As human beings, we all have some instinctive recognition that morality exists. We all know that some things are objectively good, and others are objectively bad. And we know this is not just a matter of personal preference. This understanding is unique to human beings. Animals can be trained to behave certain ways, and automatically have certain habits, but they generally act on a system of cause and effect. In the animal world, we see no justice. If human beings lived like them, there wouldn't be almost 8 billion of us.
But according to Evolutionists, human beings were not always so distinct from the animal kingdom. In fact, we are descended from apes. Or "ape like creatures", as some Evolutionists like to say, but let's be honest, that just means apes. But apes have no moral obligations. There is no such thing as good or evil in their minds. In fact, even within captivity, they can be quite savage. When kept as pets, they have been known to mutilate their owners' faces. When in the wild, they do all sorts of horrible things. Rape, unprovoked combat, pedophilia, murder, theft, eating prey alive etc. Behavior that is "acceptable" in ape societies is intolerable in ours.
In short, human beings must obey moral absolutes, and we all know it. Apes do not even think about moral absolutes, and no one, ape or man, bats an eye. If Evolution is true, moral absolutes evolved with humans, or humans are not rational creatures because we have instincts that lead to error.
The latter has three problems. The first is that if human beings are irrational creatures, we cannot even begin to believe in Evolution, because our reasoning, however much we may trust it, is untrustworthy. The second is that it is simply unconscionable. Try it now. Take the most despicable moral action you can think of and say "it's not actually wrong, I just don't like it." Whenever I have this discussion, I sometimes think of an example, and even though I obviously do not agree with the statement "X is not wrong, I just disagree with it", I cringe at having written the statement. I cannot begin to imagine how it must feel to actually affirm the statement. The third is that there are other ways to show that alternative, non-Evolutionary worldviews (specifically Christianity) is true. We have far stronger evidence for Christianity than Evolutionists will ever have for their nonsense.
But if, as most people do, Evolutionists want to defend their instinctive belief in objective morality, they must prove two things. First, they must prove that moral absolutes can still be a reality without God. Suffice to say for now, while many of them make the effort, they always fail. Second, they must prove at what point it became a reality.
To illustrate this, take a look at the diagram in the header image. There, you see the standard diagram of human Evolution from our ape ancestors to primitive man (who, I feel the need to point out, were primitive only in technology), right up to modern man. Notice the two creatures in the middle. To be charitable to Evolutionists, let's just call them hypothetical. That is, if Evolution is true, they exist, but the evidence for them is desperately lacking. There is none. But in order for primitive men, whom we judge so harshly, to be worthy of the judgement we levy upon them, one of the missing links must have become bound by moral laws.
How and when did this happen? If Evolutionists cannot even prove their existence, how can they prove their culpability? Put simply, how and when did we go from morally unaccountable apes to fully accountable human beings? This question is completely unanswerable. Evolutionists are living an inconsistent lie. The lie is Evolution itself, but it's inconsistent because they try to add the truth (i.e. morality) to it. If Evolution is true, there are no moral absolutes. But if you rob, beat up, rape, kidnap, kill, or otherwise sin against other people, Evolutionists will generally agree that is absolutely wrong. It isn't just a matter of personal preference, it is a matter of fact.
Thus, Evolutionists are trapped in a silly delusion, knowing moral absolutes exist, but affirming a worldview which denies this fact. If Evolution is true, morality is just a matter of opinion, no more objective than our ice cream preferences. If morality exists, some kind of god must exist.
Evidence strongly suggests this god is the God of the Bible. Aside from the fact He possesses all the necessary attributes of the moral legislator, He is also the only god who has actually shown up throughout history. While other gods may have a certain impact on other cultures, God alone has persistently permeated human history. Testimony of His first global judgement can be found all over the globe, and our very calendar is labelled by the birth of His Son. The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is the most powerful proof that God is who He says He is.
But this wasn't just God showing off. Conquering death is impressive for sure, but it would be silly to do it just for admiration. Rather, Jesus died out of love for us, who deserve death. While we instinctively know right and wrong exist, we so often do what we instinctively know is wrong. And God, being Holy, cannot just ignore this problem. But He can deal with it.
The first and most obvious way of dealing with it is to simply give us what we deserve. Rebelling against the Author of life obviously brings with it certain death. But the word of God says He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel Ezekiel 18:23, 32; 33:11). Instead, God wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4). Therefore, He planned and actioned a greater option: The Gospel. When Jesus died, He took upon Himself the sins of the whole world. Therefore, all who believe in Him can receive the reward of His righteous life.