Evil

Besides God, there is no greater point of emphasis in the doctrines of every religion I am even passingly acquainted with than the doctrines concerning evil: what evil is, who is evil, the source of evil, how to avoid evil, etc. Obviously the nature of evil is of extreme importance to many, many people.

Within the scope of the faith I claim, the Way of Christ, evil is a common topic as well - and the cause of much concern (as is the personage and character of Lucifer, the best known, at least by name and reputation, of evildoers).

Ask any professed follower of Jesus, layman or elder, what evil is and you will likely get a list of deeds or a discourse on the Law (or perhaps the 10 Commandments) and not obeying it or maybe some idea about Satan or not worshipping the right god.

Yet, I wonder, is that what evil really is?

Scripture tells us that man's heart is constantly imagining evil - which sounds like the world is populated by billions of psychopaths waiting for the opportune moment to pillage and plunder.

But, when I look at the people I know and meet, I don't see a crowd of barely restrained Mongols. I see many, many folks doing the best they can to get by, stay out of trouble and find some joy and happiness. The Dahmers and Stalins are far away from the place where I live. Bold and unabashed evil seems unreal - even when it does appear in this little place.

Still, God reminds us, in many ways, many times, that no-one is good or, in reverse, everyone is evil.

This suggests to me that what God knows as evil and what we think we know as evil are not the same.

For example, the idea that evil can be recognized by what evil does.Yet, when I study the stories and histories in the Bible, many acts universally seen as inherently evil, such as killing another person, are committed by people who are acting in obedience to the command of the Lord.

Conversely, Jesus tells us that, in the eyes of God, all our good deeds are as worthless and contaminated garbage - we even see Him sending away some who cast out demons and did many other seemingly good things in Christ's name.

So, it must be that evil is not inherent in the actions of people; evil is said to be the order of things in this world and among its inhabitants even though the natural eyes do not observe it to be so.

Evil would seem to be more than or different from what religious doctrine appears to teach.

If I may be so bold, I think I am finally beginning to understand what evil, the evil God sees, is.

Evil is desire: man's desire for anything other than God and God's will.

Look at the story of the Fall. Satan uses the temptation of becoming god-like to tempt Eve, but Eve does not fall until she desired the fruit and, thereby, the results the serpent suggested would come from eating it. The fact that Adam took some and ate it, without the same sales-pitch from Satan, shows that his desires changed as well.

From that day to this, all of us have desired and fallen and are evil in the sight of God.

So wholly corrupt is our heart that when we are blessed by God with the faith to believe and to desire Him God gives us a new heart, the heart of Christ.

A Marital Proposal

Marriage is a big deal.

I grant that that is a rather inelegant expression but, in its simplicity, sufficiently conveys the seriousness of marriage.

Marriage is a big deal.

Marriage is a contract.

Modern culture is thoroughly infused with Hollywood projections of romance, love and marriage. Outside of the theater, however, marriage in practical terms is a contract, forming a partnership, with all the common and necessary elements of a contract.

Currently, marriage is a contract which may only be consummated between two people - one male, one female - who are competent, of legal age, and not under duress.

The restriction as to the sex of the entrants is the source of a raging controversy throughout the nation.

Some of the states have legalized same-sex unions in some form; some have pre-empted the same with initiatives and/or amendments to the state constitutions defining or limiting marriage; most states are caught in the middle without the ability to move much in either direction.

Regardless of how the argument is parsed from either side, the same-sex marriage debate boils down to a conflict between the one group's concept of moral behavior versus the other group's belief they are being denied equality.

I suggest that there is another approach to this issue which is consistent with the philosophy of the opponents and will satisfy the need of the proponents for equal standing.

My proposition is that all regulation of marriage be removed from the purview of government - at all levels - and returned to the people where it belongs; and that the marriage license be replaced by a simple document, including all of the necessary provisions about rights, property, powers-of-attorney, etc., as is needed - the form and content to evolve and improve through use and experience. The restrictions on eligibility to file this document would include the usual limits on contracts such as competency, majority, no compulsion, no illegal acts, and so on.

There could even be an expiration or renewal date if desired.

So how does this benefit each group?

Those who oppose same-sex marriage, as stated above, generally use moral/religious bases for their opposition. These same people are generally opposed to government interference in religion.

This change would successfully remove an element of religious belief from any control of any government - thus giving them more religious freedom and preventing the feared change in the definition of marriage.

Similarly, for the proponents of same-sex marriage, they gain what they claim to desire most of all: equality. The partnership filings will be indifferent to the sex of the partners. Additionally, if there is a need for religious solemnization, no doubt there will be many ministers willing to aid - and without the concerns of running afoul of the law in some way.

Additionally, there will be some pleasant side benefits to the whole nation:

1. This divisive and unproductive debate will end.

2. Divorce Court will cease to exist. Partnership agreements will expire or be dissolved like any other contractual arrangement.

3. The power, influence and control of government will decrease - a positive effect in any regard.

I don't deny that there will need to be some more fleshing out of this bare-bones proposal, but I believe the outcome can be a win-win for all of us.

Truth?

Everyone I know says they want the truth - at least among those who actually give a thought to much at all.

I seriously question whether or not few if any really mean that they want to find the truth, because the truth is apparent and obvious everywhere around us. The whole world, and the people who populate it, shove the truth in our faces every waking moment.

In the words of Hobbes: "...nasty and brutish...."

No, I don't think we want truth. What we want is a way up or a way out.

In other words, we want to avoid consequences - and still reap the rewards.

Look how much of our time is consumed by the mundane. We worry about bills and money and possessions and money and status and money...and who among us are the most obsessed with the trappings of materiality: the poor.

Why?

Because that is the game.

From the time we are very small we learn to desire and to desire what others have. Capitalism is the economic expression of these inculcated wants.

But don't be fooled - capitalism is not synonymous with free enterprise. Capitalism is a zero-sum game. Capitalism is based on the premise that the resources of the world are finite and, because the sum is of a fixed quantity, the object is to acquire as many of these resources as possible (and never forget we, the people, are one of these resources).

In every nation, every person, to one extent or another, is expected to participate in the game.

There's a problem, however, because what is left out of the training is that the rules of the game are rigged and the outcomes fixed.

You can't win!

So, is there another option?

Yes: Don't play!