Can God justify objective morality?


[quote=“STT, post:39, topic:453574, full:true”]
How come?

The OP requires intelligent people.

[quote=“De_Maria, post:37, topic:453574”]
And what is the absolute truth?


[quote=“De_Maria, post:37, topic:453574”]
What do you mean?

Have you ever heard the truism, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”?


Ethics…can be “subjective” but morality implies and presumes God.
And God’s morality is definitely, and eternally, objective.


On another footing, the definition of morality is given in Psalm 72:1-4

Give the king thy judgments, O God, and thy righteousness unto the king’s son.
He shall judge thy people with righteousness, and thy poor with judgment.
The mountains shall bring peace to the people, and the little hills, by righteousness.
He shall judge the poor of the people,
he shall save the children of the needy,
and shall break in pieces the oppressor.

The Gospel provides three laws:

  1. Protect Life (Lazarus, the loved one of the Roman soldier, healing of the sick)
  2. Protect Childhood (Suffer little children, anyone who abuses a child should be drowned with a millstone around his neck)
  3. Protect Respect (Love thy neighbour)

The poor of the people are poor due to LIFE
CHILDREN need to be saved
The oppressor shows no RESPECT

The ten negative commandments are reduced to three positive ones which Psalm 72 tells as making a good king.
Jesus did not meet this criteria. He only came up with two commandments (Love God, Love thy Neighbour). which hung off the previous laws. A true king would have replaced the ten negative commandments with these three positive ones… or at least according to Psalm 72.

So if morality is defined in Psalm 72 and Jesus failed to complete it and Jesus is God we have a paradox.


I don’t reallt know what you’re getting at, but I just wanted to point out that your second point is a little off. The verse doesn’t mean, “those who abuse children will be drowned with millstones around their neck.” It means, “if you cause one of these children to sin, it would be better if you were drowned with a millstone around the neck [than the judgment you will receive for it].”



God doesn’t have to justify anything. he is the author, he wrote the script.
we are not God and not capable of doing what God does; so, no humans can’t justify it just because God can.
some do, some don’t agree it exist. whether we agree has no bearing on if something exist or not.
without God there is no objective morality. but man wants to be a god so he creates his subjective morality.


No. I just need the intellectual beings.

And how that helps you to know?

That is true.


No. God needs to know justice and can justify it to curious people.


God needs for nothing


Maybe we’re not intelligent enough, or as we like to think. :slightly_smiling_face:


Ok, we’ve talked a bit and I think I have a better understanding of your question.

[quote=“STT, post:1, topic:453574, full:true”]
Can God justify objective morality?

Yes, although He didn’t need to, God can and has justified morality to all men.

Let’s assume so. This means that any intelligent being, like human, can also justify it.

Many people have accepted and do obey God’s moral law. By doing so, they justify it in their lives.

Humanity however does not agree on the fact that objective morality exists.

Because men have a free will. They can accept or reject any objective truth. There are people who reject their own gender. And there is nothing more objective than that.

This means objective morality cannot be justified. Therefore God cannot justify objective morality.

Non sequitur. God has justified it. Those men who accept it and obey it have also juistified it in their lives. Those who haven’t can’t change the truth by their denial. The truth is true whether you believe it or not.


Why didn’t God create Adam and Eve so that they would know from the beginning what was right and what was wrong?


I thought that since ethics refers to rules or principles in religion it would be objective, whereas since morality refers to an individual or personal code of behavior, it would be subjective. Take for example the question of artificial birth control. Some religions would say that if a married couple has seven children and are facing financial difficulties, it would not be a mortal sin for the couple to use artificial birth control.


Causing a child to sin is abuse.
I didn’t say ‘shall’ I said ‘will’ in the determination/duty sense.

You say potato, I say potato.



Ask God.


I’ll get back to this later. Had some thoughts but need to do some research so deleted the content for now.


There is a distinction that you failed to discover, and thus your error. The distinction is ethics and morality. Morality emptiness the ego (Phil 2:5-8), and in turn God gives himself as wisdom (Sir 24:23-26, vulg.). Ethics is civic and embraces human secularism, it rules in only this world and is justified by a judgment of worldly perspective.

We came to pass morality to the poor and lowly, and in turn, they participate in the divine nature. (cf. 2 Pet 1:4)

You say: This means that any intelligent being, like human, can also justify it.

We say: Only the poor and lowly in the heart can do justice in moral terms. (cf. CCC 544)

You say: Humanity however does not agree on the fact that objective morality exists.

Yes, the rich in the pleasures of this world have there own wisdom - “for this is not wisdom, descending from above: but earthly, sensual, devilish.” (Jas 3:15) which is vain in the approachment to heaven. But useful in getting along. “And all that will live godly in Christ Jesus, shall suffer persecution.” (2 Tim 3:12)

You said: This means objective morality cannot be justified.

I say you have no grounds to state the case because you failed to understand the life of God and know what morality is. God does not inspire ethics. And I agree, there are no such things as objective ethics.


The justice of this world condemned the first truth of innocence in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Through it, God gave his justice to the devout, lowly and poor in heart.

Venerable Bede says Jesus preserved his wounds on his glorified body for four reasons: “First, to build up faith in his resurrection. Second, so that he might always show to the Father when he makes intercession for us what type of death he endured. Third, so that he might teach those redeemed by his death how mercifully they have been aided by these very indications of his death. Finally, so that in judgment he might declare how rightly the impious are damned.” (Glossa Ordinaria, ch. 24, v. 40)

How can anyone justify the world’s injustice on the Son of God, the very life of life? In the same Life in which justice is brought to expediency in the eyes of the impious on earth and ultimately in hell? A soul needs to discover this life to grasp wisdom for these answers.

God can rightly justify what is truly objective and efficacious. For he bore the effect of all injustice. Injustice in the mode of God became justice, and only in that mode, the devout, poor, and lowly may exclaim with the Church’s Easter Vigil liturgy: “O Happy Fault!”


It should be a part of God’s omniscience to speak a language we can understand.


Great. Then why people are so scattered in believing on the objective morality.

You have faith in God therefore you have faith in God’s moral law. Other people simply doesn’t have faith.

We are talking about God’s justice, facts. It should be as evident as 1+1=2.

The truth can be justified. What is the truth?


Jesus is the way the truth and the life.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit