Tag Archives: conscience

The Curse & Blessing of Self-Consciousness

In the Garden, prior to eating the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve were not self-aware. They did not possess a conscience. Instead they were intensely aware of the Presence of God and entirely reliant upon Him to determine the right course to take. Eating of the Tree resulted in separation from God and the need for what it provided, which is self-awareness and the knowledge of what is good and what is bad.

This is proven in the Genesis passage by the fact that the first couple was unaware of their nakedness until after the fruit was eaten at which point they sought to hide from the Presence of God. What is more indicative of self-consciousness than how we feel when we are naked. This is more than worry about what others think. Nudity, once one gets beyond early childhood, to a point in life corresponding to the “age of accountability,” is a state that intensely heightens self awareness.

Further, the term used for “conscience” in the Greek New Testament points to the same idea. “Suneidesis” is defined in Liddle and Scott’s lexicon first as “self-consciousness.” In Thayer’s lexicon it is first “the consciousness of anything,” then “the soul as distinguishing between what is morally good and bad, prompting to do the former and shun the latter, commending one, condemning the other.”

This Greek word is used 32 times in the New Testament always referring to the human conscience. Examples are:

“Paul, looking intently at the Council, said, ‘Brethren, I have lived my life with a perfectly good conscience before God up to this day’” (Acts 23:1, NASB).

“… by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron” (1st Timothy 4:2).

“To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled” (Titus 1:15).

The most instructive example is contained in Paul’s theological epistle to the Romans.

“…in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them” (2:15, NASB).

In this passage the Apostle is seeking to demonstrate that the Gentiles have a moral law written within them, which they elect either to follow or rebel against. It is this natural law of the conscience that will determine what happens to those who have not been exposed to the truth contained in the Bible on the Day of Judgment.

I propose that what we know as our conscience came about when Eve and Adam ate the fruit from the tree. It prepared the human race for life without the Presence of God. Myriads of moral/ethical decisions would have to be made. How does one know what is right and what is wrong? What is the standard? How do we know? We know. The conscience speaks.

However, like the Law of Moses, the natural law of conscience is weakened by human sin. We rebel against it, seeking to do whatever pleases us, and in so doing scar the conscience. This begins to happen at a young age. As the result, every society makes laws for citizens to follow. When the citizenry rebels against good laws, or when lawmakers become corrupt and make unrighteous laws, societies crumble. This happened to Rome. It is happening to America.

The concept of conscience I have briefly developed here has far reaching implications.

1- It answers the question of what happens to those who are without God’s special revelation found in the Bible, most importantly those who do not have the knowledge of Jesus Christ. They are without excuse because each person will be judged by the light of his or her conscience (as well as the revelation of God found in nature). They will be judged according to the light they have received.


2- This perspective also answers questions about what has been called original sin and how it is passed on from Adam and Eve. We are born with the curse and blessing of self-awareness and it’s companion, the conscience. This came into the human community when the first man and woman ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Without God, self-awareness results in self centeredness, which has been described as original sin. This selfishness has corollaries: pride, rebellion and unbelief.


3- This also answers the question about the essential nature of humankind. Are people inherently evil, or basically good? The answer is yes, and no. Apart from God, humankind is inherently self-centered. Thus, the idea of total depravity espoused by Calvin is only true insofar as it relates to humankind’s natural relationship to God. Apart from the Presence of God we fall hopelessly short of what we were intended to be. It does not mean humankind is utterly depraved and without goodness. The law of God is written on the conscience, and that continues to guide many. The Enlightenment concept of the noble savage is erroneous also. Civilized or uncivilized, human beings are capable of, and have committed, great evils. Motives have been money, power, self-righteousness, but it comes back to those in power looking after their own interests at the expense of others.

We need to be saved from our condemning self-consciousness through Christ. It was Jesus who said, “Deny yourself. Take up your cross and follow me.” The cross puts an end to self-centeredness. The Holy Spirit replaces the scarred conscience. God-consciousness replaces self-consciousness. Egocentricity gives way to Christo-centric living. All I have to do is make a choice to stop believing in myself and start believing in God as He has revealed Himself in His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ.

“I have been crucified with Christ and no longer do I live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live on in the body I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave His life for me” (Galatians 2:20).

“You died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God” (Colossians 3:3).

Gay Cakes

The provocative title is more narrow than this editorial. I’m reading all of the rhetoric about baking cakes and making pizzas, and it occurs to me that some of you, at least, are on an agenda-driven adventure of missing the point. Completely.

There are several issues here. Some are civil. Some are religious.

Civil issue 1) Should a person of faith (or no faith) be required by the state to violate their conscience? I should say not. This is precisely what has been at issue since the Obama administration began to prosecute businesses that object to paying for abortofacients (drugs or other contraceptives that cause de facto abortions to occur). This is what is at issue when a business that bakes wedding cakes, does wedding photography or rents space is required by the government to do so for those who are plainly in violation of every religions traditional view of marriage.

Civil issue 2) Should a business person with any particular viewpoint be forced to trade or service those with whom they disagree. We see signs on restaurants (and similar establishments) that stay: “We Reserve the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone.” Is that acceptable? Not in the broadest interpretation, but it is done all of the time, and we don’t experience a media firestorm over it. That’s because this refusal is typically for an agreed upon good reason. For example, most of us would agree with a restaurant refusing to serve someone not wearing a shirt or shoes. However, there could be a civil rights lawsuit filed if the restaurant refused to serve someone because of their race or religion. This is the generalization that the left is seeking to make concerning issue 1 above. Refusing to serve a homosexual in your restaurant is not the same as refusing to cater their wedding. Anyone may enter a restaurant, order and eat. The restaurant is not perceived as condoning the lifestyle choice of every patron. However, catering a wedding may be perceived as tacitly or actively supporting, if not the couple, homosexual marriage.

Religious issue 1) From a Christian perspective, should I do business with openly gay people, adulterers, spousal or child abusers? I’m sure many will be offended that I’ve bundled these types of people together. For the record, I do not think consensual homosexuality is harmful in the same way as spousal or child abuse. What I want you to understand is, there are some people you don’t want to do business with because of their character or lifestyle. But should you? The argument I’m hearing from a number of Christians is the standard evangelical mantra. We should do it to witness to them. I would agree, if that’s your genuine motive. Jesus ate with tax collectors and sinners, both groups despised by the religious leadership of his day. However, Jesus was never accused of either sinning or extorting money from people (as the tax collectors were accused of doing). The Lord taught the truth and spoke honestly about the need for both the religious and the irreligious to change their thinking and change their ways. Often when a Christian does business or befriends someone who is living a lifestyle that openly defies biblical morality, we just look the other way. And that is why we have a godless nation today. Develop relationships with everyone, even those who don’t think the way you do, even those who oppose Christianity, and then openly share love, grace and truth. Jesus said, “Let your light so shine before people in such a way that they see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 5:16)

Religious issue 2) Should a Christian caterer or photographer (for example) do their work for a homosexual wedding? I’m not asking whether they should have a civil right to refuse, but whether, from a biblical standpoint, this business person should participate in such an event.

No, I do not believe a Christian has any business (pardon the unintended pun) supporting something so obviously against Christian morality and the Bible, and beyond that against the time honored traditions of every civilization and religion for 5,000 years. As a minister, I would go to jail rather than officiate a homosexual wedding. Now, you may think that I shouldn’t be forced to marry a gay/lesbian couple because I am a minister in a church. The case I would make is, every Christian is a representative of Christ and every one of us are ministers. I have done videography. I would refuse to do a gay/lesbian wedding. But let’s say a homosexual couple, “married” or not, approached me to do videography for one of their children’s sporting events or birthday parties. Would I take that job. Absolutely. Look at Religious issue 1 again. If I baked cakes, would I do so for the birthday of a vocal homosexual. Again, yes… unless, they ordered some sort of sexually explicit decoration (which I would refuse to do for a heterosexual as well).

Christian friends, you need to stop allowing the culture to make up your mind about these issues. You must stop being swayed by the opinions of your friends and relatives. As a disciple of Jesus I am shaped by his teaching, the Gospel, the Word of God, which is in the Christian canon of the Bible. Speak the truth in love, and love the people of the world as Christ who died to prove his love for the whole world (Ephesians 4:15, John 3:16).