Morality Sans Religion

Gary Pollard

Carl sourced several of the most commonly asked questions and gave me 70 of them to write about. So I’ll try to tackle a question or three every week for a while (or until something more interesting grabs my attention). This week’s question is, “Is it possible to make moral decisions without religion?” It’s somewhat related to an article I wrote a few weeks ago, but seemed different enough to warrant its own article. 

There’s a simple answer, but with some nuance. Is it possible for a person who isn’t religious to make moral decisions? Absolutely. But is it possible for good morality to exist without God? Absolutely not. More on that in a minute. 

“Religion” is a very broad word. It involves anything a person or group of people worship — this could be an inanimate object, a set of ideas, a charismatic individual, a supernatural entity, certain forces of nature, or even cosmic features. It’s anything a person deems “higher” than self and worth giving some kind of respect and adoration to. 

Not all religions are created equal. Some call for harming others who aren’t in that same belief system. Some are in place solely to justify self-indulgent behavior. Some use religion to gain power over others and/or wealth. Some exist only to maintain cultural cohesion and national identity (a “state” religion). A person’s religion ultimately comes from one of two sources: God, or the powers that influence this world. 

Judeo-Christian teachings have benefited society in innumerable ways. They lifted much of the world out of poverty. They promoted peace among all people. Selfless love, sacrifice for the good of someone else, love for enemies, care for the vulnerable, and judicial integrity are just some of the ways Christianity has improved the inhabited world. Many will respond with, “But what about the Crusades? What about the many atrocities committed in the name of Christianity?” Those weren’t Christians. They may have claimed to be, but they absolutely were not. Claiming to be something and actually representing its teachings are two different things. 

How often have we heard a political figure or commentator say something like, “I’m conservative, but…” right before promoting something not remotely conservative? They’re not actually conservative. More appropriately, how often have we heard someone say, “I love Jesus, but I’ll (insert hateful words/actions here)”? They claim Jesus, but they aren’t Christians. Anyone can tell who a legit Christian is by how well they practice selfless love and genuine belief in God (cf. I Jn 4). 

The moralities of pagan cultures never held up to time well. The nihilistic hedonism they invariably devolved into destroyed them from the inside out. When everyone is primarily concerned with their own “happiness” and feeding their desires, someone has to pay. When a person’s happiness is the greatest societal good, it has to come at someone else’s expense. There were certainly attempts to keep this in check, especially by unifying around a pantheon or series of social norms (or both). But they, too, usually devolved into hedonism. 

Jesus’s teachings were unique in that they posited two necessities, both built on selfless love: for God, for every human. Justice was to be handled by government, even if that government was corrupt. Christians understood that nothing was more important than showing love to others, even if it cost them health, safety, or their lives. They understood that other people always come first. They understood that genuine, meaningful happiness wouldn’t be attainable in this life. Inner peace was certainly attainable with God’s help, but satiating self was never the way to do that.  

The bottom line is this: a person whose worldview is even loosely based on the ethics God gave humanity can make moral decisions without being religious. But this is only really possible in a society with a noticeable percentage of people who believe in God and try to act like it. Rarely do we see that kind of morality in a religious vacuum. Most people instinctively know that killing someone for fun is bad, but not all. But that’s literally the bare minimum of what makes a decent person (we’ll even include other big ones here like rape, kidnapping, etc.). What about making sure you don’t get rich by taking advantage of other people in some way? What about not influencing or enabling others to make decisions that would harm them in the future? What about being absolutely faithful to your spouse (unassailably the most functional domestic condition)? What about always telling the truth, even if it harms you? What about forgiving people who hurt you, and definitely not retaliating? These are not natural character traits, these are the behaviors of people who believe in God and try to love others selflessly. 

So yes, it is possible for a person to be moral without being religious…but not outside of a framework built on God’s morality. Genuine Christian morality promotes a culture where the least amount of people are harmed, allowing for the most amount of people tolive fulfilling, meaningful lives. 

I Want To Be “P.C.”

Neal Pollard

   The P.C. train gets longer and more unsightly all the time. Self-appointed elitists shelter their pet groups and blast and decry any who offend the sensitivities of these select groups in any way.Under the Political Correctness shelter are certain groups defending sexual immorality in various forms, anti-Christian groups, and the generally philosophic liberals.

   Certain words mobilize their police force, terribly offensive words like God, Bible, work, men, patriotism, fossil fuels, and sin. Despite all the foregoing, I have decided that I want to be “P.C.” In fact, I think God wants us all to be. Let me explain.

   I want a “pure conscience.” The New Testament word “good” (1 Tim. 1:5; 1 Pet. 3:21; etc.) modifying “conscience” means upright and excellent. It is possible to have an unbothered or permissive conscience, but we can get this from blindness to our own faults, improper teaching, or by being guided by feelings over truth. I want a conscience, trained, softened, and guided, by a diligent attempt to know God’s Word and please God’s heart.

   I want to be a “passionate Christian.” We can get passionate about our ideas, pet projects, feelings, opinions, and worldly interests, but that’s not what I mean. I want to be in love with the Lord. I want to care deeply about those things about which He cares deeply– lost souls, truth, the church and each member thereof, etc.

   I want to be a “peace creator.” It’s easy to do this through compromise and unscriptural change. That’s not true peace (cf. Jer. 6:14). Yet, I do not want to be the center of strife, division, and conflict among God’s people however I can help that (1 Cor. 1:10). I want people to be truly at peace with their Lord (Eph. 2:17). I want harmony to follow in the wake of my path.

   I want to be a “pride crusher.” I do not want to be a crusader that stamps out others’ pride. That’s their cross to bear. I want to look at myself in THE mirror (Jas. 1:23) and see myself as God sees me. Wherever I find pride in my heart and life, I want to eradicate it (cf. 1 Pet. 5:5ff). I want true conviction that “pride goes before destruction” (Prov. 16:18) and that “selfish ambition” invites “disorder and every evil thing” (Jas. 3:16). I want to remember that “every way of a man is right in his own eyes” (Prov. 21:2; cf. 12:5), but that does not clear me with God’s perfectly discerning eye!

   Let me be “P.C.” in these ways, at least for starters. I am not out to please the world or to sacrifice my relationship with God to make either sinners or the self-absorbed happy. In these and other ways, I can truly be a “Paradise chaser.” I want that! Don’t you?

   

Zealotry in the Bible: A Biblical Perspective On Passion And Devotion

Saturday’s Column: Brent’s Bent

Look up “zealotry” on Google. What do you see? Google mainly presents definitions from different dictionaries, including Merriam-Webster and Oxford. In a nutshell, these trusted sources say that zealotry is the same thing as fanaticism. It’s concerning. It was fanaticism that resulted in the Holocaust. It does not always follow that zealotry does so. Even though zealotry may be passionate, moral principles still drive it.

To an outsider, zealotry may appear to drive one to extremes. As an example, consider Phineas. When the daughters of Moab enticed the sons of Israel to “play the harlot” with their god, Baal Peor (Numbers 25.1ff), God sent a plague that killed 24,000 Israelites. Phineas taking a spear and driving it through Zimri the Simeonite and Cozbi the Midianite in flagrante delicto is the only thing that calms God’s rage.

What about our example, Jesus? According to John 2.13–17, Jesus made a scourge of cords, flipped tables, and drove the money changers out of the Temple on His first Passover of His public ministry. The followers of Jesus recalled Psalm 69.9, which begins, “For zeal for Your house has consumed me” (NASB1995). Would we accuse our Lord of fanaticism?

Zeal is an intense devotion to a cause or belief, but it doesn’t always mean acting excessively or fanatically. On the other hand, fanaticism is an extreme or irrational devotion to a cause or belief, often to the point of being unable to tolerate different points of view or being willing to do harmful or violent things to promote their ideas.

Zealots can often keep a balanced and nuanced view of their cause or belief, recognizing that there are other valid points of view and that their beliefs are not the only truth. On the other hand, fanatics tend to think that you cannot question their beliefs, and they may not want to or be able to see different points of view.

Zealots may go to extreme lengths to further their cause or belief, but they do so with a sense of moral and ethical responsibility. On the other hand, fanatics may be willing to act unethically or immorally or use violence or fear to get their point across. 

But it’s also important to know that zealotry, like any strong belief, can be harmful when used without knowledge. When someone is passionate about their ignorance, bad things can happen. Think about Saul of Tarsus. Before he became the apostle Paul, he was a zealous church persecutor (Philippians 3.6). So you need a balance of passion and moderation to make positive changes and show agape love.

We must be zealous for the gospel. Peter stated that we must obey God rather than man (Acts 5.29). Do we have the guts to take decisive action when the situation demands it? Our zeal does not cause us to behave as Phineas since we live under the New Covenant. God is reserving His wrath for the sinner (Romans 2.5). God also gave the civil government the sword to punish the evildoer (Romans 13.4). Our mission is to rescue people from the fire (Jude 1.23).

Jesus rebuked the church in Laodicea for not being “hot” or “cold” in their faith. Because they were not fully committed to Him, Jesus said He would reject them. Jesus tells these lukewarm brothers and sisters, “Therefore, be zealous and repent” (Revelation 3.19 NASB1995). If you need to rekindle your zeal, listen to our Lord’s advice and repent your apathy and indifference.

If, on the other hand, you are afraid of being labeled a zealot, remember that you are in good company since Jesus’ contemporaries recognized His zeal. You don’t have to worry about your zeal becoming misplaced fanaticism as long as your diligence allows you to use God’s word competently (2 Timothy 2.15). If you are steadfast in your fellowship with other brethren, they will stir you up to love and good works (Hebrews 10.24–25). And for lingering concerns, God tasks us with casting all our cares upon Him (1 Peter 5.7).

Brent Pollard

Why Is A Generation Leaving Religion?

Neal Pollard

Pew Research Center recently revealed that “Four in ten millennials (those, according to this source, currently between 23 and 38) now say they are religiously unaffiliated”(fivethirtyeight.com). The data seems to indicate that “today’s younger generations may be leaving religion for good” (ibid.). A contemporary study put out by the American Enterprise Institute reveals at least three reasons why: (1) They didn’t have strong religious ties growing up, (2) Their spouses are more likely to be nonreligious, and (3) They feel religious institutions are not relevant for shaping the morality and religion (or nonreligion) of their children. Parental example, dating choices, and biblical literacy and faith, then, are major drivers in this discussion. 

Those polled revealed their thinking. A majority felt that religious people are less tolerant of others, less informed or even intelligent than their secular counterparts, and less necessary for shaping their family’s moral viewpoints. At least, reading this one study and the authors’ interpretation, it seems that leaving church is a deliberate lifestyle choice of people who at least sometimes are encouraged out the door by poor examples of faith. 

Notice the startling closing paragraph of the article, which states,

Of course, millennials’ religious trajectory isn’t set in stone — they may yet become more religious as they age. But it’s easier to return to something familiar later in life than to try something completely new. And if millennials don’t return to religion and instead begin raising a new generation with no religious background, the gulf between religious and secular America may grow even deeper (“Millennials Are Leaving Religion And Not Coming Back,” 12/12/19, Cox, Daniel, and Amelia Thompson-DeVeaux). 

I found it important to share those findings for these reasons:

  • It is a matter of crisis. People abandoning God’s Word and will is foreboding (Judges 2:10ff; 2 Timothy 3:1ff; 4:3-4; 2 Peter 3:3ff). It is happening, and it must matter to us. It does to God. 
  • It is a matter of correction. The home can change course if it is on the broad way. Individual Christians can improve their ethics and morality in public (Ephesians 4:25ff). Soul-conscious Christians can make the most of our opportunities to share Jesus in Christlike fashion (2 Timothy 2:24-26). We must change what we can change. 
  • It is a matter of consequence. A culture does not get where ours currently is as the result of sincere devotion to Christ and His Word. Hosea 4:6 is incredibly relevant. The law of sowing and reaping is immutable, for good and bad (Galatians 6:7-8). Whatever we exalt as guide is leading us somewhere.
  • It is a matter of courage. The only way I can see for this to change is for you and me to not just believe something or hold a conviction. The early Christians didn’t confine their faith to the holy huddles of the assemblies. They stood up for Jesus every day and every way. 

Two of my three sons are millennials and the third is only a couple of years too young to qualify. This is, largely, their generation. They and their faithful Christian peers are faced with reaching them, and they need our help. Talk to them and have honest conversation about how to raise your effectiveness together in stopping and reversing this exodus. This is not about preserving a comfortable lifestyle, which is threatened by sin (Proverbs 14:34). This is about preserving souls, which will face Jesus some day (Matthew 25:31ff). 

Walking Away