The Moral Argument for the Existence of God: An Evaluation of Some Recent Discussions

This paper contributes to the discussion on the Moral Argument for the existence of God—an important argument of natural theology which is relevant to science and religion dialogues—by showing that the argument can be formulated in a such way that avoids the lack of comprehensiveness in Andrew Loke’s original formulation and the unnecessarily complicated reformulation offered in Jack et al.’s criticism of Loke. This paper also contributes to the discussion by demonstrating the failure of relaxed (moral) realism proposed by Jack et al. to rebut the Moral Argument and offers replies to their other objections concerning moral obligations and social relations, the law-like character of moral obligations, and moral truths and responsibilities.