The objective of this lesson: to provide insight into the fact that neither conscience nor feeling nor a combination of conscience and feeling is sufficient to determine right or wrong and good or bad from a Christian perspective.
The American culture has produced an increasingly "feeling" oriented society. A significant standard in determining if an attitude or act is right or wrong, good or bad is how that attitude or act "feels" to the person. Good "feelings" commonly confirms something is right.
Discuss and illustrate this society's virtual obsession with feelings. Do not allow the discussion to "bash" the validity of expressing proper emotion. [The failure to express emotion creates serious problems as certainly as the failure produced when a person is guided only by emotion. No emotion is as destructive as only emotion.] The objective of this discussion is to note the shift in this society toward feelings as a significant indicator of right and wrong or good and bad.
First, right and wrong or good and bad are strictly individual determinations. If it "feels" good then it is good--even if it "feels" bad to others. Thus the cry becomes, "Do not judge me!" which often means do not evaluate my "feelings" by your "feelings." Many firmly believe there is no absolute right and wrong or absolute good and bad. Everything is both good and bad or right and wrong depending on the circumstances of the individual.
Note the use of "my feelings" to determine right and wrong or good and bad is often a justification of a personal behavior/position. Appealing only to feeling allows the person to focus on personal justification to the exclusion of person evaluation.
Second, if an attitude or action does not violate "my" conscience, it cannot be wrong or bad. Stated in another way, if the attitude or action "feels" good or right then it has to be good or right. In many instances, "feeling" is the ultimate consideration. The "certain proof" something is wrong is a "bad feeling."
To many American individuals (as frequently is true in other modern societies), the ultimate criteria for determining right or wrong and good and bad is personal feelings. It is rapidly reaching the point that something does not have to "feel good" for it to be right; it just does not have to feel bad. Thus, if "my" conscience does not react against something, it has to be right. This situation creates numerous ironies. One of many illustrations: A person can be so opposed to abortion that he/she classifies it as murder because it takes a life. Yet, he/she can take the life of someone who makes abortion possible, and without "feeling" it is wrong. Thus, by appealing to a powerful feeling, one is justified in his/her own opinion in preventing "murder by abortion" by intentionally "murdering."
The cultural swings in this society in less than one life span are dramatic. We have gone from a society that inhibited emotion to a society that feeds on emotion. In the mid-twentieth century, a woman endured significant social consequences if she had a child outside of marriage. Today there are unmarried men and women who deliberately have a child outside of marriage. In the mid-twentieth century it was not unusual for sexual activity and expression to be repressed even in marriage. Now sexual activity and expression are at least sanctioned and at most encouraged prior to marriage. Alienation in marriages, divorce, single parent homes, blended families, and life styles are much too frequently the result of an individual's "feelings."
Ask class members to share societal swings they observe.
When "feelings" determine standards and values, the concepts of responsibility and commitment suffer horribly. A common rational for a child rebelling against a parent is often, "I do not want to do that." An all too common tension exists between employees and employers because of what a person "feels." In the majority of marital conflicts, the tension exists because of the "feelings" of a spouse or both spouses.
Christians do not exist in a just world. Becoming a Christian does not mean the world suddenly will become just. There are times that being Jesus' disciple involves serving in ways you do not "feel" like serving--just as Jesus initially did not "feel" like dying. Among our Christian challenges is the need to demonstrate to an unjust world the meaning of being responsible and committed in service to others using God's standards and values.
In the majority of instances when "feeling" is a significant criteria for determining personal standards and values, an individual can make terrible choices or horrible decisions in all good conscience. Because he/she "felt good" about the choice or decision when it was made, it was a "good" choice or decision even if it resulted in consequences.
Good choices and decisions come from good standards and values. Godly consciences come from good choices and decisions based on good standards and values. A good choice and a good decision is determined by the results of the choice and decision years later, not by one's feelings at the moment of the choice or decision. Often choices and decisions of great value do not feel good at the moment of choice. Often choices and decisions of horrible consequence feel wonderful at the moment of choice or decision. The issue often is NOT "how do I feel at the moment of choice," but what is the continuing result of the choice.
Consider Paul. He could threaten to kill fellow Jews in all good conscience (Acts 9:1). He could drag Jewish men and women from their homes in all good conscience (Acts 8:3). He could imprison Jewish Christians, rejoice in the execution of Jewish Christians, and aggressively search for Jewish Christians in all good conscience (Acts 26:10). He could visit synagogues, confront Jews who believed Jesus was the Christ, and physical harm them in an attempt to get these people to denounce their faith in Jesus--and do that in all good conscience (Acts 26:11). He could be enraged at his own people in all good conscience (Acts 26:11).
Note Paul's choices and actions prior to being a Christian. Note that his choices and actions were insensitive to his own people. Make his actions real. Help your students see that he could act in these ways in all good conscience. Prior to becoming a Christian, Paul was not the kind of person most of us would choose for association or friendship.
Paul "felt" good about the execution of Jewish Christians! Paul "felt" good about contributing to their executions! Paul's wrath against Jewish Christians "felt" good to him! Why? He did those things in all good conscience. Why? Those acts and feeling did not violate his standards and values. To him, the traditions and values of his religious nation were more important than the people who rejected those national traditions and values.
Paul's actions were consistent with his conscience. He had no "feeling" that condemned his insensitivity to his people, or his abuse of his people, or the deaths of his people. His "feeling" supported his choices. He could do what most of us consider unthinkable in all good conscience. He could do those things in honor of his standards and values.
A key understanding: Paul did those things in all good conscience and was completely wrong. His "feelings" did not make his conscience right. His good conscience did not make his attitudes and acts right. His standards and values were horribly misguided even though he was convinced his standards and values were unquestionably right. The moment Paul realized Jesus' true identity, he instantly understood his standards and values were wrong.
Stress the point that having a good conscience did not make his actions right. Note the moment he realized his standards and values were not God's standards and values, his perspective, his feelings, and his conscience changed.
Paul's pre-Christian conscience teaches some invaluable lessons.
Make certain each lesson is grasped in practical terms.
Lesson one: because something "feels" right and good does not make it right and good.
Lesson two: if one's standards and values are incorrect, his/her conscience will be misguided.
Lesson three: one's conscience is no more reliable than the standards and values that train his/her conscience.
Lesson four: a conscience is a good conscience only if it is reliably trained by good standards and values.
Lesson five: it is possible to have right motives and wrong understanding at the same moment.
Lesson six: culture's standards frequently serve as poor standards for training a conscience.
Make certain each student understands the primary thrust of each lesson.
Training a conscience is only to be entrusted to God, the Father of Jesus whom He made Christ. God's standards and values must become the person's standards and values. Thus, developing a good and godly conscience is a lifetime journey, not an earthly destiny. As the person spiritually matures in Christ, standards and values constantly undergo development. The conscience constantly changes through development as one's standards and values mature in Jesus Christ. Developing a godly conscience is a lifetime undertaking.
The feelings of a conscience can be trusted to be right only when a person is certain his/her standards and values are God's standards and values. As a person matures in God's ways and priorities, his/her standards and values mature. As standards and values mature, the conscience changes.
For Thought and Discussion
First, right and wrong or good and bad are individual determinations. Second, if an attitude or action does not violate the conscience, it cannot be wrong or bad.
This discussion should include the realization that what people in the past "felt" was good or wrong and what people today "feel" is good or wrong are radically different.
The two things that suffer are (1) the sense of responsibility and (2) the substance of commitment.
Note in specific terms Paul's insensitive commitment to abuse, imprisonment, and death among Jewish people who accepted Jesus as God's promised Christ.
He could do such things in all good conscience because his standards and values were not God's standards and values (even though he thought they were).
The training of the conscience should be entrusted only to God. From the Christian perspective, only God's standards and values can serve as the basis of good and bad or right and wrong.