awesome, looking forward to that next vid

What if some commands are ambiguous and there's no decisive way by which we can find out what God actually intended, but the same is necessary for salvation? In other words, how would you respond to the interpretation argument?

@daman7387

Жыл бұрын

I think DCT as described here is just trying to give an account of the fact that we are morally obligated. It's not necessarily explaining how we know we're morally obligated. A defender of DCT would probably give a different account of how God lets us know what our obligations are, and what would happen if we didn't know them and failed to fulfill them because of this. So I'm not sure the objection as I'm understanding it is an objection to DCT per se

@Nithin_sp

Жыл бұрын

​​@@daman7387 But in the video he says that "Divine Commands can be communicated through a number of means, including Special Revelation and Conscience". But I think those means doesn't necessarily help us understand what the divine commands actually are and certain features of the same actually is more expected under Naturalism as opposed to Theism imo.

@jourdan4am

Жыл бұрын

@@Nithin_sp These are excellent points and depending on the person and their beliefs you're going to get a different answer so I'm interested in the answers that maybe generated from this thread.

@TheAnalyticChristian

Жыл бұрын

It’s not clear to me that this is an objection to DCT. Even if DCT was false, but we still had moral obligations you could think many of our moral obligations are ambiguous. After all, it’s hard to know what we ought to do in various circumstances. The essence of the challenge seems to be whether God can make the fulfillment of an ambiguous moral obligation necessary for salvation. I would think that insofar as the moral obligation is ambiguous and you are not at fault for its ambiguity, then that is evidence that a good and loving God would not make it necessary for salvation, or such a God will make it clearer to you at some future time.

@Nithin_sp

Жыл бұрын

@@TheAnalyticChristian But doesn't that atleast serve as an internal criticism for some religions?

If you love goodness for its own sake and not because G-d requires it does that fall outside of the divine command theory? - I could see actions coming from this type of love as being good despite them never being required by G-d Thus being good separate from commands.

@daman7387

Жыл бұрын

Remember that DCT is not necessarily trying to give an account of why things are morally good, or what might motivate someone to do something that is moral obligatory. It's just trying to explain how it's the case that we are morally obligated. So I think yes, that would probably fall outside of DCT, if I'm understanding you right

@jourdan4am

Жыл бұрын

@@daman7387 Yes thank you that explains what dct is. But it also seems to be the case that the command is no longer good because G-d commands it but because the command is good in of itself And if that is the case then that is a better explanation of why we are morally obligated to follow those commands.

@dallas1891

4 ай бұрын

Where does God’s morality come from