Koukl Back in Time to 2007 with Epperson and Enyart

We've heard that Greg Koukl has replied on his Stand to Reason program to our latest accusation, from last week, that he is a moral relativist. But before we get around to listening to that, we're first airing his audio, with Stu Epperson and Bob Enyart from 2007 when Bob first accused Greg. His defense is that he can't be a moral relativist because moral relativists openly claim that there is no single moral standard. But that's an admitted moral relativist. Then there are millions of human beings who change their views on morality with the blowing of the wind and they are, like Greg, effectively relativists. Consider similar observations. Donald Trump isn't a socialist, we could wrongly conclude, reasoning (incorrectly) that since he says he's not, then he must not be. However: - If you say you reject socialism, that doesn't mean you're not a socialist. - If you say you reject racism, that doesn't mean you're not a racist. - If you reject legal positivism, that doesn't mean that you're not a legal positivist. Jesus warns about this. It's called hypocrisy. Someone can say, like Greg does, "I reject moral relativism" which is the belief that moral judgments cannot be absolute but only relative to one position or another. But that person can simply then be a hypocrite and actually guilty of moral relativism, if he shifts his moral positions from one standard to another, which is typically done to follow the culture. Greg's positions are that of the Body of Christ generally and that of our Christian leaders. (See kgov.com/superfluous and prolifeprofiles.com/dobson.) And tragically, the morality of the Body of Christ has imploded. So our evidence of the error of Greg's ways are... Exhibit A: the Scriptures, Don't do evil that good may come of it. And, Exhibit B: The imploding morality of the Body of Christ.