There is a practice with which many of us have had to deal as motorists: no fault claims.  The idea is to let each insurer in an accident deal with their own company and their own policy, rather than establishing blame for an accident and putting the burden on that one motorist and his or her insurer.  One argument in favor of such no-fault practice is found in the word "accident" itself.  An "accident" implies that no one is completely at fault since no one intended to do damage or to cause harm.  No-fault goes to the question: "Where do we place the blame"?

On the 11 th of September, one year ago, a group of rebels destroyed the twin towers in New York City.  For the past several months, various groups have endeavored to apply the no-fault principle to this great tragedy.  But the "tragedy" was not an accident.  It was an intentional act.  

It is precisely why this was a great tragedy that we must recall what made it tragic.  It was not tragic because men were driven to do it.  It was not tragic because others are associated with the perpetrators of the attack.  And it is not tragic because of the percentage in our society who always blame themselves first for every ill circumstance of life and thus conclude that we as a nation are partially, if not totally, at fault.

The destruction of the twin towers is tragic because thousands of innocent lives were taken, and taken with delight to others.  It is tragic because those thousands had their lives taken in God`s name.  It is tragic because good men and women feel they must defend the evil that has done this deed.  It is tragic because there is a protected potential for more of the same.

Who is at fault?  Not God.  God will bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil [Ecclesiastes 12:14].  The Lord formed the light, thus revealing the darkness.  He makes peace and creates evil on evil doers [Is. 45:7].

God asks three things of us regarding evil: first, we are to cease from doing it; second, we are to stop calling evil good; third, we are to learn to refuse evil.  

One cannot learn to refuse evil until one has known that which is good.  The prophet Isaiah describes the Redeemer as eating butter and honey from his youth, "that he may know to refuse evil and to choose good" [Is. 7:15].  Rising generations need to know what is good from their youth.  A child raised on hatred will hate, unless the mercy of God intervenes in his life.  A child taught to be lascivious or allowed to be mischievous will act that way as an adult.

Knowing evil from good allows us to call that which is evil by what it is, evil.  It allows us to call that which is good by what it is, good - whether it is good in the sight of God, good in the sight of our families, or good in the sight of our neighbors.  Indeed, God has warned us not to confuse evil with good.  Through that same prophet, the Lord declares: "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter" [Is. 5:20].

Learning what is good is the key element in fulfilling these three commands of God regarding evil.  If we learn what is good, we will learn to refuse what is evil.  If we learn what is good, we will know how to accomplish God`s second command: we will know to call that which is good by what it is, good.  We will know not to call that which is evil as if it were good.  And we will be able to accomplish the third goal: to cease from evil.  If we learn what is good, we will know that from which we are to refrain [Is. 1:16].

How do we learn what is good and what is evil?  We learn by the Word of God.  As the Psalmist declared, "Teach me good judgment and knowledge: for I have believed thy commandments" [Ps. 119:66].  And if we fail to learn, the fault is ours.