Posted on by Abe Austin

Rights and Materialism: Part Three

Thus Far)

Over the past two posts I have discussed God as a basis for our fundamental human rights, and also the natural biology of our species for a basis as well. I have explained that I believe in both foundations, but unlike a materialist/humanist, I am convinced that having the natural biology of our species as the only foundation for our rights is insufficient. In my last post I explained why, showing how from the materialist/humanist view, rights would only be an illusion invented by the species that benefits from them. We would say that humans should have a right to life, simply because if they don’t they would cease to exist, so murder is a self-destroying principle.

So long as our rights are tied only to the biology of our race, it is possible to create logical exceptions to them. I gave two examples:

  1. We could say that we are not the same race as other humans, and we only need to observe the rights of our own race, and not of others.
  2. We could say that even if the rights should be enforced by society at large, if we violate them and conceal it from society, there is no other authority that we must answer to.

Today we will consider how having our rights also based in God resolves these issues.

A New Equation)

In my previous post I gave an equation that showed the cyclical, self-contained logic of rights when based upon the natural biology of our species. I said that if we call humanity “X,” and the basic human rights “Y,” then we can say:

Y is essential for X
So X must secure Y

Now let us consider how that equation changes if we assume that God has given us our rights. We will represent God in our equation as “Z.”

Z states that Y is essential for X
So Z must secure Y for X

The rights (Y) are tethered to man (X) by God (Z). It may not seem like much of a difference, but this small alteration has massive ramifications. Introducing Z now makes X and Y reside in Z, not in each other. We no longer have a circular, isolated interdependency. The relationship between X and Y no longer collapses once we are outside of their context. Y is no longer a relative need of X, which nothing outside of X is obligated to fulfill.

Through this God-centric view, human rights are now just as universal and unchanging as mathematical truths. Just as how the Pythagorean Theorem will always be a true mathematical expression, the statement that “life and liberty are necessities for all people” will always be a true, moral principle. Even if there were no people around to observe it, the Pythagorean Theorem would still be a universal maxim between the sides of right-triangles, maintained in God, independent of man. In just the same way, even if humanity were to go extinct, it would still be a maxim in God that life and liberty are good for people and nothing would change that.

The Answer to the Problems)

Now, even if a group of people declared themselves to be a different race they would still have to answer to God if they violated the rights of other races. If individuals violated the rights of one another, and concealed it from the larger species, they would still have to answer to God. They would have to answer to God because it is He, not merely “other people,” who demand these rights for all. He demands them, and He enacts His will to see that they are secured.

And from the Christian perspective, that is exactly what has transpired throughout history. Yes, there have been long periods of various rights being violated by entire nations and individual souls, but over the years the idea of basic human rights has emerged, and in more developed countries has been applied to all, and all of it has been done under the justification that “it is God’s will.”

Conclusion)

There is nothing wrong in observing the ways that our biological nature compels us to seek what is best for one another, to enshrine rules of conduct between all people, to sacrifice our own interests for the greater good. Recognizing these logical, natural realities can certainly be further evidence to help convince all people to live in moral, ethical ways.

The problem is when we try to weaponize the existence of this biological nature against the divine basis for our rights. There are those that use a new moral perspective to beat away at the very foundation that all our moral principles rest upon! How strange, when it was the perspective that God was the author of our morals that led us to implement the freedoms and rights that we have in the first place. Trying to remove that perspective is a regression, one likely to take us back to the darkest epochs humanity has ever seen, with the vast majority of the population living under all manner of oppression and suffering.

If we destroy the one, best moral grounding we have ever had, and give the next generations a flawed moral grounding instead, they will carry it to conclusions that we would never dare. And when they do, who will the sufferers take their appeal to then? The God that we abandoned?

Posted on by Abe Austin

Rights and Materialism: Part One

The Origin of Our Rights)

A society and a government often define morals based off of the “rights” of its citizens. If an action violates another person’s rights, then that action is considered immoral and faces legal or social repercussions. If something has no rights, then nothing that you inflict upon it can be immoral. Throwing a rock off a ship into the ocean is not immoral, because the rock had no rights, but throwing a person off the ship into the ocean is immoral, because the person has a right to life and bodily autonomy!

This, of course, raises the question of where do our rights come from, and how do we know what they are? In our western civilization, rights have traditionally been seen as endowed by our Creator. It was understood that God made man, and gave commandments that spelled out the rights that God gave to man. Man has a right to life, because God said “thou shalt not kill.” Man has a right to his property, because God said “thou shalt not steal.” And so on.

Alternative Basis for Rights)

Of course, not everyone believes in God, and not everyone agrees with the rights described in scripture. They therefore have the burden of providing another basis for our rights, and another method for knowing what those rights would be.

A person with a materialist, humanist worldview might argue that we do not need the dictates of God to identify basic human rights. They might observe that certain behaviors and states are necessary for the survival and flourishing of the species. Since we are members of this species, we should consider those behaviors and states to be natural rights, as to do otherwise would be paradoxical to our being.

And I would not disagree with such an observation. There are, indeed, certain biological realities that suggest the proper sort of behaviors between people. Members of the same species killing one another is obviously detrimental to the whole, so that leads us to the same “thou shalt not kill” that was also given on Mount Sinai. Furthermore, the historical record has shown that the greatest advancement and achievement of the human race has been motivated by people who had a claim to their own property and labor, and so we can again arrive at “thou shalt not steal.”

More Than One Basis)

But I, as a Christian, do not see this as an either/or situation. The fact that we can arrive at many of the same core human rights by biological examination and intelligent reasoning does not mean that God and His dictates do not also exist. Indeed, I see these as two parts of one testimony, supporting and reinforcing one another.

And, we do need both. The materialist-humanist may think that since we have the biological basis we do not need another basis in God, but this could not be further from the truth. I will explain why this is the case in tomorrow’s post.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 19:20-25

20 And the Lord came down upon mount Sinai, on the top of the mount: and the Lord called Moses up to the atop of the mount; and Moses went up.

21 And the Lord said unto Moses, Go down, charge the people, lest they break through unto the Lord to gaze, and many of them perish.

22 And let the priests also, which come near to the Lord, sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break forth upon them.

23 And Moses said unto the Lord, The people cannot come up to mount Sinai: for thou chargedst us, saying, Set bounds about the mount, and sanctify it.

24 And the Lord said unto him, Away, get thee down, and thou shalt come up, thou, and Aaron with thee: but let not the priests and the people break through to come up unto the Lord, lest he break forth upon them.

25 So Moses went down unto the people, and spake unto them.

This is a very unusual set of verses. Moses had already ascended into the mountain, but the Lord told him to go back down and tell the people not to come up or they would perish. Moses replied that he had already told the people not to come up, as God had already communicated that requirement in the first place. God insisted, though, “Away, get thee down,” and so Moses went down to repeat the instructions to the people.

What was the point of this back-and-forth? Was God not aware that Moses has already given those instructions to the Israelites? Was there going to be a breach of protocol in spite of the original instructions, and God knew it, but Moses wasn’t expecting it? Was God simply making a point through repetition? Why weren’t Moses and God already on the same page on this matter?

Quite frankly, we aren’t given a clear explanation. In the record that we have, God never makes clear why this repeated instruction was deemed necessary. One thing that might be worth considering, though, is that the next time Moses was called up into the mountain we are not told that he went back down to remind the Israelites of their commitments, and that is the time that they actively defy the Lord and construct the golden calf.

So perhaps the Lord sent Moses down to interrupt them before they could go astray this time, but after they had received His law and more fully committed themselves, He would not stop them if they kept tending towards future infractions. Having made their bed, He would allow them to lie in it.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 19:16-19

16 And it came to pass on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; so that all the people that was in the camp trembled.

17 And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet with God; and they stood at the nether part of the mount.

18 And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly.

19 And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice.

All of Israel had been prepared, and now the miracle rolled down from heaven to the earth. Thunder, lightning, thick clouds, and the sounding of an unseen trumpet! Then, as the people gathered at the foot of the mountain, smoke, fire, quaking, an even louder trumpet. And finally, after all of that, the voice of God!

There is another passage of scripture that sounds very similar to this, which is when we are given the account of Elijah hearing the voice of the Lord in 1 Kings 19:11-12:

And a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.

Wind, and earthquake, and fire, and finally a voice. However that later account is both similar and dissimilar to the one here in Exodus. While the 1 Kings account mentions a parade of dramatic forces of nature, it says God is not in any of them, while the elements presented here in Exodus seem to be directly heralding the Lord. Also, the account in 1 Kings describes a “still small voice,” whereas one would think the voice in Exodus was booming and loud, much like the trumpets that had sounded, so that all the camp would hear it.

I believe that both accounts give us half the picture of God. The fact that God lives in our hearts and is able to speak to us in a still, small voice does not mean He isn’t also the master of heaven and earth, appearing in great glory. There is both an outer manifestation and an inner manifestation of the Lord, but they are both one and the same God. Probably most of us are far more acquainted with the quiet, inner Lord who lives in our hearts, but we look forward to the day when we can meet (and survive!) an encounter with the outer Lord in all His majesty!

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 19:12-13

12 And thou shalt set bounds unto the people round about, saying, Take heed to yourselves, that ye go not up into the mount, or touch the border of it: whosoever toucheth the mount shall be surely put to death:

13 There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man, it shall not live: when the trumpet soundeth long, they shall come up to the mount.

In addition to their steps of purification, the Israelites were instructed that they not come too close to the mountain when the glory of the Lord was upon it. They would be permitted to hear His voice, but that did not mean that they could abide touching His presence directly.

This is an interesting notion, one that is visited again later when Uzzah, the Israelite, reaches out to steady the ark and is immediately struck dead (2 Samuel 6:6-7). What is it about the Lord’s presence that people must not come too near, on pain of death?

I see in this a lesson that total godliness is too great for us to endure. It is too bright, it is too pure, it is too glorious, such that it condemns our perverse, fallen flesh. We are like particles of dust that immolate from the heat around the fire, even before we touch the flame. That buffer of disintegrating heat ensures that nothing impure ever touches that perfect light.

This is why each of us must be purified in our hearts before we meet the Father, why we must have our corruptible flesh replaced by an immortal body, why Moses had to be transfigured for his own up-close encounter with the Lord. We require a divine intermediary between us to interact with God, because His glory is literally too much for us to handle!

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 19:10-11

10 And the Lord said unto Moses, Go unto the people, and sanctify them to day and to morrow, and let them wash their clothes,

11 And be ready against the third day: for the third day the Lord will come down in the sight of all the people upon mount Sinai.

Already we heard how the Israelites expressed their intent to do all that the Lord commanded them, and He had responded by saying that He would let them hear His voice directly. Before that could transpire, though, they had to go through a purification process. Much as how Moses had been commanded to put the shoes off his feet at the burning bush, the Israelites now needed to wash their clothes. This was a time for removing the dirt and the dust, the particles of the earth, in order to have as little of the world between them and the Lord when he arrived.

We will hear in the coming verses that the people were also instructed to not be sexually active during this period of three days. Thus this was also to be a time of fasting from the basic desires and habits of the flesh, a time of enhancing the spirit within. Their spirits had to be ready to meet the Lord’s spirit, their hearts had to be open to His heart, their will had to be subservient to His will. Only then would they be ready to receive His word as it needed to be received.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 19:3-6

3 And Moses went up unto God, and the Lord called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel;

4 Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles’ wings, and brought you unto myself.

5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

After Moses ascended into Mount Sinai the Lord called out to him, extending a promise and a covenant to all of Israel. My initial reaction to the things that the Lord is saying to the Israelites was that it seemed out of the ordinary. There are two qualities here that feel out-of-place for the Lord to be extending to the Israelites. One is such direct and frank communication from God, the other is promises of great blessings.

Thus far in the Biblical record, hearing God’s words and receiving His promises had been reserved for the prophets and patriarchs who had dedicated their entire lives to Him. Noah, Abraham, and Moses may not have been perfect, but they were clearly striving to be righteous vessels of God, which is more than can be said for the Israelites at this point of time. So why would God be giving messages and promises to population that was still so prone to wander?

But then I realized, that’s kind of the whole point. Moses’s great value to the Israelites was that he did have the close and intimate relationship with God where he could receive the Lord’s word and promises, and then he could then carry those back to the people who were still finding their way. Every Israelite could receive the word and promise of God, whether they were worthy of it or not. And certainly this is also the case today. Even the greatest of sinners today knows the word of God. They know about the golden rule, and that they should love their enemies, and that heaven is the reward for the righteous. They also know about God’s law for humanity, and the promises He extends to those that enter His fold. Regardless of whether they live according to these pearls of wisdom or not, regardless of whether they would ever hear these messages directly from the mouth of God or not, they still know these things and have the opportunity to accept them.

Through Moses, and the prophets that followed him, the transcendent became common. The unnatural became familiar. The divine condescended to the level of the ordinary man.

And what was the great promise and covenant that Israel received? That if they would obey God’s voice, and keep the covenant that He would reveal to them by degrees, then they would “be a peculiar treasure” a “kingdom of priests,” and a “holy nation.” In short, they would be lifted up from the base and the worldly, becoming a people set apart for the work of the Lord. They would be the Lord’s community, even while living in the midst of a fallen world. They would be the overlap between heaven and earth, a lifted and glowing ideal that no man could attain on his own, but could attain through the Lord.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 18:24-27

24 So Moses hearkened to the voice of his father in law, and did all that he had said.

25 And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.

26 And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves.

27 And Moses let his father in law depart; and he went his way into his own land.

Moses took Jethro’s counsel and chose men to be heads over different segments of the Israelite populace. We already learned that there were about 600,000 men who took part in the exodus, which would mean about 600,000 households. Assuming that a “ruler of ten” was a ruler of ten households, then there would have had to be 60,000 lowest-level rulers, 12,000 of the second-to-lowest, 6,000 of the second-to-highest, 600 of the highest, and then Moses, himself. In all, 78,600 judges to preside over the body of approximately 2 million.

Of course, every tier of judge would have had quite a burden of responsibility. Presiding over just ten households can certainly be a highly demanding task all by itself, depending on the nature of those families, while presiding over a larger population would open one up to a larger swath of issues, though also provide a buffer in the lower judges.

And let us take note that these rulers who were chosen were already of high merit, and none of them had sought for the station, because it hadn’t existed yet. They had already proved themselves worthy, just in the natural course of their lives. They had not pursued this office by a lust for status, power, or vanity. It is an oft-observed paradox that those who seek positions of power are often the least worthy of holding it, whereas those who never sought it often become the greatest leaders.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 18:21-23

21 Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:

22 And let them judge the people at all seasons: and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge: so shall it be easier for thyself, and they shall bear the burden with thee.

23 If thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt be able to endure, and all this people shall also go to their place in peace.

Jethro had already established that Moses should remain as a teacher and a prophet to the people, but now, instead of Moses hearing every single issue that came up among the people, he should delegate that responsibility to other leaders. Jethro even describes a tiered delegation, so that there would be multiple levels of judges and high judges and higher judges, meaning that this system could scale indefinitely. Up at the very top of the hierarchy would be Moses, still available to handle the greatest judgments, while all the others would be handled by the lower tiers.

A key element to this, however, would be that the judges would have to be absolutely upstanding and righteous individuals. They had to be trusted to make right judgments more than wrong, and be personally incorruptible.

One has to wonder whether the idea of tiered delegation was entirely new to Moses. He had been raised in mighty Egypt, had the Pharaoh not maintained power through some system of chiefs or captains? We know that a Pharaoh many generations ago had delegated management of the grain to Joseph, so it couldn’t have been entirely without precedent. Perhaps the hierarchical delegation had been seen before, but wasn’t so formally defined before this point. Or perhaps it had already existed in exactly the same form that Jethro described, but Moses hadn’t considered that it might apply to spiritual leadership as well as to matters of state.

And surely there is a difference between spiritual leadership and matters of state, and Jethro shows that he appreciates this distinction when gives all due humility in verse 23. He has given this advice as an option for Moses going forward, but he then defers to the almighty when he says, “if thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so.” Ultimately, the Lord would have the final say on how His people were to be governed. If Jethro’s advice appeared wise, but God said no, then of course it should not be enacted. Apparently, though, God agreed with Jethro’s counsel. Indeed, this conversation between Jethro and Moses was probably all according to divine design. Many times the wisdom of the Lord is communicated to us through different people.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 18:18-20

18 Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that is with thee: for this thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone.

19 Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee: Be thou for the people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring the causes unto God:

20 And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shalt shew them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do.

Jethro begins his advice in familiar territory. Moses had already been called to be God’s representative to the people, and also the people’s representative to God, and Jethro states that this should continue. Jethro further reaffirms Moses’s responsibility to lay down the laws and the lessons that the Lord provides. He is to teach the people generally of God’s commandments, of the correct conduct that they must perform, of their purpose from on High.

But up until now Jethro has not spoken to how the message from God, conveyed through Moses, would actually be disseminated through the people, nor how the trials of the people would be condensed upward to God through Moses. All that has been established so far is that the immaterial, unseen God will have His word made perceptible and perceivable through the conduct of Moses. Moses would turn spirit and truth into speech and writing, and only once that mortalizing process had occurred could it be distributed to all the people.