Advertisement

The Divine Command to Transcend Morality: Reply to C. Stephen Evans, Divine Commands as the Basis for Moral Obligations

  • Edith BrugmansEmail author
Chapter
Part of the New Approaches to the Scientific Study of Religion book series (NASR, volume 5)

Abstract

This paper discusses the thesis, central to Divine Command Theory, that ethical obligations are best seen as divine commands. In reply to C. Stephen Evans’s defense of that thesis, it is argued, first, that the concept of divine command is not necessary for a true moral theory. The moral philosophy of Iris Murdoch is presented as an example of secular ethics that claims to be true. Second, it is argued that the image of God suggested by Divine Command Theory is deficient in reflecting God’s absolute generosity. The arguments offered thus amount to a plea for differentiating religion from morality. The need for distinguishing morality and religion is further supported by reference to the problem of evil and to religious practice. Accordingly, a religious reading of the concept of divine command is called for. In conclusion, the paper suggests that a purely religious interpretation of this concept may help explain why Christian faith has more to offer than moral philosophy.

Keywords

Divine command Secular ethics Ontological explanation Moral judgment Religious faith God’s supreme goodness Religion transcends ethics 

References

  1. Brontë, A. 1848. The doubter’s prayer. http://www.poetry-archive.com. Accessed 1 June 2011.
  2. Graham, G. 2004. Eight theories of ethics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Murdoch, I. 1997. Existentialists and mystics. Writings on philosophy and literature. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
  4. Smith, A. 1976. In The theory of moral sentiments, ed. D.D. Raphael and A.L. Macfie. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. St. Anselm. Proslogion. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/anselm-proslogium.asp#CHAPTERIX. Accessed 1 June 2011.
  6. Strawson, P.F. 1962. Freedom and resentment. Proceedings of the British Academy XLVIII: 187–212.Google Scholar
  7. Zachary Manis, R. 2009. Kierkegaard and divine-command theory: Replies to Quinn and Evans. Religious Studies 45: 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Philosophy in Catholic PerspectiveLeiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Philosophy of LawRadboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations