The moral argument for the existence of God holds that an all-good, authoritative lawgiver must be the ultimate explanation for moral obligation.
But some people think that “Morality just comes from evolution. We are genetically directed to act with compassion towards others because it benefits our species.”
But the problem is that if that’s all it is then there is no moral obligation at all. How can someone be morally obligated to the dictates of random chance forces?
Imagine if a scrabble box fell off the shelf and spilled out a random set of letters that said, “Be good” or if while you were eating alphabet soup the floating letters formed the phrase, “Do not kill” (This example is owed to Francis Beckwith at Baylor University). Commands that come about by chance forces are things that come about by unintelligent amoral forces. Clearly these accidentally formed “commands” are not really commands at all and can be justifiably ignored.
The same can be said of the blind chance formation of DNA information through socio-biological development. A man may be very grateful that such development got him here, but there is no good reason to say he is bound to listen to his accidentally formed genetic information now any more than an accidentally arranged sentence in alphabet soup!
Why choose one over the other?