Biblical Foundation for Christian Morality


The term "morality" is defined in explanatory terms with two broad classifications of this article: a) general description, b) biblical description. The main reason for this classification is that it is able to compare the biblical moral system with the focus of the investigation with other systems of morality. Scott B. Rae observed that "most people use morality and ethics interchangeably with one another." Technically, morality refers to the true and incorrect content. Morality is the result of ethical deliberations, right and wrong. "1 The distinction considering things will be discussed in this study as an inseparable pair.

The General Definition of Morality

The New In the biblical dictionary, the terms "ethics" and "morality" are "habits" according to Greek and Latin books. 2 The idea is to discover the things that are usually done and come to the conclusion that these things are. Logically, it follows that these things seem just to be fair to the individual and the society as well. Scott B. Rae explains a bit more about what the primary concern of morality is. He explained that morality was primarily concerned about the right and wrong issues, the ability to distinguish between two and the justification for discrimination. 3 There may be norms in society, referring to the right and wrong conditions. However, society faces so many new and challenging issues that force people to be ethical. In Samuel Enoch's Stumpf's book entitled "Philosophical Elements", the following questions arise: Why can not we do everything we want? What is the difference between people, how do we behave? Why is the question of ethics the first time? Why would we think that behavior is better than the other? To tell the truth is better than trying to get us out of trouble saying a flaw? And who is entitled to tell us what to do? Finally, he says that ethics must be studied to find answers to questions, what should I do? And why should I do this? 4 Stumpf's statement shows that the main question that divides people into moral views is the major source of moral authority.

Norman L. Geisler in the first seven chapters The book "Ethics: Options and Issues" is presented by people in this division while discussing basic ethics approaches. He argues that ethical systems are largely divided into two main categories: duty-centered and teleological (end-to-end). Deontological systems are systems based on principles in which actions (or characters or intentions) are inherently correct or bad. Teleological systems, however, form a system that is based on the result of an action. 5 Scott B. Rae discusses a section on ethical systems – relativism, as already mentioned by Geisler. According to him, "relativism" means an ethical system in which rights and mistakes are not absolute values ​​and unchanged, but to their own culture (cultural relativism) or their own personal preferences (moral subjectivism). However, this third category still suits Geisler under its two divisions. Furthermore, Geisler stated that there are six main ethical considerations: (i) Antinomianism – it claims there are no moral norms; (ii) Position – confirms that there is an absolute law (the law of love); (iii) Generalism – it claims that there are some general laws, but not; (iv) Uneducated absolute laws that never collide; v. contrary absolutism – asserts that there are many absolute norms that sometimes collide and one is obliged to make minor evils; and (vi) gradual absolutism – points out that many absolute laws sometimes conflict, but one is responsible for keeping a higher law. Geisler pointed out that these six subgroups are based on an ethical approach that is organized around norms – deontological. 7 By contrast, the other approach does not emphasize norms, but ends as a teleological, not normative or utilitarian approach.

Bible Definition

1. General observations

D. H. Field observed that "Biblical ethics is at the heart of God, instead of the majority opinion or of complying with normal behavior, the scripture encourages us to begin with God and his requirement – not man and his habits – when we seek moral guidance "8 In order to understand the moral definition of the Bible, we must examine the scripture as Field observed to see what God says and demands. He points out that the Bible is a reference to five biblical morals, indicating that the person of God discovers the nature of goodness. God alone is good and his will means good and acceptable and perfect; ii) the source of moral knowledge is the revelation. According to the Bible, knowledge of Good and Evil is not so much a subject of philosophical inquiry as acceptance of divine revelation; iii) moral education is a sentence that does not have to be declared. With the exception of OT's wisdom literature, moral judgments are normally but not reasonably justified. Philosophers, however, had to justify their moral judgment to persuade people to be good; iv) The fundamental ethical need of biblical ethics is to mimic God. God sums up the goodness in his own person. The principal ideal of man according to the Bible is to imitate him; v) Religion and ethics are theocentric. The moral doctrines of the scripture lose credibility after the religious subtraction ceases. Religion and ethics are the foundation of construction. Bible ethics comes from biblical teaching and the two are inseparable. 9 [19659002] 2. Morality in the Old Testament

From a general overview of the love of biblical morality, it is only appropriate to understand the concept presented in the two wills. In the OT, a close understanding of the covenant, law, and prophets can serve a better understanding of morality. These three aspects are examined individually.

(a) The Covenant

The covenant by Moses (24th year) made by Israel has a direct and far-reaching significance. The grace of God, as he sees in the manifestation of love and concern in bringing Israel out of Egypt, provides the supreme motive for the obedience of his commandments. Israelites, as partners of God, have united to respond graciously to God's neglected love affection. They thanked their mercy for their will and did not abuse the punishment of punishment. For this reason, for example, the slaves had to be generously treated because God treated the Hebrew slaves with generosity in Egypt.

The alliance also encourages intense awareness of corporate solidarity in Israel. The effect of this was not just merging the individual with God, but also joining every ally member into a single community. Man's sin can therefore affect the whole community (josh 7) and everyone is obliged to help the needy. OT-ethics places strong emphasis on social ethics.

b) The law

The covenant provided the context of God's law. The distinctive feature of the OT law was that it placed emphasis on maintaining good relations between people and people and God. It can be noted that the most serious order of the lawsuit was no material punishment, but the resulting breakdown in relationships. (Ho 1: 2). The Ten Commandments, to be regarded as the heart of the law, deal with the most important relationships. They have shown the fundamental sacrament in the direction of faith, worship, and life.

c) Prophets

Social relations in Israel have changed dramatically since Moses and the Israelites did not see the law required obedience in their daily lives. which also affected their relationship with God. The prophets sought to interpret the law by reading its principles and applying them to the concrete moral problems of the day

. Morality in the New Testament

Norman L. Geisler made the following observations on the New Testament


1) Christian ethics is based on the will of God. This is, as you say, a sort of divine command position; ethical duty, something that we should do

. Prescriptive;

2) Christian Ethics is Absolute. The fact that God has a moral nature

does not change (Mal 3:16), the moral obligations arising from the absolute nature. Geisler points out that anything that can be traced to the unchanging moral character of God is a moral absolute, holiness, justice, love, truth and grace. Other commands come from the will of God, but not absolute. This means that they must be obeyed because God has written them, but has not prescribed them for all people, time and place. Absolute moral bonds, on the contrary, are obligatory for all people everywhere and everywhere;

3) This Christian ethics is based on God's revelation. What God Commands Generally (Rom.1: 19-20; 2: 12-15) in Nature and especially in Scripture (Rom. 2: 2-18; 3: 2). God's Universal Revelation

contains his command for all people. In His Special Revelation

proclaims his will

; [4] This Christian ethics is prescriptive, because moral justice is described by a moral God

. Geisler pointed out that there was no moral law without being a moral legislator, or without a moral legislature would be a moral legislator. Therefore, Christian ethics is prescriptive, not descriptive. Christians do not have their ethics in the norms of Christians, but in the norms of Christians; and

5) Christian ethics is deontological. This is based on principles in which actions [or characters or intentions]

are inherently correct or bad.10


The morality as defined in this document is the actual and wrong content of the act. But the most important problem is how to determine it. The most important question arising from this question is the following: Where is the main source of moral authority? A group of people believe that power is immanent, human beings have the right to create their own moral rules and systems – belongs to the category of teleological ethics. The other group believes that moral authority is transcendent, that is, power exists outside the normal human experience. In biblical morality, this authority is God who revealed the people with special and universal revelation. By doing so, biblical ethics is unique. This is deontological. Both in the Old and in the New Testament, it can be seen that morality is based on the nature and nature of God.

As pointed out, ethics and morality are inseparable. For Christians, ethics is not so much about the good, but the choice. For non-Christians, it is better to determine the good. Whether you are a Christian or not as a human being will certainly be an ethical meeting. [1] Scott Rae, Morale Choice: Introduction to Ethics (Michigan: Zondervan

Publisher, 1995), p. 15. [19659002] 2D.H. Area, Ethics: New Biblical Dictionary. (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982),

o. 351

3Scott Rae, Morale Selection: Introduction to Ethics (Michigan: Zondervan

Publishing House, 1995), p. 21.

4Enoch Stumpf, Elements of Philosophy (London: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1993), p. 21.

5Norman L. Geisler, Ethics: Options and Questions. Michigan: Baker Library,

1989). 24.

6Scott Rae, Morale Selection: Introduction to Ethics (Michigan: Zondervan

Publishing House, 1995), p. 16.

7Norman L. Geisler, Ethics: Options and Questions. Michigan: Baker Library,

1989). 25. [19659002] 8D.H. Area, Ethics: New Biblical Dictionary. (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982),

o. 351.

9Ibid, p. 351.

10Norman L. Geisler, Ethics: Options and Questions. Michigan: Baker Library,

1989), 22-24.



Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *