Evil or Fallen?
Last weekend, the Techie Layman and I saw Ravi Zacharias live at the Gateway Cathedral in Staten Island. As someone who looks for truth, that is to say, Orthodoxy, being expounded upon in its various forms, I can honestly say that I find much of what Ravi Zacharias preaches to be good and true as far as he is an apologist for Christianity and an excellent refuter of atheism. He is in the tradition of the greats GK Chesterton and CS Lewis, though I'm not sure he leans quite as Traditionally as they would. I can be fairly certain that the attendees at Gateway Cathedral the two nights I went weren't exactly a high Church crowd, but nonetheless, good God-fearing people all the same. Did I mention we got a picture (or two) with him???
The Friday night, the agenda was about the need for apologetics in the 21st Century. Ravi Z. went through an elaborate diagnosis of humanity in post-modern society (are we still post-modern? maybe it's post-post-modern by now?). One of his best points was also the one in which his Protestantized background really showed clearly. He said that modern society negates the fact that man is, and I paraphrase, inherently flawed, and evil in his very heart.
Now, I won't say that I didn't entirely understand exactly what he meant. He was simply juxtaposing the ideals of socialism, communism, and various other forms of radical liberalism, and the Rousseauean idea that man is indeed perfectable on his own with the real world observation that no amount of effort can make man any better a creature on his own. For the traditional Christian, only Christ can make man perfectable by being identified with Him.
However, and I am simply bringing up this point for the sake of discussion, in saying that man is not perfectable on his own, I do not believe that man can also be said to be inherently evil. Does God create evil things? It is our understanding that God created man exactly as He wished, and it was the misuse of free will which made man not evil, but fallen, that is to say, susceptible to freely choosing evil. This distinction between man being a fallen creature and man being an evil creature is indicative of the difference between the Orthodox notion of theosis (this word is SO not a cliche by now) and the Western ideal of justification in a legalistic sense before God.
The Friday night, the agenda was about the need for apologetics in the 21st Century. Ravi Z. went through an elaborate diagnosis of humanity in post-modern society (are we still post-modern? maybe it's post-post-modern by now?). One of his best points was also the one in which his Protestantized background really showed clearly. He said that modern society negates the fact that man is, and I paraphrase, inherently flawed, and evil in his very heart.
Now, I won't say that I didn't entirely understand exactly what he meant. He was simply juxtaposing the ideals of socialism, communism, and various other forms of radical liberalism, and the Rousseauean idea that man is indeed perfectable on his own with the real world observation that no amount of effort can make man any better a creature on his own. For the traditional Christian, only Christ can make man perfectable by being identified with Him.
However, and I am simply bringing up this point for the sake of discussion, in saying that man is not perfectable on his own, I do not believe that man can also be said to be inherently evil. Does God create evil things? It is our understanding that God created man exactly as He wished, and it was the misuse of free will which made man not evil, but fallen, that is to say, susceptible to freely choosing evil. This distinction between man being a fallen creature and man being an evil creature is indicative of the difference between the Orthodox notion of theosis (this word is SO not a cliche by now) and the Western ideal of justification in a legalistic sense before God.
posted by street theologian @ 9:12 PM
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home