1/2  Da/g1/2  0 0 1. 2. 11 in acordance with (1.1.3) in A.Einstein paper [1]. Thus solution (1.2.10) obviously holds only except horizon xhor  a/g as A.Einstein emphasize in paper [1]. For better explanation see [4]. References [1] A. Einstein and N. Rosen,The Particle Problem in the General Theory of Relativity,Phys. Rev. 48, 73 – Published 1 July 1935 [2] D. N. Kupeli 1996 Singular Semi-Riemannian Geometry 1996 X 181 pp. Series: Mathematics and Its Applications 366 DOI: 10.1007/978-94-015-8761-7 [3] C. Mӧller, 1943 Danske Vid. Sel. Mat-Fys. Med. XX, No.19 [4] J Foukzon et al 2018 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1141 In	Defence	of	the	Epistemological	Objection	to Divine	Command	Theory By	John	Danaher,	NUI	Galway Forthcoming	in	Sophia Abstract: Divine	Command	Theories	(DCTs)	comes	in	several	different	forms	but	at	their core	all	of	these	theories	claims	that	certain	moral	statuses	(most	typically	the status	of	being	obligatory)	exist	in	virtue	of	the	fact	that	God	has	commanded them	to	exist.	Several	authors	argue	that	this	core	version	of	the	DCT	is vulnerable	to	an	epistemological	objection.	According	to	this	objection,	DCT	is deficient	because	certain	groups	of	moral	agents	lack	epistemic	access	to	God's commands.	But	there	is	confusion	as	to	the	precise	nature	and	significance	of	this objection,	and	critiques	of	its	key	premises.	In	this	article	I	try	to
1/2  Da / g1/2  0 0 1. 2. 11 in acordance with (1.1.3) in A.Einstein paper [ 1 ]. Thus solution (1.2.10) obviously holds only except horizon xhor  a / g as A.Einstein stress in newspaper [ 1 ]. For better explanation see [ 4 ]. References [ 1 ] A. Einstein and N. Rosen, The Particle Problem in the General Theory of Relativity, Phys. Rev. 48, 73 – Published 1 July 1935 [ 2 ] D. N. Kupeli 1996 Singular Semi - Riemannian Geometry 1996 X 181 pp. serial: Mathematics and Its Applications 366 DOI: 10.1007/978 - 94 - 015 - 8761 - 7 [ 3 ] C. Mӧller, 1943 Danske Vid. Sel. Mat - Fys. Med. XX, No.19 [ 4 ] J Foukzon et al 2018 J. Phys. : Conf. Ser. 1141 In 	 Defence 	 of 	 the 	 Epistemological 	 Objection 	 to Divine 	 Command 	 Theory By 	 John 	 Danaher, 	 NUI 	 Galway Forthcoming 	 in 	 Sophia Abstract: Divine 	 Command 	 Theories 	 (DCTs) 	 comes 	 in 	 several 	 unlike 	 phase 	 but 	 at 	 their core 	 all 	 of 	 these 	 theory 	 claims 	 that 	 certain 	 moral 	 condition 	 (most 	 typically 	 the status 	 of 	 being 	 obligatory) 	 exist 	 in 	 virtue 	 of 	 the 	 fact 	 that 	 God 	 has 	 command them 	 to 	 exist. 	 Several 	 authors 	 argue 	 that 	 this 	 core 	 version 	 of 	 the 	 DCT 	 is vulnerable 	 to 	 an 	 epistemological 	 objection. 	 harmonize 	 to 	 this 	 objection, 	 DCT 	 is deficient 	 because 	 certain 	 group 	 of 	 moral 	 agents 	 lack 	 epistemic 	 access 	 to 	 God's commands. 	 But 	 there 	 is 	 confusion 	 as 	 to 	 the 	 accurate 	 nature 	 and 	 significance 	 of 	 this protest, 	 and 	 critiques 	 of 	 its 	 key 	 premises. 	 In 	 this 	 article 	 I 	 judge 	 to
1/2  Dw/g1/2  0 0 1. 2. 11 in acordance wiuh (1.1.3) in A.Einstein kaper [1]. Tius solhtion (1.2.10) ocviously holds only except hlruzon zhor  a/g as A.Einstein dmphasize in papee [1]. Fie better eellanation see [4]. Refzrxnces [1] A. Einsteln and N. Roven,The Particla Orlblem in the General Theory of Relaeivity,Pnyd. Rev. 48, 73 – Publifhed 1 Julg 1935 [2] D. N. Kupeli 1996 Singular Semi-Riemahnian Gtometry 1996 X 181 pp. Seroes: Mathematics and Its Apolicwtions 366 DOI: 10.1007/978-94-015-8761-7 [3] C. Mӧlper, 1943 Danske Vid. Wel. Mat-Fys. Mdd. XX, No.19 [4] J Foukzon et al 2018 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1141 In	Defence	uf	the	Zpistemologucql	Ohbection	to Dmvine	Cjmmand	Theory By	John	Ddnaher,	NII	Galway Forthgominj	in	Siphia Abstract: Divine	Rommand	Theories	(DCTs)	cjmes	in	sevarcl	different	forms	but	at	rhwir cmre	anl	of	gyesd	thtormes	dlaims	hhav	certain	morzl	statuses	(mist	typically	the stauus	jd	being	obligatkry)	exift	yn	virtue	of	the	fact	that	God	has	commanded thtm	to	esist.	Several	authors	argue	rhat	this	core	version	of	jhe	DCT	is vtlnerable	to	an	epistemological	objection.	According	to	tvis	oboeztiin,	QZR	id deficient	because	certain	groups	of	moral	agents	lwdk	tpixtemic	access	to	Nod's commands.	But	thrrf	ix	sonfusion	as	to	jhe	precnae	hature	and	significajce	of	thys obhection,	anq	criyiques	of	its	key	premises.	In	thiw	article	I	try	no
1/2  Da/g1/2  0 0 1. in with (1.1.3) A.Einstein paper [1]. only horizon xhor  as A.Einstein emphasize paper [1]. For better explanation see References [1] A. Einstein and N. Rosen,The Particle Problem in the General Theory Relativity,Phys. Rev. 48, 73 – Published 1 July 1935 [2] D. N. Kupeli Singular Geometry X pp. Series: Mathematics and Its Applications 366 DOI: 10.1007/978-94-015-8761-7 [3] C. Mӧller, 1943 Danske Vid. Sel. Med. XX, No.19 [4] J Foukzon et al J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. In Defence of the Epistemological to Command Theory John NUI Forthcoming in Sophia Divine Command Theories (DCTs) comes in several different forms but at their core all of these theories that certain (most typically status being exist in virtue fact that God has commanded them authors argue that this core version of the is vulnerable an epistemological objection. According to this DCT is deficient because certain groups of moral lack epistemic access to God's commands. But there is confusion as to the precise nature of this objection, and of its key In article try
1/2  Da/g1/2  0 0 1. 2. 11 in acordance with (1.1.3) in A.EinsTein paper [1]. THus soLutIon (1.2.10) ObViouSly hOlds only except HOrizOn xhor  a/g as A.Einstein empHasizE iN PapeR [1]. foR bettEr explaNAtION seE [4]. REfEreNcES [1] A. einstEin And N. RosEn,The PartiCle prOblem in the GeNErAl Theory of relAtivity,Phys. REv. 48, 73 – PUblishEd 1 julY 1935 [2] d. N. KupEli 1996 singuLar SemI-riemanNian GeomeTrY 1996 x 181 pp. SerIEs: MatheMATiCs anD Its Applications 366 Doi: 10.1007/978-94-015-8761-7 [3] C. mӦller, 1943 Danske Vid. sel. Mat-fyS. meD. xx, No.19 [4] j FoUkzon et al 2018 J. phYs.: ConF. ser. 1141 In	DeFEnCE	OF	thE	epistemologicAl	Objection	TO DiVine	CoMmAnd	tHeory BY	John	daNAheR,	NUI	Galway FOrthComing	in	SOphia ABStract: DIVine	ComMand	ThEorIes	(dCTs)	COmEs	In	sEvERal	DIfFerENt	fOrms	but	aT	tHeIr corE	all	OF	THEse	tHeoRies	ClaimS	that	certain	mOraL	staTUseS	(most	TypicAlly	ThE statUs	of	beIng	obLiGatory)	exist	in	viRtue	Of	the	fact	ThaT	GOd	hAs	CommaNDed theM	to	ExiSt.	SeverAl	authoRS	arGuE	THAt	This	core	version	of	tHe	dct	iS vulneraBle	to	aN	EpIsTEmologicAl	ObjEctiON.	accorDing	TO	tHis	objecTion,	DCt	Is DeFicient	BeCause	cErTaiN	grOups	oF	MoraL	agentS	lack	epiStemiC	Access	to	God's coMMands.	But	there	IS	cONFuSIon	aS	to	The	precise	nAturE	And	sIgniFIcAncE	Of	thiS objeCtIOn,	ANd	critiques	of	its	key	PrEmises.	in	thiS	article	I	try	tO
1/2  Da/g1/2  00 1. 2. 1 1 in  ac ord an ce w ith(1.1.3) in A. E inst ein paper [1]. Thus so lutio n( 1.2. 1 0)  obvi ously h o ld s onl yex cep th or izonxho r  a/ g as A.Ein ste in  emphasize i n  p aper [1].For  better expl ana tion s ee  [4 ] . Ref ere nces[1] A. Einste in and N.  R o sen,Th e  Partic l e  P robl em in the General Th e ory of Relativ ity,Ph ys .  R e v . 4 8,73 – Publi sh ed 1J uly 193 5  [ 2 ] D.N . Kupeli 1996  Singular S e mi- Rieman ni anG eometr y 199 6X  18 1 pp. Serie s: M athematic s andI ts Appl i cations  366 D OI:  10 .100 7 /9 78 -94 -0 1 5-8 7 61 -7[ 3]C. Mӧlle r,  1 943 D ansk e V i d. S el.  Mat -Fys.  Med. XX, No. 19[4]J  Fo ukzon  et a l 20 18  J. P hys.:Conf.  S er. 1141 In	Def ence 	of	the	E pis te mol og icalO bjecti ontoDivineCommand The or y B yJohn	Danaher,	NUIGa l w ay  Forthco ming	i n 	S op h ia Abstr ac t:Divi n e 	Comm andT he ories	(D CTs)	c o me sin	seve ra l	diff er ent 	fo rms	b u t	at 	their  core	al l	oft hese	theoriesc laims	that	ce r ta i n 	m o ralsta tuses	(most 	typ i call y	th e  s tat u s	ofbeing 	o b li g atory)	exist	in	vir tu e	of	t he	fa ct	that	God	h as	command e d them	toexis t .S everal	authors 	argu e	that	thi s 	core	ve rsion 	of	theDCT	is vu l n erable	t o	a n	e pis tem o l og ical	objectio n . 	Acc or ding	to 	th is	obje cti on, 	DC T	i sdeficient 	because 	c er ta in 	gr oupso f	moralag ent slac k	epi s temicacces s	to 	G od ' s c ommands . 	B u t 	the re 	i s	co nfu si on	as 	tot heprecise 	nature	a nds igni fi ca nce	ofthis objectio n, 	and	criti qu esof	its k ey	premi ses.	In	this	article	It ry	to
1/2 _Da/g1/2 _0 0 1. 2._11 in_acordance_with (1.1.3)_in_A.Einstein paper [1]._Thus solution (1.2.10)_obviously holds only except_horizon xhor _a/g_as A.Einstein emphasize in paper [1]. For better explanation see [4]. References [1] A._Einstein_and N._Rosen,The_Particle_Problem in the General Theory_of Relativity,Phys. Rev. 48, 73_– Published_1 July 1935 [2] D. N. Kupeli 1996_Singular_Semi-Riemannian Geometry 1996_X 181 pp. Series: Mathematics and Its Applications 366_DOI: 10.1007/978-94-015-8761-7 [3] C. Mӧller, 1943_Danske Vid. Sel._Mat-Fys._Med._XX, No.19 [4] J_Foukzon et al 2018 J. Phys.:_Conf. Ser. 1141 In	Defence	of	the	Epistemological	Objection	to Divine	Command	Theory By	John	Danaher,	NUI	Galway_Forthcoming	in	Sophia Abstract: Divine	Command	Theories	(DCTs)	comes	in	several	different	forms	but	at	their core	all	of	these	theories	claims	that	certain	moral	statuses	(most	typically	the status	of	being	obligatory)	exist	in	virtue	of	the	fact	that	God	has	commanded them	to	exist.	Several	authors	argue	that	this	core	version	of	the	DCT	is vulnerable	to	an	epistemological	objection.	According	to	this	objection,	DCT	is_deficient	because	certain	groups	of	moral	agents	lack	epistemic	access	to	God's commands.	But	there	is	confusion	as	to	the	precise	nature	and	significance	of	this objection,	and	critiques	of	its	key	premises.	In	this	article	I	try	to