So, lets' check closer than my previous glance: evil - 3; woe - 1; calamity - 4; disaster - 1. As I said, calamity or disaster is predominate [in quantity], and added now: evil close behind.
As I said, I'm OK with the translation "evil," which is not always used of moral evil (see lexicon inclusion below). NKJ English search while writing this: "evil" 482 hits in 454 verses. Also: Hebrew "ra" 569 hits in 529 verses (although it looks like the search is picking up a few other similar words). Greek "kaka" 354 hits in 325 verses. Big job to tell me "evil" is not an acceptable translation, or for me to prove it is. So, let's just agree that it's OK for now to retain our personal preferences for whatever our reasons.
FWIW, I'm not opposing you on this, as I've already explained that I do see the context speaking of national judgments by God. We're thus in agreement it seems.
I'm fully aware of what I said, and of the reasons for saying it. The full context of my discussion was not moral evil, but of how God works His will in relation to man's will.
Thanks for the input. I did look for such things when reading the Text and normally do. I also looked for parallels and know that darkness is used as a metaphor for evil at times (whatever its precise meaning is in context) and I noted that "create" is used in relation to both darkness and evil in Isaiah 45:7. If I was digging deeper, I'd want to know more of why. I already noted that it seems God is making the case that He is the Sovereign God that is behind all the things that will be done by Cyrus, and that there are no other (g)God's but Him.
Depends on what "evil" means here and His judgment on nations surely has to do with how He interacts with the things you mention.
Re: evil: in this instance and maybe in one or more of the other hundreds of uses of the word, He is not distanced from evil, because it does not have to mean what you narrowly want it to mean. It all depends on what is meant by "evil" in the context. Also, just to show you what I'm looking at without digging much deeper into other resources, here's some of the flexibility of the Hebrew "ra" and note, if you care to read all this (and no criticism if you don't) how "evil" shows up 3 different times in 2 or 3 different senses:
רַע adjective masculine singular absolute
__________________________________
Holladay, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the OT (HOL)
Hol7961
רַע, ) רָע225 × ) : f. רָעָה; pl. רָעִים, cs. רָעֵי, f. רָעוֹת; adj.: — 1. of bad quality, inferior: cattle Gn 4120, water 2K 219; mar°eh ugly Gn 413; — 2. disagreeable, unwholesome: lifetime Gn 479, region Nu 205; b®r¹±â in unfavorable circumstances 2K 1410; — 3. bad, of no value, contemptible: name Dt 2214; — 4. bad-tempered, evil, morally depraved: maµš¹bâ (scheme) Gn 65; derek r¹±â 1K 1333; — 5. ra± b®±ênê bad in the eyes ( = judgment) of = disagreeable, displeasing Gn 288, = undesirable, annoying Nu 1110, = objectionable, disapproved of 1K 116; ra± ±al annoying to Ec 217; — 6. bad = vicious, harmful: boils Dt 2835, wild animal Gn 3733; d¹b¹r ra± something unwholesome 2K 441; rûµ r¹±â harmful, destructive spirit 1S 1614; ra± ±ayin envious Pr 236; — 7. evil, adverse: yôm r¹± fatal day Am 63; r¹± disaster Gn 4434; b®r¹± in a bad situation Ex 59; l®ra± l¹kem to your harm Je 76; — 8. bad, evil (in the absolute, ethical sense) Gn 29 1K 39; — 9. in a bad mood, cross, discontented: p¹nék¹ r¹±îm you look out of sorts Gn 407; — 10. ra± > noun: (I fear no) evil Ps 234; °anšê r¹± wicked men Pr 285; — 11. spec.: b®r¹± hû° he is prone to evil Ex 3222; ±¹´â r¹±â cause disaster? do harm to onesf. ? 2S 1218. (pg 342)
With all this said, like I said, I'm not really opposing you. I'm a fan of attempting to be consistent with translating words. It's confounding to see the varieties of translations for the same word. But words have ranges of meanings, translations are done in different eras under different controls, and some of my attempts to be consistent in translating myself have been humbled.
It wasn't my case that God creates moral evil, but that we don't have a handle on exactly what He does and doesn't do in all respects. I also for some time have not desired to remain in a theological box anymore and I question most thinking now, including some of the indirect responsibilities for His creation that God seems to logically have, and why that logic may or may not be correct. I understand that His character is never lessened in any way.