Vision Series 2023
Series: Jesus.All about Goodness
Speaker: Steve Jeffrey
Date: 12th February 2023
Passage: John 1:1-14
00:00:00 --> 00:00:07 Well, at the age of 16, Lance Armstrong started competing in triathlons.
00:00:08 --> 00:00:14 He became national sprint course champion in 1989 at the age of 18, two years after starting
00:00:14 --> 00:00:16 competing and again in 1990.
00:00:17 --> 00:00:22 In 1992, he became a professional cyclist at the age of 21.
00:00:22 --> 00:00:25 He won the world championship the next year.
00:00:26 --> 00:00:30 Three years later, 1996, he was diagnosed with cancer.
00:00:30 --> 00:00:36 He returned to cycling just two years later in 1998 and won the Tour de France.
00:00:36 --> 00:00:42 And for the next seven years, he won that race, seven years in a row.
00:00:42 --> 00:00:45 He was a champion who beat cancer.
00:00:45 --> 00:00:50 And we love winners, particularly winners who overcome adversity.
00:00:51 --> 00:00:53 So why is he not liked anymore?
00:00:55 --> 00:00:57 Because he cheated.
00:00:58 --> 00:00:59 Because he cheated.
00:01:00 --> 00:01:03 He broke the rules, took performance enhancing drugs.
00:01:03 --> 00:01:13 When it first was raised in his career around about 1990, 1999, he denied it and eventually
00:01:13 --> 00:01:17 came out with a public admission in 2013.
00:01:17 --> 00:01:26 He was stripped of all of his awards and he was given a lifetime ban from all sport.
00:01:27 --> 00:01:30 Not just from cycling, from all sport.
00:01:30 --> 00:01:37 The judge, in declaring that, considered that he was the biggest cheat they'd ever experienced.
00:01:37 --> 00:01:47 As human beings, we don't just look at the world through the lens of what is.
00:01:48 --> 00:01:53 We look at the world through the lens of what ought to be.
00:01:53 --> 00:02:02 We can't help but think that some things are right and some things are wrong.
00:02:04 --> 00:02:09 But how do you decide which is right and which is wrong?
00:02:09 --> 00:02:13 There's a whole range of ethical issues.
00:02:14 --> 00:02:18 We face it every single day of our life of what's an ethical issue.
00:02:20 --> 00:02:22 Use of plastic bags.
00:02:23 --> 00:02:26 The origin of the clothes that I wear.
00:02:27 --> 00:02:28 Cold power stations.
00:02:28 --> 00:02:29 Generosity.
00:02:29 --> 00:02:30 Immigration.
00:02:30 --> 00:02:31 Sexuality.
00:02:31 --> 00:02:34 Whether I'm allowed to poke little furry animals with sticks.
00:02:34 --> 00:02:40 Like, the range of issues is you're confronted with it every day.
00:02:42 --> 00:02:43 What's good?
00:02:43 --> 00:02:43 What's bad?
00:02:44 --> 00:02:50 But specifically, on what basis do you decide what's good and what's bad?
00:02:52 --> 00:02:56 What we're seeking to do in the coming weeks is to look at Christianity.
00:02:57 --> 00:03:01 Look at the rising tide of secularism in our society.
00:03:01 --> 00:03:06 And we're also looking at some other religions, occasions.
00:03:06 --> 00:03:07 We throw that in there.
00:03:08 --> 00:03:17 And see which of these belief systems, and they are all belief systems, including atheism.
00:03:17 --> 00:03:21 So if you weren't here last week, go and check that one out from last week.
00:03:21 --> 00:03:29 And work out which is the best solution to what every human being needs in order to flourish.
00:03:29 --> 00:03:31 In life.
00:03:32 --> 00:03:40 Things like meaning, the ability to face suffering, an identity solid enough to endure all the ups and downs of our personal performance.
00:03:41 --> 00:03:46 A basis for moral judgment, deciding on what is right and wrong, which is today.
00:03:47 --> 00:03:52 Belief systems is what provides these things, so which does it best.
00:03:52 --> 00:04:18 And the goal in the next number of weeks is to strengthen the faith of the believer, but also to challenge the skeptic to see that the Christian faith, which is increasingly becoming rejected in our society, is both plausible, relevant, and good.
00:04:18 --> 00:04:26 And so today we're looking at the contribution to Christianity in the issue of morality.
00:04:28 --> 00:04:32 And I want to do that by three ways.
00:04:32 --> 00:04:46 What we're looking at is by looking at how these good and evil decisions, morality decisions used were traditionally made, how they're made in a secular culture like today, and the unique contribution of the Christian faith.
00:04:47 --> 00:04:49 So traditional good and evil.
00:04:50 --> 00:05:00 A moral judgment is how we explain moral convictions, moral obligations, and moral motivation.
00:05:00 --> 00:05:03 So every moral judgment has three elements to it.
00:05:03 --> 00:05:12 A moral conviction or a moral feeling, a moral obligation, and a moral motivation.
00:05:13 --> 00:05:22 A moral conviction is I feel X is right and I feel Y is wrong.
00:05:22 --> 00:05:29 I feel I feel I should always do X, but I should never do Y.
00:05:31 --> 00:05:34 And it's a moral conviction, it's a moral feeling.
00:05:35 --> 00:05:36 It's personal.
00:05:38 --> 00:05:49 A moral obligation, however, is when I say I feel X is right and you also should feel X is right.
00:05:49 --> 00:05:53 You're obligated to feel the same way that I feel.
00:05:54 --> 00:05:56 It's moral obligation.
00:05:57 --> 00:06:00 Even if you don't feel it, you should feel it.
00:06:00 --> 00:06:01 It's an ought.
00:06:03 --> 00:06:06 That's the difference between moral feelings and moral obligation.
00:06:07 --> 00:06:09 So what is the basis for moral obligation?
00:06:09 --> 00:06:13 That's the key that I want to really unpack today.
00:06:13 --> 00:06:15 What's the basis for moral obligation?
00:06:15 --> 00:06:22 Historically, all religions and traditional cultures have said that the basis for moral obligation
00:06:22 --> 00:06:29 is a sacred order that exists outside of the world in which we live.
00:06:29 --> 00:06:30 It's transcendent.
00:06:31 --> 00:06:34 Christianity, Judaism, Islam have traditionally said,
00:06:35 --> 00:06:38 if God says it's wrong, then it's wrong.
00:06:38 --> 00:06:47 Even cultures that didn't have any concept of a personal God, such as the Greeks,
00:06:48 --> 00:06:55 still believed in a realm that existed beyond the physical material world in which we lived.
00:06:55 --> 00:07:02 In fact, the Greeks called that realm the logos.
00:07:03 --> 00:07:09 The thing that was behind the world that gave order to the world was the logos.
00:07:11 --> 00:07:17 The logos was the cosmic order, a set of moral absolutes that stood outside the universe.
00:07:17 --> 00:07:29 And to live a good life in this world as a Greek was to align yourself with that moral order of the logos.
00:07:31 --> 00:07:37 Ancient Chinese, especially Confucius, had a similar idea.
00:07:38 --> 00:07:43 Confucius told people how to live, but not because he said so.
00:07:43 --> 00:07:51 Confucius said you must live this way because it fits with heaven's will.
00:07:52 --> 00:07:57 A wise and a virtuous life was aligned to heaven's will.
00:07:59 --> 00:08:04 Now, of course, all the different religions and cultures have different opinions on that sacred order
00:08:04 --> 00:08:09 and therefore on what those moral absolutes were.
00:08:09 --> 00:08:22 But there is, and nevertheless, that was the basis of a rational justification for every bit of morality and moral decision.
00:08:23 --> 00:08:32 That is, every justification for morality was linked to purpose.
00:08:34 --> 00:08:38 There's a purpose behind the universe.
00:08:38 --> 00:08:47 And unless I obey the moral absolutes and fulfil my purpose, then I will most likely destroy my life now
00:08:47 --> 00:08:55 and also in the afterlife if that belief system had an afterlife.
00:08:56 --> 00:09:00 Now, that's how people used to make decisions of what was good and what is not.
00:09:00 --> 00:09:02 It was linked to purpose.
00:09:03 --> 00:09:06 Telos is the Greek word for purpose.
00:09:06 --> 00:09:11 Telos, the end, the goal of life.
00:09:11 --> 00:09:14 Your life must align to the telos.
00:09:15 --> 00:09:19 And the other Greek word that they used, as I mentioned, was logos,
00:09:19 --> 00:09:24 which means the word, the logic, the reason for something,
00:09:25 --> 00:09:28 the purpose and the reason, the telos and the logos.
00:09:28 --> 00:09:32 You must align your life to the telos and the logos.
00:09:36 --> 00:09:37 For instance,
00:09:38 --> 00:09:45 is this a good watch or a bad watch?
00:09:45 --> 00:09:52 On what basis do you make that decision?
00:09:54 --> 00:09:55 Because it's black?
00:09:58 --> 00:10:00 You must first ask the question,
00:10:01 --> 00:10:04 what is the purpose of the watch?
00:10:04 --> 00:10:08 You see, I could put this watch on and say,
00:10:08 --> 00:10:12 well, it's a, you know, I think it's a good watch.
00:10:12 --> 00:10:18 And then I decide that I'm going to hammer a nail into this brick wall with my watch.
00:10:19 --> 00:10:21 And it breaks it and you go, bad watch.
00:10:21 --> 00:10:22 Bad, bad watch.
00:10:22 --> 00:10:26 But that's not the purpose of the watch.
00:10:26 --> 00:10:28 What is the purpose of the watch?
00:10:28 --> 00:10:32 You cannot decide whether it's a good or a bad watch
00:10:32 --> 00:10:34 until you first understand the purpose of it.
00:10:37 --> 00:10:40 And that is what traditional cultures do.
00:10:42 --> 00:10:44 What are human beings made for?
00:10:44 --> 00:10:52 And the answer to that question is the basis of determining between good and evil.
00:10:55 --> 00:11:00 Now, the secular framework for determining good and evil starts without any purpose.
00:11:02 --> 00:11:05 Secularism says all of life is an accident
00:11:05 --> 00:11:10 and it rejects any sense of the transcendent world.
00:11:11 --> 00:11:13 A transcendent creator, a transcendent being,
00:11:13 --> 00:11:19 in his book River Out of Eden, Richard Dawkins writes this.
00:11:20 --> 00:11:25 The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect
00:11:25 --> 00:11:32 if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, and no good,
00:11:32 --> 00:11:35 nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
00:11:39 --> 00:11:41 Now, let me just say here,
00:11:41 --> 00:11:44 just in case you think I'm going to head in an unhelpful direction,
00:11:45 --> 00:11:48 I believe, I think,
00:11:49 --> 00:11:51 that secular people, atheists,
00:11:52 --> 00:11:53 do good things.
00:11:54 --> 00:11:57 It's not a question of whether they can do good things.
00:11:57 --> 00:11:59 They can do very good things.
00:12:00 --> 00:12:02 In fact, there are many atheists
00:12:02 --> 00:12:05 who have incredibly high moral convictions,
00:12:05 --> 00:12:06 moral feelings.
00:12:06 --> 00:12:08 I do, however,
00:12:08 --> 00:12:11 think that there is an enormous problem
00:12:11 --> 00:12:14 for a secular society like ours
00:12:14 --> 00:12:17 on the issue of moral obligation.
00:12:19 --> 00:12:22 A secular worldview really struggles
00:12:22 --> 00:12:24 to have a consistent,
00:12:24 --> 00:12:27 coherent argument for moral obligation.
00:12:27 --> 00:12:31 So Richard Dawkins writes that in a book.
00:12:33 --> 00:12:35 And then the same Richard Dawkins,
00:12:36 --> 00:12:38 in the summer of 2013,
00:12:38 --> 00:12:41 when England was playing Australia in the Ashes Test,
00:12:42 --> 00:12:43 and he's a major cricket fan,
00:12:44 --> 00:12:47 accused English player Stuart Broad of cheating.
00:12:47 --> 00:12:52 The fuming cricket fan Hawkins wrote on Twitter,
00:12:53 --> 00:12:56 Stuart Broad obviously knew perfectly well he was caught,
00:12:56 --> 00:12:57 refused to walk,
00:12:57 --> 00:12:58 what a revolting cheat.
00:12:59 --> 00:13:01 I now want Australia to win the Ashes,
00:13:01 --> 00:13:01 and don't we all?
00:13:06 --> 00:13:07 The question is,
00:13:07 --> 00:13:10 on what basis did Hawkins make that claim?
00:13:11 --> 00:13:16 It's a value judgment.
00:13:17 --> 00:13:20 On what basis did he make that claim?
00:13:21 --> 00:13:24 He can only say Broad was a cheat
00:13:24 --> 00:13:27 if there is a purpose by which Broad,
00:13:28 --> 00:13:29 Hawkins,
00:13:29 --> 00:13:31 and you and I must live to.
00:13:33 --> 00:13:36 On what basis does this secular person
00:13:36 --> 00:13:39 call for moral obligation?
00:13:40 --> 00:13:41 You must not cheat.
00:13:41 --> 00:13:46 Now, I'll mention a few of the main arguments
00:13:46 --> 00:13:48 for moral obligation in the secular world.
00:13:49 --> 00:13:50 There's a number of them,
00:13:51 --> 00:13:52 but here's just a few of the bigger ones.
00:13:53 --> 00:13:55 First, there's the evolutionary argument.
00:13:56 --> 00:13:57 It states,
00:13:57 --> 00:13:58 Well,
00:13:58 --> 00:14:02 all organisms are engaged in a struggle to survive,
00:14:02 --> 00:14:05 and those things that help species survive
00:14:05 --> 00:14:06 are selected.
00:14:07 --> 00:14:09 A giraffe's long neck,
00:14:09 --> 00:14:11 a cat's ability to land on its feet,
00:14:11 --> 00:14:13 nine times out of ten,
00:14:13 --> 00:14:16 or a human being's sense of morality.
00:14:16 --> 00:14:19 It's an evolved sense we have.
00:14:21 --> 00:14:21 That is,
00:14:21 --> 00:14:23 the moral feelings we have come,
00:14:23 --> 00:14:25 have come from our ancestors,
00:14:26 --> 00:14:28 and they help us to survive.
00:14:30 --> 00:14:34 One major counter-argument against that view
00:14:34 --> 00:14:40 is that evolutionary ethics
00:14:40 --> 00:14:42 describes function,
00:14:42 --> 00:14:43 not morality.
00:14:45 --> 00:14:47 Natural selection has chosen
00:14:47 --> 00:14:50 the lion's pointy teeth.
00:14:51 --> 00:14:53 It's chosen the eagle's wings.
00:14:54 --> 00:14:57 It's chosen the baboon's big red butt.
00:14:59 --> 00:15:01 Not because they're right,
00:15:02 --> 00:15:04 not because they're good,
00:15:04 --> 00:15:06 but because they work.
00:15:09 --> 00:15:11 They get the job done.
00:15:13 --> 00:15:15 Another counter-argument is that
00:15:15 --> 00:15:16 just because ethical behavior,
00:15:17 --> 00:15:17 X, Y, Z,
00:15:18 --> 00:15:20 helped my ancestors survive,
00:15:20 --> 00:15:21 that doesn't in any way
00:15:21 --> 00:15:24 obligate me to live in exactly the same way as them.
00:15:26 --> 00:15:29 There's no obligation to follow a feeling
00:15:29 --> 00:15:32 just because it's evolution.
00:15:34 --> 00:15:36 A further counter-argument is that
00:15:36 --> 00:15:38 if morality is a result of evolution,
00:15:39 --> 00:15:42 then you cannot logically
00:15:42 --> 00:15:45 criticize the past generations.
00:15:46 --> 00:15:48 You cannot criticize
00:15:48 --> 00:15:52 previous decisions of other cultures
00:15:52 --> 00:15:56 because they were simply less evolved.
00:15:59 --> 00:16:00 In other words,
00:16:01 --> 00:16:02 what they,
00:16:02 --> 00:16:04 at their stage of evolution,
00:16:04 --> 00:16:05 determined to be good
00:16:05 --> 00:16:08 cannot now be called bad.
00:16:10 --> 00:16:11 It's like saying,
00:16:11 --> 00:16:13 my cat is a terrible cat
00:16:13 --> 00:16:17 because it cannot fill its own water bowl.
00:16:17 --> 00:16:24 A secular person
00:16:24 --> 00:16:26 cannot in any good conscience
00:16:26 --> 00:16:30 criticize any past behavior of societies
00:16:30 --> 00:16:32 as being immoral.
00:16:32 --> 00:16:32 It's like that.
00:16:32 --> 00:16:39 That's a difficult problem for them.
00:16:42 --> 00:16:44 In other words,
00:16:44 --> 00:16:46 marriage between a man and a woman
00:16:46 --> 00:16:47 in past generations
00:16:47 --> 00:16:49 was good.
00:16:50 --> 00:16:52 They have to say it was good.
00:16:52 --> 00:16:58 One last counter-argument.
00:16:59 --> 00:17:01 If evolution and natural selection
00:17:01 --> 00:17:02 is the basis for moral obligation,
00:17:03 --> 00:17:05 then the strong eating the weak
00:17:05 --> 00:17:06 is natural
00:17:06 --> 00:17:09 and any feeling that I have contrary
00:17:09 --> 00:17:10 is wrong.
00:17:15 --> 00:17:17 Genocide is natural
00:17:17 --> 00:17:19 because it's the strong
00:17:19 --> 00:17:20 eating the weak
00:17:20 --> 00:17:23 and it therefore has to be
00:17:23 --> 00:17:24 determined as good.
00:17:27 --> 00:17:27 Secondly,
00:17:28 --> 00:17:29 the pragmatic argument.
00:17:30 --> 00:17:31 This one is simply,
00:17:31 --> 00:17:33 if no one does good,
00:17:33 --> 00:17:34 then all we're going to get
00:17:34 --> 00:17:35 is bad
00:17:35 --> 00:17:37 and so it's in the best interest
00:17:37 --> 00:17:39 of everyone to do good.
00:17:40 --> 00:17:42 The pragmatic argument
00:17:42 --> 00:17:43 isn't saying
00:17:43 --> 00:17:44 it is wrong
00:17:44 --> 00:17:45 to let the poor starve.
00:17:45 --> 00:17:48 They're saying
00:17:48 --> 00:17:49 it's just impractical
00:17:49 --> 00:17:50 to let the poor starve.
00:17:51 --> 00:17:53 It's impractical
00:17:53 --> 00:17:53 not to help
00:17:53 --> 00:17:55 Syria and Turkey right now.
00:17:57 --> 00:17:57 Now the danger
00:17:57 --> 00:17:58 of this argument
00:17:58 --> 00:17:59 is the definition
00:17:59 --> 00:18:00 of what is practical
00:18:00 --> 00:18:01 comes down to
00:18:01 --> 00:18:02 what's at my best interest.
00:18:03 --> 00:18:05 The reason I should care
00:18:05 --> 00:18:05 about the environment
00:18:05 --> 00:18:06 and feed the poor
00:18:06 --> 00:18:08 is because it serves me.
00:18:09 --> 00:18:10 It's about my good.
00:18:13 --> 00:18:14 It will turn out better for me.
00:18:15 --> 00:18:20 It sounds very self-centred.
00:18:22 --> 00:18:24 The third argument,
00:18:24 --> 00:18:24 which is the one
00:18:24 --> 00:18:26 that's really popular nowadays,
00:18:27 --> 00:18:28 and you probably see this
00:18:28 --> 00:18:29 worked out in the media
00:18:29 --> 00:18:29 a lot more,
00:18:30 --> 00:18:32 is the social consensus.
00:18:33 --> 00:18:34 This one tends to be
00:18:34 --> 00:18:35 the most popular, I think.
00:18:36 --> 00:18:37 As a modern society,
00:18:37 --> 00:18:38 we've progressed to see
00:18:38 --> 00:18:39 that some things
00:18:39 --> 00:18:41 that were done in the past
00:18:41 --> 00:18:42 were not so good
00:18:42 --> 00:18:44 and now we're seeing
00:18:44 --> 00:18:45 them as bad
00:18:45 --> 00:18:47 and we need to
00:18:47 --> 00:18:48 right the bad.
00:18:48 --> 00:18:49 Can you see how that one
00:18:49 --> 00:18:50 conflicts with the first
00:18:50 --> 00:18:51 argument of evolution?
00:18:53 --> 00:18:55 And there is a social consensus
00:18:55 --> 00:18:58 or there soon will be
00:18:58 --> 00:19:00 that that stuff is bad
00:19:00 --> 00:19:01 and needs to be changed
00:19:01 --> 00:19:01 to the good.
00:19:02 --> 00:19:04 If a majority says
00:19:04 --> 00:19:06 it's wrong to starve the poor,
00:19:06 --> 00:19:07 then it's wrong
00:19:07 --> 00:19:08 to starve the poor.
00:19:12 --> 00:19:13 Now, the counter argument
00:19:13 --> 00:19:14 for this
00:19:14 --> 00:19:15 is many
00:19:15 --> 00:19:17 and it's pretty straightforward.
00:19:18 --> 00:19:19 A thousand years ago,
00:19:20 --> 00:19:20 social consensus
00:19:20 --> 00:19:21 said that slavery
00:19:21 --> 00:19:22 was fine.
00:19:22 --> 00:19:26 So was it good then?
00:19:28 --> 00:19:29 Or was it fine then?
00:19:33 --> 00:19:34 It wasn't good then,
00:19:34 --> 00:19:34 was it?
00:19:35 --> 00:19:36 I mean, was slavery good then?
00:19:38 --> 00:19:38 In other words,
00:19:39 --> 00:19:40 has racism only just become
00:19:40 --> 00:19:41 a bad thing?
00:19:42 --> 00:19:43 Or was it bad
00:19:43 --> 00:19:44 300 years ago?
00:19:49 --> 00:19:51 It was wrong then too.
00:19:51 --> 00:19:53 Even though there was
00:19:53 --> 00:19:54 social consensus
00:19:54 --> 00:19:55 for it back in those days.
00:19:57 --> 00:19:58 Don't forget
00:19:58 --> 00:19:59 there was social consensus
00:19:59 --> 00:20:00 in Nazi Germany
00:20:00 --> 00:20:02 to exterminate the Jews.
00:20:04 --> 00:20:05 Social consensus
00:20:05 --> 00:20:05 in itself
00:20:05 --> 00:20:06 is not the basis
00:20:06 --> 00:20:07 of morality.
00:20:11 --> 00:20:13 There was social consensus
00:20:13 --> 00:20:15 in our society
00:20:15 --> 00:20:19 to effectively
00:20:19 --> 00:20:20 denigrate
00:20:20 --> 00:20:21 Aboriginal cultures.
00:20:22 --> 00:20:23 There was social consensus
00:20:23 --> 00:20:24 to exterminate them
00:20:24 --> 00:20:25 in Tasmania.
00:20:26 --> 00:20:27 Was that good?
00:20:29 --> 00:20:30 No.
00:20:35 --> 00:20:36 There's a second sting
00:20:36 --> 00:20:37 in the tale of this one
00:20:37 --> 00:20:40 which I think
00:20:40 --> 00:20:40 that
00:20:40 --> 00:20:42 the modern progressives
00:20:42 --> 00:20:43 need to realise.
00:20:44 --> 00:20:46 Anything that is called
00:20:46 --> 00:20:47 good today,
00:20:47 --> 00:20:50 your deepest values,
00:20:51 --> 00:20:52 your treasured
00:20:53 --> 00:20:54 moral standards
00:20:54 --> 00:20:56 could well be considered
00:20:56 --> 00:20:58 bad within the next 20 years.
00:21:02 --> 00:21:04 Depending on how society changes.
00:21:06 --> 00:21:07 Good cannot be determined
00:21:07 --> 00:21:08 by society
00:21:08 --> 00:21:09 because society shifts
00:21:09 --> 00:21:11 so quickly.
00:21:11 --> 00:21:13 It has a fickle mind.
00:21:13 --> 00:21:16 The biggest problem
00:21:16 --> 00:21:17 with the social consensus argument
00:21:17 --> 00:21:19 is how quickly
00:21:19 --> 00:21:20 it leads to the problem
00:21:20 --> 00:21:21 of authority.
00:21:23 --> 00:21:24 And the problem
00:21:24 --> 00:21:25 of what if you are
00:21:25 --> 00:21:27 in the minority
00:21:27 --> 00:21:29 that doesn't agree.
00:21:29 --> 00:21:32 it could be
00:21:32 --> 00:21:32 the wealthy,
00:21:33 --> 00:21:33 the government,
00:21:34 --> 00:21:35 the newspaper editors,
00:21:35 --> 00:21:36 the school bully,
00:21:36 --> 00:21:37 the social media influence,
00:21:38 --> 00:21:39 or just simply
00:21:39 --> 00:21:39 the one
00:21:39 --> 00:21:40 who shouts
00:21:40 --> 00:21:40 the loudest.
00:21:42 --> 00:21:43 The person
00:21:43 --> 00:21:44 with power
00:21:44 --> 00:21:45 can impose
00:21:45 --> 00:21:45 their own
00:21:45 --> 00:21:46 set of morality
00:21:46 --> 00:21:47 on others
00:21:47 --> 00:21:48 even if there's
00:21:48 --> 00:21:49 no justification
00:21:49 --> 00:21:51 for that morality
00:21:51 --> 00:21:52 whatsoever.
00:21:52 --> 00:21:55 ever heard
00:21:55 --> 00:21:56 statements like
00:21:56 --> 00:21:57 religion should have
00:21:57 --> 00:21:58 no voice
00:21:58 --> 00:21:59 in today's
00:21:59 --> 00:22:00 modern secular society
00:22:00 --> 00:22:00 when discussing
00:22:00 --> 00:22:02 ethical issues?
00:22:03 --> 00:22:05 That's an authority
00:22:05 --> 00:22:05 argument.
00:22:10 --> 00:22:12 The counter to this
00:22:12 --> 00:22:13 is that if I have
00:22:13 --> 00:22:13 a view
00:22:13 --> 00:22:15 on an ethical issue
00:22:15 --> 00:22:16 and you have
00:22:16 --> 00:22:17 a different view
00:22:17 --> 00:22:20 but I force you
00:22:20 --> 00:22:21 to have my view
00:22:21 --> 00:22:23 isn't that called
00:22:23 --> 00:22:24 oppression?
00:22:29 --> 00:22:30 And all we've done
00:22:30 --> 00:22:31 in our society
00:22:31 --> 00:22:32 and I want to put
00:22:32 --> 00:22:33 my hand up
00:22:33 --> 00:22:33 and I'm going to say
00:22:33 --> 00:22:34 this a little bit later
00:22:34 --> 00:22:35 the church has done
00:22:35 --> 00:22:36 that in the past
00:22:36 --> 00:22:37 it's just now
00:22:37 --> 00:22:38 becoming a minority
00:22:38 --> 00:22:39 voice
00:22:39 --> 00:22:40 there's now
00:22:40 --> 00:22:41 a majority
00:22:41 --> 00:22:42 secular voice
00:22:42 --> 00:22:43 doing exactly
00:22:43 --> 00:22:44 the same thing.
00:22:44 --> 00:22:46 We've just changed
00:22:46 --> 00:22:46 from one oppression
00:22:46 --> 00:22:48 to another oppression.
00:22:48 --> 00:22:52 former professor
00:22:52 --> 00:22:52 of law
00:22:52 --> 00:22:53 at Yale University
00:22:53 --> 00:22:55 Arthur Leff
00:22:55 --> 00:22:57 who was best
00:22:57 --> 00:22:57 known
00:22:57 --> 00:22:59 for a series
00:22:59 --> 00:23:00 of articles
00:23:00 --> 00:23:00 examining
00:23:00 --> 00:23:01 whether there is
00:23:01 --> 00:23:01 such a thing
00:23:01 --> 00:23:02 of morality
00:23:02 --> 00:23:03 at all
00:23:03 --> 00:23:04 once said
00:23:04 --> 00:23:05 all claims
00:23:05 --> 00:23:06 of moral
00:23:06 --> 00:23:07 obligation
00:23:07 --> 00:23:08 are authority
00:23:08 --> 00:23:09 claims.
00:23:09 --> 00:23:12 he concluded
00:23:12 --> 00:23:13 that in the absence
00:23:13 --> 00:23:14 of God
00:23:14 --> 00:23:15 there are
00:23:15 --> 00:23:16 but two options.
00:23:17 --> 00:23:18 The secular world
00:23:18 --> 00:23:20 has got two options.
00:23:21 --> 00:23:22 You turn
00:23:22 --> 00:23:23 every individual
00:23:23 --> 00:23:23 person
00:23:23 --> 00:23:24 into a little
00:23:24 --> 00:23:25 God of themselves
00:23:25 --> 00:23:27 able to decide
00:23:27 --> 00:23:28 good and evil
00:23:28 --> 00:23:29 for themselves
00:23:29 --> 00:23:31 but then
00:23:31 --> 00:23:33 who evaluates
00:23:33 --> 00:23:35 between them
00:23:35 --> 00:23:36 when there's
00:23:36 --> 00:23:37 a clash
00:23:37 --> 00:23:38 between
00:23:38 --> 00:23:39 the little
00:23:39 --> 00:23:39 God
00:23:39 --> 00:23:40 claims.
00:23:41 --> 00:23:41 Who does
00:23:41 --> 00:23:41 that?
00:23:42 --> 00:23:43 How do you
00:23:43 --> 00:23:44 decide?
00:23:45 --> 00:23:45 How do we
00:23:45 --> 00:23:46 do that
00:23:46 --> 00:23:46 in our
00:23:46 --> 00:23:46 modern day?
00:23:47 --> 00:23:48 One yells
00:23:48 --> 00:23:49 louder than
00:23:49 --> 00:23:49 the other.
00:23:53 --> 00:23:53 Alternatively
00:23:53 --> 00:23:54 he says
00:23:54 --> 00:23:54 you can turn
00:23:54 --> 00:23:55 the state
00:23:55 --> 00:23:56 into God
00:23:56 --> 00:23:57 and let it
00:23:57 --> 00:23:57 determine
00:23:57 --> 00:23:58 good and
00:23:58 --> 00:23:58 evil
00:23:58 --> 00:23:59 but then
00:23:59 --> 00:24:00 might
00:24:00 --> 00:24:02 power
00:24:02 --> 00:24:03 becomes
00:24:03 --> 00:24:04 right
00:24:04 --> 00:24:04 and you
00:24:04 --> 00:24:05 end up
00:24:05 --> 00:24:06 with sheer
00:24:06 --> 00:24:06 naked
00:24:06 --> 00:24:07 brutality.
00:24:08 --> 00:24:09 He says
00:24:09 --> 00:24:09 if you
00:24:09 --> 00:24:09 go down
00:24:09 --> 00:24:10 that route
00:24:10 --> 00:24:10 morality
00:24:10 --> 00:24:11 becomes
00:24:11 --> 00:24:12 meaningless.
00:24:13 --> 00:24:13 If you
00:24:13 --> 00:24:14 go down
00:24:14 --> 00:24:14 the personal
00:24:14 --> 00:24:15 God
00:24:15 --> 00:24:15 route
00:24:15 --> 00:24:15 morality
00:24:15 --> 00:24:16 becomes
00:24:16 --> 00:24:17 impossible.
00:24:19 --> 00:24:20 What I
00:24:20 --> 00:24:20 would add
00:24:20 --> 00:24:22 is that
00:24:22 --> 00:24:22 if the
00:24:22 --> 00:24:23 former
00:24:23 --> 00:24:24 ultimately
00:24:24 --> 00:24:24 gives
00:24:24 --> 00:24:25 the former
00:24:25 --> 00:24:25 one
00:24:25 --> 00:24:26 of every
00:24:26 --> 00:24:27 individual
00:24:27 --> 00:24:27 being gods
00:24:27 --> 00:24:28 and making
00:24:28 --> 00:24:28 their own
00:24:28 --> 00:24:29 decisions
00:24:29 --> 00:24:30 gives rise
00:24:30 --> 00:24:31 to anarchy
00:24:31 --> 00:24:31 in society
00:24:31 --> 00:24:32 and then
00:24:32 --> 00:24:33 you need
00:24:33 --> 00:24:33 the latter
00:24:33 --> 00:24:34 to solve
00:24:34 --> 00:24:34 the anarchy.
00:24:36 --> 00:24:37 secularism
00:24:37 --> 00:24:46 has a
00:24:46 --> 00:24:46 very
00:24:46 --> 00:24:47 significant
00:24:47 --> 00:24:47 problem
00:24:47 --> 00:24:48 between
00:24:48 --> 00:24:49 determining
00:24:49 --> 00:24:49 what is
00:24:49 --> 00:24:50 good and
00:24:50 --> 00:24:51 evil for
00:24:51 --> 00:24:51 society.
00:24:53 --> 00:24:54 It cannot
00:24:54 --> 00:24:55 produce
00:24:55 --> 00:24:55 moral
00:24:55 --> 00:24:56 obligation
00:24:56 --> 00:24:58 by itself
00:24:58 --> 00:25:00 and so
00:25:00 --> 00:25:01 in secular
00:25:01 --> 00:25:01 society
00:25:01 --> 00:25:02 all we do
00:25:02 --> 00:25:03 is yell
00:25:03 --> 00:25:03 at one
00:25:03 --> 00:25:04 another
00:25:04 --> 00:25:05 yell
00:25:05 --> 00:25:06 and yell
00:25:06 --> 00:25:06 and yell
00:25:06 --> 00:25:07 and so
00:25:07 --> 00:25:07 the rise
00:25:07 --> 00:25:08 of social
00:25:08 --> 00:25:08 media
00:25:08 --> 00:25:10 angst
00:25:10 --> 00:25:12 yelling
00:25:12 --> 00:25:12 about
00:25:12 --> 00:25:13 who's
00:25:13 --> 00:25:13 right
00:25:13 --> 00:25:13 and who's
00:25:13 --> 00:25:13 wrong.
00:25:16 --> 00:25:17 It's
00:25:17 --> 00:25:17 interesting
00:25:17 --> 00:25:17 that
00:25:17 --> 00:25:18 left
00:25:18 --> 00:25:19 himself
00:25:19 --> 00:25:20 an agnostic
00:25:20 --> 00:25:21 and therefore
00:25:21 --> 00:25:21 didn't think
00:25:21 --> 00:25:22 it was possible
00:25:22 --> 00:25:22 to know
00:25:22 --> 00:25:23 whether God
00:25:23 --> 00:25:23 existed at
00:25:23 --> 00:25:24 all
00:25:24 --> 00:25:24 ends
00:25:24 --> 00:25:25 his essay
00:25:25 --> 00:25:26 by
00:25:26 --> 00:25:27 pointing
00:25:27 --> 00:25:27 out
00:25:27 --> 00:25:28 that there's
00:25:28 --> 00:25:28 only one
00:25:28 --> 00:25:29 solution
00:25:29 --> 00:25:32 one solution
00:25:32 --> 00:25:34 and that
00:25:34 --> 00:25:35 would be
00:25:35 --> 00:25:36 that goodness
00:25:36 --> 00:25:38 was something
00:25:38 --> 00:25:38 bigger
00:25:38 --> 00:25:40 than us.
00:25:42 --> 00:25:42 This is an
00:25:42 --> 00:25:43 agnostic
00:25:43 --> 00:25:44 saying this
00:25:44 --> 00:25:45 something
00:25:45 --> 00:25:46 outside of
00:25:46 --> 00:25:46 this
00:25:46 --> 00:25:46 something
00:25:46 --> 00:25:47 outside
00:25:47 --> 00:25:48 of us
00:25:48 --> 00:25:51 only then
00:25:51 --> 00:25:51 could ethics
00:25:51 --> 00:25:52 morality
00:25:52 --> 00:25:53 and law
00:25:53 --> 00:25:53 work.
00:25:53 --> 00:25:55 perhaps
00:25:55 --> 00:25:56 this
00:25:56 --> 00:25:56 source
00:25:56 --> 00:25:56 of
00:25:56 --> 00:25:56 goodness
00:25:56 --> 00:25:57 could
00:25:57 --> 00:25:57 also
00:25:57 --> 00:25:58 help
00:25:58 --> 00:25:58 with
00:25:58 --> 00:25:58 the
00:25:58 --> 00:25:58 question
00:25:58 --> 00:25:58 of
00:25:58 --> 00:25:59 purpose
00:25:59 --> 00:26:00 give us
00:26:00 --> 00:26:00 a clue
00:26:00 --> 00:26:01 that we
00:26:01 --> 00:26:02 are not
00:26:02 --> 00:26:02 merely
00:26:02 --> 00:26:03 cosmic
00:26:03 --> 00:26:04 accidents
00:26:04 --> 00:26:05 churned up
00:26:05 --> 00:26:05 from the
00:26:05 --> 00:26:06 genetic
00:26:06 --> 00:26:06 cauldron
00:26:06 --> 00:26:07 of chaos
00:26:07 --> 00:26:09 but instead
00:26:09 --> 00:26:10 that we
00:26:10 --> 00:26:10 were made
00:26:10 --> 00:26:11 for something
00:26:11 --> 00:26:12 we were
00:26:12 --> 00:26:13 fashioned
00:26:13 --> 00:26:13 to be
00:26:13 --> 00:26:14 something
00:26:14 --> 00:26:17 of course
00:26:17 --> 00:26:18 this raises
00:26:18 --> 00:26:19 its own
00:26:19 --> 00:26:19 problem
00:26:19 --> 00:26:21 what are
00:26:21 --> 00:26:22 the implications
00:26:22 --> 00:26:23 for us
00:26:23 --> 00:26:24 if we
00:26:24 --> 00:26:25 fall short
00:26:25 --> 00:26:26 of the
00:26:26 --> 00:26:27 transcendent
00:26:27 --> 00:26:27 source of
00:26:27 --> 00:26:28 goodness
00:26:28 --> 00:26:29 what if
00:26:29 --> 00:26:30 we discover
00:26:30 --> 00:26:31 that we
00:26:31 --> 00:26:31 are not
00:26:31 --> 00:26:32 aligned
00:26:32 --> 00:26:33 to goodness
00:26:33 --> 00:26:34 what if
00:26:34 --> 00:26:35 we discover
00:26:35 --> 00:26:35 that we're
00:26:35 --> 00:26:36 actually not
00:26:36 --> 00:26:37 good
00:26:37 --> 00:26:38 as people
00:26:38 --> 00:26:42 if goodness
00:26:42 --> 00:26:42 is not
00:26:42 --> 00:26:43 controlled by
00:26:43 --> 00:26:43 me
00:26:43 --> 00:26:45 if it's not
00:26:45 --> 00:26:45 controlled by
00:26:45 --> 00:26:46 society
00:26:46 --> 00:26:48 it may
00:26:48 --> 00:26:49 turn out
00:26:49 --> 00:26:50 that this
00:26:50 --> 00:26:51 transcendent
00:26:51 --> 00:26:51 goodness says
00:26:51 --> 00:26:52 that I'm in
00:26:52 --> 00:26:53 fact messed
00:26:53 --> 00:26:53 up
00:26:53 --> 00:26:56 that this
00:26:56 --> 00:26:56 world's
00:26:56 --> 00:26:57 messed up
00:26:57 --> 00:26:59 everyone's
00:26:59 --> 00:26:59 messed up
00:26:59 --> 00:27:04 because the
00:27:04 --> 00:27:04 whole point
00:27:04 --> 00:27:05 of a moral
00:27:05 --> 00:27:05 standard is
00:27:05 --> 00:27:06 that we all
00:27:06 --> 00:27:07 would measure
00:27:07 --> 00:27:09 up and
00:27:09 --> 00:27:09 what if we
00:27:09 --> 00:27:10 don't
00:27:10 --> 00:27:15 this is what
00:27:15 --> 00:27:16 makes the
00:27:16 --> 00:27:17 issue of what
00:27:17 --> 00:27:17 I'm talking
00:27:17 --> 00:27:17 about this
00:27:17 --> 00:27:18 morning the
00:27:18 --> 00:27:18 issue of
00:27:18 --> 00:27:19 morality
00:27:19 --> 00:27:20 reality not
00:27:20 --> 00:27:20 simply a
00:27:20 --> 00:27:21 philosophical
00:27:21 --> 00:27:22 discussion
00:27:22 --> 00:27:23 but a
00:27:23 --> 00:27:24 highly
00:27:24 --> 00:27:24 personal
00:27:24 --> 00:27:24 one
00:27:24 --> 00:27:27 so what
00:27:27 --> 00:27:28 if we
00:27:28 --> 00:27:29 were made
00:27:29 --> 00:27:29 for something
00:27:29 --> 00:27:31 what if we
00:27:31 --> 00:27:31 were fashioned
00:27:31 --> 00:27:32 to be
00:27:32 --> 00:27:32 something
00:27:32 --> 00:27:34 and even
00:27:34 --> 00:27:35 as
00:27:35 --> 00:27:35 Christianity
00:27:35 --> 00:27:36 declares
00:27:36 --> 00:27:37 intended
00:27:37 --> 00:27:39 to know
00:27:39 --> 00:27:40 someone
00:27:40 --> 00:27:42 that's
00:27:42 --> 00:27:42 the
00:27:42 --> 00:27:42 unique
00:27:42 --> 00:27:43 contribution
00:27:43 --> 00:27:43 of
00:27:43 --> 00:27:44 Christianity
00:27:44 --> 00:27:45 to this
00:27:45 --> 00:27:45 whole
00:27:45 --> 00:27:46 discussion
00:27:46 --> 00:27:47 or if
00:27:47 --> 00:27:47 you like
00:27:47 --> 00:27:48 the unique
00:27:48 --> 00:27:49 contribution
00:27:49 --> 00:27:49 of the
00:27:49 --> 00:27:50 goodness
00:27:50 --> 00:27:51 of Jesus
00:27:51 --> 00:27:52 Christ
00:27:52 --> 00:27:54 Christianity
00:27:54 --> 00:27:55 stands
00:27:55 --> 00:27:55 with all
00:27:55 --> 00:27:56 the other
00:27:56 --> 00:27:56 great
00:27:56 --> 00:27:57 religions
00:27:57 --> 00:27:58 in declaring
00:27:58 --> 00:27:58 that there
00:27:58 --> 00:27:59 are moral
00:27:59 --> 00:28:00 absolutes
00:28:00 --> 00:28:00 that are
00:28:00 --> 00:28:01 outside of
00:28:01 --> 00:28:01 us
00:28:01 --> 00:28:02 that are
00:28:02 --> 00:28:03 the basis
00:28:03 --> 00:28:03 of our
00:28:03 --> 00:28:04 moral
00:28:04 --> 00:28:04 feelings
00:28:04 --> 00:28:05 and our
00:28:05 --> 00:28:06 moral
00:28:06 --> 00:28:07 obligation
00:28:07 --> 00:28:08 they're the
00:28:08 --> 00:28:09 basis of
00:28:09 --> 00:28:09 moral feelings
00:28:09 --> 00:28:11 and moral
00:28:11 --> 00:28:11 obligation
00:28:11 --> 00:28:14 and also
00:28:14 --> 00:28:16 behind our
00:28:16 --> 00:28:17 moral motivation
00:28:17 --> 00:28:21 having said
00:28:21 --> 00:28:21 that
00:28:21 --> 00:28:24 what we see
00:28:24 --> 00:28:25 in our
00:28:25 --> 00:28:26 society right
00:28:26 --> 00:28:27 now in
00:28:27 --> 00:28:28 this country
00:28:28 --> 00:28:28 and many
00:28:28 --> 00:28:29 places in
00:28:29 --> 00:28:29 the western
00:28:29 --> 00:28:31 world is
00:28:31 --> 00:28:32 people shedding
00:28:32 --> 00:28:34 religion and
00:28:34 --> 00:28:34 particularly in
00:28:34 --> 00:28:35 the western
00:28:35 --> 00:28:35 world shedding
00:28:35 --> 00:28:36 Christianity
00:28:36 --> 00:28:38 because they
00:28:38 --> 00:28:38 see a
00:28:38 --> 00:28:40 self-righteousness
00:28:40 --> 00:28:40 in that
00:28:40 --> 00:28:41 Christianity
00:28:41 --> 00:28:42 they see a
00:28:42 --> 00:28:43 legalism
00:28:43 --> 00:28:44 they see a
00:28:44 --> 00:28:44 cruelty
00:28:44 --> 00:28:46 they see a
00:28:46 --> 00:28:46 hypocrisy
00:28:46 --> 00:28:48 they see a
00:28:48 --> 00:28:49 history of
00:28:49 --> 00:28:49 oppression
00:28:49 --> 00:28:52 throughout history
00:28:52 --> 00:28:53 religion and the
00:28:53 --> 00:28:54 Christian church
00:28:54 --> 00:28:55 has in my
00:28:55 --> 00:28:56 view got blood
00:28:56 --> 00:28:57 on its hands
00:28:57 --> 00:28:58 for abuse of
00:28:58 --> 00:28:59 power on
00:28:59 --> 00:29:00 moral absolutes
00:29:00 --> 00:29:03 religious
00:29:03 --> 00:29:05 institutions
00:29:05 --> 00:29:07 have in
00:29:07 --> 00:29:07 the past
00:29:07 --> 00:29:08 when they
00:29:08 --> 00:29:08 had the
00:29:08 --> 00:29:09 power
00:29:09 --> 00:29:09 yelled
00:29:09 --> 00:29:10 the most
00:29:10 --> 00:29:16 many have
00:29:16 --> 00:29:17 abandoned
00:29:17 --> 00:29:18 that therefore
00:29:18 --> 00:29:18 abandoned the
00:29:18 --> 00:29:19 Christian faith
00:29:19 --> 00:29:20 and moved
00:29:20 --> 00:29:22 towards secularism
00:29:22 --> 00:29:23 as a reaction
00:29:23 --> 00:29:24 to what they've
00:29:24 --> 00:29:25 seen in the
00:29:25 --> 00:29:26 hypocrisy of the
00:29:26 --> 00:29:27 church in the
00:29:27 --> 00:29:27 past
00:29:27 --> 00:29:31 what I've
00:29:31 --> 00:29:32 tried to do
00:29:32 --> 00:29:32 this morning
00:29:32 --> 00:29:33 is show that
00:29:33 --> 00:29:34 if that has
00:29:34 --> 00:29:34 been your
00:29:34 --> 00:29:35 move
00:29:35 --> 00:29:36 that doesn't
00:29:36 --> 00:29:37 solve your
00:29:37 --> 00:29:37 problem
00:29:37 --> 00:29:40 secularism does
00:29:40 --> 00:29:40 not solve your
00:29:40 --> 00:29:41 problem so what
00:29:41 --> 00:29:42 is the solution
00:29:42 --> 00:29:46 hopefully you
00:29:46 --> 00:29:47 remember this
00:29:47 --> 00:29:49 a little while
00:29:49 --> 00:29:50 ago I talked
00:29:50 --> 00:29:51 about the
00:29:51 --> 00:29:51 Greeks
00:29:51 --> 00:29:52 and they
00:29:52 --> 00:29:53 believed
00:29:53 --> 00:29:54 the
00:29:54 --> 00:29:54 logos
00:29:54 --> 00:29:56 was the
00:29:56 --> 00:29:57 cosmic order
00:29:57 --> 00:29:57 behind the
00:29:57 --> 00:29:58 universe and
00:29:58 --> 00:29:59 gave it
00:29:59 --> 00:30:00 its purpose
00:30:00 --> 00:30:02 if you're
00:30:02 --> 00:30:03 connected to
00:30:03 --> 00:30:03 the logos
00:30:03 --> 00:30:05 and lived
00:30:05 --> 00:30:06 by the
00:30:06 --> 00:30:06 logos
00:30:06 --> 00:30:08 then you
00:30:08 --> 00:30:08 would be
00:30:08 --> 00:30:09 living a
00:30:09 --> 00:30:09 wise and
00:30:09 --> 00:30:10 virtuous life
00:30:10 --> 00:30:12 that is in
00:30:12 --> 00:30:13 obedience in
00:30:13 --> 00:30:14 following the
00:30:14 --> 00:30:16 logos is the
00:30:16 --> 00:30:16 way of
00:30:16 --> 00:30:18 a virtuous and
00:30:18 --> 00:30:19 wise life in
00:30:19 --> 00:30:19 this world
00:30:19 --> 00:30:21 at the beginning
00:30:21 --> 00:30:22 of the bible
00:30:22 --> 00:30:23 passage that was
00:30:23 --> 00:30:23 read out to
00:30:23 --> 00:30:23 us by
00:30:23 --> 00:30:24 noeline
00:30:24 --> 00:30:25 john chapter
00:30:25 --> 00:30:26 one we read
00:30:26 --> 00:30:27 this in the
00:30:27 --> 00:30:28 beginning was
00:30:28 --> 00:30:29 the word and
00:30:29 --> 00:30:29 the word was
00:30:29 --> 00:30:30 with god and
00:30:30 --> 00:30:31 the word was
00:30:31 --> 00:30:32 god he was
00:30:32 --> 00:30:33 with god in
00:30:33 --> 00:30:34 the beginning
00:30:34 --> 00:30:34 and through him
00:30:34 --> 00:30:35 all things were
00:30:35 --> 00:30:36 made without
00:30:36 --> 00:30:37 him nothing was
00:30:37 --> 00:30:38 made that has
00:30:38 --> 00:30:39 been made in
00:30:39 --> 00:30:40 him that is the
00:30:40 --> 00:30:42 word was life
00:30:42 --> 00:30:44 and that life was
00:30:44 --> 00:30:45 the light of all
00:30:45 --> 00:30:46 of mankind
00:30:46 --> 00:30:47 and then down
00:30:47 --> 00:30:48 into verse 14
00:30:48 --> 00:30:50 this word became
00:30:50 --> 00:30:51 flesh and made
00:30:51 --> 00:30:52 his dwelling
00:30:52 --> 00:30:53 amongst us
00:30:53 --> 00:30:54 this word who
00:30:54 --> 00:30:55 was god came
00:30:55 --> 00:30:56 and lived
00:30:56 --> 00:30:57 amongst us
00:30:57 --> 00:30:57 and we have
00:30:57 --> 00:30:58 seen his
00:30:58 --> 00:30:59 glory the
00:30:59 --> 00:31:00 glory of the
00:31:00 --> 00:31:01 one and only
00:31:01 --> 00:31:02 son who came
00:31:02 --> 00:31:03 from the father
00:31:03 --> 00:31:04 full of grace
00:31:04 --> 00:31:05 and truth
00:31:05 --> 00:31:09 that word there
00:31:09 --> 00:31:10 is referring to
00:31:10 --> 00:31:10 as you go
00:31:10 --> 00:31:11 through john's
00:31:11 --> 00:31:11 gospel you
00:31:11 --> 00:31:12 realize in
00:31:12 --> 00:31:13 verse 17 it
00:31:13 --> 00:31:13 makes it very
00:31:13 --> 00:31:15 clear the word
00:31:15 --> 00:31:16 is jesus christ
00:31:16 --> 00:31:21 why is he
00:31:21 --> 00:31:22 calling him the
00:31:22 --> 00:31:24 word john's
00:31:24 --> 00:31:25 writing this to
00:31:25 --> 00:31:28 greeks why is he
00:31:28 --> 00:31:29 referring to jesus
00:31:29 --> 00:31:29 what a weird thing
00:31:29 --> 00:31:30 why call him the
00:31:30 --> 00:31:32 word because in
00:31:32 --> 00:31:33 the original
00:31:33 --> 00:31:35 language the word
00:31:35 --> 00:31:36 word is
00:31:36 --> 00:31:37 logos
00:31:37 --> 00:31:42 john in writing
00:31:42 --> 00:31:43 this is using a
00:31:43 --> 00:31:44 technical greek
00:31:44 --> 00:31:46 philosophical term
00:31:46 --> 00:31:47 to say that
00:31:47 --> 00:31:48 there are moral
00:31:48 --> 00:31:49 absolutes
00:31:49 --> 00:31:50 there is a
00:31:50 --> 00:31:50 purpose
00:31:50 --> 00:31:52 it's not an
00:31:52 --> 00:31:53 abstract set of
00:31:53 --> 00:31:55 standards but the
00:31:55 --> 00:31:55 logos of the
00:31:55 --> 00:31:58 world the purpose
00:31:58 --> 00:31:58 of the world
00:31:58 --> 00:32:00 the standard of
00:32:00 --> 00:32:01 the world
00:32:01 --> 00:32:03 is not a book
00:32:03 --> 00:32:05 it's not a set of
00:32:05 --> 00:32:06 laws
00:32:06 --> 00:32:08 it's a person
00:32:08 --> 00:32:11 jesus christ
00:32:11 --> 00:32:14 there is a
00:32:14 --> 00:32:15 rational design
00:32:15 --> 00:32:16 and order behind
00:32:16 --> 00:32:16 the universe
00:32:16 --> 00:32:18 it's not a code
00:32:18 --> 00:32:19 it's a person
00:32:19 --> 00:32:21 it's jesus christ
00:32:21 --> 00:32:26 i find it
00:32:26 --> 00:32:27 remarkable
00:32:27 --> 00:32:30 quite telling in
00:32:30 --> 00:32:31 fact
00:32:31 --> 00:32:32 that when
00:32:32 --> 00:32:33 a secular
00:32:33 --> 00:32:34 person
00:32:34 --> 00:32:35 is engaging
00:32:35 --> 00:32:35 with the
00:32:35 --> 00:32:36 christian faith
00:32:36 --> 00:32:37 they pick out
00:32:37 --> 00:32:38 obscure passages
00:32:38 --> 00:32:38 from the old
00:32:38 --> 00:32:39 testament
00:32:39 --> 00:32:40 and talk about
00:32:40 --> 00:32:41 the implausibility
00:32:41 --> 00:32:41 of those
00:32:41 --> 00:32:42 passages
00:32:42 --> 00:32:43 as if it's
00:32:43 --> 00:32:43 some sort of
00:32:43 --> 00:32:44 code to be
00:32:44 --> 00:32:45 obeyed
00:32:45 --> 00:32:47 and they don't
00:32:47 --> 00:32:47 look at the
00:32:47 --> 00:32:48 person of jesus
00:32:48 --> 00:32:49 christ and pull
00:32:49 --> 00:32:50 apart him
00:32:50 --> 00:32:53 they don't pull
00:32:53 --> 00:32:53 apart his
00:32:53 --> 00:32:54 character
00:32:54 --> 00:32:59 what we discover
00:32:59 --> 00:33:00 about the logos
00:33:00 --> 00:33:01 in john's gospel
00:33:01 --> 00:33:01 is that the
00:33:01 --> 00:33:02 deepest moral
00:33:02 --> 00:33:03 obligation
00:33:03 --> 00:33:04 of every
00:33:04 --> 00:33:05 human being
00:33:05 --> 00:33:05 the
00:33:05 --> 00:33:06 ought
00:33:06 --> 00:33:07 of every
00:33:07 --> 00:33:07 human being
00:33:07 --> 00:33:09 is to
00:33:09 --> 00:33:10 know him
00:33:10 --> 00:33:11 having
00:33:11 --> 00:33:12 been asked
00:33:12 --> 00:33:12 in john
00:33:12 --> 00:33:13 six
00:33:13 --> 00:33:14 what was it
00:33:14 --> 00:33:14 that god
00:33:14 --> 00:33:15 required of
00:33:15 --> 00:33:15 people
00:33:15 --> 00:33:17 jesus responds
00:33:17 --> 00:33:17 the work of
00:33:17 --> 00:33:18 god is this
00:33:18 --> 00:33:19 to believe
00:33:19 --> 00:33:20 in the one
00:33:20 --> 00:33:21 he has sent
00:33:21 --> 00:33:24 that's the
00:33:24 --> 00:33:24 deepest moral
00:33:24 --> 00:33:25 obligation of
00:33:25 --> 00:33:26 every human
00:33:26 --> 00:33:26 being
00:33:26 --> 00:33:27 to acknowledge
00:33:27 --> 00:33:28 the son
00:33:28 --> 00:33:30 jesus christ
00:33:30 --> 00:33:31 knowing him
00:33:31 --> 00:33:32 through knowing
00:33:32 --> 00:33:33 him through a
00:33:33 --> 00:33:33 personal love
00:33:33 --> 00:33:34 relation with
00:33:34 --> 00:33:35 him we come
00:33:35 --> 00:33:35 to the heart
00:33:35 --> 00:33:36 of the universe
00:33:36 --> 00:33:38 christians believe
00:33:38 --> 00:33:40 that we are not
00:33:40 --> 00:33:42 good or saved
00:33:42 --> 00:33:43 by living up to
00:33:43 --> 00:33:44 some abstract
00:33:44 --> 00:33:45 moral code
00:33:45 --> 00:33:47 moral standards
00:33:47 --> 00:33:48 we are saved
00:33:48 --> 00:33:49 by jesus christ
00:33:49 --> 00:33:49 the logos
00:33:49 --> 00:33:52 coming into
00:33:52 --> 00:33:52 his creation
00:33:52 --> 00:33:54 to die on a
00:33:54 --> 00:33:55 cross for
00:33:55 --> 00:33:56 for us
00:33:56 --> 00:33:57 not living
00:33:57 --> 00:33:58 up to
00:33:58 --> 00:33:59 our deepest
00:33:59 --> 00:34:00 deepest
00:34:00 --> 00:34:01 moral obligation
00:34:01 --> 00:34:02 as people
00:34:02 --> 00:34:03 and that is
00:34:03 --> 00:34:04 knowing and
00:34:04 --> 00:34:05 loving and
00:34:05 --> 00:34:06 worshipping the
00:34:06 --> 00:34:07 creator god
00:34:07 --> 00:34:10 christian declares
00:34:10 --> 00:34:10 that god has
00:34:10 --> 00:34:11 set the
00:34:11 --> 00:34:12 perfect moral
00:34:12 --> 00:34:13 standard
00:34:13 --> 00:34:14 and jesus christ
00:34:14 --> 00:34:15 god himself
00:34:15 --> 00:34:16 has come into
00:34:16 --> 00:34:17 this world
00:34:17 --> 00:34:18 in order
00:34:18 --> 00:34:19 to achieve
00:34:19 --> 00:34:20 it for us
00:34:20 --> 00:34:21 he lived
00:34:21 --> 00:34:22 the perfect
00:34:22 --> 00:34:23 life for
00:34:23 --> 00:34:23 us
00:34:23 --> 00:34:25 and he
00:34:25 --> 00:34:26 died
00:34:26 --> 00:34:26 the perfect
00:34:26 --> 00:34:27 death
00:34:27 --> 00:34:28 for us
00:34:28 --> 00:34:31 a christian
00:34:31 --> 00:34:31 is someone
00:34:31 --> 00:34:32 who trusts
00:34:32 --> 00:34:32 in the goodness
00:34:32 --> 00:34:34 and the grace
00:34:34 --> 00:34:35 of jesus christ
00:34:35 --> 00:34:36 and so
00:34:36 --> 00:34:37 brothers and
00:34:37 --> 00:34:37 sisters
00:34:37 --> 00:34:38 if you're a
00:34:38 --> 00:34:39 christian here
00:34:39 --> 00:34:39 at the moment
00:34:39 --> 00:34:40 to the degree
00:34:40 --> 00:34:43 that you
00:34:43 --> 00:34:43 really
00:34:43 --> 00:34:44 really
00:34:44 --> 00:34:45 understand
00:34:45 --> 00:34:46 the very
00:34:46 --> 00:34:47 heart of
00:34:47 --> 00:34:47 the faith
00:34:47 --> 00:34:48 is that
00:34:48 --> 00:34:49 jesus christ
00:34:49 --> 00:34:50 is the
00:34:50 --> 00:34:50 logos
00:34:50 --> 00:34:52 who came
00:34:52 --> 00:34:52 into this
00:34:52 --> 00:34:53 world
00:34:53 --> 00:34:54 onto this
00:34:54 --> 00:34:54 earth
00:34:54 --> 00:34:55 he died
00:34:55 --> 00:34:56 for you
00:34:56 --> 00:34:57 to cover
00:34:57 --> 00:34:58 over all
00:34:58 --> 00:34:58 of your
00:34:58 --> 00:34:59 wrongdoing
00:34:59 --> 00:35:00 all of your
00:35:00 --> 00:35:01 moral failure
00:35:01 --> 00:35:03 so that you
00:35:03 --> 00:35:04 live by grace
00:35:04 --> 00:35:05 and love
00:35:05 --> 00:35:06 is to the
00:35:06 --> 00:35:06 degree
00:35:06 --> 00:35:07 that you
00:35:07 --> 00:35:08 as a christian
00:35:08 --> 00:35:10 will in fact
00:35:10 --> 00:35:11 live by grace
00:35:11 --> 00:35:12 and love
00:35:12 --> 00:35:13 in this world
00:35:13 --> 00:35:15 the goodness
00:35:15 --> 00:35:16 of jesus
00:35:16 --> 00:35:17 what it does
00:35:17 --> 00:35:17 more than
00:35:17 --> 00:35:18 anything else
00:35:18 --> 00:35:19 it does not
00:35:19 --> 00:35:20 turn you into
00:35:20 --> 00:35:20 an oppression
00:35:20 --> 00:35:21 we're going
00:35:21 --> 00:35:21 to see
00:35:21 --> 00:35:22 this a
00:35:22 --> 00:35:22 little bit
00:35:22 --> 00:35:23 later on
00:35:23 --> 00:35:23 in this
00:35:23 --> 00:35:23 series
00:35:23 --> 00:35:24 the goodness
00:35:24 --> 00:35:25 of jesus
00:35:25 --> 00:35:26 humbles
00:35:26 --> 00:35:26 you
00:35:26 --> 00:35:27 it does
00:35:27 --> 00:35:28 not say
00:35:28 --> 00:35:28 that you
00:35:28 --> 00:35:29 are good
00:35:29 --> 00:35:29 it says
00:35:29 --> 00:35:30 that he
00:35:30 --> 00:35:30 is good
00:35:30 --> 00:35:32 it humbles
00:35:32 --> 00:35:33 you in
00:35:33 --> 00:35:33 such a way
00:35:33 --> 00:35:34 that as
00:35:34 --> 00:35:35 you pursue
00:35:35 --> 00:35:36 the moral
00:35:36 --> 00:35:38 absolutes
00:35:38 --> 00:35:39 of this
00:35:39 --> 00:35:39 bible
00:35:39 --> 00:35:41 it turns
00:35:41 --> 00:35:42 you
00:35:42 --> 00:35:44 it doesn't
00:35:44 --> 00:35:44 turn you
00:35:44 --> 00:35:45 into some
00:35:45 --> 00:35:46 self-righteous
00:35:46 --> 00:35:46 legalist
00:35:46 --> 00:35:47 who waves
00:35:47 --> 00:35:48 their finger
00:35:48 --> 00:35:48 at the
00:35:48 --> 00:35:49 rest of
00:35:49 --> 00:35:49 the world
00:35:49 --> 00:35:52 it doesn't
00:35:52 --> 00:35:53 make you
00:35:53 --> 00:35:54 an oppressor
00:35:54 --> 00:35:54 of others
00:35:54 --> 00:35:58 as you
00:35:58 --> 00:35:58 embrace the
00:35:58 --> 00:35:59 goodness of
00:35:59 --> 00:35:59 jesus
00:35:59 --> 00:36:01 it turns
00:36:01 --> 00:36:01 you into
00:36:01 --> 00:36:02 a person
00:36:02 --> 00:36:03 of goodness
00:36:03 --> 00:36:04 that's the
00:36:04 --> 00:36:05 unique
00:36:05 --> 00:36:05 contribution
00:36:05 --> 00:36:06 of the
00:36:06 --> 00:36:06 christian
00:36:06 --> 00:36:07 faith
00:36:07 --> 00:36:07 in our
00:36:07 --> 00:36:08 society
00:36:08 --> 00:36:08 right now
00:36:08 --> 00:36:09 and we
00:36:09 --> 00:36:10 need it
00:36:10 --> 00:36:18 to
00:36:18 --> 00:36:19 listen
00:36:19 --> 00:36:21 so
00:36:21 --> 00:36:24 um
00:36:24 --> 00:36:30 well
00:36:32 --> 00:36:33 well
00:36:33 --> 00:36:35 well
00:36:36 --> 00:36:38 well