Posted on by Abe Austin

The Threat of Good People- Justification for Evil

Yesterday I spoke about how children who are socially insecure can try to tear down those who are confident, because they hold up a mirror to the insecure children’s flaws. But as the years go by, what might be nothing more than teenage angst, gradually evolves into something deeper. Even, something evil.

Selfishness and Sin)

Most of us come into evil by simple selfishness. A neighbor is looking for help with some yardwork, and we discreetly make plans to be out of town that morning. Upon seeing a traffic lane slowing down, we might swerve into the next, cutting off the driver behind. We disparage the “other side” for their idiocy, enjoying the moral superiority that that brings. We want what they want, and we only deviate from our predetermined path when it serves our own interest.

And then, inevitably, that same selfishness leads to doing something objectively wrong. The commission of a mortal sin. Something truly damning, which far more than the teenage awkwardness discussed in yesterday’s post, is something that we tend to shrink from, to try and not face up to in our own heart.

And to soothe our conscience on the matter, we tell ourselves that everyone is “looking out for number one.” Everyone takes the advantage when it is presented to them. Everyone holds a grudge. Everyone is selfish. Everyone has a serious sin hidden inside. We become suspicious of those that appear to defy these universal assertions, assuming that the so-called good are really just hypocrites and liars, pretending to be holier-than-thou, but secretly just as selfish and compromised as the rest of us.

An Unbearable Reality)

Which then makes it very difficult when someone shows an undeniable act of kindness. When someone is doing good, even when they think no one else is looking. When someone is giving, with no possibility of return. When someone forgives another, even though they have every right to demand vengeance. When someone openly confesses and renounces their sins.

Moments like these threaten the wicked, because it holds up a mirror, showing us that we don’t have to be the way that we are. That person was willing to forgive his enemy, so why don’t I? That person gave with true charity, so why don’t I? That person admitted his sins and forsook them, so why don’t I? These questions remind the sinners that we do what we do because we choose to, not because it was inevitable. The sinners see what we really are, and how what we still cling to is inexcusable. We see that we are deserving of hell.

The good people therefore become hateful to us for no other reason than that they are sincerely good. They become an unbearable burden. They are a threat to the illusion that everyone is guilty, so we’re no worse than anyone else. They are a threat because they show us that change is necessary, but we are still unwilling to change.

Then, the good people have to be crushed so that there is no longer a standard to be measured against. Society redefines morality, so that even thinking or believing or speaking “incorrectly” is now deemed violence. Then the destruction of the good is considered justified and even called right.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Perfectionism vs Shamelessness

The world today tells us to be shameless. It insists that we are always good, and that any flaw does not condemn us, but that it is actually a worthy part of our own, unique, perfection. The world today thinks that it rejects yesterday’s perfectionism, but it is just as obsessed with being flawless. Not by purging our sins, but by denying their very existence.

Shamelessness is very seductive, but it only soothes those that are able to stay in denial. Once a person is woken up to the reality of their own guilt, and are seared in their hearts by it, they are beyond the power of false comforts. Once we have truly seen our own unworthiness, our own deserving of hell, it doesn’t help to just pretend it isn’t there.

The message of the gospel, however, is neither perfectionism nor shamelessness. It does not call us to live in our shame, but neither does it call on us to repress it. The message of the gospel is based around fully acknowledging that we are flawed, and that it is serious, and that it does damn us…but also that we are loved by God anyway and He offers His life to cover us. Only the gospel message allows us to both fully embrace our guilt and fully embrace God’s grace.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Elements of a Spiritual Journey

If your spiritual journey does not include a time of
Guilt
Shame
Failure
And being saved
Then you don’t have a spiritual journey

Posted on by Abe Austin

False Moral Dilemmas- Desire for the Gray

The Desire to Excuse)

At the end of the last post, I acknowledged the fact that each one of us will break conscience at some point or another, but that it isn’t as though we have to do that. We do it as a choice. We have an alternative path that remains morally upright, and we reject it, and choose something wrong instead.

In my personal experience, and in my daily observations, I think that this is one of the most difficult things for us to accept. Truly owning our failures does not come easy. We shrink at the notion of saying, “I hurt someone. I didn’t have to, but I chose to because I’m selfish, and there’s no justifying it. It was just wrong, plain and simple.” I think we all know that this is true of everyone else, so certainly it must be of ourselves also, but we keep trying to distance from it. Even when we do acknowledge our failings, we prefer to do it for past versions of the self. “The old me did that, the current me never would.” Thus, even harder than admitting that we did wrong is admitting that we are wrong.

And with this in mind, I think I think one of the reasons why we would be obsessed with so-called moral dilemmas is clear. We can deny all our guilt once we assume a paradigm that this world is fraught with no-win moral dilemmas. We tell ourselves that all of us must face choices where moral compromise is the only option, that sometimes doing wrong is better than doing the worse wrong, so there’s no helping that we have soiled our souls. If we convince ourselves that all the world is gray, then it is a meaningless homogeny where our own “gray” choices can’t be held against us.

The Courage to be Honest)

From this perspective, false moral dilemmas are not simply a misrepresentation, they are a coping mechanism for our shame. We rely on them because saying “there were no good options,” is much easier than saying, “there was one good option, but I didn’t have the courage to face its consequences.”

The solution, then, is having the honesty to admit that we are flawed individuals, guilty of choosing wrong, and needing grace to get by. We need to be able to acknowledge the perfect path that was available and how we far strayed from it. When we have courage enough for this, then we won’t need to cast the world in shades of gray, we will be able to admit the white that was there, the black that we are, and the grace that makes us pure again.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Ascend, Decline, or Plateau- The Beginning of the Fall

Common, but Deadly)

Yesterday I mentioned how sometimes I experience times of gradual moral deterioration. These are not the deeper descents into evil that I experienced previously, but they are gradual compromises on my quality of character. I acknowledged the fact that such struggles are common, one of the problems that everyone faces who tries to walk a godly path.

So, I don’t mean to over overemphasize these common foibles, but I don’t want to downplay them either. The fact is, that while these times of slow decline may not be gravely compromising on their own, they truly are the beginning of the path to losing one’s soul. Slowly testing one’s boundaries, pushing them further and further, is oriented towards eventually taking a step you never meant to, one that really does rack your conscience with guilt.

Times of slow decline must be recognized for what they are. They are the first teasing tastes of ruin. They are the opening chapter in every great tragedy. Yes, they are common and expected, but it is also essential to arrest before they come to full fruition.

Inverse of Progression)

In my personal experience, the pattern of moral decline often happens in the inverse of moral ascension. From what I have seen, moral ascension tends to begin with a dramatic moment of redemption, with periodic additional surges when correcting core beliefs, and then maintained with ongoing ritual. Moral decline, however, has typically looked more like ongoing periods of deterioration, followed by periodic concessions away from conscience, resulting in a dramatic moment of intense guilt.

Surely there are exceptions to this pattern, but it is the pattern I see most frequently both in myself and others. Having both perspectives is valuable for having a plan to improve, and also a warning system for know how to avoid regression.

Posted on by Abe Austin

True Forgiveness

True forgiveness isn’t about trying to minimize the wrongs of others, or to trying to justify their flagrant offenses away.

True forgiveness is knowing that what the other person did is objectively condemnable and that you would be absolutely within your rights to demand justice, but turning it all over to God anyway. It is letting God be the judge, letting Him choose justice or mercy according to His will.

True forgiveness is not excusing, it is releasing.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 22:13-15

13 If it be torn in pieces, then let him bring it for witness, and he shall not make good that which was torn.

14 And if a man borrow ought of his neighbour, and it be hurt, or die, the owner thereof being not with it, he shall surely make it good.

15 But if the owner thereof be with it, he shall not make it good: if it be an hired thing, it came for his hire.

These verses conclude the matter of a man’s goods being lost, stolen, or destroyed while loaned to another man. Verse 13 is still speaking specifically for an animal that is loaned and then destroyed. It states that if the animal is torn to pieces by a wild creature, producing the remnants of the body shows that the borrower of the animal has not stolen, sold, or butchered the animal. It has been utterly wasted, with no profit to the borrower, and so that man is guiltless. It is the same as if the unfortunate act had destroyed the beast while still under the original owner’s care.

That idea is further advanced in verses 14 and 15, where it is pointed out that if one man is borrowing the animal, but at the time of wounding or death the original owner is also present, then there is no restitution to be made. This makes sense, as the original owner’s interest over the creature and protective sense to it would still be in force, even while the other man was borrowing it, and so if the animal was compromised anyway it was either because the original owner was being neglectful or because there was nothing that could have been done to prevent the harm. If, for example, the borrower wanted to make a beast of burden carry a particularly heavy load, and the owner was there and allowed it, and then the animal collapsed, it would be the owner’s fault for allowing it to happen. But if the owner is not there, then it was solely the borrower’s poor judgment that is to blame, and so he must make restitution.

The nuance and breadth of provision in these laws is very impressive. They show a deep understanding of human life, and the many different manners and forms in which misfortune occurs, and a clear recognition of where blame rests for each instance. While there will always be unique, in-between situations, a simple examination of the two laws that stand on either side of that situation would give the judge the proper limits of justice. He could then exercise his personal judgment between those bounds, and the potential for malpractice would therefore be limited.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 22:1, 4

1 If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.

4 If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep; he shall restore double.

In the previous chapter we heard all the laws related to killing. These laws covered both the killing of people and of livestock, and both the intentional and the unintentional variances of each. Today’s verses now shift from killing to stealing, and there are some interesting moral lessons to be gleaned here.

The first that stands out to me is that the penalty for the deliberate theft of an animal is substantially greater than the penalty we already read for the accidental killing of an animal. It is a key moral principle that the penalty is not based only on what the outcome was (the loss of the animal), but what the underlying motivation behind that outcome were. The penalty is according to the man’s guilt more than the deprivation that was suffered.

Also, note how in the second verse it says that a thief found with the animal still alive is required to return the creature, and then one also of his own. We already heard the principle of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, and this is consistent with that. Since this man had sought to reduce his neighbor’s livestock by one, now he shall experience what it is to have one of his herd reduced by one instead.

And finally, note how the penalty is even worse if the thief has already sold the creature away, or killed it, before he is caught. Now, instead of returning the creature and being out one of his own, he must now give up four or five of his animals. I assume the significantly more severe punishment is because the thief stole with the intention to destroy. He didn’t just take from the rightful owner, he took it out to where it could not ever be given back to the owner. That is a darker sin than to have taken, but to have left the door open for remorse and restoration.

Posted on by Abe Austin

The Impasse of Release and Guilt: Part Two

A Proper Devastation)

Yesterday I considered how obsession with failure only tends to yield further failure. In order to change our lives and habits, we have to let go of our tendency to punish ourselves, we have to forgive ourselves for falling short, we have to get right back up and resume living our commitments.

Speaking for myself, just by understanding this fact I do find it easier to let go of my more minor indiscretions. If I eat too much at a party, if I stay up too late playing games, if I find myself distracted at work, I find it within my reach to set aside the self-resentment and instead say, “yes, that happened, but I should get right back to living my commitments, hopeful and trusting that I’ve still got this.”

But not every wrong fits into that “minor indiscretion” category. We addicts are defined by how consistently and repeatedly do heavy and major wrongs. We do things that not only hurt ourselves, but those we care about most. We break beautiful things and cause irreversible damage. And just letting go of that doesn’t feel so easy. In fact, it feels disrespectful and inappropriate to just let it go. It seems too flippant to say “yes, that happened, but moving on…”

And yes, focusing on the guilt and failure of our major wrongs is still the surest way to end up repeating those painful behaviors. Pragmatically we ought to just let them go, but in our hearts it feels like we should be distressed and devastated for a time.

This is a great conundrum then. It is the impassable gulf, the catch-22 of recovery. How are we to do make the surrender that help us get better when doing so feels actively wrong? This is the gordian know we will untangle tomorrow.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Perpetrator and Victim: Part Five

Fundamentally Broken)

Yesterday I mentioned how some victims of abuse might twist their experience into self-justification. By leaning into their righteous indignation, they will try to dismiss any wrongs that they themselves do. They have created in their mind a sense of blamelessness, such that no matter what they do they cannot be held be accountable for it. The world was terrible to them first, after all, so any wrong they do now is just a well-deserved retaliation.

This is the angrier side of victimhood. It is not the only warped perspective that can be developed, though. There is also the sad, depressed option that we will discuss today.

This sort of victim can be described as being fundamentally broken. After suffering pain at the hands of another they go back and highlight their own failings, convincing themselves that they in some way deserved the pain that they received, justifying the abuser’s crimes for them. They might even call up transgressions that were totally unrelated from the abuse, assuming some cosmic power had been tabulating all of their secret, guilty deeds and sent the abuser as a force of karmic justice.

There are also victims who do not consider themselves as being particularly guilty before the abuse, but now, because they were a participant in such a violent or dirty experience, they feel forever tainted by it. They feel as of some sort of evil was transferred to them by their abuser. Thoughts, once innocent, are now overrun with horrible memories and images. They may be horrified by these images, but they self-identify with them still the same.

Divorced From Reality)

Whether such a person thinks they earned their suffering beforehand, or whether they think that they have been permanently scarred after the fact, the intense demoralization leads them to accept or seek out further injury, because that’s just what they think they belong to now. This creates a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, where they really do become responsible for the continuation of self-harm, reaffirming to themselves that they just aren’t any good. Thus, they become entrenched in this new, corrupted identity. Left unchecked, this cyclical self-harm and self-loathing behavior can take them to all sort of terrible extremes, even to the premature ending of their lives.

But for anyone on the outside, anyone who knew the victim both before and after the traumatizing event, it is abundantly clear that the sufferer is not living in a way congruent with reality. No number of past flaws can justify another person being abusive to you, neither does having evil forced upon you make you evil yourself. What other people have done is what they have done, it justifies or condemns them and no one else. In an ideal world, suffering and abuse would have absolutely no bearing on how the victim views themselves.

Of course, the victim might even know all of this in their head as well. They might know that they shouldn’t blame themselves, they might staunchly stand in defense other victims, but knowing something in one’s head and treating others a certain way does not mean that the same goes for what’s inside. The victim can believe in their head that they are innocent and deserving of love while feeling the exact opposite in their heart. It isn’t a matter of needing to be convinced, it is a matter of needing a transformation in the heart.

Of course, even if the victim sets aside all the false narratives and self-deceptions, the truth that takes their place is still bleak and tragic. Their heart is broken. Their innocence is gone. They have seen the evil world, and no amount of knowing that that isn’t their fault will change the fact that they have seen it. They should not blame themselves for what they suffered, but even if they do manage to cease doing so that doesn’t mean that everything is fine now.

Stray Hearts)

We’ve spent some time now examining both the situation of the perpetrator and of the victim. In each case we have seen the tendency for them to have a heart divided from truth and reality. The perpetrator is in denial of his wrong or he makes it his entire identity. The victim feels that he is justified in every bitter, angry thing that he does now, or he feels fundamentally broken. All of these states are based upon the person latching onto a lie at their core.

Neither the perpetrator nor the victim should view themselves as irredeemable or incorruptible. They should be able to hold an honest appraisal of their flaws and virtues at the same time. Getting to this place is going to be a process. Core lies will have to be excised, as if by emotional surgery, and truth is going to have to be applied regularly, like a salve.

We’ve also considered that even when the perpetrator and the victim get past their self-deceit, the truth they are left with is still stark and damning. Yes, it is better to embrace truth than deception, but at this point that still does not amount to healing. It is a step in the right direction, though, but we still need to consider the other steps that follow.

We’ve spent quite some time discussing the problem, the ways that both perpetrators and victims wander into strange, forbidden lands. The following posts will now be dedicated to understanding the journey back to wholeness.