Yes.
Flying is definitely the way to do it!
Last
time (I would like to say “last week” but I'm running late
again!) I told the story of Colonel Patterson and the pair of huge
(they are now in the Chicago Museum) rogue male man eating tigers so
fierce that his workforce thought they were demons and un-killable.
Patterson did not let these claims spook him but trusting in the
rifle he had used in the past hunted and eventually killed them.
So
how does his example solve my problem with moral theories?
Simple!
Well simple after you think of it.
People
who want to work out a moral system starting with the assumption
“there is no God” are just like the people who thought that the
tigers “the Ghost” & “The Darkness” could not be killed
with bullets. They have been proclaiming for the last half century or
more that one cannot bring religion into moral discussions.
Christian
moralists on the other hand have been nothing like Colonel Patterson.
We have believed the atheists without question! We have blindly
accepted the notion that Christian ideals and Biblical insights
have no place in determining "right” and “wrong” human conduct.
We have followed the atheists like lambs to the slaughter, even whole
churches throwing away their moral heritage in order to run after the
latest non-Christian (or even straight out anti-Christian) fashion in
morals.
I
would like to sound surprised that we have been so stupid … but
God's people have a long history of such stupidity. For instance
Jeremiah prophesied to his generation:
“My people have committed two
sins: They have forsaken me, the spring of living water, and
have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that
cannot hold water.
Jeremiah
2:12-14
But
that does not excuse us! If Patterson had acted as we have done he would
have packed away his rifle believing it was useless and gone back to
England leaving the local Africans to be eaten by the lions! Come to
think of it, we have left people – not to be eaten by lions but to
have their lives and the lives of others damaged and even destroyed
for
lack of moral teaching based on how the world really is.
But luckily for the Africans, Patterson had more sense than us. He used his rifle. It did work.
So
my simple way off the cliff is to recognize the claims of atheist
moralists for the sham they are!
I had already worked out that if
there is no God, then there is no basis for moral argument at all,
but if God is, then the real – and only – basis for moral
argument is God's moral character.
Use
the rifle stupid!
The
way forward is for there to be effective Christian moralists. Competent moralists who
unashamedly base their work on God. Who refuse to engage on any other
ethical theory.
The
first
problem
I see is that after decades of total surrender to atheist theories, I
don't know how many Christian moralists are capable of doing this! I
got involved in studying moral philosophy precisely because I was
appalled that my own denomination was putting out material that a
first year philosophy student should have been ashamed to hand in! I
mean they were not only unthinkingly trotting out the atheist line but with such wooly thinking that they had none of
the rigour that even atheist ethicists were bringing to their work.
It was truly embarrassing!
The
second problem is that finding out how God's moral character answers
complex modern situations is a participatory thing. That is it
involves practical, not theoretical exercises. It is not just a
matter of reading the Bible the way a sharp lawyer might read the
statute books – Jesus versus the Pharisees demonstrates that. It
involves a relationship with God, certainly with much reading the
Bible, but then putting into practice ourselves what we learn.
Actually
it is more accurately being active participants in the real life
process of God re-creating us from the inside out.
The
Bible study then becomes an iterative experience. We learn a bit
about God, we are drawn to that, he makes an incremental change in
our outlook, from this improved “viewpoint” we can see a little
better to understand what the Bible is saying, so we learn a bit more about God ….
and so on ….for the rest of our lives.
This
is SO different from studying the Bible in a theoretical way that it
is really not surprising that such people have throughout history
“proved” the wackiest things from the Bible
I
heard a great line condemning a preacher which went: “He
uses the Bible the way a drunk uses a lamppost – more for support
than for illumination”
Also
in
this
modern world of specialised knowledge, the complexities of moral
problems faced
by someone in a particular field are not likely to be fully
understood by the Bible “expert”. So for instance, church leaders
pontificating on what scientists, medical practitioners, business or
union people, or for that matter leaders of government should do in
this case or that case is not
the way. The real way is for churches to be helping “lay” people
in this process of knowing and being inwardly renewed by God. Then
these people – the ones who are actually engaged in these fields –
can apply general principles to work out and adopt the right course
of action.
So
the task of recovering the proper place of Christian morals is an
extremely difficult one. But it all starts with recovering
confidence. There is a God. So moral discussion must
revolve around him. “God was
in Christ Jesus reconciling the world to himself” - so
we must never be ashamed of our Christian heritage and Biblical
understanding of God and human nature. We should however be utterly
ashamed and stung into doing better when non-Christians using what
revelation they have, manage to outdo us in embodying God's character.
No comments:
Post a Comment