Abstract

While the moral argument for the existence of God is a more familiar issue in philosophy of religion, recently, atheist philosophers have proposed a moral argument against the existence of God. This argument has been formulated in at least five ways: from the problem of evil, from the critique of alienation, from autonomy, from the critique of expediency, and from the immoral teachings of world religions. Some of these formulations can be regarded as a theoretical moral argument against the existence of God and some of them as a practical/pragmatist moral argument against the existence of God. Theoretical moral arguments against the existence of God have concentrated on moral evidence that show there is no God and, so, theism is false, while practical moral arguments against the existence of God have concentrated on the fact that belief in God is an obstacle for fulfilled moral living and achieving the ends of moral life, or even makes our actions immoral. At the end, I conclude that none of the formulations of the moral argument against the existence of God are productive. However, there are important lessons in each of the formulations of the argument for theists if they attend to them.