Ethics and religion are two inseparable aspects of humanity that play a vital role in determining the credibility of people’s actions (“Ethics for a Whole World,” 2010). In essence, for a religion to become credible, it must be founded on the basis of strong ethical frameworks that uphold human dignity and self respect. On the other hand, religion is a great force that upholds societal morals in order to develop and maintain ethics.
This implies that religion and ethics must be used simultaneously when making decisions which affect humanity (Espejo, 2010). This paper will discuss the key absolutes of making healthy decision, describe a methodology that could be applied when making ethical resolutions, and identify an applicable way of handling issues that do not have straight biblical answers.
Additionally, the discussion will focus on how to handle directives that develop compellation which is contrary to personal absolutes.
Absolutes of Making Biblical Decisions
Essentially, there are fundamental absolutes that could guide the process of making biblical decisions. First, a healthy and ethical decision must correspond to the teachings of the bible which are the guidelines that portray the will of God. Therefore, for a biblical decision to be regarded as a healthy one, it must be limited to God’s disciplines. This was evident during the dispensation of the Kenyan constitution in 2010.
The church advised the citizens to reject the proposed constitution until the constitutional committee reviewed the law of abortion. The draft constitution indicates that the abortion is illegal unless directed by a qualified technician. In this regard, the church argued that nobody should determine the death of a child.
Particularly, Cardinal John Njue elaborated that if a complication occurs during birth, a human being is not mandated to determine the live that should be terminated. He pointed out that the medical practitioner should aim at saving the two lives rather than terminating one of them to save the other.
This implies that if the mother or the unborn child dies during the surgery that could be the will of God. In this case, the death of that victim is the will of God that should not be changed by choice of human beings. He concluded by stating that the constitution should differentiate between the powers of human beings from those of God (Njoroge, 2008).
Secondly, in order to make a healthy decision, it must be limited to the ideologies which the society regards as morally upright. This implies that the decision should not contravene the morals of the society even if they are biblically right. Since the decision will be implemented by the people in the society to impact on their daily lives, it must correspond to their moral behaviors so that they can abide by that decision.
For example, during the time of Moses, a murderer was punished by murder while thieves were punished by cutting their hands (Bloom, 1987). If a decision maker could apply these biblical aspects in the modern society, it could contravene the ideologies of humanity which essentially states that cruelty should be challenged with courtesy.
Decision Making Methodology
In the perspective, there are four broad steps that should be incorporated in the process of decision making. The important step is praying for God’s intervention during the decision making process. This has always been evident in most processes including the scientific ones. For example, Ben Carson revealed that they could always pray for God’s intervention before starting a surgery.
When making decisions, it is important to understand that the decision will impact on the people surrounding the decision maker. As a result, consulting the other parties could assist in gathering their opinions in order to avoid contravening their beliefs and omitting helpful suggestions. However, the decision maker should choose the people to be included in a wise manner in order to achieve the best results.
This does not mean that they should only comprise of the people who are always submissive to directives. Instead, it should incorporate the controversial, indifferent, and supportive people. This diversity helps in presenting a decision that has considered all the aspects of the problem including the benefits, challenges and consequences.
Considering Alternatives and States of Nature
When the decision makers consult the people around them, they obtain several alternatives that could be chosen in order to make a decision. However, each of the alternatives is conjoined to some uncertain ethical implications which are referred to as the states of nature.
Since the states of nature cannot be controlled by the decision maker, they must be evaluated in order to determine the likelihood of having ethical dilemmas in the future. As a result, this consideration assists in choosing the resolution which has the least likelihood of creating ethical dilemmas.
Making Decision and Publicizing the Entire Process
This step incorporates two aspects including the actual decision and informing other people about it. While informing them, the maker must ensure that he elaborates the entire process in order to purport transparency which is a crucial aspect in ethics. In essence, there are other steps that could fit in the process.
However, they can fit within the four steps appropriately in such a manner that the four steps are the fundamental ones.
Solving the Problems Whose Answers are not Biblically Evident
It is important to understand that the bible does not have the direct solutions for all problems. However, it has remedies for all problems that face human beings. In this case, if the solution is not direct, the decision maker must determine the implied or indirect remedy. For example, the bible has not condemned abortion directly. Nonetheless, it has condemned murder directly.
This implies that the decision maker must identify the broader solution which encompasses the problem. As a result, the answer is solved in three categorical steps. First, one should determine the problem and evaluate all the aspects conjoined to it (Espejo, 2010).
Second, a relationship between the real problem and the bible should be identified in order to assist in making a reverse implication. Lastly, the reasons of making such an implicative decision must be elaborated to a substantially high degree of conviction and clarity.
Handling Directive that are Inconsistent with Personal Absolutes
Unlike the understanding of many scholars, decision making is not about believing in personal opinions resolutely. Instead, it is about understanding issues that have evoked the ethical problem. However, understanding the issues does not mean that the decision makers should abandon his absolutes bearing in minding that the personal opinions are equally valid (Espejo, 2010).
This implies that there is a conflict of interest between the commanders and the implementers. As a result, it is important to meet with the people giving the directive in order to elaborate the personal absolutes so that they are considered. This process of solving such an ethical conflict is known as compromise.
Ethics for a whole world. (2011). Beyond religion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Bloom, H. (1987). The Bible. New York: Chelsea House.
Espejo, R. (2010). Ethics. Farmington Hills: Greenhaven Press.
Njoroge, J. (2008). Exploration of the practice of premarital counseling in the context of Kenyan Baptist Churches. Nairobi: Macmillan Publishers.