An argument for the Divine Command Theory of Right Action

Philosophical approaches to ancient Israelite religion are rare, as is metaethical reflection on the Hebrew Bible. Nevertheless, many biblical scholars and philosophers of religion tend to take it for granted that the biblical metaethical assumptions about the relation between divinity and morality involve a pre-philosophical version of Divine Command Theory by default. In this paper the author challenges the popular consensus with several arguments demonstrating the presence of moral realism in the text. It is furthermore suggested that the popular consensus came about as a result of prima facie assessments informed by anachronistic metatheistic assumptions about what the Hebrew Bible assumed to be essential in the deity–morality relation. The study concludes with the observation that in the texts where Divine Command Theory is absent from the underlying moral epistemology the Euthyphro Dilemma disappears as a false dichotomy.

Download Full-text

What if God commanded something terrible? A worry for divine-command meta-ethics

Religious Studies ◽

10.1017/s0034412509990011 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 45 (3) ◽

pp. 249-267 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

WES MORRISTON

Keyword(s):

Moral Obligation ◽

Divine Command ◽

Divine Command Theory ◽

Divine Transcendence

AbstractIf God commanded something that was obviously evil, would we have a moral obligation to do it? I critically examine three radically different approaches divine-command theorists may take to the problem posed by this question: (1) reject the possibility of such a command by appealing to God's essential goodness; (2) avoid the implication that we should obey such a command by modifying the divine-command theory; and (3) accept the implication that we should obey such a command by appealing to divine transcendence and mystery. I show that each approach faces significant challenges, and that none is completely satisfying.

Download Full-text

Swinburne on the Euthyphro Dilemma. Can Supervenience Save Him?

Forum Philosophicum ◽

10.35765/forphil.2008.1301.02 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 13 (1) ◽

pp. 17-29

Author(s):

Simin Rahimi

Keyword(s):

Possible Worlds ◽

Divine Command ◽

Divine Command Theory ◽

Moral Principles ◽

Euthyphro Dilemma ◽

Moral Duties ◽

Necessary Truths

Modern philosophers normally either reject the „divine command theory” of ethics and argue that moral duties are independent of any commands, or make it dependent on God's commands but like Robert Adams modify their theory and identify moral duties in terms of the commands of a loving God. Adams regards this theory as metaphysically necessary. That is, if it is true, it is true in all possible worlds. But Swinburne's (1981) position is unprecedented insofar as he regards moral truths as analytically necessary. In this paper Swinburne's argument will be discussed and I will reveal some of the difficulties involved in categorising general moral principles (if there are such principles) as logical (analytical/necessary) truths.

Download Full-text

Contemporary Moral Apologists

The Moral Argument ◽

10.1093/oso/9780190246365.003.0016 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 198-209

Author(s):

David Baggett ◽

Jerry L. Walls

Keyword(s):

Problem Of Evil ◽

Divine Command ◽

Moral Argument ◽

Divine Command Theory ◽

Moral Goodness ◽

William Lane Craig ◽

Natural Signs ◽

The Problem Of Evil ◽

Moral Duties ◽

Moral Arguments

A. C. Ewing worked on moral goodness; Austin Farrer focused on the value and dignity of persons; George Mavrodes underscored the odd nature of binding moral duties in a naturalistic world. Robert Adams did work in theistic ethics that produced innovative variants of the moral argument; his wife, Marilyn Adams, demonstrated how God’s incommensurable goodness can address versions of the problem of evil. Linda Zagzebski identified three ways we need moral confidence. C. Stephen Evans defended divine command theory and a natural signs approach to apologetics. John Hare did landmark work on moral arguments. William Lane Craig used the moral argument to powerful effect in books and debates. C. Stephen Layman used the overriding reason thesis and conditional thesis in his variant of the argument. Scott Smith, Mark Linville, Angus Menuge, and Angus Ritchie have offered brilliant epistemic moral arguments. Paul Copan has used history to augment the moral argument.

Download Full-text

Kant’s Divine Command Theory and its Reception within Analytic Philosophy

Kant and Kierkegaard on Religion ◽

10.1007/978-1-349-62906-0_12 ◽

2000 ◽

pp. 263-277 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

John E. Hare

Keyword(s):

Analytic Philosophy ◽

Divine Command ◽

Divine Command Theory

Download Full-text

Objections to Divine Command Theory

God and Moral Obligation ◽

10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199696680.003.0004 ◽

2013 ◽

pp. 88-117

Author(s):

C. Stephen Evans

Keyword(s):

Divine Command ◽

Divine Command Theory

Download Full-text

Reply to Almeida

Religious Studies ◽

10.1017/s0034412504007097 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 40 (3) ◽

pp. 335-339 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

MARK C. MURPHY

Keyword(s):

Divine Command ◽

Divine Command Theory ◽

Property A ◽

Property B ◽

Supervenience Thesis ◽

Moral Supervenience

Michael J. Almeida offers two criticisms of the argument of my ‘A trilemma for divine command theory’. The first criticism is that I mistakenly assume the validity of the following inference pattern: property A is identical to property B; property B supervenes on property C; therefore, property A supervenes on property C. The second criticism is that I have misinterpreted the moral-supervenience thesis upon which I rely in making this argument. The first of Almeida's criticisms is completely untenable. The second of his criticisms casts doubt on my argument, a doubt that I can mitigate but not entirely dispel.

Download Full-text