Chapter Seventeen - Lack of Moral in Today's World
¡@
1. INTRODUCTION
This last chapter is presented to acquaint you with what various people choose for a way to live. We shall note first the reasons for the lack of moral in today's world and a few of the ethical positions that challenge believers. Secondly, we shall attempt to present a biblical basis for the ethic which the believer can adopt. Hopefully, as we live a biblical moral, unbelievers could be attracted to appropriate such a life-style for themselves when they too come to faith.
¡@
2. REASONS FOR A MORAL BREAKDOWN
We have already seen how a mechanistic science is in tension with the biblical position, and how a negative humanism is totally at variance with what the Scriptures declare. We shall now see one major logical consequence of these systems of thought: the agonizing breakdown of a moral position. Once we move away from the Creator God and His morals to where man becomes the center of his own world it will not be long before evil choices and practices will be easily rationalized.
2.1 Naturalism and Emotivism
2.1.1 Freudian psychology
A naturalistic theory of ethics promotes the possibility that moral judgments can be either true of false but explained on the basis of some scientific concept. One example of such an ethic is Freudian psychology, where man has:
an Id, which is the sum of all the blind forces of the individual out of its conflict with, and chastening by, reality;
an Ego, which is developed as a person grows and relates to other people and things; and
a Super-Ego, which is a further refinement of the original, undivided, Ego. The former enables one to develop a moral conscience, which can prevent the acceptance by the Ego of "unworthy," of intolerable, impulses from the Id.
Freud felt that emotional problems, held under in the Id, could boil over into the Ego or Super-Ego, and cause a person to be maladjusted to society. However, this father of modern psychology allowed for no absolute ethic in his system. He had a sensitivity to morality, and what should be socially acceptable to society, but the Scriptures were not his source for moral norms. Rather, he felt man had the capacity to adjust socially through a proper psychological balance between his Id, Ego and Super-Ego, and therefore be a "good" person.
2.1.2 Emotive
Another theory of ethics is the emotive. Moral judgments are considered neither true nor false. They are merely the expression of how one feels about moral behavior. Some modern language philosophers (those who seek to find meaning in the language we use) state that when moral judgments cannot be verified or falsified (that is, proven wrong) by the scientific method, then they really only reflect personal feeling. When a biblical position says, "Thou shalt not kill," the emotivist will explain its meaning: "I do not like killing."
These theories of ethics (Freudian and emotive, and others as well) have no absolute moral about what the Bible conveys in the commandments. We can see why modern man has lost the sense of a biblical morality.
2.2 Situation Ethics
It is not our intention to launch into a full length explanation of situation ethics as developed by Joseph Fletcher in his book, Situation Ethics - New Morality (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1966). We can only briefly touch on this highly controversial system, because there are many today who still follow its positions.
2.3 Three Approaches to Decision-Making
Fletcher taught that there were 3 approaches to decision-making, they are:
Legalism;
Antinomianism; and
Situationism.
2.3.1 Legalism
Which he felt was contrary to Scripture. He charged Protestants with holding legalistically to the "words and sayings of the Law and the Prophets, the evangelists and apostles of the Bible" (page 21). While some may follow slavishly the biblical moral, many evangelicals have sought to live this moral in a context of love for all people. Many are the churches and missionaries who have sought to redeem communities and entire people groups who never would have been won to Christ through a legalistic life-style.
2.3.2 Antinomianism
Where no moral norms are present. Fletcher repudiated this system.
2.3.3 Situationism
Which meant that ethical decisions could only be made in the context of a decision. Fletcher felt there must be no moral rules beforehand because it must be recognized that "circumstances alter rules and principles" (page 29). Only when we come to a very specific context is the moral decision to be made, and the only valid decision is where God's love can be best realized. Fletcher does insist on one basic moral norm, God's love, but it is not to be applied until we are at the point where we have to make the moral choice.
2.4 Working Principles
Fletcher had 4 working principles, or presuppositions, where love can be applied. Briefly, these are:
Pragmatism, where one does not make any ethical decisions until he comes to the actual situation to assess what should be the ideal that would work. But how do we assess whether the action we do take will be right or wrong? Only as love is served will the pragmatic action be considered good.
Relativism, where no moral absolutes exist except that of God's love. And yet, this love must be served in each and every context in different ways.
Positivism, which underscores the scientific method as the only means by which we can verify any knowledge. In Fletcher's system, his so-called Christian ethics expressed a faith in God, but then provided the reasons for the kind of obedience required to fulfill the commandment to love in a particular situation (Fletcher, op. cit., p.47). In a sense, he made love his god.
Personalism, by which Fletcher insists that our ethical decisions are made in terms of and with people. To do so in any other way becomes legalistic. As evangelicals, we cannot afford to overlook the goal of this principle as we too seek to relate to people.
2.5 Further Propositions
Fletcher believed there were 6 further propositions which were a foundation for the entire system of situation ethics:
Only love is always good;
Love is the only norm;
Love and justice are the same;
Love is not liking;
Love justifies its means; and
Love makes decisions during the situation.
(Consult his book for further information on the above.)
2.6 It is Difficult to Sweep Away Situation Ethics
Fletcher was trying to respond to the message being proclaimed by the main line denominations of the 1960s. Most young people came out of these church denominations not having been exposed to a genuine call for salvation. Instead, they were simply exposed to the Ten Commandments as a means for moral behavior. It is no wonder that Fletcher charged such a procedure as legalistic.
2.7 Problems with Situation Ethics
While we understand Fletcher's concerns, we must understand and provide a biblical apologetic to the basic problems in his system:
The biblical position does not in any way present moral norms (the commandments) as relative, pragmatic, and from a positivist point of view. We, too, would reject these norms if they were followed in a legalistic way. We insist that in the outworking of these moral norms, they are the guide to the behavior for a godly life-style, where one seeks to reach out with compassion and love to those who do not know the Lord. And yet, in the true biblical sense, the commandments are given by God, and they are absolute. We have a guide by which we can apply them in love and with concern, even before we come to the context for decision making. We do not have to wait until we figure out what we are to do in a particular situation of life's challenges.
Fletcher did not consider adequately what the Bible teaches about man's sin nature. While the fingerprints of God are still upon a man's soul, the effects of the Fall are such that an ordinary person will have difficulty relating to the norm of God's love, as well as His holiness and righteousness. He or she may understand something about the highest form of love, God's loving-kindness, but too often, man simply cannot demonstrate it by his own efforts. He needs a new life and the new dynamic, the Holy Spirit, to make the best possible decisions for a godly life and to love as God loves.
Fletcher's system represents, in a sense, a destructive humanism. He would not think of his humanism as destructive, but rather as optimistic. However, as we assess his ethic, he expected a person to make moral decisions of which he or she is not capable. How can man do so on many occasions when he is dogged by a sin nature? A person can make ethical choices at times which will lead him or her into illicit love which the Bible can only condemn. That is why his system can contribute to a negative humanism.
Fletcher does not in any way call for a man to respond to Jesus Christ, accept Him as the Redeemer, and receive a new life. Fletcher is quite confident that man can make his own decisions and solve his own problems. Such a problem is doomed to become bankrupt for moral decision-making.
¡@
3. AN ATTEMPT FOR A BIBLICAL POSITION IN ETHICS
We turn now to consider what the Bible says about a moral, and how we as believers can apply it.
3.1 In the Pre-Flood Context
3.1.1 The sabbath
God rested on the seventh day when He finished His work. We cannot say that He was tired, but somehow, this example of the completion of a task became the guideline for man. While there is no definite word on the Sabbath rest in the Scripture prior to the Mosaic law, the principle for it seems to be in place since "the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and make it holy" (Exodus 20:11).
3.1.2 Monogamous marriages - no polygamy
When Jesus was questioned about why Moses permitted divorce, He replied that God created Adam and Eve in the beginning, male and female, and when God joined them together, they were not to be separated (Matthew 19:4-6). From the beginning, God wanted monogamous marriages. When, in the succeeding centuries, marriages became polygamous, we find a conflict, and yet we also realize that, temporarily, God permitted it. Perhaps it was to provide for a rapid growth of the human race in general, or Israel's growth in particular. In the course of time, however, Jesus insisted on monogamous marriages as the ideal, and His model was what existed in the beginning.
3.1.3 The sanctity of life
When Cain killed Abel, God asked Cain to give an account for his injustice, declaring that his brother's blood was crying to the Heavens (Genesis 4:1-10). Right at the beginning, man is seen as a special, unique creature, created in the image of God. It is therefore wrong for man to harm or kill his fellow man. We only demean the image of God when man acts violently in society.
3.2 The Mosaic Constitution
Subsequent to the pre-Flood period, followed by some 200 years of the patriarchs, and a period of some 400 years in Egypt, Israel came to Sinai and was given the Mosaic law, or constitution, which included the moral element of the Ten Commandments. It was necessary for God to provide a fuller revelation of His holiness and righteousness, so that man could know perfectly His moral absolutes.
What is the purpose of the commandments? One of them is to remind man that he is a sinner, and in need of God's grace. The law became a schoolmaster to Israel during the days of the Old Testament. In one aspect, when a person was reminded of sin, there was also the sacrificial system to which he could find forgiveness.
But the commandments also were a standard to the nations, to demonstrate that God is holy and righteous. Israel and the nations had to conform to His standards, and He had the right to call national leaders and peoples to account for their deeds. The prophets frequently reminded them of God's moral [Egypt (Isaiah 19); Babylon (Jeremiah 51); Tyre (Ezekiel 28); and so on]. It is a moral still in effect to this day, as we shall see in the New Covenant below.
In addition, the commandments were designed as a guide to the believers to live a godly life-style. It was through this testimony that the unsaved saw a different quality of life, and were thereby attracted to the Lord to find salvation (Psalm 19:7-14).
3.3 The New Covenant
The moral norms are repeated in the New Testament. Jesus and Paul make use of them, not as a legal system whereby men can find salvation, but again as a guide and standard.
To the rich young ruler (Mark 10:19) who came running to Jesus, desiring to know how eternal life was attainable, the Lord replied that he should know the commandments:
Do not murder.
Do not commit adultery.
Do not steal.
Do not bear false witness.
Do not defraud.
Honor your father and mother.
Any yet, even though the young ruler knew them, he was still dissatisfied.
Jesus then told this yound man to sell all he had, give it to the poor, and take up his cross and follow Him (Mark 10:21). The challenge was to make the young man realize that there was a contest in his life between the money that he had and the very first commandment, which was to honor the Lord. He simply had not come to a deeper understanding of what the commandments really taught.
Jesus used the commandments to demonstrate where the young man had fallen short, and if he would just listen, he could then turn to the sacrificial system and find salvation to his soul. He would then understand why Jesus is "good," and realize eventually the reason for which He came to this world.
For us as believers, the commandments challenge us to live godly lives. We should not say that since we are saved by grace, we do not have to practice a moral guideline. Living by grace demonstrates a godly moral!
Paul also understood the commandments in this sense. He told the Ephesians and all believers that one is to speak the truth and not lie (Ephesians 4:25). Neither are believers to steal. Furthermore, a believer is to work with his hands so as to earn his own living. This is an indirect reference to the tenth commandment, which tells us not to covet anything of our neighbor, but be content with the money we have earned by our work (Ephesians 4:28).
In point of fact, nine of the Ten Commandments are repeated in the New Testament, and are provided for our edification and benefit, to be our guide for holy living. Keeping the Sabbath is not mentioned. Possibly it was left open because within the Body of Christ allowance was made for any day to be set aside for rest. In the tradition of the church as it developed, the first day of the week was set aside as the day of rest, in remembrance of Jesus' day of resurrection. But in the cultural contextualization of life-style in many countries, we note that the day of rest could be Saturday (as in Israel today), or on Friday, among the Muslim peoples. Any work by the indigenous churches among these people has to take into account the day of rest. They should told their weekly meetings accordingly so as to have an out-reach. The New Testament provides for freedom of choice for the sake of the Gospel.
3.4 When Moral Norms Conflict
Believers are to follow the absolute moral norms as a guide for holy living. In the great majority of instances, there will be no question which norm should apply in different circumstances. But what happens when moral norms seemingly conflict? The Bible gives us many examples.
3.4.1 Pharaoh told the midwives to kill all the male babies (Exodus 1:15-16)
The record also tells us that the midwives had a fear of God, and could not violate the sanctity of life. They could not do as the king of Egypt had commanded them. There was a seeming conflict: murder on the one hand (in actuality, race genocide), and disobedience to the government on the other hand.
Did the midwives lie? When reproached by Pharaoh, they said the Hebrew women were athletic and vigorous, and gave birth before the midwife could get to them. It is true that slave women with tell toned muscles could deliver their babies much faster than women who live a sedentary type of life. The truth of what happened was that the midwives could also have delayed their arrival. This gave ample opportunity for both Hebrew women and babies, following birth, to be taken to some safe place.
God blessed the midwives (Exodus 1:20, 21) because they had taken a stand against an oppressive government, which had no moral right to commit race genocide.
3.4.2 Rahab the harlot
She had lied to the soldiers concerning the Israeli spies, while sending the later on to safety. Again, there is a seeming conflict:
obedience to the soldiers as a representative of the Jericho city government; and
sanctity of life, in not turning the spies over to the soldiers of Jericho.
There is no doubt that Rahab lied. But in the account in Joshua 6 (see also Hebrews 11:31), God blessed Rahab for her faith and how she treated Israel, and He spared her life as well as that of her family. God never said anything more about the lie.
3.4.3 Elisha the prophet
Ben-hadad was warring with Israel and had been defeated a number of times. He realized that his real enemy was Elisha the prophet, who was able to predict the movements of the Syrians and relay the information to the Israeli king. He had a score to settle against the prophet, and found out he resided in Dothan (2 Kings 6:13). His soldiers came looking for the prophet, but the prophet prayed that God would strike both soldiers and horses with blindness. In this condition, when they asked Elisha where the prophet could be found, they did not know they were talking to him. Elisha volunteered to take them to the man they were looking for. Instead, he brought them into the city of Samaria, and to the palace of the king of Israel! When the Syrians' eyes were opened, they realized that they had been "tricked."
Or were they? The prophet had prayed that the eyes of the Syrians would be blinded, and God was pleased to hear his prayer. The entire situation seemed to be a case where Elisha didn't have to tell the Syrian soldiers the entire truth. Instead, he took them to the Israeli king in order that they and their king should know that it did not pay to fight against Israel. There will be times when it is not necessary for us to tell the entire truth, especially to those people who need not know.
3.5 There Are More Biblical Accounts to Illustrate the Point, But There Are Also Examples from Modern Life
In 1944, Hungary was ordered to turn over all of its Jewish population to the Gestapo. Many were taken into the concentration camps, but there were Hungarians who did their best to hide Jewish people. In one instance, a mother superior of a convent took in some 300 Jewish women and children, housing and feeding them. One day the Gestapo knocked at her door. When she answered, the officer demanded of her if she was hiding any Jewish people. Her reply to them was, "Do you think I would have such people here?"
3.6 Once Again We See the Seeming Conflict - to Obey the Government or Honor the Sanctity of Life
In this case, did the mother superior really lie? She played on the prejudices of the German officers, who knew very well that there was very little love between Roman Catholics and Jewish people. She threw the decision back to the Gestapo officer. When he heard her words, he concluded that she hated Jewish people enough that she would have nothing to do with them, and led his soldiers away from the convent. It is necessary to understand that we need to exercise a moral that no government has the right to practice race genocide. We need not knowingly lie, but God does expect us to use a sanctified common sense to honor Him and His righteous moral.
¡@
4. REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY
The Best Things in Life, Part II, Chapters 8 and 9, InterVarsity Press, by Peter Kreeft.
Situation Ethics, Chapters 1 and 2, by Joseph Fletcher.
The Necessity of Ethical Absolutes, Chapter 8, by Lutzer.
Escape From Reason, Chapters 6 and 7, by Schaeffer.
¡@
Return to List of Bible Study Materials
¡@
¡@
¡@