Christ said, "...as often as you did it for one of my least brothers, you did it for me" (Mat 25:40). He defined morality in terms of helping the needy. Corrupters do the opposite. They build up the rich and powerful at the expense of the needy, generally destroying the nobodies, who they refer to as worthless eaters or riff raff. A lot of persons don't know God from satan. Who's to say the real God doesn't build up the rich and powerful at the expense of the nobodies, while satan tries to help the needy?

So the question is, what logic indicates that morality depends upon assisting the most vulnerable and destroyed persons? The most basic test of right or wrong is, what does it lead to if carried to extremes? If contributing to the rich and powerful is carried to extremes, everyone is destroyed. If assisting the needy is carried to extremes, everyone benefits. Of course, corrupters disagree; so some arguing is needed to explain why.

What is contributing to the rich and powerful, when they have no basic problems related to sustenance? It might be giving them more money and property, which is wanton waste and greed. It might be helping them defeat their indefatigable enemies, which eventually includes everyone. It might be helping them destroy the lower classes, which is like cutting off one end of a stick—it still has two ends afterward. The more the needy are destroyed, the more they are replaced by more needy.

So what is the good that comes from helping the needy? One of the needy was Christ. He walked barefoot with the nobodies from Galilee sleeping under the trees. This wasn't a quirk. Moral persons get shoved out of satan's world and tend to congregate with the needy. This means that being nonjudgmental is necessary in producing justice.

How then does everyone benefit from such justice? One of the basic principles of morality is that what's good for one is good for all. This is because everyone has similar requirements for life. Even in the spirit world, what is justice for one is justice for all.

When carrying the concept of justice to extremes, whatever is done to the least person will eventually be done to everyone. What Nazi didn't become a worthless eater by the time the war was over? Who didn't Nero murder to sustain his arrogance? Who was safe from Saddam Hussein's murder? Not his son-in-laws.

Most basically, morality defines a person. What someone will do to one person, they will do to anyone. If there is an objective criterion to determine what should be done to someone, then the result is justice. But this doesn't mean justice can be determined analytically. God allows objective reality to determine justice rather than arbitrating it. The Bible often portrays God as an arbitrator, as in Job, but this is a parody on human assumptions.