If God did not create evil, then who did?

[Robert_Sock]

Hi Robert,

Great question, and I really like your starting point for the thread. As far the Tree goes, I think it refers directly to the formation of the conscience, which has to do with knowing what is good to do, and what is bad. Evidence of this was in the effect of eating. A&E “learned” that it was bad (shameful) to be unclothed.

Well, to the degree that Isaiah 45:7 contradicts other parts of the Bible, i.e. NT explanations that God is Love, then yes, it is literally “incorrect”, it needs explaining, as other posters have done very well so far. I really liked Tantum ergo’s first response, I am wondering what your response to her is. I liked Wesrock’s too.

Another angle to this, Robert, is “Do humans have an evil inclination?” This is an assertion in itself that needs to be established. Humans definitely have an inclination to love one another and love God. They have an inclination to meet their own needs, satisfying their God-given inclinations to survive and thrive. While we are in the process of satisfying our own needs, we do occasionally do hurtful things. Is this an “inclination” to do evil? If yes, we are saying that the hurtful side-effects are what we are inclined to, but this is very difficult to establish.

We are inclined to do good, to do what we see as good.

The question should really be rephrased to who endowed us with concupiscence which as I see it is a form of evil, the evil inclination (yetzer hara) in Judaism?

 

[John_Martin]

The question should really be rephrased to who endowed us with concupiscence which as I see it is a form of evil, the evil inclination (yetzer hara) in Judaism?

Concupiscence is a good thing, as a movement of natural appetite (it is an alternate term for “desire”, and means a movement toward what is thought to be good to consume.

The “vice” associated with “desire” is also called “concupiscence”, which is why we almost always see “concupiscence” described as negative or evil.
A vice is a defect in humans, because we are rational animals. We were created to use reason to order our actions, whereas we often sidestep reason and immediately move toward what we desire.

This is what you term “evil” - it is a defect in ordering desire to right reason.
Evil simply means Defective. It “does not exist”. Rather, what exists is not complete in fulfilling its design. Without the Holy Spirit enlightening our spirit (soul), we are defective spiritually, and cannot do spiritual things. With original sin we blocked that light from illuminating our souls with the light wavelengths of “virtue” so we would not see the virtuous in things to do. "the light shines in the darkness, but the darkness… "

 

[BrunoMaria]

Well, I must admit, that I had to look up the word concupiscence.
In my language German (which still one or two tribes in forgotten corners of the world speak) this is: Begierde - begehren= lust for somebody or something.
Begierde however, concupiscence, is plain evil, **if **it not arouse out of love - love, which desires to unite with the beloved wife or husband.

Begierde, concupiscence same thing as originated from love, also might emerge out of greed, imperiousness, evil desires and more. But it might arise out of love all the same. Same word, but a universe of difference if a pedophile murderer desires his child victim on the hellish side, or a husband his spouse on the divine side.
This word is also included in the 6th Command: Thou shalst not commit adultery- In German: You must not desire your next’s…………
So; concupiscence is desire in the good as in the evil way.

In Sock’s post however, it sounds as if God endowed us with the bad edition of concupiscence - the evil edition, at once connected with the impeachment that it was God who endowed us with evil, evil desires - in short; concupiscence.
Such thougth would never come to mind in any real Christian.

 

[davidv]

Well, I must admit, that I had to look up the word concupiscence.
In my language German (which still one or two tribes in forgotten corners of the world speak) this is: Begierde - begehren= lust for somebody or something.
Begierde however, concupiscence, is plain evil, **if **it not arouse out of love - love, which desires to unite with the beloved wife or husband.

Begierde, concupiscence same thing as originated from love, also might emerge out of greed, imperiousness, evil desires and more. But it might arise out of love all the same. Same word, but a universe of difference if a pedophile murderer desires his child victim on the hellish side, or a husband his spouse on the divine side.
This word is also included in the 6th Command: Thou shalst not commit adultery- In German: You must not desire your next’s…………
So; concupiscence is desire in the good as in the evil way.

In Sock’s post however, it sounds as if God endowed us with the bad edition of concupiscence - the evil edition, at once connected with the impeachment that it was God who endowed us with evil, evil desires - in short; concupiscence.
Such thougth would never come to mind in any real Christian.

God endowed us with preternatural gifts which our first parent lost for us through sin. this loss included the inclination to sin which was not originally present. Concupiscence cannot be a gift, as it is a deprivation of our original state of holiness as created by God.

417 Adam and Eve transmitted to their descendants human nature wounded by their own first sin and hence deprived of original holiness and justice; this deprivation is called “original sin”.
418 As a result of original sin, human nature is weakened in its powers, subject to ignorance, suffering and the domination of death, and inclined to sin (this inclination is called “concupiscence”).

 

[BrunoMaria]

it wastoo late to edit - here the small edition:
not just the 5th but also the 10th command

…This word is also included in the 6th and the 10th Command: Thou shalst not commit adultery- and You must not desire your next’s…………

 

[ericc]

Isaiah 45:7 - “I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.” (Douay-Rheims)

This question may have been discussed before, but it’s a topic where I would like people’s opinion. Keep in mind that we believe in one God, not two, one good and the other evil. The paradox for me is in people’s belief that God is all good, and cannot do anything evil. I know that many will try and say that Lucifer had a free will and chose evil, but I would contend that such a belief has to be false because evil would have had to be present before Lucifer chose it.

We did. God created angels and man. Angels and man choose to sin. God created everything. So vicariously sin arose out of his creation. If he didn’t create free beings , there wouldn’t be any sin/evil. Since he created free beings, he created evil vicariously speaking. Evil is not a thing but a state arising from a disruption of a good state of affairs.

 

[fisherman_carl]

Did you miss this? (It is in the Douay Rheims after all)
create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.
[7] Create evil: The evils of afflictions and punishments, but not the evil of sin.

Afflictions and punishments are effects, not causes. Light from the sun causes sunburn if a person is overexposed (an ‘evil’), but light itself is not evil. The effect of imprudent overexposure is that the original good is ‘spoiled’, in this case, the beneficent effect of light builds up and builds up and causes a not beneficent effect of burning. Did God create ‘evil sunburn’ followed by evil skin keratosis, squamous cell carcinomas, and melenas?

Right. That is what the OT talks about when it talks about evil and God. It is talking about something bad happening because of some punishment. It is not talking about moral evil.

You can not just take one Scripture and base your theology on it, ignoring all others. Think, think, think! Winnie the Pooh!

Here are some other Scripture passages you need to take into account.

“Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.” (James 1:13)

“This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.” (1 John 1:5)

 

[fisherman_carl]

Isaiah 4:6–7. When these verses were written they may have been designed to counter dualism (very prevalent among the Persians and their neighbours), which held that two counterposed principles existed —good and evil; hence the emphasis on the fact that the Lord is the only God, the creator of all things, of light and of darkness. That would explain why God is described as the maker of “weal” and “woe”, whereas because God is infinite goodness he cannot properly be called the author of evil. However, because Christian readers could find the statement (in v. 2) disconcerting, exegetes have commented on it. Origen, quite early on, gave this explanation: “Evil, in the absolute sense of the word, was not created by God …]. If we speak of evil in a loose sense, meaning physical and natural evils, then we can say that God created it in order to convert men by their suffering. What is strange about this teaching? We refer to the punishments meted out by parents and teachers, and even the prescriptions and operations carried out by doctors and surgeons, as evils and sufferings, without blaming or condemning them. And that is how we should read the verse: I form light and create darkness, I make weal and woe (Is 45:7)” (Contra Celsum, 6, 55–56). And St Gregory the Great comments: “I make weal and woe: the peace of God is offered to us precisely in the moment when created things, which are good in themselves, though not always desired or sought with rectitude of heart, become the source of suffering and disgrace. Our union with God is broken by sin; it is fitting, therefore, that we return to him along the path of suffering. When any created thing, which is good in itself, causes us to suffer, it is an instrument for our conversion, so that we will return humbly to the source of peace” (Moralia in Job, 3, 9, 15).

• Navarre Catholic commentary

 

[CHRISTINE77]

The word translated “evil” or “calamity” in Is 45:7, can (not surprisingly) mean either “evil” or “calamity”. HALOT’s main definitions: Of little worth, poor, not beneficial, contemptible, reprobate, malicious, injurious, evil, sinister, bringing misfortune, badly depised, ill-deposed, heavy, sullen. For “destruction”, see Ez 14:21; for “evil” see Deut 17:5. Context must determine its precise meaning:

Is 45:3-8 ‘I will go before you And make the crooked places straight; I will break in pieces the gates of bronze And cut the bars of iron. I will give you the treasures of darkness And hidden riches of secret places, That you may know that I, the Lord, Who call you by your name, Am the God of Israel. For Jacob My servant’s sake, And Israel My elect, I have even called you by your name; I have named you, though you have not known Me. I am the Lord, and there is no other; There is no God besides Me. I will gird you, though you have not known Me, That they may know from the rising of the sun to its setting That there is none besides Me. I am the Lord, and there is no other; I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create calamity; I, the Lord, do all these things.’ “Rain down, you heavens, from above, And let the skies pour down righteousness; Let the earth open, let them bring forth salvation, And let righteousness spring up together. I, the Lord, have created it.

The verses before v7 show that God can create calamity. The verse after v8 emphasizes his righteousness. Thus, since the context emphasizes that God can cause calamity, and denies that God creates evil (in the moral sense), the correct translation is certainly “calamity” and not “evil”.

hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/6273/what-does-the-word-evil-mean-in-in-isaiah-45-7

 

[OneSheep]

The question should really be rephrased to who endowed us with concupiscence which as I see it is a form of evil, the evil inclination (yetzer hara) in Judaism?

Yes, Robert, I see your assertion, but the question still remains whether we have an “evil inclination”. We can see that people do what they think is best, this can be investigated though. Do you have a specific example of an “evil inclination”?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

The question should really be rephrased to who endowed us with concupiscence which as I see it is a form of evil, the evil inclination (yetzer hara) in Judaism?

Evil is a perversion of good. Sex itself is good. However it can be perverted obviously. Who endowed us with it ?- ourselves! By thinking we are on the level with God (sin of pride) we pervert his Goodness.

 

[rinnie]

So Isaiah 45:7 is not correct? I believe that God created the evil inclination in humans.

I disagree. God is good and all goodness comes from him. It is Man a d his lust for sin that causes evil.

 

[tonyrey]

There is a superb analysis of evil in *The Divine Names *by Dionysius the Areopagite:

There remains but one alternative : Evil is a weakness and deficiency of Good. Good things have all one cause. If evil is opposed to the Good, then hath evil many causes. The efficient causes of evil results, however, are not any laws and faculties, but an impotence and weakness and an inharmonious mingling of discordant elements. Evil things are not immutable and unchanging but indeterminate and indefinite: the sport of alien influences which have no definite aim. The Good must be the beginning and the end even of all evil things. For the Good is the final Purpose of all) things, good and bad alike. For even when we act amiss we do so from a longing for the Good; for no one makes evil his definite object when performing any action. Hence evil hath no substantial being, but only a shadow thereof; since the Good, and not itself, is the ultimate object for which it comes into, existence. Unto evil we can attribute but an accidental kind of existence. It exists for the sake of something else, and is not self-originating. And hence our action appears to be right (for it hath Good as its object) while yet it is not really right (because we mistake for good that which is not good). 'Tis proven, then, that our purpose is different from our action. **Thus evil is contrary to progress, purpose, nature, cause, principle, end, law, will, and being. Evil is, then, a lack, a deficiency, a weakness, a disproportion, an error, purposeless, unlovely, lifeless, unwise, unreasonable, imperfect, unreal, causeless, indeterminate, sterile, inert, powerless, disordered, incongruous, indefinite, dark, unsubstantial, and never in itself possessed of any existence whatever.

**

archive.org/stream/dionysiusareopag00pseu/dionysiusareopag00pseu_djvu.txt

In other words evil is essentially dysteleological. This view is reflected in the Catechism:

385 God is infinitely good and all his works are good. Yet no one can escape the experience of suffering or the evils in nature which seem to be linked to** the limitations **proper to creatures: and above all to the question of moral evil.

 

[tonyrey]

OneSheep;1e08672:

Yes, Robert, I see your assertion, but the question still remains whether we have an “evil inclination”. We can see that people do what they think is best, this can be investigated though. Do you have a specific example of an “evil inclination”?

Our dominant weakness is to think of ourselves first and put our own interests before those of others. It is our neglect that causes much of the needless poverty and suffering in the world. In many cases what we fail to do is by far the worst of our sins…

 

[tonyrey]

The question should really be rephrased to who endowed us with concupiscence which as I see it is a form of evil, the evil inclination (yetzer hara) in Judaism?

We are not isolated individuals, Robert, but members of a community who are deeply affected by our moral and cultural environment - which in turn is deeply affected by our independent existence. As Keats pointed out, this is “a vale of soul-making” in which we suffer but also develop as the result of our imperfection. Our capacity for love implies that we also have a capacity for lack of love which often has tragic consequences for ourselves and others. We are not “**endowed with concupiscence” **by God but by our human predicament. Our freedom has its disadvantages as well as advantages. We reap what we sow…

 

[OneSheep]

I disagree. God is good and all goodness comes from him. It is Man a d his lust for sin that causes evil.

Hi rinnie,

Man has a “lust” to satisfy sexual urges, for example, and when he seeks satisfaction outside the sacrament of marriage, it can lead to harm, no doubt. But man does not intend to cause the evil, man intends to get some good out of his action. Blindness and ignorance are part of the equation, of course, but these are always inadvertent at some level.

So I’m not seeing an inclination to do evil… other than an evil that is a by-product of something seen as good. The product is what is inclined to, not the by-product.

On the other hand, it is *purposeful *for people to believe that we have an inclination to do evil, because such labeling keeps us focused on practicing good behavior and avoiding bad behavior. Do you see what I mean?

 

[OneSheep]

Our dominant weakness is to think of ourselves first and put our own interests before those of others. It is our neglect that causes much of the needless poverty and suffering in the world. In many cases what we fail to do is by far the worst of our sins…

Hi Tony,

I agree that in many cases what we fail to do is by far the worst of our sins. However, it appears to me that God created a species that is inclined to do good.

What can be seen as a “weakness” can be viewed in a different way. God has endowed us with the strong desire to love and care for ourselves, no doubt. Such “self love” serves us, it drives us to do the best we can for ourselves to meet our physical and spiritual needs.

I agree completely that this runs into problems when the needs of the self are put before the interest of others. However, this self-before-others is a development issue. Children, for the most part, put themselves first. As they become aware of the needs of others, and also come aware of the value of other people; other people essentially become part of the “self”. We come to value the needs of others more than our own needs; in addition, harm to others becomes integrated with harm to the self. Your valuing of the needs of the impoverished and suffering is a direct result of Christ working within you through prayer and awareness.

So, rather than seeing our focus on self as a weakness, it can be seen as more of a starting-point that our Father nurtures and develops, and guides us by use of revelation.

Do you see this alternative?

 

[o_mlly]

Isaiah 45:7 - “I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.” (Douay-Rheims)

This question may have been discussed before, but it’s a topic where I would like people’s opinion. Keep in mind that we believe in one God, not two, one good and the other evil. The paradox for me is in people’s belief that God is all good, and cannot do anything evil. I know that many will try and say that Lucifer had a free will and chose evil, but I would contend that such a belief has to be false because evil would have had to be present before Lucifer chose it.

God is never the author of evil. However, one may say He indirectly causes evil when He retracts His grace. For instance, God as the source of all goodness causes the bountiful harvest. Unfortunately, fallen man becomes gluttonous. To correct man’s disorder, God retracts the grace of superfluous harvests. In the famine, man re-orders himself to God’s will: good comes out of evil.

 

[hasantas]

Isaiah 45:7 - “I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.” (Douay-Rheims)

This question may have been discussed before, but it’s a topic where I would like people’s opinion. Keep in mind that we believe in one God, not two, one good and the other evil. The paradox for me is in people’s belief that God is all good, and cannot do anything evil. I know that many will try and say that Lucifer had a free will and chose evil, but I would contend that such a belief has to be false because evil would have had to be present before Lucifer chose it.

The answer is that: The unique creator is God. That means God create every action. That is mentioned as “Tawhid” in Islam. God create the actions which we call sins. God do never injustice or evil. Human decide do an action ever good or evil and God create that action. So responsibility is belong to free will of Human.

Disasters, ilness or death which God create is not sin. human should be patient and must not rebel against God in that situations. God will reward human if human do not rebel.

And also creating evil is not evil but attaining evil is the evil. And the free will of human attain evil or good and God create. God create the action of evil but human cause that so responsibility is belong to human. The life on the world is an exam to discover if human would good or evil. So God had given human a free will and set it free to decide good or evil action. God create all action of humanbeing but through free will of human.