Christian Ethics: Transformed To Transform

NEPAL EBENEZER BIBLE COLLEGE
CHRISTIAN ETHICS
TRANSFORMED TO TRANSFORM
YESHWANTH B. V., B. E, BD
JULY- DECEMEBER 2013
[Christian ethics is very important and significant aspect of Christian life. This material is only a brief
outlook on the subject. This material should not be treated as a text book. Student is required to do
his/her own research and also can use this material for a comprehensive understanding. This
material deals with the definitions, understanding to other religious system of ethics, relationship
between Bible and ethics and Theology as well. Student is expected to draw insights and make a
Trinitarian moral response towards varied ethical realities]
CONTENTS
PART I
I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 3
A. Definitions: Ethics, and Christian ethics; Difference between Moral and Ethics ....... 3
1. The word ‘Ethics’ and the difference between Ethics and Morals............................ 3
II. Methodologies ..................................................................................................................... 4
A. Different types of ethical discourses ............................................................................... 4
1. Deontological ethics ..................................................................................................... 4
2. Teleological ethics ........................................................................................................ 4
3. Responsibility – Relationality ethical approach ......................................................... 4
4. Critique on methodologies .......................................................................................... 5
B. Religious systems of ethics .............................................................................................. 8
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 8
2. Hinduism ...................................................................................................................... 8
3. Buddhism .................................................................................................................... 11
4. Islam............................................................................................................................. 14
6. Summary ..................................................................................................................... 17
PART II
III. Bible-Theology ethics ..................................................................................................... 19
A. Bible and ethics .............................................................................................................. 19
1. Methodology: Different ways by which Bible is used in ethical reflection and an
attempt to arrive at a relevant method of interpretation ............................................. 19
i. The nature of the Bible ............................................................................................... 19
ii. Problems involved in using Bible in ethics .............................................................. 20
iii. Three approaches not be used in relating Bible to ethics ...................................... 20
iv. Three alternative approaches .................................................................................... 21
v. Summary ..................................................................................................................... 22
2. Old Testament Ethics:................................................................................................ 22
3. New Testament Ethics: .............................................................................................. 30
B. Theology and ethics ...................................................................................................... 32
1. Relation between theology and ethics: Different typologies .................................. 32
a. The image of God in the humans ............................................................................. 33
b. Natural Law and Christian faith................................................................................ 33
c. The Church and Sacraments...................................................................................... 33
d. Law and Grace ............................................................................................................ 33
e. Christian eschatology ................................................................................................. 33
2. Christological focus in ethical reflection: Bonhoeffer, Barth .................................. 34
3. Christian understanding of human nature and creation: Neibhur, Lehmann ....... 34
Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 37
2
PART I
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Definitions: Ethics, and Christian ethics; Difference between Moral and Ethics
1. The word ‘Ethics’ and the difference between Ethics and Morals1
The word “ethics” comes from a Greek word “ethos” which means “the customs and the
character which distinguishes a particular people.”2 The words “ethics” and “morals” are
interchangeably used traditionally. Both basically carry connotations of duties and
responsibility a person has in a group of which he/she is a member and /or to some
transcendent being with reference to right or wrong conduct or ultimate purpose.3 The word
moral is now being used in a restrictive sense as an adjective. Morals are descriptive and ethics
is all about serious reflections.
Therefore, ethics is a reflection of a question ‘why’ of an action whereas our
actions may be guided by the religious, cultural and philosophical aspects. In this regard,
Chandran before defining ‘Christian ethics,’ he attempts to define “ethics” as a science that
systematically studies human conduct at individual level and at corporate level. Human
conduct, according to Chandran is a “conscious and purposeful action.”4 Therefore, to put it
together ethics deals with the human conscious and its product. However, human conduct
cannot be understood in isolation from cultural and social ethos of an individual. Therefore
ethics is also concerned with the “customs and mores of people.”5
a. Difference between ethics and morality
We have learnt that ethics is a reflection of our consciousness and its outcomes. What is
morality? What is the meaning of the word ‘moral? Is there a difference at all? The
answers may be diverging when you take into account of different schools of thought.
The word ‘morals’ comes from the Latin word ‘mos’ which means ‘customs or way of
1
Hunter P. Mabry, ed., Christian Ethics- An Introductory Reader (Kottayam: Indian Theological Seminary,
1987), 1-5.
2
Ibid., 3.
3
Ibid.
4
Russel Chandran, Christian Ethics (New Delhi: ISPCK, 2008), 2.
5
Ibid.
3
life.’6 The word ‘moral’ as an adjective is used to describe “behaviours of a people
commonly regarded as right, good or appropriate.”7 As a noun, it is used to “refer to the
norms or principles held by a particular people regarding right or wrong conduct.”8
II. METHODOLOGIES
A. Different types of ethical discourses
1. Deontological ethics
Deontological ethical approach is based on obligation or duty.9 In other words it deals
with question of what is right and what is wrong. This approach emphasizes on the
obedience to the moral imperatives. For example the religious laws and the state laws
which largely deals with the question of “obeying the law” are ought to be followed to
be conformed to the community.10 All the religious laws, state laws are to be obeyed.
2. Teleological ethics
Teleological ethical approach is goal oriented.11 It is an ethics of “aspiration, good or
end.”12 This approach is concerned with the highest good. In other words, this approach
raises question- “what is the highest good or end of life which I should seek to serve?”13
3. Responsibility – Relationality ethical approach
Responsibility- Relational model of ethics has two dimensions- accountability and
responsibility. To be responsible means to be accountable. In other words, accountability
means to introspect upon one’s own action or to subject one’s self to scrutiny for the
action done. According to Mabry, this is responsibility in the network of relationships.14
In other words, to be responsible morally means that to respond to particular situation
with the knowledge of what is happening, and to be accountable to that response and a
“concern for faithfulness for human relationships”15 as we live in the network of human
relations. Religiously speaking, this approach raises questions like- what is God doing in
6
Mabry, Christian Ethics- An Introductory Reader, 3.
7
Ibid, 3.
8
Ibid.
9
Ibid., 6.
10
Ibid., 7.
11
Somen Das, Christian Ethos and Indian Ethos (Delhi: ISPCK, 2001), 6.
12
13
Ibid.
14
Ibid.
15
Ibid.
4
our history? How can we respond to his actions so as to be his people (relationship)?16 In
this relation, we need to ask what action is best ‘fitting?’
4. Critique on methodologies
i. Deontological ethics:
In brief deontological ethics is the question of “ought” which is determined by
taking history, traditions and past mistakes into consideration. There are set of rules
which are to be obeyed. For example all religious codes of conduct fall under this mode.
These codes were interpreted in a legalistic, rigid, offensive and absolute ways.
According to Mabry, ethics which are obligatory and required to do as a duty are called
technically “deontological ethics.” For example the religious laws and the state laws
which largely deals with the question of “obeying the law” are ought to be followed to
be conformed to the community.
1. Critique:
This method is legalistic and promotes absolutism. It does not take the context into
account. This method does not deal with the core problem of human morality. This
method may offer what is ‘right’ for man but it doesn’t deal with the moral disposition of
man. Only knowledge of knowing right and wrong cannot bring about transformation
but a ‘self-consciousness’ of morality does. We can apply Paul’s ethical reflections here.
Paul’s ethical convictions are strongly rooted in the thought that ethical
realization comes about when one realizes Christ’s life, death and his teachings. Christ
has reconciled man to God and also with one another.
Paul’s greatest contribution is towards his reflection on the imperative moral law.
He talks more about the internalization of the law over the practice of the law. The
imperative moral law presupposes that man is still can act contrary to the law inside the
heart. He talks about the “self-consciousness” of the goodness. According to him,
“imperative law cannot produce the innate, unforced graciousness of conduct evident in
Jesus Christ which is so much more attractive and so much more fruitful than self-
consciousness goodness.” The moral conduct and the practice should go together.
However, Paul in response to the criticism over his thought about the imperative moral
16
Ibid., 8.
5
law, he responded by opining that inadequacy of the imperative moral law to achieve the
“necessary reorganization and renewal of human life.” (Rom. 7: 7- 25) He simply says
that “dying and rising of the self” gives a complete inner transformation of the
fundamental attitudes of men toward God, their world, themselves, and their neighbours.
ii. Teleological ethics:
The Greek word ‘Telos’ means ‘end.’ Teleological ethics deals with the ‘result.’ It talks
about the aspirations or good or highest good. In other words man should orient his
actions in the present keeping in view of the end. It presupposes that an action is right, if
and only if it produces highest good. This is called as “quantitative utilitarianism17.” It
also presupposes the rightness of the action as it tends to produce happiness. There are
variant models which follow this approach. They are Kingdom of God ethics, liberation
model and other worldly models.
1. Critique:
This model emphasizes more on the end result of the action and does not
give much attention on the present or the context. The orientation towards the future
alone can bring about disorientation in the present if doesn’t take into account of the
context. It approaches or analyses man’s action not on the basis of one’ s own context,
past and present but rather analyses in isolation from the context, past and the present.
iii. Contextual ethics:
Paul Lehmann is the proponent of this method. Deontology speaks about the
moral imperatives and Teleological ethics speaks about the goodness or rightness of
action keeping in view of the end result, irrespective of the context, past and present. In
other words both of the methods analyses one’s actions in isolation from one’s sitz-im-
leben. In order to address this issue, Contextual ethics emphasizes about one’s own
context and circumstances in analysing the one’s actions. In other words it interprets the
ethical reality in a contextual way focusing on the actual context. Lehmann’s contextual
ethics is called as “koinonia ethics.” Koinonia means “fellowship, communion.” This
comprises of human relationships. In other words, to analyse one’s action, according to
Lehmann, Koinonia is the starting point. It is about “what am I suppose to do” rather
17
The doctrine that actions are right, if they are useful or for the benefit of a majority.
6
than “what I ought to do.” Therefore human factor plays a major role in this method.
There are two dimensions to Lehmann’s koinonia ethics- God’s activity in history and
man’s discernment of God’s action and to be agents of change in the world through the
influence of God’s action in the world.
Under contextual ethics we have situational ethics which talks about action which
is applicable or fitting to a specific situation. The proponent of this model is Joseph
Fletcher. He talks about ‘obedient love or agape love.’ It simply means that one has to
relate love to the world by an careful analysis of what kind of action is required by love
in that particular situation.
Responsible- Relational model of ethics has two dimensions- accountability and
obligation. To be responsible means to be accountable. In other words, accountability
means to introspect upon one own action or the attitude by which that action is done.
Obligation presupposes relationship. According to Mabry this is responsibility in the
network of relationships. This model encompasses past, present and future. In other
words, to be responsible morally means that to respond to particular situation with the
knowledge of what is happening, and to be accountable to that response and a “concern
for faithfulness for human relationships” as we live in the network of human relations.
Religiously speaking, this approach raises questions like- what is God is doing in our
history? How can we respond to his actions so as to be his people (relationship)?
To summarize above model, three things we can observe here:
• Man the actor- who responds to an action
• Accountable to that action (Responsible)
• Awareness of the effects of his/her action in the network human relationships
(relationships)
1. Critique:
This model emphasizes more on the human factor. It doesn’t conform to the imperative
laws. It is not so much concerned with the virtue of the action or the result of that action
done. In this way it does not talk about the rightness or goodness of the action but rather
it talks about what is ‘fitting’ in that particular situation.
iv. Summary
7
In summary, no model of ethics is perfectly applicable and apt to analyse human
actions and behaviour. According to Somen Das an integration of these models will help
us to have balance and can achieve some discernment in our judgment of particular
action. We also should take other sciences into consideration in analysing and
understanding human behaviour. I would like to agree with Paul’s ethical teaching.
According to him it is not the knowledge of right and wrong that makes difference,
ethics has to do with man’s deliberate rebellion towards God with the knowledge of right
and wrong. Paul’s ethical convictions are strongly rooted in the thought that ethical
realization comes about when one realizes Christ’s life, death and his teachings. Christ
has reconciled man to God and also with one another.
B. Religious systems of ethics
1. Introduction
Nepal is a pluralistic society with many religions, different castes and classes. It is a
theological and evangelical task to understand what makes a Hindu a Hindu for a
relevant dialogue with other religious world views. Without proper understanding of the
ethical framework of the other religion, our Christian ethical response towards other
religious people will be irrelevant. The purpose of this study is then, firstly, to have brief
understanding of different religious ethical understanding. Secondly, to develop respect
towards such ethical systems is very important. Thirdly, to search for ‘common grounds’
for relevant Christo-centric ethical response toward different ethical realities.
2. Hinduism
The word is broad and vague. The inclusive nature of this tradition makes it
improper to even call this tradition as “religion”. This does not have any single concept
that binds the whole system together. It is only seen as the “the way of life”.18 It is called
as “Sanatana dharma” coming down to the people through eternity.19 It has got neither
definite founder nor a particular scripture. This has eventually grown through the winds
of time inculcating different aspects of cultures, civilizations whenever and wherever it
has encountered with. This religion serves as an umbrella to many beliefs and practices
that it has conglomerated. 20
This word is the outcome of British colonial administration. This word first
derived form from the word ‘Hindu’ a Persian variant of Sanskrit ‘sindhu’, to denote both
the region and people living nearby and beyond the Indus River.21 The word was the
outcome of European invasion has constructed and coined the usage of this word
altering the meaning according it European understanding.22 Then the Muslim invaders
gave an exclusive term “Hindu” in 18th century and the meaning of the word again was
18
P.S Daniel, David c. Scott, and G.R. Singh, eds., Religious Tradition of India (fourth edition. Delhi:
ISPCK, 2006)., 75.
19
K.N Tiwari, Comparitive Religion (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publisher, 2004)., 8.
20
“Hinduism - Defining Hinduism, Historical Overview, Sacred Texts And Sects, Principal Beliefs,
Bibliography”, n.d., n.p. [cited 19 March 2009]. Online:
http://science.jrank.org/pages/7751/Hinduism.html.
21
Martin Baumann, “Hinduism,” Religions of the World A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of Beliefs and Practices
(California, Colorado, England: A B C C L I O, 2002)., 586.
22
Ibid. 586.
8
altered by the European understanding. This word was seen as the collection of people
with so-called Heathen religion which is often called as “Gentiles”. In 19th century
British Raj used this word ‘Hindu’ and the word ‘Hinduism’ is a derivative form it which
was first used in 1829.23
i. The concept of Sanatana Dharama
We know that Hinduism is also called as ‘Santana Dharma’. In other words it is the
occupation that which is being carried out by the particular tradition. The word
emphasizes on the personal designation work according to the tradition. Since it is true
no one can hold all the positions in a society, this concept holds the plurality in the work
that is being carried out by the tradition. This is where different societies or Varnas or
classes of societies arise. We have Brahmins holding priestly office, Ksyathriyas- worriors
and kings, Vaisyas- the common people, and Sudras- servants.
Dharma in day-today context comes in regard to the practice of moral and ethical
values. There are different types of Dharma such as Vyakti-dharma- dharma of an
individual, Parivarika- dharma or family dharma, samaja-dharma, Rastra-dharma and
Manava-dharma or dharma of mankind.24 Now Vyakti-dharma includes observances of
the physical body. One has to take care his/her own health and also be conscious about
his/her personal hygiene. This includes ahimsa, akrodha (anger), Brahnacharya (celibacy)
etc. Now coming to Parivarika dharma (family), individuals make up a family and there
are some ethical and moral values that a family has to stand for. Here we can see a
‘graduation’ of stages to attain mokṣa. According to Ninian Smart, the ends of human life
are generally three. They are wealth (Artha), desire (Karma), and duty (Dharma). These
ends should serve the supreme end to attain Mokṣa.25
According to Robert D. Baird, Upanishads teach the concept of Karma & Rebirth.
Karma is the law of Case and effect which is applied to spiritual and moral realm. In
other words, every action (mental as well as physical) has a karmic effect on the
23
Ibid.586.
24
Swami Bhaskarnanda, The Essentials of Hinduism A Comprehensive Overview of the World’s Oldest Religion
(Mylapore, Chaennai: Sri Ramakrishna Math, 1998)., 98.
25
Ninian Smart, “Hindu Ethics,” ed. John Macquarrie and James Childress, A New Dictionay of Christian
Ethics (London: SCM Press, 1986), 267.
9
individual. This causes the suffering and we need to attain liberation from this suffering.26
One way of achieving moksa is through asceticism. This notion of asceticism has to be
reconciled with the social responsibility at individual levels (Asramas) and at class or caste
level (Varnadharma).
Bhagavad Gita brings the above principles together. For example Arjuna, a
Kshatriya unwilling to participate in the battle as he feared that he had to kill his loved
ones. Krishna tells him that if he does not allow his class duty (Varna dharma) to reap
effects and the social order will be thrown in to confusion. Therefore, to achieve moksa,
he should remain unattached.
ii. Different interpretation from Hindu Philosophers:
a. Sankara (788- 820)
According to Sankara Reality is one. Every other thing other than Reality is ultimately
illusion (Maya). This ‘maya’ is like a dream which appears to be real as long as it lasts but
subrated by the realization of unity. According to him, perfection or moksa arises when
one experiences unity and realizes that there are no distinctions between oneself and
ultimate reality (Brahman). The one who attained this moksa is called Jivan mukta (one
who is liberated while living). For a jivan mukta body is only an appearance. Therefore,
he/she lies beyond all the distinctions and so also ethical imperatives. However, at an
illusionary level, an individual needs ethical distinctions for ordering of existence. Those
actions which lead to ego-involvement are bad and those which do not lead to ego-
involvement are good.
b. Other modern thinkers:
Not everyone saw Reality as one. According to Ramanuja (1017- 1137),
liberation (moksa) is not a realization of non-duality but it is ‘intuition27’ on the part of
the soul that it is a mode of god. Modern thinkers emphasize on the reality of the world
and place a correspondingly greater emphasis on social concern. For example,
Radhakrishnan Sarvepalli (second President of India, who hails from Andhra Pradesh,
India) and Swami Vivekananda admits that world has distinctions and it is provisional too
(maya). However, they too admit that ethical concerns remain imperative.28 Aurobindo
Ghose also admits ultimate reality of the world. He believes in ‘evolutionary ascent of the
soul’ in which matter ascents to animal, animal to human consciousness and to the higher
level stage and the most advanced one is ‘supermind.’ This is higher level of humanity, a
26
Baird, “Hindu Ethics,” ed. Carl F. Henry, Wycliff Dictionary of Christian Ethics (Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson Publishers, 2000), 289.
27
Intuition is the ability to acquire representation or knowledge about things without actually using
reason. For a brief understand see., Gordon H Clark, “Intution,” ed. Carl F Henry, Wycliff Dictionary of
Christian Ethics (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000), 337-338.
28
Ibid, 290.
10
newly constituted Gnostic being who will be involved in action while indifferent to its
fruits. The life of such is not governed by eternal laws but by the divine life within.
c. Christian & Theological response
The greatest task for a theologian is to find ways how to present the Gospel to Hindus
who believe in the doctrine of Karma. There are major differences between the view of
life in Hinduism and Judeo-Christian world views. The former has a cyclic view of life
and the later has a linear view of life. The former has God nothing to do with the fate of
the individual whereas in the later God is intrinsically involved with the history. The
former is very individualistic and the later has a synthesis of individualistic and
cooperative dimension. The former has a concept of moksa that has to be gained by the
merit whereas the later moksa comes from the grace of God.
Having stated the differences between these two world views, it is necessary for us
to analyse the doctrine of Karma theologically. In Judeo-Christian world view, we do see
a history as salvation history which is one of theme of the Bible. It presupposes that man
has fallen and God is involved in history to restore that relationship that was fractured. In
the doctrine of Karma, an individual is left to his own ‘karma.’ His inherited karmic force
will decide his birth. In other words the quality of his ‘karmic force’ will decide his life in
the cycle of Karma-Samsara.
However, in Christian world view, Salvation is free gift of God through atoning
work of Jesus Christ. In other words, Christ has broken the cycle of Karma and set an
individual free from his accumulated karma. Now, it is by imitating the person of Christ
one can develop his/her moral and ethical aspects of life.
3. Buddhism29
i. Introduction
Buddhism is one the major religions in the world. In Nepal it is the second largest
religion. Buddhism arose as a reaction against caste system in Hinduism. Buddhist
morality has special spiritual aims of faith. It consists of Buddha’s teaching which consists
of diagnoses of human condition and prescription how that condition be alleviated.30 It
29
I have deliberately omitted the origin of Buddhism as it is not very much related to the subject matter.
However, the founder of Buddhism is Gautama Buddha. Gautama Buddha was a Indian prince by name
Siddhartha who renounced his royal luxuries and privileges in order find the answer for suffering in this
world. After years of search, it was believed that he found answers to all his questions and finally became
‘Buddha (Enlightened one).’
30
Ninian Smart, “Buddhist Ethics,” 66.
11
is appropriate for us to understand the Buddhist ethical and moral frame work to make a
relevant and apt Christian ethical response in dealing with the people of Buddhist faith.
In this section we will briefly try to understand Buddhist ethics and its framework and
then we will Christian response to the same.
ii. Buddhist ethics:
Buddhism is non-theistic religion. It does not believe in the concept of super
being.31According to Saphir Atyal, it is not a religion in a usual sense but primarily an
ethical theory.32 He further opines that Buddhism addresses the problem of suffering
rather moral evil33 (in Christian world view, both were addressed not at the peripheral
level but at the existential and spiritual level, eg: Job, Habakkuk, Jeremiah and Christ and
Cross). Buddhism has a philosophical dimension in which it considers morality and
intellectual enlightenment are inherently interrelated.34 It also talks about ‘way of life’
(dharma) in which man is his own saviour. Man’s will is free; he is sole guide of his own
destiny. He has unlimited number of lives for his self development.
There are mainly two main segments in Buddhism- Thervada or Hinayana (the
little vehicle) which follows the original teachings of Buddha; Mahanyana (great vehicle)
which is more liberal and syncretism.
iii. The foundations of Buddhist ethical theory
There are mainly four foundations of Buddhist ethical theory. We will discuss briefly
about each on.
a. The four noble truths (Arya Satya):
Firstly, the suffering (dukha) - all forms of existence has misery and pain both mentally
and physically. Secondly, the cause of suffering (Dukha samudhaya) - desire for the
individual existence is the cause of the suffering. Thirdly, the cessation of suffering (Dukha
nirodha) - when desire is removed, suffering stops. Fourthly, way to cessation of suffering
(Dukha nirodha marga) - this involves eight-fold path which a person may follow to
liberate himself from the cycle of births and re-births.
b. Eight-fold path:
Right view (resolve)- to have wholesome and unselfish motives
Right speech- using only words that are worthy and useful
Right conduct- Abstaining from killing any living beings, stealing, hatred,
sensuality and intoxication
Right living- Rejection of luxury, using one’s life for the good of others
31
Chandran, Christian Ethics, 16.
32
Saphir P. Athyal, “Buddhist Ethics,” ed. Carl F. Henry, Wycliff Dictionary of Christian Ethics (Peabody,
MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000), 75.
33
Ibid.
34
Ibid.
12
Right effort- to avoid evil in a person by detachment from worldly desires
and thinking on positive values.
Right thought- Contemplation on the transitoriness of life.
Right concentration- meditation upon only one thing which leads one
into a trance state of rapture and happiness
Right understanding
There are certain hindrances to the journey of 8-fold path:

Delusion of reality- Thinking that the world is real
Doubts- Created mental idleness
False belief- Rites and ceremonies that would bring salvation
Sensual desire
Unkindness
Desire for reward in the future world
Spiritual pride
Self-righteousness
Ignorance
Removal of hindrances comprises four meditations- love, compassion, joy and peace.
c. Self, Karma and Re-birth:
Man is complete in himself according to Buddhism. He needs no god or saviour. Yet
man is part of changing process.35 Every act of man has a consequence and this
accumulates karmic factor. The consequences of one’s action cannot be stopped. This is a
theory called ‘theory of cause and effect (karma)’ which Buddha learned from Hinduism.
However, Buddha taught that by mental effort man can control his present thoughts and
actions thereby gradually bringing himself closer to his goal. However, man cannot learn
everything in one single life. He lives through many lives. Inequality among men can
explain in terms of re-births. If there is a good karma, the person will have good life after
his death and vice versa.
d. Attaining Nirvana
The eight-fold path leads to a state of nirvana which is the final goal of all moral actions
and intellectual development. It is ‘annihilation’ of personal identity or separate identity
35
I see a contradiction here because Buddhism belives that Man is complete in himself and at the same time
it holds to the belief that he is also part of the changing process. Anything that is changing is not complete.
13
or separate individual life and one’s immersion into universal self- ‘like a drop of water
into ocean.’
iv. Christian and theological response:
A serious Christian ethicist while interacting with other religious ethical world
view should have respect towards the same. We cannot deny the fact that there are many
similarities between Buddhist ethical teaching and Christian ethical teaching. For
example, Ninian Smart opines that the concept of compassion (Karua) in Buddhism can
be compared to agape love in Christianity.36 However, both world views diverge largely
from theological perspectives. Christian world view is a theistic world view where as
Buddhist world view in non-theistic. In Christian world view, man has fallen to sin
because of his disobedience against God whereas in Buddhism we do not see any such
aspect. In Christian world view, man cannot save himself and therefore requires a saviour
for which incarnation becomes necessary. In Buddhism man is complete and he is his
own saviour. In Christianity, ethics and moral responsibility is centred on Christ-
consciousness whereas in Buddhism it is anthropocentric. In Christianity, good works
are the results of our salvation which was given to us through the sacrifice of Christ
which can be realized in us with the help of the Holy Spirit. In Buddhism, to attain
Nirvana, one must do good works for the accumulation of good karma.
In Christianity everyone is made equal and in fact made in the very image of
God. In Buddhism, there is inequality because of the belief of the cycle of Karma. Finally,
in Buddhism, one helps his neighbour in order to attain good karma where as in
Christianity one loves his neighbour because he/she loves God first. Therefore, Christian
ethical frame work is very much unique when compared with Buddhist ethical frame
work.
4. Islam
i. Introduction
Islam is the second largest populated religion in the world. The Muslim population in
Nepal constitutes for 4.2 % of 29, 890, and 686 (July 2012).37 That means the
approximate Muslim population in Nepal is 12, 50, 000. Looking at the dynamics of the
population growth of Muslims and also other religions, it is necessary for us to have a
brief understanding of Islamic ethical system so as to formulate a relevant Christ-centric
ethical response.
ii. Islamic ethics
Islam, like Judo-Christian world views follow strict monotheism.38 The basis of Islamic
ethics is the absolute authority of the will of Allah and the right conduct ordained by
Allah.39 The final and ideal revelation of the character and the will of Allah is given to
36
Ninian Smart, “Buddhist Ethics,”67.
37
“Nepal Demographics Profile 2013”, n.d., n.p. [cited 8 October 2013]. Online:
http://www.indexmundi.com/nepal/demographics_profile.html, accessed on Oct 8th 2013.
38
Muslims and Jews however, refute Christian faith because of the belief in ‘Trinity’ which they deem it as
another form of polytheism.
39
14
Mohammad who himself is the supreme example for the formation of ethics in every
Muslim.
a. Sources of Islamic ethics
There are two major sources for Islamic ethics- Quran and Sunna (traditions). Quran
includes specific commandments of God on faith, manner of life for every believer
according to which all men, Muslims and non-Muslims will be judged or rewarded.40
Sunna (traditions) supplements Quran. Since Quran does not give every detail of
conduct for every circumstance, Muslims the way of life of Mohammad as the pattern of
life to be followed as recorded in the traditions.
Islam, from its genesis and development influenced by the moral ideas of ancient
Arab tribes. Therefore, according to D. M. Donaldson opines that one can find other
elements derived from pre-Islamic tribal morality like honour, loyalty to the chief and
the clan, hospitality, courage, and endurance.41 Especially the tribal loyalty has been
refined, redefined and Islamized as a religious kinship – “all Muslims are brothers.”42
In the early stages of its genesis, Mohammad stood as a reformer demanding
personal belief, morality, good intentions commanded in Quran. Disobedience is
seriously punished.
b. Ethics of Quran
Ethics of Quran can be summed up into “Believe and do right.”43 The ethics of Quran
forms the ethical behaviour grounded in God (Allah) the merciful, to whom absolute
submission is essential, the angel who record the deeds of men, the prophets, Mohammad
being the last, resurrection and the day of judgment, the predestination if all actions,
good and evil and the Quran being God’s final revelation.
In the light of the above, a Muslim must shape his everyday conduct by “doing
right.” Of all the human virtues, Quran gives primary importance to beneficence-
bestowing of benefits especially in the form of alms, poor & the needy, orphan, stranger,
slave and the prisoner.
c. Five types of ethical action
Obligatory (fard): A required duty. Rewarded if you do it, punished, if you
do not.
Preferred (Mustahabb): Reward for doing, but not punished if you don’t.
Permissible or allowed (Halal): You may or may not do it. Neither

punished nor reward for doing or not doing it.
40
Samudre, “Islamic Ethics, 342.”
41
D. M Donaldson, “Islamic Ethics,” ed. John Macquarrie and James Childress, A New Dictionay of
Christian Ethics (London: SCM Press, 1986), 315.
42
Ibid.
43
Samudre, “Islamic Ethics, 341.”
15
Disliked (Makruh): Some actions are disliked, but not forbidden. If you do
them, you will not be punished. If you do not do them, you will be
rewarded.
Forbidden (Haram): must not be done under any circumstance. Otherwise

punishment ensues. Abstinence brings reward.
d. Five pillars of Islam (Five obligatory duties)

1) Reciting the Kalima- “There is no God but Allah and Mohammad is his
prophet.”
2) Reciting the daily prayers (Namaz)-generally five times a day.
3) Observing the fast in the month of Ramzan (Roza)
4) The giving of the alms (Zakat)
5) Undertaking the pilgrimage- Mecca in person or by proxy (Hajj)
e. Moral actions
The moral actions of a Muslim are also governed by Islamic idea of sin, i.e., “what Allah
forbids.”44 The Quran repeatedly stresses on some things (halal) which are permitted and
others haram (forbidden).
Muslim theologians divide sin into two types- Kabira (great sin) and Saghira (little
sin). Under Kabira (great sins), sins like murder, adultery, disobedience to God and
parents, evading Jehad (holy war), drunkenness, usury45, neglecting Friday prayers, fast of
Ramzan, forgetting the Quran after reading it, swearing falsely or by any other name-
‘than that of God.’ The sin of sins is heresy (Shirk) - sin of associating a partner to God.
Saghira (little sins) includes lying, deception, anger, lust. These can be easily
forgiven if the greater sins are avoided and if some meritorious actions are performed.
Islamic ethics allows polygamy46. Muslims are allowed to have up to four wives
but only if he treats them equally. Divorce in Islam is very easy. It is exclusively
prerogative of the husband. A Muslim can divorce his wife at any time and for any
reason by repeating thrice the formula – “I divorce thee.”
Islam sanctions slavery and slave trade though Muslims were called to treat slaves
mercifully. Islam prohibits the manufacture and use of intoxicating liquors. It also forbids
music, dancing, gambling, and the use of religious images and pictures and of certain
meats and food.
44
Ibid, 342.
45
The practice of making immoral and or unethical monetary loans. It is a sin to take interest on loan that
is given.
46
Man can marry more than one time.
16
iii. Christian and theological response47
As we have observed, Islamic ethics basically depends on the Quran, its teachings and
interpretations in traditions and also in their belief in Allah and Mohammad who is their
role model. One cannot deny that there are many similarities between Islamic and Judo-
Christian ethical frameworks. Therefore, when dealing with a Muslim, a Christian has so
many ‘common grounds’ in order to present the uniqueness in the message of Christian
faith.
The most important divergent is Christian belief in the concept of ‘Trinity.’ Muslims
refute Christian faith as they feel it is equivalent to polytheism.48 Trinity reflects an ‘I-
thou’ relationship. Trinity is a community within which Father is in communion with
the Son and the Son is in the Father and Holy Spirit also shares this unique relationship.
We find this ‘relational-dimension’ within Godhead which we do not find in Islamic
world view.
According to Barth, Jesus Christ is neither a demigod nor an angel49 nor is he a
simple prophet. He refers Jesus Christ as the ‘second ‘mode of being’50 of God.51 That
brings us to the third ‘mode of being’ of God who is not a different personality but same
essence of the Father and the Son, who helps us to bring the realization of God-
consciousness in us. We see diversity in unity here. It is this ‘I-Thou’ relational
dimension, the Bible teaches and commands Christian to imitate in their day-to-day lives
which forms the ethical framework and also it is the basis for the Christ-centric moral
action. This is the reason we can summarise the Christian theology as ‘God-neighbour’
theology where a person who realizes God-consciousness in the self due to the
Trinitarian act in himself, is commanded to love his/her neighbour. This entails the
whole of the Christian message which is a very unique to Christian world view when
compared to Islam.
6. Summary
According to Russel Chandran, “The Gospel of Jesus Christ is addressed in India
(Nepal) to a moral vacuum, but to a people already influenced by very lofty ethical
teaching and committed to high standards of moral life.”52 It is true that Nepal is only
Hindu state in the world until recently democracy was instituted. We as Christians
should keep in mind that the Gospel of Jesus Christ has come to Nepal not into a context
47
Here my views are very brief and therefore students are required to form their own respective view after
a thorough research on the subject matter. This is a subject worthy to researched further.
48
I am not going to deal with how Trinity is not a polytheistic belief, as I assume that the student at this
level is well aware of arguments and defence on the same. Here our focus is on how the concept of Trinity
influences Christian ethical frame when compared to the monotheistic view of God in Islam.
49
Stanley J Grenz and Roger E Olson, 20th Century Theology God and the World in a Transistional Age
(First Indian Edition.; Secundrabad: Om books, 2004), 73.
50
Ibid, 73.
51
It is not to be understood as Modalism when Barth says ‘mode.’ Barth does not use the word ‘personality’
as it projects a plurality of personality in God which cannot be as God always has one personality. For
example, if Jesus Christ is a different personality other than the Father, then there is no revelation of the
Father in Jesus Christ but Jesus Christ himself. Therefore, according to Barth, Father, Son and the Spirit are
the divine ways of being that eternally subsist within God in absolute unity.
52
17
of immoral state but to a state where there are certain concepts of right and wrong or
good and bad. Russel Chandran is right is asking that whether we are able to present the
Gospel of Jesus Christ in such a way that the ethical and moral framework of other faith
goes beyond their own concepts of good and right. In other words, goodness revealed in
Jesus Christ should challenge the ethical systems of other faith to go beyond their own
concepts of good.
The revelation of Jesus Christ not only should challenge other faiths but it should
challenge us as well to respect and understand the significance and uniqueness of
Christian ethical system much better in the light of other ethical system. Only when
student of ethics inculcates such attitude as stated above, will there be a true, relevant and
Christ-centric ethical response toward other religious ethical system.
18
PART II
III. BIBLE-THEOLOGY ETHICS

A. Bible and ethics
1. Methodology: Different ways by which Bible is used in ethical reflection and
an attempt to arrive at a relevant method of interpretation
a. Introduction
It is often perplexing and at times frustrating to understand how we can use or to
understand how it has been used to arrive at moral response to pertinent ethical issues. It
is a tantamount for a Christian ethicist with regard to the usage of Scriptures for a
relevant moral action. We often find in our churches and Christian homes that the Bible
is used in a legalistic way and at other times in spiritual way. According to 2 Tim. 3:16,
the Scripture is “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in
righteousness.”
It is undeniable fact that Bible is the source of “authority” for moral discernment
and judgment for the Christian community.53 To understand the role of the Bible and its
usage with regard to ethics firstly we need to have a comprehensive understanding the
nature of the Bible. We will briefly look into this aspect from a theological vantage point
both from fundamental and liberal perspectives. We will also look into serious problems
in using Bible in ethics and then we will see some relevant suggestions on the same.
i. The nature of the Bible
When it comes to the role and the usage of the Bible, we are not just talking about its
‘authority.’ We need to understand the nature of the Bible itself. Bible did not fall
directly from heaven.54 It contains human words believed to be divinely inspired by God.
Therefore, it is both human and divine words.55 It is a ‘conjunction’56 of divine and
human but we do not know precisely how they are together.57 According to
Chalcedonian perspective this conjunction is not to be “confused, transmuted the one into
the other, divided into separate categories or contrasted according to area or function.”58
Fundamentalist perspective identifies this ‘conjunction’ as the identification of
human word with the word of God. They also justify identification of biblical ethics
with that of Christian ethics.59 Therefore, a rule or a command is presumed to be
normative for the church today.
53
Allen Verhey, “Bible in Christian Ethics,” ed. John Macquarrie and James Childress, A New Dictionay of
Christian Ethics (London: SCM Press, 1986), 57.
54
Ibid.
55
Evangelicals and Liberals debate over whether Bible is the word of God or word of God. Does Bible
contain the word of God or it is the word of God. Irrespective of the difference, they both agree about
divine and human agency involved.
56
Verhey, “Bible in Christian Ethics. 58”
57
Ibid.
58
Ibid., 58.
59
Some scholars do not agree that biblical ethics are same as Christian ethics. Biblical ethics are more
confined within the context, culture and time of biblical times and one cannot use such ethics for the
contemporary moral isuses. In that sense, there is a difference between biblical ethics and Christian ethics.
Christian ethics is a moral reflection based on the scripture to address certain contemporary moral issues.
19
Liberalism perspective identified this ‘conjunction’ as a contrast between human
words and the divine.60 This contrasting view poses a task for an ethicist to identify the
word of God with the Scriptures. This task of identifying involved a careful note in the
contemporary needs and problems to the Spirit of God in the age. Therefore, there is a
rise of contextual studies over textual studies.
In summary, Bible is the Word of God. Nevertheless, God cannot be reduced to
the level of Scriptures. If God is reduced to the level of Scriptures and Bible is used as the
only authoritative source for different moral actions, then we are running to the ‘error of
biblicism and bibliolatry.’61With this in mind, now let us probe into some of the serious
problems in the usage of the Bible in ethics.
ii. Problems involved in using Bible in ethics
For Christians, a great majority of them, Bible is regarded as the source. However, Bible
also has been regarded as a source of personal devotion for the nurturing of personal
spiritual life than as a resource for “understanding and participating”62 in the
contemporary moral struggles.
We also often see how Bible has been misused. For example, Bible has been
quoted in support of slave trade and on the other the same has been quoted against slave
trade. Therefore, we should not be surprised to see how layman is confused and
perplexed over the relationship of the Bible and moral struggle.
This leads to three crucial implications on the life of the church and its members.
Firstly, the members may resolve to be isolated from the moral struggles thinking Bible is
only for personal spiritual growth. Secondly, the members may accept the on-going
social situation as something that has been ordained (planned) by Scripture and therefore,
it is their ‘fate’ to be discriminated or ill-treated. Thirdly, members may involve
revolutions and secular movements as they lack biblical knowledge. Therefore, it is a
‘responsible-task’ as Bible student and Christian ethicist to respond constructively to
moral struggles as he/she relates bible to ethics.63 Keeping in this mind let us see how
Bible ought not to be used in ethics.
iii. Three approaches not be used in relating Bible to ethics
Before dealing with the subject matter, we need to clear about two assumptions
we often make about Bible and ethics. Firstly, we should treat Bible as a bag with ready -
made answers. Mabry point such an assumption as a ‘major fallacy.’64 The moral issues we
find in the Bible and the responses to it are of a different time than ours. They do not
have the problem of nuclear war, bio-medical issues and so on. According to Mabry,
60
Verhey, “Bible in Christian Ethics,” 58.
61
62
Ibid., 73.
63
Since there is confusion over how to relate Bible to the moral struggles and come up with a constructive
response, church often looks for seminaries and theological institutions on such matters. It is saddening
aspect that even seminaries and theological institution struggle with the paucity of material on such matter.
Another problem is that ethicists often read into the scriptures without proper exegesis of the scripture
which leads to ‘what- they- say’ rather letting the Scripture speak for itself and then drawing insights from
the same.
64
20
what we have in the Bible are “moral injunctions directed to particular people in
particular circumstances-to their sitz im leben.
Second assumption is that Christian ethic is about ‘imitating’ biblical morality.65
This assumption leads us into a fallacious thinking that history and culture are static and
the Bible presents solutions for all the times.
Keeping the above two assumption now let us see these three commonly and
most widely used approaches in relating Bible to ethics which are to be avoided.
The proof text method
In this method a verse or a portion of the text taken out of context and then used one’s
own moral claims. According to Mabry, there are two fatal flaws. Firstly, it ignores the
availability of other text on the same subject in the Scripture. For example, if Rom 13
calls for the submission to the state, then in Rev 17, it calls the state a monster. Secondly,
this approach ignores that moral injunctions in the Bible were shaped by the changes in
the historical situation. Therefore, it is fallacious to think the moral principles of the
Biblical times will serve the same purpose of the contemporary moral problems.
Spiritualization method
In this method, every moral issue is spiritualized. For example the feeding of the 500 may
be interpreted as feeding the spiritual hunger of the people.
Separation method
In this method, the Bible is deemed irrelevant to the present human struggle and is
separated from the same. Christians, who are involved in liberation movements, face the
danger of separating Scriptures as they feel it is time consuming to engage moral
reflection based on the Bible. On the other hand they also feel it is irrelevant to apply
biblical principle to the present moral struggles.
iv. Three alternative approaches
Keeping in view the above three rejected approaches, the question that we have to face is
how, then we should use the Bible? Ethicists often resort to three alternate approaches.
One is Deontological, teleological and responsibility- relationality approaches. We have
already studies what these methods are at their functional value. Now, we will look into
these with regard to how these approaches use the Bible.
Deontological approach
This approach emphasizes on commandments, rules and obligations in the scriptures are
timeless and we are obliged to obey. The problem with this approach is that it turns out
to be legalistic- “to regard Bible as a comprehensive moral handbook providing
propositional truths and prescriptive answers to all moral problems in the form of rules
and codes which must be literally obeyed.”66 Sometimes these rules and regulations are
emphasized to an extent there is a danger of running to error of Biblicism and
bibliolatry.
Teleological approach
Teleological approach sees Bible not as set of rules and regulations but rather as
providing certain notions of ultimate good that God intends for everyone. One problem
with this approach is that it does not take into consideration of the context. It also
65
Ibid., 76.
66
Ibid., 79.
21
assumes that Bible has already provided a blue print of the Kingdom of God looks like
and something that can be achieved through our efforts.
Responsibility-Relationality approach
In this approach the use of the Bible is not seen as a “revelation of morality but the
revelation of the living God.”67 It is not about obedience to the set of commandments but
it is about response to the living God as we are in ‘I-thou’ relationship with Him. This
approach concerns with the activity of God. According to Gustafason as quoted by
Mabry opines those who take this approach should not think about morality deduced to
some rules, but it should about God and how we relate to His presence and power?68 In
that sense the specific commandments and rules are not to be viewed as laws but they are
expressions of our “personal commitment and relationship with God within the context
of Covenant.”69
Like any other approach, this approach is not perfect. For example, how do we
know what God is doing in history now? How do we determine His activity? What
tools do we have to understand what God is doing? According to Mabry, this approach,
in its extreme form may turn into relativism- the feeling of ‘correctness’ about one’s own
discernment and disapproving others.70 Another reason is when we say the activity of
God in Jesus-are we referring to Jesus’ activity as teacher or Christ’s activity as Lord.
v. Summary
The use of the Bible in ethics is very important aspect. How we view and use the
Bible will make difference in our moral response. One of the reasons for the confusion
and frustration in the church is because of lack of material on this matter. As we studied
Bible should not be approached for proof text, spiritualization and separation from the
moral struggles. However, we do have alternative approaches such deontological,
teleological and responsibility-relationality approach. However, each of these approaches
has their disadvantages as we have seen. Among these, Responisbility- relationality is
most used and accepted approach in the way this approach uses the Bible.
Therefore, in dealing with the moral issues, we always not have exact situations in
the Bible. Hence, this call for a serious exegetical study of the Scriptures in its own
canonical and historical context and the insights may be applied to the contemporary
issues. However, the insights may be irrelevant to certain moral issues. Therefore, we are
left with Responsibility-relationality approach where you approach the Bible as not set of
commands but as an expression of our commitment to the revelation of activity of God
in Christ.
2. Old Testament Ethics:
a. Ethical teachings of Pentateuch (shalom, covenant, Law,
liberation)
67
Ibid., 81.
68
Ibid.
69
Ibid.
70
Ibid., 82.
22
i. Introduction
It is erroneous to jump into the text with our own thoughts and prejudices and
force the text to speak by quoting several proof- texts. Our intention should be then to
enter into their world and trying to understand their experiences in their own contexts
and thereby drawing insights to apply to our context. Now, ethics is such an agenda that
we need to investigate, analyze and bring out the implied meaning in and through the
Old Testament times. So, our task is to understand how Israel perceived and experienced
their relationship with God and how that relationship in turn reflected in their ethical
and practical ideals as an individual and as an community as a whole. To understand the
ethical outlook of Israel we need to understand the three dimensions on which it stands.
These three dimensions are theological, sociological and economical. The question that
we need to answer in this article is what it means to live as the people of God.
ii. Covenant
The context is that of creation, fall, election, redemption and consecration. Many
scholars debate with the sequence of these themes especially that of election and
redemption. They say that election has taken place after Exodus. I would like to go along
with my professor Dr. Eliya Mohol who argues that God has redeemed those whom he
has elected or with those whom he already has covenanted with. It is in this context God
revealed his identity through his words and acts in human history. Therefore it is God’s
story in which he redeemed his creation through his gracious act of salvation. It is in this
world view the people Israel perceived and understood the ethical obligation of God’s
salvafic act.
Our task is then to analyze the ‘ethical understanding’ of the people of God
through theological dimension. Theological dimension consists- Who is God (God’s
identity), What God does (God’s acts)? What God says (God’s word)? And God’s holiness
and presence.
iii. God’s identity:
Ethics are very much related to God’s identity, character, will and action.
Therefore Old Testament ethics are theological. Identity means recognition of an
individual on the basis of a relationship. It is “I-thou” relationship in which “I” perceives
himself in the light of “Thou” vice versa. When it comes to “God-human” relationship,
man perceives who he really ought to be in the light of his relationship with God. It is
from this unique relationship Israel draws their meaning for existence. The word “God”
is a generic term and we have to distinguish between “God” and “the Lord of the Bible.”
23
The Hebrew word for “Yahweh” is “‫ ”יהוה‬which is translated as “Lord” in the Bible.
Interestingly this word is derived from the verb which indicates an action. In other
words, it is the act of Yahweh proved who truly was God.
The identity and the character of God are very much important to the ethical
teaching of the Old Testament. God of the Bible is not just any god that was mentioned
in the Bible. He is known by what he does that qualifies the notion of “being God.” The
recurring phrase “Israel went after other gods” was considered not just a religious breach
but also unethical. This is because idolatry has sociological, economical and religious
degrading effect on the people of Israel. Therefore we can say that the ethical
understanding of the Old Testament depends upon the identity of God, the Holy one of
Israel.
What do we imply from this? Are, we, as Christians, as the citizens of the new
Kingdom, reflecting God’s identity in and through our lives? We boast about our belief
about the Triune God then how are we reflecting our belief in our words, actions and
relationships. Are we just complacent? Let us grapple with this thought as we are to
project his image on us to the people around. So that when they see us they should see
our Lord and God.
iv. God’s act
God is the author of life. God of Israel is known by his acts. He acts first and calls us to
respond. This is the fundamental ethical teaching of the Old Testament. It is God who
came down in search of a man. Our God is a “missionary God.” It is this aspect that
separates the faith of the Israel from its contemporaries. It is God’s act of grace that
redeemed man from his predicament. So, ethics becomes a matter of response and
gratitude within the framework of God’s relationship with the people of Israel. So
therefore ethics is not something that is to be followed blindly. This is an inherent
resultant response of gratitude to God’s act of grace.
Exodus presents a paradigm for establishing the people of God. It is very
interesting to see that God did not give the law when he met Moses in the burning bush
but after he delivered them from the hands of Egyptians, he gave them the law. People of
Israel didn’t have to follow the rules in order to be delivered. It is rather pure act of grace.
24
Israel’s redemption is not the end in itself. It should be accompanied with service. Serving
God is an ethical obligation. Therefore, law is a matter of response and a means to be in
the fellowship of God’s community. The Israelites were to maintain the law in order to
maintain their relationship with Yahweh. The point here is that law itself begins with
what God did in their past calling the people of Israel to the obedience unto the law in
order maintain their relationship with Yahweh and also their identity as the people of
God.
What do we imply from this? In order to be called as “Christians” are we
responding rightly to the Grace that redeemed us from our sins on the Cross? Or are we
simply taking grace for granted. Remember the Old Testament Law has provided a
paradigm how to conduct ourselves in all aspects of life so also Christ’s act of grace on
the Cross should penetrate into all aspects of our lives. We need to allow Christ to
transform us from inside out. This will imprint on us His image so that people may see
Christ in us so that Christ is magnified through our lives. So, therefore let’s be conscious
of what God is doing in our lives and grab every opportunity to lift him up by being
ethically upright.
v. God’s word
Our ethical response in not only to who God is and what he did in our history but also
to what he said. God involves in our human history not just by his deeds but also by his
words. This deed-word aspect is clearly stated in Deut. 4: 32- 34:
Ask now about the former days, long before your time, from the day God
created man on the earth; ask from one end of heavens to the other. Has anything
so great as this ever happened, or has anything like it ever been heard of? Has any
other person heard the voice of God speaking out of fire, as you have, and lived?
Has any god ever tried to take for himself one nation out of another nation, by
testing’s, by miraculous signs and wonders, by war, by a mighty hand and an
outstretched arm, or by great and awesome deeds, like all the things the Lord
your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes?
Deut. 4: 32-34
This text speaks about the unique experience that the people of Israel had. They
not only led by God out of Egypt but they heard His voice which has never heard of
among their contemporaries. God’s word is creative, instructive and transformative. It is
instructive in the sense it guides man in right paths. This is the reason the Law which
25
was given to Moses is a guide of conduct to the entire community. It is to this Law
which was spoken by God, the people of Israel were asked to serve. It is transformative in
the sense that this Law that was spoken penetrates into all the aspects of life of a man-
from his raising out from his bed, to his public and private matters. If the people of Israel
maintain their allegiance to this “Spoken-Law” by God, they would be able to maintain
their unique identity as the people of God. The experience of being guided by God
through his spoken word makes Israel unique among the nations. God’s very word is a
guidance of life for them (Ps. 147: 19-20)
The revelatory aspect of God’s word in the form of Law is a “gospel” to us. We all
know the word “Gospel” means “glad tidings.” Therefore, Law is a matter of joy as it
leads our paths to life. Law declares or reveals the mind of God and the one who obeys
and follows the “revealed” law will gain wisdom and life and also close fellowship with
God (Ps. 19: 7). This revealed law not only imparts knowledge of God but also wisdom
to conduct oneself with its warning and reward (Ps. 19: 11). In words of David it is “a
lamp to my feet and light for my path” (Ps. 119: 105). David is using a strong ethical
metaphor. In other words even our ethical response is guided by God’s word. Therefore
we have nothing to boast about. Whatever we do, we do within the framework of God’s
revealed word.
What do we imply form this? We need to be conscious of God’s word in our
hearts. If we are in tune with God’s word, we would be able to maintain our identity in
his kingdom. We also should know that His word is not “legalistic” but it is spoken out
of love for us. Therefore our ethical response to God should be in love and humility.
vi. Holiness of God
We see God repeatedly emphasizing on his holiness in order to call the people of Israel to
be holy, “And be holy for I Am holy.” (Lev 11: 44). Many a times we tend to think
‘holiness’ as one of the attributes of God which is a wrong conclusion. Holiness is in the
very nature of God as John E. Hartley points out to this as “quintessential nature of
Yahweh as God.” Yahweh revealed himself to the people of Israel as a holy God. The
holiness of God is relational which demands the people of Israel to be holy in order to
continue their relationship with Yahweh. So, being holy is just not a ritual exercise but it
26
is a day-to-day exercise. This holiness has to be demonstrated by Israel’s obedience. This
is the overall message of the book of Leviticus. Therefore one has to be ritually, morally
and ethically clean in order to maintain the relationship with Yahweh. In case of failure
there is providence for sanctification through the sacrifice.
The other aspect is the “presence of Yahweh.” The laws whether civil, criminal or
ritual were given in the presence of God. The presence of God is very central for
Israelites. Koch as was quoted by Hartley says that this presence is a blend of happiness
and fear that is the result of being in the presence of Yahweh. The presence of Yahweh is
manifested in the beaming glory that is devouring. This glory demands Israel
community to be holy. The law codes help Israelites to maintain purity and holiness in
the presence of Yahweh.
What do we imply from this? How are we reflecting God’s holiness in and
through our lives? Are we really conscious of his presence amidst of us? God’s holiness
and presence demands purity. Unless we are purified we cannot stand in his presence. In
other words it is impossible for us to be one among the people of God unless we are
purified. So, in order to live as the people of God we need to maintain our ethical
obligation to God thereby reflecting his glory and channelling his presence to the people
around us.
vii. Summary
Living as the people of God by reflecting God’s identity, by remembering his salvific act
of grace and by spoken word of law gives us a meaning and purpose for our lives. Living
as the people of God is not an end in itself. We are also called to be a “witnessing people”
by living as the people of God. The ethical dimension of the Old Testament gives Israel a
missional thrust. This missional thrust is not going out or sending out but it is witnessing
God’s identity, God’s acts, God’s word and his holiness and presence in and through their
lives as the people of God. This makes them very unique among the nations. In other
words the people of God are channels of blessings to the nations.
In the light of our understanding of Old Testament ethics, how can we apply
them in our context today? In this attempt we cannot bypass the ultimate revelation of
God revealed unto us on the Cross of Calvary. Cross has internalized our ethical
obligation to God. It is no more something written with an ink and a paper but it is
27
written on our very hearts. Therefore, our ethical obligation is an inherent response to
God’s gracious act on the Cross. Christ is our ultimate model. It is an imperative for us to
imitate him. However, it is very sweet and good to hear all this but how far we are able
to fill the gap between our beliefs and practices? Are we ethical while we write our
assignments? Are we ethical in our relationships? Are we ethical in subjecting ourselves
for accountability? I would like to challenge you with these questions. Let us live like the
people of the new covenant. Thus says the Lord, “I will put my Law within them, and
I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
No longer shall they teach one another, or say to each other “know the Lord,” for
they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, says the Lord;...”
Jer. 31: 33-34.
b. Ethical teachings of Prophets

Prophets played a very important role in the ethical formation of the people of Israel.
Firstly, they are covenant pointers. They constantly reminded the people of Israel about
the covenant relationship with Yahweh. The concept of covenant is very much
important in terms of their daily life and worship. Secondly, they constantly reminded
about the holiness of God. Holiness of God is a very dynamic concept. God by nature is
Holy and He cannot co-exist with sin. Therefore, the laws and regulations help them to
approach God very carefully. According to Chandran, “obedience to the law is the
touchstone and measuring rod of their covenant relationship with God.”71 Thirdly, the
prophets spoke against the economic injustice, oppression of the helpless and poor. This
is because they firmly believed God is God of love and He has preferential attitude
towards the marginalized.
The first category of the key and underlying principles of the ethical teaching of
the prophets is justice, mercy, and truth which is fundamental attributes of
God.72Secondly, the election of Israel as God’s people- God has chosen them with
purpose. The purpose is service-Service to man and God. Election is not static in that
sense but it is dynamic. Thirdly, reflecting exemplary quality of life in individuals as well
as a community based on their covenant relationship with Yahweh. Fourthly,
responsibility towards the corporate life-holiness is not only an individual and personal
matter but it has to be reflected in their responsibility towards their neighbour. Covenant
considers every aspect of the neighbours’ life to be sacred. Therefore, if community is
corrupted, no one should claim the individual goodness.73
c. Ethical teachings 8th century prophets
The 8th century prophets raised the existing ethical ideals of Israelites to a higher level.
They presented more of a social ethics which involves God’s demand for justice and
righteousness rather than hypocritical temple rituals and sacrifices.
71
72
Ibid, 35.
73
Ibid, 36.
28
i. Amos
The key ethical theme in Amos is Justice. He calls the people of Israel to practice justice
in the on-going burgeoning of wealth and oppression of the poor. He brings the words
of judgment from the LORD. For him, “what God desires is the practice of justice (Amos
5:4-15). God despises the festivals and songs of the unjust and the wicked who worship
him.”74 One unique aspect with Amos set the judgement in a universal context.
Judgment is not only for the people of Israel but to all the nations who practices injustice
(Amos 1:3-15).
ii. Hosea
The key ethical theme in Hosea is disobedience to the covenantal requirements. He
exposes the Israel’s unfaithfulness by explaining it through his own life as he marries an
unfaithful woman. For Hosea, God is a faithful husband who never forsakes His people.
He will remain faithful to His covenant to Israel. With this in mind, Hosea condemns
hypocritical religion and practices of Israel. He also pleads with Israel to return to God
who is their first love (Hosea. 12:6).
iii. Isaiah 1-39 (proto-Isaiah)
Proto-Isaiah’s basic emphasise is on the sovereignty of God over all the nations and
through this emphasis he draws the ethical insights such as righteousness and justice as
the expression of the holiness of God. He also presents an eschatological hope of peace
among the nations (Is. 2:4). Along- side this eschatological hope, he envisions a messianic
rule who establishes justice and righteousness. He also condemns the fundamental sin of
pride according to Chandran.75 Pride is the prince of all sins. It is an attitude to dethrone
God and enthrone oneself in His place. All other sins are symptoms of this core disease.
iv. Micah
The key phrase of Micah is “what does the LORD require of you?” Mic. 6:8. Based on
this emphasis he condemns spiritual and religious hypocrisy and at the same time calls the
people “to act justly, to love loyalty, to walk humbly with God” Mic. 6:8. This
requirement is nothing but an undivided obedience to the Law and practice of justice
with undergirded commitment and love towards God.
d. Later prophets
i. Jeremiah
Jeremiah is well known for his deep emotional struggle and also his solidarity with his
people. The key theme is immediate judgment. It is that light Jeremiah proclaims God’s
judgment, the reason for the judgment and the acceptance of the judgment. According
to him, evil is not just the superficial action of human beings but it is the found in the
inner being of man, i.e., the heart.76 As Chandran puts it, “human conduct is derived
from the state of the inner being. The root of sin is a hardened or a stubborn heart (Jer.
74
Ibid, 36.
75
Ibid, 38.
76
Josianic reformation took place during Jeremiah. It has brought certain changes in the life of Israel
(Judah). Nevertheless, the change is only superficial.
29
7:24; 9:14; 11:8; 13:10; 16:12; 23:17).”77 Therefore, the circumcision of the heart is more
essential than the ritualistic circumcision of the flesh. He gave a very practical advice to
the exiles to settle down even as they live as exiles in a foreign land. He reminds the
people that it was because of the disobedience to the covenant, they were punished.
However, he also asserts the ‘new covenant’ that God himself initiate which will be the
base of new ethical transformation (Jer. 31:31-34).
ii. Ezekiel
Ezekiel’s teaching is very much similar to Jeremiah. He also talks about new heart which
calls for a radical response to God’s covenant (Ezek.11:19-20; 36:26-27). According to R.
E. O. White, the teaching about the wicked living if they mend their ways which is
contrasted to righteous person sins which will not guarantee him salvation is a milestone
in biblical ethics.78 For Ezekiel, religion and morality belonged together. He emphasised
on that morality is a direct fruit of one being in “direct and close fellowship with God.”79
According to Ezekiel ideal life is in obeying God’s covenant.
3. New Testament Ethics:
a. Ethical teachings of Jesus (Focus on Kingdom of God)
According to Russel Chandran, Jesus did not fulfil the law by giving another set of
ethical laws but rather he internalized the law. Secondly, he points out that Christian
morality is not in the obeying laws but it is the reflection of the relationship with God.
Thirdly, Jesus inaugurated the sovereignty of God or Kingdom of God.
According to Russel Chandran the characteristics of the Kingdom of God can be
seen in Jesus Himself- the nature of the Kingdom of God. Secondly, according to Russel
Chandran, the nature of the Kingdom of God is reflected in the teaching and ministry of
Jesus Christ for “censure, admonition and warning.” Thirdly, the teaching is calling of
renunciation of the world but it not a call to the path of asceticism. It is a call to
surrender to God in obedience. Fourthly, the teachings of Jesus present a contrast
between the value systems between Kingdom of God and of the world. The judgment is
done based on the same contrast.
In response to the question of what is morality of the Kingdom of God?” Russel
Chandran opines that Jesus knew the importance and significance of the inner purity
over and against the practice of the moral code and it cannot address the problem of
moral disposition in the heart of man. According to Russel Chandran, the other aspect in
the ethics of the New Testament is Jesus and the grace of God which projects a shift
from the observance of moral code to repentance which is a “grace outlook.”
According to Russel Chandran the nature of the moral commands of Jesus has to
be understood from four aspects. Firstly, the understanding that Jesus did not teach his
disciples of his own teaching but he taught what he had learnt from the Father. Secondly,
Jesus moral commands are a shift from Jewish particularity to inclusivity of all. In other
words it is universal in nature. Thirdly it is an internalization of the law. Fourthly, Jesus
points out to the distortion of man’s relationship with God by sin.
77
78
Ibid.
79
Ibid.
30
i. The Sermon on the Mount
The Sermon on the Mount can be compared to the “Words” of the Law in the Old
Testament. Sermon on the Mount is an ethical teaching by Jesus. The writer might have
collected all the teachings of Jesus and made it available as a guide of conduct for the
early Christians. However, the Sermon on the Mount is not imperative commandments
but they are requirement of the “active self.” In other words the Sermon on the Mount
has summarized and internalized the law and the prophets. Jesus through the Sermon on
the Mount made us to realize the reality and the presence of Kingdom of God in the
present. In other words the Kingdom of God is realized here and now and anticipates a
culmination at the end. Therefore, the implications of the Sermon on the Mount are
applicable irrespective of time and space.
The other dimension to the ethical teaching of Jesus is God’s love. The Sermon
on the Mount not only makes us to realize God’s rule over us but also his love. He is just
God who demands kindness, love, mercy, forgiveness. The one who violate any of these
violates the law of God.
ii. Difference between the book of the Covenant and the
Sermon on the Mount
There are significant differences between the book of the covenant and the Sermon on
the Mount by Jesus. The first distinction is that Jesus addresses to the one who is worried
about “next day’s food supply.” The second one is the attitude towards the neighbour. He
stresses more on the relational aspect of the community which should reflect the
relationship with God. Finally, the aspect of reward and punishment was seen in different
sense. In the Sermon on the Mount the action of men does not begin with an
expectation of merit that fetches a reward but rather it reflects the nature of God, his
mercy and love.
b. Ethical teachings of Paul
i. Paul’s letter to the Romans
Paul’s letter is the most significant for the ethical reflection of the Christian Church.
Though it was written in A. D. 59, its message still is relevant to this day. Its relevance
can be traced by its influence over the early church father like Agustine, Calvin and
Luther. These Church father understood Christian faith in dominantly Pauline terms.
The letter of Romans presents us Paul’s “ripest thought in most complete form.” It
projects Paul’s understanding of the human situation and the depth of his religious
insight. However, according to the authors, there are some prejudices over the
understanding of the letter of Romans as many scholars see this letter as a “speculative
theology” but a deeper look into this letter especially themes like “The Righteousness of
God through Faith for Faith” throws some light of its implications to be applied in one’s
own life. Firstly the message of Romans coincides with the message of Amos as it opens a
moral indictment over the Gentile culture. Secondly this letter ends with a series of moral
imperative and counsels and its central portion is concerned with the significance of Jesus
Christ.
Thirdly, the letter of Romans provides us most important teachings of the moral
life of man and Christian conduct. According to Paul, it is not the knowledge of good
31
and evil that matter but the deliberate rebellion to do good knowing what is evil. In that
way man is revolting against himself. Therefore man is subject to sin and man has
become its slave. Paul’s teaching and Jesus teaching coincides in way that man is not
morally health because of the fact of the fallen nature of the first man and he needs to be
redeemed before he acts.
Fourthly, the Christian analysis of human situation presents us that man is a free
citizen in the kingdom of God but the fall to sin has distorted and frustrated man’s
destiny and his moral conduct which is contrary to God’s moral law. This is background
over which Paul develops his thought and presents us a “practical theology” of the “the
Righteousness of God.”
Fifthly, Paul never conformed to the idea of the duality of the life of the world as
the realm of good and evil as made by God. Whether evil is present, God is the author
and ruler of all. He is sovereign. God is the ultimate reality. He made himself known to
us in the person, life and death of Christ. Paul’s ethical convictions are strongly rooted in
the thought that ethical realization comes about when one realizes Christ’s life, death and
his teachings. Christ has reconciled man to God and also with one another.
Sixthly, Paul’s greatest contribution is towards his reflection on the imperative
moral law. He talks more about the internalization of the law over the practice of the
law. The imperative moral law presupposes that man is still can act contrary to the law
inside the heart. He talks about the “self-consciousness” of the goodness. According to
him, “imperative law cannot produce the innate, unforced graciousness of conduct
evident in Jesus Christ which is so much more attractive and so much more fruitful than
self-consciousness goodness.” The moral conduct and the practice should go together.
However, Paul in response to the criticism over his thought about the imperative moral
law, he responded by opining that inadequacy of the imperative moral law to achieve the
“necessary reorganization and renewal of human life.” (Rom. 7: 7- 25) He simply says
that “dying and rising of the self” gives a complete inner transformation of the
fundamental attitudes of men toward God, their world, themselves, and their neighbours.
Seventhly, the ethical reflection of Paul is also concerned with concept of
“neighbour.” In other words the internal transformation of man is also concerned with
the neighbour. There are three dimensions to this transformation- internal, unforced and
gracious love and practicality of in applying to the neighbour. In this way he is
juxtaposing individual factor with the social factor of man.
Finally, Paul’s ethics is also concerned with the social solidarity of the Christian.
In his anatomical explanation of the body of Christ where each member with their
respective consciousness will carry out their respective function with the direct relation
with the head which is Christ is something very unique. This interplay and intertwining
of man’s relationship with the self, God and individual is a significant contribution of
Paul’s ethical reflection.
B. Theology and ethics
1. Relation between theology and ethics: Different typologies
According to Russel Chandran in his book Christian ethics, pp 73-83 opines that starting
point of our ethical reflection should not be from the theological foundations but from
the awareness of the context in which we interact with the realities and the experience of
32
it should be reflected in our ethical decisions. However, I don’t agree with Chandran as
the ethical and moral reflection first has to be from theological point of view and then to
be applied to the context.
a. The image of God in the humans
According to Russel Chandran, humans have a special place in the creation. Secondly, he
opines that humans are part of creation. Thirdly, humans are bound by the laws of the
nature just like any other creature does. Fourthly, humans cannot be understood by the
set laws but can fully understand by their relationship with God. Fifthly, essential
humanness depends upon the relationship and accountability to God. According to
Russel Chandran humans who were made in the image of God do not fully share in that
image. The goal and purpose of the image of God is to reflect the same image which is
struggle in which God is constantly involved with his creation. To understand this
dichotomy Russel Chandran expounds this theological affirmation in terms of freedom,
personal confrontation, and affirmation that humans are sinful after the fall.
b. Natural Law and Christian faith
According to Russel Chandran early church fathers were influenced by Stoic teaching of
Natural law. They believed that the whole universe exists in harmony with the natural
laws and by conforming to these laws human can know what is right and what is wrong.
He further points out Thomas Aquinas’ teaching on theology and ethics in which he says
that the capacity of human reasoning is to discover what is given through natural law.
However there other church father who rejected his opinion. As Russel Chandran points
out, for them divine law can alone be a basis for Christian ethics.
c. The Church and Sacraments
According to Russel Chandran Church is a way of calling to have a foretaste of kingdom
of God and the goal that God has set for the humanity. According him there are two
greatest sacraments in the church. One is Baptism and Eucharist. These sacraments are
reminder of God’s act of salvation in Christ and his mission to the world.
d. Law and Grace
According to Russel Chandran one of the greatest errors is to dichotomize law and grace
as two contradictions. For him, Law is an expression of grace. He points out to the
struggle of Paul in explain this aspect. He further explains that grace does not nullify law.
According to him, in struggling to keep the word of the law based on human efforts we
may not experience the grace of God. This is the same problem that the Pharisees had.
Russel Chandran compares the relationship between the law and grace with relationship
between body and skeleton. In other words, according Russel Chandran we have
constantly scrutiny the law on the basis of demands of love and grace of God.
e. Christian eschatology
According to Russel Chandran Christian eschatology is hope- a simple hope. This hope
as points out to Jurgen Moltmen is a “passion for possible.” Firstly, according to Russel
Chandran, Christian eschatology is an ultimate triumph of God over evil. This is the
hope that we have in Christ. This hope is not just an end of history and the beginning of
a new creation. According to Russel Chandran this hope calls us to orient ourselves in
the present to address and voice out against injustice in order to project the glimpses of
the Kingdom of God here and now.
33
2. Christological focus in ethical reflection: Bonhoeffer, Barth80
a. Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945)
Bonohoeffer talks about ‘religionless Christianity.’ For him, Christianity is not a religion.
Though he is concerned about the social ethics, he had a strong evangelical commitment
and expressed the demand for ‘costly discipleship.’ In other words to be the disciple of
Christ, we have to be ready to pay the cost. This theological mindset has influenced his
interpretation of Christology differently –imitatio Christi
For Bonhoeffer Jesus is ‘the man for others.’ Christ is the authentic man. In this
way, he has secularised Christianity. The world is not divided between Christ and the
devil but it is solely and entirely the world of Christ. For him, Christ is the reality and we
are to participate in that reality. In that sense, Christian ethics how the reality in Christ is
taking effect; its purpose is participation in the reality of the world in Jesus today.
b. Karl Barth (1886-1968)
Karl Barth is considered as the most influential Christian thinker. He was also called as
modern church father. His theological method is dialectical which explains that man has
no innate capacity to have the knowledge of God. In order to have the true revelation,
God from above should come down to man. This coming down to man is an event for
Barth, in which God revealed Himself in Christ.81 Jesus Christ is the self –revealed truth
of God. According to him everything rest on Jesus Christ, so also our ethics and
morality.
In his book Church Dogmatics, Barth deals with ethics. For him command of God is grace
in action. In other words, law is grace in action. It is in this framework he deals with
ethical issues like marriage, the family, the neighbour and respect for life. He also
believed that the Lord’s Prayer ‘you kingdom come’ commits a person to struggle for
human justice in all spheres.
3. Christian understanding of human nature and creation: Neibhur, Lehmann

a. Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971)
Reinhold Niebuhr is more of a social ethicist and an apologist than a theologian. He
emphasized on the practical implications of Christian faith to the society. In his own
words, he was interested “in the defense and justification of the Christian faith in a
secular society.”82 Now let us see some of his perspectives which directly or indirectly
related the field of ethics.
Firstly, his concept of “proximate justice”83is very unique. According to him our
moral responses or ideas of a perfect society cannot be fully realized or achieved by our
80
Ibid, 92-96.
81
Grenz and Olson, 20th Century Theology God and the World in a Transistional Age, 72.
82
Ibid, 101.
83
Ibid, 102.
34
own efforts. For example, the kingdom of God can only be achieved by God himself.
However, the kingdom values are a standard for our society.
Secondly, moral ignorance in the collective behaviour of human even though as
individuals they may be highly ethical is another ethical principle we find.84 In that he
combined two divergent theological themes that man as created in the image of God as
an apex of God’s creation and human sinfulness.85 In other words, whatever human
efforts for perfection, they cannot bring out perfection. A perfect society or the kingdom
of God cannot be achieved historically but by only God’s intervention. However, the
kingdom stands as a reference for building up our society on kingdom values but with
anticipation for God’s intervention.
Thirdly, his dialectical view of love and justice is to be noted. For him justice
without love ceases to be justice. I think it is vice versa. Even if we have achieved our
best in our attempts we have to acknowledge our sinfulness.86 Fourthly, Christian ethics
is an “impossible possibility” within our history but it is ‘possible impossibility’ through
God’s intervention.
b. Paul Lehmann
Paul Lehmann is the proponent of contextual ethics. Deontology speaks about the moral
imperatives and Teleological ethics speaks about the goodness or rightness of action
keeping in view of the end result, irrespective of the context, past and present. In other
words both of the methods analyses one’s actions in isolation from one’s sitz-im-leben. In
order to address this issue, Contextual ethics emphasizes about one’s own context and
circumstances in analysing the one’s actions. In other words it interprets the ethical
reality in a contextual way focusing on the actual context. Lehmann’s contextual ethics is
called as “koinonia ethics.” Koinonia means “fellowship, communion.” This comprises of
human relationships. In other words, to analyse one’s action, according to Lehmann,
Koinonia is the starting point. It is about “what am I suppose to do” rather than “what I
ought to do.” Therefore human factor plays a major role in this method. There are two
dimensions to Lehmann’s koinonia ethics- God’s activity in history and man’s
discernment of God’s action and to be agents of change in the world through the
influence of God’s action in the world.
84
85
Grenz and Olson, 20th Century Theology God and the World in a Transitional Age, 103.
86
35
Therefore, for Lehmann primary ethical reality is the human factor, the human
indicative in every situation of ethical decision making. This ethical decision making
should be drawn owing to the specific action of God in Jesus Christ.
36
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Athyal, Saphir P. “Buddhist Ethics.” Edited by Carl F. Henry. Wycliff Dictionary of
Christian Ethics. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000.
Baumann, Martin. “Hinduism.” Religions of the World A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of
Beliefs and Practices. California, Colorado, England: A B C C L I O, 2002.
Bhaskarnanda, Swami. The Essentials of Hinduism A Comprehensive Overview of the
World’s Oldest Religion. Mylapore, Chaennai: Sri Ramakrishna Math, 1998.
Chandran, Russel. Christian Ethics. New Delhi: ISPCK, 2008.
Clark, Gordon H. “Intution.” Edited by Carl F Henry. Wycliff Dictionary of Christian
Ethics. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000.
Daniel, P.S, David c. Scott, and G.R. Singh, eds. Religious Tradition of India. Fourth
edition. Delhi: ISPCK, 2006.
Das, Somen. Christian Ethos and Indian Ethos. Delhi: ISPCK, 2001.
Donaldson, D. M. “Islamic Ethics.” Edited by John Macquarrie and James Childress. A
New Dictionay of Christian Ethics. London: SCM Press, 1986.
Grenz, Stanley J, and Roger E Olson. 20th Century Theology God and the World in a
Transistional Age. First Indian Edition. Secundrabad: Om books, 2004.
Mabry, Hunter P., ed. Christian Ethics- An Introductory Reader. Kottayam: Indian
Theological Seminary, 1987.
Ninian Smart. “Buddhist Ethics.” Edited by John Macquarrie and James Childress. A
New Dictionay of Christian Ethics. London: SCM Press, 1986.
Samudre, Vasant B. “Islamic Ethics.” Edited by Carl F. Henry. Wycliff Dictionary of
Christian Ethics. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000.
Tiwari, K.N. Comparitive Religion. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publisher, 2004.
Verhey, Allen. “Bible in Christian Ethics.” Edited by John Macquarrie and James
Childress. A New Dictionay of Christian Ethics. London: SCM Press, 1986.
“Hinduism - Defining Hinduism, Historical Overview, Sacred Texts And Sects,
Principal Beliefs, Bibliography”, n.d. No pages. Cited 19 March 2009. Online:
http://science.jrank.org/pages/7751/Hinduism.html.
“Nepal Demographics Profile 2013”, n.d. No pages. Cited 8 October 2013. Online:
http://www.indexmundi.com/nepal/demographics_profile.html.
37

Christian Ethics: Transformed To Transform

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Christian Ethics: Transformed To Transform

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NEPAL EBENEZER BIBLE COLLEGE

Right thought- Contemplation on the transitoriness of life.

There are certain hindrances to the journey of 8-fold path:

Doubts- Created mental idleness

False belief- Rites and ceremonies that would bring salvation

Desire for reward in the future world

Permissible or allowed (Halal): You may or may not do it. Neither

Forbidden (Haram): must not be done under any circumstance. Otherwise

d. Five pillars of Islam (Five obligatory duties)

2) Reciting the daily prayers (Namaz)-generally five times a day.

3) Observing the fast in the month of Ramzan (Roza)

4) The giving of the alms (Zakat)

5) Undertaking the pilgrimage- Mecca in person or by proxy (Hajj)

III. BIBLE-THEOLOGY ETHICS

b. Ethical teachings of Prophets

3. Christian understanding of human nature and creation: Neibhur, Lehmann

You might also like