A Wicked World

We often say, among ourselves, that this is a wicked world (except, of course, for the perfectly pious bit we occupy and have control over!) But is it true? I am going to assume a debating stance, arguing both for and against the motion that this is a wicked world, and then invite you all to discuss and vote on it.

MOVED: That this is a wicked world

First, then, what is to be said…

FOR the Motion

There is scriptural, theological, philosophical,and empirical support for the view that this is a wicked world. 

In Scripture, John and Paul in particular weigh in with the views that the world is under the sway of evil; that the very age we live in is evil; that a spiritual battle of good vs. evil is raging all around us; that if you’re on the side of good in this battle, better watch out; and that the root cause of all this is the sinfulness of fallen Man.

• John said: “We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one.” (1 John 5:19) So if the devil controls the world, as John says, wickedness must rule, right?
• Paul agrees with John that Satan is in charge: “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light….” (2 Corinthians 4:4) Satan’s acts of wickedness include keeping some of us in the dark, so we need to watch out, or “Redeem the time, because the days are evil” as he puts it in Ephesians 5:16. And by the way, it’s not as easy as fighting bad men: We’re fighting the very devil himself: “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age…” (Ephesians 6:12)
• Peter is equally alarmist: “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.” (1 Peter 5:8) 
• Needless to say, of course, God already saw it all coming. Wickedness was already everywhere in Genesis 6:5: “Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”

So Scripture seems to be for the motion that this is indeed a wicked world. 

Theology, unsurprisingly perhaps, stands in pretty much the same place. It too talks of original sin, of our total depravity, of the spread of human corruption to the whole of creation, of the battle between God and the Devil, between Darkness and Light; of the fact that the battle has not yet been won:  

• St. Augustine taught that humanity inherited a sinful nature due to Adam and Eve’s fall. This original sin affects every person and results in a world inclined toward wickedness.
• Martin Luther and John Calvin espoused a doctrine of “total depravity” which asserts that sin has corrupted every aspect of human nature, making people incapable of choosing good over evil without divine intervention. This pervasive sinfulness contributes to a wicked world.
• These various theologians also hold that the fall of man affected not just humanity but also corrupted the entire creation.
• Augustine and Martin Luther discuss the concept of two kingdoms in conflict—the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Satan. The world’s systems are often seen as part of the kingdom of darkness.
• George Eldon Ladd, Oscar Cullmann, N. T. Wright, and Anthony A. Hoekema are among theologians who acknowledge that while Christ has initiated the kingdom of God, the fullness of its realization awaits His return and until then, the world remains in a state of wickedness and conflict. 
• Finally, it’s noteworthy that Anabaptist and Pietist traditions emphasize separation from the world due to its inherent wickedness, and advocate for a lifestyle that resists worldly influences.

Philosophers who have weighed in on the inherent wickedness of the world include

• Thomas Hobbes, whodescribed life on earth as “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” He believed humans to be inherently self-interested and in need of strong governance to curb their baser instincts; and 
• Friedrich Nietzsche, whoviewed the world as driven by a “will to power,” often manifesting in domination and conflict.

Last but hardly least: The news media provide a deluge of empirical support for the motion that this is a wicked world, with reports of wars, terrorism, and civil unrest, and the violence and evil actions they engender. They also report social injustice everywhere—racism, inequality, and oppression that show wickedness is embedded in societal structures. Not least, they report the ongoing destruction of the environment due to greed and negligence, suggesting an evil disregard for one’s neighbor and for the common good.

In sum: There is significant scriptural, theological, philosophical, and empirical support for the motion that this is a wicked world.

AGAINST the Motion

All that sure seems compelling, does it not? Unfortunately for those who believe in a wicked world (but fortunately for the rest of us) it is not quite the complete picture. Of course we must acknowledge that the world is in a fallen state, but let’s not forget God’s redemptive work through Jesus Christ. Believers are called to be “salt and light” (Matthew 5:13-16), working to bring about transformation and reflecting God’s love in the world. The presence of evil does not negate, does not overwhelm, does not overpower the goodness that can be found through God’s grace and the actions of those who follow Him in practice if not in name.

To assert that we live in a wicked world is to suggest that wickedness is inherent to the very fabric of our existence. Yes, evil and suffering exist, but labeling the world as inherently wicked overlooks and even, it seems to me, denies the fundamental goodness of creation, disregards the pervasive presence of love and compassion, and dismisses the redemptive work of God. 

The Book of Genesis is the first evidence that goodness, not evil, is inherent to God’s Creation. God saw that his creations of light, the land and the sea, the vegetation, the sun and moon, the fish and the birds, and the land animals were good, and after creating Adam, he saw that the whole of his creation was very good (Genesis 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). This is the most foundational of all scriptural assertions and it emphasizes that the world, as created by God, is inherently good. Evil was present from early days—the serpent was in the garden with Adam and Eve before the Fall—but it was powerless as long as Adam and Eve did not become its conduit and accomplice, and they could not do that if they could not even tell it apart from anything else. Adam and Eve decided they wanted to be able to tell it apart—to discriminate. Thus, evil entered the world through human choice, not because the world itself is inherently wicked.

Even in the presence of evil and suffering, good is not overwhelmed. Acts of kindness, love, and compassion take place all the time, everywhere. People volunteer to help the less fortunate, communities come together in times of crisis, and individuals make personal sacrifices for the well-being of others. These modern-day Good Samaritans reflect the goodness embedded in humanity and the world. If the world is inherently wicked, how do you explain such widespread goodness?

Humans are created in the image of God, according to Genesis 1:27. This implies that every person possesses inherent dignity, worth, and at least the capacity for goodness. We are more than just bundles of wicked potential waiting to explode. We are all capable of great good. To me, our potential for righteousness and moral integrity flatly contradicts the notion of an inherently wicked world.

Our potential for good, like our potential for evil, is a direct consequence of our free will, which is governed by us, not by the devil. He might seek to get us to choose evil over good, but we make the decision. We have had the freedom to choose between good and evil ever since we learned to tell the difference, which we did when Adam and Eve made the wrong choice when the snake tempted them. God had specifically commanded them not to take that choice. It follows, then, that evil manifests itself not because the world is wicked, but because we made a bad and—were it not for God’s grace—irredeemable choice. Our ability to tell good from evil works both ways: It shines a light equally on good and evil. That does not make this a wicked world. The wickedness—and the goodness—of the world depend on where we choose to allow our gaze to rest.

In any case, however bad it might be, God has been actively involved in redeeming and restoring the world ever since the Fall. His sending of Jesus Christ is a testament to God’s commitment to salvation and reconciliation. John 3:16 famously declares God’s love for the world and His desire for its salvation, not its condemnation. The work of the Holy Spirit to rest our gaze on God, which inspires goodness and transformation in individuals and societies, is ongoing. Would you say it has been a total failure? I would not.

We in this class have often talked about the presence of Heaven on earth. Jesus taught that the Kingdom of God is present among us (Luke 17:21). That being so, how can divine influence, through the Holy Spirit, not permeate the world? How can it not foster justice, peace, and love? Look beyond the cataclysmic headlines, and you will see movements towards social justice, humanitarian efforts, and the spread of the Gospel everywhere. These are indications of God’s active presence in the world, countering the forces of evil. Is God losing? I don’t think so.

It has been argued that sin prevails when God withdraws, and the world has been likened to a war zone where evil fills the void left by God. But Scripture assures us that God has not abandoned the world. He has not and cannot ever withdraw. In Matthew 28:20, Jesus promises, “I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” The notion of God withdrawing is inconsistent with the biblical portrayal of a God who is ever-present and engaged with His creation.

It is also inconsistent with the countless acts of kindness and generosity that occur daily throughout the world. It’s inconsistent with ongoing movements such as “Effective Altruism” a controversial movement that purports to “maximize” goodness, and with advances in human rights, education, and healthcare. All are positive developments and all are contrary to the notion of an inherently wicked world. 

Not least, psychological studies of empathy and prosocial behavior have identified that we have natural tendencies toward cooperation and altruism. 

Overall, then, it is evident in Scripture, in literature, and in the world around us that the human spirit has an underlying strength and goodness in the form of the Holy Spirit that enables people to overcome suffering and reject evil. Think of Job. Think of Fay.

It’s true that suffering and death are realities of life, but suffering and death do not constitute the sum total of the human experience. Hobbes was wrong. What a miserable existence it would be if he was right, if our lives were nasty, brutish, and short! I would bet that all of us in this class find joy, purpose, and fulfillment in our lives and in this world, despite the existence of evil in it and—yes—in us to some extent. The human spirit is resilient. It has demonstrated the capacity to overcome adversity. And it testifies to a world where good not only can but does triumph over evil.

So in defiance of the motion, let me conclude by affirming that it’s not a wicked world. Recognizing only the wickedness of the world is myopic and negative, and does no good at all. It’s a good world, by and large. For sure, we cannot and should not deny the existence of evil and suffering. We must acknowledge it, if we are to do anything about it. Absent original sin, we wouldn’t need to do anything about evil because we would not even recognize it. But now we can recognize it, and we have to deal with that. 

How, you ask? The fundamental goodness of creation is what enables us to deal with it. All around us we see pervasive and sometimes even indiscriminate acts of love and compassion. The inherent dignity of humans made in God’s image and God’s own ongoing redemptive work all point to a world which, despite its flaws, is not wicked at its core. Recognizing the goodness in the world encourages us to contribute positively to it, and to align ourselves with God’s purpose of restoration and reconciliation.

Before we take a vote on the motion, let’s discuss it. 

First, what difference does it make in our lives and behavior whether we consider the world to be inherently wicked or inherently good? 

Second, is the world getting better, or worse, or is it staying the same as in ancient times? 

Third, if it is getting better or worse, why and is there anything we can do to influence the change? 

Fourth, what (if any) other questions does the topic raise in your mind?

Donald: The question about the world being wicked is interesting, and that’s probably how we tend to describe it. Another way to look at it is that the world is sin-filled. If sin has entered the world and we are born into sin, we are sinners from birth. So, because of the nature of sin and us being sinners, does that collectively suggest that the world is wicked? The world itself, I guess that’s the question—can the world be wicked? Or is it the people in the world who are wicked? 

Another question I have, which parallels that, is: do you really think people choose to be wicked? Do people choose evil? Do people choose selfishness? I think selfishness and greed are at the root of most challenges in human behavior. But then, if all people were good, would the world be good? Are we talking about the people, not the world itself?

Don: I’m not sure that I can even tell whether something is evil or good. Before this discussion, and before we had a lengthy conversation about grace, I would have told you that the young Jordanian woman we talked about, who developed metastatic tumors in her brain and died at a very young age, was experiencing something terribly evil. And yet, even in that situation, she taught us a lot about grace and goodness. So it’s hard for me to know what the definition of evil is, and how it compares to the definition of good. It seems that we are just as confused as Adam and Eve were. The distinction between good and evil seems to be something left to the Divine, not to us.

Sharon: It seems to me that part of this is about perspective. We know that some people naturally see the cup as half full, while others see it as half empty. I believe that if you look for the best in people and in circumstances, you’ll see the best. If you’re looking for evil, you’ll find it. As a social worker, I try to focus on the strengths of a person and minimize their negative choices, viewing them as a child of God. You can look at prisons and see them as full of evil, or you can see prisoners as people who didn’t have the opportunities that I had. But for the grace of God, there go I. 

So I think perspective, and using the lens of Christ to see the world, is crucial. For example, I was involved in research during the Kosovo War, interviewing women refugees who had been sexually assaulted and had seen their husbands slaughtered. What amazed me was the amount of resilience, even in the youngest children who had experienced the worst atrocities. Again, I think perspective is key—hopefully, we look at things through Christ’s lens, viewing the evil around us through the lens of our Christian worldview and experience. So, perspective is really important in this discussion.

David: I think perspective is fundamental. It’s a matter of where we direct our gaze—on the good or on the evil. To me, claiming that this is a wicked world means you are directing your gaze at the wrong thing. To the extent that Christianity, or any other religion, spends its time fulminating against evil rather than promoting the good it sees around us, it is making a terrible mistake.

Michael: If we’re not supposed to distinguish between good and evil, and instead try to see things how God sees them, the problem is—as David mentioned—that when God created everything, He saw goodness in it. How different is “goodness” from “good”? Because once you see good, then you start seeing evil. But if you see goodness, is that something different from both good and evil?

Donald: It’s almost like we have to separate it out. People can be selfish, and they can be greedy, but I don’t know if that’s because we’re born into a selfish world, or because they choose to be that way, or because that’s what they focus on. I think most of us in this class have had good things happen in our lives, no question about it. But there are some people who wouldn’t be able to say that. Would they say it’s a world thing or a personal thing? If someone is developing or acquiring cancer, where does that come from? So if cancer is out there and it affects good people and bad people, selfish people and wicked people, then we would probably have to say that the world is wicked—or at least that it certainly does not bring about goodness. So, people are blessed. That’s an interesting word. Blessed people talking about wickedness—that’s an interesting concept.

Reinhard: I believe people have the potential to do both good and evil. I always think back to the beginning of society. If we look at the first people, interestingly enough, there may have been 10 or 200 million people at that time. Then, of course, the first flood came. I was looking the other day at the timeline—1655 years after the creation, when the flood hit the Earth. I noticed that Noah’s grandfather, Methuselah, died the same year as the flood. I don’t know if he died a few days or months before the flood, but it’s possible he died during it. I think God taught the early people, the first humans, through spoken commandments.

But look at the end of those millions of people—most of them, including many of Noah’s close relatives, were destroyed in the flood. Genesis 6 mentions the wickedness of the people. I think that if people are left without law or authority, the tendency is for society to engage in wicked things. Without law, there is no standard for how people should behave. When law was given—first through oral tradition, then later through written commandments—God saw that without it, people would naturally tend toward wickedness in His eyes.

That’s why there has to be some authority, in this case God, to provide the law, especially moral law. Look at the Ten Commandments: God emphasizes, “Do not do this, do not kill, do not steal,” and so on. God knows that without these laws, human tendencies will lead to wickedness. And that’s why we have the authority of God and His law, especially moral law. We can see this throughout the history of the world, leading up to the redemption through the grace of God when Jesus came.

I think, again, that humans have the potential to do good. We were created perfect in God’s eyes. But without knowing God, people living in a society can easily fall into evil, like in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah. Again and again, we see that the tendency of humans to do evil is great. But if people follow the law, they can do the right thing and yield to God’s will.

In modern times, we’ve learned a lot and seen a lot, and that’s why we have laws by the state and government to prevent criminal acts. And of course, there are sanctions and punishments. In the Old Testament, the emphasis was often on reward and punishment for violators. I think “wickedness” refers to going against God’s will, like Adam and Eve when they rebelled. That was considered wicked in God’s eyes.

So, we live in this world knowing God and knowing His law, which is an advantage. But there are people who may not know God’s law, perhaps in certain parts of the world where they’ve never heard of Him. Even in those areas, though, they likely have their own laws, like what is mentioned in Romans 2, where people who have not heard of God still have a supreme being they follow. That’s just part of being human, I think.

Don: Why do you think we naturally gravitate toward the bad? I’m thinking now of David’s comment about the media. Why is it that bad news seems to sell better than good news? Or maybe that’s an incorrect assumption, but it certainly seems that, in the public domain, the discussion of bad things takes precedence over discussions of good things.

David: I think it’s a temptation that follows the ability to discriminate—the ability we acquired at the Fall. We like to exercise that ability by pointing out evil when we see it. Somehow it’s more titillating than seeing acts of goodness. It’s more shocking. But I think we gravitate more toward the news of evil rather than toward evil itself. I enjoy murder mysteries, but I do not like murder. I’m not so sure we inherently gravitate toward evil; in fact, I think it’s the opposite. But yes, we do seem to gravitate toward news of evil rather than news of good.

Take, for example, the Ten Commandments. “Thou shalt not kill.” Why did God make that commandment? It’s not necessarily because killing is inherently wrong—there may be situations where killing is justified. We just don’t know. We can’t discriminate any better than the workers in the parable of the weeds, who wanted to pull out the weeds, but the farmer told them no, because they couldn’t tell the difference between the wheat and the tares. We think we can discriminate, and to some extent, we can—but we do it imperfectly. That’s the problem. So we end up drawn to bad news on TV. 

I like to think that, before the Fall, if Adam and Eve had access to Fox News, they wouldn’t have watched it. It wouldn’t have interested them. They would’ve ignored it because all the mayhem would have meant nothing to them before the Fall.

Michael: Psychology has a concept called inherent negativity bias. We’re biased toward the negative. From an evolutionary perspective, you can explain it by saying that focusing on the negative helps us be more protective. If there’s something harmful lurking nearby, being attuned to the negative can make us more careful and attentive. That’s why we’re biased toward the negative. But I also think the news overlooks how much positive news affects us as humans. So I don’t think negativity bias fully explains it, because they do show stories of good things—people doing good, local heroes. But it doesn’t seem to get the same emphasis, even though I see it as equally effective as negative news.

Donald: Reinhard’s point about authority is an important part of this conversation. Without authority, you’d have chaos. However, I don’t think it’s just a matter of news. I think it’s about what people want to consume. Look at the programming we have—100, 200 television channels to watch. How many of them offer content that focuses on goodness? Hallmark might be the only one that claims to be something light and uplifting—what we might describe as “syrupy,” where everything ends… well, like a Hallmark card.

Why don’t we call everyone who does good a hero? If goodness does somewhat prevail, there’s a lot of good out there, but we don’t label all those people heroes. I’m a little perplexed by this conversation. I think authority is an important part of it. If you want to see where human behavior goes without authority, just look at what happens in Florida after a storm, when the governor has to speak out and warn people not to loot homes. Why would that even have to be mentioned? People will still do bad things, even in the face of disaster. And where did that storm come from? That wasn’t caused by humans.

Don: Are we all heroes in a way, and the media just doesn’t show it enough? They can easily show the bad side of us, and even religion does that. But are we missing something by not seeing the heroism in us? As you mentioned, there’s a shortage of heroes in the news, but is that actually true?

Donald: It’s like what we do now with children—no one loses, no one wins, everybody gets a star. What’s a hero in that context? If most people do good things, then we wouldn’t call them heroes. We’d just describe it as normal human behavior.

Don: Maybe part of the answer is that there’s so much heroism that doesn’t make the news.

C-J: A hero is somebody who stands up at their own peril. Doing good works is just how things should be—like helping someone lift a heavy log. But if you go into a burning house that was intentionally set on fire to cause harm, that’s a hero. That’s the distinction.

Donald: A hero goes beyond their own self-interest in doing good—that’s what makes someone a hero. I heard a young preacher giving his first sermon recently. He used illustrations on the screen—little drawings to represent what he was talking about. It stuck with me because I’m a visual person. He described something like a magnetic force. If sin prevails, the pull between the subject and the devil is strong. Goodness, he said, is the opposite—pulling us toward God. Some people are just lost, and they don’t feel anything pulling them toward goodness.

C-J: After living here for as long as I have and trying to step in and rescue people, I’ve come to the conclusion that those who will, will—and those who won’t, won’t. So I leave the ones who won’t up to God. I’m not going to fuss with it. I’m not going to get all worked up, cry, or judge them. I just say, “If that’s what you want, fine, but don’t bring it here.”

Some people are worth rescuing because you can see respect and goodness in them, despite their circumstances. Like recently, I had some squatters here. I spent two and a half hours cleaning up this grove, and twelve hours later, there they were again. What I had cleaned up was indescribable. I had to use a leaf rake and a shovel—I wouldn’t even bend over to pick it up because it was so bad. So, I woke them up and said, “Excuse me, is this okay? It’s been less than twelve hours, and we’ve got clutter all over the place again.” They didn’t respond, but I could tell they were IV drug users.

I told them, “Go back to sleep, and we’ll talk later,” which we did. I asked them not to make a mess because this grove could easily become an encampment. I suggested they move further down, and they chose to set up right across from my house near the track. I thought, “Well, okay.” When we talked, the guy shared a bit of his story, and I asked, “How long do you think you’ll be here?” He said, “I don’t know, maybe a week.” So I asked, “Is that a five-day week or a seven-day week? And if you’re going to stay, do you think you could clean up every day?” He said, “Yeah, we can do that.”

They had this large green garbage tote filled with personal belongings, and they’d found a mattress and brought it over. It was all haphazardly thrown together—didn’t look great, but they were respectful and kind, so I let it go. By the seventh day, they were gone. They left behind a lot of stuff, and the woman left me a parting “gift” from her body. I thought to myself, “That’s okay.” She was angry because I didn’t give them enough of what they needed, but I accepted it because that’s who they had become. That’s not who they were born to be, but society had judged them, and they couldn’t get out of that hole.

But I also wasn’t going to let them stay in my neighborhood and become a magnet—to use your word—where people could say, “Oh, she said it was okay, she doesn’t mind.” Yes, I do mind. I was gracious while they were finding another place, and I cared, but I wasn’t going to change a thing. The guy clearly knew he had other options. He just didn’t want them. He didn’t believe in them. That was the trade-off.

So, I cleaned out the camp and put what was left to the curb to be picked up. Yesterday morning, it was taken away. A neighbor saw me doing it and gave me this look, like, “Why did you even invite them?” It’s just so unlike me, Connie. But for some reason, I thought, “There but for the grace of God go I.” But I didn’t want to stay there. Does that make sense?

Anonymous: I think the way I’ve learned to see things through God’s eyes is to believe that everything is good. I don’t worry about the world. Yes, there’s a lot of trouble out there, but everything that happens to me in my life is good because it’s God’s will for me. I had to learn this the hard way. I used to resist and think everything was bad, that I was just unfortunate. But now I believe that everything in my life happens for good, and I praise God for that. He’s a good God, and everything He allows is good. Everything He plans for His children is always good, even when we don’t like it. It’s always for the good.

C-J: I see the value in that, in terms of God’s Holy Spirit working within us as a tool, and I also believe God is working to enlarge our relationships with Him, humanity, and our environment. I can acknowledge that, and I do. When something comes my way and I think, “What was that about?” I remind myself that God is good, and we can’t see around the curve. So I work within the limits, or guardrails as Donald would say, that keep me safe. Desperate people will do desperate things, and I do believe some people aren’t wired right. Some have sociopathic tendencies or explosive disorders, but I still have to share the world with them. The least I can do is stay out of their way or respect their space and hope I don’t have to confront them any closer than arm’s distance. That’s the best I can do.

Donald: A weapon is an interesting thing to bring into this conversation. What causes someone to use a weapon in such a horrendous way? I mean, they’re not wired right—you’re exactly right. Something’s off. Is that just plain old sin? Is it bad choices? Some alignment of circumstances that went wrong? Some human behavior is just beyond understanding, like you said, Connie. Why do I even have a role in this conversation when we’re talking about things that are so bizarre? It’s not even a matter of focusing on it or not. Sometimes it’s just plain old sin prevailing.

C-J: I think brain chemistry plays a big role, and trauma can push it toward a more dangerous perspective just for survival. So if you have two people, one bipolar and the other schizophrenic, creating children, their genome is already high-risk. Then add the trauma from their worldview, how they perceive life, and what kind of parenting and survival skills they bring into the real world. Some might call them scavengers, taking whatever they can from society without seeing it as a gift. But how much of that is on them, and how much is due to the trauma they’ve endured just trying to survive?

My youngest brother’s wife was a paranoid schizophrenic. She survived but refused to take her meds. Interestingly, she was at her best when she was pregnant, so we know there was a hormonal factor. Later in life, after menopause, she was better able to interact with a wider variety of people, not just family who understood her limits. We had to ask for permission before giving her a hug, wait for her responses—her language would degrade, or she’d isolate herself—but she had this incredible capacity to love. She was kind, loving, generous, a hard worker, and loyal. It takes a lifetime to manage these things, and my brother was with her for over 32 years until her death. She brought so much good to our family, leaving her mark not just through her genetics but in the way she loved and lived.

Her daughter and grandson also struggled with mental health, but when you know how to nurture it, not condemn it, the trauma lessens. Instead of judgment—“You think I’m crazy or have no value”—you say, “You have value, and we’re here for you.” Even if that means going through the process over and over—in and out of rehab, in and out of doctors’ offices—eventually the person starts to believe that you really love them. It’s like caring for a wounded animal that’s been beaten or forgotten. Wellness isn’t a straight line.

Look at me last week. Something in me was so afraid I couldn’t tolerate it. Everything in me said, “It will never happen here. It can’t happen here.” It wasn’t intentional, but it was my truth. What David said may have been true, but I couldn’t allow that degree of fear into my life. Wellness has to be nurtured daily by the people we trust to love us and see who we are inside, beyond what the world sees. Without God, I couldn’t survive. Literally, I couldn’t survive without God and the spiritual community.

David: It seems the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil isn’t all the serpent cracked up to be. It was supposed to give us the power to discriminate between good and evil, so why do we make such a poor job of it?

* * *