The Divine Command Theory states that morality is based on religion, where actions are deemed morally right if commanded by God and morally wrong if forbidden by God. This theory asserts that moral principles rely on God, and following His commands establishes moral obligation. However, I aim to challenge this theory by presenting the belief argument and the Euthyphro dilemma.
The primary issue I observe is the belief argument, which suggests that if DCT (Divine Command Theory) is valid, morality is contingent upon the existence of God. Consequently, it becomes impossible to acknowledge morality without believing in God, resulting in the falseness of DCT. This raises doubts about the existence of God. Consequently, atheists face challenges as this statement implies that morality may not exist for them due to their disbelief.
Divine Command Theory raises concerns about the potential for complete subjectivity in moral values. According to this theory, moral rightness is solely based on God’s commands without any objective standard apart from them. Consequently, anything commanded by God is deemed morally right by definition, with no external moral values to restrict His commands. This means that even if God were to command an act like rape, Divine Command Theory would argue it as moral because it aligns with “doing the right thing,” equating it to “doing what God commands.” Such implications seem highly implausible and suggest that immoral acts are inconceivable for God to command. As a result, determining morality becomes entirely subjective and dependent on God alone, giving it an arbitrary appearance.
In addition, a philosophical problem known as the Euthyphro dilemma arises regarding whether actions are considered morally right because of God’s commands or if He commands certain actions because they are already morally right. The Euthyphro argument brings up this issue and proposes two possibilities: either God has reasons behind His commands or He does not have any reasons at all. If there are reasons behind His commands, then these reasons would determine the morality of actions and contradict Divine Command Theory.
If God does not command actions, then His commands are arbitrary, suggesting imperfection. However, God is not imperfect, hence Divine Command Theory is invalid. The theory posits that actions are morally right solely because God mandates them. Prior to God’s commands, there was no concept of right or wrong; morality did not exist. Another perspective proposes that God commands actions because they are inherently right. This viewpoint suggests that God did not invent morality but rather recognized an existing moral law and instructed us to abide by it. Nevertheless, it should be remembered that God is the creator of everything.
Therefore, he created morality, making the first option impossible. The second option, that God commands something because it is right and obvious to Him in His infinite wisdom, avoids arbitrariness but reintroduces a problem: accepting this argument means abandoning a theological concept of right and wrong, where what is right would exist whether or not God commands it. Each case leads believers in the divine command theory into uncomfortable moral territory.
Without God serving as an authority figure, there is no one to create the standards that make up morality. As flawed beings, humans are prone to mistakes and lack the understanding needed to develop a credible moral system. Thus, the Divine Command Theory asserts that morality and purpose in life become invisible in the absence of a belief in God.
Additionally, it is widely recognized that God is inherently flawless. This simplifies the task of establishing a moral code, as perfection can be exemplified by a singular being. Moreover, envision a universe devoid of the notion of a God and divine intent. Where would the concept of morality originate? If we were merely existent without any prescribed objectives or purposes to strive for, it becomes challenging to comprehend the existence of moral obligations. To comprehend our ethical obligations, we necessitate an authoritative entity capable of enforcing these duties upon us. And in this scenario, only God could conceivably fulfill that role.
One challenge of the divine command theory is the potential for inaccuracies and human error in God’s communication. When different individuals receive conflicting messages from God, it becomes difficult to ascertain which message is genuine. This challenge is further complicated when examining the Bible, which has undergone translation and transmission across generations, making its interpretation even more uncertain.
Various denominations within Christianity have different perspectives on which parts of the Bible to include in their printing, leading to textual differences between bibles. Additionally, these denominations emphasize and de-emphasize different aspects of the texts, resulting in divergent interpretations of God’s word. In addressing the Euthyphro dilemma, one approach is to avoid depicting God as arbitrary and instead believe that His commands are based on the most compelling reasons.
By assuming that God has forbidden torture, it suggests that there were valid reasons behind this command. If we take into account that God’s decision stemmed from the realization that torture inflicts immense pain and humiliation, it becomes evident why it is deemed immoral. Because God possesses omniscience, He is aware of the abhorrence associated with torture and, out of His love for humanity, directs us to abstain from such practices. Furthermore, God comprehends the inherent virtue found in qualities like kindness and compassion; hence He issues divine decrees founded upon this flawless comprehension.
This portrayal affirms the veracity of God’s teachings and validates His establishment of the ethical code. The Divine Command Theory encompasses all moral truths that are linked to God. Due to God’s immutability, moral truth remains constant. We must regard God’s commands as the ultimate authority on what is deemed ‘right’ and ‘wrong,’ irrespective of our individual disagreement or lack of complete comprehension. Moreover, acquiring a deeper understanding of how God expects us to live enhances our overall well-being.
The justification for the Divine Command theory lies in the evidence found in the bible. If God is the ultimate creator, then he is also responsible for establishing morality. As God has authority over all of Creation, it is logical for us to obey his instructions. The bible consistently emphasizes the importance of obediently following God’s commands.
