"I . . . CREATE EVIL" But why?

[PolyHedral]

Level two: Death is a spiritual state.

What suggests that spirituality is not invented?

That's not what the New Testament says.

There is little to suggest the New Testament is right.

 

[smokydot]

Isaiah [45v7] KJV does say God created evil.
But for what purpose or use did God create evil?

You've explained that below.

Proverbs [13v2] says the soul of those dealing treacherously is violence.
They will reap what they sow. They sow evil in the form of violence and will eat evil in the form of violent calamity because as Psalm [11v5] says the one that loves violence God's soul hates.
Proverbs [21v18] says the wicked will be a ransom for the righteous one, and those dealing treacherously takes the place of the upright ones
Evil does Not dwell with God. [Psalm 5v4] But rather God uses evil in the form of calamity against the wicked as described at Isaiah 11v4 and Rev 19v15.

 

[smokydot]

Didn't Jesus also think when the physical body dies so does the mind [mental] because Jesus likened death to a deep sleep? -John 11vs11-14.
In a deep sleep the mind does not remember.
[Psalm 6v5; 13v3; 115v17; 146v4; Ecc 9v5]
When Adam died, all of Adam died. From dust, Adam returned to dust.
Adam was sinner and sinners die according to Ezekiel 18vs4,20; Acts 3v32.
As Adam was non-existent before creation, Adam became non-existent after death.

Not according to Scripture.
He believed God's promise (Gen 3:15) and was saved by his faith.

he difference being we have the hope of the resurrection.
-Acts 24v15.

Adam and all the OT people of God will be there also, that being those who believed God's promise (who is Jesus the Christ).

 

[idea]

Isaiah 45:7 (KJV) says: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”

But why?

Why   did   god   create   evil? ​

.

God did not create evil -

(Old Testament | Isaiah45:7)
7 I form the light, and (transform) darkness: I make peace, and (transform) evil: I the LORD do all these things.

it is a translational error - God transforms darkness into light, and transforms evil into peace...

see: Hebrew Word Studies
"The English word "create" is an abstract word and a foriegn concept to the Hebrews."
God transforms what eternally exists, He does not ex-Nihlo create anything...

see also: http://www.dailyglobal.com/2009/10/god-is-not-the-creator-claims-academic/

etc. etc.

Here are two choices:

1. God did not create everything, God did not create evil.

- God did not create Himself – God did not create us, He did not create everything. John1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. If it was “made” it was made by Him, however, some things are not made – some things exist without a beginning, they are self-existent.
– Even though there is a part of us He did not create, He is a Loving, merciful, just God. He wants to adopt us, will do everything in His power save take away our free agency to refine us.
John3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
We have need for deliverance – not because of anything God has created – but as a result of the self-existent part of us that God is in no way responsible for.


2. God created everything, God created evil.
- God created us to be “wretched men” Romans 7:24 - O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?He deliberately created us imperfectly that we would suffer. He created Satan, He created Hell. God caused that His Son should die, and has chosen some to spend eternity in torment. Mark9:43 … hell, the fire that never shall be quenched


1 Timothy4:1NOW the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy

Which description of God sounds like lies in hypocrisy, lies, like doctrines of devils? Who would Satan have us believe God is?

God is cleaning up a mess He did not create... He transforms what eternally exists.

5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. - Jeremiah1:5

Our birth was not our beginning… Part of us had no beginning.

8 But now, O LORD, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand. - Isaiah64:8

The potter did not make the clay… but we can become His creation if we let Him refine us.

 

[Eliot Wild]

Jesus said that he who sins is a slave to sin. Slaves aren't free.

We don't have free will in the sense that we don't have the power to execute any moral choice we may choose. . .as in a choice to be sinless.
But we are still free agents within the limits of our disposition.

God created evil to show forth the glory of his justice.

God created evil to show off? Are you being serious? The evil which coaxed humanity's downfall, that has brought suffering and loss to countless souls throughout history, that destroys families, wreaks war and murder, cruelty and divisiveness, this evil was created so that God could show off his justice? He created evil that vexes mankind and often makes the innocent miserable just so He could show everyone how 'fair' he is and how crazy talented he is at putting evil in its place?

Seriously, no offense, but your post makes absolutely no sense. It even contradicts itself. You indicate that Jesus says all are a slaves to sin and slaves aren't free. Then you write that we are free agents within certain limits. But then you also write that we do not have the choice to be sinless.

If A = B and B = C, then A = C, right?

If sin = slavery and humanity = sin, then humanity = slavery, and slaves aren't free. So, there is absolutely no way mankind can be simultaneously slaves to sin and still be free. That is an absurdity.

However, despite the convoluted inconsistencies and contradictory elements in your argument, I find it observably wrong on a purely practical, empirical level. For example, I can choose not to sin. Believe me, I have at times in the past elected NOT to sin when faced with the proposition of doing so.

Now, don't get me wrong, I think I understand what you are saying about man's sinful nature. While certainly no expert, I am somewhat familiar with the Christian notion that man has a 'sinful' nature. But this is not what I'm talking about when I refer to freewill. So, I believe you are mixing up the two things.

Freewill, at least as I was using the term, means that individuals have the ability to make certain choices. Though we may be somewhat confined by certain physical, material limitations, we are ultimately freethinking, freewilling agents capable of, yes, making moral choices.

Being born with a 'sinful' nature, per most Christian concepts, as I understand them, is not a product of our freewill. I didn't choose be born with a sinful nature. That was forced on me by fate, by genetics, by God Himself perhaps. I can no more choose to have a 'sinless' nature than I can choose to be black or of African heritage and descent. I am a white guy, and though I didn't choose it, I'm stuck with it.

But I can choose not to sin. If I couldn't choose to freely make certain decisions, such as the willful acceptace of salvation and the willful avoidence of sin in my life, then that would really make most Christian doctrine an arbitrary, convoluted mess, wouldn't it? I mean, imagine being held to account for something one did not freely choose. That would be absolutely absurd, wouldn't it?

One of the primary reasons I left the Christian church was because many Christians, and just about all of 'em at the churches I had been attending, like to engage in mechanical rhetoric that sounds flashy but makes absolutely no sense when looked at with a perspicacious eye.

It is absolutely ridiculous, in my humble opinion, that the God of this universe would need to 'show forth his glory'. Christians have this misguided tendency to assume that God is anthropomorphic in character, that he is driven to act by the same silly motivations that influence mankind. God does not need to show off. He didn't need to create cruelty, misery and tragedy, in other words he didn't need to create 'evil, so that he could show us He is God and pretty freakin' talented. He showed off when he placed the rings around Saturn. He showcased his 'glory' when he engineered the supple, delicate curve of a woman's neck.

No, sir, with all due respect, I wholeheartedly disagree. God may have had His reasons, but he certainly didn't create evil to make himself look better.

 

[Skwim]

God did not create evil -

(Old Testament | Isaiah45:7)
7 I form the light, and (transform) darkness: I make peace, and (transform) evil: I the LORD do all these things.

it is a translational error - God transforms darkness into light, and transforms evil into peace...

see: Hebrew Word Studies
"The English word "create" is an abstract word and a foriegn concept to the Hebrews."
God transforms what eternally exists, He does not ex-Nihlo create anything...

What an asinine statement: that "create" is an abstract word and a foreign concept to the Hebrews."

see also: http://www.dailyglobal.com/2009/10/g...aims-academic/

etc. etc.

The Hebrew word from which "create" is translated is "bara'" (transliteration). And, if you look up "bara'" you'll see that it means

"1) to create, shape, form

a) to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)

1) of heaven and earth

2) of individual man

3) of new conditions and circumstances

4) of transformations

(Source: Strong's Lexicon/Concordance)
​

This translation of "bara'" is an old one, and until a new translation is accepted by the majority of Hebrew scholars the opinion of a single dissenter, Professor Ellen van Wolde, will have to take a back seat to it.

And isn't it interesting that your source reaffirms the notion of creating among the Hebrews., "[Professor Ellen van Wolde] said technically 'bara'" does mean 'create' . . . ."

And believe it or not, but "etc. etc." is worthless evidence.

Here are two choices:

1. God did not create everything, God did not create evil.

2. God created everything, God created evil.

Well, how about:

3) "God did not create everything, God did create evil"?

Furthermore, none of the the exposition you present is relevant.

The fact remains that the Hebrews, as with all people, did indeed have a concept of creating (note van Wolde's remark). To assert differently is to suggest they had no concept of, causing to exist, bring into being, give rise to, or produce. Think they lacked such a recognition of causation? Hardly. The remark you quote from Hebrew Word Studies is simple idiocy. Don't believe everything you read.

So, you're left with a single dissenter over the use of the word "bara'," technically meaning to "create," for your argument that god did not create evil. Thanks, but I'll stick with the opinion of the majority.

 

[smokydot]

God created evil to show off? Are you being serious? The evil which coaxed humanity's downfall, that has brought suffering and loss to countless souls throughout history, that destroys families, wreaks war and murder, cruelty and divisiveness, this evil was created so that God could show off his justice? He created evil that vexes mankind and often makes the innocent miserable just so He could show everyone how 'fair' he is and how crazy talented he is at putting evil in its place?
Seriously, no offense, but your post makes absolutely no sense. It even contradicts itself. You indicate that Jesus says all are a slaves to sin and slaves aren't free. Then you write that we are free agents within certain limits. But then you also write that we do not have the choice to be sinless.

Sorry I wasn't more clear about that.
Biblically, free agency is not free will.
Free agency is the ability to choose voluntarily, without external constraint.
We have that ability.

Free will is the ability to execute any moral choice we may choose, such as the choice to be completely sinless in thought, word and deed, in the NT sense of the word, for our whole life.
We do not have that ability. Only Adam and Jesus had that ability.
Adam chose to disobey. . .Jesus chose to obey in thought, word and deed. . .making him a perfect sacrifice.

The Bible affirms the ability to choose voluntarily without external constraint, but it denies the ability to execute any moral choice we may choose.

If A = B and B = C, then A = C, right?
If sin = slavery and humanity = sin, then humanity = slavery, and slaves aren't free. So, there is absolutely no way mankind can be simultaneously slaves to sin and still be free. That is an absurdity.
However, despite the convoluted inconsistencies and contradictory elements in your argument, I find it observably wrong on a purely practical, empirical level. For example, I can choose not to sin. Believe me, I have at times in the past elected NOT to sin when faced with the proposition of doing so.

That is true for all of us.
But you cannot choose to live a completely sinless life, being sinless in all thought, word and deed, at least not in the NT meaning of the word.

Now, don't get me wrong, I think I understand what you are saying about man's sinful nature. While certainly no expert, I am somewhat familiar with the Christian notion that man has a 'sinful' nature. But this is not what I'm talking about when I refer to freewill. So, I believe you are mixing up the two things.
Freewill, at least as I was using the term, means that individuals have the ability to make certain choices. Though we may be somewhat confined by certain physical, material limitations, we are ultimately freethinking, freewilling agents capable of, yes, making moral choices.

Being born with a 'sinful' nature, per most Christian concepts, as I understand them, is not a product of our freewill. I didn't choose be born with a sinful nature. That was forced on me by fate, by genetics, by God Himself perhaps. I can no more choose to have a 'sinless' nature than I can choose to be black or of African heritage and descent. I am a white guy, and though I didn't choose it, I'm stuck with it.
But I can choose not to sin. If I couldn't choose to freely make certain decisions, such as the willful acceptace of salvation and the willful avoidence of sin in my life, then that would really make most Christian doctrine an arbitrary, convoluted mess, wouldn't it? I mean, imagine being held to account for something one did not freely choose. That would be absolutely absurd, wouldn't it?

Only if a remedy to the problem were not offered to all who would receive it.

One of the primary reasons I left the Christian church was because many Christians, and just about all of 'em at the churches I had been attending, like to engage in mechanical rhetoric that sounds flashy but makes absolutely no sense when looked at with a perspicacious eye.
It is absolutely ridiculous, in my humble opinion, that the God of this universe would need to 'show forth his glory'

I understand your objection, but nevertheless, it is the Biblical testimony.

Christians have this misguided tendency to assume that God is anthropomorphic in character, that he is driven to act by the same silly motivations that influence mankind. God does not need to show off. He didn't need to create cruelty, misery and tragedy, in other words he didn't need to create 'evil, so that he could show us He is God and pretty freakin' talented. He showed off when he placed the rings around Saturn.

That would glorify his power and wisdom.
But there are many things worthy of glory in God. One of them is his justice. . .which is glorified in his application of it to evil.

He showcased his 'glory' when he engineered the supple, delicate curve of a woman's neck.
No, sir, with all due respect, I wholeheartedly disagree. God may have had His reasons, but he certainly didn't create evil to make himself look better.

And yet, that is the Biblical testimony.

And I know how objectionable it is to the mind of mankind.
That's why only the Holy Spirit can bring us to faith in the Word of God written.

 

[idea]

What an asinine statement: that "create" is an abstract word and a foreign concept to the Hebrews."


The Hebrew word from which "create" is translated is "bara'" (transliteration). And, if you look up "bara'" you'll see that it means

"1) to create, shape, form

a) to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)

1) of heaven and earth

2) of individual man

3) of new conditions and circumstances

4) of transformations

(Source: Strong's Lexicon/Concordance)
​

This translation of "bara'" is an old one, and until a new translation is accepted by the majority of Hebrew scholars the opinion of a single dissenter, Professor Ellen van Wolde, will have to take a back seat to it.

And isn't it interesting that your source reaffirms the notion of creating among the Hebrews., "[Professor Ellen van Wolde] said technically 'bara'" does mean 'create' . . . ."

And believe it or not, but "etc. etc." is worthless evidence.

Well, how about:

3) "God did not create everything, God did create evil"?

Furthermore, none of the the exposition you present is relevant.

The fact remains that the Hebrews, as with all people, did indeed have a concept of creating (note van Wolde's remark). To assert differently is to suggest they had no concept of, causing to exist, bring into being, give rise to, or produce. Think they lacked such a recognition of causation? Hardly. The remark you quote from Hebrew Word Studies is simple idiocy. Don't believe everything you read.

So, you're left with a single dissenter over the use of the word "bara'," technically meaning to "create," for your argument that god did not create evil. Thanks, but I'll stick with the opinion of the majority.

Thank you for the quote, I agree - create is define as "shape, form, fashion, of transformations" etc. etc. There is No scriptures which states that God created something from nothing, rather the words God "formed" man - as you would form clay, etc. etc.

God found us, and adopted us - look up the word "adopted"

(New Testament | Romans8:15)
ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

Adoption = is when you take care of someone you did not create

Again, God is cleaning up a mess He did not make. He will adopt us if we let Him... He can shape/form/fashion/refine us if we allow Him to. everything that has been transformed into something better has been touched by God... that which wallows in an uncreated state, that which does not allow itself to be formed, is no creation of God's.

like Lexicon?
Here is another word to look up: eternal
http://www.blueletterbible.org/search/translationResults.cfm?Criteria=eternal&t=KJV

eternal, as in "eternal God"

aiōnios
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G166&t=KJV
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2) without beginning
3) without end, never to cease, everlasting

Rom 16:26But1161 now3568 is made manifest5319 , and5037 by1223 the scriptures1124 of the prophets4397, according2596 to the commandment2003 of the everlasting166 God2316, made known1107 to1519 all3956 nations1484 for1519 the obedience5218 of faith4102:

Mat 19:29And2532 every3956 one3739 that hath forsaken863 houses3614, or2228 brethren80, or2228 sisters79, or2228 father3962, or2228 mother3384, or2228 wife1135, or2228 children5043, or2228 lands68, for my3450 name's3686 sake1752, shall receive2983 an hundredfold1542, and2532 shall inherit2816 everlasting166 life2222.


The same word that is used to describe the nature of God - eternal - without beginning - is the same word used to describe us... It would be impossible for us to have "eternal life" - life without beginning and without end, if we were not already eternal beings...

 

[Skwim]

Thank you for the quote, I agree - create is define as "shape, form, fashion, of transformations" etc. etc.

Examples and synonyms are not definitions.

There is No scriptures which states that God created something from nothing, rather the words God "formed" man - as you would form clay, etc. etc.

So what? It has no bearing on god creating evil.

God found us, and adopted us - look up the word "adopted"

(New Testament | Romans8:15)
ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

Adoption = is when you take care of someone you did not create

Irrelevant.

 

[idea]

Examples and synonyms are not definitions.

So what? It has no bearing on god creating evil.


Irrelevant.

definitions. Create = transform, not ex-nihlo. God did not ex-Nihlo create everything, He did not create evil, He has nothing to do with evil.

(New Testament | 1 John1:5)
God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

(Old Testament | Isaiah45:7)
7 I form the light, and transform darkness: I make peace, and transform what is evil: I the LORD do all these things.


With the correct translation, Isaiah 45 matches 1 John... There is no darkness, no evil, in God.

a house divided against itself does not stand... God does not create evil, He transforms it - He refines, and purifies what eternally exists.

 

[smokydot]

What suggests that spirituality is not invented?
There is little to suggest the New Testament is right.

That's why it is a matter of faith.
Either you believe it, or you don't.
Evidently, you don't.

And that's where it has to be left.

 

[Skwim]

definitions. Create = transform, not ex-nihlo. God did not ex-Nihlo create everything, He did not create evil, He has nothing to do with evil.

Sorry, but saying so does not make it so. The fact is, according to most Bibles god says he created evil. And if not evil, at least something not far from it.

(Old Testament | Isaiah45:7)
7 I form the light, and transform darkness: I make peace, and transform what is evil: I the LORD do all these things.

With the correct translation, Isaiah 45 matches 1 John... There is no darkness, no evil, in God.

The "correct" translation you say. By whose standard? I went through 19 versions of Isaiah 45:7 and found 17 using "create" and two that used "make"/"made,"

" CREATE"

New International Version
New American Standard Bible
The Message
Amplified Bible
King James Version
English Standard Version
Contemporary English Version
New King James Version
GOD’S WORD Translation
21st Century King James Version
American Standard Version
Darby Translation
Holman Christian Standard Bible
New International Reader's Version
New International Version - UK
Today’s New International Version, ©2005
New International Version 1984
​

"MAKE/MADE"

New Living Translation
New Century Version
​

but none using "transform"---I assume you can tell us which version used this unusual translation. In any case, the vast majority are sticking with "create" for "bara'" in Isaiah 45:7.

 

[smokydot]

Isaiah 45:7 (KJV) says: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”
But why?
Why   did   god   create   evil?
Obviously this isn't a condition that was going to pop up all on it its own, one that would simply materialize as the antithesis of peace, or god wouldn't have found it necessary to specifically create it. A feat so unique he even makes note of it, and insures it's never forgotten by putting in the Bible.
And just so there's no tap dancing with the word "evil," Strong's Lexicon lists the following meanings (transliterated as the Hebrew "ra`"):
2) evil, distress, misery, injury, calamity
a) evil, distress, adversity
b) evil, injury, wrong
c) evil (ethical)
Note that "evil" is the primary meaning of "ra`." And although some Bible versions fudge and use terms such as "disaster" or "calamity" in place of "evil," the most preferred rendering is "evil."
So again I ask:
Why did god create evil?
(And please, let's have none of those specious "So we would have free will" arguments.

Well, let's start with the fact that just because evil is the preferred definition of ra does not mean that's what it always means,
particularly when you look at the way it is used. It usage indicates it means injury, distress, calamity.

And that occurs when God, after much long-suffering with it, judges (punishes) sin with calamity, distress and injury.

 

[Skwim]

Well, let's start with the fact that just because evil is the preferred definition of ra does not mean that's what it always means,

Never said it does, only that it's the translation given in Isaiah 45:7 in almost all Bibles.

particularly when you look at the way it is used. It usage indicates it means injury, distress, calamity.

Its usage in other passages could mean those things. So what?

And that occurs when God, after much long-suffering with it, judges (punishes) sin with calamity, distress and injury.

Irrelevant.

 

[smokydot]

Never said it does, only that it's the translation given in Isaiah 45:7 in almost all Bibles.

So you're not asking "why did God create evil?", rather you're asking why ra is translated as evil in Isaiah 45:7?
That's a question for the translators.

Its usage in other passages could mean those things. So what?

Examination of the passages shows that it does mean those things. . .and is relevant to an accurate description of the subject.

Irrelevant.

It answers why God brings on calamity, distress and injury.
That's most relevant to the OP.