NOTES ON ETHICS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

Return to Index

These notes were written in 1972 and expanded  in 1974 at the United Theological College, Bangalore, before being modified in 2007.

Part I: The Jesus-tradition
   I. The command to do.
    II.  Depth of obedience.
    III. Inclusive community
Part II: Biblical ethics as 'therefore' ethics
Part III: NT Ethics generally: The Neighbour and the Decalogue
    I. Emerging centrality of the Decalogue
    II. Love of the neighbour as central.

Part I:  The Jesus-tradition

I.  As presented in the Gospels, there is only one thing that appears to be unique to Jesus that cannot be readily paralleled elsewhere in any of the world's religions:

    What appears to be is unique about this is the positive command to do.  Elsewhere one can readily find the negative form: Do not do what you do not want done, but only in the Jesus-tradition (and its influence) does one encounter the positive injunction to do.  (Thus if there is a specifically Christian sin, it is the sin of omission, an act of love that one has chosen not to do.)
    It is in keeping with this that the Matthaean pericope of the Great Assize (Matt 25.31-46) defines the ultimate heirs of the Kingdom as those who feed the hungry 'little ones' (hoi mikroi, probably meaning disciples, 'the least of these my brethren', v. 40), give drink to them when thirsty, welcome them as strangers, clothe them when naked, visit them when sick or in prison.

II.  The Qumran community called for more obedience to the Torah, as did a number of Jewish parties, but Jesus by contrast calls for deeper obedience to Torah: depth, not breadth; qualitative not quantitative.  See especially in Matthew's Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7) the "You have heard... but I say to you..." sections, 5.21-48, for "You are to be perfect/whole/complete/mature (teleioi) as your heavenly Father is teleios."  (Cp. Luke 6:236: "Be merciful (oiktirmones), even as your Father is oiktirmón".
    I.e., God's character is the basis of what your character is to be, as it is in the OT.  (Cf. the Holiness Code of Leviticus: "You shall be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy," Lev 19.2; cf. Lev 11.44, 45; 20.7, 26; 21.8)  Note that Matt 5.48 and Luke 6.36 appeal to sons/daughters to show the character of their Father.
    On depth in Matthew cf. 23.23 where the scribes' and Pharisees' breadth of tithing dill, mint and cummin, the garden hebs that the Torah does not require to be tithed, is not condemned but is rather contrasted to the depths of God's demands: "the deep things of the Law" that they are accused of neglecting, namely, "justice, mercy and faith."  
    (On this qualitative depth in Matthew versus quantitative breadth in Qumran cf. W. D. Davis, The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount (OUP, Oxford, 1964).

III.  It is striking that although Jesus himself probably moved only among Jews, especially among tax-gatherers, sinners, and the am ha-aretz, 'the people of the land', i.e. those Jews whom scrupulous Jews counted as unclean and unobservant, our earliest writings all bear witness to an early movement out to the Gentiles.  I.e., the central thrust of Jesus' teaching (and actions) was so concerned with the unbounded and unlimited love and mercy of God, apparently, that the appropriate response of the Christian community was to move out to all people without limits (in accord with the vision of the prophet Isaiah as in Isa. 9.1f,.).
    Mark:  Every controversy with the Jewish leaders is over the boundaries of the community (cf. also 9.38-40, his controversy with his own disciple, John, over the strange exorcist).  We might characterize these as "Whom can we keep out, kick out, or make to be just like ourselves?" with Jesus' answer every time being "No one!".  Matthew:  Only gospel to quote (twice) Hosea 6.8: "I will have mercy and not sacrifice", Matt 9.13; 12.7.  Luke:  4.19 carefully omits Isa. 61.2b ("and the day of vengeance of our God"), then 4.25-27 tells of the mercy coming to Gentiles in the days of Elijah and Elisha.  Whereas in the OT "signs and wonders" are always God's judgements and punitive actions against the oppressors of Israel, in Luke-Acts they are always the "signs and wonders", sémeia kai terata, of God's mercy toward all people,  Note that Luke 10.30-37 (the so-called Parable of the Good Samaritan) defines the neighbour to be loved as the Samaritan whom the Jews hated.

Part II:  Biblical Ethics as "Therefore" Ethics:

I.   Joachim Wach, The Sociology of Religion (1948), drew a major distinction between the Christian and  the Jewish faiths on the one hand and all the world's religions on the other hand.
    He noted that all the world's religions are active, that is, they are concerned with people's actions as pleasing, placating or appeasing the gods in order that the gods may be propitious to them (or at least not bother them).  That is, men act and the gods respond.  Each of these religions is an acting cultus.
    By contrast, for Judaism and Christianity, God has acted, and on the basis of his action, man is to respond (and is enabled to respond).  His response is dependent upon God's prior action, and his response is one of faith, i.e., of trust in God who has acted for him.
   Judaism and Christianity therefore are not religions, but faiths, and they are a reacting cultus.

II.   Thus the key word in all biblical ethics is "therefore": God ha acted (in the Exodus; in Jesus) therefore we respond in faith by the strength that God has supplied, is supplying, and will supply (corresponding to faith, love and hope).
    NT example: 1 John 4.19: "We love because he first loved us."
    NT example: Ephesians 1-3 is basically a proclamation of what God has done for us in Christ.  Eph 4.1 then begins with oun, "therefore", and the ethical consequences follow: "I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you to walk worthily of the calling wherewith you were called ...."

Part III:  NT Ethics Generally:  The  Decalogue and the Neighbour.

I.  Emerging centrality of the Decalogue.
The normative heart of the ethical demand is the Decalogue (the Ten Words) in their Christian interpretation.

II.  Love of the neighbour as central.