5.81 It is that “pearl of great price,” worth the sale of all the other ethical texts in one’s library in order to obtain it (Matthew 13).
5.82 The Bible provides absolute principles which establish the needed ethical foundation for individual and corporate life;
these embrace:
5.821 (1) The Ten Commandments and other permanent moral guide-lines of the Old Testament.
5.8211 They do not include the civil and ceremonial laws of the Old Testament, which, though genuinely revelatory (as Jesus makes clear), were given to Israel to guide the community until the coming of Messiah.
5.822 (2) The refinement and interiorisation of the Old Testament moral law as provided by Jesus himself and by the New Testa-ment writers.
5.8221 Jesus stresses that the moral law is not fulfilled merely by ex-ternal conformity to the law, as some of the Pharisees thought;
it also and especially requires a right inner attitude of heart (cf.
the Sermon on the Mount, etc.).
5.8222 New Testament writers such as Paul and John teach that the greatest motive for ethical conduct is gratitude for what God
W
U A
has done in giving his Son for our salvation (e.g., Romans 12;
1 John 4).
5.83 The Bible includes in its ethical teachings the foundations for inalienable human rights—both so-called “first generation”
rights (civil and political freedoms), “second generation” guar-antees (social and economic rights), and even newer rights of the “third generation”:
(1) Procedural due process
--Impartiality of tribunals (Malachi 2:9; 1 Timothy 5:21) --Fair hearing (Exodus 22:9)
--Speedy trial (Ezra 7:26)
--Confrontation of witnesses (Isaiah 43:9) --No double jeopardy (Nahum 1:9)
(2) Substantive due process
--Versus unjust discrimination in general (Acts 10:34; Deuter-onomy 16:19; Proverbs 24:23)
--The just and the unjust stand equally before the law (Matthew 5:45)
--Likewise all races and both sexes; condition of servitude ir-relevant—vs. slavery (Galatians 3:28; Amos 9:7; Exodus 21:2) --Likewise rich and poor (James 2:1-7; Amos 5:12; Isaiah 1:16-17)
--Likewise citizens and foreigners (Exodus 12:49; Leviticus 23:22, 24:22; Numbers 9:14, 15:15-16)
--Even the sovereign is under the law (2 Samuel 11-12) (3) Miscellaneous Basic 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Generation Rights --Right to life, from the moment of conception (Exodus 20:13;
Psalm 51:5; Matthew 5:21-22; Luke 1:15, 41) --Right to family life (1 Timothy 5:8)
--Versus inhuman or degrading treatment/punishment and tor-ture (Luke 6:45)
--Freedom of thought, conscience, religion, expression, assem-bly, association, movement (John 7:17)
--Social and economic rights in general (1 Corinthians 6:19-20)
--Right to work, to a fair remuneration, and to good working conditions—protection of labour (Luke 10:7; 1 Timothy 5:18;
Deuteronomy 23:25-26, 24:6, 10, 12-13, 15)
--Right to protection of honour and personal reputation (Exo-dus 20:16)
--Right to leisure time (Exodus 20:8-11)
--Right to asylum (Exodus 21:13; Joshua 20; 1 Chronicles 6:67, et al. (cities of refuge)
--Right to equitable distribution of land (Numbers 33:54; Le-viticus 25:14-18, 25-34).
5.84 Biblical revelation also yields solid principles of political phi-losophy to assist a fallen race in organising the common life.
5.841 Scripture condemns anarchy; even bad government is better than no government at all (Romans 13).
5.842 Scripture likewise condemns totalitarianisms, since they insist on controlling and restricting the God-mandated activities of believers (Acts 5:29).
5.843 Scripture recognises the dangers of autocratic rule (1 Samuel 8).
5.844 Scripture does not, however, require one particular form of government, whether in the state (monarchy, republic, etc.) or in the church (episcopacy, presbyterianism, congregational au-tonomy, etc.).
5.845 Scripture’s insistence on high human rights principles leads to the inescapable conclusion that, whatever its form, any govern-ment in accord with revelational standards must not exist to feather its own nest but must manifest the characteristics of an
“open society”: transparency, accountability, and sensitivity to the public weal (Matthew 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45).
5.8451 The existence of a revelational bias in favour of democratic forms of government would therefore appear to be a legitimate inference from the totality of biblical data .
5.8452 A further not illegitimate conclusion is that a biblical philoso-phy of government would support the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights that those who actively promote the
elimination of an open society have no right to function within that society (Refah Partisi v Turkey, 31 July 2001).
5.8453 To argue, as do the theonomic Reconstructionists (Rushdoony, G. North, G. Bahnsen) that Scripture requires the substitution of theocracy for democracy is absurd: prior to the return of Christ to rule at the end of time, only fallen human beings (the Theonomists themselves?) are available as God’s alleged spokespersons.
5.84531 Calvin’s Geneva, the English Commonwealth, and Puritan New England have amply illustrated that democratic govern-ment, with all its failings, is to be preferred to rule by God’s self-styled representatives.
5.85 Might not one argue that biblical standards of ethics and human rights, even granting their existence, are of little consequence since they do not cover all practical issues or resolve all ethical difficulties: they still have to be applied, and self-centred hu-mans will twist them to their own advantage even as they twist the dictates of conscience and the natural law?
5.851 But the fact that biblical pronouncements are already in propo-sitional form means that they are far less subject to misinterpre-tation and perversion than the unwritten law of nature and the cries of conscience.
5.8511 Since the latter are not in propositional form, they must un-dergo formulation before they can be used; this additional step opens the door to further potential slips between cup and lip.
5.852 And: better to have sixty-six books of absolute principles, even though they do not cover everything, than no revelational artic-ulation of ethical principles at all.
5.853 And: we have already dealt with the issue of the clarity and per-spicuity of Scripture, observing that its declarations are suffi-ciently precise that avoiding them is not easy.
5.854 And: the existence of an objective body of revelational litera-ture means that when a bizarre interpretation is offered which would dull the edge of scriptural morality (e.g., attempts to jus-tify racism by isolated Bible quotations), the matter is open to correction by a vast number of past and present students of the
5.8541 How much more satisfactory this is when compared with the subjective difficulties attendant on obtaining ethical guidance from conscience or the natural law.
5.86 Can it not also be objected that biblical principles themselves may be in conflict in a fallen world, and so do not solve all eth-ical dilemmas?
5.861 For example, the scriptural prohibition against lying, in conflict with the biblical requirement to assist one’s neighbour; as when the Nazi arrives at the door asking, “Are their any Jews here?,”
and you are hiding them to prevent their being taken to death camps (Corrie Ten Boom).
5.862 Such ethical difficulties are not assisted by convoluted attempts to establish a hierarchy of ethical principles in Scripture, alleg-edly permitting one to violate “lower” ones whilst holding to
“higher” ones—and thereby avoid sinning.
5.8621 “Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, is guilty of all” (James 2:10).
5.8622 The prime purpose of the law, as we shall see later, is not to make possible our “pulling out a plum and saying, ‘What a good boy am I’”: it is rather to remind us of our fallen condi-tion, so as to drive us to the Cross for the only forgiveness pos-sible.
5.863 We are, therefore, in the rare instances of such conflicts, to “sin bravely and go to the Cross bravely” (Luther).
5.8631 In the hiding place incident, this means evaluating, by the gen-eral sweep of biblical teaching, the relative damage to be done by lying to Nazis versus turning Jews over to almost certain death; the conclusion (one fervently hopes) will be exceedingly persuasive lying, followed by fervent admission at the Cross of one’s involvement in a tragically sinful world.
5.864 The ethical difficulties in these boundary situations arise not from a deficiency in the ethical teachings of the Bible (after all, both refusing to assist your neighbour and lying are clearly wrong!): their source lies in the hopelessly messy world we ourselves have produced owing to our individual and corporate sinfulness.
5.8651 The situationist never experiences a conflict of principles, for she recognises no principles in ethical decision-making (only
“love,” which, as we have seen, remains undefined and subjec-tively capable of alignment with virtually any moral interpreta-tion).
5.8652 The biblical ethicist, however, is faced with conflicting princi-ples, revealed as absolute by Scripture, which in an unfallen world would not be in conflict at all; her problem is to conform as fully to God’s will as the human catastrophe will allow, and at the same time to seek forgiveness for her Adamic and per-sonal contribution to that catastrophe.
5.87 The provision of absolute ethical guidelines in Holy Writ does not turn a broken world into the land of Oz, but it does provide the only solid basis for an individual and societal ethic which overcomes the relativity of human opinion as to standards of right and wrong.
5.9 The most serious deterrent to ethical conduct and to the