Can We Be Good Without God?

​Read “We Hold These Truths”
pp. 8-14
Can We Be Good Without God?
By Charles Colson

In his 1993 essay “Can We Be Good Without God?”,

Charles Colson talks about where our ideas of right and wrong come from. He argues that:

• Most societies have agreed on certain moral truths, like “don’t steal” or “treat people fairly.”

• These moral truths usually come from a belief in a higher power — from God — who gives people a clear and unchanging standard.

• When a society pushes God out of public life, people begin to disagree about what is right and wrong because there is no shared foundation.

• Without a solid foundation, morals can change based on feelings, trends, or what is convenient, which can lead to confusion or even injustice.

• Colson believes that believing in God gives people a strong reason to respect others, value human dignity, and make ethical choices, even when it’s hard.

Overall, he suggests that while individuals who don’t believe in God can still act morally, a whole society functions best when its moral values are rooted in something higher than human opinion.

Multiple Choice

If Colson believes moral standards weaken when society removes God, what might he predict about a culture that bases morality only on personal feelings?

• The culture will quickly agree on universal moral truths

• Moral beliefs may shift depending on trends or convenience
  C.

• People will automatically become more ethical

• Laws will become unnecessary

If Colson believes that moral standards weaken when society removes God, he would likely argue that morality becomes subjective—based on individual feelings rather than fixed truths. When people decide right and wrong according to personal emotions, opinions, or preferences, moral beliefs are no longer stable or universal.

This means that what is considered “right” or “wrong” can change over time, influenced by popular opinion, social trends, or personal convenience. Without an absolute moral foundation, standards may shift to suit what feels acceptable in the moment rather than what is consistently right.

Choices A, C, and D do not fit Colson’s view:

• A is unlikely because personal feelings do not lead to agreement on universal truths.

• C contradicts Colson’s concern that morality weakens without God.

• D ignores the need for laws to regulate behavior when moral agreement breaks down.

​

Multiple Choice

Colson argues that shared morals need a higher foundation. What can be inferred about his view of disagreements in society?

• Disagreements happen because people are naturally dishonest

• Disagreements disappear when people stop believing in God

• Disagreements arise when there is no common source of right and wrong

• Disagreements are mostly caused by a lack of education

Colson argues that for a society to share moral standards, those standards must be grounded in a higher, objective foundation, which he believes is God. From his perspective, moral agreement depends on having a shared understanding of what is truly right and wrong.

When a society removes that common foundation, people are left to determine morality based on personal opinions, experiences, or cultural preferences. As a result, disagreements increase, not because people are malicious or uneducated, but because they no longer appeal to the same standard of truth. Each person or group may claim their own version of morality, leading to conflict and confusion about ethical decisions.

The other options do not align with Colson’s view:

• A focuses on dishonesty, which Colson does not identify as the primary cause of moral disagreement.

• B contradicts Colson’s belief; he would argue disagreements increase, not disappear, without belief in God.

• D suggests education alone solves moral conflict, but Colson believes education cannot replace a shared moral foundation.

Multiple Choice

Colson says individuals can still act morally without believing in God. What does this suggest about his belief regarding human behavior?

• People only behave morally when forced

• Individuals can choose moral actions even without a shared moral foundation

• People who lack faith do not understand morality

• Humans are naturally moral without any guidance

Colson acknowledges that individuals are capable of acting morally even if they do not believe in God. This suggests that he recognizes human beings have the ability to make moral choices through conscience, upbringing, or social influences. In other words, faith is not the only factor that determines whether a person behaves ethically in daily life.

However, Colson also maintains that while individuals can act morally on their own, a society as a whole needs a shared, higher moral foundation to maintain consistent and lasting moral standards. Without that foundation, moral agreement becomes fragile and disagreements increase—even if many individuals continue to act ethically.

The other answer choices do not reflect Colson’s view:

• A is incorrect because Colson does not believe people must be forced to behave morally.

• C is incorrect because Colson does not claim that people without faith are incapable of understanding morality.

• D goes too far; Colson does not argue that humans are naturally moral without any guidance at all.

Multiple Choice

 If Colson is concerned about “relative morality,” what would he likely say about a society that regularly changes its moral standards based on social media pressure?

• This society shows a strong and stable moral foundation

• The quick changes prove it has clear moral truth

• This pattern reflects the risks of morality based on shifting human opinion

• This society has no moral disagreements

Colson’s concern about “relative morality” is rooted in the belief that when moral standards are based on human opinion rather than a fixed, higher truth, they become unstable and inconsistent. A society that frequently changes its moral standards in response to social media pressure is a clear example of this concern.

From Colson’s perspective, social media amplifies emotions, trends, and popular opinion, which can change rapidly. If morality shifts along with these trends, then right and wrong are no longer grounded in lasting principles but are instead influenced by what is currently popular or emotionally compelling. This reflects the risk Colson warns about: morality becomes flexible, unpredictable, and subject to pressure rather than truth.

The other answer choices do not match Colson’s viewpoint:

• A is incorrect because constantly changing moral standards indicate instability, not a strong foundation.

• B is incorrect because rapid change suggests uncertainty about moral truth, not clarity.

• D is incorrect because shifting moral standards often increase disagreement rather than eliminate it.

Multiple Choice

Colson argues societies function best when values come from a higher source. What inference can you make about his expectations for government?

• Governments should create their own moral truths

• Governments should support a foundation for universal moral standards

• Leaders should change moral rules whenever the public wants

• Leaders should avoid connecting ethics to any larger belief system

In Colson’s view, when moral values are grounded in a higher authority, they provide a stable framework for laws, justice, and social order. Government, therefore, should operate within and support this moral framework—protecting principles such as justice, human dignity, and responsibility—rather than redefining morality based on convenience or popular demand.

The other options conflict with Colson’s perspective:

• A is incorrect because Colson does not believe governments should create moral truth; morality should exist independently of government.

• C reflects moral relativism, which Colson warns leads to instability and confusion.

• D contradicts his belief that ethics must be connected to a larger, higher belief system to remain consistent.

The reading, questions, and feedback explain Colson’s argument that while individuals can still act morally, societies function best when moral standards are grounded in a higher, unchanging source rather than personal feelings or shifting public opinion. The image reinforces this idea by contrasting a stable structure built on solid rock with an unstable one on cracked ground, symbolizing the difference between enduring moral foundations and relative morality influenced by cultural trends.

​