Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian
From: jhpb@granjon.garage.att.com
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Moral reasoning (was Re: draft of Identity Task Force statement)
Message-ID: <Dec.6.03.42.28.1990.23580@athos.rutgers.edu>
Date: 6 Dec 90 08:42:30 GMT
Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs (Liberty Corner)
Lines: 58
Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu

Here's what was posed:

    --  given that there are things in the New Testament which are on
        the face of them unconditional rules, commands, or prohibitions,

    1a. how can we tell when one of these rules should be modified so
        that what used to be forbidden is now permitted,

    1b. and given that everyone in the dispute about such a change will
        claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit, how can we tell who _is_?

    2.  and if those claims can be invalidated by the passage of time,
        why should we place any greater trust in the rest of the NT?

Morally speaking, law is an objective norm of right action.  Moral law
originating with God can be divided into two kinds:

    - natural law
    - positive law

Natural law is the moral law written in men's hearts.  The natural law
is the 10 commandments, basically.  Natural law is knowable to mankind
through the exercise of human reason.  St. Paul speaks of the natural
law in Romans 2:14-15:

    For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those
    things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law unto
    themselves: Who shew the work of the law written in their hearts,
    their consciences bearing witness to them, and their thoughts
    between themselves accusing, or also defending one another.

Divine positive law is known through revelation, since it proceeds from
the free will of God.  Much of the Mosaic law is divine positive law.

One important difference in the two kinds of law immediately follows:
natural law is immutable, while positive law is not.

Thus, murder is always and has always been immoral, and always will be
immoral, because it is natural law.  The particular Old Testament kosher
laws, however, are no longer in effect; they were Divine positive laws
for a particular people and a particular time.

I think that answers the issues underlying most of 1a and 2.

Underlying your questions is the rule of Faith of the Reformation: the
Bible.  Choosing this as the rule of Faith has made mincemeat of the
Faith.  In addition to the Bible, you have to at least have a means for
deciding what the Bible means.  The Reformers didn't provide this.  Thus
the uncertainty being introduced on moral matters.  Human opinions are
getting mixed in with matters of Faith, with no standard means to
distinguish them.

As far as 1b goes, here is one test that works pretty well: beliefs
proceeding from Faith do not admit of doubt.  If a person can change his
mind in a matter of Bible interpretation, his belief proceeds from his
own reason, and not the grace called Faith.

Joe Buehler