Divine command theory

{{religion}}
'''Divine command theory''' (or '''DCT''', also known as '''theological voluntarism''') — in the simplest of terms — states:
{{cquote|An action or person is right/wrong/good/bad ''if and only if'' [[God]] said so.}}

A slightly more formal definition states:

{{cquote|An action's status as morally good is equivalent to whether it is commanded by God.<ref>{{wpa|Divine command theory}}</ref>}}

All you need to know regarding why this is true: [[Appeal_to_authority|because God said so]].<ref group=note>Keep in mind that appealing to the ''ultimate'' authority just makes it an ultimate [[appeal to authority]].</ref>

DCT shares its underlying assumptions with the [[argument from morality]], though it doesn't stop there.

In effect, DCT makes morality a dictatorship, as that and ''only'' that which the Supreme Leader wants is good, and literally everything he didn't ask for — or happens to retrospectively condone on a whim — is bad. [[Free will]] becomes ''nothing but'' the power to do evil by this definition, as even trying your best to only follow every literal word of God [[Biblical_contradictions|will prove impossible]].  On the plus side, DCT solves the [[problem of evil]], as whatever God wanted was good, and whatever he didn't want wasn't good. Off the hook, scot free!

Any form of non-religious morality is obviously made categorically impossible in this view. The upside is that, from this viewpoint, quoting scripture at people like an asshat is ''considered ethical!'' Hooray!

Despite the name "divine command theory" containing the word "[[theory]]", adherents reliably fail to apply their favorite fallacious [[Just_a_theory|criticism against it]].

==Formulations, allegedly==
{{see also|Christian apologetics}}

According to the [[Bible]], in reference to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, God had told Adam and Eve:

{{quotebox|<bible book="Genesis" chapter="2" verse1="16" verse2="17" />}}

Since God created such a tree, every piece of knowledge of Good and evil comes directly from God.

Various verses have ''attributed'' God as '''sovereign''', or judge and ruler of all.  If anything is good for the reason other than his commands then He is not in charge of everything.

==As a code word==
DCT theory is the code word for "[[Self projection as god|I'm]] [[PIDOOMA|defining]] morality that uses [[God]] to [[Ad hominem|label disagreement/dissent as evil/immoral]]."

The argument is that since God communicates in [[revelation]]s, it is [[Authenticity of divine revelation#Corollaries|indistinguishable between an actual revelation to the speaker and stuff made up by the speaker]].  Since the revelation is attributed to God, anyone disagreeing with the speaker can be labeled as disagreeing with God.

Scriptural morality, in a similar manner, is the code word for "[[Argument by assertion|I said the book is right]], so I am [[quote mining|quoting it in the way I like]] in order to convince people that the morality I [[bullshit|made up]] is correct."

These can be used to label debate opponents negatively in a debate, especially a debate about morality.

==Criticisms==
===Euthyphro dilemma===
{{main|Euthyphro dilemma}}
In a nutshell: does God say it is good because it is intrinsically good, or is it good because God says so? It highlights the circular reasoning behind divine command theory.

===Authenticity of revelations===
The underlying assumption is that [[God]] communicates through [[revelation]]s, which, the assumptions made in the definition of God (specifically, existence of [[omnipotence|omnipotent]] beings) will make it difficult to validate the authenticity of revelations without using [[special pleading]] (That God's existence is unique in set of [[omnipotence|omnipotent]] beings, ''and'' God is omnibenevolent).  See the derivation [[Authenticity of divine revelation|here]].

===Uniqueness of ''summum bonum''===
If it is good because God says so, then there exists a '''unique''' ''Summum bonum'' (the highest good), namely, approval by God.<ref group=note>In case it isn't obvious enough,  approval by God is the ''only'' good in this case.  Therefore, it is the highest good.</ref>
The existence of a unique highest good means one should sacrifice everything for it and derive everything from it,<ref group=note>The derivation is similar to the hedonism problem in Plato's dialogue {{wpl|Philebus|Philebus}}.</ref> including but not limited to:
*Consciousness (including consciousness to being approved by God)
*Knowledge (Including knowledge of what will get God's approval, and knowledge of whether God actually exists)
*Wisdom (Including the biblical definition of "Fear of God")
*Free will (Refutes [[theodicy]])
and the exchange should be taken at every opportunity  ''regardless whether God approves any and all of those things'', because (i) God approving those things by no means imply the individual possessing such things will be automatically approved/commented and (ii) the assumption is that God is capable of changing opinions<ref group=note>If He isn't, there goes His omnipotence.</ref> from time to time.

On the contrary, if "being conscious that oneself is being approved by God" is the ''summum bonum'', then such consciousness may be merely an illusion due to the [[authenticity of revelation]] problem.

===Interpretations of scriptures===
If the source of ethical propositions come from the scriptures, an additional issue arises that concerns with how to interpret the scriptures correctly.<br>
Christianity, for example, can have various interpretations on the same issue.  Take killing people for example:
*Story of Cain and Abel:  Killing carries ''additional'' punishment on top of the one from the original sin.
*The [[Ten Commandments]] is translated as saying either "Thou shalt not kill." or "Thou shalt not murder." But God actually commands killing, even [[genocide]], elsewhere, and if the commandment is merely against "murder", then it requires a pre-existing legal code establishing just what "murder" is (and since "murder" is "killing that is not allowed", saying "murder is not allowed" is rather tautological).
*[[Examples of God personally killing people|God killing people]], for some reason, is justified, every single time (by calling God "good" and "just").
*[[Examples of Satan personally killing people|Satan killing people]], for some reason, does not come with corresponding punishments (perhaps due to being contracted out from God).
*It is assumed that justified killings are performed for every instance of [[capital punishment]] for [[Actions which demand the death penalty in the Old Testament|this list of crimes]] in the Old testament, which is rather convenient considering that appeal processes do not exist back then.  Not that you will need the appeal process if you just send everyone to the [[afterlife]] and let the almighty sort them out given his [[omniscience]].  With his [[omnipotence]] He should be able to put you back to life in [[Resurrection|one way]] or [[Zombies|another]] in case you are wrongfully convicted.
*Biblical battles mandates that any non-virgin women and men in the settlements besieged by the Israelites are to be killed after a successful siege regardless whether they have participated in the battle.

==See also==
*[[Presuppositionalism]]
*[[Euthyphro dilemma]]
*[[Self projection as god]]
*[[Might is Right]]
*[[Appeal to authority]]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|2|80%}}

{{apolbox}}

[[Category:Morality]]
[[Category:Apologetics and counter-apologetics]]
[[Category:Morality and religion]]
[[Category:Appeals to authority]]

Categories: Morality, Apologetics and counter-apologetics, Morality and religion, Appeals to authority