Jesus’ formula for discerning Good from Evil

Among the many things John’s Gospel teaches is a concise formula to discern Good from Evil. John records Jesus as saying:

The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly. (John 10:10 NRSV)

In Greek it reads: ὁ κλέπτης οὐκ ἔρχεται εἰ μὴ ἵνα κλέψῃ καὶ θύσῃ καὶ ἀπολέσῃ· ἐγὼ ἦλθον ἵνα ζωὴν ἔχωσιν καὶ περισσὸν ἔχωσιν.

And so I would paraphrase it: The thief only comes for theft, murder, and destruction. I have come that they may not only survive, but thrive. 

In the first sentence, Jesus lays out what is evil, anti-life, anti-Christ, and anti-God. In the second sentence, Jesus lays out what is good, enhances life, embodies Christ, and glorifies God. 

Goodness always helps people live fully: To survive (at the bottom of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs) and thrive (all the way at the top). It always seeks to bring about abundant life and full human flourishing, without demeaning or harming other persons. As Saint Irenaeus says: “The Glory of God is humanity fully alive.”  

On the other hand, Evil is by definition parasitic, an infection or virus which destroys other life to enhance itself. Evil seeks life by extracting it from other living persons, instead of by enhancing the possibilities of life for all. Instead of “me and you” evil is intrinsically “me versus you”. This evil seeks to steal, kill, and destroy so it may suck life from others. 

Thus, we may distinguish good and evil on the basis of life or death, creation or destruction, gift or theft, health or harm, synergy or parasitism: Does an act or attitude seek to enhance the possibility that all persons may survive and thrive? Then it is good. Does an act or attitude seek to diminish life and wellbeing for some in order to benefit others? Then it is evil. Now, sometimes it is necessary to stop those who do evil by force, when they will not stop harming others to benefit themselves. This is still evil, but it is a lesser evil and a temporary evil in order to establish the social conditions for lasting good.

This is not a new idea from Jesus, but a rather clear elucidation of what is found in the Hebrew Law and Prophets, and most other great Spiritual teachers across history. For instance, the Ten Commandments affirms the absolute value of protecting life by giving the injunction “Do not murder!” The Law of Moses goes on further and makes life itself a principle for moral decision making:

I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live... (Deuteronomy 30:19)

The writers of the New Testament also reiterate this principle of life and death in several places, notably:

The mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace. (Romans 8.6)

The early Christian tradition firmly grasped life and death as the crucial factor in discerning good from evil. And not only that, the absolute value of life entails the absolute commitment to desire life for others, and to work for their wellbeing. This absolute commitment to life is what the Christian tradition calls "Love". And thus the early manual of Christian life and belief written in the first century, the Didache, declares:

There are two ways, one of life and one of death, but a great difference between the two ways. The way of life, then, is this: First, you shall love God who made you; second, love your neighbor as yourself, and do not do to another what you would not want done to you. (The Didache, Introduction)

This absolute value for life is not unique for the ancient Jewish people. Most ancient cultures taught that we should learn to see our own lives as interconnected with the lives of other loving creatures, and that we ought to protect and enhance those lives, by doing to others what we would want done to us. A short list of such texts across religions includes:

Those who follow the path of service, who have completely purified themselves and conquered their senses and self-will, see the Self in all living creatures... (Hinduism, Bhagavad Gita 5.7). 

A man should wander about treating all creatures as he himself would be treated. (Jainism, Sutrakritanga 1.11.33)

I renounce all killing of living beings, whether subtle or gross, whether movable or immovable. Nor shall I myself kill living beings nor cause others to do it, nor consent to it. As long as I live, I confess and blame, repent and exempt myself of these sins, in the thrice threefold way [i.e., acting, commanding, or consenting, either in the past, present, or future], in mind, speech, and body. (Jainism, Acarangasutra 2.15)

What is right action? Refraining from violence against creatures, refraining from taking what has not been given, refraining from going wrongly among the sense-pleasures, this is called right action. (Buddhism, Majjhima Nikaya iii.251-52)

Comparing oneself to others in such terms as "Just as I am so are they, just as they are so am I," an Enlightened Person should neither kill nor cause others to kill. (Buddhism, Sutta Nipata 705)

Tsekung asked, "Is there one word that can serve as a principle of conduct for life?" Confucius replied, "It is the word shu (reciprocity): Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you." (Confucianism, Analects 15.23)

Take not life, which God has made sacred, except by way of justice and law. Thus does He command you, that you may learn wisdom. (Islam, Qur'an 6.151-53)

Not one of you is a believer until he wants for his brother what he wants for himself. (Islam, Forty Hadith of an-Nawawi 13)

To these affirmations of the intrinsic value of Life, we could easily add all the various ways different cultures have affirmed the worth of human life in their own formulations of the "Golden Rule". Finally, the idea that each human life ought to be maximized and fulfilled finds a more clinical expression in Immanuel Kant: 

“Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.” (The second formulation of the “Categorical Imperative”). 

Thus we find across history that morally serious and sensitive sages have grasped the fundamental ethical value that is at the Source of all moral thinking: “Life ought to be preserved and enhanced for all.” The desire to work for the flourishing of all humans is what Christianity calls “Love”. Love is the giving of self to fulfill the potential of others, so that they not only survive but thrive. Jesus exemplifies this Love, and embodies this striving for life, by giving himself so that all others may live (cf. John 3.16-17), and then rising to life again to demonstrate that his life overcomes death (cf. 1Corinthians 15). 

Christ then calls us to love each other as he has loved us (cf. John 13.34-35, 15.12-13). And this Love entails that we work with each other, and for each other, to enhance the life and wellbeing of all others following the Pattern of Christ (cf. 1Corinthians 13). All of this flows from God, who is in essence, Love (cf. 1John 4). God is the Value of Love personified, the Source of the Universe’s striving for Life, as evolution expresses Life in ever-more complex and creative forms of Life. So we find that the Love that seeks to actualize Life is the creative Source of all Worlds. 

And thus, as people committed to Christlike Love, we may ask of any individual act: Will this act bring about life and wellbeing, without causing harm or destruction, for all who are involved? If so, pursue it. It is good. If not, is this act necessary to stop some greater harm and destruction from happening? If so, pursue it only as far as is necessary to end harm and bring about greater life. Finally, will this act only benefit some, at the expense of diminishing the life and wellbeing of others? Then do not pursue it. It is evil. 

And it is especially evil when some are hoarding more resources than they could ever need or use, while others do not have the basic resources to survive. While it is permissible for some to have abundance as long as everyone has enough, it is never permissible for some to have excess while others lack necessities. Let no one starve so that others may be obese. We must strive for daily bread for all, before we serve dessert to some.

Finally, we must note that the ethical value of Life is predicated on a deeper Transcendent Value: The enjoyment of the Beauty of Life. Life is the flourishing of creative potential in all of its forms. And this flourishing is beautiful in its own right, for no other reason than the intrinsic aesthetic value it possesses. Life is not valuable because it is a means to some other end, or it has utility to bring about something else that is desirable. Life is valuable because it is the living actualization of creativity, and for no other reason. Each life is an actualization of some of the possibilities contained in the Cosmos. 

And if you are a Theist, Life is an expression of the Divine Potential contained within Godself. And those sentient persons who both live, and can know and enjoy Life, are able to partake in the joy and fulfillment that Life contains inherently. Thus we find that the empirical criteria for discerning good from evil is based on the ethical value of Life. And the ethical value of Life is based in the aesthetic enjoyment of Life for its own sake. And this enjoyment of Life, as well as the striving to maximize Life, is what we call Love. Divine Love. For "God is Love".

Because evil comes only to steal and kill and destroy. Love comes that all may have life, and have it abundantly.