fbpx
Articles

ERLC Academy provides equipping on ethics

/
May 25, 2017

Pastors, seminary students, Bible teachers, ministry leaders and writers were among those who gathered in Nashville for a crash course in Christian ethics, and participants testified they came away better prepared to address the difficult issues of the day.

The Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission sponsored its ERLC Academy for the third consecutive year May 22-23 and followed it with a three-day doctoral seminar.

ERLC President Russell Moore lectured on ethics and answered questions during the two days of the academy before nearly 250 participants at the Southern Baptist Convention building and, in some sessions, an audience watching on Facebook. He first provided an ethical paradigm and then addressed such issues as the sanctity of human life, gender identity, religious liberty, marriage, artificial reproductive technology, capital punishment and poverty.

Author and Bible teacher Jen Wilkin said she “left better equipped with a framework for thinking through the ethical implications of dilemmas common to pastoral ministry.”

“The lectures helped me identify where my implicit assumptions or personal experience were shaping my responses to ethical dilemmas,” Wilkins said in email comments for Baptist Press. “The academy created space for me to think in directions my normal schedule doesn't always allow me to.”

Raleigh Sadler — executive director of the Let My People Go Network, an anti-human trafficking, non-profit organization in New York City – said Moore’s “treatment of Christian ethics was refreshing, to say the least.”

“Rather than merely regurgitating a list of hot-button issues and a subsequent list of the ‘right’ answers, Moore did the opposite,” Sadler told BP via email. “[H]e began by addressing ethics at the level of basic beliefs. Equipping the student with a biblical framework through which to understand ethics, he began to address issues that we face on a daily basis. Through each seminar, Moore would show how each of these basic categories was important when thinking through the ethical dilemmas that we face on a daily basis.”

Lauren Konkol — a student at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary who is on staff at the Ethics & Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C. – said the academy prepared her "to think rightly about difficult ethical issues facing the public square by challenging me to use Scripture as the lens, rather than cultural stereotypes.”

Moore told BP he was "delighted to once again host the ERLC Academy.”

“This is a week I treasure every year, and my prayer for all those who attended or watched sessions is that they would come away with a renewed understanding and passion for the truths of Scripture and the expansion of Christ's kingdom," Moore said in email remarks.

The academy and doctoral seminar continued the cooperation between the ERLC and the convention’s seminaries. Doctoral students from Southern Seminary, Southeastern Seminary, Midwestern Seminary and New Orleans Seminary participated in both the academy and seminar.

Randy Stinson, provost and senior vice president for academic administration at Southern Seminary, told BP the partnership between Southern and the ERLC “is fruitful for our students in multiple ways.”

“Not only are they able to be taught by great leaders like Russell Moore, but they are exposed to the great work of the ERLC and it strengthens the students' relationship and commitment to the SBC," Stinson said in email comments.

This year’s registration, 249, nearly doubled the 125 registrants at the first ERLC Academy in 2015. The initial academy also was held in Nashville, while the 2016 event took place in Washington, D.C.

Speakers in the doctoral seminar were Moore and ERLC staff members Phillip Bethancourt, Daniel Patterson and Travis Wussow, as well as National Review senior writer David French.

Wilkin — a member of The Village Church in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex and a part of the ERLC’s Leadership Council – explained to BP why she chose to take part in the academy.

“My path into ministry was not via seminary, so I jump at the chance to receive seminary-level instruction when possible,” she said. “The academy presented the perfect condensed learning opportunity on an area of Christian thought in which I need development. Dr. Moore is adept at teaching complex concepts in accessible ways, so the scope and the instructor made the academy an opportunity I didn't want to miss.”

Sadler said he “had no idea what to expect of the ERLC Academy. This is because, frankly, there is nothing like the ERLC Academy available for those in local SBC church ministry or those aspiring to the office of pastor.”

 “[E]verything was practical and easily applicable while also being thoroughly saturated with the Gospel,” Sadler told BP, adding he expects the training to benefit his anti-trafficking efforts.

“As I work with churches helping them to address the vulnerability that is rampant in their respective communities, I am always coming face to face with ethical issues,” Sadler said. “This class helped me to have a better understanding of how to not only think through these issues but how to help others do the same.”

Konkol told BP by email the academy “far exceeded my expectations — the teaching was clear; the production was excellent; and the hospitality was outstanding.”

This article was originally published by Baptist Press

Tom Strode

Tom Strode serves as a correspondent for Baptist Press. Tom and his wife, Linda, have been married since 1978. They have two children with wonderful spouses and five grandchildren. He is a graduate of the University of Missouri and Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary. Linda and he live in Nashville, Tenn. Read More by this Author

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24