The divine command theory is a concept that primarily emphasizes the notion of God’s commands being the sole determiner of morality and goodness. In other words, something is good because God stated and instructed so. However, such a state of affairs raises the Euthyphro dilemma, where either God is the only source of moral good due to he or she mandating that something ought to be so, or God is a mere messenger of morality, which means he or she is not a source of it and goodness is not determined by God. If an all-knowing, omnipotent, and all-good God exists, then his saying that a thing is good is enough for it to be good. The main reason is that God is a creator of all things, which can either be good or evil, and thus, the very essence of things, actions, and decisions are either good or bad due to God’s design.
It is important to note that the main issue of the Euthyphro dilemma is that it does not consider God as a creator with distinct and absolute qualities of being all-knowing, omnipotent, and all-good. In other words, a god, who lacks any or all of these qualities, can no longer be a source of morality since he or she does not have either wisdom, understanding, or capability to be the main driver of the divine mandate theory. However, God, within this context, is, above everything, conscious and capable of perceiving goodness or evil, which means that he or she alone is aware of a multitude of layers of understandings and reasons behind something or someone being pious or not. Even the wisest human being has limitations of comprehension and understanding, which means he or she might perceive and conclude something is evil, whereas God knows it is good because he created it that way.
