Three Ethical Perspectives

Christianity not only presents a coherent conception of God but also brings together all three ethical perspectives. I believe this is one of the reasons why Christianity has stood the test of time. The philosophies of man have tried to create a complete ethical system to achieve their desired goals but none of them has provided an ethical system that leads to wholeness and true transformation. John Frame points out that “Many non-Christian writers appreciate the three principles, or at least one or two of them, even though they reject the God of the Bible. However, in the absence of the biblical God, these principles are in tension with one another.”¹ In this article, I would like to define and describe the three ethical perspectives as defined by John Frame to demonstrate why only a comprehensive religion like Christianity can unite all three perspectives into a complete ethical system.

In existential ethics, the “focus is on being and acting well.”² In secular forms of existential ethics, it is believed that the cultivation of good habits creates a good person. However, Christianity reverses the order of doing and being: a person declared righteous by God will inevitably produce good works.³ Frame states, “God wants our behavior to display what we are at the most fundamental level.”⁴

Moreover, in a teleological ethic, Frame notes that “morally good decisions are means of achieving happiness.”⁵ Tim Sansbury adds, “Teleological ethics is purpose-based ethics; the ends justify the means.”⁶ With these definitions, it is easy to see why bending or ignoring rules can be the norm in this ethic since rules are simply viewed as the means to accomplish their purpose of maximizing their happiness. Frame observes, “The Bible affirms the importance of considering the purposes of our action. . . . And it affirms the importance of maximizing the happiness of others (as in Luke 10:27). But unlike secular teleological ethics, Scripture also affirms the authority of God’s moral norms and the importance of the character of the heart.”⁷ It is important to note that from a Christian perspective, the happiness of man is the byproduct of glorifying God.⁸ Since the Christian’s purpose is to glorify God, he will submit to God’s laws because he understands the purpose of obedience and the joy that flows from it. Frame notes, “He has made us in His image so that our greatest fulfillment occurs in seeking His glory in history, as His Word declares.”⁹

If teleological ethics is purpose-based ethics, deontological ethics is rule-based ethics.¹⁰ Hence, the deontological principle sees a good act as a response to duty.¹¹ Sansbury observes that this ethical system would be best fulfilled by a robot because it has no appreciation for purpose.¹² Moreover, the problem with the secular deontological ethic is that it does not have a sole authority that determines “where our duties are to be found and what our duties actually are.”¹³ This creates confusion because it cannot provide an absolute ethical standard that is applicable in every situation.¹⁴ With no sense of purpose, Sansbury believes that it “will fall apart into doing nothing or doing whatever we want.”¹⁵ However, in Christianity, God defines the duties of His people.¹⁶ Frame states, “The ultimate source of human duties is God’s authoritative word.”¹⁷ Thus, Christian duties are given meaning by the purpose that God has determined for His people. In Christian ethics, purpose and rules go hand in hand because obedience to God’s rules allows Christians to fulfill their purpose to glorify God in all that they do. Frame writes, “He ordains history, so that people will find their ultimate blessing in doing their duty.”¹⁸

I believe that what makes all the three ethical perspectives come together in Christianity is the biblical God. Frame states, “With God they cohere, for the same God who controls the consequences of our acts also declares our duties and also gives us a new inner life.”¹⁹ God determines the purpose of His children and writes His law on their hearts so that they might obey Him willingly and glorify Him with their lives. This desire to obey comes from a heart that has been changed and “is based on God’s lordship attribute of presence.”²⁰ Sansbury rightly concludes, “The gospel cares about who we are, our purpose, and our actions. . . . Only Christianity that involves a personal, loving God who is also a Sovereign Creator can make all three of the Existential, Teleological, and Deontological ethics come together.”²¹

1 John Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing Company, 2008), 51.

2 Tim Sansbury, Video Lecture. Knox Theological Seminary, Ft. Lauderdale FL. Lesson 8, August 9, 2019.

3 Jonathan Linebaugh, Video Lecture. Knox Theological Seminary, Ft. Lauderdale FL. Lesson 4, August 17, 2017.

4 John Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing Company, 2008), 74.

5 Ibid., 92.

6 Tim Sansbury, Video Lecture. Knox Theological Seminary, Ft. Lauderdale FL. Lesson 6, August 9, 2019.

7 John Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing Company, 2008), 92.

8 Ibid., 49.

9 Ibid., 51.

10 Tim Sansbury, Video Lecture. Knox Theological Seminary, Ft. Lauderdale FL. Lesson 11, December 22, 2020.

11 John Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing Company, 2008), 49.

12 Tim Sansbury, Video Lecture. Knox Theological Seminary, Ft. Lauderdale FL. Lesson 9, December 22, 2020.

13 John Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing Company, 2008), 50.

14 Ibid., 101-102.

15 Tim Sansbury, Video Lecture. Knox Theological Seminary, Ft. Lauderdale FL. Lesson 9, December 22, 2020.

16 John Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing Company, 2008), 50.

17 Ibid.

18 Ibid., 51.

19 Ibid., 52.

20 Ibid., 51.

21 Tim Sansbury, Video Lecture. Knox Theological Seminary, Ft. Lauderdale FL. Lesson 10, December 22, 2020.