Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CAN GOD DO EVIL?

micaela

Member
I always thought that evil is allowed by God, because of the free will thing, but nothing evil or bad can come from God. But Isaiah 45:7 just really confused me.

Isaiah 45:7 (King James Version)
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.


can anyone please help me out on this one? Is there any other scriptures about this?
 
.
The point is that Yahweh alone is ultimately responsible for everything in nature and history. Everything that exists does so because of the creative will of God. God was not claiming that He creates "evil" but both wellbeing (Heb. shalom) and calamity (Heb. ra'). He allows bad things to happen to people for His own reasons, as well as good things, but He does not cause people to make morally evil decisions (James 1:13 - the testing of your faith produces patience).
 
micaela said:
I always thought that evil is allowed by God, because of the free will thing, but nothing evil or bad can come from God. But Isaiah 45:7 just really confused me.

Isaiah 45:7 (King James Version)
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.


can anyone please help me out on this one? Is there any other scriptures about this?
The words in our scriptures are not always translated correctly.

Job 34:10
"So listen to me, you men of understanding. Far be it from God to do evil, from the Almighty to do wrong.
 
Hello and what a great topic.
Actually, this topic was being discussed in another thread. Perhaps the discussion can contiune :thumb

I enjoy Jewish commentary on the Torah and I think they bring a lot of value to the language. (Who better knows the Hebrew language better ;) )
But anyway, I have a copy of the Rambam, and this is what I found on bara (created). It comes from Genesis (Bereshith) 1:1 and is the same word used in the passage you've cited (Is 45:7)

Enjoy :)

The Rambam said:
Now listen to the correct and clear explanation of the verse in its simplicity. The Holy One, blessed be He, created all things from absolute non-existence. Now we have no expression in the sacred language for bringing forth something from nothing other than the word bara (created). Everything that exists under the sun or above was not made from non-existence at the outset. Instead He brought forth from total and absolute nothing a very thin substance devoid of corporeality but having the power of potency, fit to assume form and to proceed from potency, fit to assume form and to proceed from potentiality into reality. This was the primary matter created by G-d; it is called by the Greeks hyly (matter). After the hyly, He did not create anything, but he formed and made things with it, and from this hyly He brought everything into existence and clothed the forms and put them into a finished condition.

Know that the heavens and all that is in them consists of one substance, and the earth and everythign this is in it consists of one substance. The Holy One, blessed be He, created these two substances from nothing; they alone were created, and everything else was constructed from them.

This substance, which the Greeks called hyly, is called in the sacred language tohu, the word being derived from the expression of the Sages: “betohei (when the wicked bethinks himself) of his doings in the past.†If a person wants to decide a name for it [this primordial matter], he may bethink himself, change his mind and call it by another name since it has taken on no form to which the name should be attached. The form which this substance finally takes on is called in the sacred language bohu, which is a composite word made up of the two words bo hu (in it there is [substance]). This may be compared to the verse, Thou art not able 'asohu' (to perform it, Exodus 18:18) in which case the word asohu is missing a vav and an aleph [and I is a composite of the two words] aso hu. It is this which Scripture says, And he shall stretch over it the line of 'tohu' (confusion) and the stones of 'bohu.' (Isaiah 34:11) [The tohu in Hebrew or the hyly in Greek] is the line by which the craftsman delineates the plan of his structure and that which he hopes to make. This is derived from the expression, Kavei (Hope) unto G-d (Psalms 27:14). The stones are forms in the building. Similarly it is written, They are acconted by Him as nought and 'tohu,' (Isaiah 40:17) as tohu comes after nothingness and there is nothing yet in it.

So the Rabbis have also said in Sefer Yetzirah: “He created substance from tohu, and made that which was nothing something.â€

They have furthermore said in the Midrash of Rabbi Nechunya ben Hakanah: “Rabbi Berachyah said: “What is the meaning of the verse, And the earth was 'tohu' (without form) 'vavohu' (and void)? What is the meaning of the word “was?†It had already been tohu. And what is tohu? It is a thing which astonishes people. It was then turned into bohu. And what is bohu? It is a thing which has substance, as it is written, [bohu is a composite of the two words] “bo hu†(in it there is subtance)
 
micaela said:
I always thought that evil is allowed by God, because of the free will thing, but nothing evil or bad can come from God. But Isaiah 45:7 just really confused me.

Isaiah 45:7 (King James Version)
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.


can anyone please help me out on this one? Is there any other scriptures about this?

Hi

It actually is very simple.

Anything that God has created , never existed before. For instance - God is all light and in him is no darkness at all - I John 1:5 --- So God didn't need to create light, he only needed to form the light.

The same with evil. Evil is unrighteousness, and God is all righteousness. God is peace, so evil had to be created. Evil is unrest. And all unrighteousness is sin. And sin is walking in death.

God created the heavens and the earth, because they never existed before.

Anything that God created had to be brought into manifestation. So God made the heavens and the earth as well. God created the first man Adam, in the image of God = spiritual. So then , God had to make man in his image = spirit of man. As God formed the light, he also formed the man from the dust of the earth. To form something is to bring about from the existence of something else. God formed light from his light, because God is light. God formed man from the dust of the earth, because God had already created and made the earth.

Evil on the other hand, is neither made nor formed by God. Evil must still be manifested, but it is only manifested by an action, by one, who goes against the peace of God. The Word tells us, that where there is confusion there is every evil work. Confusion is a total lack of peace. Or another way of saying it, is that confusion is the opposite of peace.

God is a God of peace, not confusion. Thus God does not bring about evil, nor can he.

Evil is when one goes against the attributes of God. Love, peace, patience, etc. Then evil has become manifested by the one who goes against the attributes of God.

The opposite of light is darkness

The opposite of peace is evil
 
If God is all powerful then presumably he can do whatever he wants and can therefore do evil if he chooses to.

This interpretation of God is in no way reconciled with the Christian God of the Bible.

Evil can only be defined as being the opposite of good, and since God is ultimate goodness, it's impossible for Him to do evil.
 
LaCrum said:
Evil can only be defined as being the opposite of good, and since God is ultimate goodness, it's impossible for Him to do evil.
This is the Euthyphro Dilemma. Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is good, or is it good because it is commanded by God?
 
That English word "evil" from the Hebrew "ra" has many definitions, other words based on it. That could be adversity, affliction, bad, displeasing, harmful, and evil. None of that word related to wickedness. That's the true idea of the phrase "I make peace, and create evil". Can you see how taking the two words out of context can create unnecessary confusion? The "evil" is related to peace, being the opposite of peace. If men forsake striving for peace they will suffer adversity. There would be no concept of "peace" unless evil replaces it. When God made "peace" to be possible He had to make sure adversity would take its place. Notice He didn't just create the adversity part.

There are many harmful things in life, but for each there's usually some alternative or benefit. Wisdom is designed to use knowledge of things having good with bad in ways avoiding harm. Since fire can burn us someone might say God was evil for making it. We needed fire, so must learn not to abuse it, avoiding the evil of it.

God opened His mouth and let His words create. I don't believe what was created came from nothing, but in fact had substance in those words and the power behind them. Nothing just "happened", but everything was designed to work certain ways. A stone was created. The only "evil" we might find about it is should a man use it to bash his neighbor's head in. That evil was not created into the stone, nor did God speak that evil into existence. He made stones hard and useful as weapons, but also to build buildings with. Bad things happen, and some are expressions of wickedness, but not all bad things are wickedness. Bad things we don't like exist simply because they are part of how things work.

God could have created some force other than gravity, so that if I stepped off a tower I would just float and then go wherever I wished. The alternate force might have been a shield that kept me from entering the vacuum of space, repelling me towards Earth the higher I flew, maintaining a balance for life.

But He didn't do it that way. Gravity will demand that I slam into the ground. Knowing the consequence of defying gravity like that, is God evil for making it that way? I don't think that's a reasonable thought. Putting your hand in a fire will cause a burn and pain. God made fire that way. He put some "evil" to fire for reasons. Fire is useful and a wonderful thing, but if abused we can reap only bad from it. So it is with everything in creation. We learned there's an equal but opposite force to every action. That principle has benefited mankind immensely. Is God considered the merchant of evil if we hurt ourselves by hitting our head with a hammer? Yet, that potential "evil" comes with use of a hammer. It would not make sense for God to have made everything in such a way as nothing could hurt us. Instead He gave us a brain and ability to learn the proper use of the hammer. I have hammers, and detect no evil in them, thought know not to mash my thumb with them.

We find at the beginning of creation only darkness. That was the default condition. Was that evil? I don't think so, but abuse of darkness can be. Preferring the darkness doesn't look forward to life. Is it necessary for people to choose to do evil? The Bible doesn't teach that. The darkness was all around until God illumined it. He added light. The opposite of darkness is light. By comparison to light darkness is "evil", but God is not wicked for having darkness in existence wherever light is absent.
 
logical bob said:
If God is all powerful then presumably he can do whatever he wants and can therefore do evil if he chooses to.
All powerful does not mean that God can do that which is contradictory to his nature.

logical bob said:
This is the Euthyphro Dilemma. Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is good, or is it good because it is commanded by God?
False dilemma.
 
Free said:
logical bob said:
If God is all powerful then presumably he can do whatever he wants and can therefore do evil if he chooses to.
All powerful does not mean that God can do that which is contradictory to his nature.

That's right. It's like asking if God can create a square triangle :shrug


My translation is an ESV, and it reads "I make well-being and create clamity". In the context of this passage, which is God addressing Cyrus whom he used as a deliverer of Israel, I understand this to mean that good and bad come from the Lord: Good to those who love him (his people and those who bless them), and bad (calamity, judgment) to those who hate him (in this context, those who plundered Israel).
 
I agree Caroline.

In another thread, I wrote:
*****************************************************************************************************************
As far as Isaiah 45:7, within context, this verse is speaking about deliverance and judgment and thus, the word calamity would reflect a better understanding of the situation. More specifically, this verse is speaking of Babylon and how the Lord anointed Cyrus, the Persian who was devoted and pledged to Marduk (verse 4), to end Israel's exile and restore them to their land.

Let's be clear here, it is God who is delivering Israel from exile, not Cyrus. (Verse 7) Cyrus is the Lord's anointed instrument... In other words, the Lord is present with Cyrus.

God does this by anointing Cyrus (verse 1) so that he can conquer the Babylonians and thus, judgment is served upon Babylon and Israel is delivered from exile. Ironically, Cyrus is viewed as a Messiah (Verse 13), a savior, to Israel yet Cyrus maintains allegiance with Marduk and credits Marduk for his successful campaign against Babylon. (see the cylinder of Cyrus)

This stirs the theological question, "Is God present in his absence?" (Think covenant, Deut 28 / Lamentations) After all, it was God who caused Babylon to conquer Israel in the first place. ;)
*********************************************************************************************************************

I never did get anyone's reply with the idea that God is present in his absence...

But I regress. YHVH was present with Israel until they broke covenant and were exiled (Deut 28). Then, YHVH was present with the Babylonians so they could conquer Israel to implement Isaels exile, and once that was fulfilled, YHVH left the Babylonians and became present with Cyrus (Persians) for the redemption of Israel....
 
Free said:
logical bob said:
If God is all powerful then presumably he can do whatever he wants and can therefore do evil if he chooses to.
All powerful does not mean that God can do that which is contradictory to his nature.
Odd, then, that since I can choose to do good or evil I should have more free will than God.

Free said:
logical bob said:
This is the Euthyphro Dilemma. Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is good, or is it good because it is commanded by God?
False dilemma.
How so?
 
StoveBolts said:
Ironically, Cyrus is viewed as a Messiah (Verse 13), a savior, to Israel yet Cyrus maintains allegiance with Marduk and credits Marduk for his successful campaign against Babylon. (see the cylinder of Cyrus)

I know this is both pedantic and a derail, but hey...

Cyrus was a shrewd politician who used different religions to further his own ends. The Persians were new on the international scene while Babylon was seen as the most ancient and culturally sophisticated of cities. If his new empire was to be taken seriously he needed to be seen as the rightful ruler of Babylon. Marduk was the chief of the Babylonian gods and Cyrus claimed that Marduk had chosen him to conquor Babylon because the previous king, Nabonidas, had betrayed Marduk. There was an old Babylonian ritual where once a year the king presented himself in the temple of Marduk to have his face slapped and his ears pulled! Cyrus sent his son to submit to this several times, which was unusual for a conquorer in an age where destruction of a defeated city was the norm. When not in Babylon, however, Cyrus continued to worship the traditional Persian god Ahura Mazda. With the writing of Isaiah 45, Cyrus achieved Messiah status in three different religions, which was no mean feat.

[/pedantic derail]
 
Free said:
he is the standard of goodness; he is the good.
That doesn't work. If whatever God commands is good by definition then we have to accept that the genocide in Canaan was morally good, along with all the notorious rulings on stoning disobdeient children, forbidding disabled people from approaching the altar and not wearing mixed fibres. I'll take a lot of persuading that the complete and violent destruction of whole ethic groups could ever be good. In Bosnia and Rwanda and at Auschwitz we certainly didn't think so.

Secondly, people who have no contact with the Judeo-Christian god still have broadly similar moral values to us. All societies agree on the golden rule and that it's good to respect people, tell the truth and avoid stealing, violence etc. If God is the sole standard of moral good, how do people who've never encountered him come to these conclusions?
 
To get an idea as to how big God is - we read - >

I Kings 8:27 - "But will God indeed dwell on the earth ? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee : how much less this house that I have builded ? "
 
logical bob said:
Free said:
he is the standard of goodness; he is the good.
That doesn't work. If whatever God commands is good by definition then we have to accept that the genocide in Canaan was morally good, along with all the notorious rulings on stoning disobdeient children, forbidding disabled people from approaching the altar and not wearing mixed fibres. I'll take a lot of persuading that the complete and violent destruction of whole ethic groups could ever be good. In Bosnia and Rwanda and at Auschwitz we certainly didn't think so.
There are no simple answers to these questions and I do not want to appear to be simply dismissing them. I doubt I could give a good answer for them as they require a lot of depth and biblical understanding.

Having said that, at least a few points need to be made:

1) I will say that we need to be careful through whose eyes we are looking when we call acts of God morally wrong.

2) Some things are meant for certain people in certain times for a certain reason.

3) Do not over simplify the problem of evil. It is more complex than how the typical philosophical argument states it.

logical bob said:
Secondly, people who have no contact with the Judeo-Christian god still have broadly similar moral values to us. All societies agree on the golden rule and that it's good to respect people, tell the truth and avoid stealing, violence etc. If God is the sole standard of moral good, how do people who've never encountered him come to these conclusions?
This is precisely why many Christians argue to the absoluteness of morality. If God is the standard of what is morally good then morality is absolute and we should expect that most people have at least some common sense or idea of what is good and what is not.

This could come from at least two places: 1) all men are created in God's image, and 2) as Romans 1 says, "all men are without excuse;" that is, there is something about nature, about creation, including man, that points to the existence of a supreme being.
 
Job said, shall we recieve good from God and not evil also.

God himself is not evil or wicked. Everything that He does is good and just and right. God however can send evil and wickedness so that His sending it is just but the act itself and the one He sends it through is evil and wicked.

For example: God cannot lie- but God can SEND a lie.
God can and does use the wickedness of a mans heart, to bring that person to go and persecute Gods unruly people. Then God afterward, punishes that person that He used for what they did to His people even though it was HIM who had them do it.

So like God sent Assyria after Israel, Assyria was wicked, and they did evil to Israel which God sent and caused to happen to punish Israel. THEN He sent punishment to Assyria for what they had done.

The same way God can send a demon, or satan to do something that He has purpose to have done, but that demon or satan will in the end recieve judgement for what they have done.
 
Back
Top