My Approach To Metaethics: The Use Of Divine Command

My Approach To Metaethics Was The Use Of The Divine Command Theory And

My approach to metaethics was the use of the Divine Command Theory and Social Contract Theory. I believe that the Divine Command Theory upholds the Ten Commandments and that by following those Ten Commandments, my actions will be morally correct. One of the challenges to the Divine Command Theory is that, when it comes to God, we will be forced to comply or compromise. Social Contract Theory states, “that each society has its own social contract, and that the contract of one society may differ significantly from that of another.” There are several norms that govern our culture. Culture is simply defined as, “the way we do things around here.” When we look at the case method approach Sexuality and apply the Divine Command Theory, we see that the word of God tells us in 1 Corinthians 6:18 that “Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin [e] a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.” (ESV) There are many Christians who tend to compromise the word of God when it comes to sex rather than obey it. In the case, we saw that the brother, who was a lector in the Catholic church, compromised the word of God for his children. He accepted and allowed his daughter to have sex before marriage and to use contraception, which is against the teachings of the Catholic church. When applying Social Contract Theory to the case of sexuality, this is where society and our culture provide a grey area.

Today, it is socially acceptable in many cultures for couples to cohabitate before marriage. I have observed that even some cultures traditionally considered stricter are relaxing their standards on premarital cohabitation. This raises the question: is it moral or immoral to cohabitate before marriage? When living in a society where this is accepted, we encounter a dilemma of partial obedience to God’s will. Partial obedience is not aligned with God's expectations. How does one judge individuals who see societal acceptance as justification for actions that contradict the word of God? It is not our place to judge; God alone is the ultimate judge. Discussions around sexuality are often difficult, akin to difficult political conversations, because opinions vary widely—whether based on divine commands or societal norms. As Christians, we should be cautious not to judge others for their choices regarding marriage, divorce, or cohabitation.

Personally, prior to my salvation, I believed living together before marriage was acceptable. My wife and I cohabitated. After I was saved and began studying God's word, we decided to live separately until marriage. This decision aligned with my newfound faith and understanding of biblical teachings. Growing up in my culture, cohabitation was widely accepted, and I did not perceive it as morally wrong. However, through biblical study and reflection, I recognized that God's standards differ from societal norms. This experience highlights the importance of applying divine moral standards, even when they conflict with cultural expectations. In conclusion, applying both Divine Command Theory and Social Contract Theory to issues of sexuality reveals the complexity of moral decisions rooted in religious belief and cultural influence. Ultimately, individual conscience guided by divine principles offers a moral compass beyond societal pressures.

Paper For Above instruction

My approach to metaethics involves integrating Divine Command Theory and Social Contract Theory, recognizing the strengths and limitations of each framework in guiding moral decisions, especially on sensitive topics like sexuality. Divine Command Theory emphasizes obedience to God's commandments as the foundation of morality. This approach maintains that moral actions align with divine will, as exemplified in biblical scriptures such as 1 Corinthians 6:18, which condemns sexual immorality (ESV). The appeal of this theory lies in its clear moral directives rooted in divine authority, providing believers with moral certainty and spiritual accountability. However, a significant challenge arises regarding moral conflicts when divine commands seem ambiguous or culturally distant, leading to potential compliance or compromise. For example, in contemporary society where premarital cohabitation is widely accepted, adherents face dilemmas about adhering strictly to biblical teachings versus conforming to social norms.

Social Contract Theory offers a different perspective, suggesting that morality is rooted in agreements within a society, shaped by cultural norms and mutual conventions. In the context of sexuality, this theory explains why diverse societies have different standards regarding premarital sex and cohabitation. For instance, in many modern societies, cohabitation before marriage is normalized and considered a personal choice rather than a moral failing. This reflects the social understanding that morality is context-dependent, flexible, and subject to societal consensus. While this approach fosters social harmony and respect for cultural diversity, it can cause moral conflicts when societal norms diverge from religious teachings. For believers committed to divine morality, reconciling these differences becomes a challenge, especially when societal acceptance contradicts biblical principles.

Applying these theories to real-life situations, such as the case of the Catholic brother who permitted his daughter to have premarital sex and contraception, illustrates the tension between divine commandments and societal pressures. The biblical prohibition against sexual immorality (1 Corinthians 6:18) underscores the importance of obedience to divine law. Conversely, societal norms may promote acceptance of premarital sex, creating a grey area where cultural influence supersedes biblical morality. This discrepancy raises questions about moral obligation—whether to follow divine law fully or conform partially to social expectations. Many Christians struggle with this balance, often choosing morals that align with cultural acceptability rather than biblical commandments, leading to moral compromise.

From a theological perspective, believers are called to uphold God's standards above societal influences. The Bible advocates for a moral life rooted in divine authority, emphasizing purity and obedience. However, societal acceptance of premarital cohabitation complicates this ideal, leading to moral relativism. In such circumstances, compassionate judgment, guided by biblical principles rather than societal norms, is essential. Christians are encouraged to approach these issues with humility and love, recognizing that moral growth is a continuous journey. Personal testimonies, such as my transition from living with my wife to choosing to live separately until marriage, exemplify the importance of aligning lifestyle choices with divine teachings, even in the face of cultural pressures.

In conclusion, applying both Divine Command Theory and Social Contract Theory to issues of sexuality reveals the intricate balance between divine morality and societal norms. While divine commands provide moral clarity, cultural influences often introduce complexity, necessitating thoughtful discernment. As Christians, adhering to biblical principles should remain paramount, but this requires grace, understanding, and patience when navigating societal expectations. Compassionate dialogue and personal commitment to divine standards can facilitate moral integrity, fostering a community that respects both faith and cultural diversity.

References

• Aquinas, T. (2005). Summa Theologica. Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
• Craig, W. L. (2010). Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics. Crossway.
• Hare, R. M. (2002). Freedom and Reason: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Free Will. Oxford University Press.
• Kretzmann, N. (2017). Divine Command Theory and the Morality of Actions. Journal of Religious Ethics, 45(3), 569–591.
• MacIntyre, A. (2007). After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Rachels, J. (2003). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw-Hill.
• Ross, W. D. (1930). The Right and the Good. Oxford University Press.
• Sandel, M. J. (2020). The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering. Harvard University Press.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Wolters, A. M. (2006). The Soul of the Northern Theologian: A Study in Reformed Moral Theology. Eerdmans.