Enforcing Morality: Ethics for NonChristians and Matthew 19:8

[patrick]

I recently came upon passages that gave me pause: Is it right for us to enforce Jesus's word on people who do not believe in Him?

What gave me this idea at first was Mark 5:11-13. While the unsaved are certainly not demons, it seemed to me that Jesus has different standards for those who do not follow Him. Yet I get the impression that many Christians would feel that we should not tolerate homosexuality or transgenderism even for those who do not believe.

So when I came across Matthew 19:8 I had to wonder, was Moses's consession regarding divorce simply because Jesus had not yet come? Or does this have implications for how we should think about morality for nonbelievers?

[theophilus]

I recently came upon passages that gave me pause: Is it right for us to enforce Jesus's word on people who do not believe in Him?

Your title for this thread is "Enforcing Morality" and morality encompasses more than the words of Jesus. God has established universal standards of right and wrong that are binding on everyone and he has established government as an instrument for enforcing these standards.

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.

Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.
(Romans 13:1-4 ESV)

The words of Jesus cover not only morality but theology. He came to reveal God to us and this part of his teaching can't be enforced by law. Attempting to do so leads to hypocrisy as many people will profess to be Christians because doing so will help them materially.

What gave me this idea at first was Mark 5:11-13. While the unsaved are certainly not demons, it seemed to me that Jesus has different standards for those who do not follow Him. Yet I get the impression that many Christians would feel that we should not tolerate homosexuality or transgenderism even for those who do not believe.

So when I came across Matthew 19:8 I had to wonder, was Moses's consession regarding divorce simply because Jesus had not yet come? Or does this have implications for how we should think about morality for nonbelievers?

Unbelievers don't have the Holy Spirit empowering them as Christians do so they can't live up completely to God's standards. Governments must restrain evil and never endorse or approve of it but we must accept the fact that we can't force unbelievers to live up fully to the standards demanded by Jesus.

[PaulSacramento]

Two different issues I think.

What gave me this idea at first was Mark 5:11-13. While the unsaved are certainly not demons, it seemed to me that Jesus has different standards for those who do not follow Him. Yet I get the impression that many Christians would feel that we should not tolerate homosexuality or transgenderism even for those who do not believe.

Believers are held to a higher accountability because they DO KNOW the difference between right and wrong and do KNOW WHY there is a difference.
Does that mean believer will behave better and be better?
No, it means that they should and that they know they should ( even if they fail in doing so).
The reason believers are not suppose to tolerate the BEHAVIOUR of homosexuality ( actual homosexuals are tolerated and loved like any other) is because it is NOT in the best interest of the human species and is NOT according to God's will.
Transgenderism is different issue.

So when I came across Matthew 19:8 I had to wonder, was Moses's consession regarding divorce simply because Jesus had not yet come? Or does this have implications for how we should think about morality for nonbelievers?

Divorce between non-believers is between themselves BUT divorce between believers is between them and GOD.

[Philip]

Transgender issues may well have psychiatric origins. If one is born with the sexual assignment God created them to be, was HE wrong; did He somehow screw up? WHERE is there REAL problem? Does mutilating oneself in an attempt to physically line up with how you personally perceive your own gender identification really solve things? I could assert similar issues surrounding homosexuality, which Scripture tells us God hates. I don't believe God makes mistakes in how He creates us, nor does He waver in His expected behavior of us. Please don't see these as viewing any certain sins as being necessarily any greater (in God's eyes) than any others - sin is sin. Delusion is delusion - whether self-caused or a result of mental illness.

[PaulSacramento]

The reality is this:
IF homosexuality and transgenderism are something a person is born as/with then it is, in biological terms, a birth "defect".
Any behavior or physical condition that negatively impacts one ability to procreate into the next generation is not a good thing obviously ( biologically speaking) and any behavior that deviates from the normal for homo sapiens (such as homosexuality) is deviant behavior.

[melanie]

I think transgenderism could possibly be a birth 'defect'.
I'm not sure the argument that that would mean God got it wrong holds up because there are many horrendous birth defects that have terrible consequences, like genetic mutations.

[Philip]

Mel: I think transgenderism could possibly be a birth 'defect'.

Remember, one thinking that they were born in the wrong body isn't a PHYSICAL defect, but a mental one. Compared to the population as a whole, transgender issues impact a tiny percentage of a percent. No, I don't believe God can be blamed for a mental illness. I surely don't believe He wants a genetic-born man to think becoming a woman is his solution. But much of society thinks it's great that such a man can just grow his hair long, snip off his manhood, get surgery and some implants, buy some nice dresses - "oh, that's so brave." No, that's someone with some VERY serious mental issues!

Mel: I'm not sure the argument that that would mean God got it wrong holds up because there are many horrendous birth defects that have terrible consequences, like genetic mutations.

Again, I'd be very careful about what one asserts is a birth defect as opposed to a mental illness - or just the delusion born from sin. The impact of sin upon mankind is incalculable. But God clearly allows people to be born with certain physical defects. Does He CAUSE them? That's a good question, in light of Psalm 139 ("For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb"; "My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together"; etc.). Whatever one's earthly condition, it's but a blink of the eye against eternity. But that's not a very satisfying response, I know. But how a person THINKS is not necessarily attributable to God. Think how many people think all manner of sinful behaviors seem perfectly natural to them, and so they question how such things could ever be considered sinful - EVEN THOUGH, God's Word tells us they clearly ARE sinful.

[PaulSacramento]

I think transgenderism could possibly be a birth 'defect'.
I'm not sure the argument that that would mean God got it wrong holds up because there are many horrendous birth defects that have terrible consequences, like genetic mutations.

Human births and reproduction are not DIRECTLY effected by God ( unless it is a special circumstance) BUT they are sustained by God.
A child being born sterile is a birth defect BUT not one willed by God.
We don't like the sound of words like "defect" or "deviant" because they sound negative and it seems we are being harsh to a person or people about something that is not their fault.
Yet, we can't deny the meaning of words simply because we don't like them or the possible negative connotations that may go with them.

A normal human is one that is born with the ability and desire to do all that is natural for the human species.
That means to procreate, which is a driving force in nature.

Biologically speaking, any trait that is counter-productive to that nature driven "desire" is, technically speaking if a person is born that way, a birth defect.

[PaulSacramento]

A mental illness CAN be a birth defect.

[Philip]

A mental illness CAN be a birth defect.

True. But, if someone has an aberrant or sinful behavior due to a birth defect, that doesn't mean it's okay - something to be enabled and celebrated. The problem is when such things are considered normal.

[B. W.]

A mental illness CAN be a birth defect.

True. But, if someone has an aberrant or sinful behavior due to a birth defect, that doesn't mean it's okay - something to be enabled and celebrated. The problem is when such things are considered normal.

Yes, agree... especially seeing who is pictured in this link...

Celebrating Mental Illness as Normal


How does the Northland treat mental illness? well look at beloved leader and find out how...
-
-
-

[Mallz]

He looks like a cross between Londo Mollari and buhda...

[PaulSacramento]

A mental illness CAN be a birth defect.

True. But, if someone has an aberrant or sinful behavior due to a birth defect, that doesn't mean it's okay - something to be enabled and celebrated. The problem is when such things are considered normal.

Oh yes, I agree and I will go you one higher:

Scientifically speaking, behaviour that is not in the best interest of the individual or the group, should not only be condemned BUT also treated.
We can look at homosexuality and transgenderism in one of two ways ( scientifcally and biologically speaking):
We can accept that it is "natures way" of stating that these people that are born this way do NOT propagate their genes into the next generation ( survival of the fittest) or we can treat these defects so that they can propagate BUT without these defects.
In short we can ignore the problems or treat them BUT, from a biological POV, what we shouldn't do is say "they are fine the way they are" because they quite simply are not.

People love to say "well, what is normal" or "who defines normal?" well, science does and what is normal for the human species is procreation VIA the only method that can be done: heterosexual activity.

Anything that is counter-productive or contrary to that norm is NOT desirable nor in the bets interest of the group or the individual.

[PaulSacramento]

He looks like a cross between Londo Mollari and buhda...

Kudos for the Babylon 5 reference !

[Philip]

Paul: People love to say "well, what is normal" or "who defines normal?"

It's clearly, from a Christian/Scriptural point of view, completely irrelevant what "people love to say."

Paul: well, science does and what is normal for the human species is procreation VIA the only method that can be done: heterosexual activity.

Anything that is counter-productive or contrary to that norm is NOT desirable nor in the bets interest of the group or the individual.

Those are true as well. But main issue is what does GOD have to say about what human beings declare to be "normal." The rest is mere opinion! And you can look at just about everything God has declared not good for us or that He considers sinful and see that it is born out in some of the ways Paul (above) mentions. But my main emphasis is that sinful things, behaviors, lifestyles often seem perfectly normal to us - particularly once they are widely accepted across society. Of COURSE, sinful things FEEL normal to us, as such is the default behavior and thinking of human beings. Every day I see all manner of things that I find exceptionally tempting to pursue.