BiblicalInsights.net

Greg Epstein wrote a book titled, Good Without God in which he makes the bold claim that Humanism can produce moral goodness without God.  Epstein is the Humanist chaplain at Harvard.  He attempts to provide a worldview for nonbelievers that provides a basis for morality.  The premise of the book is: Humanism can deliver morality without God.  Can we be good without God?  The question is not: Can we be good without belief in God? An atheist, for example, may be able to do some morally good things (as a matter of choice), but doing some good things does not make one good by definition.  No one is sinless (Rom. 3:23).  Consequently, all need a savior (John 3:16).  Jesus  is the savior of the world (John 4:42; I John 4:14). We cannot be good without God when we understand goodness/righteousness to be the result of redemption through Jesus Christ.
Can We Be Good Without God?
This is a question that focuses on the nature of moral values.  Are moral values/laws we hold dear the result of social convention?   Are they the result of personal preference (relativism)?  Or, are they valid and binding independent of our opinions being grounded in the nature of God and His laws?
Consequences of Naturalism
Naturalism is the view that moral values are the by-product of biological evolution and social conditioning.  This means that all moral values are self-determined and relative.  Under this view, the Holocaust could be justified on the basis of a form of eugenics that was advantageous to German Nazis.  If there is no God, anything and everything is permissible!  If a lion kills a zebra in order to have food to eat, does the lion kill (murder) the zebra?  Does it have to stand trial for killing the zebra?  If a great white shark forcibly copulates with a female shark does it rape it?  Do we hold it accountable for rape?  We make a distinction between the conduct in the animal world and human beings.  Human beings are not animals.  Human beings are held to a higher moral standard than animals.  Naturalism fails to make this distinction and treats human beings as if they were animals.  We recognize the truth that for human beings objective moral values and duties exist.
Consequences of Theism
Theism affirms that God is (Gen. 1:1 and Heb. 11:6).  God is good (Mark 10:18).  God is the only morally perfect Being (The Triune God) who is intrinsically good.  God is holy (I Pet. 1:13,14).  God is love (I John 4:8, 16).  God is righteous (Ps. 11:7). “For the righteous LORD loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright.”  Moral laws come from God.  The nature of God defines the nature of moral values/laws.  Moral duties exist because God has expressed His Will to human beings from the very beginning of the creation of mankind (Gen. 1 and 2).  There never has been a time, since human beings were created by God, that they did not have moral guidance from God.  When people give up their knowledge of God and rebel against God, they become morally reprobate.  Sin by definition is a transgression of God’s Will (I John 3:4).  People are not morally good when they violate God’s law and sin against Him.  The basic proposition of theism is:  If God does not exist, then objective moral values and duties do not exist.  Objective moral values do exist (murder, rape).  Therefore, God exists.
The Euthyphro Dilemma Resolved
This dilemma was named after a character in one of Plato’ Dialogues.  The dilemma can be stated thus:  Is something good because God wills it? Or, does God will something because it is good? The solution to this dilemma is: God wills something because He is good!  God, Himself, is the moral standard that determines good and evil.  God’s commands reflect His moral character, His holiness.  (see William Lane Craig, On Guard, pp. 120-121).
Sin Is Intrinsic Evil
Sin is defined by God in His Word (I John 3:4; 5:17).  All unrighteousness is sin.  Since all people sin against God, all accountable people must be saved from sin and its consequences (Rom. 3:23).  No one is good without God!  Through His love, mercy, and grace we can be saved from sin and justified before God. We are made perfect through the redemption that God has provided in and through His Son-Jesus Christ. “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.  Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him” (Rom. 5:8-9).  No one is good without being saved by the blood of Jesus Christ.  You cannot be good without God!  “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16).

Moral relativity consists of making moral or ethical choices based upon one’s own internal feelings and opinions (subjectivism).  Thus, morality becomes relative to the person who holds the moral view.  The only “standard” is the individual’s own need for recognition and dignity–to be true to himself/herself.  In this study, we will show that moral relativity is false and must be rejected.  A call for moral truth based upon the Word of God is greatly needed in our culture today.
When you abandon truth, you abandon rationality.  We are living in the age of irrationality due to the fact that many people now believe in moral relativity.
Moral Relativity is False
We can show that moral relativity is false in many different ways.  For instance, if we ask, “relative to what?”  It can’t be relative to the relative ad infinite, since there would be nothing to which it is relative.  This reduces the concept to an absurdity.  The Law of Rationality states that we must gather all of the evidence, reason about the evidence correctly and draw only such conclusions as are warranted by the evidence.  The correspondence principle of truth means that truth conforms to fact or to reality.  From a biblical point of view, truth corresponds to reality as God defines that reality.  God’s Word is truth (John 17:17).  Truth is not self-determined.  Truth is determined by a sovereign God.  Every moral issue is relative to an absolute principle and so is either true or false based upon the standard of truth that originates with God.  The idea that truth is self-determined is an abandonment of God and His Word.  This type of unbelief is at the heart of moral relativity.
Secondly, we can show that moral relativity is false because value judgments would be impossible.  If someone says, “the world is getting better” or “the world is getting worse” –these value judgments require a standard by which the comparison is made (better or worse).  Good, better, and best are comparative terms that require an objective standard in order to distinguish among them.  Thirdly, moral disagreements would be impossible.  Those who affirm moral relativity must affirm that both sides of a moral issue are acceptable even if they are contradictory.  For example, if someone says, “Hitler was not an evil man” or “Hitler was an evil man” can both statements be true at the same time?  The answer is no.  Any proposition/statement that involves self-contradiction is a false statement.  Only by rejecting the Law of Rationality could one say, “yes” to both.  The moral relativist affirms a contradiction.  Moral absolutes are unavoidable.  When someone says, “you should never say never”, he/she affirms a contradiction.  When someone says, “there are no absolutes”, he/she affirms a contradiction (he/she has stated an absolute that there are no absolutes).
Five Consequences of Moral Relativism
First, moral relativism denies God and God’s Word.  God is supplanted with self (this is deification of self).  The denial of God is unbelief.  All unbelief is irrational since it involves a rejection of the truth which results in the belief of a lie.  Rejection of the truth and acceptance of a lie will lead to eternal damnation (II Thess. 2:11-12; Mark 16:16).
Second, moral relativism destabilizes society.  Social order is tied to sacred order (God’s laws and commandments).  Destroy the sacred order (God’s moral law) and the result is moral chaos and the destruction of the social order.  Moral relativism moves us in the direction of social chaos and collapse.
Third, moral concepts would be in a constant state of flux.  This means that every imagination of the hearts of people would be permissible.  Nothing would be forbidden.  The sense of “normal” would disappear.  The very laws by which society determines good from evil and right from wrong would collapse.  No one could be defined as a “criminal.”  The rule of law would collapse.
Fourth, the notion of freedom is redefined.  Licentiousness becomes freedom.  Those who accept moral relativity do so in the name of freedom–the freedom to be me.  If you do not permit me to do what I want to do, then, you are oppressing me and limiting my freedom.  Licentiousness is freedom from restraint.  The unbridled lusts of the flesh are not freedom, but rather, servitude to sin (Rom. 6:16, “Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey: whether of sin unto death or of obedience unto righteousness”).  Lasciviousness is condemned by God in His Word.  It is a work of the flesh (Gal. 5:19).  It is a sin of the unregenerate heart that is hardened against God (Eph. 4:19; I Pet. 4:3; Jude 4).
Fifth, moral relativity results in amorality, i.e. no morals whatsoever!  Crime and violence will increase.  Every form of corruption is permissible.  Satan rules the hearts of men and women.
The Call To Moral Truth
In the face of God’s impending judgment, declared by God’s prophet, Jonah, the king of Nineveh called his people to turn away from every evil thing and to repent in sackcloth and cry mightily unto God for mercy (Jonah 3:8).  This is a proper example of what needs to be done today.  The gospel call is a universal call given by the Lord Jesus Christ to come unto Him (Matt. 11:28-30).  It is a call to obtain salvation (II Thess. 2:13-14).  It is a call to repentance of sin (Acts 17:30; 2:38; 3:19).  It is a call to self-denial and to sacrificially follow Jesus Christ (Matt. 16:24).  It is a call out of darkness into his marvelous light (I Pet. 2:9).  It is a call to spiritual union with Jesus Christ (Gal. 3:26-29) and all of those of similar faith in Christ and obedience to His commandments.  It is a call to holiness (I Thess. 4:7).  The moral law of God’s Word reflects the holiness of God Himself.  In as much as we keep God’s commandments, we reflect His holiness and glorify His name.

Earl Edwards recently wrote a lecture for the Freed Hardeman Lectureship held in February, 2018 titled, “Can a Christian Drink Alcohol?”  (Entrusted with the Faith,ed. by Douglas Y. Burleson, 147-155) in which he affirms the moderation view of drinking alcoholic beverages while advising a voluntary abstinence.  I have written a reply to Edwards and put it on my blog under the page Biblical Articles.  Please take the time to read this reply.  Edwards makes the following errors:  (1) he commits the fallacy of selective evidence; (2) he commits the fallacy of analogy by using an analogy falsely; (3) he contradicts the apostle Paul; and (4) he contradicts himself.  In these ways, Edwards has violated the law of rationality in order to reach his conclusions. The reader is asked to weigh the evidence, reason about the evidence correctly, and draw only such conclusions as are warranted by the evidence.

Steven Ertlelt wrote an article for lifenews.com titled, “Planned Parenthood CEO Confirms It will Not Stop Selling Body Parts From Aborted Babies” (Sept. 30, 2015).  In this article, he reveals that Cecile Richards admitted in her testimony before Congress that she is ‘proud’ of Planned Parenthood’s baby body parts harvesting program.  Planned Parenthood is responsible for expanding late-term abortions and  selling of baby body parts.
David Daleiden, the founder of the Center for Medical Progress, which was responsible for the series of 10 videos showing the abortion giant selling baby body parts states that the organization is not worthy of taxpayer funding.  Here are some excerpts from the ten videos:
1.  In the first video:  Dr. Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood commented on baby-crushing.  “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.”
2.  In the second video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter joked, “I want a Lamborghini” as she negotiated the best price for baby parts.
3.  In the third video:  Holly O’Donnell, a former Stem Express employee who worked inside a Planned Parenthood clinic, detailed first-hand the unspeakable atrocities and how she fainted in horror over handling baby legs.
4.  In the fourth video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Savita Ginde stated, “We don’t want to do just a flat-fee (per baby) of like, $200.  A per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it.”  She also laughed while looking at a plate of fetal kidneys that were “good to go.”
5.  In the fifth video: Melissa Farrell of Planned Parenthood-Gulf Coast in Houston boasted of Planned Parenthood’s skill in obtaining “intact fetal cadavers” and how her “research” department “contributes so much to the bottom line of our organization here, you know we’re one of the largest affiliates, our Research Department is the largest i the United States.”
6.  In the sixth video: Holly O’Donnell described technicians taking fetal parts without patient consent: “There were times when they would just take what they wanted.  And these mothers don’t know.  And there’s no way they would know.
7.  In the seventh and perhaps most disturbing video: Holly O’Donnell described the harvesting, or “procurement,” of organs from a nearly intact late-term fetus aborted at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Alameda clinic in San Jose, CA. “You want to see something kind of cool,'” O’Donnell says her supervisor asked her. “And she just taps the heart, and it starts beating.  And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think.”
8.  In the eighth video:  StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer admits Planned Parenthood sells “a lot of fully intact aborted babies.”
9.  In the ninth video: catches a Planned Parenthood medical director discussing how the abortion company sells fully intact aborted babies–including one who “just fell out” of the womb.
10.  The 10th video: catches the nation’s biggest abortion business selling specific body parts–including the heart, eyes and “gonads” of unborn babies.  The video also shows the shocking ways in which Planned Parenthood officials admit that they are breaking federal law by selling aborted baby parts for profit.
The total disregard for the value and sanctity of the lives of the unborn reaches a new low in these videos.  Certainly, such conduct is an abomination to the God of heaven.

“And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord; And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment” (Mark 12:29-30).  Jesus affirms a moral hierarchy of the heart.  In Mark 12:29-31, He gives an order:  first, then second.  First, love for God must be supreme.  Then, love for neighbor.  There is none other commandments greater than these.  This does not mean the other commandments of God are not important, but that these two rank high in our understanding and practice.
Our relationship with God must be defined by our love for Him.  Love for God must be supreme, complete, intense, and authentic.  Love for God encompasses our entire being.  When we love God supremely, then obeying all of God’s commands follows.  When we love God supremely, then we will love our neighbor as ourselves.  Love for neighbor worketh no ill toward our neighbor.  It involves seeking the highest good for our neighbor and acting to accomplish it.
Love for God (Mark 12:29-30); love for the kingdom of God (Matt. 6:33); and love for spiritual things (Col. 3:1-2) outrank other loves.  Consider some examples:
-When we put our own desire for recreation ahead of worshiping God, we have violated the moral hierarchy of the heart.  Love for God ranks above love for golf or any other form of recreation.
-If we love our family above love for God, we have violated the moral hierarchy of the heart.  “He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me” (Matthew 10:37).
-If we seek to preserve our lives from persecution and so deny the faith, we violate the moral hierarchy of the heart.  “And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me is not worthy of me” (Matthew 10:38).  Love for God is greater than love for life if and when I am called upon to give my life in service to my Lord.
-Love for your children is more important than love for your job.
-Love for truth is more important than love for popularity.  If someone tells you something in confidence and you tell it to others in order to seem important, you have placed the love of popularity (love of self) above love of friendship.  You have violated the moral hierarchy of the heart.
-When you demand your rights to the destruction of the souls of weaker brethren, you violate the moral hierarchy of the heart.  Romans 14:13-17.
Often when we violate the moral hierarchy of the heart, we are  putting self ahead of God and others.  Selfishness is the opposite of love (I Cor. 13:4-8).
A final thought comes from the writings of the apostle Paul.  Faith is important and essential, but it is not greater than love.  Hope is important and essential to Christian living, but it is not more important than love.  “And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity (love-DS)” I Corinthians 13:13.  Love is the more excellent way!  Love has its priorities and these priorities define the moral hierarchy of the heart.

Steve Turner in his book, Popcultured, makes reference to a psychological ploy used by advertisers to sway consumers. The ploy is called, psychological obsolescence. Turner states that advertisers had to make consumers embarrassed at using clothes or products that were not the “latest thing.” One American advertisng executive of the period said, “What makes this country great is the creation of wants and desires, the creation of dissatisfaction with the old and outmoded” (Popcultured, p. 166). The basic concept advertisers must convince consumers to accept is that newer is better, while older is obsolete. The old adage, “out with the old and in with the new,” applies here.
Could this ploy also be used to target religious beliefs and values? It certainly is. We must be careful that we do not attempt to destroy moral standards that God Himself has commanded. Just because a moral belief is old does not mean that it should be discarded. God-given traditions are still binding on men today. Paul writes, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (II Thess. 2:15). There is a difference between the traditions (apostolic doctrines) of God and the traditions of men. The traditions of men are vain. “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:1-9, esp. v. 9). Being stedfast in the apostle’s teaching is an essential aspect of faithfulness to God (Acts 2:42, “And they continued stefastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers”).
Conformity to God’s Will necessitates going back to His Word! The culture in which we live is driven by satisfaction of the lusts of the flesh. While some view moral laxity as progressive, in reality it is regressive. We are not moving our culture or community forward when we sink into the depths of wickedness and moral corruption. In reality, we are going back to the time before the flood or back to Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 6 and 19). Rather than jettison the old, we might attempt to learn from it.
Moral progress is Christlikeness! Jesus lived a pure and sinless life (Heb. 4:15, I Pet. 2:21-22). He calls us to follow Him. This means we must listen and obey His teaching and pursue the example He established. He calls us to holiness (I Thess. 4:7). True reformation of human nature occurs only when we answer that call and “cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (II Cor. 7:1).

Jeremiah was a prophet of God during the time of Judah’s apostasy.  He is known as the weeping prophet.  He was called in the 13th year of King Josiah (626 BC) and continued to prophesy until the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BC.  He prophesied under the last five kings of Judah:  Josiah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah.  Judah was engulfed in idolatry and moral degeneracy.
God gave Jeremiah a mission:  find a man that executeth judgment and seeketh the truth.  “Run ye to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, and see now, and know, and seek in the broad places thereof, if ye can find a man, if there be any that executeth judgment, and that seeketh the truth; and I will pardon it” (Jeremiah 5:1).  Jeremiah needs to find one good man.
The search begins among the common people, the poor, the regular folks (5:4).  They have God’s name on their lips, but they do not have His glory on their minds (5:2).  They swear falsely–they commit perjury with their lips.  They have suffered, but their suffering does not produce character.  They are ignorant (5:4) and do not respect the LORD (5:11-12).
Jeremiah turns to the leaders among the people (5:5).  “I will get me unto the great men…”  He looks among the politicians and the priests.  He remarks that they have known the way of the LORD and the judgment of their God.  But, they have broken off the yoke–they were willfully disobedient to God.  They have not sinned out of ignorance.  They have sinned out of defiance!
The quest continues among the children.  Jeremiah indictes them, “thy children have forsaken me” (5:7).  The children are following in the footsteps of the parents.  They swear by gods that are not gods.  They committed adultery and fornication.  This may refer to fornication which was commonly associated with idolatry.  Jeremiah compares them to an animal in heat, “Everyone neighed after his neighbor’s wife” (5:8).  They were sex-crazed!
Jeremiah looks among the prophets (5:13).  “And the prophets shall become wind, and the word is not in them…”  They should be preaching God’s Word, but the only thing coming from their mouths was “hot air.”  Jeremiah was the exception.  “I will make my words in thy mouth fire, and this people wood, and it shall devour them” (5:14).  The prophets among the people prophesied falsely and the people loved to have it so (5:31).
All Jeremiah needed to do was find one good man.  But, so far, he has found none.  God’s indictment against them reads, “But this people hath a revolting and rebellious heart; they are revolted and gone.  Neither say they in their heart, Let us now fear the LORD our God…” (5:24,25).  Jeremiah calls them to repentance, but his words fall on deaf ears and hardened hearts.  God will visit them, i.e. punish them for their sins (5:25-31).
Jeremiah was looking for one good man.  What type of man was he looking for?  One who seeks God and His truth.  One who discerns the times and keeps himself unspotted from the world.  One who fears God.  One who respects God in worship and whose lips speak authentically from a pure heart.  One who bodly declares God’s Word.  One who faithfully serves God with tears.  Now, where could we find such a man?