Theonomous Christian ethics

Theonomous Christian ethics

1. Interpreted Word of God

   • For other Christians, the Bible is a source of moral guidance but does not necessarily have to be understood literally
   • Those Christians believe that it was written by authors inspired by God,but using their own words, rather than the exact word of God
   • It is believed that the Bible was written in particular times and cultures and that some parts of it are more appropriate for the past, but a lot of it is appropriate for the present day
   • In The Moral Vision of the New Testament (1996), Richard B. Hays points out a number of factors that can affect a Christian's reading of the Bible. For example, a Christian might use only a narrow range of texts or favourite images and stories, so that even Christians who claim to take the Bible literally are probably being selective and bringing their own judgements and biases to it
   • Criticisms
     • It can lead to disagreements and disunity, for example on verses relating to women in leadership or on homosexuality, where some argue that biblical teaching needs reinterpretation for the modern world and others say that it holds a truth which should be upheld
     • It can be seen to be 'cherry-picking', where Christians ignore the parts of the Bible they find too challenging to adopt to their own lives
     • It is not always easy to tell which parts of the Bible are meant to be for all time and which can be understood as cultural or as myth

2. Direct word of God

   • For some Christians the Bible reveals God's word directly, making it the only source for Christian ethics
   • The Bible is understood as the literal, inspired 'breathed in' word of God
   • It is believed that the human authors simply wrote down the words as God told them, without adding any interpretation of their own
   • In this view the Bible is an infallible guide to life and its commandments apply at all time. Christians who have this understanding of the Bible might use verses to support their opinions on homosexuality or divorce or other moral issues
   • The view that the Bible should be understood literally tends to be more popular amongst evangelical Protestant Christians
   • Criticisms
     • The Bible appears to contain some contradictions of fact, such as different accounts of Jesus' last words on the cross
     • If the Bible is the direct word of God, it is difficult to understand why it contains so many different styles of writing and interests; this suggests some degree of human authorship
     • Some parts of the Bible's moral teaching seem to be in direct contradiction with other parts, for example in Sermon on the Mount in Matthew's Gospel, Jesus contradicts some of the laws given in the Old Testament
     • Some of the facts in the Bible do not match modern scientific knowledge

3. Introduction

   • In Biblical Imperatives (1994), the theological Richard Mouw argues that Christians need to be aware of the different commandments and stories in the Bible, and not just take something like the rule of love and try to apply it without studying different passages
   • In SCM Study Guide to Christian Ethics (2006), the theological Neil Messer argues that moral guidance in the Bible can be found not just in the commandments, but also in other passages. Figures could be seen as role models, and stories of history could have a moral implication for modern political life
   • The Bible can be approached in either a propositional or a non-propositional way:
     • A propositional approach to the Bible accepts that the words of the Bible are true messages from God
     • A non-propositional approach to the Bible looks at biblical stories, especially the life, death and Resurrection of Jesus, as speaking to a Christian's own life and experience

4. The Bible as the only authority for Christian ethical practices

   • “All scripture is inspired by God, and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness” 2 Timothy 3:16. This passage from the Second Letter to Timothy, in the New Testament, is often quoted by those who hold a biblicist or fundamentalist view of the Bible and supports the view that as all scripture (Old and New Testaments) is inspired by God then the Bible alone must be used for moral instruction.
   • One of the glories of the Bible and a great strength of theonomous Christian ethics is that ethics are not always spelled out as separate commandments but illustrated through real life situations. For example, the story of King David's adulterous relationship with Bathsheba in which he not only makes her pregnant but also misuses his kingly powers and causes the death of her husband, powerfully illustrates what it means, or rather does not mean, to live a moral life. The story also demonstrates that David is not merely judged on whether he has broken the commandments but the kind of person he is. By contrast, Uriah (Bathsheba's husband) is everything which David is not — law-abiding, loyal, faithful, honest and courageous.

5. Literalism and interpretation

   • No intelligent reading of the Bible can take every word literally and at face value. For example, Jesus says, 'If your right eye causes you to sin, tear out and throw it away (Matthew 5:29). Even very conservative biblicist Christians would not actually do this because they understand that the command to 'pluck out' in its context is really a metaphor for seeing things in the wrong way and is a call for repentance and change
     • This example illustrates the dangers of a limited understanding of how to interpret the Bible. Despite the high status he gave to the Bible, the great Protestant theologian Karl Barth (1886-1968) also warned of the dangers of literalism because it falsely gives the Bible a divine status which may only be attributed to God. He called this ‘bibliolatry': that is, the false worship of the Bible. Barth's view was that God's Word, his revelation in the world, has worked through the different writers of the Bible over a long period of time. The Bible's words, therefore, are a witness to the Word, but not the Word itself. While the Bible is a supreme source of Christian moral truth it is not the truth, itself and must be read critically as a source of inspiration.

6. Dealing with contradictions

   • One of the most problematic challenges for theonomous Christian biblical ethics is how to reconcile apparently contradictory commands or rules. For example, does the Bible command the use of violence for just means in cases of capital punishment or war?
   • Old Testament. Many contrast the shift in attitude to the use of violence between Old and New Testaments. The Old Testament permits war and retributive justice, summarised as an 'eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth' (Exodus 21:24). Capital punishment is seen to be part of God's judgement on those who blaspheme by destroying human life made in the image of God (Genesis 9:6). The death penalty is for all those who undermine social and divine order: adultery (Deuteronomy 22:22), dishonour to parents (Exodus 21:15) and the stranger who enters the Temple (Numbers 1:51). In Deuteronomy 20:10-20, which sets out the rules of war, the Israelites are permitted to kill foreign women and children
   • New Testament. But in the New Testament, Jesus' Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) consciously appears to revise the old law. Retribution is replaced by reconciliation (Matthew 5:38-42) and love of one's enemies (Matthew 5:44). The shift is not just a problem for biblicists. Some argue that Jesus' teaching stresses the future ideal state of Kingdom of God, just as the prophets in the Old Testament had done (Micah 4:1-4) and that meanwhile in an imperfect world, the use of war and violence is a necessary evil. This is the view of many, such as Augustine, Luther and conservative interpreters today. Yet, even those who are not biblicists, such as Martin Luther King, argue that the biblical vision of pacifism and non-violence is the one which Christians have a duty to follow because it is at the heart of Jesus' teaching on love.
   • Although there appears to be a problem for theonomous Christian ethics, this is only so if the Bible is treated in a very narrow sense as a rule book. For many, apparent contradictions are necessary if Christians are to fully engage with the problems of ethical decision-making and work out for themselves how the biblical principles are to be applied to life today. However, this suggests that Christian ethics necessarily involves more than merely following the Bible — that is the conclusion of those who hold a heteronomous view of Christian ethics.