fbpx
Articles

Why should Christians study ethics?

Understanding the relationship between theology and Christians ethics

/
February 7, 2022

One of the (many) ongoing debates within the Church today centers around the usefulness of worldview studies and how we are to think about the nature of the Christian life. Some rightfully see that a key element of the Christian worldview is having the right beliefs about God, ourselves, and the world around us as revealed by Scripture. Often, this is seen in the high emphasis placed on studying theology throughout the Christian life.

A quick look at church history shows that when doctrinal beliefs are compromised, it leads to countless dangers and a watering down of Christian truth in hopes of accommodating more popular and culturally acceptable beliefs. Thankfully, many have sought to bolster the teaching and preaching of God’s Word throughout the years and to inculcate a love of theology in our churches, seminaries, and on the mission field. Theology matters, but is simply having the right beliefs really enough to sustain the fullness of the Christian life?

Juxtaposed to this emphasis on right doctrine and belief are those who seek to emphasize the priority of our “loves” and seek to give attention to our actions and practices. Proponents of this line of thinking argue that worldview studies is traditionally overly rationalistic and propositional, focusing exclusively on having the right beliefs to the neglect of our hearts and practice. These thinkers are often challenged by the first group saying that they focus too much on the experiential aspects of life; emphasizing our experiences and habits is too person-centric, which takes the focus off the transcendent and rational truths of Christianity.

The relationship between theology and ethics 

I believe this debate over the value and nature of worldview reveals a deeper chasm within Christianity, especially in Protestantism, over our understanding of the proper relationship between theology and ethics. To many, Christian ethics is seen just as the mere application of Christian theology, meaning it doesn’t need to be studied as formally as theology. It is often unintentionally downplayed — subsumed under the theological discipline rather than studied as a crucial element of the Christian worldview alongside theology. 

As a result, Christian ethics is frequently neglected in theological education. Many college and seminary graduates entering ministry receive at most one or two courses in ethics as opposed to numerous required courses in theology, biblical studies, and the languages — unless they choose an ethics or philosophy concentration. This emphasis on theology and doctrine is laudable given the biblical emphasis on knowing truth and the ongoing rejection of traditional Christian theological beliefs over the last century or so throughout society. But what good is a head full of knowledge if those beliefs either aren’t put into practice or are put into practice wrongly? It is true that God willingly discloses himself and certain truths throughout Scripture, but equally important is that God also reveals to us how we are to live in light of those truths. Unfortunately, our lack of emphasis on and formal study of ethics is seen throughout many of our churches today as our beliefs, too often, are not reflected in our actions. 

This confusion over theology and ethics was made clear to me by a friend who mentioned that he had considered studying ethics at the doctoral level but decided on the “real work” of theology instead. I don’t believe that he ever meant to denigrate the study of ethics, but his words reveal the attitude of many in evangelical life. Theology reigns supreme, and everything else is downstream from it. But as theologian Kevin Vanhoozer has written in Hearers and Doers: A Pastor’s Guide to Making Disciples through Scripture and Doctrine, “head knowledge, either of scripture or doctrine, is not enough to make disciples.” Indeed, something more is needed.

Studying both theology and ethics is crucial for the Christian life. It also helps overcome the tendencies of worldview studies to neglect the heart and the truth that what we do usually reveals what we truly believe. Dutch Reformed theologian and ethicist Herman Bavinck, writing in Reformed Dogmatics, reminds us that theology (dogmatics) and ethics are “not materially different,” yet they are “formally distinct.” He goes on to state:

“Dogmatics describes the deeds of God done for, to, and in human beings; ethics describes what renewed human beings now do on the basis of and in the strength of those divine deeds. In dogmatics human beings are passive; they receive and believe; in ethics they are themselves active agents. In dogmatics, the articles of the faith are treated; in ethics the precepts of the Decalogue. In the former, that which concerns faith is dealt with; in the latter, that which concerns love, obedience, and good works. Dogmatics sets forth what God is and does for human beings and causes them to know God as their Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier; ethics sets forth what human beings are and do for God now; how, with everything they are and have, with intellect and will and all their strength, they devote themselves to God out of gratitude and love. Dogmatics is the system of the knowledge of God; ethics is that of the service of God.” 

Loving God and our neighbor

This intricate and beautiful relationship of theology and ethics is also seen in the words of German theologian Christoph Ernst Luthardt, who described the connection of theology and ethics as, “God first loved us is the summary of Christian doctrine. We love Him is the summary of Christian morality.” Thus, whether in worldview studies or the regular disciplines of Christian life, it must not be an either/or approach to theology and ethics, or placing a higher priority on one or the other. 

When we focus exclusively on having the right beliefs, we can fail to acknowledge that what we say we believe does not always align with what our actions reveal as our true beliefs. In our pursuit of the pure and unadulterated truth of God’s Word, we can neglect to emphasize how that truth informs our practices and especially how we are to love our neighbor as ourselves (Matt. 22:37-39). We study ethics not only to understand how God calls us to live in light of these truths but also to see how the philosophical and ethical theories of our day routinely shape our approach to the text and the great moral challenges before us. These non-Christian theories can even blind us in justifying certain ungodly actions for some greater goal or right outcome.

Christians study ethics in order to love God and love our neighbor faithfully as we become more like Christ, not just in believing the right things but also in doing the right things. Studying ethics does not mean that we should neglect to study God’s Word through a theological lens, but it does mean that we must emphasize the rightful place of Christian ethics in our doctrinal study and pursuit of Christ — not just in the academy, but from our pulpits and discipleship strategies in the local church. The study of ethics can help us see the rich relationship of our beliefs to our practices, of the truths of God’s Word to their application, and of the rich relationship of both theology and ethics in the Christian life.

Jason Thacker

Jason Thacker serves as senior fellow focusing on Christian ethics, human dignity, public theology, and technology. He also leads the ERLC Research Institute. In addition to his work at the ERLC, he serves as assistant professor of philosophy and ethics at Boyce College in Louisville Kentucky. He is the author … Read More

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