Week Three - Day Three: What We Believe

Clue #5: We have a sense of right and wrong

We have an innate sense of right and wrong – all of us. We know that Nazi Germany’s attempt to exterminate Jews was horrifically wrong and we cannot be convinced otherwise. In fact, it is a mystery to us that Hitler could convince a nation of people to more or less follow him in this. “How could they?” we ask with indignation. And in the question we betray just how deeply ingrained our innate sense of right and wrong really is.

Why should we have such a sense and how do we explain it?

Some of you have read C. S. Lewis’ argument for Christian faith in Mere Christianity. He outlines this clue very effectively. Let’s spend some time with Lewis this morning.

“Everyone has heard people quarrelling. Sometimes it sounds funny and sometimes it sound merely unpleasant; but however it sounds, I believe we can learn something very important from listening to the kind of things they say. They say things like this: ‘How’d you like it if anyone did the same to you?’ – ‘That’s my seat, I was there first’ – ‘Leave him alone he isn’t doing you any harm’ – ‘Why should you shove in first?’ – ‘Give me a bit of orange, I gave you a bit of mine’ – ‘ Come on you promised.’ People say things like that every day, educated people as well as uneducated, and children as well as grown-ups.

“Now what interests me about all these remarks is that the man who makes them is not merely saying that the other man’s behavior does not happen to please him. He is appealing to some kind of standard of behavior which he expects the other man to know about. And the other man very seldom replies: ‘To hell with your standard.’ Nearly always he tries to make out that what he has been doing does not really go against the standard, or that if it does there is some special excuse. He pretends there is some special reason in this particular case ...”¹

To really feel the power of this clue and its implications, we’ve got to remember everything we’ve said about doubting our doubts. This is really one of those cases that the skeptic must answer. Some of our other clues, we must admit, can be simply rejected. As I’ve said, taken together I believe they are hard to simply reject, but it is possible to dismiss them with “I disagree.” However, I believe this one demands an answer. I’m not saying it can’t be answered, but I’ve never heard this sense of right and wrong explained well apart from appealing to some higher moral force inherent in the universe.

Most often the argument against this clue takes the form of disagreeing with the premise entirely. “No, you’re wrong. This sense of right and wrong is far from universal and therefore does not really require explanation. It doesn’t exist.” Again, let’s let Lewis respond.

“I know that some people say the idea of a Law of Human Nature or decent behavior known to all men is unsound, because different civilizations and different ages have had quite different moralities.

But this is not true. There have been differences between their moralities, but these have never amounted to anything like a total difference. If anyone will take the trouble to compare the moral teaching of, say, the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Hindus, Chinese, Greeks and Romans, what will really strike him will be how very like they are to each other and to our own. Just think what a totally different morality would mean. Think of a country where people were admired for running away in battle, or where a man felt proud of double-crossing all the people who had been kindest to him. You might as well try to imagine a country where two and two made five. Men have differed in regards to what people ought to be unselfish to – whether it was only your family, or your fellow countrymen, or every one. But they have always agreed that you ought not to put yourself first.”

The best explanation for our sense of right and wrong comes from the Christian belief that we were created by a perfectly moral and just God to exist in His image. This is not the only explanation, but it is the best explanation. Taken together, I believe these clues present a compelling case in favor of the existence of God. As we’ve said repeatedly, they can be resisted, but when we combine them with the challenge to doubt our doubts, the overall case for God becomes very, very strong.

So What? What Difference Does All Of This Make To Me?

Let me answer with an illustration. Suppose we built a small fire in a small warehouse room. To keep that fire going we need two things: we need a fuel source – something like wood – and we need oxygen. Without fuel the fire will burn itself out. And if the space is fairly airtight, the fire will burn up the available oxygen in the room and die out. (This is why most victims of fire die from asphyxiation and not from being burned alive.)

These daily offices are like the fuel that feeds our spirits. Each morning we are throwing an extra log on the fire. Each day at noon and at five we stir the fire and move the logs closer together. And each night we throw on another log. The content of the offices, doubting our doubts and considering the case for God’s existence, is like the oxygen for the fire. Ideally, our discussion of God’s existence has increased our confidence in Him and bolstered our ability to resist doubt. This, then, enables us to keep our spiritual fervor – the fire within us – burning hot.

But what if there is no fire? Or what if the fire has burned so low, it is simply too cool to attack the log when we throw it on the pile? What if there is no spiritual fervor to “keep”?

We will consider that case tomorrow. After that, we will begin to look at the character of the God for which we have built a case over the last two weeks. Should be fun ...

Before You Start Your Day

1. Take time to chew. Review. What are you thinking?
2. Pray. Give as much as you know of your day to as much as you know of God.