Why Morality Is Absolute—and What That Actually Means
Christians often claim that morality is absolute, but they rarely explain why. Indeed, most don’t even know why and would be very hard-pressed to explain why if challenged to do so. Even most pastors would have a hard time giving more than a pat, one sentence, answer if they were ever asked directly about why they believe in moral absolutes. And in a culture where moral claims are seen as subjective or situational, hand-waving appeals to “God said so” are not persuasive, even for many Christians. We need more than assertion; we need understanding. We need to know not only that morality is absolute, but what makes it so, and not only that but also how to defend it without relying on circular logic, blind belief or religious tradition. In what follows, I hope to establish that moral absolutes are not only real but that they are necessary (i.e. logically necessary) and why.
The first point to consider is the fact that we do not live in a morally neutral universe. This is true because we do not live in a personally neutral one. The ground of all being, all existence, is not a mindless force or mystical principle; it is a living God. Not a god that is merely alive in a sort of biological sense, but fully alive in every meaningful dimension: spiritual, volitional, rational, relational, dynamic and creative.
God doesn’t merely possess life; He is Life (I John 5:12). He is not just the communicator of moral truth; He is the reference point for it.
Right and wrong, then, are not social constructs or evolving conventions. They are reflections of what aligns, or fails to align, with the very nature of ultimate reality: God Himself.
That which affirms, promotes and protects innocent personal life; the kind of life that is volitional, rational, and capable of relationship with the God who is its Creator and Source is good. That which degrades, corrupts, or destroys it is evil. (Proverbs 11:19: "As righteousness leads to life, so he who pursues evil pursues it to his own death.")
This is not subjectivism. It is not arbitrary. It is not “divine command theory.” It is a moral framework grounded in the knowable and immutable character of the God who made us in His image (Genesis 1:27)
Because God is Life in its highest and most complete sense, life becomes the reference point for moral discernment. Not just physical life, but personal life, life that reflects God’s nature: life that is volitional, rational and relational. Right and wrong, good and evil, are not judged by social norms or consequences alone, but by whether they uphold or violate the kind of life we were made for and in the likeness of.
That means every moral wrong, whether overt like assault or subtle like gossip, finds its wrongness in this fact: it violates or erodes what is necessary for that kind of life.
Conversely, what we call “good” are not arbitrary virtues, but actions and attitudes that reinforce and elevate this design:
Any coherent moral system requires three things:
To truly call something evil, we need a fixed standard grounded in something greater than ourselves. That standard must have moral authority; not just because it exists, but because it reflects the nature of the One who made us. And when that standard is rooted in the character of a personal, righteous Creator, it transcends all human opinion and applies equally to all.
This is what gives our moral intuitions their weight. As Isaiah warned, “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness” (Isaiah 5:20, NKJV). Deep down, we know that certain actions are not merely unpleasant, they are, in fact, wrong. Our moral sense demands an anchor that is fixed, authoritative, and universal. Without it, we’re left calling atrocities “unfortunate” instead of evil, and that’s worse than inadequate, it’s immoral.
This moral anchor is not a list of commands, it is the living, rational, righteous nature of God Himself (Malachi 3:6: "For I am the Lord, I do not change; therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob"). He is not simply “the enforcer” of right and wrong, He is THE good. And because we are made in His image, we are accountable to that same goodness (Romans 2:14–15: "For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law... they show the work of the law written in their hearts"). Morality then, is not a matter of commandments and obedience. It is a matter of character – God’s character! And God's character is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8: "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever").
But what about the difficult cases; the so called “gray areas”?
Someone might be asking: Is lying always wrong? What about lying to protect someone from harm?
That question reveals a common confusion between moral rules and moral principles.
Absolute morality doesn’t mean rigid, context-free prohibitions. It means there is a fixed reference point by which actions are measured. Moral discernment is the art of applying unwavering principles to ever-shifting circumstances. Its exercise is not a slide into moral relativism, but a demonstration of moral wisdom.
It’s not about the surface act, but what the act accomplishes (or violates) relative to the kind of life God intends. In some cases, telling a lie might actually serve truth in a higher sense by preserving life, shielding the innocent or protecting the relational fabric from a malicious tear. Rahab lied to protect the Israelite spies, and she was commended for her faith (Joshua 2:1–6; Hebrews 11:31). The Hebrew midwives also lied to Pharaoh to protect the newborn Moses, and God honored their actions (Exodus 1:15–21).
That doesn’t mean lying is generally good, but under certain circumstances, a falsehood can become righteousness when it defends or promotes innocent life and aligns with God’s character of justice and mercy.
Likewise, something that is generally good can become evil if done from a corrupt motive. Generosity, for example, is normally praised, but if someone gives in order to impress others or gain leverage, then the act is no longer righteous. Jesus warned against this directly...
The deed looks good on the outside, but it’s hollow because it's motive is conceit not love, and so it fails the moral test. Again, it’s not the surface act that matters most, but the heart, the goal, the promotion of life in alignment with God’s character.
In effect, God’s nature, His righteous character, is the moral equivalent to the North Star. It doesn't move and stands as a steady reference, even when the terrain around us shifts beneath our feet and becomes less than entirely intuitive.
In conclusion, morality is not subjective, it isn’t invented, and it is not optional. It is embedded in the structure of reality because reality is personal, and the Person at its core, the One who created and sustains it, is good!
So...
Christians often claim that morality is absolute, but they rarely explain why. Indeed, most don’t even know why and would be very hard-pressed to explain why if challenged to do so. Even most pastors would have a hard time giving more than a pat, one sentence, answer if they were ever asked directly about why they believe in moral absolutes. And in a culture where moral claims are seen as subjective or situational, hand-waving appeals to “God said so” are not persuasive, even for many Christians. We need more than assertion; we need understanding. We need to know not only that morality is absolute, but what makes it so, and not only that but also how to defend it without relying on circular logic, blind belief or religious tradition. In what follows, I hope to establish that moral absolutes are not only real but that they are necessary (i.e. logically necessary) and why.
The first point to consider is the fact that we do not live in a morally neutral universe. This is true because we do not live in a personally neutral one. The ground of all being, all existence, is not a mindless force or mystical principle; it is a living God. Not a god that is merely alive in a sort of biological sense, but fully alive in every meaningful dimension: spiritual, volitional, rational, relational, dynamic and creative.
God doesn’t merely possess life; He is Life (I John 5:12). He is not just the communicator of moral truth; He is the reference point for it.
Right and wrong, then, are not social constructs or evolving conventions. They are reflections of what aligns, or fails to align, with the very nature of ultimate reality: God Himself.
That which affirms, promotes and protects innocent personal life; the kind of life that is volitional, rational, and capable of relationship with the God who is its Creator and Source is good. That which degrades, corrupts, or destroys it is evil. (Proverbs 11:19: "As righteousness leads to life, so he who pursues evil pursues it to his own death.")
This is not subjectivism. It is not arbitrary. It is not “divine command theory.” It is a moral framework grounded in the knowable and immutable character of the God who made us in His image (Genesis 1:27)
Because God is Life in its highest and most complete sense, life becomes the reference point for moral discernment. Not just physical life, but personal life, life that reflects God’s nature: life that is volitional, rational and relational. Right and wrong, good and evil, are not judged by social norms or consequences alone, but by whether they uphold or violate the kind of life we were made for and in the likeness of.
That means every moral wrong, whether overt like assault or subtle like gossip, finds its wrongness in this fact: it violates or erodes what is necessary for that kind of life.
- Deceit is wrong because it fractures trust and damages the shared understanding that makes relationship possible (Ephesians 4:25: "Therefore, putting away lying, 'Let each one of you speak truth with his neighbor,' for we are members of one another"; Leviticus 19:11: "You shall not steal, nor deal falsely, nor lie to one another").
- Theft dishonors another’s dignity and agency, treating them as a means to an end rather than a person of value (Exodus 20:15: "You shall not steal"; Philippians 2:3 “Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself. 4 Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others.”).
- Contemptuous speech wounds the spirit, erodes mutual respect, and sabotages the harmony needed for meaningful connection (James 3:9–10: "With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so").
- Laziness is wrong because it diminishes a person’s capacity to engage in meaningful, responsible living (Proverbs 19:15: "Laziness casts one into a deep sleep, and an idle person will suffer hunger").
- Gluttony is wrong because it dulls both our own mind and body, and it undermines self-governance, physical and relational fitness (Proverbs 23:20–21: "Do not mix with winebibbers, or with gluttonous eaters of meat; For the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty").
Conversely, what we call “good” are not arbitrary virtues, but actions and attitudes that reinforce and elevate this design:
- Honesty fosters clarity and trust (Proverbs 12:22: "Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord, but those who deal truthfully are His delight").
- Courage protects and upholds others at potential personal cost (Joshua 1:9: "Have I not commanded you? Be strong and of good courage; do not be afraid, nor be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go").
- Kindness honors the dignity of others and creates an atmosphere of grace (Ephesians 4:32: "And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you").
- Justice safeguards fairness and ensures the moral order is respected (Micah 6:8: "He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God?").
- Patience sustains relationships through trials and guards against impulsive harm (Colossians 3:12: "Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering").
- Fidelity builds enduring trust and affirms covenantal bonds (Hebrews 13:4: "Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge"; Proverbs 3:3: "Let not mercy and truth forsake you; Bind them around your neck, Write them on the tablet of your heart").
Any coherent moral system requires three things:
- a standard that doesn’t change with mood or majority,
- a reason that standard carries binding moral weight, and
- a way to call certain acts universally evil—regardless of culture, consent, or convenience.
To truly call something evil, we need a fixed standard grounded in something greater than ourselves. That standard must have moral authority; not just because it exists, but because it reflects the nature of the One who made us. And when that standard is rooted in the character of a personal, righteous Creator, it transcends all human opinion and applies equally to all.
This is what gives our moral intuitions their weight. As Isaiah warned, “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness” (Isaiah 5:20, NKJV). Deep down, we know that certain actions are not merely unpleasant, they are, in fact, wrong. Our moral sense demands an anchor that is fixed, authoritative, and universal. Without it, we’re left calling atrocities “unfortunate” instead of evil, and that’s worse than inadequate, it’s immoral.
This moral anchor is not a list of commands, it is the living, rational, righteous nature of God Himself (Malachi 3:6: "For I am the Lord, I do not change; therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob"). He is not simply “the enforcer” of right and wrong, He is THE good. And because we are made in His image, we are accountable to that same goodness (Romans 2:14–15: "For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law... they show the work of the law written in their hearts"). Morality then, is not a matter of commandments and obedience. It is a matter of character – God’s character! And God's character is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8: "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever").
But what about the difficult cases; the so called “gray areas”?
Someone might be asking: Is lying always wrong? What about lying to protect someone from harm?
That question reveals a common confusion between moral rules and moral principles.
Absolute morality doesn’t mean rigid, context-free prohibitions. It means there is a fixed reference point by which actions are measured. Moral discernment is the art of applying unwavering principles to ever-shifting circumstances. Its exercise is not a slide into moral relativism, but a demonstration of moral wisdom.
It’s not about the surface act, but what the act accomplishes (or violates) relative to the kind of life God intends. In some cases, telling a lie might actually serve truth in a higher sense by preserving life, shielding the innocent or protecting the relational fabric from a malicious tear. Rahab lied to protect the Israelite spies, and she was commended for her faith (Joshua 2:1–6; Hebrews 11:31). The Hebrew midwives also lied to Pharaoh to protect the newborn Moses, and God honored their actions (Exodus 1:15–21).
That doesn’t mean lying is generally good, but under certain circumstances, a falsehood can become righteousness when it defends or promotes innocent life and aligns with God’s character of justice and mercy.
Likewise, something that is generally good can become evil if done from a corrupt motive. Generosity, for example, is normally praised, but if someone gives in order to impress others or gain leverage, then the act is no longer righteous. Jesus warned against this directly...
Matthew 6:1 "Take heed that you do not do your charitable deeds before men, to be seen by them”
The deed looks good on the outside, but it’s hollow because it's motive is conceit not love, and so it fails the moral test. Again, it’s not the surface act that matters most, but the heart, the goal, the promotion of life in alignment with God’s character.
In effect, God’s nature, His righteous character, is the moral equivalent to the North Star. It doesn't move and stands as a steady reference, even when the terrain around us shifts beneath our feet and becomes less than entirely intuitive.
In conclusion, morality is not subjective, it isn’t invented, and it is not optional. It is embedded in the structure of reality because reality is personal, and the Person at its core, the One who created and sustains it, is good!
So...
- Morality is absolute because God is absolute.
- Life is the standard of morality because God is Life.
- Right and wrong are discernible because we were created in God's image, with minds capable of reason and hearts made for relationship and love (Romans 1:20: "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made").
- And the standard is not cultural, flexible, or human; it is rooted in the nature of the One who is Life itself.
Last edited:
