit murder...but that does not make Christianity false any more than a doctor who commits crimes of abuse makes medical science false...

The atheistic neo-Darwinism is what fed the world view of those like Hitler and Stalin...

If there is no transcendant God and therefor no law above man's, murder can not be wrong. It can only be illegal. It can be considered "not nice", but not inherently wrong. One person thinking something is wrong and another thinking that same thing is ok does not change the "wrongness" if there is a trnscendant law.

Murder, or anything, can not be deemed universally and inherently wrong.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Hi Mitch :)

I think that you are probably right, that in certain circumstances, certain people will accept that murder is not inherantly wrong ~ but I do not think that this has anything to do with the existence or non-existence of God.

People who believe in God can convince themselves that certain killings are ok ~ eg in wars.

And, yes, the fact that Christianity has been misused does not mean it is wrong.

Equally, though, if some aspects of 'atheistic neo-Darwinism' have been misused, then it doesn't make atheism or 'Darwinism' wrong, either.

Atheism is not immoral and evolutionary theory certainly isn't immoral ~ it's just science.

I accept your own definitions of 'illegal' and 'immoral', but they are not mine.

I think that we can have morality without God or religion. Murder could be legalised, but I would still consider it immoral. I think that most people would feel the same ~ I certainly hope so.

However, if murder became legal, I don't think that atheists would be commiting any more killings. There would be no logic to that.

I have discussed the issue, before, as to whether 'Murder, or anything, can not be deemed universally and inherently wrong', and yes, I do think that you have a point ~ but I think that your point stands regardless of whether or not God exists.


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

The natural end to a purely atheistic neo-Darwinistic wordl view is that of survival of the fittest...it is not a departure from that world view...

Someone killing in the name of Christ is departing from the world view that Christianity (Biblical Christianity)is at it's core...

You state that you would still find it "immoral" even if God was not real. Define, in that context, immoral...

And does one person, or even a group of people, deeming something personally repugnant, make it wrong?

Inherently wrong is not the same as personally repugnant...

I am enjoying our debate/conversation...


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Hello Mitch :)

Yes ~ an interesting discussion :)

'Survival of the fittest' simply means that creatures, which fit well into their environment, are more likely to survive. Thus, a green frog on a green leaf is less likely to be eaten by a predator than a red frog on a green leaf. Though the poor red frog may get killed, I don't see any real link with murder and morality there.

And 'Darwinism' ~ or, rather, evolutionary theory, based on Darwin's discoveries ~ is not an atheistic worldview. Plenty of Christians accept it.

Either way, neither atheism, nor scientific evolutionary theory, encourage murder or immorality.

As for what makes something 'wrong' or 'immoral', that is a very interesting subject. I am sure that many philosophers must have mulled it over.

Maybe it's different for different people. I think that it probably is, because, basically, it depends on how one was brought up.

And I actually think that, in many cases, it is, indeed, related to something being considered 'personally repugnant'.

However, it is also more than that. I find the idea of eating offal personally repugnant ~ but is it morally wrong? ~ Not to most people. However, people who believe that killing animals is as bad as killing humans might, indeed, think so.

I have noticed that many Christians believe that morality only exists because of Christianity, and the existence of God.(Other faiths may have parallel opinions.) I know a lovely, kind and virtuous lady, who is convinced that she is only moral because she is Christian. I really do not understand that attitude. Is a decent person going to turn into a monstrous torturing murderer because she changes her mind about the existence of God, or Jesus?? I doubt it.

Interestingly, most atheists, agnostics and doubters I know agree with me, that it is perfectly possible to be moral without religion ~ just as it is perfectly possible to be immoral with religion.

What is immoral? ~ It is usually what society and individuals deem it to be. It depends, as I said, on how we were brought up. Maybe we are told by our parents, by the lawmakers and by religious leaders, as well, but is that the same as something being 'inherantly wrong'? ~ Probably not.

I do think the closest we come to 'knowing' that something is 'inherantly wrong' is that 'gut feeling' we get about things ~ I think that this is our consciences at work.

I am agnostic. The world is an amazing place, so I would not rule out a power or intelligence that could be termed 'God'. However, I do not belong to any religion and I do not believe that 'God' is as decribed in the Bible. But I do have very strict moral standards and find the idea of murder absolutely abhorrent.

No, 'inherently wrong' may not be the same as 'personally repugnant', but it doesn't have to be related to religious belief, either.

Of course, if someome believes in God, and believes that God has commanded them not to murder, then they may perceive murder as inherantly wrong or immoral, as defined by God, or, alternatively they ay decide that it is illegal, as determined by God's laws. Either way, it is really as decided by their religious beliefs.

Others may decide that murder is wrong for other reasons.


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

Maybe I phrased the question wrong...something not inherently wrong just because people don't like it...likewise, something isn't ihetently good just because people agtee with it...

If, theoretically, every person on the planet decided today that taking someone's life was ok, would it be? Mind you, I mean EVERYONE...that is the issue with the statement "I'm a moral person"...if left purely up to the individual it is subjective...whim or upbringing only dictate social norms...social norms change...

This is why I say that with God, nothing can actually be universally wrong...it doesn't rest on whether wr agree or not...the "moral" woman you know, what arbitrary "criteria" makes her moral?

If murder is inherently wrong, it is wrong no matter who believes it...


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Hi Mitch :).

I'll have to get back to you on this. I was just about to post a complicated response, when it all disappeared into the ether :)

Sorry!


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

been there... :)


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Hi again Mitch :)

You wrote : 'If murder is inherently wrong, it is wrong no matter who believes it...'

Yes, I agree with that definition.

So, how is it decided, or discovered, what is moral and what is immoral?

In most cases, someone tells us what is right and what is wrong ~ teachers, parents, priests, judges, etc.

But when they are thus informing us, are they telling us what they think is wrong; what society has decided is wrong; or what is a permanent, essential attribute of 'wrongness' [that is the Oxford definition of 'inherent']?

Children learn right and wrong from their elders ~ but do they also have a sense of some activities not just being disliked or outlawed, but of being 'inherently wrong'?

Our reaction to murder is usually distress, fear, sadness, trauma, anger, disgust, hatred, vengefulness, etc.

Most of us seem be born with an innate feeling and belief that murder is wrong.

At least, I would like to think that most of us are born with that feeling, and that it would be a natural gut instinct ~ a response from our consciences.

I would like to think that, but, of course, I do not know.

However, since most societies seem to outlaw murder, then this feeling ~ that murder is wrong ~ must be common to most of humanity.

It could indicate that murder is not seen as wrong because it is illegal, but, rather, that it is illegal because it is immoral.

The illegality of murder would then stem from, and reflect, its inherent immorality.

Of course, some laws reflect morals and principles, and others simply benefit the specific society, so it still isn't that simple.

And I think that there are levels of murder. I think that most people would consider the torture, rape and murder of a child to be wrong, for example. But what if the parent of that murdered child sought revenge and killed her attacker? That would be classed as a crime ~ murder! But some would consider murder acceptable, and not 'wrong', in such circumstances. So, yes, the question of whether murder is inherently wrong is not simple one to answer.

But you asked something more:

'Can Murder be Wrong if there is no God?' / 'Can murder be considered inherently WRONG if there is no God nor His revealed truth in the Bible?'

I think that the arguments given still count.

I, or we, may think that murder must be inherently wrong, but, once we look closer, we find that it is actually a very difficult question to answer. And I think that this stands, whether or not God exists / whether or not people believe in God / whether or not people belong to a religion ~ Christian or otherwise.

Believers may decide to accept the commandment not to kill, and they may think that God has classified murder as inherently wrong, but, basically, that is not so very different from deciding that murder is wrong for any other reason ~ eg that most people in the world believe it to be wrong. It is just making a decision, based upon our background / education / culture / society / etc.

And, since the Bible contains both God's commandment not to murder and also a number of horrible killings, supposedly on God's part, then I would say that the Bible is not a reliable source of what is morally right or wrong, anyway.

So I would say that some murders, at least, feel inherantly wrong to me ~ and may feel inherantly wrong to others ~ and may, therefore, be inherantly wrong ~ but I couldn't be sure, because our feelings may or may not be innate ~ and may, alternatively, be based on culture, upbringing, etc.

I would also agree that 'if murder is inherently wrong, then it is wrong no matter who believes it' ~ and I would say that this is correct, regardless of whether God exists / whether the Bible states that it is wrong / whether people believe in God / etc, etc.


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

Well written response...

But, (and you knew there was a but coming)that actually makes my point. We may still feel, as individuals that it was wrong, but others might not...but, that doesn't matter...What we believe does NOT change what IS, but what IS should change what we believe...

If it is inherently wrong, it is wrong whether anyone agrees or not...Social acceptance is not the foundation for right and wrong, only acceptable or unacceptable...

If there is no transcendant law that superceeds man's laws, then nothing can be inherently wrong...it can only be socially approved or dissaproved of, for whatever reason given. Consensus does not make something right or wrong...It is not whether we believe in God or not that is in question...If we do not believe, that does not make Him cease to exist...but, if He does not exist, then we have only social norms to contend with...which can change at anytime...

If there is no transcendant law, why not murder to get what you want...apart from the legal punishment what is the problem...Not talking about how it makes someone feel, but on the inherent "wrongness"...It can't be!


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Basically, I am agreeing with you on certain matters, Mitch :)

'If there is no transcendant law that superceeds man's laws, then nothing can be inherently wrong.'

~ Yes, I suppose that could be considered true.

'If there is no transcendant law, why not murder to get what you want.'

~ Well, yes, and some people do ~ but most do not, regardless of their religious beliefs.

What I believe is that the majority of people must have a sense of morality, since societies, world-wide, pass many laws which are, or seem to be, based on principles and morals.

Murder is, generally, considered to be wrong.

People, generally, seem to consider that it is inherently wrong. It feels wrong.

And why can't we talk about how it makes us feel?

Maybe our feelings are right at the crux of the matter.

Many Christians seem to think that there is no morality without God. I disagree. I think that we have something amazing called our 'conscience', which helps us to deal with right and wrong.

Our conscience makes us 'feel' good or bad about certain behaviour.

So how we ~ ie the majority of people ~ feel about something may, indeed, be the decider about whether something might be considered inherently wrong.

Social acceptance ~ based on our gut feelings, or consciences ~ may indeed be the foundation for right and wrong.

In other words, how we 'feel' about right and wrong may be more important than whether 'we' accept God's existence.

Yes, social norms can change at any time, but so can religious beliefs ~ and it is those religious beliefs which make Christians think that there is no morality without God.

Just because there may not be a 'transcendant law', supervised by God, does not mean that people are going to turn into murderers.

You ask 'why not murder to get what you want...apart from the legal punishment what is the problem?'

I can't get to grips with this question, because, to me, there would be a huge problem.

I actually think that this must be one of the huge divides between certain Christians and atheists + agnostics ~ the belief that, without God, people would turn into monsters.

Most atheists would never consider saying that there is no God, so why not murder to get what you want.

We are looking at two very different mindsets here.

Whether or not there is God, it is a good thing for us all to get along together. It makes life pleasanter. It makes us all feel better. Society works better.

Our sense of morality ~ our conscience ~ tells us that murder is bad, so it makes us feel bad. Most people don't want to do it and don't approve of it.

Of course, laws change and ideas on what is right and wrong may change. I accept that and believe that this is a complex issue, with no truly right or wrong answer.

We can philosophise on whether there is any action, which is inherently wrong and / or we can look at real life and consider whether there is any action, which is generally considered to be inherently wrong.

For most people, I think that murder ~ murder of innocents, anyway ~ would come into that category.

And I don't think that this has anything to do with laws that may be found in the Bible ~ especially as those laws are often contradicted by descriptions of God's supposed behaviour.

Maybe how we feel and what we think doesn't count, but why shouldn't it ~ and what does?


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

Trish,

I'm not saying that the world would turn to utter chaos if we didn't believe in God. But, that inherent "wrongness" does not exist with God. We could still chose to do "right", but the "right" thing would be completely arbitrary. I'm not saying it would be good to commit murder, just that it would not be inherently wrong. I think we agree on the larger question and have room for the nuances. I was a pretty "moral" person before I came to know Him. Knowing Him is not about becoming moral.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Hi Mitch :)

Yes, I think that we are basically saying similar things but, though I may concede that inherent "wrongness" does not exist, I do not agree that inherent "wrongness" can only exist if God exists ~ which is what I think you are saying.


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

Trish,

How, if it is not transcendant to man, can it be inherently wrong. It can be universally accepted (theoretically), but acceptance does not make it inherently so...Inherently wrong, as I am describing it, is wrong regardless if we agree with it or not. Otherwise, it is just accepted and therefor could be rejected...It not a question of obediance to the law, but the truth of the law itself...

To look at it, somewhat simply, as gravity...whether you believe in it or not you will fall if you jump of a bridge...the law remains whether you believe it or not...If gravity "stopped" you and I would float away no matter what we believe...This is the law of gravity...in this scenerio we would call Physics, God...Without physics, no law of gravity...

Maybe that's over simplified, but I think you get what I'm saying...The idea can exist regardless of the reality, but the reality is the reality...Without God there can be no universal truth only universal acceptance which is not the same...It doesn't mean that people can't or might not do the right thing; it just means that other than the legal/social ramifications there is no reason to...and the legal/social "laws" can change...


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Yes, Mitch, I agreed with you that we could say that nothing was 'inherently wrong'.

However, we do seem to have a moral compass, which tells us right from wrong ~ so, maybe we do have the ability to sense if something is inherently wrong, after all.

I am suggesting that this is a possibility; I am not saying that it is something that I am sure of.

I just don't think that God is relevant to the discussion. God is not the only reason for doing right.

Christians would, no doubt, disagree with me ~ but it would be a boring world, if we all agreed with each other :)


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

Trish,

Just re-read our conversation...that was fun and insightful...hope you are well...


kkkkjk 5 years ago

Killing is not wrong because a made up guy said so.

Do you see animals going aroung killing their own species because they can? No because it's natural instinct not to get rid of something that is usefull. People that kil have some psycological problems. But the point of surviving is not killing your own species

Simple answer for an overused retarded question


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

kkkkjk, Actually other species, including chimpanzees do kill others of their own species. Furthermore, you did not even address the question as it was posed. Name calling is not answering a question. But, if that is all you can offer to the conversation...


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

Hi again :)

I suppose that I could ask whether you, personally, think that killing is wrong.

Inherent or not, most normal decent people would think that murder was wrong.

Would those people change their minds, according to whether [they believed] God existed or not?

Would that really change anything about the act of murder?


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

By the way, I wrote a hub on morality ~ related to Turek's ideas. :)


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 5 years ago from South Jersey Author

Killing or Murder? Murder, the taking of innocent human life, is something that I personally think is reprehensible and wrong. That being said, my personal belief does not make it universally so. Without a higher power, an ultimate law giver, it can only be my opinion.


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 4 years ago from The English Midlands

Murder seems to be wrong for most people. I don't see that it takes a higher power to make it so. Turek does and I take issue with his ideas and his reasons.


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 4 years ago from South Jersey Author

"wrong for most people" is not universally WRONG in of itself...that very statement proves my point. Universally WRONG, and not just personally or socially unacceptable are not the same things.

If tomorrow, everyone said that murder was not wrong, would it then be right and ok? That is the question...is it's "wrongness" just a social construct that is subject to change based on whether "we" agree or disagree?


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 4 years ago from The English Midlands

Hi :)

I haven't re-read all of this, so I may repeat myself ~ but, no, murder is not just wrong because someone else says that it is wrong, or because the law says that it is wrong.

What makes it wrong comes from various 'places' ~ society, family, conscience, etc, and it is finally decided in one's own brain.

Is it possible that some people would think that murder was ok? ~ Obviously, yes, largely, I think, because of the words that we use to excuse our behaviour.

Men kill other men, daily, but it is not always classed as 'murder'. Sometimes it's war; sometimes it's capital punishment; sometimes it's human sacrifice (look at Abraham), etc, etc.

You say that knowledge of what is wrong has to come from 'a higher power, an ultimate law giver'. Well, if such a power exists, then it seems possible that 'he' gave us our consciences, so, without knowing whether or not God exists that is all that I can say on the matter. Maybe knowledge of right and wrong comes from a higher power and maybe it doesn't.

Certainly the Bible condones some horrific behaviour and it describes God encouraging, condoning and committing, murder. Thus, if God tells us that murder is wrong, then it is not via the Bible and it cannot be God as described in the Bible.

If it were suddenly proven ~ to your satisfaction ~ that God did not exist, would you suddenly decide that murder was ok?


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 4 years ago from South Jersey Author

Your statement "What makes it wrong comes from various 'places' ~ society, family, conscience, etc, and it is finally decided in one's own brain.", makes my point...it is not, in your opinion,inherently wrong...It is societal or familial...it is a personal decision only and not wrong unless the individual or group agrees that it is...IF that is true, then it could equally be agreed otherwise...

Inherent wrongness means that it is wrong regardless if any or all people believe it or not...


Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 4 years ago from The English Midlands

Hi,

You seem to be assuming ~ and maybe I am mistaken ~ that something could, indeed, be inherently wrong, if morality comes from God.

I am saying that this could, indeed, be true, if it is God, who gives us our sense of morality, but, since there is no proof that God exists, then that is questionable.

And, if we are assuming that this is God, as described in the Bible, then it is not only questionable, but it simply cannot be so ~ not based on the example set for us.

I still wonder ~ if it were proven that God did not exist, then would you suddenly decide that murder was ok?

Also, why is it that people feel that murder is inherently wrong? Where does this feeling come from, if not because people / society etc has decided that it is the case.

After all, just because people are of the opinion that murder is inherently wrong does not mean that it isn't.

If God's authority can make it inherently wrong, then why not the authority of the huge number of people, who believe this to be true?

I am not saying that murder is or is not inherently wrong, because it can be argued different ways, of course, but I am just looking at the fact that most people feel that it is and that this 'opinion' must hold some weight in the answer to your question.

If every single person in the world thought that it was inherently wrong, would it still be just an opinion?

Why would a Christian belief in / opinion of God's say-so make any real difference?


Seek-n-Find profile image

Seek-n-Find 4 years ago from Illinois

To jump in on a discussion from about 10 months ago... :-)

I'll just add that I think the questions we ask are just as important as the answers we seek. I don't see the question as being, "If God did not exist would murder still be wrong?" but rather, "What does an inherent/internal sense of right and wrong actually prove?" To that, I would say that it is the very existence of morality itself that necessitates the need for a moral lawgiver i.e. God. For a complete explanation, please see my hub entitled "Where do you get your morality from? It can’t be God!" Debunked (A Response)". Mitch--our hubs pair very well together. :-)


Mitch Alan profile image

Mitch Alan 4 years ago from South Jersey Author

Seek-n-Find, thanks for reading... I agree that the questions can be as important as the answers, for without the right question you won't arrive at the correct answer.

I linked to your hub from mine, as I feel it furthers the conversation in a meaningful and poignant way.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working