McQuilkin and Copan offer readers four succinct objections to
evolutionary ethics. The strongest of the arguments would be a
combination of the final three. The first argument presents challenges to
the traditional attributes of God, namely his immutability and omniscience
as well as the biblical creation account. McQuilken’s initial assertion is that
those who claim an evolutionary view of ethical beliefs fail to recognize
that God could have engineered the process through evolution. Although
this is true, it is not a compatible argument or belief for a Christian to
take. The Bible explains that all men are created in the image of God;
therefore, we are all born with an understanding of objective morality and
truth, but not all will recognize this fact.[1]The prophet Amos makes
known that the idolatrous nations were responsible for their
transgressions even though they did not worship or seek God.
Therefore, McQuilken’s final three assertions that human dignity
comes from our sense of God, from God we can trust this belief, and
finally how we should behave, result in a solution for ethical conduct.
[2]Likewise, Paul declares that through Christ, all things were created
through him and for him.[3]
Atheists often insist the position of evolution is the default state,
that Christians must defend objective morality, while atheists can assume
it has evolved. However, as Copan observes, many prominent atheists,
while asserting that morality can be explained independently of God, do
not provide evidence for this assertion. People can know proper morality
without believing in God or the Bible; as noted earlier, we are made in
God’s image, but without the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful
God, all other explanations are inevitably self-defeating.[4]Concerning
morality, Copan questions “how such rights or values could emerge from
valueless matter. Matter has properties (shape, mass, color, texture, and
so on), but moral value isn’t one of them.”[5]Moreover, the apostle Paul
declares, “For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what
the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not
have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their
hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting
thoughts accuse or even excuse them” (Romans 2:14-5).[6]
From our knowledge of God through special and general
revelation, we can understand the truth. Moreover, having been made in
the Creator’s image, every life has intrinsic value[7], a belief that is
untenable with naturalism. Without objective truth, every other philosophy
is self-defeating. For the postmodernist, there is no objective truth; rather,
truth is a construct of social conditions and arrangements.[8]One must
wonder the point of arguing or debating with someone who refuses to
believe that two plus two equals four or that an accidental arrangement of
matter cannot produce objective truth or morality without the question of
whether that belief can be trusted. The answer lies in Scripture itself, the
Great Commission, Paul’s declaration of Romans 10:17, or Peter’s
pronouncement in 1 Peter 3:15. Even Van Til, who gave the admonition
that “any attempt to base the truth of Christianity on reasons or proofs
that could be recognized by the non-Christian on his own terms” would be
“wrong headed and doomed to failure,” admitted that a “rational
argument for Christianity was both possible and necessary.”[9]
Word Count: 682
[1]Genesis 1:27, Romans 1:18-20.
[2]Robertson McQuilkin, and Paul Copan,An Introduction to Biblical
Ethics: Walking in the Way of Wisdom(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 2014), 180-81.
[3]Colossians 1:15-6.
[4]Paul Copan,True For You, But Not For Me: Overcoming Objections to
Christian Faith(Grand Rapids, MI: Bethany House Publishers, 2009), 75-6.
[5]Ibid., 75.
[6]Unless otherwise noted, all biblical references are in the English
Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008).
[7]Psalm 139:13-14, Job 33:4, Isaiah 43:7, and 1 John 3:1 for instance.
[8]Douglas Groothuis, “Why Truth Matters Most: An Apologetic for Truth
=-Seeking in Postmodern Times,”Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Societyno. 47, 3 (September 2004): 441.
[9]James K. Beilby,Thinking About Christian Apologetics: What It Is and
Why We Do It(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2011), 78-9.
