Click here to get this post in PDF

Knowing Good & Evil

“And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, ‘Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, I am the LORD your God. After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances. Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein: I am the LORD your God. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.’ ” Leviticus 18:1-5.

This is a key passage for any legal system. Notice that neither the legal system from whence they had come nor the legal system of the land to which they were going were acceptable. Notice that it is not negotiable. The bottom line for acceptance of this law is the statement “I am the Lord.” That is all that is necessary for acceptance. Neither the conservative nor the liberal view of a legal system is appropriate. Why is that? Aren’t there truths in both systems of thought? Don’t we need to compromise to get to what’s right and acceptable? How do we know what to compromise? What parts of the liberal view and what parts of the conservative work together? Which are totally incompatible? Are they both right? Partly right? Both wrong? How do we know? What this passage says is that no human system of thought as to the appropriate legal system is acceptable. The only thing the Israelites needed to concern themselves with was the application of what God told them. Why? Because God is the author, source, fount of truth.

I am convinced that the problem of our day is not too little information but too much information. Without God’s standard, there’s no way to judge a legal system as to what is correct and true and what is not. More information will not help us understand what is right and true. Only an authoritative statement of the law can tell us anything. Any other method of deciphering the truth of a good legal system is simply a replay of the Garden of Eden, where Adam and Eve decided to “know” good and evil instead of listen to God’s authoritative law-word. The very first step of men to figure out a good and proper legal system is itself an act of illegality. It is an act of rebellion against the God who says, “Ye shall do my judgments.” Thus, modern man begins “in the hole” so to speak.

In seeking a legal system of his own creation, he is attempting be “like God, knowing good and evil.” He calls this freedom, and so the people following Adam and Eve lived – right up until the flood of Noah, when the earth was filled with violence and the imagination of men’s hearts was only evil continually. Thus, the very purpose of a legal system – to provide protection for the law abiding and punishment for the law breakers – fails from the outset for several reasons. Clearly, to fight against the very God who created man puts man in a very difficult situation. Second, how does man know who are the righteous – to be protected – and the wicked – to be punished?

Third, even in the process of experimenting with law, how does man know if a law creates a benefit or a deficit, is good for mankind or destructive? Can there be a test process, where the law is not used, so that like the scientific experimenter, legislating man knows that a law’s creation results in good? Perhaps the past, before the law’s creation, can be used. But that can’t work because there are too many laws needed for a society to operate. If my society prospers, how can I tell if it’s the law against stealing that worked versus the law against killing? How do I know that marriage is a good thing versus free love? Even if there were only one law that a society might need in order to operate, say “love thy neighbor,” how does the legislator know how to define love? As we gain more knowledge, the questions grow exponentially.

Let’s take the test case of stealing. Is stealing loving to my neighbor? What if my neighbor has too much wealth, making him stingy and selfish and unhappy? Perhaps taking something from him is a good thing. Surely such thinking exists in the minds of Progressives who seek to redistribute wealth by force, that is, by the force of the civil government. Lastly, who enforces the law? What person – the strongest, the smartest? Who decides? What keeps the enforcer from becoming a tyrant? What law limits his actions? Or whose law limits the tyrant? Why not a multitude of laws, one for each family or group or individual? What prevents chaos from being the standard? Thus, we have too many choices.

There is no method of scientific testing that can determine a good law from a bad law, as if society could be treated like a test tube. And then there’s the question as to who decides which law and who enforces the law? Laws multiply with the people who claim to have a better way. There is no way to determine the correct and true law absent an authoritative pronouncement from one who knows law intimately, who issued the original law, who understands man and the creation. There is no way to have an adequate legal system without the God of the bible. The law of society should be unique, authoritative, and issued by God.