What do you think?
Rate this book
Divine Love Theory: How the Trinity is the Source and Foundation of Morality
What if the loving relationships of the Trinity are the ultimate, objective source for living morally?
Adam Lloyd Johnson injects a fresh yet eternal reality into the thriving debate over the basis of moral absolutes. While postmodernism's moral relativism once temporarily disrupted the footing of classic moral theories like natural law and divine command, many nontheistic philosophers assert that morality must rest on something real and objective. Divine Love Theory proposes a grounding for morality not only in the creator God but as revealed in the Christian Scriptures--Father, Son, and Spirit eternally loving one another.
Johnson contends that the Trinity provides a remarkably convincing foundation for making moral judgments. One leading atheistic proposal, godless normative realism, finds many deficiencies in theistic and Christian theories, yet Johnson shows how godless normative realism is susceptible to similar errors. He then demonstrates how the loving relationships of the Trinity as outlined in historic Christian theology resolve many of the weakest points in both theistic and atheistic moral theories.
Johnson leaves no stone unturned, his research is exceptional, and his topic and treatment of it are first-rate. I very strongly recommend this book. --J. P. Moreland, distinguished professor of philosophy, Talbot School of Theology, Biola University
Divine Love Theory is an important and original contribution to the on-going contemporary debate between theists and non-theists over the foundations of morality. It is a work that will be of interest to theologians and philosophers alike. --Erik Wielenberg, professor of philosophy, DePauw University
Johnson's own proposal is a refreshing and insightful address that is often missed in the moral debate of mere theism: Trinitarianism. Divine Love Theory is at once more consistent with the largest theistic population, Christians, but also provides greater explanatory power over competitors, theistic and atheistic alike. --Corey Miller, President of Ratio Christi
Adam Lloyd Johnson injects a fresh yet eternal reality into the thriving debate over the basis of moral absolutes. While postmodernism's moral relativism once temporarily disrupted the footing of classic moral theories like natural law and divine command, many nontheistic philosophers assert that morality must rest on something real and objective. Divine Love Theory proposes a grounding for morality not only in the creator God but as revealed in the Christian Scriptures--Father, Son, and Spirit eternally loving one another.
Johnson contends that the Trinity provides a remarkably convincing foundation for making moral judgments. One leading atheistic proposal, godless normative realism, finds many deficiencies in theistic and Christian theories, yet Johnson shows how godless normative realism is susceptible to similar errors. He then demonstrates how the loving relationships of the Trinity as outlined in historic Christian theology resolve many of the weakest points in both theistic and atheistic moral theories.
Johnson leaves no stone unturned, his research is exceptional, and his topic and treatment of it are first-rate. I very strongly recommend this book. --J. P. Moreland, distinguished professor of philosophy, Talbot School of Theology, Biola University
Divine Love Theory is an important and original contribution to the on-going contemporary debate between theists and non-theists over the foundations of morality. It is a work that will be of interest to theologians and philosophers alike. --Erik Wielenberg, professor of philosophy, DePauw University
Johnson's own proposal is a refreshing and insightful address that is often missed in the moral debate of mere theism: Trinitarianism. Divine Love Theory is at once more consistent with the largest theistic population, Christians, but also provides greater explanatory power over competitors, theistic and atheistic alike. --Corey Miller, President of Ratio Christi
256 pages, Paperback
Published March 14, 2023
7 people are currently reading
43 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
February 22, 2023
Here is a fascinating look at what the author calls Divine Love Theory. On the one hand, I fully subscribe to this idea as something of the big picture of our faith. I found much here to strengthen my inclinations. On the other hand, this book is something of a technical look (point-counterpoint) at it and particularly the author’s precise theory or presentation of it. It’s still good and it reads with as much a philosophical tone as a theological one.
He will usually interact with other theories or writers to flesh out his ideas, but he is still easy to read compared to what you usually find with that style. I notice that he excels at building his argument, presenting it sequentially, and meeting all objections along the way. This approach will thrill academic types, but those outside that world might prefer something more in the popular vein. I believe Mr. Johnson could write such a work since he succeeded in communicating even in the academic style. Readers should, though, create expectations with this in mind.
Going forward, this will likely be a reference title to me. I underlined a lot of things that I can use if I encounter these issues again. I will be able to expect clear analysis in those cases with this work.
I could even feel comfortable saying the position in this book is now my own; that is, the precision and supporting details matches what I believe implicitly. There’s great competency here!
I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.
He will usually interact with other theories or writers to flesh out his ideas, but he is still easy to read compared to what you usually find with that style. I notice that he excels at building his argument, presenting it sequentially, and meeting all objections along the way. This approach will thrill academic types, but those outside that world might prefer something more in the popular vein. I believe Mr. Johnson could write such a work since he succeeded in communicating even in the academic style. Readers should, though, create expectations with this in mind.
Going forward, this will likely be a reference title to me. I underlined a lot of things that I can use if I encounter these issues again. I will be able to expect clear analysis in those cases with this work.
I could even feel comfortable saying the position in this book is now my own; that is, the precision and supporting details matches what I believe implicitly. There’s great competency here!
I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.
May 15, 2023
Summary: Proposes that the love within the Trinity serves as the objective basis and foundation for living moral lives and engages the competing atheist theory of Erik Weilenberg proposing an objective basis for morality apart from God.
In campus ministry, one of the questions we would sometimes pose to engage dialogue was “can we be good without God?” Actually, at least by the world’s account, atheists sometimes run moral circles around Christians, though I think none of us live up to whatever standards of goodness we set for ourselves. But then the question can be raised, on what does one base one’s morality if not on the character of God? For most, the response is one’s own subjective sense of right and wrong, a sense that we observed drew extensively on theist capital.
This book takes the conversation further in two ways. One is, that for me, it acquainted me with the work of atheist philosophers who argue (often against other atheists) for an objective basis for morality beyond ourselves. This work particularly focuses on that of Erik Weilenberg who has proposed the idea of godless moral realism, proposing that moral values and duties exist as abstract objective realities, apart from the existence of God. The other is the author’s proposal that moral reasoning and life has an objective basis in the loving character of the relationships within the Triune God. Most ideas of objective foundations for morality deal with God monotheistically. Johnson, by contrast considers the relational character of the Trinity and its defining quality of eternal love, that makes sense of the biblical claim that “God is love.”
One of the things I appreciated in this work is the careful, academic argument by which Johnson makes his case for Divine Love Theory. He begins with a historical survey of moral theories, the disagreement between objective and subjective theories, and the difference within objective theories between theistic and atheistic theories. He then elaborates the work of Erik Weilenberg, of godless moral realism. He notes three features of the theory: its reliance on brute ethical facts, his focus on making relationships in which natural, nonmoral properties instantiate moral properties, and that it is non-natural, that is not grounded in naturalism.
He then elaborates his Divine Love Theory, that objective morality is grounded in God’s Trinitarian nature. He notes how his work borrows from Robert Adams approach to divine command theory which first focuses on moral value modelled in God’s nature that is then expressed in commands creating our moral obligation. Johnson believes that the loving inner-trinitarian relationships are at the heart of our understanding of the goodness of God and the basis for both moral value and at the center of God’s commands, reflected in the commands to love God and neighbor.
He then identifies and responds to various objections to Divine Love Theory: concerns with loving relationships within the Trinity relating to the distinction of persons, concerns from Divine Will theorists, from Natural Law theorists, concerns about God’s will being arbitrary, and concerns with Platonism. Having answered objections by competing theorists, he outlines his contention that Divine Love Theory offers a stronger objective basis for morality than Weilenberg’s godless moral realism. He argues that his theory provides an exemplar for moral value, a human telos for moral obligation, a social context for moral obligation, and a personal authority at the head of a chain of moral obligation, features absent in Weilenberg’s theory.
He then considers problems with Weilenberg’s theory: a bloated ontology, a lack of evidence for brute ethical facts, and problems with his “making relationship,” particularly that cognitive properties can instantiate objective moral properties. Finally, he responds to a critique Weilenberg makes observing unexplained necessary connections (a problem with his own theory as well). In the case of theists, it is the connection between God’s nature and God’s commands. Johnson observes that with his own theory, there is direct connection between God’s loving nature and the necessary commands to love God and others.
The last section of the book discusses the “lucky coincidence” objection to Weilenberg’s theories and whether theistic approaches to objective morality are subject to similar criticism. The basic question is how our moral beliefs would ever line up with objective truths that are causally inert–it being a lucky coincidence that they would. It also discusses an unrelated issue, a discussion of whether the obligation of obedience to commands can be grounded in the obedience within the Trinity and whether this entails functional subordination. Since this is problematic, Johnson proposes two alternatives: the idea of the eternal generation of the Son and the idea of inner-trinitarian love, that our love that obeys resembles and imitates love within the Trinity.
I thought this a valuable work for several reasons. It extends a growing emphasis on Trinitarian theology into the realm of moral theology and philosophy. The tri-unity of God ought affect all reality including moral realities and Johnson draws this out well. Second, Johnson elaborates, defends, and shows the superior explanatory power of his theory with clarity and careful reason, offering an excellent resource to the Christian apologist dealing with arguments for objective morality apart from God. Finally, Johnson models scholarly charity in engaging Weilenberg, with whom he has a warm relationship (Weilenberg is one of the book’s endorsers!). He offers an outstanding example of rigorous disagreement about ideas that remains civil and gracious. We could use more works of this character!
________________________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher.
In campus ministry, one of the questions we would sometimes pose to engage dialogue was “can we be good without God?” Actually, at least by the world’s account, atheists sometimes run moral circles around Christians, though I think none of us live up to whatever standards of goodness we set for ourselves. But then the question can be raised, on what does one base one’s morality if not on the character of God? For most, the response is one’s own subjective sense of right and wrong, a sense that we observed drew extensively on theist capital.
This book takes the conversation further in two ways. One is, that for me, it acquainted me with the work of atheist philosophers who argue (often against other atheists) for an objective basis for morality beyond ourselves. This work particularly focuses on that of Erik Weilenberg who has proposed the idea of godless moral realism, proposing that moral values and duties exist as abstract objective realities, apart from the existence of God. The other is the author’s proposal that moral reasoning and life has an objective basis in the loving character of the relationships within the Triune God. Most ideas of objective foundations for morality deal with God monotheistically. Johnson, by contrast considers the relational character of the Trinity and its defining quality of eternal love, that makes sense of the biblical claim that “God is love.”
One of the things I appreciated in this work is the careful, academic argument by which Johnson makes his case for Divine Love Theory. He begins with a historical survey of moral theories, the disagreement between objective and subjective theories, and the difference within objective theories between theistic and atheistic theories. He then elaborates the work of Erik Weilenberg, of godless moral realism. He notes three features of the theory: its reliance on brute ethical facts, his focus on making relationships in which natural, nonmoral properties instantiate moral properties, and that it is non-natural, that is not grounded in naturalism.
He then elaborates his Divine Love Theory, that objective morality is grounded in God’s Trinitarian nature. He notes how his work borrows from Robert Adams approach to divine command theory which first focuses on moral value modelled in God’s nature that is then expressed in commands creating our moral obligation. Johnson believes that the loving inner-trinitarian relationships are at the heart of our understanding of the goodness of God and the basis for both moral value and at the center of God’s commands, reflected in the commands to love God and neighbor.
He then identifies and responds to various objections to Divine Love Theory: concerns with loving relationships within the Trinity relating to the distinction of persons, concerns from Divine Will theorists, from Natural Law theorists, concerns about God’s will being arbitrary, and concerns with Platonism. Having answered objections by competing theorists, he outlines his contention that Divine Love Theory offers a stronger objective basis for morality than Weilenberg’s godless moral realism. He argues that his theory provides an exemplar for moral value, a human telos for moral obligation, a social context for moral obligation, and a personal authority at the head of a chain of moral obligation, features absent in Weilenberg’s theory.
He then considers problems with Weilenberg’s theory: a bloated ontology, a lack of evidence for brute ethical facts, and problems with his “making relationship,” particularly that cognitive properties can instantiate objective moral properties. Finally, he responds to a critique Weilenberg makes observing unexplained necessary connections (a problem with his own theory as well). In the case of theists, it is the connection between God’s nature and God’s commands. Johnson observes that with his own theory, there is direct connection between God’s loving nature and the necessary commands to love God and others.
The last section of the book discusses the “lucky coincidence” objection to Weilenberg’s theories and whether theistic approaches to objective morality are subject to similar criticism. The basic question is how our moral beliefs would ever line up with objective truths that are causally inert–it being a lucky coincidence that they would. It also discusses an unrelated issue, a discussion of whether the obligation of obedience to commands can be grounded in the obedience within the Trinity and whether this entails functional subordination. Since this is problematic, Johnson proposes two alternatives: the idea of the eternal generation of the Son and the idea of inner-trinitarian love, that our love that obeys resembles and imitates love within the Trinity.
I thought this a valuable work for several reasons. It extends a growing emphasis on Trinitarian theology into the realm of moral theology and philosophy. The tri-unity of God ought affect all reality including moral realities and Johnson draws this out well. Second, Johnson elaborates, defends, and shows the superior explanatory power of his theory with clarity and careful reason, offering an excellent resource to the Christian apologist dealing with arguments for objective morality apart from God. Finally, Johnson models scholarly charity in engaging Weilenberg, with whom he has a warm relationship (Weilenberg is one of the book’s endorsers!). He offers an outstanding example of rigorous disagreement about ideas that remains civil and gracious. We could use more works of this character!
________________________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher.
July 16, 2024
Excellent work of Philosophy of Religion. Johnson pulls in the Trinity to make an abductive case for grounding moral value and obligation in a Trinitarian Theism.
Read
July 6, 2023Building on the divine command theory of ethics, Johnson, taking a more robust, self-conscious Trinitarian approach, argues for a divine love theory given his conviction that the Trinity is the source and ground of morality. Though some may be concerned that this would require a social trinitarianism in order to be compelling, Johnson helpfully argues that a classical understanding of the Trinity which affirms one will in God and the distinction of the three persons not by making them individual centers of consciousness but by their relations still allows room for love to be shared between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
The main interlocutor in his book is an atheistic philosopher who takes a non-naturalist approach to ethics, seeing ethics as abstract objects of brute fact that are part of the universe and, therefore, this philosopher's approach is a blend of atheism with Platonism. After setting up the systematical theological foundation for his understanding of ethics in the first part of the book, Johnson turns to a philosophical approach, demonstrating that Platonic atheism is neither satisfactory on an atheistic nor a theistic account. This is a work of theological and philosophical sophistication that is clearly written and as such one would I recommend for any serious student of apologetics or ethics from a Christian perspective.
The main interlocutor in his book is an atheistic philosopher who takes a non-naturalist approach to ethics, seeing ethics as abstract objects of brute fact that are part of the universe and, therefore, this philosopher's approach is a blend of atheism with Platonism. After setting up the systematical theological foundation for his understanding of ethics in the first part of the book, Johnson turns to a philosophical approach, demonstrating that Platonic atheism is neither satisfactory on an atheistic nor a theistic account. This is a work of theological and philosophical sophistication that is clearly written and as such one would I recommend for any serious student of apologetics or ethics from a Christian perspective.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews