Why God Created Evil

[Sola_Fide]

Why God Created Evil
Vincent Cheung

http://www.vincentcheung.com/2005/06/09/why-god-created-evil/​

We are not using the word "create" in the same sense as God's original creation out of nothing, but we are referring to God's control over things that he has already created. That is, although God must actively cause evil thoughts and inclinations in the creature, and then he must actively cause the corresponding evil actions, he does not create new material or substance when he does this, since he is controlling what he has already created.


It is true that a person sins according to his evil nature, but as Luther writes, it is God who "creates" this evil nature in each newly conceived person after the pattern of fallen Adam, whose fall God also caused. And then, God must actively cause this evil nature to function and the person to act according to it. Luther writes that God never allows this evil nature to be idle in Satan and in ungodly people, but he continuously causes it to function by his power.


Luther perceived the biblical and metaphysical absurdities of affirming anything short of the above; in contrast, the weak view (common to [some seemingly] Reformed Christians today) is an unbiblical, unnecessary, irrational, and sophistical evasion. If our position is hyper-Calvinism (it is not), then it would simply mean that hyper-Calvinism is the correct and biblical view. And mislabeling it as fatalism doesn't do anything, either – it is the wimp's way out.


As for God's purpose for sin and evil, first, in boldly acknowledging the biblical truth that God is the sovereign and righteous "author of sin," we can note that even if we were unable to answer the question as to why he caused sin and evil, it would not pose a problem to Christianity, nor would it undermine what I've said about the "author of sin" issue. That is, even if we do not have an answer to the question, there is no self-contradiction in our view, nor does our view contradict Scripture. It would just be a matter of a lack of information, and rationally speaking, this is all that is at stake.


That said, we do have an answer to the question, and it is in the very passage that we examined from Romans 9:

One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?'" Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?


What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath – prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory –

even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? (v. 19–24)

According to Paul, at least one reason (it doesn't have to be the only reason) God created the reprobates (that is, to "create sin") is to provide a context through which he can reveal his wrath – something that the elect will otherwise never witness or experience. In other words, the reprobates are for the education and edification of the elect. They maintain a world of struggles and temptations for the elect, and at the end the elect will witness the outpouring of divine wrath against them. All of this serves to advance the sanctification of the elect and the declarative glory of God.


The following is taken from my Systematic Theology:

One important but neglected benefit that the love of God makes available to Christians is spiritual illumination:

Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him. (John 14:21)

I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. (John 15:15)

Theological knowledge – that is, intellectual knowledge about spiritual things – is one of the least prized gifts from God. But to be a friend of God means to have such knowledge. The scorn with which many professing believers regard doctrinal studies shows that they do not truly love God, although they would like to think that they love him.


Jeremiah 9:23-24 tells us that our priority is to obtain understanding and knowledge about God:

This is what the LORD says: "Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom or the strong man boast of his strength or the rich man boast of his riches, but let him who boasts boast about this: that he understands and knows me, that I am the LORD, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight," declares the LORD. (Jeremiah 9:23-24)

The knowledge of God is the most valuable treasure, and everything else is "dung" (Philippians 3:8, KJV) in comparison. In offering his elect reliable information about himself, God is giving them one of the greatest gifts that he can give to them….

One purpose of the reprobates – "the objects of his wrath" or those who are "prepared for destruction" – is that God may reveal this aspect of his nature to "the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory" (Romans 9:22-23). Since Christians have been "saved from God's wrath" (Romans 5:9) through Christ, this is one divine attribute that the elect will never experience, and therefore it must be demonstrated to them in other people. Recall that one benefit God gives to the elect is information or knowledge about himself, and this shows us to what lengths he will go to make himself known to his people.

Of course, people might not like this explanation, but it is the explicit teaching of Scripture. All that God does is intrinsically good and righteous, so it is also good and righteous for him to create the reprobates for the above purpose. Humanistic thinking will be horrified by this teaching, since it is more concerned about man's dignity and comfort than God's purpose and glory, but those with the mind of Christ will erupt in gratitude and reverence, and affirm that God is righteous, and that he does all things well.

...

 

[TER]

Blasphemy.

 

[libertarian4321]

Blasphemy.

Agreed.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster would never knowingly create evil.

 

[Drex]

Man created evil

 

[Captain Caveman]

Agreed.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster would never knowingly create evil.

God knows all things, past present and future. Agreed?

Knowing this, knowing what His creation was going to do, HE allowed it anyway (good and evil).

Without knowledge of wrongdoing, or wrongdoing to be allowed, we would not know how or why we need Him.

Therefor, the logical conclusion is that God may not have intentionally set out to create evil, but He knew that it would occur, and He created all things anyway.

With this reasoning in mind (not the reasoning given in the OP), it can be said that God did create evil.. not that He set out to do that, but that it was a "side effect" of creating all things.

God created all things, yes?

/food for thought

 

[otherone]

Therefor, the logical conclusion....With this reasoning in mind.....food for thought

I believe the Greeks screwed up a perfectly fine Jewish splinter cult.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Blasphemy.

Okay. Now this is a heavy charge, and something I take very seriously. Therefore, let's focus on God's Word and see if your heavy charge against me will bear out.

There are so many possible verses that I could begin with, but I will start with the one in the OP just to stay with the theme. This is from Romans 9. I am going to quote from the NLT because it is the simplest to understand. I am going to divide up the verses so everyone can digest each verse before going on to the next:

Romans 9:15-24 NLT

For God said to Moses,
“I will show mercy to anyone I choose,
and I will show compassion to anyone I choose.”


So it is God who decides to show mercy. We can neither choose it nor work for it.


For the Scriptures say that God told Pharaoh, “I have appointed you for the very purpose of displaying my power in you and to spread my fame throughout the earth.”


So you see, God chooses to show mercy to some, and he chooses to harden the hearts of others so they refuse to listen.


Well then, you might say, “Why does God blame people for not responding? Haven’t they simply done what he makes them do?”


No, don’t say that. Who are you, a mere human being, to argue with God? Should the thing that was created say to the one who created it, “Why have you made me like this?”


When a potter makes jars out of clay, doesn’t he have a right to use the same lump of clay to make one jar for decoration and another to throw garbage into?


In the same way, even though God has the right to show his anger and his power, he is very patient with those on whom his anger falls, who are destined for destruction.


He does this to make the riches of his glory shine even brighter on those to whom he shows mercy, who were prepared in advance for glory.


And we are among those whom he selected, both from the Jews and from the Gentiles.

TER, could you please exegete Romans 9:15-24 in the simplest way possible for me? I won't ask any other questions of you until I see where you stand on this. Thanks.

 

[moostraks]

A different perspective:
"THE ORIGIN OF EVIL


At the dawn of creation, before God made the visible world, but after the creation of the angels, there was a great catastrophe, of which we have knowledge only by its consequences. A group of angels opposed itself to God and fell away from Him, thereby becoming enemies of all that was good and holy. At the head of this rebellion stood Lucifer, whose very name (literally meaning 'light-bearing') indicates that originally he was good. By his own will he changed from his natural state into one which was unnatural; he opposed himself to God and fell away from good into evil. Lucifer, also called the devil (Greek diabolos - 'divider', 'separator', 'slanderer'), belonged to one of the highest ranks in the angelic hierarchy. Together with him other angels also defected, as the Book of Revelation tells us metaphorically: 'And a great star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch... and a third of the stars was struck, so that a third of their light was darkened' (Rev.8:10, 12). Some commentators therefore say that along with the morning star a third of the angels fell away.

By exercising their own free will the devil and his demons found themselves in darkness. Every reasonable living creature, whether angel or human being, possesses free will: the right to choose between good and evil. Free will is the property of everyone so that we can, by practicing good, become an ontological part of that good. In other words, goodness was never meant to be granted externally to us but must become our very own possession. If God imposed goodness as a necessity or an inevitability, then no one could ever become a perfectly free person. 'Nobody has ever become good by force', says St Symeon the New Theologian. Through unceasing growth in virtue the angels were meant to ascend to the plenitude of perfection, to the point of utter assimilation to the God of supreme goodness. Yet some of them chose to reject God and thereby sealed their own fate and the fate of the universe, which from that moment onwards became an arena for two contending polar (yet not equal) principles and powers: the Divine and the demonic, God and the devil.

The problem of the origin of evil has always been a challenge for Christian theology as it has often had to contend with overt or hidden manifestations of dualism. According to some dualistic sects, the entirety of being is made up of two realms which have forever existed together: the kingdom of light filled with many good aeons (angels), and the kingdom of darkness, filled with evil aeons (demons). Spiritual reality is subject to the god of light, while the god of darkness (Satan) has unlimited dominion over the material world. Matter itself is a sinful and evil entity: the humans should by all means possible mortify their bodies in order to be liberated from matter and return to the non-material world of good.

Christian theology viewed the nature and origin of evil differently. Evil is not a primeval essence that is coeternal and equal to God; it is a falling away from good, it is a revolt against good. In this sense it would be wrong to call evil a 'substance', as it does not exist in its own right. As darkness or shadow are not independent beings but are simply the absence or lack of light, so evil is merely the absence of good. 'Evil', writes St Basil the Great, 'is not a living and animated substance, but a condition of the soul which is opposed to virtue and which springs up in the slothful because of their falling away from Good. Do not, therefore, contemplate evil from without; and do not imagine some original nature of wickedness, but let each one recognize himself as the first author of the vice that is in him'.

God did not create anything evil: both angels and humans, as well as the material world, are good and beautiful by nature. However, rational creatures, possessing free will, can direct their freedom against God and thereby engender evil. This is precisely what happened: the light-bearing morning star (Lucifer), originally created good, abused his freedom, defaced his own virtuous nature and fell away from the Source of goodness."

http://www.sourozh.org/orthodox-faith-texts/the-origin-of-evil.html

 

[JuicyG]

There is no such thing as good and evil.

I suggest you guys read "Beyond good and evil" by Friedrich Nietzsche.

 

[MRoCkEd]

"As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today." Gen 50:20

 

[TER]

A different perspective:
"THE ORIGIN OF EVIL


At the dawn of creation, before God made the visible world, but after the creation of the angels, there was a great catastrophe, of which we have knowledge only by its consequences. A group of angels opposed itself to God and fell away from Him, thereby becoming enemies of all that was good and holy. At the head of this rebellion stood Lucifer, whose very name (literally meaning 'light-bearing') indicates that originally he was good. By his own will he changed from his natural state into one which was unnatural; he opposed himself to God and fell away from good into evil. Lucifer, also called the devil (Greek diabolos - 'divider', 'separator', 'slanderer'), belonged to one of the highest ranks in the angelic hierarchy. Together with him other angels also defected, as the Book of Revelation tells us metaphorically: 'And a great star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch... and a third of the stars was struck, so that a third of their light was darkened' (Rev.8:10, 12). Some commentators therefore say that along with the morning star a third of the angels fell away.

By exercising their own free will the devil and his demons found themselves in darkness. Every reasonable living creature, whether angel or human being, possesses free will: the right to choose between good and evil. Free will is the property of everyone so that we can, by practicing good, become an ontological part of that good. In other words, goodness was never meant to be granted externally to us but must become our very own possession. If God imposed goodness as a necessity or an inevitability, then no one could ever become a perfectly free person. 'Nobody has ever become good by force', says St Symeon the New Theologian. Through unceasing growth in virtue the angels were meant to ascend to the plenitude of perfection, to the point of utter assimilation to the God of supreme goodness. Yet some of them chose to reject God and thereby sealed their own fate and the fate of the universe, which from that moment onwards became an arena for two contending polar (yet not equal) principles and powers: the Divine and the demonic, God and the devil.

The problem of the origin of evil has always been a challenge for Christian theology as it has often had to contend with overt or hidden manifestations of dualism. According to some dualistic sects, the entirety of being is made up of two realms which have forever existed together: the kingdom of light filled with many good aeons (angels), and the kingdom of darkness, filled with evil aeons (demons). Spiritual reality is subject to the god of light, while the god of darkness (Satan) has unlimited dominion over the material world. Matter itself is a sinful and evil entity: the humans should by all means possible mortify their bodies in order to be liberated from matter and return to the non-material world of good.

Christian theology viewed the nature and origin of evil differently. Evil is not a primeval essence that is coeternal and equal to God; it is a falling away from good, it is a revolt against good. In this sense it would be wrong to call evil a 'substance', as it does not exist in its own right. As darkness or shadow are not independent beings but are simply the absence or lack of light, so evil is merely the absence of good. 'Evil', writes St Basil the Great, 'is not a living and animated substance, but a condition of the soul which is opposed to virtue and which springs up in the slothful because of their falling away from Good. Do not, therefore, contemplate evil from without; and do not imagine some original nature of wickedness, but let each one recognize himself as the first author of the vice that is in him'.

God did not create anything evil: both angels and humans, as well as the material world, are good and beautiful by nature. However, rational creatures, possessing free will, can direct their freedom against God and thereby engender evil. This is precisely what happened: the light-bearing morning star (Lucifer), originally created good, abused his freedom, defaced his own virtuous nature and fell away from the Source of goodness."

http://www.sourozh.org/orthodox-faith-texts/the-origin-of-evil.html

Worth repeating. Excellent post.

 

[TER]

Okay. Now this is a heavy charge, and something I take very seriously.

As you should. Stating God is the cause for evil is a serious charge as well.

TER, could you please exegete Romans 9:15-24 in the simplest way possible for me? I won't ask any other questions of you until I see where you stand on this. Thanks.

AB, why don't you read some of the early Church Fathers for the answers. They explain it much better than me.

 

[Captain Caveman]

I believe the Greeks screwed up a perfectly fine Jewish splinter cult.

Oddly, I thought the thinking I wrote about was getting away from Hellenistic thinking (Greek "this or that" mentality), to promote some extra ideas.

heh

 

[Captain Caveman]

As you should. Stating God is the cause for evil is a serious charge as well.



AB, why don't you read some of the early Church Fathers for the answers. They explain it much better than me.

Causing something to happen, can differ from purposing something to happen.

Not trying to throw any monkey wrenches in here (maybe I am.. sorry!).

 

[TER]

Evil is not the opposite of Good as much as it is the absence of Good just as Darkness is not the opposite of Light as much as it is the absence of Light.

Evil 'exists' in that it is apart from God. It has not substance to itself just as darkness is not substance but the lack of light. God allows things to happen that we see as evil because by allowing it to happen we might be corrected and change our ways. BUT, that does not mean that God is the cause of it or it is His will that such evil occurs.

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, but you were not willing!" (Luke 13:34)

I have yet to get a Calvinist give me any kind of response to this quote of the Lord.

 

[Sola_Fide]

As you should. Stating God is the cause for evil is a serious charge as well.



AB, why don't you read some of the early Church Fathers for the answers. They explain it much better than me.

Seriously??? You can't even give me a brief synopsis off the top of your head? Here is the text again:

Romans 9:14-24 NLT

Are we saying, then, that God was unfair? Of course not!


For God said to Moses,
“I will show mercy to anyone I choose,
and I will show compassion to anyone I choose.”


So it is God who decides to show mercy. We can neither choose it nor work for it.


For the Scriptures say that God told Pharaoh, “I have appointed you for the very purpose of displaying my power in you and to spread my fame throughout the earth.”


So you see, God chooses to show mercy to some, and he chooses to harden the hearts of others so they refuse to listen.


Well then, you might say, “Why does God blame people for not responding? Haven’t they simply done what he makes them do?”


No, don’t say that. Who are you, a mere human being, to argue with God? Should the thing that was created say to the one who created it, “Why have you made me like this?”


When a potter makes jars out of clay, doesn’t he have a right to use the same lump of clay to make one jar for decoration and another to throw garbage into?


In the same way, even though God has the right to show his anger and his power, he is very patient with those on whom his anger falls, who are destined for destruction.


He does this to make the riches of his glory shine even brighter on those to whom he shows mercy, who were prepared in advance for glory.


And we are among those whom he selected, both from the Jews and from the Gentiles.

The title of this thread was "Why God Created Evil". I contend that in Romans 9, Scripture gives us the answer. Do you concur? Or do you think the text explains something else? What is the meaning of Romans 9:14-24?

 

[TER]

Seriously??? You can't even give me a brief synopsis off the top of your head? Here is the text again:

The title of this thread was "Why God Created Evil". I contend that in Romans 9, Scripture gives us the answer. Do you concur? Or do you think the text explains something else? What is the meaning of Romans 9:14-24?

AB, I am working a busy shift right now and don't have time to offer you an explanation that you will just scoff away. Like I said, if you want to learn more, study the writings of the Church from the beginning instead of ignoring a thousand and a half years of saints.

But, if you have the time, I am looking forward to hearing your explanation for the quote of our Lord above. You would be the first Calvinist to provide one. Bet you wont though...

 

[Sola_Fide]

AB, I am working a busy shift right now and don't have time to offer you an explanation that you will just scoff away. Like I said, if you want to learn more, study the writings of the Church from the beginning instead of ignoring a thousand and a half years of saints.

But, if you have the time, I am looking forward to hearing your explanation for the quote of our Lord above. You would be the first Calvinist to provide one. Bet you wont though...

Do you promise that you will defend your charge of blasphemy against me and exegete the passage in Romans 9 if I exegete the passage in Luke? I am going to assume the answer is yes because you are a fair man.

Luke 13:34 is one of 3 primary verses (out of the entire Bible) that Arminians use to support their position. Yes, there are only 3 primary ones they use. So let's see if Luke 13:34 proves Arminianism.


The text is:

Luke 13:34 NIV

"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.

I bolded the most important portion of the verse. As James White says:

The ones the Lord desired to gather are NOT the ones who "were not willing"! Jesus speaks to the leaders about their children that they, the leaders, would not allow Him to "gather." Jesus was not seeking to gather the leaders, but their children.

So Jesus is saying to the Pharisees (who just a verse earlier told Him to leave Jerusalem) "I have wanted to gather your children together but you, the corrupt and evil leadership, have not been willing".

How on earth is this verse supposed to prove freewillism? Dr. White goes on to say:

This one consideration alone renders the passage useless for the Arminian seeking to establish freewillism. The "children" of the leaders would be Jews who were hindered by the Jewish leaders from hearing Christ. ( Potter's Freedom, 138, 2nd ed.)

Now, there are 2 other verses (only 2 more in the entire Bible) that Arminians usually use to try to prove freewillism. We Calvinists jokingly call these verses "The Big Three". I would bet money that the next verse you go to will be one of these 3.

And we can get in to all of the passages in Romans, Ephesians, and all of the passages in Luke and John where Jesus CLEARLY teaches the doctrines of grace. I only focused on Romans 9 because I wanted to focus on one passage at a time and not throw a million verses at you.


So...your exegesis of Romans 9 please? Whenever you have the time.

 

[TER]

so let me get this straight, putting aside the obvious exegesis and common sense in what Christ is saying in the above quote, for 2000 years, the witness of the entire Church according to the saints is all wrong and Mr. James White, born in the 20th century, has figured out what Christ really meant.

Yeah, I'm not buying it.

 

[Sola_Fide]

so let me get this straight, putting aside the obvious exegesis and common sense in what Christ is saying in the above quote, for 2000 years, the witness of the entire Church according to the saints is all wrong and Mr. James White, born in the 20th century, has figured out what Christ really meant.

Yeah, I'm not buying it.

These appeals to authority are not persuasive to me. I want to know what God's Word says, not what some men in robes tell me what to believe. If the men in robes differ with the Word of God, then its the men in robes who are wrong, not God.

Besides, I am intentionally not trying to engage that argument right now. I am appealing to your fairness, in that, because I attempted to exegete your verse, that you would exegete my passage from Romans 9. Can I count on your fairness?

I am proposing that Romans 9:14-24 shows us that God had a purpose in creating the evil in this world. Can you show me from that passage why I shouldn't believe this? What are your thoughts on this passage?