Thomas Aquinas` version of the NLT is clearly theistic, as it presupposes the existence of an intelligent builder of the universe who has endowed us with the ability to know the law of nature. However, this does not mean that actions according to God`s arbitrary commandments are good or bad. Instead, he takes the position that if God commands us to do X, it is because X is right. Moreover, we don`t need to believe in God to know what is right or wrong. Everyone, whether theist or not, is able to identify the laws of nature that govern morality because they are implicit in nature itself. So why would God give us commandments? The concept of natural law is not modern. In fact, it dates back to the time of Aristotle and Plato. Since natural law is based on human nature and not on culture or traditions, it is constant throughout the world. For example, all societies view murder as morally wrong, regardless of how it is perceived by religion or court law.
One reason for this is that God is able to see infallibly the consequences of our actions. People can predict the consequences of our actions (“if I shoot man with a gun, he is likely to be killed”), but God`s omniscience involves an infallible prediction. God will even be able to foresee the consequences of our actions in the hereafter. Even if God`s reasoning is impeccable, our own reasoning is imperfect, so we can use God`s commandments as a resilience that allows us to reliably determine the right course of action. So, if God commanded us to do X, then we should do X under the NLT. 6. However, critics of natural law theory doubt that the inherent nature of Homo sapiens establishes laws of behavior for humans in the same way it can establish laws of behavior for cats, lions, and polar bears. This is particularly difficult because much of human behavior is shaped by the environment, that is, by conscious and unconscious conditioning, training and education.
We could approach your question through Euthyphro`s dilemma: Does God command what is good because it is good, or is it good simply because He commands it? The first answer denies God`s sovereignty: it subjects God to good. This last answer – which is the response of the theorists of the divine commandments – saves God`s sovereignty, but at the cost of arbitrariness. The theory of divine command includes the latter answer. The classical tradition of natural law rejects both responses in favor of a third. The CSD tries to equate morality with the so-called commandments of God. Some thinkers, e.g. Robert Adams (1999), argue that the existence of objective moral obligations is consistent only when a personal God exists. In other words, the idea is that objective morality presupposes either that God exists or that the existence of God is the best explanation of objective moral obligations. To consider such arguments, some of which date back to Immanuel Kant (1788), would take us too far from the central themes of this chapter. However, see Evans (2018) for a more detailed analysis of these arguments. PROBLEM: The physical record may not be as clear and open to interpretation.
There is evidence of homosexual mating in species other than humans. How many cases or species are needed to conclude that such behavior is natural in mammals and that the accomplishment of a basic physical forcing is accomplished in a manner harmless to the species is questionable. But this is not called the “divine command theory,” for God`s commandments derive their authority not from a will that says, “Do it because I say so,” but from a will united with supreme wisdom and goodness. Does that clarify the difference? Each alternative derives most of its plausibility from the simple lies of the others. Note, however, that they share an implicit premise: they both assume that God and good are different things. Classical natural lawyers deny this assumption. God is simply the uncreated good. To turn the idea around and look at it from the other side, if we ask deep enough questions about the good, what we find is not a what, other than God, but a who, God Himself in person. READ: Tim Holt on the www.philosophyofreligion.info/christian-ethics/divine-command-theory/the-euthyphro-dilemma/ Dilemma See also Wikipedia on the Dilemma en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro_dilemma Natural Law: A Reformed Critique web.archive.org/web/20030415195837/capo.org/premise/96/feb/p960204.html an Investigation of Natural Law by Peter J. Leithart found in the premise.
Adams` MDCT is an example of how philosophical theories respond to criticism, such as Euthyphro`s dilemma. Adams accepts that God`s arbitrariness is intolerable, but does not abandon CSD completely. Rather, he imagines the theory as insisting on the identity of moral rules with God`s commandments, but abandons the idea that the source of morality lies in God`s arbitrary commandments. The strategy is promising, but we should note that Adams abandoned the idea that adultery is wrong, for example, because God forbids it. Here is another theory that, in one of its forms, involves belief in the existence of a deity, God. This is the ethical principle of the great religious traditions of the West: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Encyclopedia of Philosophy – Natural Law – www.utm.edu/research/iep/n/natlaw.htm definition and explanation of the theory of natural law with bibliography. The theory also uses the principle of DOUBLE EFFECT: Craig argues that moral rules are neither independent of God nor arbitrary. The commandment not to commit adultery is based on the very goodness of God; It is therefore not arbitrary. Nor is the commandment independent of God, for it is only through God`s good nature that commandment comes first.
2. Who knows what are the commandments of the Godhead? Can anyone claim to have heard the order and respond to it? Here are some recent examples of divine commandments. What are the laws of nature that guide human action? These include: the law of survival, the natural act for living things to provide for themselves and reproduce, etc. It is a big problem for this theory to determine what exactly these laws are and how they apply to human circumstances. How does anyone know what the “God” or Divinity commands? The “God” or Divinity tells them, directly or through an intermediary, or by signs, omens or experience, that those who receive the command claim to have been the transmitter of the message or order. How exactly do people get the order? Well, it`s directly or indirectly through an intermediary like a person or a written work. Can the deity continue to give orders after previous recordings? Yes, the Divinity can update and modify the commands as he wishes. God`s law is a law or rule believed to come directly from God. This is God`s law. In addition, people generally regard divine law as superior to natural law or secular law. Those who believe in divine law believe that divine law has more authority than other laws. Moreover, they believe that it cannot be changed by humans or human authorities.
Therefore, the main characteristics of divine law are 1) it is universal and permanent, 2) created by a Supreme Being, 3) and guides people to become good. Many people claim that morality is impossible without belief in a supernatural being (God), from whom ultimately derives our sense of right and wrong. And yet, in the 4th century BC, Plato put a huge hole in this argument. Remember this excerpt from Plato 3. Even if we have certain natural tendencies, are we entitled to claim that these inclinations or tendencies should be developed? For example, what reasons do we use to justify the choice of property? On the one hand, if God forbids adultery because it is immoral, then God has reasons for the commandment.  We might assume that God is largely consequentialist and forbids adultery because of the evil consequences it entails.