Situational Ethics Versus God's Commands

The concept of situational ethics, which suggests that moral decisions should be based on the specific circumstances of a situation rather than on fixed moral rules, stands in contrast to the biblical emphasis on adhering to God's commands. The Bible presents a clear and unchanging moral framework, with God's commands serving as the foundation for ethical decision-making ^[1].

In the biblical view, rebellion against God's commands is considered a serious offense. The Israelites' disobedience to God's laws is described as rebellion, with severe consequences ^[3]. The importance of adhering to God's commands is reiterated throughout the biblical text, with warnings against forsaking or despising them ^[5].

The biblical emphasis on obedience to God's commands is not limited to specific circumstances but is presented as a general principle. For example, the command to honor one's parents is cited as a fundamental aspect of God's law, with the implication that this command is not subject to situational exceptions ^[12].

In contrast, situational ethics often prioritizes context and circumstance over fixed moral rules. However, according to Reformed theologian Charles Hodge, the moral law as revealed in Scripture is considered perfect and complete, providing a comprehensive guide for moral decision-making ^[9]. This perspective argues that God's commands are not arbitrary or subject to change based on circumstances, but rather reflect a consistent and righteous character.

The early church fathers also grappled with the relationship between circumstance and moral obligation. Augustine, for example, discussed the apparent inconsistencies in biblical teachings on certain issues, such as the instruction to disciples to take a scrip and purse versus the earlier instruction to go without ^[7]. Augustine's discussion highlights the complexity of applying biblical teachings to different situations, but ultimately affirms the importance of adhering to God's commands.

The Reformed tradition, as represented by Charles Hodge, emphasizes that God's commands are not limited to specific situations but provide a general framework for moral decision-making. According to Hodge, an act is considered right or wrong based on its conformity to God's commands, rather than on its consequences or circumstances ^[10].

In the view of the Baptist/Reformed commentator John Gill, the Pharisees' tradition was seen as a corruption of God's commands, highlighting the danger of substituting human traditions for divine law ^[8]. This perspective underscores the importance of adhering to God's commands as a foundation for moral decision-making.

Ultimately, the biblical emphasis on obedience to God's commands provides a framework for evaluating moral decisions. While circumstances may vary, the moral principles underlying God's commands remain constant, providing a guide for navigating complex ethical situations ^[6].

The patristic writers and Reformed theologians represented in the sources emphasize the importance of adhering to God's commands, even in the face of challenging circumstances. As Augustine notes, the teachings of philosophers, while potentially insightful, lack the authority of divine instruction ^[11]. In contrast, God's commands are seen as a reliable guide for moral decision-making, providing a foundation for living a righteous and obedient life.

The biblical text itself provides numerous examples of the consequences of disobedience to God's commands, serving as a warning against situational ethics that might compromise or disregard these commands ^[2]. The importance of maintaining a commitment to God's commands is underscored by the biblical emphasis on the need for decision and commitment in serving God ^[4].

Sources

Exodus “Exodus 18:16 (LEB) — When ⌞they have an issue⌟, it comes to me, and I judge between a man and his neighbor, and I make known God’s rule and his instructions.””
Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Rebellion Against God — Forbidden -- Nu 14:9; Jos 22:19. Provokes God -- Nu 16:30; Ne 9:26. Provokes Christ -- Ex 23:20,21; 1Co 10:9. Vexes the Holy Spirit -- Isa 63:10. Exhibited in Unbelief. -- De 9:23; Ps 106:24,25. Rejecting his government. -- 1Sa 8:7; 15:23. Revolting from him. -- Isa 1:5; 31:6. Despising his law. -- Ne 9:26. Despising his counsels. -- Ps 107:11. Distrusting his power. -- Eze 17:15. Murmuring against him. -- Nu 20:3,10. Refusing to hearken to him. -- De 9:23; Eze 20:8; Zec 7:11. Departing from him. -- Isa 59:13. Rebellion against governors appoi”
Ezekiel “She has rebelled against my ordinances in doing wickedness more than the nations, and against my statutes more than the countries that are around her; for they have rejected my ordinances, and as for my statutes, they have not walked in them. -- Ezekiel 5:6”
Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Decision — Necessary to the service of God -- Lu 9:62. Exhortations to -- Jos 24:14,15. Exhibited in Seeking God with the heart. -- 2Ch 15:12. Keeping the commandments of God. -- Ne 10:29. Being on the Lord's side. -- Ex 32:26. Following God fully. -- Nu 14:24; 32:12; Jos 14:8. Serving God. -- Isa 56:6. Loving God perfectly. -- De 6:5. Blessedness of. -- Jos 1:7. Opposed to A divided service. -- Mt 6:24. Double-mindedness. -- Jas 1:8. Halting between two opinions. -- 1Ki 18:21. Turning to the right or left. -- De 5:32. Not setting the heart aright. -- Ps 78:8,37. Exe”
2 Chronicles “But if you turn away, and forsake my statutes and my commandments which I have set before you, and shall go and serve other gods, and worship them; -- 2 Chronicles 7:19”
Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Justice — Commanded -- De 16:20; Isa 56:1. Christ, an example of -- Ps 98:9; Isa 11:4; Jer 23:5. Specially required in rulers -- 2Sa 23:3; Eze 45:9. To be done In executing judgment. -- De 16:18; Jer 21:12. In buying and selling. -- Le 19:36; De 25:15. To the poor. -- Pr 29:14; 31:9. To the fatherless and widows. -- Isa 1:17. To servants. -- Col 4:1. Gifts impede -- Ex 23:8. God Requires. -- Mic 6:8. Sets the highest value on. -- Pr 2:13. Delights in. -- Pr 11:1. Gives wisdom to execute. -- 1Ki 3:11,12; Pr 2:6,9. Displeased with the want of. -- Ec 5:8. Brings its own”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 4: Augustine — Anti-Manichaean, Anti-Donatist — BOOK XXII. (part 70): sent you without scrip, or purse, or shoes, and ye lacked nothing;" at another, "Now let him that hath a scrip take it, and also a purse; and he that hath a tunic, let him sell it and buy a sword." Does not this show how, without any inconsistency, precepts and counsels and permissions may be changed, as different times require different arrangements? If it is said that there was a symbolical meaning in the command to take a scrip and purse, and to buy a sword, why may there not be a symbolical meaning in the fact,”
Mark (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Mark 7:8: For laying aside the commandment of God,.... Meaning not any particular commandment, but all the commandments of God, the whole written law; to which they preferred the oral law, or the traditions of the elders, and the decisions of their doctors. So the Syriac, Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic versions read, "the commandments of God". Ye hold the tradition of men: very significantly are the elders, whom the, Jews revered, and whose traditions and constitutions they extolled above the Scriptures, called "men", in distinction from "God", whose commands they neglected; which”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 39: whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices.” Perfection of the Law. The perfection of the moral law as revealed in the Scriptures, includes the points already considered, — (1.) That everything that the Bible pronounces to be wrong, is wrong; that everything which it declares to be right, is right. (2.) That nothing is sinful which the Bible does not condemn; and nothing is obligatory on the conscience which it does not enjoin. (3.) That the Scriptures are a complete rule of duty, not only in the sense just stated, but also in the sense that th”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 49: 410 but not commanded.” He adds that it provokes a smile ( man muss es naiv nennen ) that Gerhard finds an analogy between the case in question and the permission given to the Israelites to despoil the Egyptians. 363 363 Evangelische Kirchen-Zeitung, June 1840, pp. 369-416; see p. 378. It is probable that the venerable Gerhard would smile at the writer’s criticisms. In the first place, God can no more allow evil than He can command it. An act otherwise evil, ceases to be so when He either allows ( i.e ., sanctions) it, or commands it. If ”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 2: Augustine — City of God, Christian Doctrine — CHAP. 7.--THAT THE SUGGESTIONS OF PHILOSOPHERS ARE PRECLUDED FROM HAVING ANY MORAL EFFECT, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT THE AUTHORITY WHICH BELONGS TO DIVINE INSTRUCTION, AND BECAUSE MAN'S NATURAL BIAS TO EV (part 1): But will they perhaps remind us of the schools of the philosophers, and their disputations? In the first place, these belong not to Rome, but to Greece; and even if we yield to them that they are now Roman, because Greece itself has become a Roman province, still the teachings of the philosophers are not the commandments of the ”
Matthew (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Matthew 15:4: For God commanded, saying,.... That he might not be thought to suggest this without any foundation, he gives them an instance, wherein a command of God was transgressed, by the observance of their tradition: the command he refers to, stands in Exo 20:12 and is this; Honour thy father and mother. This was a plain command of God, written with his own hand, and delivered by Moses to them; it was of a moral nature, and of eternal obligation: and to be understood, not merely of that high esteem parents are to be had in by their children, and of the respectful language a”

Ask Your Own Question