Ethics and Biblical Events
Some may
wonder why I have chosen to write an ethical treatise focused on law, rather
than on the great events of biblical history. Why not an ethic of creation? Or
incarnation? Or atonement, resurrection, or eschatological expectation?
An ethic of
creation would, of course, focus on the biblical concern for the environment.
But since the environment includes everything, it could use the environment as
a perspective on other ethical teaching in the Bible: God as our worship environment,
the Sabbath as our temporal environment, the family as our nurturing
environment, etc.
An ethic of
incarnation might focus on how we should follow Jesus’ example by entering
fully into the lives of others, loving them by empathy and sympathy. An ethic
of atonement would focus on self-sacrificing love as the paradigm of love. An
ethic of resurrection would stress bringing God’s renewal into our own lives
and those of others. An eschatological ethic would see everything in the light
of our future hope, including the rewards of heaven.
I have no
objection to ethical treatises of these types. They can be very helpful, useful
perspectives on the discipline. I have chosen, however, to focus on the law,
for reasons such as the following:
1. The
focus on law enables us to interact with our historic traditions, for it is the
focus of the confessions of various denominations.
2. The law
has been the main focus of my own study of ethics. So I find it easier to work
in this conceptual milieu.
3. I
believe that despite its historic centrality, the authority of the law is under
attack in some Christian circles (let alone secular circles). Many Christians
think that attention to the law is spiritually detrimental, or that it detracts
from grace. In my judgment, this view confuses the legal with the legalistic.
This whole book, I trust, is an antidote to that kind of thinking.
4. An ethic
based on one or more redemptive-historical events inevitably reverts to law
when it seeks to define its specific standards. In an ethic of creation, an
author will want to say that we should care for the environment. But how does
he know that, from the bare fact that God created the heavens and the earth?
God has not charged rats or tigers with the care of the earth, only human
beings. And he has given us that responsibility, not just by creating things,
but by giving us a mandate to care for them. Mandate is another word for law.
Similarly, whatever we may want to derive ethically from incarnation, etc. will
have to be verified in God’s law. To derive it from the event simply in itself
is a case of the naturalistic fallacy.
5. It may be that in some cases the desire to turn from law to some other aspect of Scripture as ethical focus is related to the desire for human autonomy. As sinners (and often as modern theologians), we don’t want God telling us what to do. It may seem that by moving away from a legal focus we can avoid the stark voice of God commanding good and forbidding evil. But as I have indicated, the focus on biblical events depends on the law for its ethical authority and credibility.