The problem of evil

[Norman70]

My apologies if this has been discussed already in any forum at CF, but in discussion with my wife today, Christmas Eve, she has come up with an interesting theological position, not particularly concerning a solution to the problem of evil, but more concerned about its source.

She is not convinced that the devil was created by God, firstly as a good angel in heaven, but then rebelled. Her argument is that God is a perfectly good God, cannot in any sense be involved in evil, therefore could not have created an angel who went bad. She maintains that only goodness was created by God, but because all things must have an opposite, then badness was created too, without any exercise on His part. The devil was released into our material world (this has a surprising parallel in science with our knowledge of positive and negative, and matter and anti-matter). Whatever ever is created, even by God, there has to be an opposite, therefore the devil is at large now and God's purpose is to instruct us as to how to cast him out.
I was impressed, I had not ever thought about the possibility of this theology. My immediate reaction was to think that her thoughts were not unique, and there must already be a theology which encompasses this approach to the existence of evil.
Neither of us are literalists, therefore the Adam and Eve story is a nice story, and the devil may well have been in the snake, but we are here discussing from where did the devil first come?
Does anyone know whether or not such a theology on the existence of evil has already been developed and is already one of the existing named theologies? We are interested in this discussion not as to how to deal with evil, apart from following God's Word (Jesus) of course, but to enquire whether or not there is an existing theological position which espouses this idea?

 

[TuxAme]

Doesn't your wife believe that we are created by God? How could we be when we ourselves are capable of such evil?

Doesn't she believe that all things (and beings) were created by God? If God didn't create Satan, then who did?

She is mistaken about what's good. God doesn't cease to be good because His creation rebels against Him.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

My apologies if this has been discussed already in any forum at CF, but in discussion with my wife today, Christmas Eve, she has come up with an interesting theological position, not particularly concerning a solution to the problem of evil, but more concerned about its source.

She is not convinced that the devil was created by God, firstly as a good angel in heaven, but then rebelled. Her argument is that God is a perfectly good God, cannot in any sense be involved in evil, therefore could not have created an angel who went bad. She maintains that only goodness was created by God, but because all things must have an opposite, then badness was created too, without any exercise on His part. The devil was released into our material world (this has a surprising parallel in science with our knowledge of positive and negative, and matter and anti-matter). Whatever ever is created, even by God, there has to be an opposite, therefore the devil is at large now and God's purpose is to instruct us as to how to cast him out.
I was impressed, I had not ever thought about the possibility of this theology. My immediate reaction was to think that her thoughts were not unique, and there must already be a theology which encompasses this approach to the existence of evil.
Neither of us are literalists, therefore the Adam and Eve story is a nice story, and the devil may well have been in the snake, but we are here discussing from where did the devil first come?
Does anyone know whether or not such a theology on the existence of evil has already been developed and is already one of the existing named theologies? We are interested in this discussion not as to how to deal with evil, apart from following God's Word (Jesus) of course, but to enquire whether or not there is an existing theological position which espouses this idea?

Look up the term, "Zoroastrianism."

I don't intend to directly burst the theological bubble your wife has made, but have her then look up Christian rebuttals to Zoroastrianism.

 

[SkyWriting]

My apologies if this has been discussed already in any forum at CF, but in discussion with my wife today, Christmas Eve, she has come up with an interesting theological position, not particularly concerning a solution to the problem of evil, but more concerned about its source. She is not convinced that the devil was created by God, firstly as a good angel in heaven, but then rebelled. Her argument is that God is a perfectly good God, cannot in any sense be involved in evil, therefore could not have created an angel who went bad. She maintains that only goodness was created by God, but because all things must have an opposite, then badness was created too, without any exercise on His part. The devil was released into our material world (this has a surprising parallel in science with our knowledge of positive and negative, and matter and anti-matter). Whatever ever is created, even by God, there has to be an opposite, therefore the devil is at large now and God's purpose is to instruct us as to how to cast him out.I was impressed, I had not ever thought about the possibility of this theology. My immediate reaction was to think that her thoughts were not unique, and there must already be a theology which encompasses this approach to the existence of evil.Neither of us are literalists, therefore the Adam and Eve story is a nice story, and the devil may well have been in the snake, but we are here discussing from where did the devil first come?Does anyone know whether or not such a theology on the existence of evil has already been developed and is already one of the existing named theologies? We are interested in this discussion not as to how to deal with evil, apart from following God's Word (Jesus) of course, but to enquire whether or not there is an existing theological position which espouses this idea?

It's the examination of love that is at issue.

If you love something, you give it options. If you love you children, do not leash them or cage them, but give them guidance and the option to disobey and discover the wisdom of your guidance.

If your wife loves you, she lets you leave the house.

Because God loves us, he created a situation where we could disobey him (sin). Sin is embracing the evil of not obeying God. But that is our option because of Gods love.

 

[SkyWriting]

Look up the term, "Zoroastrianism."I don't intend to directly burst the theological bubble your wife has made, but have her then look up Christian rebuttals to Zoroastrianism.

Becasue no one can join that religious group, it's hard to imagine why a rebuttal is needed. It's not like they are recruiting.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Becasue no one can join that religious group, it's hard to imagine why a rebuttal is needed. It's not like they are recruiting.

Well, sure. But my point in saying what I've said to the OP is to address the general 'framework' that the gentleman's wife is entertaining. And that's it.

Anyway, I'm out of here for the day. Have a Merry Christmas, SkyWriting!

 

[tdidymas]

Becasue no one can join that religious group, it's hard to imagine why a rebuttal is needed. It's not like they are recruiting.

"We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities..."

The devil is still recruiting his bad ideas to anyone who listens.
TD

 

[tdidymas]

My apologies if this has been discussed already in any forum at CF, but in discussion with my wife today, Christmas Eve, she has come up with an interesting theological position, not particularly concerning a solution to the problem of evil, but more concerned about its source.

She is not convinced that the devil was created by God, firstly as a good angel in heaven, but then rebelled. Her argument is that God is a perfectly good God, cannot in any sense be involved in evil, therefore could not have created an angel who went bad. She maintains that only goodness was created by God, but because all things must have an opposite, then badness was created too, without any exercise on His part. The devil was released into our material world (this has a surprising parallel in science with our knowledge of positive and negative, and matter and anti-matter). Whatever ever is created, even by God, there has to be an opposite, therefore the devil is at large now and God's purpose is to instruct us as to how to cast him out.
I was impressed, I had not ever thought about the possibility of this theology. My immediate reaction was to think that her thoughts were not unique, and there must already be a theology which encompasses this approach to the existence of evil.
Neither of us are literalists, therefore the Adam and Eve story is a nice story, and the devil may well have been in the snake, but we are here discussing from where did the devil first come?
Does anyone know whether or not such a theology on the existence of evil has already been developed and is already one of the existing named theologies? We are interested in this discussion not as to how to deal with evil, apart from following God's Word (Jesus) of course, but to enquire whether or not there is an existing theological position which espouses this idea?

God didn't create the devil (Satan) as the devil, but He did create Satan with a possibility of rebellion against Him, which did happen as we see it. God allowing evil to enter creation does not make God evil. Rather, God had an original plan for mankind whom He knew would fall prey to evil, and that was redemption through Christ. Faith in Christ is the means to that redemption, and is the means for us to become Christlike. So in effect, for this plan to happen, evil had to happen in order to put a barrier to our Christlikeness, so that our faith in Christ's delivering power would be the means for our overcoming evil. This is Christlikeness, since Christ is the ultimate overcomer. Therefore, it is necessary for evil to exist in order for the overcoming power of Christ to be displayed in all who overcome evil by faith. Reference Romans 8:1-25.
TD

 

[SkyWriting]

"We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities..."

The devil is still recruiting his bad ideas to anyone who listens.
TD

I've heard that, but again, principalities don't recruit.

 

[tdidymas]

I've heard that, but again, principalities don't recruit.

So then, you don't believe that demons (evil entities, unclean spirits, Satan) exist?
TD

 

[Norman70]

Reading responses so far gives us this story, which presumably is Scriptural. In the Beginning the whole of God's Creation was good, and Satan was one of God's angels, all of whom were good including Satan. But Satan rebelled and came to earth as the devil, brought a few angels with him, introduced sin and spread his wickedness.
Satan rebelled because all of God's creatures were given free will, so where did Satan's desire to rebel come from? If everything was good, why rebel?
I trust no one sees me as being facetious, as a novice Christian I am just searching.

 

[tdidymas]

Reading responses so far gives us this story, which presumably is Scriptural. In the Beginning the whole of God's Creation was good, and Satan was one of God's angels, all of whom were good including Satan. But Satan rebelled and came to earth as the devil, brought a few angels with him, introduced sin and spread his wickedness.
Satan rebelled because all of God's creatures were given free will, so where did Satan's desire to rebel come from? If everything was good, why rebel?
I trust no one sees me as being facetious, as a novice Christian I am just searching.

Actually, the Bible doesn't say. It is surmised that pride was Satan's downfall, and the statement about the king of Babylon in Isa. 14:12-14 is traditionally attributed to Satan.
TD

 

[Norman70]

@tdidymas. Thank you for your quick response. You say it is surmised that pride was Satan's downfall therefore I have to ask from where does this surmising come? Does it come from the authors of the Scriptures or from interpreters?
Also I have a problem if pride is a sin. If Satan was a perfectly good angel in God's perfect world, then from where or how did Satan's pride arise?
And again, the seven deadly sins are mostly sins of the flesh, but God created a perfect man in His image therefore why did this mortal form possess the propensity for these sins?
I have no criticism here of Christianity, I am just asking how we answer these apparent paradoxes.

 

[tdidymas]

@tdidymas. Thank you for your quick response. You say it is surmised that pride was Satan's downfall therefore I have to ask from where does this surmising come? Does it come from the authors of the Scriptures or from interpreters?
Also I have a problem if pride is a sin. If Satan was a perfectly good angel in God's perfect world, then from where or how did Satan's pride arise?
And again, the seven deadly sins are mostly sins of the flesh, but God created a perfect man in His image therefore why did this mortal form possess the propensity for these sins?
I have no criticism here of Christianity, I am just asking how we answer these apparent paradoxes.

The surmising came from interpretation of Isa. 14 and other similar passages of scripture. Notice that it quotes the ultimate sinner in saying "I will be like the Most High." Self-exalted pride is the attitude here.

The question that if Satan was initially created as a perfect being, then how could "sin be found" in him (the phrase from another passage in Ezekiel). If God created both angels and man in His own image, then it would include virtues as well as intelligence, etc. But it would also include a potentially autonomous will, called "free will."

So then, if the "natural" reasoning forgets who God is, and thus reasons around respect of God, then the reasoning might become corrupted by a shift from God-centered to self-centered reasoning. Then if self-centered reasoning results in self-exalted pride, then one might become God's adversary, thus "satan." This is exactly what "free will" did to Adam and Eve, since they became autonomous, that is, an authority unto themselves - "knowing good and evil" and therefore determining it for themselves in disregard of God's will.

It is believed the same thing happened to Satan and all the fallen angels, now considered unclean spirits or demons. The difference is that the fallen angels are spirit beings which apparently cannot be redeemed as mankind can, since mankind has never seen God. Therefore God in His great wisdom can redeem man through substitution and grace, since man can believe in the God he doesn't see.

The apostle Paul wrote "Christ was foreknown from the foundation of the world" - this tells me that God had redemption of mankind as His primary plan (there is no "plan B"). In order to do this, it was necessary for evil to exist, and to conquer man, so that man could be redeemed from it. Part of the virtue of Christ is His overcoming strength.

So in order for man to exhibit this overcoming virtue of Christlike character, sin must exist in him so that he can overcome it by faith in Christ. Thus, the fleshly bodies we live in tend to pressure us toward pleasure and avoidance of pain, and this is the inclination to sinfulness. If we love pleasure more than God, then we will commit sin.

We do not know how or why God created us the way we are. All we know is that we find ourselves in this sinful condition, and that forces us to go to God for His solution, and this is part of redemption. If He had created us in a glorified state like the angels, then we probably could not have been redeemed, since the fallen angels are not redeemed.

We know by what the gospel and the NT says, that love is the path to Christlikeness. But "Love comes from God," as the apostle John writes, therefore it takes faith in Christ and in the Spirit to appropriate that love from God that God requires us to express to others. This is the overcoming action that shows we are sons of God. "This is what overcomes the world, even our faith." (1 John 5:4, Mat. 5:43-48).
TD

 

[Lots of Questions]

"She maintains that only goodness was created by God, but because all things must have an opposite, then badness was created too, without any exercise on His part."

I know many people agree with that idea but it does not make sense to me. I can not understand how God can be almighty and still have something that is out of His control.
Currently my personal take on the problem of Evil is this: God created evil but since God is the basis for Good and Evil (as in, God decides what is good and what is evil) then God can still be good. We can think God is evil for creating evil but our opinion does not matter, only God's opinion matters. And if God says He Himself is good then He is indeed good. It's very similar to the idea that Good and Bad are simply a human construct, and that ethics are just based on opinion. In that case I'd say "true" ethics belong to God, and that way God can be good, despite having created evil (if He did, but I can't understand how He could have not). Or maybe that "true evil" does not exist.
It's very hard for me to think of God not having created evil Himself. I can't agree with any theory about evil that I've heard (sorry that I haven't read the replies yet, I will after writing this post). The theories I've heard are:

• "Evil exists because it must exist, you need opposites, you need Good and Bad, Light and Dark." - I can't agree with this one because I can't understand how God can be all-powerful and still have things out of His control. If God created everything, He created the laws of reality and ethics too.
  Otherwise, if something "must" exist it would mean that God is not in charge or in control of the "law" that defines that, a "law" that He did not create himself. I think that God being all powerful could have easily created a reality in which opposites are not binary but in threes (for example good/light, evil/dark and a third "opposite" state). But He chose to make it binary for some reason.
  I think that since God must have created that binary reality of 2 opposites, then the fact that He created this reality and/or the fact that He created Good also makes Him the creator of Evil.
  
• "God didn't create evil, either humans or the devil created evil. God simply allowed it" - Again, I can't agree with this one because I don't understand how either humans or the devil have the power to create something that does not exist already. Sure, we can shape reality but evil is such a basic and fundamental thing that I don't understand how it could have been created without God having a part in it. And even if He indeed simply allowed it, I think it makes God just as much responsible for it as He would be if He had created Evil himself. Besides, God created everything so I think that even if we or the devil create things, it's still a consequence of God's actions.
  People compare this to a parent being responsible for what their offspring does, and say it's not the parent's fault. But I think this is not really a valid example since we can't compare a human parent to the creator of literally everything.
• "Evil comes from free will, God simply gave us free will and allows us to make evil choices" - Sure but the fact that God created free will and gave us that choice makes Him responsible for the Evil that we can do. He could have easily created a reality in which free will can still exist without the need to have choices being either good or bad. Because God is all-powerful, He could have created any form of reality with any form of rules, but He chose to create it the way He did. So God is still behind the creation of Evil.

I want to also point out that in this topic people sometimes make a distinction and only talk about Evil as something that comes from people's actions, but I think that Evil (or the problem of Evil) should also include "natural evil", meaning bad things that happen and are out of our control. For example accidental deaths, animals eating people, natural disasters, etc. Those are hard to explain since they don't involve free will, unless you count Adam and Eve as being responsible for it. But then again, this goes back to the issue of whether God created Evil Himself or not.

This is a work in progress for me, I hope some day I understand it better. I know my personal theory is not based on scripture directly so I don't claim I'm right, but it's simply the only one that makes sense to me in a way I can understand or put logic into it. However, there IS some text in the Old Testament where God claims to have created Evil, right?
"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace and create evil: I the Lord do all these things"

So to sum up I personally think God created Evil himself and that God is the basis for Good and Evil. If God says He's good then His opinion matters since He is God, so then He is indeed good, even if by our own standards He could not be. I think God can simultaneously be good and be the creator of Evil.

I really don't get how people can make sense out of God not having created Evil, but I guess it's one of those things that might just "click" with me some day and I'll change my mind about it, after a sudden clarity.

 

[Norman70]

Many thanks for your lengthy posts, tdidymas and Lots of Questions. For my wife and myself this too is a work in progress. Christianity is a journey, as described by C. S. Lewis in A Pilgrim's Regress.
You have both given us lots to think and talk about, but we are a little disappointed that there appears to be no Christian denomination or theological varient which embraces this idea that God is somehow not responsible for evil, in spite of it being said that many people (Christians?) hold to it.
Must close now, it's Christmas night.

 

[Norman70]

I have now been reading here the question of the Virgin Birth, and it appears this is linked with sin, through the concept of original sin. There is a lot to it!!
It appears here we have a controversial doctrine (the Virgin Birth) even amongst Christians, some believing that to be a Christian one does not have to believe that Mary was a virgin. Jesus did have a human father, probably Joseph, but not necessarily so. I found the threads by searching the forums here for the virgin birth. So much to read, and plenty of references to the Scriptures.

 

[BarWi]

My apologies if this has been discussed already in any forum at CF, but in discussion with my wife today, Christmas Eve, she has come up with an interesting theological position, not particularly concerning a solution to the problem of evil, but more concerned about its source.

She is not convinced that the devil was created by God, firstly as a good angel in heaven, but then rebelled. Her argument is that God is a perfectly good God, cannot in any sense be involved in evil, therefore could not have created an angel who went bad. She maintains that only goodness was created by God, but because all things must have an opposite, then badness was created too, without any exercise on His part. The devil was released into our material world (this has a surprising parallel in science with our knowledge of positive and negative, and matter and anti-matter). Whatever ever is created, even by God, there has to be an opposite, therefore the devil is at large now and God's purpose is to instruct us as to how to cast him out.
I was impressed, I had not ever thought about the possibility of this theology. My immediate reaction was to think that her thoughts were not unique, and there must already be a theology which encompasses this approach to the existence of evil.
Neither of us are literalists, therefore the Adam and Eve story is a nice story, and the devil may well have been in the snake, but we are here discussing from where did the devil first come?
Does anyone know whether or not such a theology on the existence of evil has already been developed and is already one of the existing named theologies? We are interested in this discussion not as to how to deal with evil, apart from following God's Word (Jesus) of course, but to enquire whether or not there is an existing theological position which espouses this idea?

Interesting theology your wife has. Mine is similar, though I don't approach it from the idea that God "can't" produce evil. Not saying He does, and your wife's position certainly deserves exploration, just noting that alternatively it may be that God could create evil if He did so knowing that evil would serve a greater good.

I take a more technical approach than some. To my thinking, terms like "sin" and "evil" are affective in nature and are effects of a deeper cause. It is the cause of sin and evil that interest me.

I take a metaphysical approach, that truth is a quality inherent in all things, as Avicenna and others in antiquity have theorized. Truth requires a mind--hard to see how value can exist apart from a mind to impose it--so the notion of truth as a condition of existence in the essence of things is compatible with the idea of a God-designed and built universe. (Sorry to push an abstract hypothesis at you, but this is the Christian Philosophy and Ethics section...)

Anyway long story short, this hypothesis assumes--following the Genesis account of creation--that Adam and Eve were created in the perfection of whole truth, but were given the power to falsify their own essence (spirit). So, the theory harmonizes with your wife's idea that God didn't create evil; I suspect He created man with the inherent ability to create his own evil in the form of falsity. In other words, A&E produced, by the power of their own choice, falsity, the cause of sin and evil.

Briefly, it [hypothetically] works like this: falsity is the opposite of and antagonistic to truth, and therefore inserts corruption into a truth-endued reality. To the extent spirit is falsified, that corruption is causatively passed to the soul [mind], and to the material realm. The fragmentally falsified mind creates falsified mental content (reasons, ideas, dispositions, etc.) which result in falsified actions. It's therefore in a sense it's value itself, not substance, that is exchanged between value-bearing agents (e.g., humans--though some argue that all living things can have 'agency', I hold to the position that only intellects are capable of engaging in or understanding moral or prescriptive value) and the material sphere we inhabit.

This translates into the idea that humans create evil through [primarily but not entirely] the falsification of their own essence. Thus, when the Bible uses affective language in declaring salvation from sin and evil, these are technically references to the destruction of falsity in essence and a restoration, both to humans individually and to the created universe entirely: in 1Cor 15:28 the declaration of "all in all" suggests that all things will again be made "true" because the false cannot be part of God...to be all in all requires all to be "truth in truth", or that everything is wholly true (perfect).

One corollary of this to my thinking is that Satan is actually a metaphor for thoughts and actions produced by falsity [evil] in the human soul. When one looks in a mirror, one beholds satan. This doesn't sit well with my more fundamentalist brethren, but I hold the figurative meaning of the Bible, where we're able to rightly discern it, to be more true and powerful than the literal.

 

[BarWi]

Lots of questions, to your statement,

• "Evil comes from free will, God simply gave us free will and allows us to make evil choices" - Sure but the fact that God created free will and gave us that choice makes Him responsible for the Evil that we can do. He could have easily created a reality in which free will can still exist without the need to have choices being either good or bad. Because God is all-powerful, He could have created any form of reality with any form of rules, but He chose to create it the way He did. So God is still behind the creation of Evil.

I don't see it follows from the fact that God created man with the ability to chose good or evil freely that the creation of this ability makes God implicit or culpable in evil's creation since He instructed them in how to avoid it [don't eat from the tree] and warned them of its consequences [if you do you will die].

Culpability legally requires intrusion on the will of others, and the Genesis account of the garden seems to me to demonstrate a lack of intrusion on God's part.

 

[grantdenning]

If you read the old testament, Satan isn't the evil spirit or demon that is in the new testament. If you read the book of Job, Satan is an angel who is a servant of God. God himself sends Satan to do evil things to Job. Satan is under Gods command, not an evil angel who is rebelling against god.

The actual meaning of Satan is simply "accuser" or "adversary", & every time Satan is mentioned in the old testament, he is playing one of those roles. I think the whole Christian concept of satan is wrong, but it is very handy for the Christian church to play up satan as this evil dude who is influencing the whole world to do evil (which would make satan a god by their definition), because if you start to question any teaching of the church which may be embarrassing to them, or for which they have no sensible answer, they can accuse you of being influenced by satan, & shut down your questioning.