Posted on 09/24/2022 9:27:48 PM PDT by OneVike
The debate about who created evil is an important one, since atheists and skeptics use the existence of evil in their arguments against theism. To begin with, Christians are told we must believe what the Bible tells us. Even a popular children's song has in its lyrics these words,
“Jesus Loves Me this I know, for the Bible tells me so"
If it is incumbent upon Christians to believe what the Bible tells us, then we can start with the first verse of the Bible that says,
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”
(Genesis 1:1)
So, if God created everything, and if evil is in the world, doesn't it follow that God created evil? After all, in his Gospel, the most beloved Disciple tells us,
“All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.”Thus God made everything through Christ. However, are there any Scriptures that specifically say God is the author of evil? Well, the closest we can get is,
(John 1:3)
“I make peace and create calamity”Then we read what the Prophet Amos wrote,
(Isaiah 45:7)
“If there is calamity in a city, will not the LORD have done it?"Ok, so can we then point to any passages that might elude to God condoning evil? Probably the best examples would be the time Joseph confronted his brothers who sold him into slavery,
(Amos 3:6)
“you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good"Then in Exodus we read that God sent Moses to Pharaoh with this message, Now, to make an honest Scriptural argument for my stance on this issue, I had to first share with you the verses used by those who argue that Scriptures prove God is the author of evil. Those who come from the persuasion that God has foreordained the entire course of events as Calvinists do, then reason and logic would suggest that God must be the author of evil. However, Calvinists who teach that God is the author of evil would be wise to pay attention to the following quote from (John Calvin) himself:
(Genesis 50:20)
“It is helpful, I think, to understand that sin is not itself a thing created. Sin is neither substance, being, spirit, nor matter. So it is technically not proper to think of sin as something that was created. Sin is simply a want of moral perfection in a fallen creature. Fallen creatures themselves bear full responsibility for their sin. And all evil in the universe emanates from the sins of fallen creatures.” Calvin goes on to state unequivocally that, “God's role with regard to evil is never as its author. He simply permits evil agents to work, then overrules evil for His own wise and holy ends. Ultimately He is able to make all things--including all the fruits of all the evil of all time--work together for a greater good.”
[Institutes, 3:23:8]
Mind you, the biggest defenders among Christians who believe God created evil are those who adhere to the teachings of John Calvin. Well it seems to me that there is a bit of a schism in the ranks of the Calvinist movement.
Two verses used to defend the belief that God created evil are (Isaiah 45:7) and (Amos 3:6). In both instances the word evil, not calamity, is used in 12 of the 21 Bible translations I have. It is important to note that all but one of the translations using the word evil were published before 1948. This is important, because in 1948 the (Dead Sea Scrolls) were discovered by a shepherd boy in the caves of Qumran in 1948. After exhaustive and painstaking investigation,it was learned that the Scrolls revealed that the proper translation for these verses would actually be disaster or calamity, not evil.
Now some may argue that a calamity is an evil, because it causes pain and misery and so they will still argue that God is the creator of evil. However, when speaking of evil in regards to the nature of sin, it should be observed that there are three kinds of
(Excerpt) Read more at trfmf.com …
That again is simply contrary to an INESCAPABLE LOGICAL CONCLUSION and instead examples illogical reasoning. Knowing what a person will do - which I myself can often tell - simply does not translate into scripting them to do so as without their choice for their own reasons, even though the foreknowledge of their choices fulfills your plan. In wartime strategy then the known reaction of an enemy can be used to the advantage of the adversary, but that does not mean the former is being compelled to do so.
Now while God knows the end from the beginning, and the death of Christ "was foreordained before the foundation of the world," (1 Peter 1:20) yet even still, none of the actions of Pilate of any of parties involved were against their free will, but of their own free will they made choices which God knew they would, and were responsible for, yet which were consistent with the plan of God, who is beyond our time/space habitation.
Your problem is not with when God works in mysterious ways, but that when He reveals how He works and how He does not, then you persist in irrational rants contrary to what He reveals, and logical, rational, reasonable analysis.
There’s not much sense in arguing religious belief; but I believe that God set it all up with certain ends in mind and laws functioning, and left us to it.
Original assertion by aquila48:
There is no free will if God is omniscent.
__
From your perspective it’s free will. From God’s perspective it’s predestination.
Rational thought is a powerful tool but human knowledge will always be incomplete (see Gödel). The irrational knowledge of faith is required to discover the knowledge of God. By faith I understand that God’s creation is good because his word says so. God gave me life to become an instrument of his praise and by finding him I found myself, not by force but by a voluntary act of accepting his perfect gift of salvation.
In addition to being omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent, God is infinite (has no beginning or end), God is immutable (never changes), God is self-sufficient, God is perfect (no blemish), God is good, wise and just. He is faithful, merciful and gracious. God is loving and God is personal (he desires that we do good and prosper). God is not a man that he should lie.
Finally, God is holy and sin separates us from his presence. If we acknowledge our sin and ask for forgiveness, believing that Jesus Christ is the son of God and was resurrected from the grave, we are saved. Our fellowship with God is restored because God sees only the righteousness of Christ in us.
Yes there is evil in this world but God did not create this evil, that is absurd. The light shined in the darkness but the darkness did not understand. Evil arose in the hearts of the disobedient, disobedience results in sin and sin leads to death. Those who love God demonstrate this love by obeying his commandments, not by works but by faith. Jesus gave us a new commandment, that we should love one another as he loved us. No greater love has any man than to lay down their life for their friends.
Yes there is suffering in this world and it seems senseless. But Jesus said “I have spoken these things to you so that in me you may have peace. In this would you will have tribulation but take courage, I have overcome the world.”
Faith is the key to a better understanding of the ways of God. Faith is the evidence of things not seen, the substance of things hoped for. That which is seen is temporary but that which is unseen is eternal.
Be of good cheer aquila48, in the constellation Aquila the Eagle, whose brightest star is Altair, one of three in the Summer Triangle.
“Knowing what a person will do - which I myself can often tell - simply does not translate into scripting them to do so as without their choice for their own reasons, even though the foreknowledge of their choices fulfills your plan.”
The person who knows what you will do, does not have to be the one that scripts or compels you what to do. The two can be separate entities, although the one who compels you what to do without exception, will obviously also knows what you will do.
In other words, if an impeccable seer, an omniscent, can predict without fail what you will do, you will inevitably do that and thus do not have free will. Your life story would be written and cast in concrete.
It’s really very simple and basic logic. I’m surprised that you’re having so much trouble seeing it. Or more correctly you don’t want to see it because it would be a major blow to your world view if free will did not exist.
One way out of this would be to relieve god (and everyone else) of omniscence. Of course that would cause other problems.
Hope this helps.
“There’s not much sense in arguing religious belief; but I believe that God set it all up with certain ends in mind and laws functioning, and left us to it.”
That’s not far from what I believe as well.
There is a certain order to the workings of the universe that definitely suggest that it was “designed”, which also suggests that there is a designer, which motivates us to find everything we can about him so we can, somehow, influence him to help us along our way.
And he/it designed us with senses and a brain that allows us to glean certain aspects of that order - which is what science is mostly about. Discovering the causes and effects that make this world what it is.
Science is mostly concerned with the physical world. how humans should lead their lives is not so much in its jurisdiction. So people resort to other disciplines - like religion, psychology, philosophy, experience... - to get a handle on how to best live a life.
“There’s not much sense in arguing religious belief; but I believe that God set it all up with certain ends in mind and laws functioning, and left us to it.”
That’s not far from what I believe as well.
There is a certain order to the workings of the universe that definitely suggest that it was “designed”, which also suggests that there is a designer, which motivates us to find everything we can about him so we can, somehow, influence him to help us along our way.
And he/it designed us with senses and a brain that allows us to glean certain aspects of that order - which is what science is mostly about. Discovering the causes and effects that make this world what it is.
Science is mostly concerned with the physical world. how humans should lead their lives is not so much in its jurisdiction. So people resort to other disciplines - like religion, psychology, philosophy, experience... - to get a handle on how to best live a life.
“From your perspective it’s free will. From God’s perspective it’s predestination.”
I’m not sure I follow that. If there is predestination, free will can’t possibly exist. Right? You will do what’s predestined - you have no choice.
“Rational thought is a powerful tool but human knowledge will always be incomplete (see Gödel). The irrational knowledge of faith is required to discover the knowledge of God.”
Perhaps, and maybe faith is just a higher order sense that some people posses. And for those who don’t, it can’t be described in terms of the other senses. Just like colors can’t be described to a blind man.
Sachi asked, please tell me, why does God allow evil? I don’t understand it.”
Kurosawa put down her sandwich. “Hmm, you know that’s a fair question,” Kurosawa tapped her chin in thought, “Let me think for a moment how to answer that for you.”
Sachi waited patiently while Kurosawa looked down while thinking. Then she looked up again. “Hmm, all right. Tell me, Sachi, I have a question for you.”
“Yes?”
“Tell me, can God make a stone that is so heavy that He cannot lift it?”
Sachi was confused. “Huh? That is something a child would ask.”
“Yes, but how would you answer that question if you were God?”
“I wouldn’t. It’s a silly question.”
“But why is it a silly question?”
“Well, it just is. It’s just.. a bogus question, that’s all.”
“You mean the question is invalid.”
“Yes, exactly.”
“But why is it invalid?”
“Uhm..” She thought some more. “Because it just is.”
Kurosawa smiled. “Sachi, the proper response is to say that the question is invalid because it is ill-posed. The question is based on the assumption that God would ever desire to do something against His own will. The question stumbles on the double-meaning of the word ‘can’. It conflates its two definitions: to allow (you may) and to want (desire to).”
“You mean kind of like the question, ‘When did you stop beating your wife?’ “
“Well, I suppose, sort of. But that question makes a different bogus assumption, that the person had been beating his wife, and the only question was to determine when he had stopped beating her. It’s a cheap rhetorical trick.”
“I see.”
“So getting back to the original question.. now tell me, what do you think of your question now, ‘Why does God allow evil?’”
Sachi thought a bit. “Hmm. I think what you are saying is that it is like the rock that God cannot lift, right? The question itself is ill-posed. Invalid.”
“Yes. But why is it ill-posed?”
Sachi thought some more. “It is because the question stumbles over the meaning of the word ‘allow’, just like the first question does over the word ‘can’.”
“You are correct. The question conflates the meaning that word, to permit (you may) versus to want (desire to). Now, in this case the second meaning is a bit more subtle than the rock question, because it turns on an implicit implication that God can do anything He desires, and so therefore He ought to be able to prevent evil and yet He does not.”
“I see. So in other words, what you are saying is that God permits evil to exist, but He does not desire it. But then please tell me, ma’am, why did God create evil in the first place if He does not want it?”
“You are asking me why did God create evil?”
“Uh, yes.”
Kurosawa looked a bit disappointed, for she saw that Sachi had just asked another ill-posed question without realizing it. She felt that Sachi should have been able to answer it herself. Kurosawa thought a moment about how to best explain it as simply as possible.
Kurosawa took a sheet of paper and turned it upside down, then she took out a ballpoint pen and carefully drew a round line on it. She then handed the piece of paper to Sachi. “What is that?”
Sachi looked at it on her desk. “You drew a circle.”
“Yes, a circle. That is my answer to your question.”
Sachi picked up the piece of paper and looked at it more closely. “This is a riddle.” She tried the understand the point that Kurosawa was trying to make. Eventually she gave up. She had no idea what Kurosawa was driving at.
Kurosawa explained, “The answer to my little riddle, dear girl, is the circle itself. Its existence. Did God create that? I don’t mean this particular one, I mean the idea, the concept, of a circle.”
Sachi thought. “Uhm, well, not ‘create’ as such, no. The idea of a circle exists independently of any creator. It would exist even if there was no God at all.”
“Right. A circle exists intrinsically. It has always been ‘created’, so to speak, not by God per se, but by the fundamental rules of basic mathematics. These basic laws exist independently of any creator. A circle is the natural result of constructing the set of all points on the Euclidean plane that are at a given distance r from a given point. The end result is always a circle.”
“I see. So what you are implying is that evil works the same way, yes? That evil is the result of some deeper, more fundamental, rules.”
“Am I? Keep going.”
“And, uh, and so..” Sachi furrowed her brow. “.. and so there might be rules that are so deep that they are intrinsic to how everything works, right? So the ‘circle of evil’, so to speak, is intrinsic. It is intrinsic not in the sense of God creating our particular universe or world, but in how any such universe by necessity must operate. At least any interesting one. And so to prevent a circle from being created, Euclid could have stopped with simply a one-dimensional geometry instead of a three-dimensional one.”
Kurosawa’s eyes twinkled. “Very good, Sachi. You just said something profound.”
“Uh, I did?”
Then Kurosawa appeared to change the subject. “Tell me, Sachi, why do predators exist?”
That threw Sachi off a bit. She wasn’t sure where Kurosawa was going with her new question. She thought some more. “Uhm, predators exist because they are a fundamental part of how life works..?”
Kurosawa beamed at her, “Very good! Yes, predators do seem to be everywhere. Even amoebas are predators. Organisms would have never progressed beyond the level of pre-eukaryotic cells otherwise. Mitochondria would have never been captured, for example, and that is a necessary prerequisite to form cells that contain a distinct nucleus with internal organelles, without which life would have been incredibly dull and uninteresting. And so we have predators.”
Sachi said, “And so.. on a human level it’s the same thing, right? It’s a fundamental side effect of our having free will. If humans could never prey on other humans, if evil was not possible, then we would lose all of our free will, our freedom to make moral choices. And the freedom to make those choices is important to Him, yes? Its part of what makes us precious in His eyes..”
“Yes. A forced confession is useless, empty. Meaningless. Worse than useless, actually.”
“Of course. Otherwise we would be nothing more than dolls, robots.”
“Which is why free will is fundamental. But tell me, Sachi, why not just simply outlaw all evil acts? Why not just create, say, some kind of worldwide police force that would always intervene as soon as we tried to do anything wrong?”
“Uhm.. because then there would just be resentment added as well. The desire for rebellion would be universal, and be quite justified to boot.”
“Okay. But now we are back to square one.”
Sachi sighed, “Ugh. I never realized how tricky it is..”
Kurosawa smiled at her indulgently. “You’re catching on. And yet we know that God’s solution is elegant, that His creation is amazing and majestic. I mean, just look out the window at it all, at all of the wonderful and beautiful scenery that you see, all of it was constructed from just a few basic physical rules and forces that are actually quite simple to understand.”
“And it is the same with us at the human level, right? That there are just a few basic rules of behavior? God has established those basic principles, like free will, which are needed in order for us to choose to love Him of our own volition. And so evil was also permitted, but not as flaw or defect, but rather as a necessary side effect of our ability to make choices.”
“Yes. I think C.S. Lewis said it best. ‘Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. A world of automata - of creatures that worked like machines - would hardly be worth creating. The happiness which God designs for His higher creatures is the happiness of being freely, voluntarily united to Him and to each other in an ecstasy of love and delight compared with which the most rapturous love between a man and a woman o
She went on. “When Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Good and Evil, it gave them the awareness of the ability to make moral choices, which they then could make of their own free will.”
Sachi leaned forward. “But ma’am, didn’t they already have free will before the Fall? And if so, why couldn’t they do evil acts before then?”
“They did have it, but they were also in perfect communion with God, so having evil thoughts didn’t even occur to them. They didn’t sin because it just wasn’t even conceivable. Afterwards it was.”
“But why not just have both? Why can’t we have perfect communion with Him and the awareness to make moral choices, all at the same time?”
“Well, you can either have the knowledge and ability to make moral choices - and face the consequences - or you can have direct contact with God, and with it immortality, and never stray because it never even enters your mind. You cannot have both. Once the option is open you are going to slip up. It’s inevitable, and then communion with Him becomes impossible. Well, that is, at least not until you introduce some kind of reconciliation mechanism.”
“You mean Christ.”
“Yes.”
“So, evil is basically the inevitable byproduct of our having free will combined with our ability to make moral choices.”
“More or less.”
Curious, did you go read the whole commentary?
Oh?
Genesis 3: 22
And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”
How did Man gain KNOWLEDGE of evil?
Would it not have to exist BEFORE the breaking of the only command GOD gave him?
Or was it created the instant that Adam took a bite?
We know (from Scripture) that Satan was around before Eve took a bite.
there ya go!
I believe these views are sustained by Scripture, including the truth that no one will be condemned because of what will be found in the books recording everything they did but only because their names are not found in the Lamb’s Book of Life.
Rather, it is you who is refusing to see the fallacy of your illogical false dilemma construct, for the simply fact that surely knowing what you will do can be by knowing what you will do with your freedom to choose! God knows that given the freedom to choose, and in the light of other factors, you will act in a certain way (in fact, since God exists outside of time, the future can be seen as today) and He does not have to make or coerce you, and as with Cain, can seek to persuade you otherwise. Why is that so hard to see? No, I’m not surprised that anti-theists have so much trouble seeing it, because it would be a major blow to their world view which seeks to impugn the character of God.
"One way out of this would be to relieve god (and everyone else) of omniscence. Of course that would cause other problems."
Actually, the way out of your parroting of ignorant irrational anti-theist assertions is to acknowledge that omniscience simply does not mean taking away the ability to choose, and thus being accountable for it, which man is for his chosen actions relative to the grace one has (for God can give more persuasive grace to some than others who choose evil), versus having no choice but to follow a script. That foreknowledge must mean the latter is simply illogical, regardless of the blindness of those who refuse to see it.
The confusion is btwn the manifestation of evil vs the concept and potentiality. If there is a right answer to 2+2 then there is necessarily a wrong answer, even before it is given. But the one who created numbers and correct addition did not create the wrong answer, but only the potentiality for such. It is the one who first provided the wrong answer that "created" it, and the devil created evil by the first rebellion, the first wrong answer/response to the Lord God being so.
Only two choices?
All this thread needs is for Slick Willy to chime in with his (in?)famous “it depends on what is is” statement.
Some people don’t follow - or interpret - scripture as you do, Elsie.
I believe profoundly in God - an intelligent Creator and First Cause of the Universe. I don’t presume, as some do, to be able to encompass God in my limited understanding; but I believe.
I consider myself a cultural and philosophical Christian; but there are things in some human interpretations of the various scriptures that I DON’T believe.
I’ve never bought-into the notion of a vengeful or capricious God, for instance; nor into the concepts of ‘vicarious atonement’ or some ‘salvation’ that takes place by faith alone.
I’ve come to what I believe through long thought and study, and I think that what I’ve decided upon (so far) has served me well.
I like to leave others to figure it out in their own ways, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.