Session 7 – Moral Law (Part A)
Some Definitions:
1) Normative ethics: the set of issues that arise when we think about the question
“how ought one act – morally speaking?”
2) Objectivity: A sentence is objective if it meets two criteria:
(a) Capable of being true or false.
(b) Whether it’s true or false does not depend on who says it, when they
say it, where they say it, etc.
Where do we get our concept of right and wrong?




An authoritative (revelatory?) source – e.g. the Bible
Conscience
Society & family
??
Is morality absolute or relative?


‘bottom-up’ or ‘top-down’? Or both?
Can you have absolutes without them being God-derived?
The Euthyphro Question
Plato’s dialog The Euthypro (written ~380 B.C.E).
Brief plot summary:
Socrates meets Euthyphro outside the courthouse in Athens. Euthyphro, a very
religious young man, has come to the court because he is going to prosecute his
father for the murder of one of his father’s servants. The case is ambiguous,
perhaps more manslaughter than murder. But it is also highly unusual to also
violate kinship norms by such a pursuit.
So Socrates asks Euthyphro whether he is confident that what he's doing is the
right thing. Euthyphro replies, a bit haughtily, that ordinary people don't really
understand the divine attitude to piety and impiety, whereas, he does know what
the gods think about such matters. And he knows that what he's doing is pious
(i.e. morally correct).
Socrates is at the courthouse to defend himself against a charge of impiety, and
here Euthyphro claims to know what piety is. So, Socrates asks him to define it.
Euthyphro makes 3 attempts:
1) piety is doing what I'm doing here today, namely, prosecuting my father for
murder and seeing that justice is done.
2) Pious acts are loved by the gods. But there were many Gods in Greece and
they didn’t always agree, so –
3) Pious acts are loved by all the gods.
Then Socrates, as is frequently the case in Platonic dialogs, then hits Euthyphro
with the central question, which you suspect he had been carefully leading up to
all along. He asks (at Euthyphro 10a): “Is what you’re doing pious because it is
loved by the gods, or do the gods love what you are doing because what you are
doing is pious?”
Or – stated more clearly for our purposes:
Does God command us to do right because it is right, or is it right because it
is commanded by God?
So - God first? Or right first?
The typical (I suggest) response of a Christian (sort of like Euthyphro’s initial replies) is
God first. That sounds both orthodox and Anselmian (‘that than which a greater cannot
be conceived’).
Divine Command Theory (DCT)
DCT is the view that morality is somehow dependent upon God, and that moral
obligation consists in obedience to God’s commands. Divine Command Theory includes
the claim that morality is ultimately based on the commands or character of God, and that
the morally right action is the one that God commands or requires.
Again, this sounds totally orthodox.
Now, some inter-related objections.
1) Arbitrary. If divine command theory is true, morality is based merely upon
God's whim. If, for example, God had commanded that we be cruel or dishonest
then it would have been morally obligatory to do these generally understood as
harmful (cruel and dishonest) things, and morally impermissible to do the
opposite.
The likely reply to this unpleasant idea would deny that God would not have
commanded such things because, being essentially good, he necessarily would not
command evil. But – this is the point – if the definition of what is good is rooted
in whatever God commands, they who are we to say cruelty/dishonesty are wrong
– if God commands it! There is no intrinsic wrong.
2) Moral evaluation loses all meaning. If good is defined as whatever God does
then how can we meaningfully say that ‘God is good’. That’s the same as saying
‘God is whatever God is’. This is a tautology.
3) We cannot evaluate ‘god-wannabes’. This is a practical consideration. There are
and were lots of so-called gods and holy scriptures for us to choose from. How
can we evaluate them? With this premise (God precedes good) then you cannot
differentiate between ‘gods’ – or even no God.
Does the Bible support DCT? Consider:
Gen 18:23,25 "Then Abraham approached him and said: "Will you sweep away the
righteous with the wicked? ...Far be it from you to do such a thing-to kill the righteous
with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will
not the Judge of all the earth do right?""
Notice Abraham has subordinated the ‘Judge of all the earth’ (which presumably
includes himself) to doing ‘right’! Of course, perhaps Abraham was out of line in his
comments.
Consider Ellen White’s description of Lucifer’s rebellion (emphasis mine):
“God in His great mercy bore long with Lucifer. He was not immediately
degraded from his exalted station when he first indulged the spirit of discontent,
nor even when he began to present his false claims before the loyal angels. Long
was he retained in heaven. Again and again he was offered pardon on condition of
repentance and submission. … The spirit of discontent had never before been
known in heaven. Lucifer himself did not at first see whither he was drifting; he
did not understand the real nature of his feelings. But as his dissatisfaction was
proved to be without cause …” - Great Controversy – pp. 495-497
“Even when it was decided that he could no longer remain in heaven, Infinite
Wisdom did not destroy Satan. Since the service of love can alone be acceptable
to God, the allegiance of His creatures must rest upon a conviction of His justice
and benevolence.” - Great Controversy pp. 498-499.
Primary Objection to Rejecting DCT.

It seem like if we reject God as the ground for morality, then the only ground left
is us. And that seems both fallible and relativistic!
How do we find a ‘ground’ for truth, goodness, morality?
Some Questions to Consider:
Q: How do you ground your morality? Do you feel attracted to Divine Command
Theory? Why or why not?
Q: How reliable do you think our conscience or ‘inner moral compass’ is?
Q: Do you believe it is possible for, say, a Muslim who adheres to DCT, to convert to
Christianity? How might a missionary proceed? Would the Muslim have to give up DCT
in the process?
Q: Do you agree or disagree with my contention that DCT is near the heart of Adventist
disagreement over homosexuality and creation/science? Why?