A Question of Morality

Are humans inherently a “good” species or are they “bad” by default? We all seem to have a sense of what is moral, but did we always “know”, or did we just learn our behaviors? If it is just a matter of knowing what is good, what makes some people choose to cause harm or distress to others intentionally? And what of unintentional causes of harm or distress? Are we culpable for these? I am sure you have all heard or met Christians loudly proclaiming that we are all sinners by default and there is just no way to be exempt from this status. If scripture says we “fall short of the glory of God”, does this mean we are to blame? And just what does this mean anyway? As a Christian, this question plagues me, especially when I see all the goodness in people who go out of their way to help others. I certainly can’t see them as “bad” people. We may just take the easy way out and say that sometimes people are good and sometimes they’re bad. But even this “falls short” of an acceptable explanation since it doesn’t address the aforementioned question. Why ask this question in the first place? Well different people interpret scripture in different ways. But what does this excerpt from Romans 2:12 mean? “When outsiders who have never heard of God’s law follow it more or less by instinct, they confirm its truth by their obedience. They show that God’s law is not something alien, imposed on us from without, but woven into the very fabric of our creation. There is something deep within them that echoes God’s yes and no, right and wrong.” So “goodness” is “woven into the very fabric of our creation.” Would that not indicate that "goodness" is in us by default as well? Perhaps the English language is severely lacking in clarity. Let's try Hebrew: Khata is the word for "sin,' and can be defined as a "failure," "missing the mark," and more importantly, not prioritizing human life. But Many Christians feel that proclaiming, “You are a sinner!” will suffice to convince others to follow Jesus, however, I know firsthand that most people do not accept this accusation at face value. Accusations often lead to combat, a highly destructive situation, and guilt, which is damaging and detrimental to a healthy relationship with God. This is rarely understood, nor is the cryptic statement, “You are a sinner” explained satisfactorily before the audience loses interest and walks away feeling indignant. Here are some common reactions:

1. I try my best, but my failures disappoint everyone. Am I a bad person?

2. Who are you to accuse me of being sinful? You’re nothing but a hypocrite!

All good and valid responses. So why would Christians choose to call everyone sinners? Is this fair? Well, there could be a logical explanation for this sentiment. Let’s start with the beginning:

Before there were people or even life on planet Earth for that matter, there was God. We all know the story: Adam was created first, then Eve. Now we could argue that that because God is perfect and complete, his creation cannot be greater that the Creator. Therefore, his creation is imperfect. “Falling short of the glory of God” simply means, not better that the Creator but lesser. “In his image” does not mean equal to Him but similar to Him. Though Adam and Eve were sinless, they were not perfect nor equal to God. But then they did it – they ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. But what exactly did they do in layman’s terms? It was forbidden to try to compete with their maker, God. Although this was impossible in the first place, they were convinced by the serpent that they would become equal to God if they just ate the apple from the tree that they were told not to touch. It was not just disobedience, but a strong compulsion to “know” what the Creator knows. What would they “know”? They would have the ability to discern good from evil. In other words, morality was borne in Adam and Eve. So why is this so bad? Well, prior to the “original sin”, they were not aware of whether or not their actions were good or bad since they were in perfect relationship with God and depended on Him for everything (even discernment). Only God had the authority to judge human transgressions. But Adam and Eve with their newfound morality would begin to judge right from wrong. They were no longer in a “perfect” relationship with God. Conscience and self-consciousness are also borne and with them a Pandora’s box of negative emotions like guilt, hypocrisy, deception, accusation, shame, selfishness and more. We can now see that “sins” are not simply laws that have been broken, but the result of not relying on God for the solution to our problems. But not relying on Him, means relying on our own poor and “imperfect” judgement. To paraphrase Jesus, do not try to point out the errors of others before looking at fixing your own errors. “Every time you criticize someone, you condemn yourself. It takes one to know one. Judgmental criticism of others is a well-known way of escaping detection in your own crimes and misdemeanors”. It has always been God’s place to judge and always will be.

Many seekers have asked, “Why would God create humans with a tendency to make mistakes and disobey him? The answer is that He is a forgiving God. We can’t say “God is Love” without acknowledging his capacity for forgiveness. Jesus had come to Earth to change the rules by forgiving all transgressions or “sins”. Through his teaching we learn that God’s true nature is one of patience, kindness and grace. In fact, we know that in dying on a cross, a most cruel and unusual punishment, Jesus showed us the lengths to which He would go to forgive all of humanity. At the same time, he required no more from us than to accept his forgiveness. As long as we accept that none of us is perfect, the need for forgiveness will be apparent to us.

At this point you may be asking, “How does Jesus’ death grant us forgiveness from God?” If Jesus had not suffered at the hands of the religious leaders, God could not have shown us his solidarity, demonstrating empathy for humans at our own level of suffering. So, by placing the human version of himself into the human experience, God has shown us His suffering.

But this hasn’t really explained how the forgiveness part works. Forgiveness is so important to God, that it is often understood as the main reason for Jesus’ death. If we accept His ability to create the Earth with all of its inhabitants, then forgiving those who ask is an easy task.

But what of those who have a different take on this subject? How many of you have been threatened with hellfire and brimstone for making mistakes? Does this sound perplexing to you? Or have you been told that if you follow all the rules, you will be forgiven? This type of reasoning is at the very least deceptive. We are not called to tell our kin that they are sinful. God will be the judge of that! It also puts one at the risk of being a hypocrite. Jesus hates hypocrisy, and he commands us not to judge others “lest we be judged”. As Matthew 7 says, “Don’t pick on people, jump on their failures, criticize their faults— unless, of course, you want the same treatment. That critical spirit has a way of boomeranging. It’s easy to see a smudge on your neighbor’s face and be oblivious to the ugly sneer on your own. Do you have the nerve to say, ‘Let me wash your face for you,’ when your own face is distorted by contempt? It’s this whole traveling road-show mentality all over again, playing a holier-than-thou part instead of just living your part. Wipe that ugly sneer off your own face, and you might be fit to offer a washcloth to your neighbor.” And the heaven or hell ultimatum is rendered null and void when spoken by someone who has no idea what your fate will be – which is everyone, frankly.

At this point, I’d like to share a little story with you. At a very busy intersection, amid the bustle of shoppers and rubberneckers, a group of Christian proselytizers were warning the crowd of their impending doom: an eternity in Hell. A young man approached me with a tract and I happily obliged, just to be friendly. However, once we began to converse, it became clear that we disagreed on many points. I asked him, “What do you think is the main message of the Gospels?”

“Repent!” he cried. I was taken aback at his fervor.

“But are we not forgiven of our sins by the power of Jesus’ death? So, wouldn’t forgiveness be the main message?” He thought about this for a moment.

“And what about love? Didn’t Jesus command us to love others as ourselves and to love even our enemies?”. He then admitted he had never read the Bible.

Then I said it – words that would ignite a fiery tantrum. I said, “How do you know the fate of others? You are a mere human. Only God knows that.”

Then suddenly, shaking his head furiously, and stamping his feet, he commanded the demon (me) out of his sight. He was visibly shaken, crying out, “Lies, lies!” Even as I walked away, he pursued me yelling and continuing his tirade. Why was he so angry and indignant to the point of tears? I truly felt pity for the young man who had obviously been deceived in the absence of his own information about the Gospels. But I understood immediately the message he had been told to share. While Jesus commands us to follow his teaching, he did not ever command us to judge others. This person and his cohorts did not require a Bible. They were simply given a formula in the form of an ultimatum: Love Jesus or go to hell. Sounds a bit deranged doesn’t it? But we know that love is not inspired by fear, and this group were certainly causing me to fear them!

So, it is not simply a decision based on self-preservation. Or the choice of whether to suffer the fires of hell or enjoy an eternity in heaven. Anyone when given this ultimatum, would choose the former, but this takes no effort and does not make us “good” people. What Jesus calls us to do is to go beyond self-interest and love others selflessly. Choosing not to go to hell does not demonstrate love but merely avoidance of the obvious. However, going further means loving your enemy and loving others even when it means you are inconvenienced.

Two Options

Recently, I watched an episode of Black Mirror on Netflix in which the protagonist was a 17-year-old computer programmer, living in the 80s, during the rise of computer games. His brainchild, a video game called Bandersnatch, takes the player into a world where he/she determines the destiny of the game's character by choosing one of two options. The player has 10 seconds to choose. For example, does he go left or right? Each choice leads to a different outcome. Like a labyrinth, the player experiences various fates at which points he must start over from where he left off and make the other choice. Although a masterful and enjoyable production, the point of this dissertation is not a review but an interesting thought exercise. I will begin with my own thoughts on the subject of quantum theory.

Two very interesting scientific discoveries caught my attention recently. I had just read an article on Schrodinger's Cat where the entire concept is revisited using a quantum experiment in a real-life scenario. (no cats were harmed in the experiment). But I will not get into these details yet. It is important, however to be familiar with the original experiment. Just to be clear, in the original thought experiment, a cat is placed in a box with a lethal instrument that has a chance of detonating within a minute, thereby killing the cat. (clearly, Schrodinger was not a cat person). The lethal device is a radioactive atom which emits radiation on a random basis. This triggers a switch which releases poisonous gas. However, since we have sealed the box and can't see inside, we don't know if the cat is dead or alive until we look inside. This thought experiment is intended to describe the interactions of subatomic particles but using a macroscopic example. A minute after the box is sealed therefore, the cat is in a state of being both alive and dead but not one or the other until we open the box. This state, a kind of quantum superposition, exists in nature all the time in the subatomic world. In other words, the reality of the cat’s fate is determined by our intervention, i.e., the opening of the box. This is referred to as measurement or observation. In the quantum world, our very act of observation of subatomic particles forces this state of superposition to collapse into one reality or another, in this case, a dead cat or a living cat.

Back to the Black Mirror episode. In this case, while the Netflix viewer, (you or I), is watching our hero live his life in the midst of a mental breakdown, Netflix has created an interactive feature, that allows the viewer to choose the fate of the protagonist by selecting one of two options for the storyline on their computer screen. And each choice takes the viewer to an alternate ending for the protagonist. Once again, the story picks up from the last choice and the viewer makes the opposite choice leading the protagonist down a different rabbit hole.

Now imagine that everything in your life is controlled not by a choice of two options, but multiple options. Some options are numerous, like what will I wear today? Where will I go for lunch? What if you (as in all of humanity) make these choices everyday of your lives and we change our destinies just by acting on our environment. And imagine each option we choose will lead us down a different path until the next choice is made, creating a fascinating web of potential events. But wait! Can this "web" be mapped by a computer? In fact, many believe that we are currently living in a 'virtual reality" computer program similar to that of the "Matrix" trilogy, from which there is no escape. Do you think this could be your reality?

At the macroscopic level, however, we cannot experience what subatomic particles do at the microscopic level. But what if we could? Imagine you are in a room with a door that locks both ways or opens both ways, and you may attempt to open the door or not. If you do, the door may be open or locked, but you will not know until you interact with the door. However, much depends on who is in control of the lock, but we will just say a mysterious outside observer controls the lock using a coin flip to decide to lock or unlock the door. But what if you do not interact with the door? Then it is in a state of being locked and not locked simultaneously, from your point of view. Just for a lark, let’s say there is a guy on the other side of the door, who is in a similar predicament. He doesn’t know if the door is locked or not. So, if he interacts with the door, he will render it locked or unlocked. If the door opens when he tries it, reality has collapsed into the “unlocked door” state. But is “measurement” even necessary for every observer? Well, according to the most recent quantum physics experiments, two different states of alignment of an observed photon can exist to two different observers. So, if you attempt to open the door and it is found to be locked, it is possible for the observer on the other side of the door to find it unlocked. We can conclude that reality only "appears" to be objective. Some scientists even believe that we "create" reality with every single interaction with our environment, and that nothing is really there without us. However, in this case, an outside "observer" has created the reality that the door is in fact locked or open depending on two options: heads or tails. This scenario does not deal with photons but macroscopic locks whose reality does not mimic subatomic reality. But this is an amusing conundrum all the same.

Now imagine that this time, there are other doors in both rooms. In fact, there are 10 doors in each room. One door leads to the outside world, your goal, but the other doors lead to other smaller rooms. They are also locked or unlocked. Yikes! Did you say math?!!! Well, yes; math is needed at this point. But luckily, this thought exercise is not intended to sharpen our math skills. However, every day when we wake up, we start with a mathematical equation. “Get out of bed” is about a 99% probability. There is also the possibility that we just choose to stay in bed all day. This scenario is rare, let’s say 1%. Next, there are the high probabilities of your normal routines occurring in the same day (stretching, going to the bathroom, showering, eating breakfast etc.). But what of those things that are not under our control? If you fall ill, get injured or just suddenly perish, the probability that you'll get out of bed is slimmer and then the probabilities of your normal routines occurring (in the same day) are slim to none. Can you see how the calculations can get highly complicated and difficult to follow? Why, it is a virtual web of choices, paths, and their probabilities that determine our destinies. Introduce God's intervention and the math goes berserk! Even without His intervention, life is complex beyond our comprehension. For example, most people control their own doors, but just think of what would happen if your “brain” forgets to lock a door or bring keys, or both! Or someone else with keys locks or unlocks the door without your knowledge! Can all outcomes in someone's life be predicted with precision using a computer program? Or can God change anything he wants at any given juncture, changing the mathematical "path" in someone's life?

Computers operate on two options: 0 and 1. From this humble beginning, we now have the technology to create video games simulating a variety of scenarios strikingly similar to the real world. Imagine the ease with which a quantum computer could simulate our lives if virtual reality programs were improved. We can thank our lucky stars that we are not just part of a grand video game. God has given us free will, so this must be our own choice.