The Irony of Evil: When Declaring Others Evil Becomes Evil Itself

 

A Truth-Driven Agreement Ethic Critique of Biblical Moral Absolutism




I. Introduction

Throughout history, the concepts of good and evil have fueled wars, persecutions, and divisions. Nowhere has this tension been more visible than in religious conflicts, where competing groups claimed the authority to declare themselves righteous and their opponents evil. The Bible, revered as a moral foundation for billions, is often invoked as the source of such judgments. Yet its definitions of good and evil are notoriously ambiguous, leaving wide room for interpretation and exploitation.

The irony is stark: in claiming to know the will of God well enough to condemn others as evil, religious absolutists enact the very fracture that constitutes evil. The Truth-Driven Agreement Ethic (TDAE) provides a lens through which this irony becomes clear. Whereas the Bible’s definitions are vague and easily weaponized, TDAE offers clarity: good is the convergence of truth and agreement, while evil is the disregard of either.

II. The Bible’s Ambiguity

The Bible does not provide a single, precise definition of good and evil. Instead, “good” is broadly described as what aligns with God’s will (e.g., Psalm 119:68), while “evil” is framed as rebellion against God (e.g., 1 John 3:4). Such formulations may work devotionally, but they collapse under ethical scrutiny. Who determines God’s will? Which interpretation is authoritative?

Because the Bible offers no operational test for these concepts, they are left open to human manipulation. Crusades, inquisitions, witch hunts, and denominational wars were all justified by groups claiming to embody “good” while condemning rivals as “evil.” The very ambiguity of the Bible’s moral language created fertile ground for conflict.

III. The Pompous Claim to Know God’s Will

At the heart of these conflicts is an extraordinary presumption: that human beings can know the infinite will of God with such certainty that they may declare others evil. This is not only arrogant but also self-contradictory.

Even the Bible itself acknowledges human limitation: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways” (Isaiah 55:8), and “Now we see through a glass, darkly” (1 Corinthians 13:12). Despite these admissions of partial knowledge, countless leaders and movements have claimed full authority to wield God’s name against others.

The irony is devastating. By elevating themselves as the arbiters of good and evil, these individuals enact pride, coercion, and distortion—qualities that fit any reasonable definition of evil.

IV. The TDAE Lens on Good and Evil

The Truth-Driven Agreement Ethic (TDAE) resolves this ambiguity by defining morality in operational, participatory terms:

  • Good = alignment with truth and fair agreement among those affected.

  • Evil = the disregard of truth or the breaking of agreement, whether through distortion, coercion, or neglect.

Through this lens, the act of declaring another person “evil” without grounding in truth or agreement is itself evil. It denies truth by presuming absolute knowledge of God’s infinite will. It violates agreement by silencing others’ participation in defining morality. And it enacts coercion by imposing authority without consent.

V. The Irony Exposed

This is the central irony: the most consistent historical act of “evil” has been the religious denunciation of others as evil. Wars, persecutions, and exclusions justified in God’s name fracture truth and agreement at every level. The Bible-thumper who shouts, “You are evil!” becomes the embodiment of evil under the TDAE framework.

The arrogance of claiming to own God’s will fractures truth. The silencing of others fractures agreement. And the violence that follows fractures society itself.

VI. Toward Moral Clarity

Whereas biblical definitions of good and evil invite endless conflict, TDAE provides a foundation for peace. Because good is grounded in verifiable truth and fair agreement, it cannot be monopolized by a priest, preacher, or sect. Because evil is defined as fracture, it is recognizable in practice—distortion, coercion, and betrayal of trust—rather than hidden in theological mystery.

TDAE transforms morality from a weapon into a process. It disarms absolutist claims and replaces them with participatory clarity. In doing so, it prevents the very dynamic that has driven centuries of holy war.

VII. Conclusion

To claim absolute knowledge of God’s will and to condemn others as evil is not merely pompous—it is itself evil. The irony is as old as religion and as current as today’s culture wars. The Bible’s ambiguity left space for violence; TDAE closes that gap with precision.

Good is truth plus agreement. Evil is the fracture of either.
By this measure, the act of branding others “evil” without truth and agreement is the clearest example of evil humanity has known.

--

-
...And for the icing on the cake, I'll even provide a definition of "Truth":

Truth is the convergent structure of reality; what remains consistent across perspectives, verifiable through experience, and coherent within context.
It is not a single statement or fixed law, but a pattern of alignment.
It is what makes agreement possible.
It is centered but not singular—emerging through relationship with reality.

TDAE Truth Axioms:
Truth is real — it exists independently of belief.
Truth is plural — it appears differently from different positions.
Truth is convergent — it is what different perspectives can agree on when aligned.
Truth is directional — we move closer or farther from it.
Truth is functional — it supports accurate prediction, moral coherence, and relational trust.
Truth is evolving — not because it changes, but because we do.

“The one truth is that there are many truths; but the more they converge through us, the more real they become for us.”

Popular Posts