Socrates (469-399 BCE)was one of the first to question this theory.  He asked whether we call the GOOD good because the gods have done it or whether they have done it because it is GOOD.  His question implies the possibility of the existence of a standard for the GOOD separate from the divine.

Religions often base their notion of morality on the character of their God claiming that (1) What is 'good' is good because God commands it and (2) people cannot live moral lives unless they follow God's moral teachings. In Christianity (2) is often believed to be impossible until a person has had their sin dealt with by God. Only then will they be in a position to want to do what God wills and be able to do it ('The sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so' (Romans 8:7)). However, this raises questions concerning the relationship between morality and God. If what is 'good' is good only because God wills it is it not possible that one day God might say that what was previously known as 'bad' is now 'good'? Some might say that this would not happen because we would know God was making something 'bad' good but this means we have an independent criteria by which we can assess God's morality. If this is the case then we know what is right and wrong without God's intervention - so why bother with God (for more on this see The Euthyphro Dilemma)?- - - Stephen Richards

READ: http://www.faithnet.org.uk/AS%20Subjects/Ethics/divinecommand.htm

Plato(,427-347 BCE)  presented this matter in the dialogue titled the Euthyphro.                     The Euthyphro Dilemma

http://www.faithnet.org.uk/AS%20Subjects/Ethics/euthyphrodilemma.htm

Many people claim that morality is impossible without the belief in a supernatural entity (god),, from which our sense of right and wrong ultimately derives. And yet, Plato put a huge hole in this argument, back in the 4th century BCE. Think about this excerpt from Plato’s Euthyphro (Socrates is speaking):

"Consider this: is what is pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods? (Euthyphro, 10a)"

Euthyphro’s dilemma, as it has come to be known, is this:

Horn 1 - If the good is such because God says it is, then morality is arbitrary (e.g., God condoning all sorts of immoral acts in the Old Testament, including: Genesis 34:13-29, Exodus 17:13, 32:27, Leviticus 26:29, Numbers 16:27-33, 21:3, 21:35, 31:17-18,Deuteronomy 2:33-34, 3:6, Joshua 6:21-27, Judges 3:29, etc., etc.).

Horn 2 - If the good is absolute, and God cannot do evil, then we don’t need the middle Man to figure out what is good and what is not (e.g., we know that killing innocent children and women, ethnic cleansing, etc. are wrong, period).

Notice that this is not an argument against the existence of God, only about gods’ irrelevance to morality. Yet, if one cannot avoid either horn of the dilemma, it is difficult to see what the point of religion ultimately is... by Massimo Pigliucci, at www.rationallyspeaking.org

In DIVINE COMMAND THEORY the GOOD is whatever the "god" commands. This means whatever and whenever and wherever.   How does anyone know what GOD COMMANDS?  God tells them.

How?     Directly or indirectly through some intermediary like a person or a written work.

Can the deity continue to issue commands after previous recordings?

Yes, the deity can update and change commands as the deity wishes.

There are many problems with this theory.

The religions of the West have rejected DIVINE COMMAND THEORY and instead hold for Natural Law Theory.

DIVINE COMMAND THEORY does not rest on scriptures. DIVINE COMMAND is DIVINE COMMAND.

People claim that GOD has COMMANDED them to do X

Therefore doing X is a morally good act.

X can be ANY ACT AT ALL.

ANY ACT AT ALL can be good if GOD COMMANDS it!!!

In DIVINE COMMAND THEORY there is NO GOOD or BAD by itself at all. There is only what GOD COMMANDS

GOD COMMANDS= GOOD

GOD FORBIDS= BAD

GOD GIVES NEW COMMAND

NEW COMMAND= GOOD

No one who accepts DIVINE COMMAND THEORY can question the commands of the deity or make a statement such as "I do not believe God would command the things you stated here at all." because a person who accepts the DIVINE COMMAND THEORY accepts NO ACT as being GOOD or BAD except according to what the deity commands.

According to DIVINE COMMAND THEORY

• rape can be good
• child molesting can be good
• lies can be good
• theft can be good
• slaughter of thousands of innocent people can be good

All that matters is that the "god" commands it.

Scriptures can record what some people at some time thought god commanded them to do. Some people can follow what is written in those scriptures. That is not DIVINE COMMAND THEORY.  Why not? Because for those who believe in a deity or a god then GOD lives forever. GOD is alive. GOD keeps issuing COMMANDS.

People hear the DIVINE COMMAND in 1205 1and 1776 and 1848 and on May 10, 2003 and on December 23, 2005 and so on and they follow it thinking the command makes the act that is commanded the morally correct thing to do.

DIVINE COMMAND THEORY has so many problems that there are very few people on earth that use it and they tend to be fanatics, and mentally unstable people. No organized religion actually supports DIVINE COMMAND THEORY because of all the problems with it and the threat it poses to organized religions. Judaism and Christianity and Islam support NATURAL LAW THEORY and not DIVINE COMMAND.

Problems:

1. Is there a god or any deity?

2. Who knows what the commands of the deity are?  Can anyone claim to have heard the command and respond to it?

3. The commands may need to be interpreted, but by whom?

4. If there are a few who claim to be designated by the deity or who are designated by some group to be the official recipients of the divine commands are humans prepared to follow the commands of these designated recipients as if they were the commands of the deity?

5. If the deity commands or the designated recipients of the deity's commands do command that every human sacrifice the second born child on its third birthday on an altar would that make human sacrifice a morally GOOD act?

So there are several and severe problems with the Divine Command Theory.  They account for the reasons why no major organized religion would use this theory as the basis for morality.

Familiarize yourself with:

•  the basic criticism

•  Quinn's Defense for theists

•  Nielsen's criticisms

READ:   http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/d/divineco.htm

Argument for the Divine Command theory -

1.  God created the universe and everything in it, including human
    beings.
2.  If God created human beings, then God has an absolute claim on our
    obedience.
3.  If God has an absolute claim on our obedience, then we should
    always obey God's commands.
4.  Therefore, the Divine Command theory is true.

Argument against the Divine Command theory -

1.  If the Divine Command theory is true, then we should always obey
    God's commands, no matter what they are.
2.  If we should always obey God's commands, no matter what they
    are, then we should do so even if God were to command us to
    commit atrocities, such as to create as much pain among innocent
    children as possible.
3.  It is absurd to think that we should create as much pain among
    innocent children as possible, even if God were to command us to
    do so.
4.  Therefore, the Divine Command theory is not true.

--------------------------------