Iniquity is described in the dictionary as “gross injustice—a violation of right or duty”. The Biblical definition of iniquity is used for people showing blatant disregard for God’s standards of righteousness.
Many mistakenly believe society’s standard of justice has evolved when in reality it has not. The inequity of racism raises its head as demonstrated in unreported or reported incidents at paragons of learning as San Jose State. It is a reminder that injustices remain in spite of revamps to cultural standards.
The Bay Area was touched once again by violence impacting America’s future when three of its brightest students fell prey to a sinister plot by a troubled young man attempting to balance the scales of justice in his own twisted mind. The term “injustice” can be a bastardization of what is right or wrong depending on who one talks to.
Clearly there has been a great injustice as articulated by an eloquent speaker during the memorial to the students slain that fateful night last Friday in Santa Barbara. Those students murdered had not planned to have their lives end so tragically and without notice. The students still recovering from their injuries were not looking to spend their precious time in the hospital. There were finals and graduation preparations to do.
There has been a great injustice indeed, but whose injustice is one speaking about? Aren’t we training our society in the concept that there is no such thing as absolute right or absolute wrong? Are we not indoctrinating our children that all truth is relative?
Society flirts with injustice regarding violence. It is permissible to allow abortion which sanctions violence against an unborn child. Of course the word “injustice” is conveniently ignored and is deemed “justified” in the eyes of the fickle law. Injustice becomes a byword.
The future of our society is just as tainted with injustice in the ongoing carnage against our children on the streets of Oakland, Richmond, San Jose and nation wide. Once again, it really depends on the new version of injustice regarding whether one should be outraged or not. There is a value assessment assigned based on one’s own definition of injustice.
God’s definition of injustice has long been relegated to the rear view mirror by those with ambivalent values. The shedding of innocent blood is a standard that is repugnant in any circumstance and not only played when it is politically expedient to do so. God values all life, however this is not the case with the new morality being established.
There is a price to pay when one believes in the psychology that humans are merely evolved animals. There is a price to pay when the survival of the fittest is the mindset achieved by those interested in dominating their environment and subjugating the masses. What would be the logical prognosis should one have no other hope but the grave and no accountability for any action?http://www.wjla.com/articles/2014/05/santa-barbara-shooter-bears-similarities-to-mass-murderers-103530.html
Removing the righteousness of God as a standard for right or wrong eliminates all restraints and validates any expression of behavior. There is no such thing as injustice. As in the animal kingdom, when a predator stalks it prey and kills it, there is no evil intent but only a natural expression of the order of things. The strong is suppose to dominate the weak.
This primitive attribute is expressed all the time as those indoctrinated by school or business inject the dog eat dog mentality, look out for number one, or it is not how you play the game but whether you win or lose. There is no moral code as long as one finishes ahead.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_jungle
One could not find a more diametrically opposed perspective when Jesus Christ walked the Earth in the Holy Land. The Romans worshipped power, strength, and had supreme authority. If one did not submit to Rome you would be crushed into the dust under the iron feet of a Roman legion. It was an ultimate display of Darwinism working before there was Darwin.
With Jesus’ fulfilled dispensation of the law of God, it expressed the softer side of God’s nature based on love and real choices from decisions made. Along with this standard, there were real consequences of either following or not following what God had already established.
Following one’s own evil nature gives birth to issues as unfairness, injustice, and other ugliness. But it is still based on the righteousness established by God. There is really no such thing as injustice if one removes the standard of right or wrong determined by God’s word. As a wise philosopher declared, everything is permissible if you remove God as the standard.
That includes killing.