Theme 1A: Divine Command Theory
ivine Command Theory (Theological Voluntarism) is ameta-ethicaltheory which claims that
D
moral truths are grounded in thewill and commandsof God. Right and wrong are not
determined by human reason, culture or consequences, but by what God commands or forbids.
sFrankenasummarises, an action is right“if andonly if and because it is commanded or
A
forbidden by God”. Moral authority, therefore, restsentirely with God.
Objective moral truth grounded in God
Divine Command Theory holds that morality is:
O
● bjective– factual and not dependent on opinion
● Absolute– universally binding
● Universal– applicable in all cases
ight is right because Godcommandsit.
R
Wrong is wrong because Godforbidsit.
This depends upon classical theism. God is:
● mnibenevolent(perfectly loving)
O
● Omnipotent(all-powerful)
● Omniscient(all-knowing)
● Omnipresent(present everywhere)
ecause God is the creator ofall things, moral laworiginatesin Him.Genesis 1:31affirms
B
creation as“very good”, indicating that goodnessreflectsGod’s nature.
Scripture is regarded as anauthoritativemoralrevelation:
“All scripture is inspired by God…” (2 Timothy 3:16–17)
Moral standards, therefore, come from divine authority,not human reasoning.
Moral goodness as obedience
ivine Command Theory isdeontological(fromdeon,meaning duty). Moral obligation consists
D
in obeying divine commands.
The Ten Commandments(Exodus 20) provide an exampleof revealed moral law. If God forbids
stealing, then stealing is wrong because it violates a divine command.
o circumstance or good intention canmake a divinelyforbidden act morally right.Moral
N
evaluation is determined by conformity to God’s will.
,Divine command and omnipotence
If goodness existed independently of God, then God would besubject to a higher moral law.
This would undermine divineomnipotence.
Divine Command Theory, therefore, maintains:
T he standard of goodnessoriginatesin God.
●
● Moral law isnot externalto Him.
● Divine authoritycannot be overridden.
J .A.T. Robinsonsummarises this:“ They are the commandmentswhich God gives… They come
down direct from heaven, and are eternally valid for human conduct.”
Robert Adams’ Modified Divine Command Theory
obert Adams refines the theory toavoid arbitrariness.
R
He argues that the following two assertions are equivalent because moral wrongness consists in
being contrary to the commands of a loving God.
. It is wrong to steal.
1
2. Stealing is against God’s commands.
owever, morality isnot arbitrarybecause it is rootedin God’sintrinsic omnibenevolence.
H
God’s nature isessentially loving. Therefore:
G
● odcannot command crueltyfor its own sake.
● Moral goodnessreflects divine character.
● Commands express God’s stable nature rather than random choice.
Although logically possible, it is unthinkable that a loving God would command evil.
hallenges to Divine Command Theory
C
The Euthyphro Dilemma
Plato’sEuthyphropresents the central challenge:
Is something goodbecause God commands it, or doesGod command itbecause it is good?
If actions are good only because God commands them, morality appearsarbitrary.
If God commands actions because they are independently good,goodness exists apart from
God.
Either option threatens thecoherenceof the theory.
,The Arbitrariness Problem
Thesecondhorn suggests that Godcould declare anythinggood.
illiam of Ockhamargued that even actionsnormallyjudged evilcould becomegoodif
W
commanded by God. Acts such ashatredortheftcouldbemeritoriousunder divine command.
ugustinesimilarly acknowledgesexceptions to killingwhen commanded by divine authority.
A
This implies:
M
● oral categories couldreverse.
● Crueltycould becomeobligatory.
● There would beno intrinsicmoral qualities.
damsattempts to resolve this bygrounding moralityin God’s loving nature, preventing
A
random commands.
The Pluralism Objection
anyreligioustraditionsclaim divine authority,yet theirmoral teachings differ.
M
For example:
M
● atthew 5:32forbids divorce.
● Deuteronomy 24permits divorce.
Interpretations ofhomosexuality,gender rolesandlegal practices vary across denominations
and religions.
This raises serious epistemic questions:
W
● hich revelationis authentic?
● How do we resolveconflicting commands?
● Can morality depend ondisputedreligious authority?
Pluralism challenges the claim that divine command providesclear moral certainty.
Flexibility and moral development
istorical shiftsraise further concerns. Some biblicaltexts appear topermit slavery.
H
Contemporary Christianity rejects slavery. If morality is fixed by divine command, how are such
changes explained?
ivine Command Theory may struggle to account formoral developmentwithout appealing to
D
human interpretation.
,
ivine Command Theory (Theological Voluntarism) is ameta-ethicaltheory which claims that
D
moral truths are grounded in thewill and commandsof God. Right and wrong are not
determined by human reason, culture or consequences, but by what God commands or forbids.
sFrankenasummarises, an action is right“if andonly if and because it is commanded or
A
forbidden by God”. Moral authority, therefore, restsentirely with God.
Objective moral truth grounded in God
Divine Command Theory holds that morality is:
O
● bjective– factual and not dependent on opinion
● Absolute– universally binding
● Universal– applicable in all cases
ight is right because Godcommandsit.
R
Wrong is wrong because Godforbidsit.
This depends upon classical theism. God is:
● mnibenevolent(perfectly loving)
O
● Omnipotent(all-powerful)
● Omniscient(all-knowing)
● Omnipresent(present everywhere)
ecause God is the creator ofall things, moral laworiginatesin Him.Genesis 1:31affirms
B
creation as“very good”, indicating that goodnessreflectsGod’s nature.
Scripture is regarded as anauthoritativemoralrevelation:
“All scripture is inspired by God…” (2 Timothy 3:16–17)
Moral standards, therefore, come from divine authority,not human reasoning.
Moral goodness as obedience
ivine Command Theory isdeontological(fromdeon,meaning duty). Moral obligation consists
D
in obeying divine commands.
The Ten Commandments(Exodus 20) provide an exampleof revealed moral law. If God forbids
stealing, then stealing is wrong because it violates a divine command.
o circumstance or good intention canmake a divinelyforbidden act morally right.Moral
N
evaluation is determined by conformity to God’s will.
,Divine command and omnipotence
If goodness existed independently of God, then God would besubject to a higher moral law.
This would undermine divineomnipotence.
Divine Command Theory, therefore, maintains:
T he standard of goodnessoriginatesin God.
●
● Moral law isnot externalto Him.
● Divine authoritycannot be overridden.
J .A.T. Robinsonsummarises this:“ They are the commandmentswhich God gives… They come
down direct from heaven, and are eternally valid for human conduct.”
Robert Adams’ Modified Divine Command Theory
obert Adams refines the theory toavoid arbitrariness.
R
He argues that the following two assertions are equivalent because moral wrongness consists in
being contrary to the commands of a loving God.
. It is wrong to steal.
1
2. Stealing is against God’s commands.
owever, morality isnot arbitrarybecause it is rootedin God’sintrinsic omnibenevolence.
H
God’s nature isessentially loving. Therefore:
G
● odcannot command crueltyfor its own sake.
● Moral goodnessreflects divine character.
● Commands express God’s stable nature rather than random choice.
Although logically possible, it is unthinkable that a loving God would command evil.
hallenges to Divine Command Theory
C
The Euthyphro Dilemma
Plato’sEuthyphropresents the central challenge:
Is something goodbecause God commands it, or doesGod command itbecause it is good?
If actions are good only because God commands them, morality appearsarbitrary.
If God commands actions because they are independently good,goodness exists apart from
God.
Either option threatens thecoherenceof the theory.
,The Arbitrariness Problem
Thesecondhorn suggests that Godcould declare anythinggood.
illiam of Ockhamargued that even actionsnormallyjudged evilcould becomegoodif
W
commanded by God. Acts such ashatredortheftcouldbemeritoriousunder divine command.
ugustinesimilarly acknowledgesexceptions to killingwhen commanded by divine authority.
A
This implies:
M
● oral categories couldreverse.
● Crueltycould becomeobligatory.
● There would beno intrinsicmoral qualities.
damsattempts to resolve this bygrounding moralityin God’s loving nature, preventing
A
random commands.
The Pluralism Objection
anyreligioustraditionsclaim divine authority,yet theirmoral teachings differ.
M
For example:
M
● atthew 5:32forbids divorce.
● Deuteronomy 24permits divorce.
Interpretations ofhomosexuality,gender rolesandlegal practices vary across denominations
and religions.
This raises serious epistemic questions:
W
● hich revelationis authentic?
● How do we resolveconflicting commands?
● Can morality depend ondisputedreligious authority?
Pluralism challenges the claim that divine command providesclear moral certainty.
Flexibility and moral development
istorical shiftsraise further concerns. Some biblicaltexts appear topermit slavery.
H
Contemporary Christianity rejects slavery. If morality is fixed by divine command, how are such
changes explained?
ivine Command Theory may struggle to account formoral developmentwithout appealing to
D
human interpretation.
,
