Let's take a moment and look as Wes Morriston's premises in this quote. Why should the reasons why God gives his commands be superior to God? He made and set up those reasons also. He is not playing by anyone else's rules. God made up the rules, the environment, and is in complete control. Therefore divine command theory is far from rebutted. If one does not like the way Dr. Craig establishes the ontological foundation of morality, maybe one may prefer this quote Brian Auten posted this morning.
Since [Dr. William Lane] Craig made a big deal of this in his debate with Sam Harris, here is Wes Morriston's critique of it. Link. Here's a quote:
Either God has good reasons for his commands or he does not. If he does, then those reasons (and not God's commands) are the ultimate ground of moral obligation. If he does not have good reasons, then his commands are completely arbitrary and may be disregarded. Either way, the divine command theory is false.
"If there is no absolute moral standard, then one cannot say in a final sense that anything is right or wrong. By absolute we mean that which always applies, that which provides a final or ultimate standard. There must be an absolute if there are to be morals, and there must be an absolute if there are to be real values. If there is no absolute beyond man's ideas, then there is no final appeal to judge between individuals and groups whose moral judgements conflict. We are merely left with conflicting opinions."1
- Francis Schaeffer
Debunking Christianity: William Lane Craig and the Ontological Foundation of Morality