In His Image: How Man is Designed to Legislate Morality

In The Bible, God creates man in His image. I set out below to show a tiny overview of a far more complicated and amazing collection of working parts in man that show that God designed man not just in His physical image, but in the way we are designed to do things similar to what God has done: Legislate Morality. 

Speaking of Man

It is often stated in varying degrees that man is extremely similar to monkeys, and that he is just a primate that learned to talk through a series of accidental, beneficial mutations that occurred to better ensure his survival. So how does the language of man compare to the sounds of animals? 

According to the National Human Genome Research Institute (1), a human being is 96% similar to a chimpanzee. Some say this is evidence of a recent evolutionary link between the two very distinct species. It also turns out humans are 90% similar to a cat, 85% similar to a mouse, 80% similar to a cow, and 61% similar to a fruit fly. Your DNA is also said to be 60% identical to both a chicken and a banana. That said, DNA research continues to throw these numbers farther apart with every new discovery of the layers of information contained within each of your cells, but that’s a topic for another day. 

If we just look at what is around us, we can see what the codes of that DNA bring about; people, cows, fruit flies, monkeys, bananas and all the other living things on this planet. Humans aren’t as good as monkeys at climbing trees. They both eat bananas, which now seems strange if we are actually 60% like bananas. 

But monkeys don’t talk. They simply lack the physical design in their throats, mouths, lips and jaws (think hardware) and far more importantly they lack the dedicated areas of the brain (think software) to comprehend oral communication. Depending on the desired sound, there are as many as 100 muscles used by a human in order to make the precise sounds of the tens of thousands of words in the English language. There are animals with a variety of chirps, squeeks, grunts or howls, but nothing even remotely close to the complexity and order we find in any one of the many human languages. 

Monkeys are an entertaining animal, and clearly have non-verbal forms of communication, but it seems clear that monkeys were not designed to communicate with words. Monkeys will never be able to describe how they feel, or say how their banana tastes. They can’t say thank you and they can’t say I’m sorry. Monkeys will never converse with one another about how the DNA of humans is 60% similar to bananas and chickens. 

No other living kind can communicate information the way humans do. A few animals may mimic the sound that humans make, but they can’t understand why the sounds are significant. Animals can certainly sense fear and react to it, but they cannot tell another creature how the fear makes them feel, or tell another about their day, or where they are from. Animals can be a part of a story, but they can never tell the story.  

Man is designed in such a vastly different way than any other creature to use the fine motor skills of his mouth, and the circuitry of his brain to be able to speak and comprehend speech. Without speech, so much human achievement would have been impossible. And yet, the animals go on without the mutations proposed to be of our benefit. They continue to chirp and grunt and live and go on about their lives unchanged for thousands of generations. They don’t seem bothered by their inability to speak in terms of their ability to survive, as would seem to be the point of evolving the ability in the first place. 

There is no denying that man seems intentionally designed to speak, especially when compared to all other living creatures. The Genesis account of creation begins with God speaking creation into existence. Jesus is referred to as “the Word” in the book of John. Without speech, we would not be able to ask the questions, where did we come from, or, why are we here? Without speech we would not be able to communicate our ideas of right and wrong. We could never tell someone they must not do this, or they must do that. 

 

Hands on Purpose 

When I was a new recruit at the police academy 20 years ago, there were a number of things that the instructors drilled into our heads, everything from how to shine your shoes to how to shoot a gun. One of the most often repeated things I heard, and continue to preach to officers, is that you have to watch peoples’ hands. The hands are what will kill you. 

There are lots of ways for a man to kill another man, but the vast majority require the hands. The hands can strangle and punch. The hands are what throws the spear, swings the sword, pulls the trigger or pushes the button. 

The other thing they taught us about hands in the academy is that we officers should always have our hands out of our pockets. If you were seen with your hands in your uniform pockets by a drill instructor, get ready for problems. This was their way of getting it through to us that our hands were our defense. We had to be ready to react with our hands at any moment to whatever may be thrown at us. I have threatened to sew pockets of officers’ uniforms shut for fear of them not being prepared to react to the random human outburst, often aimed more at the uniform than the individual officer. 

Man’s hands aren’t just dangerous though. Man’s hands are the only hands of all the creatures that are so finely tuned to provide enough strength and dexterity that a person can go from climbing a mountain to swinging a bat to writing a letter to playing a piano without issue. Man’s hands have created the incalculable amount of art that has existed in history. Hands are the primary instrument in expressing design and imagination, using tools small and large, and putting the intricate finishing touches on a creation. 

No animal comes close to the potential of man and his hands, especially when combined with his intelligence and imagination. Animals continue to live on, seeming not to need the capabilities we possess with our hands, and instead relying on instinct rather than imagination and finely tuned hands. From the beginning, the hands of a human seem important. A fetus at 10 weeks is only 2 ½ inches long, but already has fully identifiable hands formed(1).  

 The hands of man, while capable of being used to commit terrible atrocities, are the same hands used to perform the most complex surgeries imaginable to save other human lives. Human hands are used for eating, greeting, expressing thoughts, writing, sensuality and for prayer. And when speech doesn’t come to a person, our hands are capable of  speaking (sign) and reading (braille). Hands are used to feed infants their first solid food. Hands can be used by a father learning to braid his daughter’s hair, or a mother teaching her son to tie his shoes. 

 Man also uses his hands quite frequently to write important things down, especially things like history and laws. No animal has written a history of their kind from creation to present. No animal has compiled so much as a sentence about the right and wrong ways to conduct themselves. The law of the jungle is not   

 

Legislating Morality 

In criticizing Christianity, many point to the idea of how unjust the world is as clear evidence that there cannot be a good God. It is initially hard to argue against this idea when you consider the horrible ways people treat one another on a daily basis around the world. How do we deal with this undeniable evil? 

In the recorded history of man, laws of one sort or another have been a staple of every civilization. In a very summarizing statement, a law is supposed to bring about order and establish standards of behaviors. This is not a uniquely Judeo-Christian philosophy. Every society has laws that govern the behavior of its people in their conduct toward one another. It is a fundamental purpose of governments, as even the bible notes.1 

One thing I often hear is that we should not try to “legislate morality.” We should let others do as they please, as long as no one gets hurt. My response is that all laws legislate morality. That is the purpose of laws in the first place. If people were inherently moral, we would not need to legislate any laws. But people are not inherently moral. While people are quick to point out their relatively good behavior compared to their neighbor or Hitler, it is not often they compare their behavior to Mother Teresa or God Himself. 

Every statute in our criminal code legislates morality. Laws against violence, rape and murder exist because people recognize that man has inherent value, and should be protected. That is a moral position. Laws against white collar crime and fraud exist because stealing from others is agreed upon to be morally wrong. Laws concerning drug, food and water safety exist to protect people because we value people. That is a moral position. Stop signs legislate morality. If none existed, do you think anyone would stop out of pure courtesy to their neighbor as they are running late for work, with no potential traffic ticket to worry about? If you follow any law back to its source, you will eventually find a moral position that grounds it. 

The moral basis for laws are a reflection of the value man sees in other men. These laws have many similarities to natural laws in that if you break them, bad things happen. If you try to defy gravity, you will likely crash to the ground. If you defy a stop sign, you will likely crash into a car.

If the Bible is true, we are all the sons and daughters of the God Who spoke the laws of nature and of man into being. Man is given dominion to act in a way that reflects God’s value for the life He originally spoke into existence. 

There is no other creature aside from man that possesses the hardware or software to speak the way we speak, to read the way we read or the fine motor skills we have in our hands that allow us to write complex symbols that express ideas to others. Without the ability to speak, read and write, humanity would be unable to collectively have a history, and as importantly, to have a law that came about as a result of that understanding of history. 

Simply being able to speak, or even to read and write, would not get us to a point where we speak and write about right and wrongs. We have also been given a sense of right and wrong from the same Creator Who created us in His image. The animal kingdom has it’s laws, but they are not written down or even spoken. They are just instinct. 

The God of the Bible is the original Lawgiver, and we are the Lawgiver’s law givers, acting out our instinct, with the use of our completely unique abilities to speak, read and write, to legislate morality in defense of creation and our fellow image bearers.


Tony Williams is currently serving in his 20th year as a police officer in a city in Southern Illinois. He has been studying apologetics in his spare time for two decades, since a crisis of faith led him to the discovery of vast and ever-increasing evidence for his faith. Tony received a bachelor's degree in University Studies from Southern Illinois University in 2019. His career in law enforcement has provided valuable insight into the concepts of truth, evidence, confession, testimony, cultural competency, morality, and most of all, the compelling need for Christ in the lives of the lost. Tony plans to pursue postgraduate studies in apologetics in the near future to sharpen his understanding of the various facets of Christian apologetics. Tony has been married for 9 years and has two sons. He and his family currently reside in Southern Illinois. 


One Good Reason to Believe in the Bible: Guilt (and man’s attempts to avoid it)  

One Good Reason (1).png

Editor’s note: Good Reasons Apologetics has graciously allowed us to republish their series, “One Good Reason” You can find the original post here.

For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths-2 Timothy 4:3 

On September 12th, 2021 a 90 year old man named John Shelby Spong passed away in his sleep. Spong was an American Bishop of the Episcopal Church in Newark, New Jersey from 1979 to 2000. In the course of his tenure as Bishop and afterward, Spong wrote a number of books expressing his thoughts on God and Christianity. Spong’s works were not what you might guess would come from a person who had risen to such a position of prominence in a Christian church. Spong called for a “fundamental rethinking of Christian belief away from theism and traditional doctrines.” 1 

Spong came up with what came to be called his 12 theses. Just as Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to a church door at Wittenburg, Germany to call for a reformation of the Roman Catholic Church, Bishop Spong posted his 12 ideas for a new reformation of the Christian Church today. The 12 ideas Spong put forward included the ideas that the idea of God as we’ve always understood it is totally wrong, the story of a perfect creation and fall from grace is nonsense, there is no set of laws that can govern people for all time (think 10 Commandments), prayers to God are meaningless, the miracles of the Bible are untrue, there was no virgin birth of Jesus, the story of Christ’s death on a cross for the salvation of others is barbaric and primitive, and Jesus could not have been literally resurrected.

Of Bishop Spong’s 12 theses, the one that may be most telling is his belief that, “the hope for life after death must be separated forever from the behavior control mentality of reward and punishment. The Church must abandon, therefore, its reliance on guilt as a motivator of behavior.” 

I would argue that it was the last idea that led to him trying to sell the other 11 as facts, with much pushback from scholars I might add. With the exception of a few sociopaths, being guilty is a problem for us. In the course of interviewing many people suspected or known to have committed crimes, clues of someone lying  all boiled down to the person being physically uncomfortable with lying or facing the idea of their own guilt. I also  found that when a true confession came, there was a tremendous sense of relief by the confessor. The burden of hiding the truth was over, and they were almost always visibly relieved to let the truth be known, despite the consequences. 

Spong followed the patterns of many “critical” scholars who have attempted to dig holes under all of the things that the first 2000 years of Chirstianity claimed to be true of itself, such as the idea that God created everything perfectly, mankind is fallen, we have all sinned, and therefore we all need the sacrifice of Christ crucified to return us to fellowship with our Creator. In his attempts to remove an all knowing, all powerful God, creation, sin, guilt and Christ’s work on the cross, Spong was ultimately trying to provide another way out of guilt that he seemed to be accusing Christianity of using against its members. However, if we are honest with ourselves we all know the truth. We know we are guilty anyway. Like a defendant pleading not guilty, just because you say it doesn’t make it true.  

Like me, I am confident that you have done things you wish you could take back. You have had to be forgiven, or pay the price for things you’ve done. People know the guilt is there without needing to go to church. We make excuses for our behavior, but that doesn’t get rid of guilt. However, the sooner we acknowledge the truth of our own guilt, the sooner we can work to reconcile those we have hurt. Even if it’s the Creator of the universe.   


IMG_3560.jpg


Tony Williams is currently serving in his 20th year as a police officer in a city in Southern Illinois. He has been studying apologetics in his spare time for two decades, since a crisis of faith led him to the discovery of vast and ever-increasing evidence for his faith. Tony received a bachelor's degree in University Studies from Southern Illinois University in 2019. His career in law enforcement has provided valuable insight into the concepts of truth, evidence, confession, testimony, cultural competency, morality, and most of all, the compelling need for Christ in the lives of the lost. Tony plans to pursue postgraduate studies in apologetics in the near future to sharpen his understanding of the various facets of Christian apologetics. Tony has been married for 9 years and has two sons. He and his family currently reside in Southern Illinois.

One Good Reason to Believe in God: The Intrinsic Value of His Image (and Man’s Attempt to Escape It)

One Good Reason.png

Editor’s note: Good Reasons Apologetics has graciously allowed us to republish their series, “One Good Reason” You can find the original post here.


“Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness.’” (Gen. 1:26)

Of the 10.7 million Africans who were taken captive and brought to the new world, it is believed about 388,000 ended up in what is now the United States. Congress outlawed bringing slaves into the U.S. in 1808, and yet the population of Africans in the U.S. by 1860 was 4.4 million, 3.9 million of which were slaves, and it was almost entirely the result of natural growth (i.e., babies born into slavery generation after generation).     

According to the Columbia Guide to the Holocaust, almost 6 million Jews were killed in Europe and Russia in just a few years during World War II. This represented about 55% of the population of Jews in the regions. At least 50 million people lost their lives as a direct result of the fighting in World War II, with as many as 85 million who lost their lives in total when things like war related famine and disease are included.

Today in the US, according to the conservative numbers we have, it appears we abort about 850,000 unborn children a year. This has been occurring legally since 1973 thanks to a Supreme Court decision that birthed the idea of the “right” to abort a child. It is now estimated that there have been approximately 42 million unborn Americans aborted.

Many who championed chattel slavery did not view Africans as fully human. The idea of evolution provided racists and eugenicists a way to claim that Africans, Aborigines and other people groups were less evolved, and thus less deserving of life than their more evolved counterparts. Nazi propaganda called Jews “rats” and referred to their homes as “nests.” They systematically exterminated Jews, “invalids” and other groups they called “life unworthy of life.” The most common defense of abortion is that it is not a person, but rather a “clump of cells,” or a “choice.”

The cycle of dehumanizing other humans, followed by murder and genocide and eventually negative historical judgement through time is evidence that man still intuitively recognizes the implicit value in other men, and must overcome the idea his target is fully human before taking life in cold blood.

One might argue that humans enslaving and killing other humans on a large scale is just evolution’s “red in tooth and claw” history playing out as always. However, the overwhelming historical tendency for man’s need to dehumanize other men before enslaving or murdering others seems counter to evolution’s “survival of the fittest.” Shouldn’t it be easier to kill with all this practice?

Anyone who has suffered the loss of a loved one or cried out at the senseless loss of a stranger’s life knows the unexplainable angst that comes from the unjustified or systematic taking of a human life. Does this come from blind, purposeless accidents through time that create the psychological illusion of value in one another based only on mutual advantage as is suggested by some?

It seems far more likely to be the residue of his Creator’s imprint of the value of fellow image bearers on every man’s soul. We dare not kill the King’s sons and daughters, and we know it. 


IMG_3560.jpg

Tony Williams is currently serving in his 20th year as a police officer in a city in Southern Illinois. He has been studying apologetics in his spare time for two decades, since a crisis of faith led him to the discovery of vast and ever-increasing evidence for his faith. Tony received a bachelor's degree in University Studies from Southern Illinois University in 2019. His career in law enforcement has provided valuable insight into the concepts of truth, evidence, confession, testimony, cultural competency, morality, and most of all, the compelling need for Christ in the lives of the lost. Tony plans to pursue postgraduate studies in apologetics in the near future to sharpen his understanding of the various facets of Christian apologetics. Tony has been married for 9 years and has two sons. He and his family currently reside in Southern Illinois.