Re: Every Ethical System Subject to Relativist Problems

[Eric Engerbretson <votive@earthlink.net>]

Title: Re: Every Ethical System Subject to Relativist Problems

Dear Ted,

I've been reading much of your thought-provoking input on the list. Thanks for being there.

But, just for your future reference-- I want to clear something up for you.

In regards to:

>Consider the issue of the death penalty.  There is major disagreement within 
>the range of views expressed by Christians on this issue.  Some Christians 
>are nearly pacifists in applying the teachings of Christ and the Commandment 
>"Thou Shall Not Kill" to the death penalty!  They ABSOLUTELY regard it as 
>wrong.  Other Christians support the death penalty and will quote other 
>principles of ethics from the Christian tradition to support the death 
>penalty.  They ABSOLUTELY regard it as right.  WHAT IS YOUR STANDARD?  Prove 
>to me that you have the ultimate answer to the quandary Christians find 
>themselves in regarding the death penalty, and why YOUR STANDARD SHOULD BE 
>BINDING?  If you pick the wrong ethical action and it is against God's will 
>your standard will be false and is not therefore not binding, according to 
>your assumptions.

Usually, confusion between Christians taking different viewpoints on interpretation of a certain scripture verse simply boils down to weak, uneducateded interpretation. Just so you'll know in the future-- The command "thou shalt not kill" has been misunderstood for centuries. The translation into English in the King James version was simply wrong. The original Hebrew says "You shall not MURDER".  That is a completely different story.  The most surface reading of scripture will tell you this was God's intent, without knowing  any Hebrew at all. All through the Old Testament God commanded the Israelites to go out and fight and kill. He couldn't have commanded them to never kill and then in the next breath send them out to kill!  In Luke 3:14 it says "And soldiers also asked Him [Christ], saying, 'And we, what must we do?' And he said unto them, Extort from no man by violence, neither accuse any one wrongfully; and be content with your wages.". If killing was always wrong, Jesus would have told them to immediately resign from the army (or volunteer for permanent KP).  Ecclesiastes  3:3 says "there is a time to kill".  Most often, one of the battling Christians doesn't read or take into account the ENTIRE scripture-- just the verses that support the position that his emotions dictate.

Almost every single "quandary" or apparent contradiction in scripture can be traced to these sorts of errors.  It is exactly the same in the world of science-- some scientists have the correct interpretation of data, and some have the wrong one. Just because two sets of sincere scientists have absolute feelings about the data doesn't mean that there ISN'T a true interpretation and that no one can ever know it, so we should just give up looking for the truth and be careful never to imply that somebody could actually be right.  There never was such a thing as a Brontosaurus. Scientists mistakenly put the head of an Apatasaurus on a Brachiasaurus' body.  You can bet there were some that believed wholeheartedly in the Brontosaurus. But they were wrong.  No one in their right mind would try to say that both the Bronto-believers and the Bronto-disbelievers were both simultaneously right. Yet, that is what most Americans want to believe about the world's religions. However, it is God's command that those in the right treat all others with complete respect and love, and the Church throughout the ages has consistently disobeyed that command.

The absolute Truth is most often far more simple, reasonable, logical, rational and knowable than most people think-- they just have a hard time looking at anything without being too jaded by their preconceptions and emotions. I believe that if anyone can read the Bible with a truly, completely open mind and an objective heart that is willing to see the truth no matter how unpolitically correct  or hard to swallow it is, they will soon be amazed at how clear things become and how many misunderstandings are quickly reconciled.  The problem is there are so many wacky Christians running around saying and doing wacky things (and people who say and think they are Christians but aren't) that there are very few non-Christians who can examine the claims of Christ with an open heart free from biases and prejudices. The main problem that steals objectivity from seekers is that few Christians who know they are in the right act, speak and write with the selflessness, humility, and love that God commanded.

Ted, you can't even make your argument that absolutes are relative, without using all sorts of absolutes to do it!  So, there is such a thing as Truth-- the sad part of that is, that some people will be right and some will be wrong. I hate it that it has to be that way, but it does, just as really as in a math sum.  

The quickest way to get a person who believes in relative truth to face reality is to throw him in jail for something he didn't do.  All of a sudden he becomes a believer in absolute Truth. "I didn't do it!", he screams, "and that's the Truth!!".  Now if the judge was a proponent of the modern American religion of "everybody's-faith-is-true-for-them", to be consistent he would have to rule: "The bench's truth says you did it and your truth says you didn't-- and since both are 'true'--  you will serve 20 years for our truth and then be free for 20 years for your truth."    But no, the man has recently converted to absolute Truth and he demands justice.  There can be no justice unless something is True.  And if something is True, then some will know it and some won't.  And you can bet that those who don't know it, or think it can't be known, will greatly resent, and hate, those who say they do know it.  They will rant about the incredible presumption of those brain-washed idiots. But just because there are nasty consequences doesn't mean that Truth doesn't really exist and no one should presume to say they've found it.  Following the Truth is simply examining all the available evidence and then, excuse my brashness, making a "bet" based on one's intellect, instinct, emotion and interpretive skills. The unavoidable fact is, some will win their bet and some will lose.  A horrible fact, but true nonetheless.

Your saying that no one should presume to be "right" and impose that presumption on others, is simply you, Ted, presuming a higher "rightness" and imposing that presumption on others.  How presumptuous of you. It's nice you've found you're Truth, but please don't pretend that you're not claiming to be Right.  It makes you come off as some sort of brain-washed fundamentalist. 

Most sincerely,

Eric Engerbretson