A counter-argument to the morality argument for a God (from a Christian standpoint) in "I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist": Not only is a biblical standard for morality predicated on “absolute truth”, but even once we get past the absolute truth prerequisite, counterpoints for moral relativism can be found both within Christianity and outside of Christianity. Actually the bible (supposedly the base for morality) is also the best evidence for moral relativism. But let's look first at an example outside the Abrahamic faiths. If God is needed for a moral compass, then logically humans without God in their belief system would not have a moral compass and would therefore be “lost” morally. This would include Buddhists who don’t believe in supernatural deities or “God”. So why, after the tsunami and Fukushima disaster, when there was no law and order, wasn’t there widespread looting and raping/pillaging in Japan where 95% of population is Buddhist? Why didn’t these people, who according to the author don’t have a moral compass, act immorally when the opportunity presented itself? Ghandi wasn’t a Christian, why was he such a moral person? What did he use as a moral compass? Within Christianity/Judaism, if morality is absolute and not relative, is God’s Word and laws eternal and immutable throughout time? If morality is absolute and not relative, why are the Ten Commandments still followed as “God’s Law”, but the following laws (many from the same book of the bible as the commandments) from the Literal Word of God are no longer followed: - homosexual activity punished by death - adultery punished by death - bastards not allowed in church - beating of slaves, breeding of slaves condoned by God's law - women can’t speak in church - raped woman can become your wife if you pay a certain fine - polygamy condoned by God's law Even with the bible as the "absolute moral standard", Jews/Christians' morals have changed as God's Word is applied to a changing society (relativism). Jesus himself changed some of God's standards for morality, did he not? How can morality have an "absolute" biblical standard, when the bible itself has undergone moral relativism?