A CRITIQUE OF THE DIVINE COMMAND THEORY OF ETHICS FROM THE TEACHINGS OF THE ABRAHAMIC RELIGIONS

Abstract

Divine command theory is a theory of ethics that grounds the nature of ethical demands in the fact that they represent the command of God. It posit that God‟s command is the ultimate source of moral obligation or that God‟s will is the basis of moral laws. This position was held by the medieval theologians and philosophers like Anselm, Abelard, Duns Scotus and William of Ockham. Endorsed by Locke and Berkeley, and in the modern age it has been especially elaborated by Kierkegaard and Barth, it was criticized by Aquinas, who emphasized God‟s intellect rather than His will. The divine command theory of ethics, however, faces a philosophical difficulty. Interestingly, is that in spite of some disagreeing debates within, the divine command theory is supported in all the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam). This article, therefore, aims to critique the arguments of some scholars for and against the theory. A hermeneutic framework is employed. The significance of all critique is that looking at morality within the religious tradition, solutions are provided to the moral problems within human conflicting societies.