It is said about the game Go, that the rules are so simple, every intelligent life form in the universe must be playing it. And even though the rules may be simple, the objective of the game is not really obvious. From all the cultures in the world only the Chinese came up with it. And it is not a game you can play anytime anywhere. Sure, you could draw the board on the flor, but you still need a whole lot of pebbles in two distinct colors. The rules of soccer are way more complex, but the objective of the game is so obvious, that almost all cultures in the world at some point played a version of it. (Believe it or not, but around 600 A. D. it was the national sport of China. Including a professional soccer league. But around 100 years later, it had completely disappeared.) And of course, all you need is something to kick. It does not have to be round or bouncy. As long as it is movable and does not break your food, when you kick it, you will be fine. Even better, if it should survive the game mainly unharmed. The possibilities are endless. Hats, cans (full or empty), stones (with care), boxes, and so on. Also, of course, balls in every shape and size. The goal can be as simple as kicking something around or back and forth. Be fancy and add a goal. How about a second team? And sooner or later we can organize a league, to find out, who is the best. But the moment it becomes competitive, we need clear rules and a way to deal with players breaking them.

Forming teams in school seems to be as universal as soccer. Pick two leaders who then pick their team members in an alternating fashion. The two, you picked first, stay in charge of their team. So they are perfect to settle disputes during the game. In the early days of modern soccer, the leader of a team had to stop the game every time one of their own broke the rules. The other team then got the ball. It is not difficult to imagine, why we don’t have that anymore. Why should I stop the game, when my guy did something wrong? (Yes, guy. Women were not allowed to play soccer until the 1970s.) But it took ten years until disputes got so out of hand, that another solution became necessary. Soccer games now had a referee. But he was basically powerless. Only when the two leaders could not agree, he functioned as an impartial judge. That all sounds so childish compared to the equipment used to rule the field today. One referee with up to six assistants, cameras, sensors, and a whole armada of other gimmicks. And all, because the players can’t be trusted. None of it would be necessary, if everybody would only play according to the rules. But even though we would all agree, that following the rules is good, we all ignore that notion (at least partially) in order to win the game. Rules are good, winning is better.

Since the early days of philosophy, back in Ancient Greece, a very fundamental discussion goes back and forth. Are humans in their core good or evil? For a long time, the answer was evil. That changed for most philosophers during the time of the enlightenment. Yet, the history of soccer illustrates, that the answer is all but simple. Of course we love the idea of a good and fair game. That’s why we welcome rules. (Imagine a Game without rules. Everybody would do, whatever they please. Nobody could know for sure, who won. For one, scoring goals might be the objective. For another, being the fastest. And so on. In the end, only time passed and everybody decides, how to feel about it. Nothing more.) But when you watch players, who broke the rules, argue with the referee, you will notice, that the idea of rules is only good, as long as they work in our favor. So, yes, we want to be good people. We want the world to be a good place. We despise evil. But all of that breaks down, when being good stands between us and reaching our goal. (Or, in case of soccer, reaching the opponents goal.) So the answer to the question, are we good or are we evil, is a clear yes. Sure, we want to be good, but not at all cost. We do bad thinks, but we love to justify them by pointing to a good end (which may never come). And here comes the follow up question: why? What is the reason for this dilemma? Natur or nurture?

In a discussion about soccer, I heard the remark, we would be able to go back to the beginning (no referee), if we taught our children right. So it is all nurture. The bad world makes bad people. Our nature is, in itself, good. And sure, our children copy us. So when we are good, they will be. At least, to some extent. And that would mean, we could have perfectly good people. But through history, that has never happened. Yes, there are some really good human beings. But dig deep enough, and you will find the times, where even their desires got the better of them. Let’s take “the man after God’s own heart”, King David. Lying, stealing, adultery, murder. And that was only the one story. Or “the most humble man on the face of the earth”, Moses. (It still cracks me up, that he wrote that himself in numbers 12:3.) He felt the need of proving himself to the people of Israel, that he disobeyed a direct order from God. Look, what I can do! God consequently takes away the privilege to lead Israel into the promised land. And later he tells the people, it was their fault, he couldn’t go in. Even Jesus struggled with that. The devil’s offers wouldn’t have tempted Him, if worshiping Satan was not an option.

For me, the only logical conclusion is, that it’s our nature, that is bad. At least in parts. The Apostle Paul calls it “doing the things he does not want”. In a way, we are split personalities. We want to be good, but all to often we do bad thinks. And it seems like there is no escaping that. And right here, we find yet another thing, Jesus wants to heal in us. He was the only one, who struggled with this split nature (even more so, because He was torn between being God and being human), but never gave into the evil desires. Not even, when they might have served His goals. And yet, He was punished as if He gave into all of them. Because He received the consequences of all the times, when we followed the urge to do evil. And now we can bring our personalities, broken by the Fall of Men, to Jesus. He can fix them, He wants to fix them, He will fix them. But until then, He will be our fair referee, and we are able to play, even though we tend to put us before everyone else.