The Ethics of the Old Testament
William Brenton Greene

Introduction by Ken Morgan

Over the centuries, many objections have been raised against the ethics of the Old Testament. Certain acts and events apparently allowed, commanded, or praised by God raise difficult questions concerning the ethical standards in the Old Testament, especially when compared with those promoted in the New Testament. Was Rahab right to lie when she hid the spies (Josh. 2:1-6)? What about God himself? Was it morally right for him to order the complete extermination of the Canaanites (Exod. 23:32-33; 34:12-16; Deut. 7:1-5; 20:15-18)? There are many questions such as these originating in the Old Testament.

In the article reproduced here, "The Ethics of the Old Testament," William Benton Greene responds to these objections. It was originally published in the Princeton Theological Review, XXVIII (1929), pp. 316-66. We have taken this paper from a collection of essays compiled by Dr. Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., one of my former professors at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School: Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972). Indeed, the essays in this book are classics, milestones of interpretation. They deal with important topics in all the major sections of the Old Testament: the Pentateuch, the historical books, the poetical books, and the prophetical books.

Dr. Kaiser has an annotated bibliography at the end of the article by Greene, which we have included. I might also add the following books.

Geisler, Norman. Options in Contemporary Christian Ethics. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981.

In Kaiser's annotated bibliogrpahy, he cites another of Dr. Geisler's books on the subject of ethics, Ethics: Alternatives and Issues, mentioning that Geisler takes the position of "ethical hierarchicalism." There are three views taken by Christian scholars on the subject of ethics. All three believe in the existence of moral absolutes, as opposed to various forms of situation ethics or relativism.

• Geisler's view argues that there is a hierarchy within the moral laws. Moreover, moral laws can come into conflict, and some have more weight than others, which determines the right (sinless) course to take in such a situation.
• John Murray, author of another book in Kaiser's bibliography, argues that there are moral absolutes that admit of no exceptions, and they never come into conflict with one another in any situation. Therefore, in this view too, sin can always be avoided.
• The third view argues that moral conflicts are possible, and in such a case, one is guilty no matter which choice he makes.

In Options, Geisler defines and discusses each of the three views.

Henry, Carl F. H., editor. Baker's Dictionary of Christian Ethics. Canon Press, 1973.

This is a large book (726 pp.) Each entry is written by a Christian scholar; over two hundred contributed to the dictionary. The entries cover all aspects of ethics, in biblical and modern times.

Click here for "The Ethics of the Old Testament"