Interpreting the Moral Principles of the New Testament

by Raymond Fox

1988 PSN

10 Nov 2020**

In the teachings of Christ there are some moral laws that describe very specific behaviors such as the prohibition against adultery. There are also moral laws or principles that are very comprehensive, each covering a large range of similar forms of behavior. An example of such a comprehensive moral principle is Jesus' command to seek first the kingdom of God.

The problem encountered with comprehensive moral principles is that a passage containing such a principle is often cited with reference to a specific conduct without showing the relationship of the principle to the specific behavior. The passage loses its force when the relationship is not clarified.

The question is: How can comprehensive moral principles be clarified and taught in such a way to show the relationship between the moral principle and the specific behavior?

The goal of this study then is to demonstrate how to present a logical case that defends the application of a comprehensive moral principle to a specific moral action. A related question is: Can comprehensive moral principles have the same force as other more specific moral principles?

1. The liberal says that the person who binds principles to specific conduct is a legalist, but the liberal is the real legalist because he in effect is saying that he will not follow a moral principle unless it is formalized as a specific rule.

2. Following comprehensive principles in specific applications requires the desire to follow Jesus in every particular. This desire is the motivation to consider how the teachings of Jesus apply in specific circumstances.

3. The mature Christian has the ability to understand how the comprehensive principles of Jesus' teachings apply in specific, everyday conduct. He will apply the moral principles of Jesus with equal force as laws.

The Meaning of Moral Principles

1. The study of morality or ethics deals with the code of laws or principles with which we are able to make a moral judgment concerning the rightness or wrongness of some specific behavior or form of conduct. Morality is a system of judging conduct.

1. Law and principle.
2. A law is a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority (Webster). There are different kinds of laws: some are moral laws, others are physical laws, others are mathematical laws.

1. A principle is a comprehensive and fundamental law, doctrine, or assumption; a rule of conduct (Webster).

1. Therefore the word "principle" can refer to a "law" if we mean a "comprehen- sive and fundamental law" or "rule of conduct." The definitions of both words have these common elements.

1. Unfortunately sometimes people use the words "law" and "principle" to disting- uish between two different kinds of rules of conduct in a system of morality.
2. The word "law" is sometimes used to refer to a very precisely worded rule of conduct with a specific referent such as: do not drive on the left side of the road, do not make unauthorized copies of computer software, do not cheat on your income tax.
3. In contradistinction the word "principle" is used to refer to a com-prehensive rule of conduct that may refer to many different but similar forms of behavior. Some examples from the Scriptures include: "Seek ye first the kingdom of God"; "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers"; "Love not the world."
4. This distinction is misleading because one might assume that since there is a difference between law and principle, then principles are not binding in the way that laws are. (However principles that are moral principles are certainly binding.)
5. Moral principles are laws.
6. If the word "principle" is used to refer to a rule of conduct, even though it may be a comprehensive or fundamental rule of conduct, it is binding on conduct. A rule of conduct governs the course of conduct and is able to judge whether that conduct is on the "right course."
7. "Law" and "principle" are words that can both refer to "rule of conduct." Therefore the distinction between "law" and "principle" in this context of morality is not a real distinction.
8. If a principle is denominated a moral principle, it is binding on conduct simply in virtue of the fact that morals constitute a code of conduct that judges the rightness and wrongness of actions.

III. The comprehensive nature of moral principles.

1. Moral principles, with which we judge conduct, are always to some degree or another comprehensive in that many similar forms of conduct may be included within the judgment of a single moral principle.

1. The distinction between specific moral precepts and comprehensive moral principles is only a distinction of degree. Specific moral precepts are comprehensive in the sense that a specific moral precept judges a number of similar forms of conduct and never simply refers to one specific case of morally responsible conduct in one particular point in time and space. The specific precept against idolatry for instance must apply to idolatry in all of its forms and circumstances if it is a moral precept.

1. To understand how moral principles always are to some degree comprehensive, we must understand the structure of moral principles.

The Structure of Moral Principles

1. An identifying characteristic of moral principles is a prescriptive nature.
2. Moral principles are prescriptive because they prescribe conduct, that is, they lay down directions or rules for conduct. (Prescription is the act of laying down authoritative directions or rules.)

1. Moral principles are not suggestions or preferences for conduct; nor do they intend to propose alternatives for conduct without commending the rightness or condemning the wrongness of such conduct.

1. When a person makes a claim that a certain principle is a moral principle, he must commit himself to act on that principle and follow its logical implications or else deny that it is a moral principle.

1. The prescriptive language of moral principles.
2. The word "ought" expresses the obligation of moral principles. If we say, "I ought to worship every Lord's day unless I am physically unable," we are expressing a moral obligation.
3. Since "ought" expresses a moral obligation, if I say "I ought to worship" and then I do not worship, I have contradicted myself.
4. Any moral principle can be worded in the form, "one ought to."
5. Most of the moral principles of the New Testament are worded as imperatives or commands.
6. An imperative can form a moral principle if the imperative is given with the intention of prescribing conduct, not for just a particular person or group of people, but for everyone who finds himself in the same relevant circumstances.
7. Thus if the language of an imperative can be replaced with the language of "one ought to . . .," without changing the meaning or intention, then the imperative forms a moral principle.
8. For instance, when Jesus sent the apostles out on a missionary journey he commanded them that they must not take money with them (Matthew 10:9-10). 

However, this imperative cannot be replaced by "one ought not to take money on a missionary journey" without significantly changing the intention of the imperative. So this particular command is not a moral obligation for everyone.

1. Another identifying characteristic of moral principles is their universal nature. Moral principles are universalizable.
2. The purpose of a moral code is to present moral principles that can govern the conduct of society. If a person commits himself to a principle as a moral principle that can judge his conduct, and yet he does not accept that principle as judging the conduct of others in like circumstances, then his principle is not a moral principle. His principle actually expresses a personal preference instead of a moral judgment.

1. A system of morality that says, for instance, "abortion is right for me but may be wrong for you although we find ourselves in the same circumstances" is not a genuine system of morality; it is a system of preferences. It is not logically possible to base ethics on preferences.

1. Thus the universal element of moral principle requires that we accept our principle as rules of conduct for everyone in like circumstances.

1. This element of universalizability is precisely the point of Jesus' saying, "And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise" (Luke 6:31).

1. In order for a moral principle to be universalizable, there must be some means to establish that the moral principle and the specific instance of conduct share in "like circumstances."

1. Relevant descriptive characteristics.
2. As stated previously, a moral principle is universalizable because we accept its application for everyone in "like circumstances."
3. The question therefore is: What constitutes "like circumstances"? In other words: how can one determine whether the relevant circumstances expressed by the moral principle are the same as the relevant circumstances constituting the specific conduct in question?
4. Every moral principle will include, implicitly or explicitly, a description of the relevant characteristics of the behavior referred to in the principle.
5. Take for instance the principle, "One ought not to abort a fetus."
6. To describe abortion as the deliberate termination of a fetus may sound rather innocuous. But if in our description we can show that the fetus is a living person from conception, we have shown that abortion is the deliberate killing of a living person.
7. Thus to properly understand the principle, "One ought not to abort a fetus," it is necessary to clarify the descriptive characteristics of "abortion" and "fetus."
8. Likewise one can describe the relevant characteristics of a specific instance of conduct.
9. To make a moral judgment, it is necessary to have a specific case of conduct (real or hypothetical) in mind. This specific case must be described in its relevant characteristics.
10. As an example we may consider a woman who decides she is not ready to have a baby and aborts the fetus.
11. If the conduct in question possesses the same relevant characteristics as described in the moral principle, then the moral principle and the act of conduct share "like circumstances." The moral principle can therefore be used with certainty as a moral judgment of the particular instance of conduct.
12. Moreover, because of the universalizability of moral principles, the same moral principle may judge various examples of moral behavior with the same descriptive characteristics. The descriptive characteristics of a moral principle enable the principle to be comprehensive, covering many forms of conduct that are relevantly alike.
13. Some people claim that it is morally wrong to abort a fetus except in the case of rape. But the means of conception actually does not create a relevant difference in this case and the case mentioned above.
14. The case above is also relevantly similar to taking the so-called "morning after" pill that acts on the fetus after conception.
15. The task of the interpretation of a moral principle in the New Testament is to first understand the relevant descriptive aspects of particular moral principle.

1. What determines the relevance of certain descriptive characteristics?
2. A description of the moral principle must be a description of its "relevant" characteristics.
3. Descriptive characteristics that are relevant are those that cannot be changed without changing the meaning of the moral principle. Once the meaning of a moral principle is established, the relevant characteristics can be described.
4. In the case of "one ought not to abort a fetus," the descriptive characteristics of "abortion" and "fetus" are essential to the meaning of the principle. Describing the fetus as a "non-living entity" changes the meaning of the principle.
5. In the interpretation of New Testament principles, the contextual meaning of the words constituting the principle and the intention of the author of the principle will determine the meaning of the principle itself.
6. Thus those descriptive characteristics that are logically necessary to express the principle will be the relevant characteristics.
7. Irrelevant descriptive characteristics are those characteristics that can vary without changing the principle or the relation between the principle and specific cases of conduct.
8. Once the meaning of the principle, "one ought not to abort a fetus," is estab- lished, certain descriptive characteristics in specific cases of abortion can vary without affecting their relation to the principle.
9. For instance, irrelevant characteristics would be the age of the fetus and the circumstances of conception.

1. Disagreements about the application of a moral principle.
2. Understanding the relevant descriptive characteristics of a moral principle will enable one to correctly apply the principle.
3. Disagreements about the application of moral principles are usually based on disagreements about the descriptive characteristics of a moral principle and which of these descriptive characteristics are relevant in making an application. (e.g., Disagreements about a moral principle concerning abortion center around the actual status of the fetus.)
4. Disagreements also originate from a failure to properly define the relevant descriptive characteristics of the specific instance of conduct in question and thus a failure to logically show the connection between the moral principle and the specific instance of conduct.

III. At this point we can understand how moral principles are always to some degree comprehensive. No matter how specifically worded a moral law may be, if it is a moral law, it will apply universally to all instances of relevantly similar conduct. The comprehensive nature of all moral laws or principles is thus due to the universalizability of moral principles.

The Comprehensive Moral Principles of Jesus

1. The Teachings Of Jesus Fall Into Two Categories: Doctrinal And Moral.
2. The doctrinal teachings include what Christians believe to be true about reality; such as the existential relationship between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

1. The moral teachings include the rules of conduct for the behavior of Christians. The moral teachings comprehend conduct in every aspect of life whether it be in the church or among those of the world. The teachings concerning worship are examples of moral teachings because they instruct man concerning his conduct in worship.

1. The Nature Of Moral Principles In The Teachings Of Jesus.
2. The moral code of Christianity does not include hundreds of precisely defined moral precepts that apply only to very specific situations. It does not contain precise and minute directions for every specific case of moral conduct that might occur.

1. There are no specific moral precepts that deal directly with such specific moral actions as gambling, abortion, dancing, specific forms of immodest apparel, going to movies, watching soap operas, social drinking, etc. In order to morally prohibit such conduct, some comprehensive moral principle will have to be found that applies to each one in particular.

III. The Comprehensive Moral Principles Of Jesus.

1. Many of the moral principles of the New Covenant are comprehensive moral principles. A comprehensive moral principle is a principle that covers many specific forms of behavior that are similar by virtue of their descriptive characteristics.
2. Jesus indicated that the moral principle, "Honor thy father and mother" is a comprehensive moral principle. Although this principle does not mention specifically the economic care of one's parents, Jesus implied that the principle comprehended this form of honor (Mark 7:10).
3. An adequate exposition or description of the moral precept, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers," (2 Corinthians 6:14) will show that it not only applies to marriage but to many other moral actions that are descriptively similar.
4. The contextual meaning of "Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness" (Matthew 6:33) indicates that this principle refers to any conduct that threatens to place the satisfaction of material desires before obedience of the will of God.

1. In many instances Jesus used a specific case of moral conduct to illustrate a comprehensive moral teaching. Often he does not elaborate the principle itself. The listeners must deduce the principle and its application from the particular illustration.
2. In the parable of the good Samaritan, Jesus simply said, "Go thou and do likewise" (Luke 10:37). This does not mean that Jesus was instructing us in the case that we might find a Jew lying by the road, having been overtaken by robbers. "Likewise" indicates that the truly descriptive properties of this illustration provide for us a moral principle that we will be able to apply in many situations. Thus the specific illustration points to a comprehensive principle: that one ought to love his neighbor by helping someone in a similar situation.
3. When Jesus washed the disciples' feet, he used footwashing to illustrate a moral principle: that His disciples ought to humble themselves toward one another. The foot washers today have missed the point and robotically follow a specific case without realizing that Jesus was teaching a comprehensive moral principle that has many applications of which footwashing is just one. The work of interpretation is to extrapolate from the specific illustration, from the context and from other similar teachings in the New Testament, a comprehensive moral principle.
4. Jesus used a specific contemporary custom to illustrate the comprehensive moral precept of "going the second mile" (Matthew 5:41) that has many specific applications.

1. Applying The Comprehensive Moral Principles Of Jesus.

1. Either these comprehensive moral principles are meaningless or they apply to some specific form or forms of conduct in actual life.

1. Because for some students of the Bible these principles express a certain vagueness in regards to specific application, the moral principles have little force and are thus meaningless in their daily life.

1. If the principles apply to specific conduct then it must be possible to logically define the relationship between the moral principle and the specific moral action.

1. This relationship is clarified by describing the relevant characteristics of the comprehensive moral principle and comparing this description with the relevant characteristics of the moral conduct in question.

1. The description of the moral principle may also demonstrate its logical relation- ship (by identity) to other examples of specific moral conduct. This should be expected if it is a comprehensive moral principle. (This point will be elaborated in the following section.)

The logical Interpretation 

of the Moral Principles of Jesus

1. There Must Be A Logical Relationship Between A Moral Principle And The Specific Moral Action That This Principle Judges.
2. This logical relationship is one of identity between the relevant description of the moral principle and the relevant description of the specific moral action in question.

1. The task of interpretation is to elucidate the descriptive characteristics of the moral principle by employing correct methods of contextual interpretation.

1. The work of contextual interpretation: understanding the meaning of the moral principle.
2. The meaning of the words used to express the principle.
3. The precise meaning of a word depends on the contextual usage of the word. Some words have many meanings and shades of meaning. The context must determine the exact meaning.
4. Some principles employ figurative meaning. Figurative meaning must also be determined by the contextual setting.
5. Parallel texts that mention the principle using different wording may also assist in the determination of meaning

1. The intention of the author or speaker in delivering the principle.
2. For whom did he intend the principle?
3. What error or moral wrong called forth the principle? What error did the speaker propose to judge or correct?
4. To discover the complete answer to these questions, contextual information concerning the people who first received the principle and their circumstances will be indispensable.
5. In some cases Jesus taught a moral principle by illustrating the principle without explicitly expressing the principle itself. The principle will have to be deduced from the context of the illustration. The question will be: what principle did Jesus intend to teach by means of the illustration.

1. The meaning of words and the intention of the author will help us understand how those first receiving the principle understood it.

III.What Are The Relevant Descriptive Characteristics Of The Principle?

1. An understanding of the meaning of the principle will yield a description of the relevant characteristics of the behavior referred to by the principle.

1. The meaning of the principle (the meaning of the words and the author's intent- ion) will determine which circumstances or characteristics of the behavior are relevant.

1. The relevant characteristics are those characteristics that cannot change without changing the meaning of the principle.

1. Comprehensive Application Of The Principle.
2. A description of the relevant characteristics of the moral principle will not only provide the logical connection between the principle and the specific conduct in question, but it will also establish a logical relation with other similar examples of moral conduct.

1. What other moral actions fall within the confines of the description of the moral principle? What other actions have the same relevant description? If one commits himself to this moral principle, what other forms of conduct does he also commit himself to in order to avoid self-contradiction

1. Usually it will not be possible to list all the applications of a principle nor will it be necessary.
2. Our experience is limited in that we perhaps have not been confronted by every possible application of a particular moral principle.
3. The purpose of comprehensive moral principles will remain a guiding principle in the heart and mind of the Christian. He will recall it when confronted by a moral decision that calls for its application.

1. The Failure Of Principles, Or Applications Of Principles.
2. Some principles will fail because they force us to accept applications that we cannot accept. (For example, if we were to accept the principle "one ought not to change things for change sake," we might not be ready to accept all of its applications. Sometimes we do want to change things for change sake.)

1. Applications of a moral principle will fail if they do not actually share relevant descriptive characteristics with the principle. In such cases one can accept the principle as true and reject false applications without self-contradiction.
2. It has been argued that if we believe in a return to New Testament Christianity, we must not sing scripture songs. But one can accept the principle, "return to New Testament Christianity," and reject the supposed application, "do not sing songs from the Scriptures," without self-contradiction.
3. It has also been argued that if we believe in doing all things decently and in order, we should never change the order of worship services. But one can consistently accept the principle, "do all things decently and in order," and reject the application, "never change the order of worship services."

1. Some Examples Of Comprehensive Moral Principles.
2. "Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth." (Matthew 6:19-21).
3. This principle is virtually meaningless for many Christians because their rationalization enables them to avoid the application.
4. Language: to "treasure up" means to heap up, accumulate, store up in reserve. A treasure refers to an accumulation of things that are not immediately necessary.
5. Intention: In this passage Jesus contrasts laying up treasures in heaven with accumulating material things. His purpose is to instruct his disciples that their treasures should not be material. The principle that one ought to lay up treasures in heaven instead of accumulating material wealth is also taught in Luke 12:16-21.
6. Descriptive characteristics: The principle refers to any accumulation of material things that are not immediately necessary in place of storing up works of spiritual value.
7. Example of application: buying a vacation home or an unnecessarily luxurious home instead of supporting the gospel.

1. "Beware of covetousness" (Luke 12:15).
2. Language: Covetousness is an inordinate desire to have more possessions, especially those possessions that others have. A covetous person will often do unwise things to obtain what he desires.
3. Intention: Jesus is warning against covetousness. His warning constitutes a moral principle: "one ought not to be covetous."
4. Descriptive characteristics: This principle refers to any action in which is displayed such a desire to obtain material possessions that a person will be unwise things to obtain them.
5. Application: Gambling is an action in which people, motivated by material desire, will bet on an highly uncertain outcome in the attempt to obtain what they want. Gambling is thus a manifestation of covetousness.

1. "Abstain from all appearance of evil" (1 Thessalonians 5:22).
2. This verse is commonly (but mistakenly) applied to actions that appear evil though they are not evil in and of themselves.
3. Language: The word translated "appearance" in the KJV expresses the idea of "form" or "kind". According to Thayer the phrase means to abstain "from every kind or evil or wrong."
4. Intention: Paul's purpose is to teach the Christians that they must deny them- selves all evil, in all its forms.
5. Descriptive characteristics: Anything that is evil according to God's Word is the subject of this principle.
6. Application: This principle would especially apply to someone taking the position of defending his participation in some sin by claiming that the sin is not as bad as other sins.

1. "I will have mercy and not sacrifice" (Matthew 12:7).
2. This principle has long been abused as a pretext to commit many actions condemned by the Word of God.
3. Language: "Mercy" in this context is the outward show of compassion. "Sacrifice," figuratively, is obedience to the letter of the law.
4. Intention: In responding to the accusations of the Pharisees, Jesus defended the unlawful act of David when he ate the shew bread in the tabernacle. Jesus shows that David's action was an instance in which mercy had to take precedence over obedience to the letter of the law. What David did was unavoidable. It was not necessary that he die of starvation in order to keep the commandment prohibiting anyone except the priests to eat the shewbread.
5. Descriptive characteristics: In circumstances in which obedience to the letter of the law unavoidably prohibits the showing of mercy, the command to show mercy takes precedence. (It does not apply to situations in which disobedience to the law is avoidable.)
6. Application: When an illegal immigrant is baptized into Christ, one cannot demand that he immediately return home (because he is in violation of civil law) when, upon returning, he places himself in physical or spiritual danger. (This principle does not apply in the case of showing mercy to false teachers by refusing to criticize their doctrines. Their doctrines are clearly avoidable.)

When the Comprehensive Moral Principles 

of Jesus Are Rejected

1. People "make the Word of God of none effect by their traditions" when they follow a specific moral teaching without considering the implied comprehensive moral principle.

1. Those Who Reject The Force Of Comprehensive Moral Principles Would Also Reject The Force Of A Detailed Set Of Moral Precepts Precisely Because Their Heart Is Not Submitted To The Will Of God. They will always be able to find pretexts for following those teachings that they are already inclined to follow. Man will always search for a plausible excuse for doing what he is inclined to do.

III. A Greater Love For The Lord And Submission To His Will Is Required By A Moral Code That Includes Comprehensive Principles. Self-control and maturity is required to follow comprehensive principles because following these principles implies meditation and commitment to learn their application in daily life. It is easy for man to follow only those principles that are precisely described and ignore the more comprehensive principles as vague and meaningless.

Conclusion

The power of comprehensive moral principles can be fully appreciated only when we take the time to properly elucidate their meaning and show the logical connection between the principle and cases of actual moral conduct.

We are under the obligation of teaching these comprehensive moral principles and teaching how to properly apply them. 

753 Saucito Ave., Salinas, CA 93906