Skip to main content
Log in

Procedure, substance, and the divine command theory

  • Articles
  • Published:
International Journal for Philosophy of Religion Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Notes

  1. Richard Swinburne,The Coherence of Theism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977), p. 203.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Johnson (1984),op. cit.

  3. David O. Brink,Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  4. John Mackie,Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong (New York: Penguin, 1977), p. 38.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Plato,Euthyphro, in G.M.A. Grube, translator,The Trial & Death of Socrates (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1975), p. 14.

  6. Ibid.

  7. S.J. Sullivan, “Arbitrariness, Divine Commands, and Morality,”International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 33 (1993), p. 33.

    Google Scholar 

  8. James Rachels,The Elements of Moral Philosophy (New York: Random House, 1986), pp. 42–43.

    Google Scholar 

  9. The classic statement of legal positivism is John Austin,The Province of Jurisprudence Determined, abridged as “Law as the Sovereign's Command” in M.P. Golding, editor,The Nature of Law (New York: Radom House, 1966). The clearest contemporary statement is H.L.A. Hart,The Concept of Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961).

  10. Jeffery L. Johnson, “Privacy, Liberty, and Integrity,”Public Affairs Quarterly 3 (1989).

  11. See, for example, Ronald Dworkin,Taking Rights Seriously (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  12. See, for example, Nelson Pike, “Omnipotence and God's Ability to Sin,”American Philosophical Quarterly 6 (1969). Reprinted in Paul Helm, editor,Divine Commands and Morality (New York: Oxford University Press, 1981).

  13. See, Hart,op. cit., Chapter Five on the nature of secondary rules.

  14. Robert M. Adams, “A Modified Divine Command Theory of Ethical Wrongness,” inReligion and Morality: A Collection of Essays, edited by Gene Outka and John P. Reeder (Garden City: Doubleday and Company, 1973). Reprinted in Paul Helm, editor,Divine Commands and Morality (New York: Oxford University Press, 1981), p. 84.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Peter Geach,God and the Soul (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1969). Reprinted in Helm,op. cit., p. 172.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dewi Z. Phillips, “God and Ought,” in I.T. Ramsey, editor,Christian Ethics and Contemporary Philosophy (London: SCM Press, 1966); and Baruch A. Brody, “Morality and Religion Reconsidered,” inReadings in the Philosophy of Religion (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1974). Both reprinted in Helm,op. cit.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Adams,op. cit.

  18. Hart,op. cit., pp. 78–79.

  19. Ibid.

  20. Ibid., p. 102.

  21. William P. Alston, “Some Suggestions for Divine Command Theorists,” reprinted inDivine Nature and Human Language (Ithica: Cornell University Press, 1989), pp. 268–269.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ibid., pp. 268–269.

  23. Ibid., p. 269.

  24. Ludwig Wittgenstein,Philosophical Investigations (New York: Macmillan, 1958), p. 25.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Adams,op. cit., p. 87.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Johnson, J.L. Procedure, substance, and the divine command theory. Int J Philos Relig 35, 39–55 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01540519

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01540519

Keywords

Navigation