The Bible as a Moral Standard

Is the Bible really the record of truth spoken by God? If so, why has society rejected it, and what have been the results of this rejection?

If we are going to discuss truth and morality, we must have a common standard to refer to as a higher opinion; otherwise, each individual can speak as his own authority and ones ideas are as valid as another. After all; we all have vivid imaginations and can create scenarios to prove our points without end. However; if we are going to get to the truth, there must be a viewpoint from a higher authority.

To put this into perspective; we may collide in driving toward each other in the same lane if we both decide the same lane is the right lane for us or we may do the same thing approaching an intersection because we disagree about whether a red light means go or stop -Who is at fault for the resulting damages? If there is no standard that either of us can agree on, we will be at an impasse. If there is no higher authority to impose its viewpoint on the situation, then we are left without resolution.

Moreover, we also understand this when it comes to our justice system. There must be established laws as a standard that governs the decisions of the court. The government of our nation also follows the same principle in that there must be a constitutional standard to which proposed legislation conforms.

Why then would it be different when reasoning of God and morality? What higher authority exists, that can serve as a standard to which all deliberations of morality may appeal?

New Life Assembly says that the Bible is such a standard.

Of course, we are aware that modern philosophy has rejected the authority of the Bible, and in fact, any final law of absolutes. Thus, they have delightfully removed boundaries to appropriate behavior to the point of social and moral disintegration. Consequently, everyone is irresistibly being drawn to what is right in their own self-rationalization. Has this made society better? Of course not!

The same is true in pseudo-Christianity. The rejection of the authority of preaching and the Bible by modern, weak, and worldly churches has made current religion a worldly mockery of what God intended the church should be.

New Life Assembly operates by a very simple premise that the Bible is true. We may not yet fully understand it, and there may appear to be minor contradictions within it (which have always been resolved with further investigation). There may be disputes on historic dates and places by contradictions of other writings. But until compelling evidence surfaces to the contrary, we say that in all such cases the Bible is true and such contradictions are false.

One of the reasons for this strong position is that we have seen many lives changed by obedience to the preached directives set forth in scripture. This is evidenced in the testimonies of hundreds of thousands of people who stopped lying, cursing, cheating, or using drugs and alcohol as they studied and obeyed the teachings of the Bible. I am talking about people who after hearing Bible preaching have been miraculously healed, or had failed marriages restored, or experienced joy replacing sadness and depression. In face these changes as a result of hearing preaching are so consistently experienced in people at New Life Assembly that we are surprised if it doesn't happen.

Here is another question to consider: When have such conversions and dramatic miraculous life improvements occurred during speeches against God by atheist's and agnostic philosophers? Of course, they don't occur at all. All the anti-God followers get when they rail against the massive evidence of God and morality is a self-induced temporary thrill of pseudo bravado. They assume a sort of puffed up momentary prideful significance by attacking the huge evidence of God. Outside of this little thrill for them, no measurable benefit is provided for people in that crowd except the toxic but pleasurable relief from reality.

Yet, strangely enough, it is actually because of the Bible's power for good that no other book has been attacked more than it. Why is this? Of all the books that have been written, the Bible has been most influential in changing the thinking of humans in a positive direction. This measurable impact testifies of the obvious power and significance of the Bible. As a result, this puts intense pressure on a person to deal with its claims as not only a binding standard of human behavior but a testimony of God's teaching and principles in his dealings with man.

The biblical based morality standard offers authority that men can align themselves to both for harmony with their own conscience and with one another. This standard is a bright light that exposes and thus censors human behavior, creating a conflict with our innate human lust and pride of life which resists restraints.

It is much easier to cast off restraints by attacking the standard than it is to conform to it. Therefore, men who want freedom to sin will naturally reject such restraints by seeking intellectual means of rationalizing their actions.

However, for such people, casting off bible based morality restraints has value…. only if most others do not also cast off such restraints.

While the rebel wants to be lawless, he wants others to be law abiding. Hence, he would naturally shrink from the idea of living in a land where there are no laws to protect him from others, like himself: Others, who like him, want no moral restraint in their treatment of him just as he wants none in his treatment of them.

Again: The atheist may attack the Bible to cast off moral restraint for himself but he certainly wants others to respect his rights and treat him in a morally upright fashion. For example, if someone injures or steals from him, he naturally wants others to subject their evil designs against him to a moral standard and higher authority. Thus, he depends on absolute higher moral standards for them, even while he denies and attacks such standards in their application to his own conduct.

This explains why there hasn't been wholesale movement of free world atheists to communist countries where the official atheistic government's positions would match their own. They don't move because they like the humane treatment of the Bible-based Christianity which they cowardly attack. Yet, they get great delight in cutting away the ground upon which they stand - no wonder the Bible calls atheists "fools".

It is easy enough to compare the value of the contradictory positions of “regard for the bible” and “rejection of the bible” in the same way that you can easily judge a company by its product. In the past century, humanity has moved significantly away from regard for the Bible and more and more into philosophy.

Enough time has passed and the results are in. You can easily test the value of the Bible against society's rejection of the Bible by the resulting changes in human behavior.

You and I are surely intelligent enough to take an honest look at what people are like today, compared to a hundred years ago. Are our families stronger? Are people more honest and trustworthy? Has crime of humans against their fellow humans decreased? Has human regard and treatment of fellow humans increased?

If the Bible is false, then moving away from it should be producing more children who love their parents, and vice versa.

If we are escaping the tyranny of bible constraints then husbands and wives should be more likely to work out problems and stay married now than they were a hundred years ago.

If modern anti-God anti bible philosophy is making us better we should need far less laws to govern trade, commerce, and social unrest - since people are naturally MORE honest, patriotic, and increasingly responsible citizens.

In general, moving away from a false faith in the Bible should have made us a far more loving and humane society—bonded together in loyalty to one another—than what we were a hundred years ago.

Of course if you do this, that is look at society a hundred years ago and now you arrive at an opposite conclusion.

Therefore, moving away from the Bible has not produced better character in humans. Instead, it has removed an important standard or morality that held people to personal accountability for their behavior towards others.

Therefore the only honest conclusion of such comparison is that disregard for the Bible has actually promoted people's separation from the welfare of others to the point where crime and selfishness in our society are nearly epidemic.

Certainly, in the case of rejecting the Bible, "less is more".

Now that we have less Bible we need far more prisons and more lawyers to process lawsuits and divorce cases. Now that we have less bible we need more pills for depression, and more therapists for the psychotic. Yes indeed: We have less Bible but more violence; less bible but more perverted sexual expressions; less bible but more political corruption; less bible but more substance abuse; less bible but more personal and national debt; less bible but more dysfunctional families.

Yes indeed: When it comes to bible faith less is certainly more!

We need not to go on. The conclusion is very clear! The product of society's rejection of the Bible is a very rotten fruit indeed. Pointing to the social results of biblical rejection is the best proof we can offer for the truth and value of the Bible.

The glaringly obvious testimony of ruined lives and corrupt society is how you can judge the current philosophy factory which rejects the Bible. You can buy its product if you like but at New Life Assembly we are buying the truth instead. In other words we emphatically reject society's Bible rejection.

Thus, the official position of New Life Assembly is a follows: we affirm the Bible to be true and its ultimate authority the basis for all discussion of truth.

So this article has made no use of scripture to affirm the value of scripture since it was a defense of scripture by the use of logic. However, the other articles that set forth the guiding principle of New Life Assembly will make abundant use of the scripture with the assumption that the reader gets past this article that he recognizes that faith in the validity of the Bible is the only basis for intelligent discussion of morality and the meaning of religion.

User Access