Legal Does NOT Mean Moral!

Legal Does NOT Mean Moral! In much of Western Culture, there is a belief that if something is legal, it must be morally acceptable. Why do people think this way? In a previous post, I talked about how Friedrich Nietzsche shifted our cultural vocabulary away from speaking about morals (which are objective), to talking about “values,” (which are subjective). When morality becomes relativized (the belief that there is no objective moral truth, only personal, subjective opinions), there are only a couple of options left for a civilization to keep itself from being hurled headlong into the abyss of anarchy (making up your own rules), hedonism (living for pleasure), and utter chaos. Civil Law (which restrains society) will either be based on an objective moral law (which can only ultimately come from God), or man’s subjective opinions. Our society has rejected the concept of objective morality because it necessitates a moral law-giver (God), and the notion of a God to whom we owe our allegiance and submission has become reprehensible to many. So that leaves us with human opinions. If a society is detached from an objective moral law, the people will be governed by: 51% of the majority opinion in a country (a Democracy). An monoarchy (rule by a king, queen or dictator) An oligarchy (rule by a small group of elites who control everything) A representative Constitutional republic. Our nation has been, in concept, the fourth of these options. We are to be governed by the Rule of Law, and not by the mere whim of our leaders, or even of the people themselves. We have a couple of written documents from our nation’s Founding Fathers: The Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence. In a so-called “secular” society, that refuses to acknowledge God and be internally governed by His moral law (Self-Government), these documents (and the laws that have emerged from our law-makers since that time, have become, by necessity, a kind of moral plumb-line, or secular Bible for the American people. Therefore, whatever is established by a written man-made law or code becomes in the minds of people the definition of what is right or wrong, or acceptable and unacceptable. The problem with this, however, is that humans can be wrong, and their opinions can change. Today there are many things that are deemed legal. and therefore, at least subconsciously for many, moral and ethical. Abortion and homosexual marriage used to be viewed in our society as moral...

Evil Proves the Existence of God

Evil Proves the Existence of God Whenever something terrible happens on the news, like the murder of innocent people, atheists often rage and say, “This proves that God does not exist, because if God is good and all-powerful, then He would stop all of the evil in the world.” The truth, however, is exactly 180 degrees in the opposite direction. The existence of evil in the world can only be adequately explained within Theism (a system of belief that presupposes the existence of God). If God does not exist, then nothing can ever be called objectively evil. You can say that you don’t like this or that, but you cannot say something is true morally wrong. To say something is evil presupposes the moral categories of good versus evil, which presupposes an objective, universal moral law. Apart from God, there is no objective basis or standard for morality, since any objective moral law requires a universal Moral Law-Giver. If we are simply the result of a big bang, of matter plus energy, evolving through time plus chance, you can never get categories of right or wrong (or really any metaphysical concept for that matter), from molecules that blew up for no reason. Put more succinctly, you can’t get ethics out of a rock. The fact that a certain set of molecules eliminated another set of molecules may be pragmatically inconvenient for your personal, subjective set of values, but it cannot be declared morally wrong in any way. You can say you don’t like it, or you wish it hadn’t happened, but there is no reason to declare that anything truly moral or evil has occurred. If God does not exist then morality does not exist and evil does not exist and stuff just happens for no cause whatsoever, so just live with it and stop complaining. Molecules live, and molecules die. That is your logical and philosophical option if you reject God. Israel Wayne is an Author and  Conference Speaker. He is the Director of Family Renewal, LLC and Site Editor...

“Whatever Works is Right” — The Danger of Pragmatism

“Whatever Works is Right” — The Danger of Pragmatism Ideas have consequences. You and I are often unknowingly influenced by various philosophies and ideologies. A faulty worldview that subtly impacts the lives of many Christians is Pragmatism. The Process and the End Result Pragmatism is the belief that the end result is all that matters. The ends justify the means. It doesn’t matter how you get from point A to point B, as long as you get to point B. The method or form you use is of no importance, as long as you achieve your goal. Whatever works is the best choice. This idea may look good on the surface, but in reality it isn’t Biblical, and it doesn’t work. Pragmatism, as practiced by Christians, is built on at least two false assumptions. Fallacy #1 “We can use our own human reasoning to figure out what is best for us, and determine God’s will for our life.” We must remember that we are finite, and God is infinite. The fact is, unless we are given a direct instruction from God, in His Word, we cannot always know what God’s ultimate plans might be in any given situation. Oftentimes we deceive ourselves by choosing to believe that what we want for our lives is also what God wants. Fallacy #2 Secondly, Christian pragmatists wrongly assume: “God cares only about the end result and is uninterested in the process.” This is proven wrong time and again in Scripture. God is concerned with our making it to our final destination, but He also cares how we go about getting there. Pragmatism finds its way into the many decisions in our lives; business, marriage, parenting, church life, economics, education and more. Pragmatism Examined In Scripture, we see many examples of Pragmatism and its results. In 2 Sam. 6 and 1 Chron. 13, the Ark of the Covenant was taken by the Philistines. King David wanted to bring the Ark back to God’s people. The first act of Pragmatism was to assume that God didn’t care how they brought the Ark back, as long as it came back safely. A clue to their mentality is found in 1 Chron. 13:4, “the thing seemed right in the eyes of all the people.” Disregarding the specific Levitical instruction for the priests to carry the Ark, the people loaded it on an ox cart and led it along. Along the way, the oxen stumbled and the Ark appeared ready to fall. Uzzah pragmatically decided that the...

Why Government Needs to Get Out of Healthcare

Healthcare is not the domain of the civil government. Medical expenses, above and beyond the ability of an individual or a family to pay, falls into the category of a charitable need. In this essay, I will seek to outline how God has directed these needs to be handled in the Scripture. In the Bible, God has created various spheres of government: The Individual, the Family, the Church and the Civil Magistrate. Each of these spheres has been given authority over separate and distinct spheres and should never cross the jurisdiction of the other. This concept is called the doctrine of Sphere Sovereignty. When Paul was talking to Timothy about the care of widows in the church, he puts the responsibility squarely on the individual (in particular on the man) to care for widows who are in financial need (this falls under a charitable need). “But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” (1 Timothy 5:8, ESV) If an individual and/or family cannot or will not care for their own relatives, then Paul directs the church to  provide for widows who meet the necessary requirements for church care: “If any believing woman has relatives who are widows, let her care for them. Let the church not be burdened, so that it may care for those who are truly widows.” (1 Timothy 5:16, ESV) What should be done for people who have no family and cannot find help within their local church? Well, they should find another church. Never is the Civil Magistrate given the role of being involved in charity. “For (the Civil Magistrate) is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” (Romans 13:4) “(The Civil Magistrate is) sent by God for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.” (1 Peter 2:14) The civil magistrate’s role is one of force, and the Bible forbids the concept of force ever being used for charity. “Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” (2 Corinthians 9:7, ESV) You can learn more of why government funding of charity (legal plunder), including tax-payer funded healthcare, is immoral HERE....

Would Ivy League Students Conduct Nazi-Style Torture Tests?

Author Eric Metaxas speaks about German Theologian, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and his resistance to Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich. Bonhoeffer was part of a resistance movement to oppose Hitler, a move that ultimately cost him his life. Unlike most of the pastors in Germany in the 1930s and 40s, Bonhoeffer was not content to sit idly and do nothing. He joined an underground group of church leaders to form a non-registered, non-State-run seminary, and preached against the new Socialist party. It makes you wonder why more people didn’t resist Hitler, and it makes you wonder what people would do today if they were in the same situation as Bonhoeffer. After the Nuremburg Trials, a psychologist named Stanley Milgram wanted to know what American students would do if they were in the same position as German officers like Adolf Eichmann. So he set up an experiment with students from Yale University where they were told to administer a lethal level of electric voltage to a person who they had been told had a heart condition and could be killed by the experiment. The Milgram Experiment found that 65% of those involved in the test administered the fatal volume of 450 volts on the (actor) person they believed they were killing. Only one student refused to go over 300 volts. Please remember that a regular household electric socket is 110 volts! If at any time the subject indicated his desire to halt the experiment, he was given a succession of verbal prods by the experimenter, in this order: Please continue. The experiment requires that you continue. It is absolutely essential that you continue. You have no other choice, you must go on. The point is, even highly educated people, from an upscale economic background, are capable of being persuaded to commit terrible ethical and moral atrocities. It is only when you have an Objective Moral Absolute, that is found outside of yourself, that you can consistently make the correct moral decisions. Increasingly, it is going to be imperative for people, especially young people, to know what they believe, why their beliefs are true, and have the courage to live out their convictions against all opposition. In this way, Dietrich Bonhoeffer serves as a great role-model for our day. Israel Wayne is an Author and Conference...

« Previous Entries

© Israel Wayne.