Are humans inherently good or bad?

I am with Fr. Mathis on this one, Elizabeth. If we are made in God’s image and likeness I can see no other possibility than that we are basically good. And I do think we are weak as a result of the Fall. And I also agree that we can, with the help of God’s grace, be transformed and grow in virtue. We need Jesus to mediate that grace to us.

I’m thinking.

For sure. This is definitely not something I feel able to respond to in a moment. There are a lot of associated strands, sub-questions, implications of either answer to the question you pose…and so, it’s not like I in my finite and tainted mind should expect to exhaust those before stating an answer. (Though my Myers-Briggs type and my probably ADHD send me in that direction!) I do, however, want to think and discuss more.

Thanks for your well-framed thought-offering in order to facilitate this. You’ve chiseled the issue well. And Fr. Mathis’ post is helpfully constructed, too.

May the Holy Spirit hover over and give form to our ponderings in accordance with His Word and He who is the Word!

Elizabeth, this really resonated with me: “my previous position (we are inherently bad) often resulted in a glaring lack of compassion. In fact, it led me to dehumanizing thoughts and opinions about other people.” This is me all over, and a terrific wakeup call.

As for Christ dying despite our being good–you know, Heaven is for perfect love, and even a good person isn’t perfect. That’s how I see it.

“For me, it’s a revolutionary idea. From infancy, it was ingrained into my psyche that I was a bad, horrible, wretched sinner worthy of Hell. The result was that for most of my life, I felt unworthy of love.”

“It has only bee n in the last couple of years that I have finally come to believe that God loves me.”

It’s both, and that is what makes God’s grace all the more amazing. Scripture makes it clear that we are sinners from birth…we have all inherited Adam’s sin nature, and we are utterly depraved, save by God’s grace…both working His good will through unregenerate people (thus we see “good acts”) and through His redeemed people, who now have a new nature.

We are indeed wretched, worthy of hell, BUT GOD, loved us anyway, and sent His Son to die for us. We need Jesus because there is nothing good in and of ourselves. We’re are 99% good (or any other %), and Jesus makes up the difference…we are 100% evil, and we need Jesus to redeem us, buy us out of the slavery of sin.

I’m sure it must be hard to study scripture, totally removed from your background, but I’d encourage you to do just that. Study the matter, read commentaries and articles explaining this aspect of theology, and try to forget the baggage that you unfortunately carry from your religious upbringing.

When you are able to see the truth in this doctrine, you will come to see God’s grace in a new, magnified way…I know I did.

Blessings

Nothing in the assertion that each human being is created inherently good denies the reality that we are born into a damaged world filled with damaged human beings and with an innate capacity for both great good and great evil. (Though in truth, few of us achieve any sort of greatness in either category.) As I alluded in my comment, I believe that statements about mankind’s “inherent” good or evil natures actually say more about the sort of God we worship than they do about mankind.

The idea you reference seems to me to be one of the philosophical strains flowing from what is often called the “Enlightenment” in Western Civilization than anything directly connected to Christianity. (Well, other than the fact that are strains of Christian belief deeply shaped by those cultural forces.)

I would not say we are “capable of bad” because of a fall of any sort. We were created free and thus each and every one of us innately capable of choosing God or not. If we were not created with the capacity to choose good or evil, we would have had no capacity to “fall”. We have all inherited mortality as part of the human condition. As part of that, we are born with a propensity toward being ruled by our passions. Moreover, we are born into a dangerous world surrounded by those who are, as often as not, ruled by their passions. “All have sinned” is more a statement of inevitability than a statement about some sort of innate nature.

In fact, since Christ joined his nature to humanity’s, we have to say that mankind now shares in his nature. That aspect is universal and is no longer in question. The question before us is do we share to life or to condemnation.

I believe that buried in the perspective you describe is a flawed idea on what “holy” means and what it means to be “saved.” Here’s a question that I find helps us dig deeper into what the Incarnation means. If mankind had never “fallen” (whatever you might take that idea to mean) would the Son of God, the eternal Logos, have needed to become sarx or flesh? That’s an important question because Christianity has traditionally held that there was much more going on in the Incarnation than just the Cross. (The ancient answer to that question is that the Son would have had to join his nature to ours no matter what since we never had any capacity on our own to become one with God. Without a “fall” he would not have had to die because our nature would not have been mortal.)

I still think this question has more to do with the sort of Creator you worship than with the nature of the creation itself.

*Personally* (relating to me only; not speaking for anyone else; do not want anyone trying to talk me out of my conviction)—I find great comfort in the fact that I’m not good. I used to cry “I’m not good, I’m not good” and wear myself out trying to be perfect, and then beat myself up when I failed miserably. Now, I can say with joy “I’m not good!” because there is one who is perfect who saved me from myself and my sin. Jesus is the perfect one and I am covered by His perfect blood. In knowing that, I find joy, relief, comfort, and peace.

As one recovering “fundmentalist” who uses the KJV and all of that, I understand where you are coming from.

This is my take on it. Babies being formed in the womb and babies that are born are innocent and good. They are born without sin. Just like Adam and Eve were without sin before they fell.

But sin came into the world because of Adam and Eve’s sin, and the temptation is very great. No man has ever been victorious over this temptation. No man except Jesus. He was tested in the Wilderness under exceptional circumstances and came out sinless. This is one of the many evidences that we know He was God.

We reach a certain point in our lives when we come to the knowledge of Good and Evil. And we make a conscience decision to eat our own forbidden fruit…with the full knowledge that we are doing something wrong. Then we sin. Once we sin, we are sinners.

To enter Heaven we must be 100% perfect. If we manage to live this life without one sin, we are in. If we make one mess up, we are not perfect, and thus we won’t make it.

This is why Jesus did die. He took our sins upon his body, and died the death we should of, and paid in full for our sins. *ALL* of them. Past, Present and Future.

As a fundmentalist, I didn’t even understand that essiential truth. I thought there was something always within *me* to make his cross work effective. His cross work is effective weather I believe it or not. It becomes *mine* when I accept the truth and rest in it as my only hope.

He took *my* sin on his body. He paid my debt that I owed. That payment was death. He paid it through his death in my behalf.

I do not know if this makes sense, but I do know that I never understood this in my fundmental church.

And I know what you mean by lack of compassion. I don’t believe that the fact that men are taught that they are inherriently evil makes one uncompassionate.

I think pride and being legalistic makes one uncompassionate. I was once uncompassionate against man’s frailites myself.

I became compassionate once I saw myself the sinner that I really was, and saw that the whole of man kind is in the same boat as I am. And that they need Jesus.

Not to help them to be good through His Grace. But they need *HIS* own rightousness. God took *my* sin. When I believe this to be true, He gives me Jesus’ 100% Righteouss perfection.

I agree that fundmentalism teaches that God’s love is conditional. I agree that there are *A LOT* of hang ups in fundmentalism.

I understand the journey you are on, seeking the truth. ♥

5) and if you leave this church, you are leaving God’s will and therefore; His protection.

For me, fear was one of the main reasons I stayed until I was 25.

((hugs)) Kat R.

Maybe it’s just me, but your tone seems a little patronizing. I’m not “going to the other extreme.” I’m just rethinking my previous assumption. Seeing human beings as basically good does not negate the necessity for a Savior. I like how Scott points out that our existence has more to do with the Creator–ie. He creates good.

Sometimes I get weary of the anecdotal evidence like: just watch a room full of 2 year olds!

As if that explains everything; ie. total depravity.

Which makes me think: hmm. Maybe what I really disagree with is this idea of total depravity.

Wow. I’m rambling.

Last thought: I do agree that belief in the ultimate goodness of man (ie. man w/o need of God) leads to totalitarianism. Good point!

Velinka: Your question strikes me as disingenuous. Are you sincerely “curious” about which Bible I read? Because your question seems disguised as a criticism. The feeling I get from your comment is that you think my conclusions are false because if I were really reading the Bible, I would know better.

Honestly, this strikes me a borderline nasty comment. However, I want to give you a chance to elaborate and add constructively to this conversation. This comment does not do that. Please try again.

Here I think we need to learn to speak carefully. We should all learn to recognize ourselves as “the chief of sinners” and pray for mercy. The parable of the pharisee and the publican illustrates perfectly the underlying reality if we say anything else. And it is true. We also need to learn to see ourselves as part of humanity rather than isolated individuals and learn to perceive our shared participation in the plight of mankind. I say that because coming from my background, neither of those have been automatic or easy for me. I’m still a long way from either, but I do see their importance now.

But that recognition of ourselves as sinners and of our participation in the sins of all, is very different than this question of “inherent” goodness or depravity. The idea of total depravity teaches something I find loathsome about God and the nature of the universe.

“But that recognition of ourselves as sinners and of our participation in the sins of all, is very different than this question of “inherent” goodness or depravity.”

Scott, can you elaborate on that more? Particularly how the recognition of ourselves as sinners–even the chief of sinners–coincides with “inherent” goodness? That would be helpful for me.

(Elizabeth’s obviously touched on it a bit, too. I also think my difficulty understanding may be coming from a relatively slippery understanding of the term “inherent” in this particular conversation. I can tell others aren’t seeming to have this problem, though, so I know there’s something there to be got!)

I’m really sorry to come across that way.

I found your post fascinating and wanted to share how I come to the conclusions I do in what I believe. But, having a very limited knowledge of catholicism, I honestly wouldn’t know what bible you would be reading. And, I’m assuming, that would be where you are drawing your conclusions.

I apologize again for coming across that way. I think not knowing me and me having only little snippets of time to comment lends itself to not being able get me intention across.

No problem, Velinka! ((hugs)) Thanks for clarifying!

Actually, I read several Bible translations. I read the KJV, the New American Standard and I also have a Catholic translation that includes books like Maccabees and the Book of Wisdom.

However, my thoughts about this topic have come mostly from reading other writers and/or church fathers, etc. I know part of this is a Catholic/Protestant thing and it’s truly not my goal to cause strife or friction since I see us as all being brothers and sisters in Christ.

Again, thanks for clarifying and I totally understand how things can get misinterpreted. no problem!

I’m not sure I can add anything to the discussion. But, as someone who struggles with accepting that God loves me, the real me, not the never ending striving for perfection me I just wanted to say thank you.

This is a very rambling comment… just warning you now.

I resonated with Heather’s statement, “I became compassionate once I saw myself the sinner that I really was, and saw that the whole of mankind is in the same boat as I am. And that they need Jesus.”

When I think I’m better than I really am (which honestly is most of the time — pride is a huge weakness of mine), it is almost automatic for me to look down on and fail to show to compassion to the people around me who screw up. I jump to conclusions, read things that aren’t there, and assume the worst.

When I run headlong into my personal sinfulness and weaknesses, suddenly I see how we’re all together in this state of whatever-it-is. I’m actually no better than anyone else. And I’m more able to extend kindness, forgiveness, patience, and mercy to others… somehow knowing we’re all in this together helps me. But I suspect that I’m only able to see that in myself and see others the same way by the grace of God opening my eyes to see myself truly.

Also, I think you’re onto something when you say that being a sinner isn’t the same as being inherently or utterly/completely evil.

I’ve grown up in circles that believe that Adam and Eve’s sin in the garden did something permanent to all humans born since. I’ve heard that “something permanent” labeled “inherent sinfulness” and sometimes “inherent evil”. However, I think evil is much too strong a word.

I think (right now, that is, I’m definitely still in process and sorting things out too) that we’re born broken – with a weakness towards sin. And what is that weakness? When I am honest with myself, it is me-worship. I want the world to revolve around ME and everyone to do things MY way — ME on the throne. Maybe this is another way to say what Scott has referred to as “ruled by your passions” — letting my desires and dreams control me instead of God’s desires and plans for me.

It seems to be that making ME my priority is the opposite of what Jesus calls us to do in the Golden Rule: love the Lord our God and love our neighbor the way we love ourselves. So Jesus says that God is supposed to be my highest priority, and one way to show that he is that priority is to love the people he has created… but not just a little bit. I’m supposed to love them the same way I love myself. OK… that’s a tough one!

As a parent, I have most definitely seen this desire to be the center of the universe in my children. They go about world domination in different ways, and respond to being frustrated in their efforts at world domination in different ways, but they all show it. Isn’t that why a baby screams til he turns beet red when you insist on making him wait 2 seconds before feeding him so you can put something down? But, on the other hand, our children also show varying degrees of good qualities. So we are NOT born completely and utterly worthless, incapable of any good.

I like how someone earlier put it: we are good but we are broken. And we are born broken because of Adam and Eve’s sin. I look forward to the day when we are made whole again.

those are just a few ideas from where I’m at today.

Very thought-provoking post and comments. I enjoyed reading all of it.

Interesting. I’m reading a biography about Luther right now in order to more accurately understand the movement and reaction that was the Reformation. Right now it is describing the very beginning of his years as a professor after being a monk, and the very first traces we have of the thought process that eventually led to his controversial beliefs that were the founding of the Reformation.

It starts somewhat like you describe your own thought process, but in other ways opposite. He was taught that human beings are basically good – that there is ALWAYS that spark of life that enables a human to reach God, and that humans must be committed to the sacraments and the Church paths that ultimately lead that spark to grow until you are good enough for heaven.

And yet Luther, like you, confessed his sins constantly and wrestled deeply with guilt. His early notes on teaching the Psalm show him honestly saying he is angry with God for being fundamentally righteous, and that the word righteous in scripture always caught his attention and study. He found God’s righteousness to be impossible, because regardless of the good in humans or the good path they took, the righteousness of God seemed entirely unreachable, Luther still felt guilty, and he was angry and depressed by this.

I’m still reading about the transformation of his thoughts, but it’s interesting that for Luther, the identification of humans as utterly bad and unable to reach God (I was surprised how Calvinist he sounded here) actually frees from the guilt, because it means that there is NOTHING we can do, and that the righteousness of God as portrayed in the scripture must therefore be a righteousness offered and given to man THOUGH man still does not deserve it and will never begin to approach God with pure motivations on his own accord.

Anyways, basic old school theology there, but I found it interesting to compare your thought process here to the process Luther was going through in his early years. Some similar motivations but sort of the opposite path.

Wow. Already 36 comments! Sorry that this is a short week for me EE, I am spending most of my time trying to cram things into my day since I leave tomorrow for El Salvador.

My fundamental belief the humanity is good is rooted in the person of Jesus Christ, who despite what many modern Christians teach is our primary source of revelation. He is the lens through whom we come to the fullest understanding of what God is like and he is the the perfect example of humanity. If Christ is the perfect image of both God and Humanity, which is both attested to in the Bible and in the tradition of the Church Fathers, then we cannot believe anything but that we are created good. Jesus never sinned, he was all good and as the perfect example of what it means to be human, I take the stance that we are created to be like him.

There are many who argue that because of the fall, sin has become an essential part of humanity. The Christian faith has always rejected this idea. If sin were an essential part of humanity there would be no need for Christ to bring salvation and healing into the world.

I often ask people a simple question that illustrates the point. “When you sin, does it make you more human, or less human?” I have yet to find someone say more. Sin always has a negative effect on our lives and the lives of others which is why we should avoid it with the help of God.

Anyway, I still stand by my original response which is we are created good AND we need Christ. I am with Tom in saying also that even had there been no fall we would have needed Christ.

Thanks for opening the conversation again EE. I may not get to be part of much of it this week as I will be away from technology, but I hope it is a good dialogue.

Brooke: I loved this description. Thank you for sharing it.

But creation is not something that happened in the past. Each of us continues to be a creation of God or you are conceding to the secular divide of the Deist God. The question is therefore not did God create some hypothetical past human being good or evil, but did God create you good or evil? Did God create me good or evil? Did God create my children good or evil? That’s why I set the categories the way I did.

Part of this goes back to your earlier question. I don’t know your background within the context of Christianity, but every time I’ve heard people describe “post-fall” (whatever they might mean by that category) man as inherently evil or evil by nature, they are operating within some part of the framework of a comparatively recent (at least given the overall history of Christianity), specifically Protestant doctrine generally called “total depravity”.

While there are variations on it, the basic theme is that at the fall, the image of God in man was not merely tarnished or cracked, but was instead completely obliterated. No man in recorded human history (except, I suppose Jesus — which means he did not assume our nature — but that’s a problem for another day) has since been created and born in God’s image.

(There’s another problem in this idea since it abstracts the “image” of God into some abstract thing separate from the nature of man. The more precise language of the LXX says that mankind was created according to the image of God. In other words, it’s what we are, not something separate we carry inside us. That image is marred to the extent that we are marred, but you couldn’t obliterate the image in a human being without obliterating humanity itself.)

Tied up in that idea is usually the idea that an “unregenerate” human being is incapable of truly doing anything whatsoever that is truly and really good. You’ll have seen some of the various expressions of that peculiar and demonstrably (at least to my satisfaction) false notion in some of the comments on this post.

So the discussion here is basically whether human beings are created and born in the image of God with the potential to do both good and evil or created and born totally depraved with no innate capacity for good.

Now, it’s only once we get past that barrier that we can really begin to discuss ourselves as sinners. There’s the issue of “original sin” which is a point on which I’m firmly somewhere within the spectrum of Orthodox belief and thus would differ with most Protestants and probably some Roman Catholics. (The modern — as in post-Vatican II — Roman Catholic statements about Original Sin I find tricksy enough that I’m unsure if I agree or disagree. The way they have backed off the idea of limbo for unbaptized infants leads me to believe I might agree more than disagree, but I’m not at all certain.)

But this has become a complicated issue that truly has little to do with our recognition of ourselves as “sinners.” It’s also tied into what differing Christian groups mean when they use the term “salvation.” I use it in various ways, but ultimately I use it to mean union with God and with my fellow human beings without loss of personal identity. It’s hard sometimes to clearly hear what others mean, but there are obviously notes of other ideas about what being “saved” might mean in the different comments on this post.

“Sin” as it is used in Scriptures fundamentally means “missing the mark.” If the “mark” is to ultimately be one with God and with each other in the same way the Son is one with the Father, which I believe it clearly is, then we miss the mark when we shape or form ourselves into the likeness of anything that is not God.

Hmmm. And we have to step back again here. People often develop some abstract idea about what they think God is and then they say Jesus is God and cast him in that mold. Moreover, they say that whatever they imagine the image in which we were created also looks like the God they have imagined. From a Christian perspective, that’s backwards. As we see in Colossians, Jesus is the image of the invisible God. So it’s more accurate to say that God is Jesus — that is that we understand God only in and through Jesus of Nazareth. Moreover, since Jesus is the image of the invisible God, we are created according to the image of Jesus. Thus we read that our purpose is to be conformed to Christ, for only when that’s true can our cracked and tarnished image be said to be healed.

If we do not simply pray for mercy and recognize ourselves as the chief of sinners, that means that we are in essence thinking God that we are not as other men (or women). However, before we can honestly do that, we also have to recognize our own active participation in the fall and in the sin of all human beings. We are not islands. We share a common nature and are thus complicit in the actions of all. It’s not about some sort of blame or legal debt. It’s a recognition that, contrary to our desire to be like Cain, we are in fact our brother’s keeper. When my brother or sister misses the mark, I share in the responsibility.

Well, I tried to summarize a mountain of thought in a few paragraphs and probably failed miserably. But hopefully my poor efforts provided you some insight into the perspective and categories I am using when I write on this thread.

For some reason I referred to Scott as Tom in my previous comment. My apologies….tired today!

Let me begin by saying (again!) that I adore your blog. As one who went to a Catholic school growing up and, at the same time, attended a fairly conservative Baptist church, many of your themes resonate with me. Regarding this particular post, I think we walk a slippery slope when we see ourselves in an overly positive light (or as “inherently good”). Personally, I tend to be more comfortable in my sin with this mindset and easily forget my need for a Savior. Jesus becomes the spiritual cherry on life’s sundae, and not much more. I also have trouble reconciling what God’s Word says (Psalm 14:1-3, Romans 5:10, 1 John 4:10, much of what Paul speaks about, among others) in thinking otherwise. On the flip side, I do recognize the danger of falling into a pattern of self-loathing and hatred when we continually focus on our evil nature and the sin in our life. That can obviously be dangerous and harmful, too. Bottom line, as Christians, those who claim Christ, He (and only He) makes us good through His shed blood on the cross. Not any one particular church or belief system or theology. It is important that we are mindful of our original sinful state long enough to know what we were rescued from BUT it’s equally important that we not dwell there, suppressing our freedom in Christ and bringing about spiritual depression. Like most things, we need to find a healthy balance. And to continually be focused on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith.

Thanks, Jessica. OK, several people have referenced Ps. 14:1-3. I think we need to look at the context of this passage.

I’m no theologian and I’m not gonna get too technical. But it’s pretty clear from reading the WHOLE of Psalm 14 that it’s not a blanket condemnation of all humans.

Psalm 14:1 is clearly referencing an atheist–someone who says “there is no God.” Verse 2 and following expound on this. However, is the Psalmist really saying that there are NO human beings who are good? No. If that were true, then vs. 5 makes no sense: “God is in the generation of the righteous.”

If there is NOT ONE GOOD, then how is it possible there is a generation of the righteous?

Very clearly throughout Scripture there WERE righteous men and women (Noah, etc.).

I used to hinge my entire belief in “inherent evil” on Psalm 14 and Romans 3:10 (which is a quote of Ps. 14). I think maybe this was a Protestant thing–I would hang entire doctrines on a couple of verses rather than examining the whole counsel of Scripture and/or the writings of early Church fathers.

I do agree, however, that there is a danger in seeing ourselves in an overly positive light. I loved your description: “Jesus as the cherry on the sundae.” I agree. We need to take our sin seriously.

But there needs to be balance, etc. Thanks for chiming in. Great thoughts, Jessica!

Fr. M: if you get a chance, I would love to hear your thoughts on Psalm 14. See my comment to Jessica below. Am I reading that Psalm correctly?

p.s. will be praying for your trip to El Salvador! Keep us updated!

Isn’t it just a matter of semantics, though, Scott? What I mean when I say Christ makes us “good” is that we are reconciled through Him, not that he makes us a “good person.” Like Paul says, “I do what I know I shouldn’t and don’t do what I know I should” (ROUGH paraphrase, there). I’m still a bit of a train wreck, here on earth. BUT, I’m on a train headed towards eternal glory. That’s what is truly “good”

Very interesting post…reminds me of only a short while ago when I first read a debate of whether or not humans have a ‘sin nature’. I was raised to believe they did, but after the debate and the thoughts it raised, have concluded thus far that humans have a human nature yet it is very easy to sin. After all, Adam and Eve are not described as having been created with a sin nature, yet they sinned. So if they didn’t need a sin nature to sin, why do we? Long complicated thoughts stem from this topic, and verses get thrown back and forth with vehemence, so one is advised to google some of the links that do a great job of discussing the topic but as it relates to your question, EE, I think it highly possible that we are created simply human (that is, not evil, and even with some good qualities or potential) and have a very difficult time not going astray (like the sheep we are often likened to) when we aren’t functioning in a good relationship with Christ. We seem to be designed to need a ‘guide’ and lifegiver-Christ. We ‘miss the mark’ because it is so easy to do so when left to our own decisions. Is a driver ‘bad’ because he drives off the road? Or is he simply a driver who goofed for whatever reason? Is he ‘good’ when he stays on the road? Is Jesus-to drivers-somewhat akin to having satellite road guidance plus a mechanic, etc., all wrapped into one? Are we created good, or good with some neutral, or neutral, or bad, etc.? I am glad you are exploring this topic!

Our bondage to death, definitely. As a result of our separation from God.

“For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by His life.” Romans 5:10

“Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God” 1 Peter 3:18

“But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ” Ephesians 2:13

Even as Christians we will always have moral failures, right? So if Christ came to resolve those He didn’t accomplish it. But I may be misunderstanding your question. It’s been a long day…

So sad! I came in too late in this conversation and now it’ll take me days to catch up to all the good comments! Since I’ve only read about 1/3 of them please forgive me if I repeat someone else.

I was in college when it occurred to me that the phrase “mankind is inherently evil” is not found anywhere in Scripture. It is an interpretation by people with an agenda. Most often (in my experience) the agenda is to control you by fear or guilt or both.

Here are some passages that jumped into my mind while reading your post:
Genesis 1:13a “And God saw all that he had made and it was very good.”
Genesis 6:5 “The LORD saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.”
This passage infers that there was a time when not all thoughts were only evil all the time. It was a gradual process of people becoming slaves to their fleshly desires rather than to God’s desires. But even during that time there was a man who had DECIDED to stay true to God’s desires and his whole family, and consequently the human race, was saved through him. I also find it interesting that nothing is said about the righteousness of his sons or other members of his family.

The verses I hear most often to support this point of view are Isaiah 53:6, Romans 3:23, and Isaiah 64:6 which you mentioned. But context clearly describes that they are referencing our lack of ability to conjure up justification for our sins. However, that is different than inherently evil. There is nothing in those verses that convinces me that God views us as inherently evil. Especially considering that the whole theme of the Bible is that we are redeemable. Whole chapters of the Bible are dedicated to reasoning with us to do the right thing, to decide to leave our slavery to sin and choose a new master: God. Slavery implies that we are not inherently evil, but compelled by an evil master to do evil. Very rarely in the Bible is someone actually called Evil. Only when they have made a reputation for themselves, when they have made years of decisions to do the wrong thing and hardened their hearts to their conscience, then they are called evil. Otherwise, it is their actions that are called “evil.” Have you read Mere Christianity? C.S. Lewis’s views on “inherent evil” are very interesting and probably my favorite part of the book. Though I don’t agree with some of his theology, I really appreciate his tact when addressing these sorts of issues.

Elizabeth,

I’m so sorry I didn’t mean to sound patronizing. I think I spent too many years teaching college kids maybe and that annoying teacher voice just slips in sometimes: the need to raise questions, steer the conversation with leading questions or just get all pedantic with points that don’t really have any bearing on the conversation everyone else is having. Ugh!

Nor did I mean to imply that you were going to the other extreme. I do understand that you are questioning your previous assumptions and are not in danger of making that error. I suppose I’m just being pedantic because this is the discussion that always happens in my head when I see that question because my secular materialist students more frequently erred by holding that mankind is inherently good/there is no such thing as sin or evil/ we don’t need a savior.

I know my point was really tangential to yours and I should probably have kept my ramblings to myself. This is what too little sleep and teething babies does to my brain.

I don’t think the fall makes us “capable of bad”. As you say, the fact that our first parents were able to fall means they had the capacity to choose either good or evil. But what the fall does for us their descendants is it makes it harder for us to choose good. Our freedom to make a choice is damaged by concupiscence, the fact that our will is weakened so that evil is often more attractive to us than the good.

I’d agree that the nature of creation tells us about the nature of the Creator. Just as any human work of art tells us about the person who made it, our understanding of creation says something about who we think God is.

Uff da! I’m new to blogoland and I’m not sure what is appropriate…so I don’t know if replying to your reply is acceptable or not… but here it goes anyway.

I am wondering a few things about your response. Being created to have God’s love satisfy us more than everything in this world: I absolutely agree! But that doesn’t mean we’re deserving of it… or that we choose it all the time. If we did we wouldn’t need Jesus to forgive our sin and bring us to God, we could get there ourselves with our being “deserving” and “good enough”. It makes Jesus look very very satisfying.

And what have your children done to deserve your love? Besides simply existing?

I think in transferring that analogy to spiritual things the argument falls apart… Outside of having Jesus… no one is a child of God. We’re dead. Dead people don’t deserve anything. Dead people don’t love God. But when God breathes life into us… we still don’t deserve it… but that’s when we become his children… and that’s when his love for us is like yours for your children. Unconditional.

(Eph. 2:1, John 1:12,13)

I think the reason many see it as bondage is because your “liberation” is not rooted in seeing God in a new way… as glorious and merciful… as just and yearning that we find our utmost love in Him… and not in ourselves… and not in seeing yourself as good… as glorious… and good enough to be accepted by God. That will never fully satisfy you… not as much as undeserved grace in Jesus.

I know my wandering heart (I’m not simply talking about outward morality… I know I’m capable of doing good works and doing evil works… I’m talking about the heart that delights in Jesus above everything else… and from there moves into action)

I do resonate with SarahJ and your comments to her. I feel those same things too. When I see those types of feelings (ones I’ve had and have)… and see the type of pain you write with… I feel like Willie May in Tiger Rising (by Kate DiCamillo)… I just want to sit back with a cigarette and say, “I know you. I’ve known you for a long time. You hurt and pain at the hand of religion.” … I don’t smoke… but I might just do it if that situation arose…

Plug for Kate DiCamillo: Uff da!

I believe we are born inherantly good; as has been said above, in God’s image. But also born with free will, which is the ability to choose right from wrong, others over self. Temptation, the precurser of sin, comes from our awarness of our flesh, of “being of this world”.

I’ve never commented before. But I love reading your blog- it’s encouraging to find other Christian moms who are realistic about their walk. I do disagree- I believe we are inherently evil, which is what makes the cross all the more remarkable. It’s not that we were “kinda” worth saving, that 1% of us was worth it, but that there was/is nothing in us that is desirable. It gives God more glory (which is the point of everything) that if I do good then it’s Him giving me grace and mercy- or else I have a right to boast in my own goodness, even if it’s a lousy 1%.

Great post and discussion. Thanks

I linked to a blog post has some great stuff on the good/bad/corrupt debate. He makes some important distinctions between depravity and what he calls “worm theology” (the idea that we are no better than worms).
http://soulation.org/daleblog/2010/03/the-theology-of-spiritual-abuse-in-christianity-today.html

The only thing that I wanted to say is I know that having been brainwashed with “people inherently evil” mindset, it really affects our view of children. I have been in Christian parenting circles that dehumanize children and always look at them through that lens of “they are evil…they are manipulating you”…and these people can’t/don’t truly enjoy their kids when they view them as evil! (And truthfully, I still struggle with not viewing my own children this way, b/c teaching like this runs deep) I started believing a few years ago that we are a mixture of both with propensity for both…it not only gave me a love/compassion/grace for my fellow man and made me feel “one with humanity”, but also it healed my mothering heart in many ways.

I think it has to contain both to be so remarkable, though I don’t think I can come up with the “proper” terms. He not only loved us enough to die for us, but did it while we still sinned. Where in the gospels does Jesus say that it is more remarkable to die for a bad person? I forget … but that’s what I mean.

Amazing. And amazing that His beautiful grace covers my sins I will commit today. So humbling. So beautiful. So loving. So gracious. So life-changing.

When I realized that (and I don’t mean treating grace cheaply) it changed my life.

Elizabeth:

Forgive me for chiming in late. I am pressed for time at the moment and didn’t read all of the replies, so forgive me if I’m being repetitious, too.

But (from what I read in the comments) no one addressed key Scriptures that directly spell out humanity’s state before God’s grace brings us to life.

Humans are born evil. Our hearts are deceitful above all things (Jer. 17:9). Romans 3:9-18 says no one is righteous, no one does good. Romans 5:10 calls humans enemies of God. Psalm 51:5 says that David was sinful from birth; sinful from the time his mother conceived him.

I think there are some definitions that must be stated here. Sinful=evil. Why? Because sin is an affront to a holy God. Sin is evil. Sin is not holy or pure or righteous. There are no degrees of sin. Are we 80% “good” but have a “little sin” and therefore, the good outweighs the bad? No. APART FROM CHRIST, we are 100% sin.

Now, when we belong to Christ, our sin is paid in full. We grow in grace. We are capable of good things. Even those not in Christ are capable of good things, BUT that is only because of God’s common grace, NOT because of some inherent goodness in the person. I believe it was Jonathan Edwards who said that we (humanity) are only being held away from hell by a thread. If God were to remove his common grace and his presence from our world, would it be sunshine and roses because of all the inherently good people roaming around? No.

Yes, humans are created in God’s image and that is GOOD. Yes, our first parents were born holy and happy until the Fall. WHY did they fall? I don’t know. But when they fell, they plunged ALL of humanity into sin with them (Romans 5:12), which would require a PERFECT sacrifice for atonement and reconciliation.

I believe that an understanding of humanity must first begin with a theology of God. I believe that God is all-perfect, all-love, all-good, all-righteous. Anything, any emotion, any act by a human is automatically NOT GOD’s. Therefore, it’s totally depraved. AND because of such, our salvation required the ultimate perfect, law-keeping, God-pleasing sacrifice. In the end–in my opinion–an elevated view of humans eventually cheapens the work of Christ. If we are a “little bit good,” then what says we can’t be a little bit better? And a little bit more? Taking that line of thinking, then, why couldn’t we reach a point to either make atonement for our own sin OR to stop sinning altogether?

I suppose, compared to Hitler (or some other obviously EVIL character), most of us WOULD be considered basically good. But we are compared to God and his character and his standards (in the eternal sense of things). We are not God. We are evil. We aren’t as bad as we could be (we are all CAPABLE of grave atrocities), but we offend a holy God. There’s only two remedies for that offense: death ourselves or substitutionary death. Someone must atone for the sin (Christ): it’s me or Christ in my place.

Finally, this view of my humanity does not depress me. It’s liberating! My salvation is never contingent on how good or how bad I am. It sends me to my knees in joy and gratitude! Again, God doesn’t NEED me! But he CHOSE me! He loves me. He protects me. He KNEW me from the foundation of the world and ordained all my days. Me!

Elizabeth, I appreciate your post and your past experiences. I can’t imagine what you must have grown up in. I have always been among grace-centered Christians and have very little experiences with fundamentalism. So, I realize I come at this from a very different place.

I wrote on this topic at my blog last fall. If you don’t mind, I’ll post the link here, in case you are interested to read more. http://www.writingmomof3.com/2009/10/are-people-born-basically-good-or.html

I hope I haven’t rambled too much. I pray grace and peace for you and yours. If you want to discuss further, I’m always eager.

I always enjoy reading your blog.

I’m catching up with this after the Saturday Evening Blog post, so you probably won’t catch my reply. That’s OK. The truth is, of all the things I’ve been over the course of my life, a materialist (of any sort) is not one of them. I have family and friends who are, so I’m not entirely unfamiliar with the perspective. I’ve just never been inclined in that direction. Similarly, I’ve never been particularly captivated by the secular perspective (which is not the same as either materialist or atheist). But I’m not surprised it’s a common issue for many in our world.

Exactly. I’ve seen more of that in the years since I’ve become more ‘Christian’ than I ever imagined I would — even from people who are dear to me. It breaks my heart.

I’ve never viewed my children as ‘evil’ in any way. I instinctively reacted with utter revulsion to this idea when I encountered it. It makes me sad that some people really believe their children are ‘evil’ and consider that a Christian perspective.

I am not sure if I’ll be able to add very much here, everyone’s comments are so well said, but as a psychodynamically trained child therapist (Freudian – don’t hate me!), I believe that all people are born with the potential for both good and evil BEHAVIOUR. I don’t believe that we are ‘inherently’ either ‘good or bad’ and given the right (or wrong?) circumstances, I think we all have the potential to behave in both depraved and wonderful ways. That potential, to me, is what being born ‘sinful’ means. God is not capable of sinning – we are, so we need him. I’d even go as far as to say that I believe people who commit crimes are not inherently evil, although some of their deeds most certainly are. God created us as his priceless and precious treasures, regardless of our deeds and inner state, and if this were not so, why would he have loved us enough to die for us? HE thinks we’re worth dying for. He died for the criminals too.. our ‘goodness or badness’ is to me not as meaningful as God’s love.