There is practically no Christian who has not been told, “Why should we bother about it. It is their private business” or ” Let them do what they want. How does it affect us”. This statement, however, does not jibe with “Test and examine all things; hold fast to that which is good” in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 which clearly teaches that a child of God needs to examine and discriminate between things that people do, say, and think.
While most of what others do, such as studies, career-planing, fall into the category of “it is their private business”, not all activities can fall into this category. When king David sinned, the prophet did not consider that a private affair. He did nor say that “past is past” because Uriah was now dead anyway. He condemned David on his face instead of covering it up or condoning it. Five centuries before that an Israelite brought a Midianite woman and introduced her to his relatives. Obviously she was his mistress. The relatives accepted this as a fact of life and none of them apparently reacted or spoke a word against it. Since his immediately family showed no alarm when he brought this gentile woman, the others could easily have brushed off the affair by saying that it is their private business. The Biblical record shows that this is what everyone did, expect one young person. When Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron saw this, he could not condone it. Nor could he remain a mute spectator. He seized a spear, chased that couple, and killed them both on the spot. There was a clear-cut violation of God’s command, and no cross-examination, or issuing of a clarification of how and why the Israelite took that gentile woman was needed, or allowed. God approved the public punishment, which was demonstrated when the mighty plague stopped. The Right, The Wrong, And The Scripture: The Holy Scripture is saturated with instructions related to the ideas of right and wrong, ethics and morality. One of earliest communication from God was about right and wrong when God told man that he was not supposed to eat the fruits of the tree of knowledge. The definite consequence of violation was also spelt out clearly. In fact even the very foundation of the Christian faith is connected to right and wrong where we see man’s sin, God’s verdict (sin and its consequences), and Christ’s sacrifice (divine principles of right and wrong). Thus the ideas of right and wrong, judging, proclaiming a verdict, etc. form the foundation and core of the Christian faith. Every story that one learns in Sunday School, every Bible verse one commits to memory, and every hymn one sings is built upon a foundation the includes the essential concept f right and wrong. Remove that single idea and the entire Christian faith and theology crumbles down like a house of cards. While Christians might not always speak about right and wrong in the analytical language of a book the way you are reading here, these ideas are firmly there in the back of their minds. Their conscience is anchored in the idea of right and wrong. Consequently, a lot of things in the present society create a jarring effect in the Christian mind. A believer feels uneasy, even if he is not immediately able to present an analysis of what exactly is wrong. The restlessness increases when the violation is more clear-cut, and it reaches its peak when one spots Christians indulging in evil without any pricking of conscience. While every Christian should be shocked by such behavior, most Christians do not know that something far worse than mere misconduct is taking place: a blackout of conscience among Christians. More than one survey worldwide has shown that in the twenty first century almost all moral barriers have been breached and even annihilated among evangelical and professing Christians. Consequently, today there is practically NO difference between the moral and ethical standards of the man on the street and the average professing Christian. Both of them nurture a love for non-obligatory moral values, resent obligatory moral standards, and both would behave in practically identical manner in morally questionable matters. Given a chance, professing Christian students cheat in exams, and indulge in premarital sex, almost as often as nonchristians: specially in upwardly mobile societies. The rate of abortion and divorce are also approaching the level seen among nonchristians, specially among Christians in developed countries. TV programs with violent and obscene content are watched with increasing frequency in Christian homes, and the arrival of the Internet has opened conservative and evangelical Christians as a new marketplace for those who peddle of filth. It is therefore quite common for seemingly godly Christians to disagree when Bible teachers condemn questionable behaviour. Some of them even become visibly agitated, and try to argue that unless a Christian “tastes” everything, he would remain an ignoramus about temptations. They would argue that unless the freedom for experimentation is granted, young Christians would remain “backward” in their knowledge. This position is totally in opposition to the word of God which forbids even standing in the way of wicked people. In Psalms 1:1 onwards we read, “Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of the scornful”. In I Thessalonians 5:22 we read, “Abstain from all appearance of evil”. In Ephesians 5:3 we read, “But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once NAMED among you, as it is becoming to saints”. While the Scripture commands the believers to keep a distance (abstain from the appearance, and do not mention even once), an increasing number of believers today accept these things as an unavoidable component of their earthly life. Others among us promote the freedom to “experiment”. Surely something is amiss in the ethical and moral outlook of many contemporary Christians. Moral Relativism: We see a large number of slogans that have effectively been used to destroy the moral foundations of the society. Slogans are simple devices with just three to ten words, but are effective like a crowbar that multiplies the force manifold though it is the simplest of the tools which people use. The harm done by slogans like “Do it”, “It cannot be wrong if it feels good”, “We prayed before doing it”, etc. is incalculable. They have wedged their way into the pagan as well as the Christian minds, and have become an integral part of the twenty first century psyche. The result is seen in the Christian community when well-meaning Christians claim that all criticism is wrong, that the Christians should ignore and tolerate all viewpoints from within and without even if these ideas challenge even the core of the Christian faith, and that moral violations are a private affair.
Hidden behind this is the erroneous outlook that there are no absolute values, that there are no universal moral standards, and also the idea that a moral/ethical choice that is wrong for one person might be right for another person. Moral values are assumed to be relative, dependent upon people, times, and situations. This outlook is called “Moral Relativism”, and has become the de facto standard of the secularized people worldwide. The same is the essential moral. outlook of the humanists, nihilists, atheists, and even agnostics. Shockingly, the same is increasingly becoming the outlook of evangelical Christians, openly for many and in their longings for most. As a consequence, the society in general is not outraged at things that are grossly wrong, unethical, and immoral. The increasing frequency with which Courts of Law worldwide pass seemingly odd orders, and the increasing frequency with which justice is aborted, is a result of the increasing influence of moral Relativism. Once the society becomes saturated with Relativism beyond a critical level, a curious inversion takes place, called the “criminal-victim exchange”. Once this happens, those who continue to adhere to high moral values are perceived as criminals who destroy social harmony, amity, and progress. The morally upright person becomes so odd and unwanted that he is labeled as a criminals, while the social and moral perverts project themselves as victims. Witness the way in which pornographers, homosexuals, and lesbians are rising up to demand their “rights” and the way they label straight people as narrow-minded, bigots, and wicked. This is the reason why people cry for the rights of people in prisons, ask for reduction in penalties even for grave and grotesque crimes, while none of them shows any sympathy to the victims of these crimes. While common people of the world has no divine standards by which they ought to order their lives, the Christians are different. The have a verbally inspired Canon that lays down clear and unchanging laws. Consequently every spiritually sensitive Christian is shocked when he hears a defense of Moral Relativism from church pulpits, Christian magazines, and from Christian leaders. A few years ago the “Family Foundation” (magazine of an IFES related movement) published a lengthy justification of a born-again girl who married a Muslim boy. The article went on to claim that God has clearly guided the born-again girl to marry this Iranian Muslim so that she could become a Missionary to Iranian Muslims. The nagging question left in the minds of the readers relates to the statement in 2 Corinthians 6:14 and 15 which says “Be ye not unequally yoked with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communication hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or What part hath he that believeth with an infidel?”. When the Scripture makes the subject unmistakably clear in so many words, would God permit one of His children to break it. If He would, then are there any commandments in the Bible which are inviolable. Worse, by publishing a lengthy justification for Mortal Relativism, the magazine impressed upon countless impressionable young minds that ultimately no divine command is firm and inviolable. They get the message that the moral commands of the Bible are flexible, and that Christians through fasting and prayer can coax God in to making an exception for them. This is no different from the philosophy behind the stories in pagan religion where a person can obtain a boon from gods, howsoever morally repugnant, though penance and sacrifices.
Another article I read recently was in a publication titled “You And Us”, a magazine that claims to be “evangelical”. In it they carried an interview with a young girl who tells about how she prayed and how in response to it God granted an attractive job. The catch came at the end where she says she would never be able to attend Church as long as she would be in this job because there was no leave on Sundays. Then she went on to claim that since it is God who gave her this job, God also endorsed her perpetual absence from the church. That is plain Moral Relativism.
The big question now is, where is the end of this moral slippery-slope and free-fall. If God Himself allows one person to skip worship on Sundays, and another person to marry a Muslim, then Christian morality no longer remains objective. It becomes another version of Situation Ethics. Such a generation rewrites Philippians 4:13 which now reads, “I can do all things Christ ALLOWS me to do” and then finds was to justify every kind of questionable behavior as specially allowed by Christ for a special situation. The big question in the minds of morally sensitive believers is, “Where do I stand in the midst of this fluid and confusing scenario? Should we uphold what we know to be true, or should we be more expedient and keep our mouths shut and confine our value system to ourselves alone. If we speak out, we immediately become black sheep in this community. If we remain silent but try to live according to the objective morality of the Scriptures, again we are labeled as black sheep, and even as criminals. To be or not to be jumps out of Shakespeare and transforms itself from a mere drama to harsh everyday reality. People wish to avoid any analysis and censoring of moral/ethical compromise because they want to look good to all and have peace, but it is not a solution at all. Nobody can really flee and isolate himself, and nobody can live his spiritual life in a safe cocoon through silence. We are all social beings, and we need to interact with people sooner or later. Since a good amount of such interaction is value-related, isolation is just not possible. Silence is neither golden, nor free of consequences. When one’s own son comes home with his homosexual partner, and daughter comes home with her lesbian partner, and when one’s wife decides to have a donor-assisted fertilization, and when one’s husband decides to take in a mistress, nobody can continue to live in his or her shell. The choices are clear. Either one stands for God even if he/she is ostracized, or he/she flows with fate of the mixed multitude in Sinai. [You are encouraged to photocopy and distribute this article. You are permitted, and encouraged, to reproduce this article in any media whatsoever, provided you make no modifications]
