A skeptic was wondering why I thought that he was a moral
relativist – someone who didn’t believe in an objective, God-given moral law. I
answered:
·
When you reject the only possible basis for objective
moral law - God - it is then inevitable that you must create your own moral
code. This is moral relativism.
·
We do not submit to what we create anymore than
we submit to our belief in a certain political party. We might like this party,
but our affiliation is subject to change, especially if we deem that it is no
longer expedient for us. So too with moral relativism.
Will we resist our pedophilic impulses if it becomes legal
to seduce children with a bag of candy and a pornographic movie? If we are a
moral relativist, we will not. Even if we intuitively KNOW that pedophilia is a
horrible sin against a child, we have already convinced ourselves that morality
is just a matter of what we and society create for our convenience. Therefore,
any reason to affectively resist our immoral temptations is eliminated.
If it bothers our conscience, we’ll just drop a pill or see a psychologist. Meanwhile, Scripture assures us that we know better and we will be judged according to this knowledge:
If it bothers our conscience, we’ll just drop a pill or see a psychologist. Meanwhile, Scripture assures us that we know better and we will be judged according to this knowledge:
·
For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by
nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they
do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their
hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting
thoughts accuse or even excuse them. (Romans 2:14-15)
No comments:
Post a Comment