In the article, I argue that contemporary philosophers have misinterpreted Aquinas’ Fourth Way as a type of moral argument for God’s existence, when it is in fact mainly a metaphysical argument for God’s existence. After this, I emphasize that Aquinas doesn’t have an argument that is similar to the contemporary version of the moral argument for God’s existence, but does have several arguments that deal with God and morality.
In particular, I discuss and explain two arguments that Aquinas uses regarding morality. The first I discuss is an argument for the existence of the moral law. The second is an argument for the enforcement of the moral law, which Aquinas believes can only be eternal separation from God.
I believe that these Thomistic moral arguments can be beneficial for Christian apologists who use the classical approach to defend Christianity. Specifically, they can bridge the gap between arguments for God’s existence and the historical evidence for Jesus’ resurrection. These Thomistic moral arguments follow-up arguments for God’s existence by showing that God created a moral law and that the only proper punishment for breaking this law is separation from God. They are easy to memorize and should make it clear that we all are in need of a Savior. Hopefully they will generate more interest in hearing evidence’s for Christ.
Above I have posted a link to my seminary’s website where the issue with my article can be purchased, and also a link to the paper that I have stored on my website.
I hope you check it out!