Teaching Morals

by Raymond T. Exum
Crystal Lake Church of Christ, Crystal Lake, Illinois, USA
April 27, 1997

I would like to invite you this morning to look with me, please, in the Old Testament, at the book of Judges. This is the seventh book of the Old Testament. If you would please look at Judges, Chapter 17, I would like to read from here in just a few minutes.

By way of background to Judges 17, may I remind you about the giving of the ten commandments back in the days of the Exodus. When the children of Israel left Egypt, they were on their way to the promised land. They stopped at a certain point to receive the ten commandments.

Please listen once again to a reading of the first two of the ten commandments. The first commandment is worded this way: "I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me." That was commandment number one.

Commandment number two reads this way: "You shall not make for yourself an idol or any likeness of what is in the heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them."

Notice in the first two of the ten commandments, they both commanded the Israelites to only have one God, not to bow down to idols, not to have something else first in their hearts. We know that over time the Israelites did drift into idolatry, and the results of that drift were disastrous. The northern ten tribes were basically destroyed by the Assyrians because of the idolatry in that area. The southern two tribes went into seventy years of captivity in the nation of Babylon because of their idolatry.

It was a serious thing in the Old Testament to bow down to an idol. In the New Testament we know that in I John 5:21 we are warned to guard ourselves from idols. It is important therefore for us as Christians to be admonished by these words. Idolatry is a serious sin.

Please allow me to ask this thought question this morning. Is it possible that in the United States today a new idol has arisen? Most Americans would be shocked at the charge that this has become a nation of idol worshippers. Yet it has happened. The United States has become a country of idolatrous feelings. In fact, we could call the new idol "our feelings." People today have made that an idol in their hearts. There is no longer an objective standard of truth today in our country. With so many people around us today, what is first place in their hearts is the way that they feel about a certain matter. The truth is not as important as their feelings.

This has had a number of very unfortunate consequences. One is the fact that we are essentially losing our freedom of speech today because of the threat of lawsuits. There are so many people who go by their feelings rather than the truth that if somehow they take a statement as an insult to their feelings then they will sue. We find all kinds of frivolous lawsuits today, and essentially our freedom of speech is coming to an end because of the idol of "our feelings."

There is another effect. This concerns a lack of moral standards as people go more by their feelings than by objective truth. Several years ago there was an outstanding book written by a professor at the University of Chicago, Dr. Allan Bloom. His book is entitled The Closing of the American Mind. I want to read some comments from that book.

Dr. Bloom said this: "There is one thing a professor can be absolutely certain of. Almost every student entering the University believes that truth is relative. The students, of course, cannot defend their opinion. It is something with which they have been indoctrinated." Allow me to read another statement from his book. He says, "The other element of learning that has disappeared is religion. Real religion and knowledge of the Bible have diminished to the vanishing point." He goes on to say that "one of the most popular statements that his students can make is 'This is my personal opinion.' Students will go on to say, ?Of course I'm not judging anyone. If you think that is all right, that is OK, but I'm personally against it.'" I'm sure that we have all heard statements like that by our friends outside of the body of Christ. Is this not a case of the feelings of people having become an idol in their heart?

Not everybody has heard of Dr. Bloom at the University of Chicago, but I imagine that most people here have heard of Seventeen magazine. I imagine that some of our young people are familiar with Seventeen. I want to read an article that they had in Aug of 1983. The article was entitled "How to Cope When Friends Pressure You About Sex." That's a very interesting title. Allow me to read their answer concerning how to cope when friends pressure you about sex.

I'm reading direct quotes from this article.

"Peer pressure can prompt you to think about what you believe and what you want for yourself. It can lead you to examine in a new way the feelings [notice that word] - the feelings, values and beliefs you have about sexual choices and to reaffirm your convictions about what is right for you."

Then they get down to the specific advice which they give on how to cope with friends who pressure you about sex:

"Have a strong sense of what's right for you. There are many sexual options. What feels [notice the word there] - what feels right for one person may be all wrong for another. It's foolish to try to judge what's right for you on the basis of someone else's experience, so it is important to know what is based on your own values."

Please listen to one more paragraph. They say,

"Be non-judgmental with your peers, and in this way ease the pressure. You can defuse a lot of pressure by refusing to fall into a defensive exchange with each criticizing the others' choices and values. Getting into an ?I'm right and you're wrong' argument accomplishes nothing positive. Whether the other person is your boyfriend or girlfriend, it can be much more constructive to say 'I respect your feelings and choices, what you want or what you're choosing may be right for you, but I feel that what's right for me now is quite different.'"

That really confirms what Dr. Bloom said in his book. We have become a nation in which our feelings have become god in our lives. In fact, there was a poll in 1992 of Americans, and this is truly a sad piece of information. According to this poll, 69% of American adults now believe that morals are determined by the situation and not by any absolute standard of truth. The majority of Americans believe in what is basically situation ethics. It's going to be more and more difficult, therefore, to teach our young people good morals. It is a laugh to think they can take a course at school in ethics. What is so funny is that without a foundation for those ethics, how can you possibly teach ethics? There must be some kind of moral standard if we are going to teach our young people the difference between right and wrong.

Did you know that there was a time in the history of God's people when they faced a similar situation in society? It was in the time of the judges. In fact, chapter 17 of the book of Judges there is the first of three scriptures that I would like to read this morning. In Judges 17, verse 6, notice how the writer summarized this period in the history of the human race. In Judges 17:6 the writer said, "In those days there was no king in Israel. Every man did what was right in his own eyes."

Could you turn over a few more pages, please, to Chapter 21 of the book of Judges. Notice the very last verse of Chapter 21, the last verse in the book of Judges and again notice how the writer of this book summarized the time of the judges. In verse 25 of Judges 21 he said, "In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes."

Well what was the period of the judges like? If you are familiar with Bible history you know that the period of the judges was the most violent period in Jewish history. The period lasted from the death of Joshua down until when Saul was appointed the first king over the twelve tribes. It was a period of about 300 years.

In those 300 years, there were 13 men and one woman who served as judges over Israel. It was a time of great paganism. The nation would fall apart, crime would soar, idolatry would be practiced, they would be robbing one another, killing one another without any cause. In fact if you have time, you might want to read Judges 17. Judges 17 is such a horrible chapter you almost ask the question, "Is this really supposed to be in the Bible?" Of course it is. Nevertheless it is such a scene that is described there of bloodshed and robbing one another.

We find in Judges 17 a young man stole 1100 pieces of silver from his mother. Can you imagine robbing your own mother? Well eventually he returned the money. They found out what he did. He returned the money. Out of those 1100 pieces of silver, she took 200 pieces out and had them melted down and put into the form of an idol. We see that things deteriorate further in the next few chapters.

In Chapter 19 we read about rape and homosexuality. We read about a woman who was killed. She was murdered. Her body was cut into 12 pieces and a piece was sent to each of the 12 tribes. It was a time of lawlessness. It was a time of great violence. Because of what was going on among the Israelites, the enemies of the people could come in and conquer them. God would feel sorry for them and raise up another judge and things would be OK for a few years, but they would drift back into all of these sins and then they would be oppressed by their enemies again. It was a time of great agony. The book of Judges is one of the most unusual books in the Bible.

Why was it such a violent time? Why was it a time of such immense bloodshed where even one of the twelve tribes was almost decimated? It almost ceased to exist because of various things that they had done. Why was it that way? Because every person did what was right in his own eyes.

Has the United States reached that situation today? Earlier in the twentieth century there was a philosophy known as existentialism. It came from a Danish philosopher named Soren Kierkegaard. I want to read Mr. Kierkegaard's definition of this new philosophy from his journals. He said, "The thing is to understand myself, to see what God really wishes me to do. The thing is to find a truth which is true for me." Notice the emphasis there on his feelings about what is right and wrong, not necessarily what God thought about that matter. That statement was the basis for Ernest Hemingway's statement "Good is what you feel good after doing and bad is what you feel bad after doing."

Many people today have not heard of the philosophy of existentialism, but most of us, I'm sure, are familiar with humanism, which is its successor. I want to read from the Humanist Manifesto II. This really summarizes the way most Americans believe today, unfortunately. This is what they state:

"We find insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of the supernatural. As non- theists, we begin with humans, not with God. We reject those features of traditional religious morality that deny humans a full appreciation of their own potential. We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. [Did you catch the significance of that?] We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is situational, needing no theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stem from human need and interest. To deny this distorts the whole basis of life."

Then they simply say,

"We strive for the good life here and now."

I think most Americans agree with that today. Most Americans would be humanists, I believe, and would take their morality from themselves and from their own feelings. We can begin to see why Seventeen magazine could make some of the statements that I read a few moments ago. We begin to see why so many Americans believe a statement such as what we found in that magazine.

I'd like to take some of the issues of our day and examine them from the point of view of our feelings. Here is a question that is being discussed in our society today. If you listen to any kind of talk radio station, you know that this frequently is brought up and people call in and give their views on the matter. Let's take just this question, "Should homosexuals be allowed to marry?" This is a very relevant question today, very current. Should homosexuals be allowed to marry?

If you listen to some of the talk radio stations, there will be many people who will call in and say, "Well, every person has a right to live as he wants to. Therefore homosexuals have a right to get married." What is unfortunate about that statement is that there is no basis for making it. I could come back and I would say, "Well, why do you believe that every person has a right to live the way he wants to?" The person might say, "Because it's true. We don't have a right to tell anybody else how to live." I'd like to come back and say, "But why do you believe that?" The person might say, "Because it's a free country and because everyone has a right to live the way he wants to." "Yes, but why do you believe that? What is the basis for that statement?"

Eventually if you pursue this far enough they will reach the point where they say I believe it because I want to believe it, or I believe it because I feel that it is right. My response is, "Suppose I don't feel that it's right?" Suppose I say, "My feelings tell me that a person does not have a right to live the way that he wants to."

So here are your feelings and here are my feelings. Which set of feelings is correct? The problem is that when one person thinks a certain way because he feels that way, then somebody else can think another way because he feels that way. Ultimately who is right and who is wrong?

If you read yesterday's newspaper, you saw a very tragic article about the fact that 100,000 Rwandan refugees have disappeared from a refugee camp in Eastern Zaire in Africa. I think everybody knows what happened to them. They were slaughtered by the soldiers in eastern Zaire. Nobody has found the bodies yet, and yet there are no more refugees in a camp that used to hold 100,000 of them. Was it right or wrong for them to be slaughtered? We would say, "Well, that was wrong."

What is the basis for making that statement? You know the soldiers that did the slaughtering, assuming that is what happened, must have thought it was all right. Their feelings told them that they were doing the right thing. Our feelings would say they were doing the wrong thing. Which view is correct if ethics are situational?

I ran across a little poem that really summarizes the way that most people view these things today. It is entitled "It All Depends".

It all depends on where you are

It all depends on what you are

It all depends on what you feel

It all depends on how you feel

It all depends on how you're raised

It all depends on what is praised

What's right today is wrong tomorrow

Joy in France and England's sorrow

It all depends on point of view

Australia or Timbuktu

In Rome, do as the Romans do

If taste just happens to agree

Then you have morality

And where there are conflicting trends

It all depends, it all depends

Doesn't that really summarize how most people today view morality? The truth is this: when everyone does what is right in his own eyes, then society begins to disintegrate as it did in the days of the judges, as it did in the period of time known as the Dark Ages, and as it has done at other times in world history.

In fact, I want to go back to another time in world history, back to World War II and the years leading up to that war. I want to read a statement that was made by Adolph Hitler in defending the Holocaust. That is, "How could you possibly have allowed this to take place? Six million people killed by the Nazis! How could this possibly have taken place?" I want to read you Adolph Hitler's explanation of how he allowed this to happen. He said, "There is no controlling legal authority that says this was in violation of law."

Was he correct there? Yes, he was correct. Just a minute, I'm sorry. I've got the wrong card here. That was not a statement made by Adolph Hitler. I'm so embarrassed. I've made a mistake here. That was actually a statement made by Vice President Al Gore in his March 3 news conference defending himself against charges made against him. Seven times in that news conference he said there is no controlling legal authority that says this was in violation of the law.

Good friends, if that was his justification for what he had done -- he did not violate the law -- would that not also have worked for Adolph Hitler? He did not violate "the law" either. If it will defend one person, will it not defend another person? Hitler never violated German law in carrying out the Holocaust.

I think we begin to see how society does deteriorate when every person does what is right in his own eyes. It makes us very inconsistent. Can you imagine a state in this country that is going to execute a criminal? He has already been sentenced. He's a real hardened criminal. He's committed some kind of heinous crime and they're getting ready to carry out the execution. What they do is get him to put his head forward. They cut a hole in the back of his neck. They stick a big pair of scissors in there and they cut his brain to pieces. That is what kills him. Can you imagine the outrage in this country? Can you imagine how furious all of the special interest groups would be that you have violated this man's rights and you have caused him to suffer and endure all of his pain and have such a horrible death? There would be an awful outcry concerning how that criminal was executed.

And yet, everyday there are babies that die by that same procedure with partial birth abortions. Exactly the same. Where is the outcry? There is no outcry because of the way people feel. It doesn't violate their feelings if babies are killed that way. It does violate their feelings when a criminal is executed that way or would be executed that way. How can this happen? What has happened to the United States that we have reached the point where we can tolerate that kind of murder in a baby who is innocent and never tolerate it in a criminal who is guilty? What has happened in the land of the brave and the home of the free?

Good friends, what has happened is that every one is doing what is right in his own eyes. How are we as parents ever supposed to teach our children morals? How are we supposed to teach them the difference between right and wrong? One phrase that I guess I've just had it up to here with is "inappropriate behavior." That's sort of the code phrase today. If your kid is beating up on his little sister, you say, "Look, Johnny, that is inappropriate behavior." That's not going to stop anything. Children are smart. I mean all they have to do is say, "Well, why is that inappropriate behavior?" Little boys are not supposed to beat up on their little sisters. "Why are little boys not supposed to beat up on their little sisters?"

Eventually it gets back to our feelings. We think this is wrong. Maybe we can try to rule out this expression "inappropriate behavior." It's not going to work. Teaching right and wrong without a foundation will not work. Teaching family values without a foundation will not work. Teaching ethics without a foundation will not work. What is the foundation that we need when it comes to teaching our children the difference between right and wrong?

I would like to ask you to look with me at one more passage this morning. If you would look in the New Testament at the book of John, the fourth book in the New Testament. Look at John, Chapter 17. Here we have a prayer that our Lord delivered shortly before his death on the cross. He was very concerned about his disciples. He was hoping that they would not fall away, not be led away by false teachers and so forth. Notice, please, John 17:17, as He was praying on behalf of His apostles and His disciples. John 17:17. The Lord Jesus Christ said, "Sanctify them in truth. Thy word is truth." Beloved that is the one and only source of absolute truth. The Bible, the Word of God.

"All flesh is like grass, and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers and the flower falls off, but the word of God abides forever." I Peter 1:24-25.

How therefore can we teach morals in an immoral age? Teach the Word of God. The Word of God says, "You shall not steal." That is absolute. There are no exceptions to that word from God. It is never right to steal. When the word of God says, "You shall not commit adultery", that is an absolute statement. There are no exceptions. It is not based on our feelings. It is not based on the situation.

As we go through all of the commandments of God, we realize that these are absolute truths. We do not have to say to our children, "It all depends, it all depends." We do not have to say, "That is inappropriate behavior." It is not based upon whether it is inappropriate or appropriate or how we feel about the matter. God has spoken to us through his son Jesus Christ, through the Words in the Bible, through the words of the inspired apostles.

If we want to teach morals in an immoral age we teach our children the Bible. We bring them to Sunday School. We have them here for worship as this morning and as this evening. We will bring them Wednesday night to study the Bible once again. We will immerse them as we immerse ourselves in the Word of God.

Life begins to make sense. If our country continues on the course that it is on today, the end result may very well be exactly what happened in the days of the judges. Let us therefore stand upon the word of God and hope that enough people will respond to it and be saved.

In the churches of Christ we do not have a creed. There was some dear person who called me this past week on the phone here at the building and asked about the beliefs of this congregation. I was proud to tell her that we do not have a creed. We take only the Bible as our guide in all spiritual matters.

She asked about our plan of salvation and again I was able to tell her from the scriptures exactly what the Bible says to do. You must believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (John 3:16). We have to confess Him before those around us that we believe in Him (Matthew 10 explains that). We have to repent of our sins, as we read in Luke 13:3. In Acts 2:38 we are told to be baptized for the forgiveness of our sins in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

I hope that maybe these messages, these comments, this morning from the book of Judges and the book of John will encourage us all to put greater emphasis on the word of God.

If you see at this point that you are subject to the invitation, that you need to become a Christian according to what the Bible says, then we offer you this opportunity to be baptized in our presence by immersion in water in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and to be brought into the body of Christ. If you're subject, would you please come to the front now.

Return to Crystal Lake Church of Christ home page
Updated 01/02/03