ALL THINGS PERMITTED?

I recently read an article in First Things titled "When Everything is Permissible," by Wolfhart Pannenberg. It is a rather studious article that looks at the historical development of our current position that separates morality from a belief in God, which the author says is the condition of modern Western Civilization. A well known radio preacher has called this "the cult of the crowd."

America, despite what you may have heard or what is being taught these days, was founded upon a strong belief in Christianity, and Christian ethics formed the basis of our government for most of the first two hundred years following the Declaration of Independence. When Clarence Thomas was asked his position regarding "natural law" at his Senate Confirmation Hearing, he was being asked if he believed natural law was a law bestowed by God, as John Locke contended, and if this belief would enter into decisions he might be called upon to make as a Supreme Court Justice.

The fact that a person's belief in God could be considered a handicap in a judicial position illustrates just how far down the road to apostasy our nation has traveled. There was a time in our history when most states required a profession of faith in God and a belief in an ultimate judgment by that God from every elected official. Today, we do not even want our school teachers mentioning the fact that God may exist. Even many Christians actually subscribe to the philosophy of separation of church and state.

It seems that "consensus" has become the controlling factor for many things in modern society. We are told that our governing bodies are seeking consensus from the people so they will know what we want in the way of government. The Clinton Administration is most notable for relying on polls to make policy. Then there are the "visioning" sessions being conducted in many communities for the alleged purpose of arriving at a consensus for the future development of local areas.

Now it seems we are to determine morality by consensus. If everybody agrees it is okay to have pre-marital sex, then it must be okay. If the general consensus is that abortion is a legitimate birth control mechanism, then who am I to question that decision?

We are witnessing the ultimate fruit of situation ethics, a direct outgrowth of the secular humanist philosophy, which says in effect that nothing is either good or bad but is made good or bad by the situation.

This sounds great. It legitimizes all those things I want to do but have been forbidden because of some outmoded religious code. Any kind of behavior between "consenting individuals" becomes acceptable. You will notice I did not say "consenting adults."

In spite of what you might think, this is not a new concept. In the Bible, in the book of Judges, chapter 17, verse 6 we read, "In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes." The Bible goes on to show us that this behavior resulted in severe judgment upon the land. Not because God just zapped the nation, but because our behavior results in consequences.

The standards laid down for us in the Bible are not put there to deny us pleasure nor to stifle our potential. They are there to protect us from the consequences of bad judgment. A look at what is happening in our nation today should be sufficient to show that we have been making many poor choices in recent years. A consensus among righteous people might result in a reasonably fair choice, but consensus among a fallen race will always lead to destruction.