The Subject of Ethics Subjectively

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “ethical” as “of or relating to ethics; conforming to accepted and especially professional standards of conduct.” Further, the M-W Dictionary notes the words virtuous, moral, and principled as synonyms for the term under examination. Though this type of definition can be useful under certain conditions, it is overtly conventional. The problem with conventional is that it makes ethics seem clear-cut, as purely black or white. While black and white are colors that are straight forward and undiluted, gray is a shade that is murky and undecipherable. My definition of ethical will probably be gray, but ethics is a gray-ish sort of issue.
First, ethics are subjective. What is ethical in your neighborhood may be considered unethical in other atmospheres. For example, if you have ever seen the movie Wrong Turn, Cannibalism was an accepted practice in the town that the poor, misguided group of young people to stumbled upon. But, hopefully, to you and I eating people is not only considered gross, but also highly frowned upon. Another example is that in certain cultures slurping and belching during a meal shows enjoyment while the typical U.S. home depicts such actions as ill-mannered. Hence, there is not one commonly accepted set of standards that the whole world follows.
Similarly, while there are certain guidelines that all Christians must follow (i.e. thou shalt not have any gods before the God, thou shalt not make graven images…Ex.20), all Christians are given individual, internal convictions. Romans 14:14 states it best:
I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of
itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
This means that God will place into a person’s heart his or her own standards of right and wrong which may or may not be cohesive to another person’s views. For example, the Amish way of life rejects all electricity, but other Christian branches openly embrace technology. Also, some may feel that they are going against God when they do not keep the kosher laws of the Old Testament, yet others are not ethically convicted when they eat pork. Lastly, some women may feel guilty of wrong doing when they wear pants to church and others may not. It all depends upon the person.
Thus, ethics are not objective, not even in Christendom. A standard of conduct that is accepted without debate or opposition will never be reached here on earth. As Japanese poet Kaneko Mitsuharu (1895-1975) phrased it in “Opposition:”
This I believe: to oppose Is the only fine thing in life. To oppose is to live (…)
My final word on the issue is that the will of God must be performed. Obeying the Spirit, that is ethical.