The appearance of "evil"

[Emiliana]

eidos, eidous: form, which means both how something looks and what kind of thing it is. (semantic range strikes again!)

[Whistler]

A former idol-worshiper might feel like it wasn't okay to eat the idol-meat, because it would cause him/her to want to worship the idols. Paul's point isn't that you should worry about what other people think of YOU, it's that you should be concerned with helping others not commit idolatry.

(Can you tell I took an entire course in 1 Corinthians in Bible college...?)

I definitely like your interpretation of the passage! I wrote a paper on it many years ago, and apparently all I could remember was the "weak conscience" thing.

[vorpal blade]

Should you be worried?

Absolutely. For the boyfriend. (12 hours trapped with my girlfriend's mother? No thanks.)

I always enjoyed spending time with my mother-in-law. She is such a nice gracious lady. And so is my wife.

[vorpal blade]

In some cases Paul points out that there is wisdom in avoiding the appearance of evil, as in eating sacrifices given to idols.

Yeah, wasn't this about not causing other members to freak out (basically)?

Yes and no. 1 Thessalonians 5:22 is the verse often translated "avoid every appearance of evil," but other translations say "every form of evil," which is something quite different. And my Greek is too rusty to give you an explanation of why it could be translated either way.

Emiliana. First, taking a cue from what Concorde recently said let me assure you that I think you are beautiful and charming. I like the way you think, and I like the way you express yourself. I am grateful that you responded to Whistler’s comment on my comment with your learning, wisdom, and insight. It is wonderful and incredible to be able to converse with someone who has studied these things in Bible college. Thank you for the tactful and amazing way you handled the question.

I’d like to make a number of comments, not in the spirit of disagreeing with you, but to add some additional points of view to consider. In fact I think we already are mostly if not completely in agreement. I’d like to discuss the issue of eating meat offered to idols but in this post I want to talk about the meaning of 1 Thessalonians 5:22.

I see that many translations do say "every form of evil.” As you indicate when you look up the meaning of “eidos” you get what may appear as a somewhat ambiguous translation. I like to use the Blue Letter Bible source. The two meanings I find are “the external or outward appearance, form figure, shape,” and “form, kind.” The word “eidos” appears five times in Greek Concordance of the KJV Bible; Luke 3:22, Luke 9:29, John 5:37, 2 Corinthians 5:7, and 1 Thessalonians 5:22. http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex ... 1491&t=KJV

Let me give you some examples of how LDS church leaders have used 1 Thessalonians 5:22 in their talks.

Virtue is the golden key to the temple. So, third, be not moved in being worthy to make and keep sacred covenants. The covenant you make at baptism will tether you to the path of virtue and happiness as you renew that covenant each week by partaking of the sacrament. As you keep your baptismal covenant, you will look different, dress different, and act different from the world. Keeping this covenant will enable you to be guided by the Holy Ghost. Stand in holy places, and do not even go near those environments or music, media, or associations that might cause you to lose the companionship of the Holy Ghost.11 [See 1 Corinthians 6:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:22; 2 Timothy 2:22; Doctrine and Covenants 9:13.] And as you keep your covenants, you will remain worthy and prepared to enter the Lord’s holy temples.

What can each of us do to begin our return to virtue? The course and the training program will be unique to each of us. I have derived my personal training program from instructions found in the scriptures: “Let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly.”14 [D&C 121:45.] “Cleave unto [your] covenants.”15 [See D&C 25:13.] “Stand … in holy places.”16 [D&C 45:32.] “Lay aside the things of [the] world.”17 [D&C 25:10.] “Believe that ye must repent.”18 [Mosiah 4:10.] “Always remember him and keep his commandments.”19 [D&C 20:77.] And “if there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, … seek after these things.”20 [Articles of Faith 1:13; see also Romans 8:16; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:22; Jacob 4:6; Alma 37:36; Moroni 10:32.] Now more than ever before, it is time to respond to Moroni’s call to “awake, and arise” and to “lay hold upon every good gift, and touch not the evil gift, nor the unclean thing.”21 [Moroni 10:30–31.]

Young men and women, keep yourselves worthy. Stay away from those environments, the music, the films, the videos, the clubs, and the associations that draw you into immoral conduct (see 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Thes. 5:22; 2 Tim. 2:22; D&C 9:13).

Remember, Satan does not want you to be happy. He does not want you to dare to do right. He wants you to be miserable, as he is. He has captured the hearts of wicked men and women who would have you participate in bad things such as pornography, drugs, profanity, and immorality. Stay away from these evils. Avoid books, magazines, videos, movies, and television shows that are not good. As the scriptures tell us, avoid the very appearance of evil. (See 1 Thes. 5:22.)

I cannot help wondering about parents who adopt the attitude with their children, “do as I say, not as I do” with respect to using harmful substances, going to inappropriate movies, and other questionable activities. Children often take license from their parents’ behavior and go beyond the values the parents wish to establish. There is one safe parental rule: do not just avoid evil, avoid the very appearance of evil (see 1 Thes. 5:22).

Do some of us need to reevaluate what constitutes proper observance of the Word of Wisdom? Are we becoming too liberal in our personal interpretation and application of this law? The Apostle Paul counseled: "Abstain from all appearance of evil" (1 Thes. 5:22). Here again, we can unlearn and resolve to stay strictly on the Lord's side of this law and be safe and at peace with ourselves.

Yet I want to make this point: you and I can help the cause of righteousness very materially, every one of us, if we will live as we teach, as we profess. Then our lives will be as lights upon a hill, and others seeing our good works (Matt. 5:14-16) will have their tongues of criticism throttled, if not tied. It is particularly important that we be careful of our personal conduct, avoiding insofar as possible the very appearance of evil (1 Thes. 5:22), for Satan, the liar and deceiver, is ever alert to use every excuse to inspire criticism among our Father's children.

[Whistler]

one might also argue that "appearance" doesn't mean "kinda looks like." "Appearance" can also mean something like instance, or say, every time evil appears. So I think the ambiguity of eidos is pretty well mirrored in "appearance."

[Marduk]

Should you be worried?

Absolutely. For the boyfriend. (12 hours trapped with my girlfriend's mother? No thanks.)

I always enjoyed spending time with my mother-in-law. She is such a nice gracious lady. And so is my wife.

What a strange way to respond to a joke.

[Emiliana]

Why thank you, Vorpal! Here are my observations about the quotes you've presented:

For the most part, when the authorities reference the "appearance of evil," the implication seems to be that people should stay away from things that are borderline acceptable--a "slippery slope" argument, if you will. None of the quotes seem to indicate that you shouldn't do something just because it might LOOK bad to others. (The only reference to how something looks is the comment that people who are baptized in the LDS church will look different from others, but the point isn't that others will know you aren't sinning.)

So as to whether we agree, I'm not sure. If you're saying that married people shouldn't ride in cars with others because it might look bad to others, I disagree. If you're saying that a married person shouldn't ride with others because it's a slippery slope ... well, I don't entirely disagree, but nor do a wholly agree. I think that married folks should maintain appropriate boundaries with members of the opposite sex, but that's going to look different for everyone and kind of needs to be worked out within the marriage itself. I think it's a little ridiculous for the boundary to be as far back as not giving someone the occasional ride...The fact that my married, male coworker and I occasionally go to the Taco Bell drive-through together does not in any way increase my desire to hop in the sack with him. And if it did, I think that would say more about the state of my marriage than about the general acceptability of mixed-gender car rides.

[Portia]

But chalupas are so erotic.

[vorpal blade]

one might also argue that "appearance" doesn't mean "kinda looks like." "Appearance" can also mean something like instance, or say, every time evil appears. So I think the ambiguity of eidos is pretty well mirrored in "appearance."

That's very interesting, Whistler! I hadn't thought of interpreting "appearance" as "occassion," or "instance."

One thing I thought interesting in the quotes I gave is that they seem to span a range of interpretations of "appearance." And I think that is good, because I believe the scripture meant to span a range, and not just a single, narrow interpretation. If something looks evil, as the form of evil, and might be evil, then you probably should stay clear of it. And if it is evil then definitely give it a wide margin. However, none of them seem to indicate that we should avoid doing good works merely because someone is going to mistakenly think we are doing something bad. If we were merely trying to avoid gossip we would close down our temples.

So, I agree with you that the KJV word "appearance" is properly wide in meaning.

[vorpal blade]

What a strange way to respond to a joke.

Come to think of it, I think it strange the way you respond to my jokes.

[vorpal blade]

The passage about meat sacrificed to idols specifically to avoiding causing others to violate their OWN consciences. So yes, you can eat idol-sacrificed meat all you want, just as long as it wouldn't cause someone else to sin in their own minds. A former idol-worshiper might feel like it wasn't okay to eat the idol-meat, because it would cause him/her to want to worship the idols. Paul's point isn't that you should worry about what other people think of YOU, it's that you should be concerned with helping others not commit idolatry.

I mostly agree with you, wise and intelligent Emiliana. I may be nickpicking here, but in a way I think Paul IS saying that you should worry about what other people think of you, IF what they think of you leads them into sin. But even then we shouldn't refrain from doing good works regardless of what others think, although we should try to not give others an occassion to take offense.

I came across a number of interesting quotes by LDS church leaders referencing 1 Corinthians chapter 8. I'd just like to give one of them now (paragraphing added).

In process of time Brother Taylor came along and he and I crossed the ocean together, and arrived in England, and here I want to make a little statement of my experience in those days concerning circumstances that took place with me. When Brother Brigham left home he told (D&C 84:105, Acts 8:39) you that all his family had was one barrel of rotten flour. Two hundred cents would have bought every pound of provision I left with my family when I left home. But we left our wives, for we had the commandment of God upon us, (D&C 118:4) and we were either going to obey it, or die trying. That was the spirit of the Elders of Israel; and I blessed my wife and child and left them in the hands of God, (D&C 118:3) and to the tender mercies of our noble Bishops, and those who were acquainted with them know how it was in those days.

However, I went on my way, and I want to speak of one little circumstance. I had with me an old cloak which I got in Tennessee when traveling with Brother Smoot over forty years ago. It had once been a dandy cloak, and had on keg buttons, and when new had a good deal of trimming and fancy work about it; but it was then pretty well threadbare and worn out. I wore it in Kirtland and I carried it to England with me; and when I was called by revelation to go to John Benbow’s and preach the gospel I wore that cloak. I went there and found over six hundred people, called United Brethren, and among them were eighty-three preachers, and they, as a people, were prepared for the word of the Lord, and I wanted to catch them in the gospel net. (Matt. 13:47)

Before embracing the doctrine of the United Brethren, Sister Benbow had been what is called a “lady” in England, and she had worn her silks and satins; but after obeying the doctrine of this religious body she cut up and burned and destroyed her silks and satins and wore the plainest calicoes she could get, because she thought that was religion. When I went there to preach she looked at me with this old cloak with the keg buttons on, and the Spirit of the Lord bore testimony to me that religion, so far as she was concerned, had a good deal of tradition about it, and that her faith could be tried by the coat a man wore; and as Paul said, if eating meat offended his brethren, he would never eat any (1 Cor. 8:13) more, so I felt a good deal, and one morning I went out and cut off the buttons from my old cloak, and never had a button on it afterwards.

By doing this and some other things, which some perhaps would call foolish, I, through the blessing of God and with the assistance of Brother Young, George A. Smith and Willard Richards, caught the whole flock and baptized every soul except one solitary person into the church and kingdom of God. Many of them are here in this room today, and some of them have passed away. I mention this just to show our position. We traveled without purse and (Luke 22:35) scrip, and we preached without money and without (Isa. 55:1) price. Why? Because the God of heaven had called upon us to go forth and warn the world.

[vorpal blade]

So as to whether we agree, I'm not sure. If you're saying that married people shouldn't ride in cars with others because it might look bad to others, I disagree. If you're saying that a married person shouldn't ride with others because it's a slippery slope ... well, I don't entirely disagree, but nor do a wholly agree. I think that married folks should maintain appropriate boundaries with members of the opposite sex, but that's going to look different for everyone and kind of needs to be worked out within the marriage itself. I think it's a little ridiculous for the boundary to be as far back as not giving someone the occasional ride...The fact that my married, male coworker and I occasionally go to the Taco Bell drive-through together does not in any way increase my desire to hop in the sack with him. And if it did, I think that would say more about the state of my marriage than about the general acceptability of mixed-gender car rides.

I have to confess that I hadn't read the 100 Hour Board question before I attempted to make a joke as a comment. To address the issue I would say that you are right, our reason for not riding in cars with just one member of the opposite sex ought not to be simply a fear of gossip. Yet I think part of our thinking should involve how our actions might cause others to have bad thoughts about us AND influence their behavior.

I've known many church leaders who counsel couples who have been torn apart by adultery. There are many causes of adultery, but surprisingly often adultery starts out innocently enough. It may, in fact, begin with something as simple and innocuous as spending time together occasionally getting something to eat at Taco Bell. Physical intimacy is preceeded by emotional intimacy that may begin with a shared experience that would apparently be completely innocent. There is something about an experience that just the two of you share that develops a bond.

Now, obviously, most of the time such experiences don't lead to anything at all. But perhaps when things are particularly tough at home and the relationship is rocky, perhaps when you are feeling depressed or rejected or neglected, during these alone times together you let slip some deeper emotional expression. Just to an understanding friend of the opposite sex. Probably nothing comes of that, either. It is just when you view it from the persective of counseling someone who has been adulterous, you see that it all began innocently enough with time spent alone with someone you could be attracted to who is not your spouse.

I think there is wisdom in driving well away from the edge of the clift. Setting standards and rules that put you safely out of harm. As Hartman Rector used to say (loosely quoted), "the Navy had a rule of not flying your plane in the trees. But that involves little room for error or chance when you are flying along at 500 miles per hour. My rule is to not fly within 500 feet of the trees."

A church leader may or may not be vulnerable to having an affair with someone he is alone with. But when others see the church leader driving around town with a member of the opposite sex, not his wife, it gives them an excuse to draw close to the danger zone and feel the thrill of temptation. In and of itself he may be in no danger alone with someone, but he has to think how this action might be the catalyst for someone else putting his marriage in danger.

I don't have a hard and fast rule. But it is good to have a policy that gives you guidance when it is easy to rationalize risky behavior. I would make every effort to help someone who needs a ride, and avoid making them feel bad when they may not understand my policy.