Greg Koukl's Views of Evil and Morality

Better Essays
Most situations regarding moral rightness, such as those for preserving life and dignity, are very human and easily agreed upon within the environment in which they are born. Greg Koukl’s idea morality and evil is disguised by the sentiment that his ideas are also humanistic and easily agreed upon, but if one were to disagree, he claims it would do nothing more than “put a rock in [the] shoe” of the one who was in disagreement. Seeming to have no idea of sociological deviance, he presents that any deviant behavior away from his personal moral code, and those like it, is “evil” and in “aversion to God”. Even Koukl’s use of usually weak circular logic arguments are weakened by the constant contradictions to his own statements.

At the beginning of the presentation, I was interested in what Mr. Koukl had to say. He seemed to be logical enough, though his statements were vague and simplistic, but I shrugged it off knowing he must be building up to his real argument. The points he made more at the beginning were more directed toward humanity’s plight against evil, “‘How could an omniscient God allow evil in the world?’ The statement only applies when the issue is personal.” Initially I agreed with Koukl’s logic, people are more concerned with their own wellbeing due to the fact that we know more about ourselves than others. If we are to curse someone for the faults in our life, why not curse God? But soon after, this is where we took a turn for the worse. Koukl then goes on to state that Eastern religions don’t believe in the concept of evil, blanketing the entire scope of eastern philosophy under being estranged from God because of “their” idea that evil is just an illusion. For me, this obvious lack of research on his part was enou...

... middle of paper ... a child’s sprit in hopes they will be happy in the time they have left. To say Russell had no traction in his views was also out of line. Russell had enough moral fiber to face the problem of a dying child head on instead of hiding behind the guise of God and “His” will.

After hearing Koukl’s argument about reconciling evil, I’m beginning to think that true evil is ignorance. Not the privation of a God’s goodness, not the lack of “morality” or denying God, but ignorance to the thoughts feelings and beliefs of others; not only ignorance, but the casting aside and chastising of those values also. I won’t say all of Koukl’s arguments were wrong, to do so would sink to his level, but perhaps it would be in the best interest of his soul to stop being close minded to anything not related to God, lest it become more obvious how ill prepared his arguments really are.
Get Access