> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://matthew-d-burkholder.ghost.io/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # Problems with Apologetics (Part 3): Morality - URL: https://matthew-d-burkholder.ghost.io/problems-with-apologetics-part-3-morality/ - Published: 2022-03-08T16:32:43.000Z - Updated: 2026-08-28T19:42:35.000Z - Author: Matthew D. Burkholder - Tags: Theology, #Migrated-1787946130805, #wp, #wp-post, #Import 2026-08-28 15:42 This series has so far been an attempt to build a steel man of some of the arguments against Christianity. The steel-manning technique is when one attempts to present an opposing argument fairly and in the best possible light. When practiced, it allows all parties involved to evaluate their own beliefs or positions considering the best forms of the argument available. The opposite of this is building a straw man. This is when you poorly represent an opposing point of view and then argue against that weak position. Something that comes to mind quickly is the so-called debate over evolution. For years I was equipped with what were essentially decades-old straw men fallacies against evolution by young-earth creationists (YEC): En garde! Where are the transitionary fossils? (Literally everywhere!) Carbon dating isn't accurate (not THAT inaccurate!) Why are there still monkeys? (my head a splode.) Evolution is just a theory! (You mean like GRAVITY?) YEC is notorious for building straw-men arguments and using logical fallacies to a [shocking extent.](http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html?ref=matthew-d-burkholder.ghost.io) If Christians are going to have any kind of vibrant intellectual life, we must refuse to construct straw-man arguments. And of course, Christians are on the receiving end of this fallacy as well. Christian theology is a rich discipline and religious thinkers have had a profound impact on the world. Entire careers have been built on attacking fundamentalist traditions as if they represent the depth of the Christian faith (ahem, I'm looking at you Dawkins!) This brings us to the moral argument for the existence of God. Moral arguments are some of the most sophisticated philosophical arguments for the existence of God ever developed. If there was ever an argument that skeptics perhaps too quickly dismissed, it would be this argument. If morality is at all objective, that is, morality is real and exists independently of human interpretation, religion provides one hell of an answer: an independent moral being that grounds this reality. Morality appears so intrinsically linked to personal agency, that conceiving of morality outside of something like God seems to render the entire concept of right and wrong *logically* absurd. We cannot dismiss the strength of this argument. Truth be told, this post cannot do this debate justice. And as I've already confessed, I'm not smart enough to be a philosopher. Nonetheless, these posts are about steel-manning the views of the skeptic, which brings us back to evolution. Many Christians have simply failed to adequately recognize the importance of this groundbreaking discovery. We haven't always wrestled with evolution's explanatory ability nor even grasped its basic premises. Many Christians simply ignore it as a subject of study. *Many* reactions against evolution are essentially arguments from incredulity - that is, since evolution cannot *currently* explain x, evolution must be false. Unfortunately, many Christians have retreated to what is essentially the self-defeating and dangerous God of the gaps argument. Inserting God as an explanation for the mechanics of nature is unwise. *If* God's importance is defined accordingly, God is reduced in importance as scientific discoveries are made. For example, if you assert God holds the universe together, the discovery of gravity possibly threatens your view of God. And if we are using God as the ultimate explanation for the mechanics of morality, certain possible discoveries about the nature of morality risk rendering God obsolete. For example, evolution asserts that organisms adapt to environments for the purpose of survival. One of the aspects of human beings is that we are social beings and cooperation appears to increase our chance of survival. Nature is filled with examples of cooperation within species, who benefit from collective effort and suffer from optional participation. Some might respond that adapting cooperation for the purpose of survival shifts the definition of morality to something other than what we normally mean by right and wrong: that morality is something that exists independent of survival. In other words, if survival depended on eliminating half of all living matter in the universe, it would still be immoral. For example, Thanos is unquestionably morally wrong even if by chance he was potentially pragmatically right. Or put another way, evolution appears to explain what *is* and can't explain what *ought to be*. But that doesn't mean evolution is incapable of contributing anything to our understanding of morality. By denying the premise outright we run the risk of ignoring how this powerful mechanism of nature has shaped the human person and the society we live in. Apologetics can be problematic in that it potentially posits the wrong kind of God. It posits a God who is no less discoverable than the mechanics of nature. What if God is *not* discoverable through nature? What if our inquiry into nature is simply limited to discovering just that: nature? What if morality is part of our natural process? What if God is actually radically different from nature? What if questions about God's *existence* put God in our box, a box of dimensionality, mass, and matter? What if faith actually is the only way to *discover* God? Of course, Christian apologists do not deny the role of faith. But perhaps looking at the action of God in creation to discover the being of God our creator is beyond our capability *as* creation. We don't stand above creation, we *are* creation. And perhaps we need to change our perspective to prevent putting God in the gaps until he has disappeared completely.