ETHICS/MORALITY
MORALITY
WHERE DO MORAL LAWS COME FROM?
Some Religions such as CHRISTIANITY, JUDAISM, ISLAM; and some PHILOSOPHERS, SCIENTISTS POLITICIANS etc believe that morality comes from God.
(Isaiah 33:22 (KJV) For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.)
NOT ALL BELIEVE THAT MORALITY COMES FROM GOD.
There are many theories from diverse sources of the higher learning that explain away morality to be far from God. Some of these are Evolutionists, Scientists, Philosophers, Psychologists, Politicians, Atheists and even Religious people.
WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO RULE THE NATIONS?
This is therefore the biggest question or debate that all generations must answer because at the heart of it, the answer determines who man should look to, as the ultimate lawgiver for humanity; from the individual to communities and to the world at large.
IF CHRISTIANS BELIEVE THAT GOD IS THE ULTIMATE LAWGIVER AND HIS LAWS ARE GOOD TO MAKE A NATION OR MANKIND PROSPER THEN THEY MUST HEED THE OBLIGATION OF 2COR 10: 3-5 AND DESTROY FALSE ARGUMENTS OF HUMAN REASONINGS AND PRESENT THE BIBLICAL MORAL VIEWS SHOWING ITS SUPERIORITY TO THE VAIN HUMAN PHILOSOPHIES COL 2:8
A LIGHTED CANDLE MUST NOT BE HIDDEN WITHIN NOR UNDER THE TABLE.
WE OWE OUR LORD A DUTY OF SERVICE IN DEFENDING HIS KINGDOM VALUES IN THIS DARK PERISHING WORLD.
Luke 11:33 (KJV) No man, when he hath lighted a candle, putteth it in a secret place, neither under a bushel, but on a candlestick, that they which come in may see the light.
Society cannot function well without moral laws. Morality is about what is right or wrong, hence moral laws are righteous laws.
(Proverbs 14:34 (KJV) Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.)
When communities of people or nations do not believe that morality comes from God, they reject Him and chose or make their own laws.
Man, from the time of Adam and Eve until now has entertained desires to be his own arbiter of right and wrong, flirted with tendencies for autonomy (self rule) but history shows that it has never ended well. Even in the Bible men have shown such examples.
(A). Eve sought autonomy, for she reasoned that the tree will make her wise and by that she could decide for herself what is right or wrong and therefore needed not God.
(Genesis 3:6 (KJV) And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.)
(B) Each does what seems right to him :
Judges 17:6 (KJV)
In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
(C). Israel rejects God and desires a king:
1 Samuel 8:4-7 (KJV) 4 Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, 5 And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations. 6 But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD. 7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
CAUSE FOR DEBATE, CAUSE FOR DISCUSSION, CAUSE FOR EXAMINATION.
As rational beings with free will, it will not suffice for Religion to say God said it, and you must blindly obey it, for so have many been led into regrettable blunders. Likewise the other side of the debate must also show a rational evidence of their counter claims.
QUOTE : “ SCIENCE KEEPS RELIGION FROM SINKING INTO THE VALLEY OF CRIPPLING IRRATIONALISM, AND RELIGION PREVENTS SCIENCE FROM FALLING INTO THE MARSH OF OBSELETE NIHILISM” - Martin Luther King - AZ QUOTES
To make it easy to understand the debate our discussion will be divided into 2 parts
Part One:
Are there any objective binding laws that man must obey universally?
PT 1A. ANTINOMIANISM
The Group that says there are NO binding absolute or universal laws are assembled under the ethical theorectical umbrella named ANTINOMIANISM , etymology -( GK. Anti-Nomos) ( against-law) therefore, Anti-Law.
This group claims that there are no universal binding laws that man must obey. They may allow that there could be general laws that are situational; that is to say that law may depend on the situation at hand or is relative to the individual.
ANTINOMIANISM In Christian Theology.
It is the belief of some christians that because of divine grace, they are freed not only from biblical laws and church-prescribed behavioral norms, but also from all moral laws.
This belief is in appearance opposed to Legalism however it can turn to Legalism by itself at the same time.
Legalism vrs Antinomianism will be discussed in a separate issue .
Some Antinomians , by the principles of their delusions, justify or excuse their consciences to indulge in polygamy, fornication, adultery, masturbation , undeserving divorce and so on.
Obviously the world would be glad to embrace this.
There are many moral or ethical theories from the world that appear sound on the surface but a little scratch beneath the surface is a hugging welcome into antinomianism.
Some examples which we will examine later are: PROCESSISM, HEDONISM, SKEPTICISM, INTENTIONALISM, VOLUNTARISM, NOMINALISM, UTILITARIANISM, EXISTENTIALISM, EVOLUTIONALISM, EMOTIVISM, NIHILISM, and SITUATIONALISM, - source Christian Ethics by Norman Geisler 2nd Edition, pages 22-25
PT 1B.
The counter group says YES there are binding universal moral laws. This group is under the umbrella called ABSOLUTISM. which is graded in 3 steps from extreme to the mildest.
(A.) Unqualified Absolutism- ( meaning the moral law is absolutely binding without compromise, It is universal. Eg Do not lie whatsoever the case is.)
(B) Conflicting absolutism-( meaning some of the moral laws conflict one another so one may obey one and repent of the other.)
(C) Graded Absolutism- ( meaning some of the moral laws are not necessarily in conflict but rather in a hierarchical relationship. One is more important than the other so chose the most important one. Eg love transcends all. You can tell a lie out of love to save innocent life . Love will not allow you to uncover the hideout of an innocent at the demand of a murderer.
The position of absolutism is that there is an absolute law or a universal law that must be obeyed.
This can be expressed in another form called Deontological Ethics. ( Deontology refers to ‘duty’)
It is in this understanding that Christianity Ethics or moral laws find its category.
It is on the grounds that the Christian moral law is a divine command and man has a duty to obey it.
The Euthypro’s Dilemma:
A popular question that people have for Christian ethics by its virtue of divine command is that,
“Is something morally right because God commanded it or God commanded it because it is right?
This is what is referred to as the Euthypro’s dilemma by Plato.
The trap in this question is that if you say God commanded it because it is right then it means the objective moral law is outside of God and God is subject to it . If God is subject to a law then the law must be higher than Himself. It then follows that He is not God after all and that He is not the ultimate law giver.
If you say It is right because God commanded it the critics especially the voluntarists argue that God uses His will voluntarily and there’s the possibility that He could be capricious and or repent afterwards.
Will God will something contrary to His nature?
Here is the solution:
The Euthypros’ delemma is after all not a dilemma in view of the Christian God’s attributes. A dilemma is supposed to be a difficult choice between two values.
God is essentially good, just and righteous . When he does something it is good because it is His nature. His will, commands and decisions therefore are in harmony with His nature. Jesus said only God is good.
Luke 18:19 (KJV) And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
When God commands or allows what it may seem evil in contrast to His nature to our cursory assessment, a deeper understanding reveals that His choices or what others may term voluntary choice or will, is not capricious or evil intended but a choice of greater good in preference of greater evil.
For instance the order for the destruction of the Canaanites was not in contradiction of God’s law “Thou shalt not murder” nor his character. Nor was it an act of evil on God’s part. It is a preventive justice to avoid greater evil. This can be seen in the following texts.
Genesis 15:16 (KJV) But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full. (Here you see God’s patience. The Amorites are given time to repent but they use their free will and liberty to continue evil until their sins or rebellion reach a toxic level whereby it threatens the stability of rest of the world. He must then bring justice to halt the advancement of such threat in order to preserve the righteous and the world ). Ref. …. Lev 18:25… the land itself vomits out the inhabitants. Remember that justice is a virtue of good.
Deuteronomy 18:12 (KJV) For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.
Deuteronomy 20:16-18 (KJV) 16 But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: 17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee: 18 That they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods; so should ye sin against the LORD your God.
Leviticus 18:20-25 (KJV) 20 Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy neighbour's wife, to defile thyself with her. 21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD. 22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [ is abomination. 23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. 24 Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: 25 And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants.
For the sins of the Canaanites there are websites that provides great read.
PART 2 : WHERE DO THE LAWS COME FROM?
At the height of all psychology, philosophy and “-isms, you will see the appeal to human instincts, emotions, opinions, rational judgment.
For instance when Evolutionists appeal to natural selection, we may ask, by what standard of judgment do they base their assessment of the natural selection to determine mutation as good or bad? From the time of Darwin until now the conclusions, claims and projections of evolutionists have not been purely true science but a mixture of opinions, false science, fraud, and bad philosophy.
Whiles ‘MICRO EVOLUTION’ ( change within the same species) is compatible with the Bible, (Gen 1:11-26) . ‘MACRO EVOLUTION (change from one species to another kind of species ) does not exist.
Without the proof of macro evolution, the Darwinian Evolution is false and cannot account for creation of the world.
Fossil museums worldwide have not been able to show any sample of transitional fossils. Many examples put forth such as Nebraska Man, Peking Man, Lucy, the Archeopterix have all proven to be false and in some cases fraud.
RATIONAL EXPLANATION OF WHY MORAL LAWS MUST COME FROM GOD:
Rationality must be based on axioms, a priori or universal truths without which there can be no consensus in human reasoning. A consensus thus must be credited to a common source, in this case that is the creator of the minds that agree to the consensus.
For rational minds to come to a common conclusion there must be a “ common foundation or inter subjective intelligibility,
Or else how can we agree on colors or maths if 2+2 is not universally accepted as 4. In the foundational theory we ask, what is it in all us that makes us see the same colors as they appear. What makes us have the intuition that 2+2 is 4?
The argument at length will boil down to the ONE AND THE MANY.
The one thing that lies behind all universals or the universe is God.
A CLOSER LOOK AT ANTINOMIANISM
ANTINOMIANISM : ANTI-NOMOS ( AGAINST -LAW- Moral, Religious or Social )
In Christian Theology it is the doctrine that says that it is not necessary to preach or obey the moral laws of the OT.
ARGUMENT FROM ANTINOMIANISM:
1. The believer is justified by Grace through Faith and is not obligated to obey the Law.
Rom 3: 19-28, Gal 3:1-all chapter.
2. That since Christ has raised believers above the positive precepts of the law, they need to be obedient only to the immediate guidance of the Holy Spirit who will keep them from sin.
3. According to some religions and sects, such as Gnosticism the Law came from a Demiurge and not from the true loving Father, therefore it is the Christian’s duty to disobey it.
4. Since sin is inevitable anyway, there is no need to resist it.
TRACING THE REMOTE SOURCES:
ANTINOMIANISM CAN BE TRACED TO OR SAID TO BE INFLUENCED BY THE UNREGENERATE HUMAN NATURE.
1. Man naturally desires for self rule ( AUTONOMY/INDEPENDENCE) and thus sees heteronomy (governed by another ) as tyrannical imperialism , or oppression.
2. Man thus has the nature or tendency to hate a law that interferes with his passion. ( cf. excerpts from Fatal flaws at the end of this page)
3. Sin then becomes a phenomenon of selfish Independent proud rebellion against God.
Genesis 3:4-5 (KJV) 4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
From the garden we all inherited from Adam the same tendency for autonomy .
Satan’s argument in the garden had inherent suggestions such as: autonomy, - self rule- Do what you want. You don’t need God to show you right and wrong.
Have your freedom to choose a life independent of God’s moral Laws. Be your own judge. Let no one judge you nor tell you what to do. Gen 3:4-5
By extension, morality then becomes subjective to the individual or a group of people instead of being objective.
From this source is the appeal to lNo gods no masters’ (Ni Dieu ni maître). (Neither God, nor Master) Used as Slogan or motto by Anarchists, Labour Unions and Socialists since the 19th century.
The Slogan was coined by socialist, Louis Auguste Blanqui in 1880 who invented Blanquism.
Blanquism refers to a conception of revolution generally attributed to Louis Auguste Blanqui (1805–1881) which holds that socialist revolution should be carried out by a relatively small group of highly organised and secretive conspirators.[1] Having seized power, the revolutionaries would then use the power of the state to introduce socialism. It is considered a particular sort of "putschism"—that is, the view that political revolution should take the form of a putsch or coup
No Gods, No Masters": was used by Margaret Sanger on Birth Control". gmu.edu. Retrieved 5 June 2012.
Margaret Sanger used it on her pamphlet ‘WOMAN REBEL ‘ with the subtitle as ‘No God’s No Masters in 1914
- Wikipedia - No God’s no Masters
Sin then is rightfully defined by an author as “an independent proud rebellion against God”
Stubborn PASSION leads to rebellion. It becomes an idol which will not go away. 1 Sam 15:23
This is why The Lord was angry with the elders of Israel when they came to inquire from The Lord. Eze 14:3-8
What is passion ?
Among other meanings the Webster Dictionary gives :
b: Intense, driving, or overmastering feeling or conviction
c Ardent love
We can easily understand that the unregenerate heart without the fear of God refuses to yield its passion to his maker: Reminiscent of the saying “ if there is a cure for this, I don’t want it”.
Passion can override rationality, law, authority, and even apologetics,
When the passion is sin , it hates light. Jn 3:19-20
PASSAGE FROM FATAL FLAWS - HANK HANEGRAAF
Years ago noted evolutionist Aldous Huxley and his peers argued that that the theory of evolution supported the assumption that there was no meaning to the world and therefore life could be lived without moral restrictions. Huxley wrote, “Like so many of my contemporaries, I took it for granted that there was no meaning [to the world]. This was partly due to the fact that I shared the common belief that the scientific picture of an abstraction from reality was a true picture of reality as a whole; partly also to other, non-intellectual reasons. I had motives for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption.” Huxley went on to say, “For myself, as, no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom.” 10 As such, evolution provided the ultimate escape from God. What we got in return was adultery, abortion, and AIDS. Adultery has become commonplace as people fixate on feelings instead of fidelity. It is not surprising that nearly half of all new marriages end in divorce. 11 Abortion has become epidemic as people embrace expediency over ethics. In America alone the death toll for preborn children has exceeded 43 million. 12 AIDS has become pandemic. As people clamor for condoms rather than for commitment, more people have died worldwide from AIDS than America has lost in all of its wars combined.
Over the centuries philosophers, intellectuals and revolutionaries have created movements upon movements supposedly to improve civilization
but all have proven to be ANTINOMIANISM disguised in one form or the other. Movements and Philosophies such as Post Modernism, Modernism, Deconstructionism are examples.
