Week #7 Christian Ethics Class

Last evening we conducted our seventh week Christian Ethics class. Unfortunately, Kolya could not attend and we missed him. We continued our study theme of responding to relativism. In a nutshell, moral relativism is logically impossible. It is not coherent nor consistent with the reality of objectivity. If a relativist disagrees with you, stating that you ought not, or should not, push judgment or morals on them, they have just contradicted, logically, their (false) assumption of relativism. For relativism to be absolutely true there can be no objective absolutes. This means they can not hypocritically appeal to any sense of ought, for then they are appealing to something objective. You see, the relativist wishes everything to be subjective--self-validated. But this cannot be logically true when they object to you pushing morals or criticizing them. The next thing they want to appeal to is a sense of tolerance. But this too the relativist twists to a modern meaning to insist you must affirm or agree with them with respect to their personal sense or right or wrong (which is morality anyway). When you will not affirm their ideas they wish to label you intolerant (which is judging me and logically violating relativism). They do not accept that the true meaning of tolerance is to imply that you really disagree with them. You may tolerate unwillingly and reluctantly their view to generate a sense of peace, but you certainly are not obliged to accept, nor affirm, their view. Tolerance implies disagreement.
Please pray as we continue to train the minds of these students.