Welcome to Gaia! ::

OK... This really isn't a troll thread. I swear...

It is a legitimate discussion that will hopefully prove a very real point that I want to make, which I will reveal later on...

The argument has been brought up in another thread that God created evil, and it was also argued that He couldn't have created evil...



This is a highly arguable statement, but between different denominations of Christians, it is considered true and false. It is definitely something I want people to ponder before posting.




A wonderful Scriptural reference to say the least. Yet, I can't help wondering what happened since God created EVERYTHING...




I have to ask, given this last quote, and the preceding Scripture... It is established that God created everything, and everything was good. Now it is established that God created the adversary (Lucifer if you must), but that means he created him with the capacity to be foolish... does that mean foolish is good? The same question applies to all other things. If all things were created good, yet they are not good now, then they were created with the capacity to fail, then does that mean their failings are good?



I honestly blatantly disagree with this one, but then I know others whole-heartedly agree. I don't see pain as evil, in fact, pain is a warning, that is wired into our nervous system, something God created. It is whet keeps me from injuring myself severely, or makes me rest when nothing else will. It is a signature of healing, and a prerequisite of strength. I think even Adam and Eve could experience physical discomfort before the Fall, but then again, I don't believe pain is evil...

Yet, there are allot of presumptions in this OP... presumptions like we know exactly what evil and good are. It seems to me as though so many of us just assume that if we don't like it, it must be evil. We don't seem to account for the fact that this life as we know it now is temporary, and that the more important side of life is on the other side.

I would like to know you guys thoughts. I am sorry if it seems I am singling anyone out, but I do love debate, and I will definitely debate. wink

I think it is important for views to be tried and tested. I believe that if we are open minded yet solid in our faith, then each time we test our faith, it is as though we are refining gold through fire.

this one of the topics where Christianity and Judaism disagree and ironically Christians and us "ebil" Gnostics agree. The verse in Issiah, "I created good and evil" when taken in context means literally that. In Hebrew thought God is the author of all things, including moral evil.

Christians diverge from their Jewish brethren because they assert that God could not have created evil, due to either personal experience or indirect experience of Christ as being the window into God's nature. This is where Jews will then accuse Christians of being dualistic and idolatrous. It would be easy to drop Isiah from canon and not deal with this viewpoint but the problem lies in that most of the support for Jesus alleged messiahship depends on Isiah. Now one could play mental gymnastics and say "well he created natural evil but not moral evil" but that ignores how Judaism interprets the Fall not as the introduction of evil but the introduction of moral responsibility for one's actions.

I think the most honest answer one can say in addressing Isiah if one hold it as canon would be, "Yes the author who wrote the text held to this view point but because of our revelation of Christ into the nature of God this is a view we disagree with."

My take on how evil, moral evil specifically, is that it is Wisdom with out Love and/or Reason. An idea gets executed with out thinking of others or not thinking about what it's consequences will be and bam you get a big mess. I hold to a variation of open theology which believes that God allows for evil in order to preserve agency since we are little gods made in his image. Natural evil, like weather catastrophies, wild animals, etc., are basically natural events that occur due to the natural laws being set from the get go and that God gave up some of his agency in order to set creation in motion so it could be distinct from him.

Miracles and divine intervention to me is not in that an act or some event happens in nature because it's unexplainable but because such events make us "think again", re-examine our life, or change us into becoming more loving and compassionate people toward each other. All miracles have naturalistic explanations that are consistent with the laws of the universe but what makes an event a miracle is how the event impacts us into become more Christlike. A statue can bleed for 20 years but it won't mean a hill of beans if it doesn't transform someone for the better.

Edit: The definition of evil I am using is ironically a variation on Augustine's definition. That evil is the absence of agape (compassion? comes close I think) in one's actions and thoughts.

Very beautifully put.

So...

So far, we pretty much all agree that God created at least the capacity for evil, if not evil itself. Then there are we who believe God is the author of all whether good or evil...

I have to point out this as well... What is evil? How would we know that which is good, or that which is evil, if we did not have a sense of it ingrained in us in the first place? Would we know what was good and evil if we did not first have a definition of it? Who gave us our first definition of morals? Where do we get the Law from?

If God had not written His Law on on our hearts, and if He did not give us the letter of the Law, we would not have boundaries of what is good and what is evil... It was only when He defined it that it came to be.

You can give the Tree of Knowledge argument (If you take the story literally), but it is the same answer. It would not have been 'wrong' if God had not gave the direct command to not eat of it. When He did, it became wrong. His defining what was wrong thus created a boundary that could be crossed... to me, the creation of that boundary is the creation of right and wrong, thus the creation of evil.

... But... we could argue that there would be no distinction of good, if there was nothing to counter it with...

I fully agree

This is actually an example along the lines of what I was looking for! 3nodding

This argument still demonstrates the idea that God created the capacity for evil... at least for me... If He made all things awesome with the capacity to later separate into good and evil, he was then, at least, aware of their potential (if we assume He is perfect)... to me that is the same as creating the evil itself... Was this then a mistake on His part, if He did not want the evil to exist?

This leads to another set of questions. The nigh blasphemous; "Is God really perfect?"

Returning to the planet theory... If we live on a planet that is only light, and that is all we know... but then one day we discover a planet in total darkness... Do we conclude that darkness did not exist before we knew of it?

It is generally accepted that there was a point in which we realized the existence of good and evil, but the very nature of the question implies it was already in existence before we knew about it. Thus it was already defined.

Thank you very much for this observation Venus! heart

I think everybody's got this headed in the right direction smile
I'm with the idea that god didn't create evil, that it was the choice of satan, and adam and eve that brought it into the world, but evil in what it is isn't a created thing, god created all of creation, so and did make everything good, so for evil to exist, it must not exist, but rather be the lack of existence, take fore example depression, it's not a chemical that creates it but rather the absence of balance the absence of serotonin, and endorphins. Depression, brokenness, agony, despair, anger, hatred, loss, hoplessness, rage, genocide, fear, its not something god created, but what's left when you take god and his good plan out of the picture. That's also the definition of sin is the absence of god and rejecting his plan, so evil is the absence of good, like depression the absence of fulfillment and hope, like darkness is the absence of light. That's the idea behind jesus, is that this sin, brokenness, this darkness and depraivity, Christ came as light, as truth, as love to burn away the darkness of our hearts in our rejection of god, to bring an end to lies that truth may reign, to bring love that conquers fear and overcomes hatred. but to do that, to have the truth the light the love of christ it requires giving up all that you are laying down your brokenness your anger, your rejection of god, even your dreams and your failures your shame and your depravity, and taking christ as your everything and giving up all you are and giving it to him, with that you gain christ as your own, and with him love conquers all fear and truth casts out lies, it breaks the chains of slavery to the heartbreak of sin. That's the idea behind christianity in a nutshell.

This is a very awesome line of philosophy.

Yet for argument's sake...

So, the absence of God, and good, is the perpetuation of evil. So, evil existed before God created the substantial?

Or when God decided to create and separated the substantial and the nothingness, evil would then be defined as the absence of God? Thus, God created the potential for evil when He separated the elements into their distinction and thus defined Himself from the rest of nothingness... The implications for this idea are staggering if you really sit down and think about them.

It leads to another point I would like to make... what spurred God to create everything in the first place? Are we just some cosmic experiment? Was God lonely? What was the catalyst for creation?