In Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro, Euthyphro and Socrates discuss the dilemma of whether the pious is loved by gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by gods. Initially, the speakers posit that they should perceive the pious as something loved by all gods. Then, they move on and state that there should be a separation between the first and second assumptions because piety and love of the gods are different concepts. Subsequently, many philosophers considered this dilemma far-fetched, but some see it as a prerequisite for religious disputes. The dilemma is probably important for religion and morality since, from the standpoint of Christians, love for God is the source and cause of everything, including piety. At the same time, the view that piety can arise outside of God’s love may cause disagreement among some theologians.
The main idea behind the Divine Command Theory is that God could cancel any of his commands if he saw fit. In other words, the proponents of this theory believed that God’s will transcends his qualities of love and wisdom, which are less valuable attributes, and can be applied outside of these attributes. Many philosophers and theologians criticized the Divine Command Theory – for example, Hugo Grotius noted that the moral law of nature is unchangeable and cannot be altered by God. Cudworth’s criticism was most important to disprove the theory since he posited that in this case, nothing can be so vicious as not to be recognized as just and righteous if such is the Divine decision. He also criticized the position of the proponents of the theory that something can not be good or bad just because it is, but can be judged only by the will of God.