The book defines evil as the willful pursuit of any goal that can only be attained at the expense of love. Do you agree?

[Melisa Jane]

BOOK WEBSITE: https://ygodallowsevil.com



In Part II of the book, the author defines "evil" as "any willful choice to pursue an objective that can only be acquired or experienced at the expense of love." Do you agree with this definition? If not, how would you define it?

[Irene Kana]

I totally agree with the author’s definition on the basis that since we are all given a choice to willfully decide between good and evil, whatever decision we make will automatically decide our fate, on whether we intentionally choose to love (God), good or evil to satisfy our fleshly desires. But any sinful or evil act automatically is a sacrifice against love as noted from his chapter: (Love before Justice)

[Rashad Deniro Price]

I think I agree with that. It's probably one of the simplest definitions of evil. Love pushes us to good deeds and, which are not only beneficial to us but also to others. So when this is lacking then an injury has been done, and that could be termed evil.

[Mr Benj]

This is a good definition of evil. Some people attains some goals with the sacrifice of happiness that comes with love.

[Gerry Steen]

I believe that it is evil to do anything that causes harm to or is destructive to love. This implies causing pain to other human beings. So, yes, doing anything at the expense of love is evil.

[Harty Muli]

I don't think this is an accurate description because of the idea of self-love. Self-love can open one to selfishness which can be evil. So, any definition of evil is not exclusively a lack of love because of the idea of self-love which can be evil.

[Neha Panikar]

I do agree with this definition. Anything contradicting love and it's expressions could lead to pain and suffering, and therefore (probably) evil. I like how simple and straightforward this definition is..

[Uchenna Precious]

Yes. I totally agree.
You can't have love in you and do evil. Truly, evil is done devoid of love because you can't hurt someone you love.

[Leslie coccia]

I agree with it from the perspective that an evil act is at the expense of love. But I also think there are other ways to define evil, it just depends on a person’s point of view.

[KeishaMoore]

I agree with it because evil is associated with selfishness which is not an attribute of love. A selfish person cannot be said to possess love because love doesn't think of itself alone, and most times, love is even blinded to itself.

[Catarina Luciane Silva]

I find the definition of 'evil' in Part II quite limiting. Evil purely as a 'willful choice' tied to love overlooks natural and unintended harms. For example, natural disasters or genetic disorders cause immense suffering, yet don’t result from anyone’s conscious choice. defining evil solely in relation to love feels subjective—what about cases where harm is done for reasons other than selfishness, like acts committed under coercion or misinformation? A broader definition might consider evil as any action or occurrence that causes unnecessary suffering, regardless of intent.

[Gerry Steen]

I find the definition of 'evil' in Part II quite limiting. Evil purely as a 'willful choice' tied to love overlooks natural and unintended harms. For example, natural disasters or genetic disorders cause immense suffering, yet don’t result from anyone’s conscious choice. defining evil solely in relation to love feels subjective—what about cases where harm is done for reasons other than selfishness, like acts committed under coercion or misinformation? A broader definition might consider evil as any action or occurrence that causes unnecessary suffering, regardless of intent.

I like the broader definition that you proposed. You made a good point with the example of natural disasters and genetic disorders. Evil comes to us in many forms.