Ch:2 Ethics Knowts
2.1 The Root Cause of Unkind Speech
The fallenness of humanity creates a natural pull away from what is right, even when one knows the right thing to do.
Real-world illustration: a child’s fascination with magnets shows how strong pulls can override awareness of risk.
Neodymium Iron Boron (NIB) magnets are described as extremely strong due to energy density; if attracted, they can move with great speed and power, illustrating how strong pulls can override judgment.
This magnet analogy is used to depict how human desires can pull us toward wrong choices despite knowing the right course.
The Fall and the internal pull to sin:
Apart from God’s grace, our fleshly desires exert a force that can feel inescapable and overpower our moral resolutions.
This pull can manifest in media consumption, online images, or responses expressed toward others (classmates, siblings, or parents).
We often recognize the negative consequences of wrong choices and still find our desires tugging us in the opposite direction.
The crucial question: Are we excused because something within us pulls us toward sin?
The answer cannot be found apart from a biblical framework of Creation, Fall, Redemption.
A sound understanding of ethical decision-making begins with doctrines of man, sin, and salvation—grounded in the biblical storyline.
The Fall’s effect on ethical decision-making:
The Fall distorts creational norms and moral norms rooted in God’s character.
Many people adopt fallible ethical systems that fail under the Fall’s effects, making ethical living difficult.
Key terms to recall:
Creational norms: moral norms rooted in God’s character; norms God established in creation.
Creation order: the way God designed the world to function; the baseline for ethical living.
Fall: the entrance of sin into creation, corrupting both humans and the created order.
Foundational takeaway:
A biblical worldview distinguishes creational norms from the warped reality produced by the Fall.
Without this distinction, secular frameworks can misread the world’s condition as the norm.
2.1 The Fall's Effects on the Created Order
Scriptural anchors for the Fall’s impact on creation:
Genesis 3:16-19 and Romans 8:18-23 highlight how the Fall disrupts the created order and leads to a world full of ethical difficulties.
The Fall explains why fields like bioethics and medical ethics exist: creation has been marred, creating ongoing ethical questions.
Genesis 1:31 and the idea that God created the world very good:
God’s original design was free from taint; natural laws and creational norms operated perfectly under God’s design.
These norms provide the standard for how things ought to be and point to the basis for an ethic grounded in God’s character.
The Fall distorts, but does not erase, creational norms:
Sin disfigures human ability to function according to creational norms, God’s law, God’s wisdom, and God’s righteous character.
Humans still image God, but in a marred way.
Creation Mandate and its frustration:
Genesis 1:28: Humans are to fill and subdue the earth (Creation Mandate).
Genesis 3:16-19: The Fall introduces pain in childbirth, relationship difficulties, and laborious work, as a just judgment for living apart from God.
This demonstrates that the world as it operates now cannot be the perfect guide for ethics; it is broken.
Biblical contrast: creational norms vs. fallen reality
A biblical worldview distinguishes between creational norms and the warped reality resulting from the Fall.
The secular worldview often interprets warped reality as the norm (naturalistic fallacy).
The naturalistic fallacy and its dangers:
Some argue that what is found in nature is morally good; this is a fallacy when used to ground morality apart from divine revelation.
In a secular evolutionary framework, there is no transcendent authority; morality is reduced to human consensus or natural descriptions.
How Christians should reason ethically:
Christians may appeal to natural law as a subset of creational norms but must interpret it in light of Scripture.
Scripture provides the clear interpretation of creational norms and remaining moral duties.
Unbelievers may grasp some moral grounding through common grace (e.g., conscience, design of creation), but full moral grounding must come from God’s Word.
Romans 8:18-23 and the Fall’s ongoing effect:
Creation groans under the Curse; believers long for redemption and restoration.
As stewards of creation, it is good to work against the Fall’s effects, but final restoration comes only through Christ.
Practical implications:
The Fall’s effects justify ongoing ethical inquiry and the need for a robust biblical framework to evaluate competing ethical claims.
Important cross-reference ideas:
The Creation Mandate (Gen 1:28), The Curse (Gen 3:16-19), The Fall’s effects on mind, will, emotions, and the created order, Romans 8:18-23.
The Fall's Effects on Human Nature
The Fall affects every part of human nature: mind, will, and emotions are all impacted.
The Fall’s scope on human person:
Every part of the human has been affected; the Fall’s effects are pervasive, like the air we breathe.
Even the best works and intentions fall short of God’s standard because of original sin and its pervasiveness (Rom. 3:10-18; Isa. 64:6).
Sinful state and guilt:
Humans are defiled from the inside out due to the Fall (Rom. 5:12; Rom. 3:10-18).
Imputed guilt and transmitted corruption come from being in Adam (Rom. 5:12).
The Fall’s effects on the mind:
Apart from the gospel, regeneration, illumination, and spiritual union with Christ, minds are blinded (2 Cor. 4:4; 1 Cor. 2:14; Eph. 1:17).
Unbelievers suppress the truth (Rom. 1:18-25; John 8:45) and live in ignorance and darkness when trying to justify sin (Eph. 4:17-19; Titus 1:15).
The Fall’s effects on the will:
Everything chosen comes from the heart (Prov. 4:23; Matt. 15:17-20); apart from God’s saving grace, people are dead in sin (Eph. 2:1-3).
People are slaves to sin (John 8:34; Rom. 3:10-18; 6:16; 8:5-8); even addictions illustrate the will’s bondage.
The Fall’s effects on the emotions:
Emotions are corrupted: delight in sin (Prov. 2:14; Rom. 1:32); unrighteous anger (Prov. 14:29; James 1:19); loves for fleshly things (Col. 3:5-10; 1 John 2:15-17).
Even examples like David show strong desires that led to sin (1 Sam. 13; 2 Sam. 11).
The unity of mind, will, and emotions:
Affections drive the mind and will; the heart’s control center shapes choices.
Before salvation, the heart is idolatrous (Jer. 17:9; Rom. 1:25).
Common Grace: the Spirit’s restraint on the Fall’s effects:
Not all people are as bad as they could be due to God’s restraint through conscience, fear of consequences, the created order’s design, Christian influence, and the Holy Spirit’s restraint (Ezra 5:3-5; Dan. 3:28-29; Matt. 7:9-11).
Common grace allows unbelievers to glean some moral grounding by observing God’s design (Prov. 8:4); however, this grounding is incomplete without special revelation.
The Fall’s effects and moral decision-making:
Everyday life involves constant ethical choices; the Fall renders many issues complex and fraught with competing pressures.
Saved believers are not yet perfected; they remain finite and do not possess absolute certainty in every fact.
Implications for culture and subcultures:
Fall effects on individuals affect families, churches, and broader cultures as groups interact.
Why this matters for ethics:
Because the Fall touches mind, will, emotions, and the created order, ethical decision-making is inherently difficult and requires divine guidance.
Structure and Direction: A Paradigm for the Fall’s Effects
Structure vs. direction:
Structure: creational norms—the God-designed, good functioning of the world.
Direction: use, toward or away from creational norms (how created things are used).
Diagrammatic understanding (described in the text):
Bad direction: bending toward fallen human nature away from creational norms.
Creational norm (structure): perfect, pure, holy. Structure represents God’s created order.
Good direction: bending back toward the intended order (toward redemption and proper use).
The Fall’s effects on human nature and decision-making:
All aspects of human nature are affected, making ethical decision-making challenging.
Even believers, though redeemed, remain finite and imperfect in understanding.
Romans 8:18-23 and the created order:
The created order groans under the Curse ( Rom. 8:20-22 ) as it waits for redemption.
The Creation Mandate remains a legitimate framework for stewardship; working to alleviate the Fall’s effects is good and appropriate, but ultimate restoration awaits Christ’s return.
Practical takeaway:
Distinguish creational norms from the Fall’s effects when evaluating ethical questions.
Use Scripture to interpret natural law; recognize how common grace may provide initial grounds for ethics while Scripture provides final standards.
2.2 Faulty Approaches to Ethics
Four major secular approaches outlined in the chapter:
Deontological ethics (Kant): duty-based, universal rules, absolute norms; focus on the motive and the principle, not the outcomes.
Consequentialist ethics (Bentham, Mill, and variants): end-based; the rightness of an action is determined by its outcomes (greatest good for the greatest number or similar goals).
Virtue ethics (Aristotle, MacIntyre, Hauerwas): focus on character and virtues; right action flows from a virtuous person rather than from rules or outcomes.
Existentialist ethics (Sartre): focus on individual existence and freedom; ethics are defined by authentic choices of the individual; no objective universal moral order.
A few concrete prompts/examples used to illustrate faulty thinking:
A soldier sacrifices for a higher duty vs. surrendering to a flawed absolute duty; a politician accepts bribes if it saves lives; an athlete who refuses aid to the race despite the cost; a person who says “I’m just being true to myself.”
These vignettes show how people justify actions under different ethical lenses, even when outcomes or means are questionable.
How each approach tends to view moral decision-making:
Deontological: rules govern action; the ends do not justify the means; universalizable maxims matter; the good will is central.
Consequentialist: outcomes determine the rightness of actions; sometimes favors flexibility and pragmatism; some forms include utilitarianism, situation ethics, and ethical egoism.
Virtue ethics: emphasis on the agent’s character; right actions flow from virtuous dispositions; community norms or individual virtue shape behavior.
Existentialist: personal authenticity and freedom; individuals create their own meanings and essences through choices; responsibility rests on the individual.
Quick map of major proponents:
Deontology: Immanuel Kant
Consequentialism: Jeremy Bentham; John Stuart Mill
Virtue Ethics: Aristotle; Alasdair MacIntyre; Stanley Hauerwas
Existentialism: Jean-Paul Sartre
Summary of how these systems relate to Christian ethical reasoning:
The book critiques reliance on reason or natural observation alone for absolutes; without Scripture, moral systems lack a sure standard and may fail when tested by the Fall’s complexities.
Christians may appeal to natural law as a subset of creational norms but must interpret it through special revelation (Scripture).
The goal is not to abandon reason or virtue but to integrate them within a biblically grounded framework.
2.3 Evaluating the Faulty Approaches
Three rules of thumb for evaluating ethical systems:
Internal consistency: does the system undermine or contradict itself within its own logic?
External coherence: does the system align with how things actually work in life and design (creational order)?
Alignment with Scripture: does the system conflict with the explicit teaching or principles of God’s Word?
The Christian presupposition:
If you are a Christian, Scripture is the ultimate standard; other tools (internal coherence and external coherence) should be evaluated in light of Scripture.
Problems with the Deontological approach (without Scripture):
Lacks a sure basis for universal absolutes; human reason alone cannot reliably generate universal maxims.
Can lead to contradictions when trying to apply a single rule to conflicting duties (e.g., loyalty to a spouse vs. duty to all human beings).
Can become overly legalistic, focusing on letter-of-the-law rather than spirit of the law, sometimes neglecting genuine care for others.
The problem of discovering duties: how to determine which duties apply in complex situations; potential conflict among multiple duties.
Problems with the Consequentialist approach:
Consequences are often unpredictable and difficult to measure across long timelines and large groups.
The approach can justify immoral actions if they produce a perceived greater good for the majority (risk of minority oppression).
Situational ethics can reduce love to subjective preferences; ethical egoism can justify exploitation.
A purely consequentialist framework lacks intrinsic moral absolutes and can be manipulated by the chooser’s preferences.
Problems with Virtue Ethics:
May neglect universal moral norms by focusing on community-defined virtues.
Can be relativistic if virtue is defined differently across communities.
How to form virtuous character? Circular reasoning: virtue leads to virtuous acts; acts are needed to form virtue.
Biblical critique: the Bible depicts virtue in light of God’s objective truth and the gospel; mere character-building without the gospel can miss the ultimate source of virtue.
Problems with Existentialist ethics:
Denies an objective moral order outside the individual; risks endorsing anarchy if authenticity overrides obligation.
Lacks mechanisms to restrain behavior when individuals pursue self-defined meaning with no external moral constraint.
Without divine moral order, there is no universally binding standard beyond personal choice.
Strengths highlighted by the chapter:
Deontology: clarity of duty; moral seriousness about following principled rules.
Consequentialism: flexibility and concern for outcomes; usefulness in considering practical consequences.
Virtue ethics: shifts focus to everyday character and habitual good, not only rare hard cases; emphasizes sanctification and growth toward Christlikeness.
Existentialism: emphasizes personal responsibility and authenticity; can guard against hypocrisy by challenging surface-level conformity.
Overall Christian methodology suggested in the text:
Biblical ethics should integrate elements of these approaches while grounding them in Scripture.
A robust Christian ethics should honor creational norms and God’s design, account for the Fall’s distortions, and pursue what glorifies God in acts, ends, and character.
Thinking It Through 2.1–2.3 (Study Prompts and Problems)
2.1 Thinking It Through:
1a) Identify two key passages about the Fall’s effects on creation.
1b) According to one of the key passages, how does the Fall affect our ability to fulfill responsibilities?
1c) According to the other key passage, how do the Fall’s effects on the created order impact ethics?
2a) Define the naturalistic fallacy.
2b) Explain how the naturalistic fallacy relates to ethics.
3) Should Christians appeal to the natural world or to natural laws to forward their ethical positions? Explain.
4) Identify areas where the Fall has affected human nature; provide at least one Scripture reference for each area.
5) Why is it hard to make right decisions?
2.2 Thinking It Through:
1) How does ethics relate to philosophy? Identify the four major ethical systems and their bases.
2) Identify a major proponent for each system.
3) Compare utilitarianism, situation ethics, and ethical egoism: similarities and differences.
4) What is Kant’s categorical imperative?
2.3 Thinking It Through:
1) List three rules of thumb for critiquing ethical approaches.
2) Summarize strengths and weaknesses of each approach (deontological, consequentialist, virtue, existentialist).
3) Identify a strength and a weakness of each approach.
4) Provide a strength and a weakness of existentialist ethics.
5) Reflect on the idea: “You do you” in light of ethics and postmodern concerns.
Practical decision-making and critique prompts included in the chapter:
Scenarios about family definitions, weapon seizure, stealing for legitimate ends, and compensation for historical wrongs; each scenario invites critique through internal consistency, external coherence, and Scriptural alignment.
Conclusion and personal position:
The text promises to culminate in a biblical methodology that integrates these frameworks toward a God-glorifying end, guided by Scripture and the gospel.
Review Terms, Memory, and Practice
Terms to remember:
naturalistic fallacy
deontological ethics
categorical imperative
consequentialist ethics
utilitarianism
situation ethics
Scripture memory:
Romans 3:10-12
Understanding ethics: recap of key terms and frameworks for study and exam prep.
Connections, Implications, and Real-World Relevance
Why the Fall matters for ethics today:
It explains why ethical systems often fail under pressure and why people justify morally ambiguous actions.
It grounds the necessity for a biblically-informed framework that acknowledges creational norms while distinguishing the Fall’s distortions.
Practical application:
When evaluating ethical issues in modern life (bioethics, technology, social policy), Christians should appeal to Scripture first, view natural law through the lens of creation, and consider the created order’s design while acknowledging the Fall’s distortions.
Ethical decision-making as a life-long process:
Even saved believers are not perfected; they rely on Scripture, community accountability, and sanctification to navigate ethical challenges.
The broader goal:
To cultivate virtuous character formed by the gospel, guided by God’s Word, and directed toward loving God and neighbor as the overarching aim of ethics.
Note: The notes above consolidate key ideas, terms, and arguments from the transcript sections 2.1–2.3, including the created order, the Fall’s effects on mind, will, and emotions, common grace, and the major ethical theories. They are organized to serve as comprehensive study notes that align with the structure of the original content and prepare for exam-style questions. While the transcript contains many illustrative examples (magnet analogy, historical philosophers, and practical scenarios), the notes summarize and integrate these concepts to provide a coherent, test-ready guide.