Lewis presses the evidence: the Moral Law is real, demanding, and not of our own making — and the implications are deeply uncomfortable.

Discussion Questions

6 questions

1.Lewis argues that the Moral Law is not simply a description of how humans behave but a *prescription* of how they ought to. What is the difference, and why does it matter for his argument about God?

2.He says the Moral Law is the one thing in the universe that cannot be dismissed as 'just the way things happen to be.' Why can't we be comfortable with that explanation for morality when we can be comfortable with it for, say, gravity?

3.Lewis points out that we feel *guilt* when we break the Moral Law — not just regret or inconvenience. How does the phenomenon of genuine guilt support his argument that the Law comes from outside us?

a.Describe a time you felt genuine guilt — not just fear of consequences. What did it feel like, and where did you sense it was pointing?

b.How is guilt different from shame? Does Lewis's argument depend on that distinction?

4.By the end of Chapter 3, Lewis has established two facts: that a Moral Law exists, and that we break it. He says these are the 'two dark facts' that form the foundation of all clear thinking about ourselves and God. Do you agree that these are unavoidable facts? What would you add or qualify?

5.Lewis carefully avoids claiming too much at this stage — he has not yet mentioned Christianity or the Bible. Why is this methodological restraint important for someone who is skeptical of religion?

+ 3 more questions in this week

Get all 176 questions across 29 weeks

Get Full Guide — $24.99