The Source of Good Moral Standards

I wrote the following essay to complete an open-ended assignment for my Introduction to Philosophy class. I have two concerns with posting it: one is that people will skim it or only read parts of it and thereby do an injustice to the material discussed within it; two is that people will read it and accept is as truth. Please do neither - enter into it thoughtfully, read it in its entirety, and use it as a diving board into God's deep ocean of truth. Prayers for a decent grade are also appreciated.

James Rachels never answers the question that serves as the title for his essay, “Must God’s Commands Conform to Moral Standards?”, but only states what he sees as the ultimate conundrum: “we must either regard God’s commands as arbitrary, and give up the doctrine of the goodness of God, or admit that there is a standard of right and wrong that is independent of his will, and give up the theological definitions of right and wrong” (4). He reaches this inconclusive conclusion by examining the two options offered about piety in the Euthyphro, in which Socrates addresses the question, “Is conduct right because the gods command it, or do the gods command it because it is right?” According to Rachels, the problem with the first option, called the Divine Command Theory, is that the lack of rightness and wrongness before the issuance of God’s commands makes them arbitrary and not good (3). He finds equally troubling consequences to the second option in rejecting traditional theological considerations of right and wrong because they exist completely apart from God (4). But throughout Rachels’ discussion, he fails to mention some key attributes of God, namely the beginningless existence of the Holy Trinity, its role in the creation of the universe, and its love for the human race, which all indicate that God is the source of Good Moral Standards.

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity states that God exists in three persons that make up one being that unchangingly was, is, and will be from eternity to eternity. Inherent in God’s existence is goodness and holiness in the sense that the three persons in the Godhead have always and will always enjoy a peaceful and dynamic existence centered around each other. Dr. Timothy J. Keller describes the nature of the Trinity like this: “The Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit are characterized in their very essence by mutually self-giving love…. Each person in the Godhead does not insist that any of the others revolve around them, but rather they center on one another, they glorify one another, they adore one another, they serve one another, they defer to one another, they put the interests of the other over their own interests” (“Father, Son, and Holy Spirit”). In this existence is only good and no bad, only holiness and no sin, but the lack of the presence of the negative does not negate the positiveness of the positive. The members of the Godhead did not submit to an even more weighty and eternal charter of righteousness to make their actions right, nor did their acting in a certain way induct that action into a compilation of right actions, but righteousness and the ways of God were inseparable. This ultimate and eternal reality is the source of all other existence.

Assuming that this holy Trinity exists and created the universe, it is natural to believe that the world is designed to perfectly reflect the same mutually self-giving love. Life in the Garden of Eden is presented as a paradise where evil is unknown and nonexistent and all things live in harmonious equilibrium. Although God’s commands were not stated, they were naturally followed because it was the nature of His creation, and the full implementation of His right ways allowed for the fullness of right existence. In creating humans in His image, the Godhead imparted an innate knowledge of rightness: the fact that people seek and follow it “show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness” (Romans 2:15). The natural fulfillment of God’s ways was broken in Eve and Adam’s rebellion against God – they came to know good and evil and brought a curse upon life on earth – but the world’s design continues to plead for God’s ways. It is because of this design that inserting other authorities into Socrates’ question about piety (“Is conduct right because parents command it, or do parents command it because it is right? Is conduct right because society commands it, or does society command it because it is right?) leads one to the second conclusion, but this answer is incorrect in a God-context because the definition of right in this world has its source in His righteousness.

God, the eternal Trinity, the Creator and Sustainer of the universe, did not respond to the rebellion of the human race in wrath, but has patiently and lovingly sought after the redemption of the world. With the goal being for humans to enjoy existence fully in completely following His holy ways, in totally obeying the moral standards that have their source in the timeless reality of God’s love, He provided prophets and a Messiah, words of Truth and miracles of power, laws of righteousness and a story of love. The three members of the Godhead who selflessly have revolved around each other in good existence from eternity and desire a similar good existence for humanity do not give commands and laws arbitrarily but remain faithful to their nature in requiring what sets aside selfishness and seeks the betterment of others. Rachels’ argument that God’s command could have just as easily made lying right as honesty ignores who God is and that righteousness and His nature are inseparable. God’s commands reflect His ways and do not define what is right, but reflect the rightness that He is and that He created. It is in view of His loving and truthful nature that we can trust that His commands are good and right to follow because they reflect how this world is designed to operate.

All of the confusing objections surrounding Socrates’ discussion of piety can lead to one reassuring conclusion. The problem with saying conduct is right because God commands surround the fact that the source is God’s command. The problem with saying that God commands what is right surrounds piety’s existence apart from God. The implications of these problems are severe, but those issues can be solved by saying that conduct is right because it aligns with God’s Essence, the ultimate reality, the source of creation. And knowing that His essence is with some oversimplification selfless joyful love, those seeking to live a pious life can be confident that it exists in orbiting around others rather than demanding that they orbit around them.

Holy Bible, New International Version. Nashville: Boardman, 1984.

Keller, Tim. “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” Sermon. Hunter College Auditorium, Redeemer Presbyterian Church, New York City, New York. 15 Jan. 2006

Rachels, James. “Must God’s Commands Conform to Moral Standards?”