hello to you I do hope you're well welcome to this AEV religious studies revision video I'm Bo mle and today we are talking about Divine command Theory the idea that morality is determined by God's commands and John Calvin summed it up as the will of God is the Supreme rule of righteousness so it is the idea that whatever God has commanded us to do is what we must do because it is morally correct and the reason it is morally correct is because it has been commanded by God and of course the most famous example of this is The Ten Commandments which were revealed to Moses in the Old Testament book of Exodus and they are seen as important moral commands that must be followed because they have been commanded by God now we're going to be talking today about Divine command Theory we'll be looking at John Calvin and also Carl B who believed that the question of Good and Evil has been settled because what God has revealed to us is what we must do so good and evil has been settled and decided because God is the author of morality he has commanded us in our conduct he has told us how we should live and because it's been commanded by God it must therefore be the moral and right thing to do now an interesting question or an interesting dilemma that we'll be looking at later is the you ofro dilemma which is associated with Plato because he asked is conduct right because the God's command it which is what divine command Theory would suggest or do the gods command it because it is right and of course the problem with that is that would suggest that morality is actually higher than God or Gods because that would suggest that God is commanding something because God has discovered or because God knows it is right whereas of course with Divine command Theory the idea is that whatever ever God commands is Right simply because it has been commanded by God and of course one of the big problems there is going to be well what if God turned around one day and commanded genocide because if we're saying that whatever God commands is right and is the thing you must do then that would surely mean you have to go and commit genocide now of course the defense of that would be well God would never do that because he is Omni benevolent but as you can probably see already the are lots of questions that are raised by this idea of divine command Theory and we're going to be looking at those questions and looking at potential answers to those questions in today's video and of course one thing that goes without saying is that this is an ethical theory that is rooted in theism isn't it you know it's not going to be applicable it's not going to be relevant to anybody who is an atheist who doesn't believe there is a God to command what is good in the first place so let's get started shall we before we do actually do excuse me let me just signal to you a really great synoptic link to uh paper two on the AQA a level spec when we talk about God and we look at ethical monotheism the idea that Christians do believe in one God who is the source of one morality this is also of course very relevant within the matter ethics topic when we're looking at what is goodness is good something objective to be discovered or as the emotivist suggest that you know morality is just an expression of an opinion or a personal preference of course with Divine command Theory it is grounded in this idea it is anchored in this belief that there is one God who is the source of one morality so we'll be making lots of links to other topics as we talk through this today let me just show you where this topic does fit in on the AQA specification this is part of paper one the philosophy of Religion and Ethics although of course you might bring this in for many of your paper 2 topics and of course you might also bring this in in your dialogue's 25 markers um and This falls into the metarex section of the course so where we're asking that question what is good and of course the Divine command answer is going to be that what is good is whatever God has commanded so here are our key terms for today our first key term is divine command Theory itself and this is a met ethical Theory which proposes that morality is determined simply and solely by whether something is commanded by God so morality is determined by God's commands and so for a person to be moral they ought to follow God's commands this is obviously an example of religious ethics which is an approach to ethics which derives moral values from God or of course more generally a Divine realm and divine command Theory as I say is a key example of this if you're not religious Divine command theory is not going to do anything for you is it because if you don't believe there's a God to command these things in the first place you're not going to follow the commands in a holy book because they have no importance for you beyond being an interes in historical text which can teach you about a religion and how people thought at the time that book was written secular ethics in contrast is the approach which argues that ethical theories and actions are based on human faculties such as logic and reason and not on religious values or commands given by God you know for secular ethicist you should not just blindly follow a command that has been given to you by your God you must think for yourself you must you know make that judgment you must use reason you must use logic you must make that decision for yourself you should not just blindly follow a rule because you've been told that's what God has commanded you know for a secular ethicist they want you to use reason they want you to think they want you to use logic as I say to make that decision and to be fully responsible you cannot just follow commands that are in a holy book because you believe they were given by a God and then finally emotivism and this is a really important topic that we're going to look at when we are evaluating Divine command Theory because this is um associated with AJ a amongst other atheists and it's the meta ethical theory that moral judgments are not statements of fact so they're not objectively true but expressions of a speaker's emotional attitude or a personal preference or opinion uh so moral judgments are neither true or false but simply exess Expressions excuse me of the speaker's opinion often described as the boo harah Theory because you're just saying boo that's a bad thing or yay that's a good thing so it's an emotion it's a personal preference but obviously you know this is a nice link with religious language as well the idea that religious statements and ethical statements are meaningless because they can't be empirically verified they aren't true by definition so of course that's going to be great when we are criticizing Divine command Theory and the idea that things are objectively good and moral in this case because they've been commanded by God for an emotivist all morality is personal opinion it's about you know expressing a personal view in the same way you might say I like fish and chips or I don't like broccoli you're going to be saying I like it when people are kind I don't like it when people steal so you know already thinking at the start of the video what are our ao2 points going to be and how are we going to critique this Theory so let's just focus in on the theory and those two key Scholars so as I say whenever you're talking about Divine command Theory you want to think about your Ten Commandments of course you want to think about ethical monotheism within Christianity and you want to be thinking about John Calvin and KL B so the key points on this are that morality is based on what God commands so basically whatever God has commanded is moral because God has commanded it that is the reason yeah so simply because God has said it God has revealed it God has instructed it that makes it the right thing to do that makes makes it moral so these are the commands given by God and they are the statements of God's will so they are what God wants and what God wants is seen as what must be done it must be correct because it's been commanded by God and of course that links in with those Christian views about the nature of God God is omnipotent Omni benevolent omniscient for example if God's commanded it it must be the right thing to do now John Calvin sum this up by saying that the will of God is the Supreme rule of righteousness so that you know there is an objective right out there there is an objective truth when it comes to morals and that is what is within the will of God what God Wills is the Supreme rule of righteousness that must not be questioned it cannot be challenged it should not be changed it must simply be followed and obeyed and then K bath said that the question of Good and Evil has been decided and settled once and for all in the decree of God so again the idea that God has determined morality that what God Wills Is moral it is the right thing to do and it's what people must do and I think a really important line there or extract there is has been decided and settled so the decision has been made God has made his judgment so obviously for an emotivist morality is just an ongoing you know process of expressing personal views you know and for many ethicists morality can change over time can't it you know opinions can change things can be uh decriminalized things can be legalized in terms of government laws um but for bath the question of Good and Evil has been decided and settled God has decided it it has been decreed by God and so we must obey that we must follow God's commands so of course this links back to the idea that God is the creator of everything and that includes morality so God is the greatest possible being God is omnipotent omnicient uh Omni benevolent he is the Creator and controller of everything and of course that is why God is seen as the creator of morality so there must be an organic link between Creator and created and of course this is beenen in Genesis that first book of the Bible which is the scriptural foundation for the imod day Doctrine the idea that we are made in the image and likeness of God and so because we are made IM magod day many theologians believe that humans are like God in having a rational and a moral character and they believe it therefore follows that human moral Behavior should be in the image of God and that means following God's commands so because we've been made in magod day in the image and likeness of God we must follow in um the example of God I could put it like that I suppose or we should follow the instructions and the commands given by God and of course for a Christian that would include the teachings of Jesus himself who was God incarnate so for Protestants so for our particular denomination of Christians who of course live by the solar scriptura Doctrine and the idea of scripture alone God's commands are revealed specifically in scripture and of course that scripture is the Bible which is seen as the infallible word of God and so what God commands in here must be right and it must be followed for example the Ten Commandments in Exodus and then also The Sermon on the Mount in the gospel of Matthew delivered by Jesus and of course for our Protestants in particular the Bible is therefore the soulle source of Christian ethics because it is the infallible word of God and the absolute source of morality because it contains the word of God and it therefore contains the commands given by God and so the Bible must be read and it must be followed you know the commands given must be followed they must be put into practice so here are the two Scholars that we're going to be talking about in the context of divine command Theory to help us understand it and to ensure that every point every paragraph We Make in the exam is grounded in scholarly Authority so John Calvin is the first Theologian we're going to talk about and he wrote in his Institutes of the Christian religion that the will of God is the Supreme rule of righteousness so that is a great quote to get on a Post-It note and you know commit to memory ahead of the exam so that everything which he Wills must be held to be righteous by the mere fact of his willing it so simply because God has willed something that means it must be right it must be the right thing to do therefore when it is asked why the Lord did so we must answer because he pleased so there is no reason God has done it other than he wanted to but if you proceed further to ask why he pleased you ask for something greater and more Sublime than the will of God and nothing can be found so of course nothing is greater than God even morality itself because morality has been created by God God is the Creator and controller of everything and so we have to say that something is righteous it is the right thing to do because it is willed by God because it is then commanded by God because God is the greatest there is nothing greater than God there is nothing greater or more Sublime than the will of God and so whatever God Wills must be right it must be done he said therefore that um God is the cause God is the creator of everything including morality so let's have a look at how this all fits in with Calvin's theology we've already met him on the course because of his ideas about predestination and he actually uses Divine command Theory to justify his on this so the key theological argument that he's making is that God um callused everything okay he cannot be caused to do anything because if God is caused to do anything that would suggest there is a force external to God so God cannot be caused to command anything there cannot be a reason that God um is caused to command us to do things okay because God is omnipotent so at the core of our understanding of God is his omnipotence so there cannot be anything that causes him to do anything so to challenge or question God's will is to ask for something greater and of course he says that is not possible there cannot be a reason or we cannot understand a reason other than that's what God wants so for Calvin Divine command theory is a natural result of the absolute power and the sovereignity of God so it's the idea that whatever God has commanded is righteous because whatever God Wills Is righteous simply because merely based on the fact that it is commanded by God it can't be well God's commanded it because XY Z we have to end it at that point where we go it's the right thing to do because God has commanded it full stop now Cole B reaffirms this position and he wrote in his text church dogmatics that for the question of Good and Evil has been decided and settled once and for all in the decree of God so the case is closed the book is closed closed the decision has been made and that is by the cross and by the resurrection of Jesus Christ now that this decision has been made theological ethics cannot go back on it so theologians can't start changing morality they can't start questioning things they simply have to but the Christian you know living your Christian Life obey it follow the command because that decision about what is right and what is wrong what should be done and what shouldn't be done has been decided and settled once and for all and he says that that is in the decree in the Judgment of God so bar argues that man's obedience to God is the answer to all questions about ethics he said scripture should be used to critique Society not the other way around so you know that you know many scholars many um biblical Scholars will look at the text and they will reflect on it and they will critique it and they'll think is this still relevant today does this fit with our modern worldview bar believed you should actually do it the other way around you should not use Society to critique scripture you should use scripture as the standard by which to critique Society so it's not about changing scripture to fit in with modern social views and modern contemporary beliefs but actually you should be using scripture as the standard you should be using scripture to judge society and you know Society should be held to the standard of scripture it shouldn't be that scripture is changed and reinterpreted to fit the prevailing trend and the popular viewpoints of the day so he said the commands of God set Christian ethics totally apart from General discussions of what is right and wrong and totally override fallible human debates on moral issues so you know it shouldn't be about people getting together and freshing it out you know there is something that is much higher there is something that is much more potent and much more important which is what God has commanded in scripture so Christians should listen to and seek to understand uh secular ethic iCal principles you know absolutely listen to the debates hear people's views but they should then use the Bible they should use what scripture says to critique them so their Authority should come from scripture because it contains those Divine commands and remember bath believes that man's obedience to God is the answer to all questions about ethics so don't reduce yourself to those human level discussions because they're going to be fallible you should turn to the infallible word of God you should see what the you know scripture says God has commanded and then you should use that to critique whatever discussion is going on whatever um debate is taking place so let's start to evaluate shall we let's start to think about the strengths and the weaknesses of this Divine command Theory this idea that morality is determined by God's commands and that whatever God has commanded must be right merely because it has been willed by God so our first strength is that it is consistent with ethical monotheism so ethical monotheism remember is belief in one God who is the source the sole source of morality and of course our key religions today our major world religions today are all examples Judaism Christianity and Islam so are abrahamic Faith uh So Divine command Theory reflects the fact that God is the Creator and controller of everything including rules that Humanity must follow so you know God has created the heavens and earth we read in Genesis 1:1 and that includes all of the morals um and divine command Theory May therefore provide theists and remember it does depend on belief in God with a clear authorative and objective source of morality and of course the fact that it is clear and it is authorative means that it's helpful because people can find out an answer they can get a definitive answer by picking up their holy book and seeing what God has said for example in the Ten Commandments and of course it also emphasizes the importance of holy books as the fible word of God because they contain his ethical commands which must be taken seriously and followed so it is consistent we could say with ethical monotheism with the beliefs that most uh theists hold today are Christians Muslims and are Jews um and it is also consistent with beliefs about the Bible in terms of that solar scriptura Doctrine and the view that the Bible is the infallible word of God okay our next strength then Builds on this because it provides clear objective and unchanging um moral principles it provides an objective moral standard doesn't it the ethical rules are made by God not humanity and so they cannot be subject to change and that provides consistency and objectivity there is one law Eternal you may remember cisero saying about natural moral law that is created by the Eternal and omnipotent God that is therefore binding upon all people at all times and All Nations so it's clear it provides a very clear and very con consistent uh approach to ethics doesn't it because it gives us one clear answer that is objective and that is not subject to discussion whatever God has commanded is Right morality is determined by God's commands which have been revealed to us in scripture so that decree has been delivered that decision has been made so there's no ambiguity here at all so as I said for example The Ten Commandments are a great example so that would give people certainty about morality now of course a bit of critical analysis if you wanted to bring that in within your paragraph as part of your evaluation very important for that a star you could actually say but hermeneutics is important because many theists believe that the Bible must be understood within the context It Was Written you can't just take the 613 rules of the Old Testament for example and try to apply them all today you know the books within the Bible have for example been translated many times so some of the rules may have changed changed as they've been translated their original meaning might have been lost they might no longer be relevant and here's your problem what if some of them actually contradict each other what do you do then because if it's saying you need to follow all of God's commands what if those commands seem to contradict each other you know you've got different commands within scripture so therefore we can ask how do we know which Commandments are still relevant if they do contradict which one is more important which one does God will more for example um and we've got to also ask is divine command Theory really that clear or unchanging considering how different Generations have understood the Bible in different culturally specific ways so is it the case that this text reveals clear Commandments that should always be followed by everybody or do we not need to interpret this text do we not need to acknowledge that was revealed in a certain context to certain people and that we're reading it we're you know studying scripture in a very different social context and so you know actually can we just say these are the rules and that's it you know surely there should be some more flexibility so could it be too objective you know could it therefore become impractical and we'll talk about that more when we talk about weaknesses but always great to be bringing in a bit of critical analysis for example after you've written about a strength in a paragraph just to show The Examiner that you're not just following a formulaic strength weakness pattern but that you're actually critically thinking about each of the points you're making in your essays okay so let's talk about some weaknesses shall we and the big problem of course is that it depends on belief in one God which many people today do not and so they're not going to be interested in Divine command Theory because it depends on belief in a monotheistic God who is the source of all morality and many people today as have said do not believe in a God so they would believe that Divine command Theory provides an unsatisfactory approach to ethics and moral decision making it would be irrelevant to them wouldn't it it would be in the words of AJ a meaningless you know it's just not something they're going to be interested in it's not going to do anything for them and it's not going to help them make moral decisions because they believe scripture was written by men and it was mainly men in that patriarchal context who were shaped by their social contexts and so you know they don't believe that it is God who has given these commands they believe that it was people writing for particular audiences at a particular point in history so they don't believe that those teachings are necessarily all still relevant and even if some of them are relevant that's because they practically work it's not because they've come from God so they would take more pragmatic approach you know they're not going to say well if that's in the Bible I'm definitely not going to do it they would think right well is that rule helpful would that rule help society today and if so they'd follow it but they're not going to follow it just because someone says that was given by God that is the will of God they'd say well I don't believe in God so I'm not going to do it for that reason um so you know we have to remember that for our atheists this is not going to cut it is it just saying well you must do that because it's the will of God because if they don't believe there's a God they're not going to do it for that reason now emotivist in particular uh believe that morality is a matter of personal feeling and opinion so there is no absolute moral truth to be discovered so of course that completely koses the whole idea of um Divine command Theory doesn't it because there is no Divine will to be revealed and followed um they believe that in the realm of moral judgments everything is a matter of subjective personal opinion because remember morality moral statements would fail the verification principle you know they can't be empirically verified um you know these statements they that are made in the Bible these commands for example their Ten Commandments for example they don't believe an atheist does believe there is a God making moral rules they just think it's a matter of personal preference so for example the rules in the Bible are the personal preferences of the people who wrote them hundreds thousands of years ago our next one then is to actually really critique the Bible and say that the Bible is actually inconsistent and outdated so we could say the Bible contains outdated and immoral commands so why should they be followed just because they've been supposedly commanded by God the Old and New Testaments are sometimes inconsistent so again what do you do when commands seem to contradict which one do you follow if they've both been supposedly willed by God for example slavery Paul writes that slaves should be submissive to their masters appearing to condone slavery by requiring slaves to put up with their situation so would a Christian today really believe that that is a Divine command that slaves should submit to their masters and that should just be followed because it's what God has commanded in one of Paul's letters and homosexuality of course many churches now are inclusive of those in LGBT plus relationships and they believe that the Quakers believe for example it is the nature and quality of the relationship that matters the Methodist now allow same-sex marriage but of course Leviticus commands that if a Man Lies with a man as with a woman they shall be put to death so is that command still relevant you know even churches which don't allow gay marriage do not believe that homosexual people should be sentenced to death and so that command is in the Bible that's been commanded by God so why is that not being followed um so is the Bible not therefore outdated because you know the majority of Christians today would not believe you should be killing homosexuals um and people who have same-sex relationships so again you know when we start to look at particular commands that are given we start to realize that actually there could be a little bit of a problem in terms of of whether Divine command theory is fit for purpose for 21st century theists in terms of their moral decision- making and this brings me on to uh our next weakness which is the youth ofro dilemma which is going to be a big Focus for us now so here is the question that Plato asked is conduct right because the gods command it or do the gods command it because it is right so a bit of a tongue twister something to get you thinking about and I want to explore this I want to unpack this now because there are two problems that this dilemma raises for us so the statement one the first statement God commands something because it is morally right and that first statement is obviously not what the Divine command Theory wants or suggests I should say because remember Divine command Theory says that something is morally right because it is commanded by God that is the idea at the heart of divine command Theory so we're actually going to start with that one where is the highlighter I need to highlight this because that's the one we're going to start with so this one here that I'm highlighting in yellow well I'm attempting to anyway that is terrible I apologize that is not very aesthetic at all do bear with me H so that is what divine command Theory says that something is morally right because it is commanded by God that is the idea of divine command Theory and of course the problem with that is that if this is true God could command anything even genocide and it would be morally right morality is based on God's whims it's not his will it's his whims and that is known as the arbitrariness problem okay whereas on the other hand you could therefore say okay well God commands it because it is morally right but then the problem with that of course is that if that is true then morality is above God God is Not omnipotent because morality is superior to him morality is something God neither created nor controls he has simply discovered it and shared it with us so as you can see you know whichever way you look at this dilemma you've got a problem so this for us can be a really great weakness of divine command Theory because it's exposing isn't it very clearly to us the problem with Divine command Theory so and the key Point here is that morality is based on God's whims and that becomes the arbitrariness problem okay so you know this is really really higher level thinking about what actually is morality and what is goodness and of course that is the key question at the heart of meta ethics isn't it okay I don't know how I get off the highlighter but we're just going to keep going and hope for the best uh so we need to have a look now at a rebuttal to the Youth of bro dilemma okay because obviously that does present a problem for us doesn't it this question of well if you know something is morally right because it is commanded by a God then we have the arbitrariness problem because morality is seemingly based on God's whims so Robert Adams has given us a rebuttal always great for our essays and he refined the Divine command Theory to meet the Youth of row Challenge and he argues and I would love to know in the comments what you think of this that the omnipotence of God is preserved by seeing that morality comes from God however God is Not arbitrary because God's character and I mentioned this at the start of the video is Omni benevolent again the highlighter is really not looking good there but we're going to keep going in any way I'm getting into it now there we go bit of color there we go in other words the Youth of pro dilemma left out a critical dimension of judeo-christian belief the loving character of God and remember God is love so a way of resolving the youth bro dilemma the problem that it presents is to add in that God is loving and so you know if I go back again something is morally right because it is commanded by God God is omnipotent and we add in there God is Omni benevolence we wouldn't command anything that isn't loving anyway so don't worry all is well we've solved the problem um and Adams therefore promotes Divine command Theory as practical intelligible and objective when based on belief in that Omni benevolent God so that is how he rescues and he restores Divine command theory for the modern world um you know he says well you know of course it shows God is omnipotent nothing is greater than God he is the Creator and controller of everything in and so everything should be subject to his will but he then adds in but don't worry God is only benevolent and we see that in the Gospel of John that God is love however we've got a rebuttal to our rebuttal of course we do because this man here Richard Dawkins would not agree that the evidence supports Adams so remember Divine command Theory anchored in scripture and what scripture commands Richard Dawkins says script the infallible word of God does not reveal an omni benevolent God he said that the god of the Old Testament where we find many commands don't we 613 rules is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction he's jealous and proud of it he's a petty unjust unforgiving control freak a vindictive bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser a misogynistic homophobic racist infanticidal genocidal filicidal pestilential megalomaniac say masochistic capriciously malevolent bully there we go guys there's the tongue twisted to uh get you get you going um so what Dawkins is saying there is actually Adams this God who is commanding these things is not Omni benevolent at all so you can't just turn around and say well don't worry God's only benevolent so we should just do what he says because he's not going to command anything that's not loving because actually he's saying read the Old Testament have a look at what God did have a look at what what God commands and you're going to see he is the most unpleasant character he's not Omni benevolent he's unpleasant so Dawkins would say why on Earth would I follow the commands of this God this is a cruel God this is an evil God why would I follow the commands of this God and I think that is a nice way to end our divine command Theory revision video if you've got any questions about this please do let me know down in the comments and if you've got any thoughts on Divine command Theory again please do let me know in the comments but thank you for watching good luck with your studies and hopefully see you again soon take care bye-bye