The Theory of God Ethics

In philosophy class, Professor Jensen was discussing the origin of ethics. The basis of our study came from Plato's discussion of ethics with Euthyphro outside the Lyceum in Athens. If you are not familiar with this work, I suggest reading it. Euthyphro is thought provoking. Based on the Theory that God is ethical, and murder is unethical, we were discussing whether it was ethical for God to kill Uzzah for attempting to steady the Arc of the Covenant when the oxen stumbled (1 Chronicles 13:9-10). Some say it was ethical because God had commanded it and that God decides ethics, others say it was ethical but they did not know why, they merely trust that God knows the laws of ethics better than we do. I however, have a theory that the design of the arc (gold encompassing a wood core, carried about on wood stick preventing it from being grounded, and subjected to immense static electricity from the sand in the desert) could constitute a very large electric capacitor capable of holding a charge strong enough to instantly kill a man. To this I said it is possible that God gave the command to not touch the Arch of the Covenant, not because He (God) would kill you, but because the Arc itself would kill you, thus his commandment was one of protection rather than one of ethics. This theory is mine alone, and Professor Jensen had never heard it before. I ruined his lesson plan and left him struggling to lead the discussion until he changed examples. It was not my intention to ruin his discussion, though his surprise at my comment was comical. He did, however bring up some interesting points regarding ethics and their origin which have inspired this thought.

If you ask a man of faith what is the origin of ethics, he will likely reply,from God. The 'faithful' often claim that God himself establishes all that is good, and all that is bad. God then gave us his, or at least part of his, ethical code in the form of commandments. These commandments act as a guide, as well as a standard by which the 'faithful' believe they will be judged in the last days. But, if you were to ask a faithful man why God chose the commandment 'thou shalt not kill', he might respond with, 'because murder is unethical'. This circular path of thought leads us to our final question, is murder unethical because God commands, or does God command because murder is unethical?

This question makes the faithful uneasy, especially if they believe that God is all powerful, as most do. If God decides ethics, and God is all powerful, then God has the ability to change his ethics as he sees fit. This would allow God to have commanded 'thou shalt kill' from the beginning, or even change to this commandment now. God's ability to change his mind would then force us as his children, to loose confidence in him. Yesterday, God gives us a standard to live, by which we can obtain heaven, but the day before we die God changes his standard and we fail to enter heaven, can we have faith in such a being? Oh, many of you would say 'but God would never do that', why not? Would you respond, that murder is unethical? By the rationale that God defines ethics, then murder would no longer be unethical, if that is what God decided, thus it would be acceptable for us.

But if God truly could/would not command us to kill because murder is unethical then we must accept the fact that God lives and operates under a law, that even he cannot change, which also existed before him. God cannot make himself God if the law existed before him; only the law, which existed before him,  can make him God. In short, God is not God because he is God; God is God because of the standard that he lives by has made him God. This theory is sure to be highly controversial in religious circles because it presents the possibility that God is subject to something higher than him, and that God could lose his God-hood if he ever violated the law that made him God. Rest assured that God can only be God and nothing less because he is incapable of breaking the law of heaven; God has in turn become the law of heaven through his enforcement of the law and is only subject to himself (a law that he cannot change).

God is subject to himself, but what is it about God that he is subject to? What is the essence of God? When God describes himself, does he wish to flaunt his power, his knowledge, or his rank? More than anything else, God is the antithesis of hate, for "he that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is Love" (1 John 4:8). This simple statement conveys more truth (in my opinion), more knowledge, and more guidance than any other verse, dialogue, or sermon ever given. We must comprehend that God is love before we can begin to understand his works. Why did he create us, why are we here, what are we supposed to accomplish, what is his plan, where is the end, what is the end, and how must it end? Without God's love, the answers to life's most important and far reaching questions remain out of our reach. But God is love, and God is the standard of heaven, and the true source of our ethics.

This love, 'God's love', is not the love that either you or I am capable of fully obtaining. His love is more perfect, his love is more sincere, his love is pure charity, "but charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever, and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him" (Moroni 7:47). For God in "the last great day of judgement, which..shall pass upon the inhabitants thereof, (shall judge)..every man according to his works" (D&C 19:3). Do we need more proof that pure charity is the standard of heaven (ethics), as well as the standard by which heaven shall admit us? I for one do not.

This theory, which I call 'The Theory of God Ethics', presumes that God exists, that God takes an active roll in our lives, and that we can be admitted to heaven to live with God. If you wish to argue any of these three assumptions then this theory is not applicable to you. However, to argue any point one must begin at a point of common belief before debating further conflicting views and these assumptions serve as our common ground.

It is my opinion, however, that if you wish to debate God's existence, his active participation in our lives, or the possibility of acceptance in heaven, than debating the origin of ethics should be the least of many of your concerns.