Reading the "Unmasking Malevolence" review brought to mind a series of podcasts done by Marty Solomon at BEMA Discipleship. He uses a great deal of Jewish scholarship and commentary to inform his studies. What I found fascinating was his treatment of the "image of God" question and how it contrasts humanity from the rest of creation. His conclusion was, the one thing that definitively separates us from all other creatures is the ability to restrain ourselves and know when to say, "enough". He uses the example of God establishing sabbath as a time to cease from activity. He notes the failure of Eve and Cain to tell themselves, "no" when they see a course of action, and have the ability (and responsibility) to stop.
Interesting to see how the conclusion of the book is to lay the ultimate cause of evil as a breakdown in our ability to self-control. In the same way, it is precisely then that we fail to reflect our nature as bearers of the image of God.
Your mention of the controversy over whether it is acceptable to cure blindness (i.e., to acknowledge that the created order is in fact fallen) reminds me of an excellent discussion of Christian anthropology versus Gnostic anthropology in a lecture by Princeton professor Robert P. George titled "The Gnostic Revival: How Should the Body of Christ respond?". Reminding us that the early church councils affirmed as good (albeit fallen) the physical created world and labeled as heresy the Gnostic rejection of our physicality, it brings clarity to the current cultural confusion about sexual orientation and gender identity. The lecture video is at this link:
I am currently reading Laura Engelstein's "Russia In Flames". It covers the period between 1914 and 1921. There are a number of similarities between then and now, unfortunately.
Reading the "Unmasking Malevolence" review brought to mind a series of podcasts done by Marty Solomon at BEMA Discipleship. He uses a great deal of Jewish scholarship and commentary to inform his studies. What I found fascinating was his treatment of the "image of God" question and how it contrasts humanity from the rest of creation. His conclusion was, the one thing that definitively separates us from all other creatures is the ability to restrain ourselves and know when to say, "enough". He uses the example of God establishing sabbath as a time to cease from activity. He notes the failure of Eve and Cain to tell themselves, "no" when they see a course of action, and have the ability (and responsibility) to stop.
Interesting to see how the conclusion of the book is to lay the ultimate cause of evil as a breakdown in our ability to self-control. In the same way, it is precisely then that we fail to reflect our nature as bearers of the image of God.
Your mention of the controversy over whether it is acceptable to cure blindness (i.e., to acknowledge that the created order is in fact fallen) reminds me of an excellent discussion of Christian anthropology versus Gnostic anthropology in a lecture by Princeton professor Robert P. George titled "The Gnostic Revival: How Should the Body of Christ respond?". Reminding us that the early church councils affirmed as good (albeit fallen) the physical created world and labeled as heresy the Gnostic rejection of our physicality, it brings clarity to the current cultural confusion about sexual orientation and gender identity. The lecture video is at this link:
https://www.touchstonemag.com/conferences/the-gnostic-revival-by-robert-p-george.php
Interesting connection to Gnosticism. Slipped my mind, but it's obvious once noted. :-)
I am currently reading Laura Engelstein's "Russia In Flames". It covers the period between 1914 and 1921. There are a number of similarities between then and now, unfortunately.
I think this WSJ Commentary touches on the aspect of how people may enter into evil such as in your first link.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/doestoevsky-knew-it-can-happen-here-hamas-palestine-progressive-radicalism-a7d196d6
Thanks, Jackie, for noting this article. Indeed, it is quite good. I'd seen the headline but hadn't read it.