The case for "evil"

Eventually every serious person must decide what they are going to do with questions about "evil." For thousands of years this has been one of the core issues about life itself. You can read what the ancient philosophers wrote, early Christian writers like Augustine, all the way up to modern day thinkers and you'll probably still be confused. It is often mentioned in the Bible, so we know its important. But when asked, and we will be if not already have been, "what is evil and why does it exist?", what can we really say that satisfies the one who asked? Maybe even satisfy ourselves!

I do not by any means in writing this blog assume I have the answers once and for all. This blog is merely how I have condensed very difficult treatises on "evil" by very smart people for a very long time. I have tried to do the "heavy lifting" for those I love and who might want to know my point of view. So here it is:

The idea of "evil" can only be understood in light of "good." We must also deal with the philosophical question, "what does 'exist' mean? There really is no way around being a little philosophical. After all, philosophy is just the way we think about things. So if you ever think about "good and evil", you are practicing philosophy.

Our natural tendency to think about the word "good" is to equate it with what's beneficial or favorable, especially to the experience or the way we view the outcome. In this way, "good" is the quality associated with the object, not the object itself. To say a person is "good" is to describe the person. It is the person that exist, not "good." The fact that we experience the person in a certain way is meaningful, but it is not "good" that has form and substance, it is the person. In this way, "good" does not exist as an object but merely qualifies the experience or observation of the object. 

In the Biblical context "good" is still understood as the quality of the object, not the object. Yet, it has a very different meaning. An object is "good" not because of extrinsic benefit but because of the intrinsic nature of its creator. You have likely heard me explain the Biblical idea of "good" this way, "a pie is good not because of its benefit to me, but because of the qualities of the baker." So the object, in this case the pie, is good because of the pie's intrinsic qualities granted to it by the creator of the pie. In either meaning of the word "good", the pie is the object, not the quality (good) of the object. The pie exists, "good" describes something about the pie that exist.

Since "evil" is generally viewed in a spiritual or moralistic context. We must use the Biblical idea of "good" as our basis for what is "evil".

So, does evil exist? I would say no. It cannot "exist" because it has no form or substance and is therefore not an object, either observable or abstract. Like "good", "evil" can be used to describe an object, such as an evil person or an evil act. St Augustine said it like this, "either the evil we fear exist or our fear itself is the evil." Assuming the later Augustine rejects the notion that "evil" itself is an object, but rather fear (an emotion which exists) is the object and that "evil" is simply a quality of the object we call fear.

Then when we see "evil" as a qualifier of an object and not the object itself, we do not have the irreconcilable issue of "how can a good and powerful God create evil?" Augustine goes through an elaborate dialectic to conclude "evil has no being." He defended this by concluding that "You (God) have made all good things and there are no substances that You (God) had not made." Augustine goes on to confess, "I was seeking the origin of evil, but seeking it in an evil way, and failing to see the evil in my own search itself."

This is a great warning to all of us, it certainly was to me. We cannot answer philosophical questions under the "weight of carnal habits." Augustine realized that pursuing the questions of "evil" like the world did had been the problem. He confessed "above my changeable mind soared the real, unchangeable eternal truth .... indeed did I perceive your invisible reality through created things." To heed Augustine's conclusions in my words, "don't try to find a place to paint in open spaces left by others, switch to the right canvas, or don't try to swim better than others in the wrong pool, get in the right pool."

So, where did the quality come from that objects can possess and why would God allow it if He is all powerful? To answer the first question let's go back to "good." In the Biblical notion of 'good" it is a quality of the object. In this case to say anything is "good" is to say that it has the quality of its Creator, in this case God. So something is "good" (in the Biblical sense) when it embodies the very nature of God. So, "good works" are those things we do that are intrinsically God. They may or may not seem to benefit us or anyone we can notice. In fact we may observe the very opposite. But "good works" are "good" because they are done out of the very heart of God.

That would mean that "evil" occurs in an object when its intrinsic qualities do not contain those of God. Another way to say this is that an object is "evil" when it is absence the qualities of God. Why then would God ever allow an object He created to not have His nature? This answer is found in the very idea of the Fall, of Adam and Eve's rebellion, where they preferred to be God themselves. Evil is the way we describe any object that has declared its independence from God. It is not that evil is some object that has invaded the world or your life, but that evil is the description given to anything that operates with a will apart from God. Anything seeking its own glory is considered to be evil.

Why does God allow anything He created and has the power to control to operate outside of His will? Now that is a tough question, way more difficult than "the case for evil." I will leave that in the "too hard pile" and the subject of a future philosophical discourse.

That's why we will forever ponder on this side of eternity .....   

Trust in the ...

This verse from the Bible is the favorite of more people than any other verse I know. This verse can really direct your thinking and feeling unlike most any other verse. So, it's probably worth a little pondering. Like

what is trust?
what are we really trusting "in the Lord" for?
what is the "heart"?
what determines our "own understanding"?

That probably pretty much covers it, don't you think?

"Trust" is willful vulnerability. It is the act of choosing (your will) to give up control (becoming vulnerable) to someone because we believe they will not take advantage of us in their actions.

So, "trust in the Lord" is choosing to give God control. That means we don't keep any influence or interest in the outcome. Its for God to decide. It is totally up to Him to decide.

"The heart" is an interesting thing to ponder. "The heart" is our basic, core assumptions that lay deep down in us that we never question but use to prove everything else. There are really only two orientations of the heart and a Christian can have either. One is the set of assumptions that relate to our fallen human nature. This influences us to see everything through the lens of equitable exchange. So, if we trust with all of our heart and our heart is a function of our human nature, we would see that we are trusting that God is really good at equitable exchange. If we do our part, He is obligated to do His. That is what our heart would tell us. It is our motivation to read the Bible more often and pray longer, harder, deeper, louder, with more skill and sincerity, etc. and we can trust God to do His part.

That's where "lean not on your own understanding" comes in.

A transformed heart is a heart that is no longer ours. It has a different set of assumptions, deep down in the soul. These core beliefs are the "mind of Christ." They tell us that God is Sovereign and He willfully does what He does according to His promises, not as a duty in exchange for our admirable actions. Sovereignty means that He acts independently of what we do, and that His purposes are what determines His actions, not outcomes that we think we need or want.

To "lean not on our own understanding" then means
Our view of the situation typically requires a solution that is circumstantially beneficial to us while God's view of the situation requires a solution out of His Sovereignty, mainly that His glory be revealed.

To "lean not on our own understanding" is not what we may typically think it means. We often think we must just quit trying to make sense of the outcomes in our life and accept what happens. What we must do is realize it is our own understanding of God that is wrong, not our misunderstanding of the circumstances. He does not function on equitable exchange like everything else in our world does.

We can read this verse "til the cows come home," but if we don't get that "all of our heart" is the problem. We can trust as hard as we like but we are prone to a heart that can only make sense of things through equitable exchange. We can accept and accept outcomes but eventually are likely to become very disappointed in what happens in our life. We can over time think that God cannot be trusted. He is either not capable or He doesn't care.

We are good Christians so we know in our head this is not the case, so we keep thinking - persevere, keep it up, "trust in the Lord with all your heart." We are left to ponder - maybe we are not doing it right or trying hard enough. The problem for us is that the wrong heart makes trusting futile. We are trusting, really hard, very sincerely in the wrong view of "the Lord."

Realizing our heart is likely not really trusting that God is Sovereign and good, but actually trusting that God is the "great trader", is why we must not "lean on our own understanding."

Now, maybe you knew all of this all along, that's fantastic.

Whether you knew this before or its a new perspective for you, its is always worth some pondering ...

Taking a second look at evil

The "axis of evil"
He or she is "pure evil"
the battle of "good vs evil"
and so on

The idea of evil is quickly and easily applied to people and situations that seem horrific to us or society as a whole. At first glance, I guess we assume evil just means bad. Or maybe it means really, really bad. I'm not sure most people have much of an understanding of "evil" beyond some notion of , "it's just bad."


Maybe its worth some pondering to take a second look at "evil". Our expert "go to" resource, Wikipedia, says "evil" in general refers to something that is the opposite of good. A more specific context is often associating "evil" with profound immorality. Certainly the Bible speaks about "evil" quite often. Yet, the Bible is not about morality, but about a Kingdom and a King. There must be more to "evil" than meets the eye. So, what does the Bible add to the idea of "evil" that Wiki seems to miss? I thought it was worth a second look, what about you?

The word for "evil" in the Bible literally means "rotten to the core." This implies that when something or someone is "evil", the very inner or intrinsic quality is inexhaustibly BAD. The "evilness" is not determined by the outcomes associated with the person or thing, but the qualities that determine the person or thing in its very essence. Regardless of how good something looks on the outside, if the heart or essence is rotten, it is "evil". There is nothing that can be done to change it because the "evil" in endemic to the object. That's what "to the core" means.

The idea of "rotten" or bad seems to only have clarity when we compare it with the idea of "good". This may seem routine, but the idea of "good" is not so simple. There are two ways something or someone can be "good." First, there is the extrinsic way to view "good." That is, something or someone is "good" if the outcome from it (them) is beneficial or useful. You say "that is a good idea" when the idea is helpful in the quest for accomplishing something. You say, "that food is good" when something you eat is favorable to your taste buds or healthy. Positive impact on circumstances is the extrinsic way something or someone is considered "good." Since morality is a code of conduct that is considered right vs wrong, this meaning for "good" would include an extrinsic conformity to moral code.

But, the word most often used in the Bible for "good" is not extrinsically or situationally contingent. The word for God uses to describe creation, the word for "good" Paul uses when referring to our works, and even the word for "good" in Romans 8 that gives us the hope that everything will work out for "good" is not about circumstances. This word for "good" is an intrinsically oriented notion of quality. It means that something or someone is "good" in its very essence of being. In the Bible something is "good" when it possess the qualities of God, who is the source of goodness. Creation, the works of believers, and our ultimate well being is "good" because it is "of God." This is why Jesus points the rich young ruler to the "one that is good."

Hence, if "evil" is rotten to the core, then "evil" is anything or anyone that in its (their) very essence is not of God. "Evil" is enmity with God intrinsically or in one's inner qualities. For a person to be "good" and therefore not "evil", he/she must possess in the very core of their thinking, the mind of Christ. For an action (works) to be "good" and not "evil", the source of motivation must flow from the mind of Christ. To see "evil" as God wants us to see "evil", we must orient ourselves to the intrinsic qualities of people and their actions and not the circumstantial consequences that we witness. Assumptions about and insights into what God is doing in His Sovereign will must be our determinant of what is "evil" and "good".

You may never get an unbelieving world to see "evil" any way other than extrinsically. After all, Wiki has more credibility than God's word. However, if you are a Christian, seeing "evil" and "good" as God does requires a second look.

It is just one more way we ponder what it means "to walk by faith and not by sight" .... 

This is one of many topics young believers can explore in our course on Biblical Psychology available at http://b4worldview.com/homeschool/

"that the guilty may go free"

Every Sunday Christians sing about their guilt and bondage. BUT, does this message resonate deeply in the soul or is it a narrative that is just a theologically correct way to think? After all, western evangelical Christians focus more on fixing a world that is fraught with the evil of meaningless murder, terror, fraud and corruption. Christians fight for religious freedom and cultural purity - send money, presence and prayers to places of poverty and slavery. Christians in the Western civilized world seem to view themselves as "the fixers", not the transgressors, in jail and in need.

What exactly are reformed, evangelical Christians guilty of? What bondage are they freed from? Do they REALLY know it?

Consider what we have learned from psychology. sociology and philosophy about the human condition. Psychologists have found that social exchange is the dominant obsession of human nature. Balanced exchange is the basis for justice. Exchange is defined by transactions of cause and effect. What is right is what is deserved or fair. Sociologists point us to how humans conform to their world around them. How behavior is structured and conditioned by one's environment. Philosophers find that either the physical world is real and the invisible is an illusion or vice versa. Truth is determined by what we can reason from what we can observe. Rational inquiry is for generating our own ideas, NOT processing revelation of ideas we receive through the invisible realm.

Can it be that our guilt is that we identify with our human nature. Our bondage is a futility derived from a psychological debt of poverty, fraud, deception, perversion, greed, and so on. We depend on what we see to determine what is true. For instance, we observe issues with our sex and sexuality and conclude God's revealed design for men and women is not true. As long as things are fair, then they are "right." I've heard it said "we take God's good gifts, pervert them and then blame Him." We are in bondage to a culture that values tolerance above all else and thus must make all people equal. At the same time we witness the guilt of shaming others that don't agree instead of rejoicing in the differences. These are the psychological repercussions of the Fall.

It is proper and appropriate for Christians to address the poverty in the world, sex trade, children sold into slavery to work in rock quarries, random acts of murder, and many other social injustices. The question is how we view this mission? Is it an exchange (transaction) where we achieve great things for God in the physical world so He sees us in a favorable light OR are these atrocities in the physical world a picture of our own fallen nature separated from God? Do we see the mess in the physical world as a picture of ourselves as the ones guilty and in need of God's grace as the fix? Is the response to the evils in this world motivated by a thanksgiving sourced in the sense of one's own guilt?

Freedom granted by the Cross comes from a new identity. Being a redeemed child of God is a soul whose self-concept aligns with God's Kingdom, not a physical being in the cosmos. This transforms the soul from one that seeks rights, rewards, and religion as a creature to a soul that rests in the privileges, provisions and promises of the Creator. Trusting the unseen evidence of the Cross (faith) fundamentally changes a soul from identifying with "the outcome of things" (circumstances) to one that identifies with "the Source of things" (Sovereignty).

Identity crisis occurs when our head (Biblical learning) tells us we are redeemed, but our heart (inherited assumptions of our human nature) actually influence how we think, feel and act. This disharmony in beliefs is called dissonance. Dissonance distresses the soul. Exploring the ways assumptions of our human nature affect us mitigates the risk of dissonance.

The word "soul" is referenced over 100 times in the New Testament. Maybe the Bible is serious about psychology. When Christians recognize that trusting the human identity is the guilt and trusting their Spiritual identity is freedom, then the promise of an abundant and virtuous life becomes more of their experience. Dissonance diminishes. Identity crisis is relieved. The risks of abandoning the faith or living the joyless Christian life are reduced.

This is the heartbeat of the team that developed b4worldview, an online course available to anyone, but especially targeted to Christian teenagers who face a challenging world at work, in college and in relationships that are forming their future.

When young people declare "that the guilty may go free", we desire that this not only be a theology in their head, but a song in their heart.

Its worth pondering and maybe even giving it a try @ http://b4worldview.com/homeschool/

source of identity crisis

There is so much being said and written about "identity" in both our culture and our churches. We have "identity politics" and we have "identity in Christ." Of course, the use of identity is used by different people for different emphases, but the fact that IDENTITY is so important in various aspects of society is not unimportant.

The two uses of identity are really not unrelated when we think about it. IDENTITY is one's basic core self concept. All of our core assumptions that frame what we believe and therefore how we think, feel and act flow from who we believe we are. Psychology and sociology have a lot to say about how people perceive their identity. Generally, there are 3 facets of IDENTITY - social formed by our sense of belonging, personal formed by our innate unique characteristics and natural formed by whether we see ourselves as mainly physical or mainly spiritual beings.

Your core assumption about reality and truth specifically flows from your identity. You either assume that the visible physical world (cosmos) is what is real and embodies what is true or the unseen realm in which a supernatural being rules is what is real. Based on which assumption about reality, you will assume truth is either determined by what we observe in the cosmos or by what is revealed to us by the supernatural. It is not too much of a stretch that if you believe what is real is what you can observe by your physical senses, then your identity is essentially found in your human nature and your circumstances. Otherwise, reality for you is that which is eternal, true all the time everywhere, and exists in the invisible realm.

One very common identity crisis occurs when Christians' theology (head knowledge) informs them that their identity is in Christ, but their "heart" or embedded assumptions operates from an identity associated with their human nature OR an identity that is based in a reality found in the physical world and an orientation that truth is determined by physical evidence we can collect and analyze.

Historically some try to resolve this by going to the other extreme and assume the physical world is either evil or an illusion. This flies in the face of the Incarnate Christ and cannot be the answer to the Christian's question - "if the physical world is not REAL (eternal truth and then not worthy of our allegiance), then what is the purpose of it?" That is a good question. Let's see what God says though His mouthpiece Paul:

"For the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world (cosmos - ordered system of the physical universe) are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even His everlasting power and divinity."

So what has happened? From Adam mankind inherits a fallen human nature biased to assume the cosmos is "reality", not God's invisible Kingdom. It is hard wired into each of us at birth. Martin Luther, as part of the Reformation, said that investigative inquiry to know truth is put in every human. Yes, but the human nature biases this inquiry to see truth as that which can be determined by observation. When we repent (think completely differently) and believe (trust our identity in Christ), we see that truth is determined by inquiry associated with revelation, not observation of the physical world. Although God says He displays His glory in the cosmos (physical world), it's trusting the unseen evidence (faith) of the invisible reality of His kingdom that regenerates and transforms our identity.

Paul says this another way when he reminds us that "we have this treasure in an earthly vessel, that the exceeding greatness of the power may be of God, and not from ourselves." Thinking our identity is established by the cross, but actually assuming otherwise, is THE IDENTITY CRISIS with only one solution. We must renew our mind such that our implicit assumption of a Spiritual identity (not physical or circumstantially oriented) supports our explicit knowledge of identity evidenced in Scripture.

Ponder this ......
Human nature assumes the mind is a generator of ideas - that truth is what the mind concludes it is based on what we can reason from what we can see VERSUS the mind of Christ which assumes the mind is a receiver - that truth is disclosed to us reasoned by evidence we cannot see (faith), only to be represented in or modeled by what we can see (purpose of the cosmos).

You might ask, "I know I need to read my Bible more but is there something that can help me also with these human nature core assumptions that hijack my joy, freedom, hope, purpose, and sense of esteem and belonging without me even being aware that this is what is happening?"  

Glad you asked - I have poured the past few years of my life in helping to develop a course that can assist the transformation of core assumptions associated with the two identities. Its found at

http://www.b4worldview.com/ 

What in the "world" is the problem?

Powerful men are falling all around us while millions of women are saying,"me too."The biggest mass shooting in history is a mystery. Marriage is whatever we want it to be. Laws don't seem to matter, unless we want them to. Pastors, theologians, writers and worldview thought leaders like the Colson Center and Barna claim our culture is broken and needs fixing. If we could just go back a few generations when the culture was better, things would be all right.

I DON'T THINK SO!!

Let's ponder this a bit. I am going to make my point and then explain it (I usually do it in reverse but I'd likely lose most people that way.) My point

Social exchange explains why someone does what they do and culture is the criterion that society uses to determine if the exchange is right or wrong. However, social exchange, regardless of  culture, is an obsession of human nature that keeps us from the privileges and provisions of God's Kingdom.

Let's take Harvey W. for example. In his mind if he exchanged with a young woman what he deemed she wanted to get what he wanted, this is a fair exchange and therefore acceptable behavior. That is why he first couldn't understand the uproar and why his defense is, "this is the way it was when I was coming up and the sex was consensual." His claim - it was fair and culture deemed the exchange OK. However, society today says that when the one with power forces another to do something they don't want to, then the exchange is not fair and therefore unacceptable. Exchange explains the behavior, culture rules whether the exchange is right or wrong based on a view of justice.

Take the  Las Vegas shooter. No one can find his motive. The only answer is that he was evil. Consider this possibility. He assumed that certain people deserved to be killed for what they believed so it was necessary for him to act on behalf of those who believed like he did. In his mind this was a "fair exchange." Their death balances out with their belief and enacting justice is his responsibility. However, society says that it is not OK to use power against someone who didn't agree that the exchange was fair. In other words, the actor (shooter) saw a fair exchange but culture did not agree. The actions of the shooter were wrong only because culture finds the exchange is not fair.

So what is going on from God's perspective. "God so loved the world that He gave His only Son." Yet, God tells us, "love not the world, nor anything that is in the world." The word for "world" is Kosmos, which means 'an ordered system', specifically relating to the physical universe. This ordered system is controlled by equilibrium, reciprocity, cause and effect, justice. Right or wrong is determined by whether the exchange is fair or not. Culture makes that distinction. Therefore, anything that is in balance is fair and considered OK. BUT, this ordered system is futile and needed redemption.

God sent his son out of His love to provide an alternative, or a solution to this order in the physical world. Nature is subjected to the subjectivity of culture and the futility of equilibrium. Even hurricanes are explained by nature trying to restore equilibrium. So, God tells us to not make this ordered system of exchange our priority. In doing so we miss His solution, a Kingdom we can dwell in that is governed by Grace, unmerited favor, not subject to equilibrium, not based on cause/effect relationships.

Its the ordered system of this world, one based on equilibrium, reciprocity and justice, that is the problem - NOT culture. Culture is merely the referee for which a system of exchange is deemed OK by society. When Paul says, "do not conform to this world. but be transformed," he is now talking about not fashioning our life around (attaching ourselves to) the forces of this age (word for world in this verse), a time in which the natural order is equilibrium. BUT, rather become new by having a mind that sees him/herself as a part of another order, a spiritual Kingdom, the one in which a Sovereign father chooses Grace, unmerited favor, a system of disequilibrium.

So, when you are tempted to believe that the problem is around us (culture), think deeply that the problem may be within us (an attachment to this world). People do things to get or maintain equilibrium with the world around them - culture decides whether the exchange is acceptable (fair) or not.

At least its worth a little pondering ...

Lessons from Lexie

We like to believe that "out of the mouths of babes" comes great wisdom. Babies and small children have yet to condition their thinking to what others want to hear or that fits some politically correct way of thinking. Babies have an unfettered look right into the face of truth. What then can we learn from baby Lexie?



Lexie is a 3 month old baby who lives in foster care. Yes, traumatic situations can occur to people before they even take their first breath. Lexie's mom is a druggie. Who knows who the father is? When Lexie's great grand parents heard of her birth, they were moved to take her in, to give her the best chance at a life that from the "get go" has dealt her a bad hand.

There are at least two points I take from Lexie. One is, what does her young life tell us about "free will"? Second, what does her young life tell us about how our needs get met?

"Free will" - unconstrained choices available to us. What choices have Lexie made about her own life? ZERO. She didn't choose to be born, certainly born to the parents she has. She didn't choose to be born into a life of futility. She didn't choose who would take her in and care for her. She doesn't choose her food or who provides it for her. Soon she will be adopted. That is not her choice.
If "free will" is a fundamental truth about life, someone needs to convince Lexie that she should be doing more choosing. Oh wait, the world will convince her of that soon enough.

"Satisfaction" - the supply for what we need. Does Lexie do anything to get her needs met? I don't think so. She receives the provision and privilege afforded her because her great grand parents have chosen to love her. There is no reason except that she belongs to them. Lexie is satisfied soley by unmerited favor. What she needs is bestowed on her by someone who has the resources and the will to bless her completely.

What are the lessons from Lexie? The life we see in this world provides a picture of what is real in the invisible, spiritual realm. We have lessons, such as those from Lexie, not so we will believe, but to strengthen the evidence (faith) of what God has revealed to us supernaturally - His Spirit to our spirit. 

Lexie is so cute and fun to cuddle with. But more importantly, Lexie, and for that fact, each of us live a life that points us to what is real.

What better to ponder ??????