Showing papers in "Transformation in 1984"
TL;DR: The use of the New Testament for social ethics has been criticised by some as discussed by the authors who argue that it lacks sufficient concreteness and is not the right type of material for ethics.
Abstract: The second objection to the use of the New Testament for social ethics auestions whether the New Testament contains the right type of material for ethics. The diverse persons raising this objection present two contrasting views of ethics. The first sees social ethics providing the correct solutions to issues faced in societies today. It provides the right decision or the correct programme. It is then noted that neither Jesus nor the New Testament writers provide a social programme. The New Testament lacks sufficient concreteness. The other type of objector, in contrast, is bothered by the concreteness of the New Testament. Behind the problems raised specific concerns are apparent. Some are concerned, for example, that Christians, whom they view as 'perfectionistic', attempt to apply directly to society such commands of Jesus as turn the other cheek, or sell one's property and give to the poor. Others are concerned about the use conservative Christians make of traditional material, such as women keeping silent in the churches or slaves being obedient to their masters. Such commands from the Haustafeln (tables of household duties) found in the Epistles are said to be 'morally irrelevant or perverse' according to one modern viewpoint. They show the flaw in believing that the Bible contains revealed morality.\"' Some are concerned with the attack on the moral authority of the Bible which may follow.
3 citations