Theory on the origin of evil

[The Righterzpen]

Will not the conquering create another evil, in your theory? Because its again some action.

The "first phase" of the conquering is that God became part of His creation in the incarnation with the purpose of redeeming it. Evil can not overcome that action of God because it's not equal to God's power, knowledge, presence, everlastingness and God is ultimately not killable.

God overcame evil in that the ultimate enemy of evil is God Himself. The payment for transgression that plunged the creation into the position of being under God's wrath was overcome by God Himself.

It really is a genius plan!

 

[The Righterzpen]

Jeremiah 17:9
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"

True - lol - but it doesn't answer the OP question. And if you are using that verse as the answer saying Satan's heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked - how did that come to pass?

 

[Jonathan Mathews]

Origins of Evil Theory

I've often wondered about the origins of evil? Many church fathers and people in Christian circles believe that evil began with Satan. This may be true, depending on your definition of "Satan"; but if we look closely at the first few verses of Genesis, we'll see that this can not be. If we believe Satan is a fallen angel; (as much of church history has taught) than we know for a fact that evil did not begin with him, since it was present before angels were ever created. Darkness (destruction) was "upon the face of the deep" from the first time God had uttered "Let there be light."

The first words of Genesis start out with "In the beginning". This phrase is in "construct state" and has a "Beth" prefixed preposition to it. The construct state declares that the state of one noun is dependent upon the action of another. In this case the state of heaven and earth are dependent upon the action of God. (Yeah, I know that's an "uh duh" type of observation.) Now as for the Beth prefixed preposition, it indicates the location or instrumentality of the action. So in other words, the action of what happened "in the beginning" began with God. (Yeah, I know; another "no brainer".) This is important to understand though, because what it is really saying is that all subsequent happenings (including the presence of evil) did not exist before the beginning!

In a prior study I did concerning what had occurred "in the beginning"; I'd stated that I didn't know where evil came from. (I'm still not sure I know?) In that study, it appeared to me that evil was already present from the point that God began the creation process. I'd thought that it may have even predated creation itself. From a little closer look at this word / phrase "in the beginning" though it seems that from the very commencement of any action of God - evil appeared.

Interesting - now why is that?

Here is another point where I'm not sure I have the answer to this question but I'm gonna give it a crack with a theory that's been kicking around in my head here. Now admittedly, this theory isn't "my theory" - no, it's actually part of physics. "To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."

Now let's back up here from "the beginning" to before the beginning. Before any action of creating ever commenced; there eternally existed God. No action brought God into existence. He was just always ...there! So because there was no "action" that created God; there was no "reaction" to His existence. He as an entity is "something" and the opposite of "something" is "nothing". So, in eternity, besides God there was nothing and so any opposite of God that would have "existed" - did so in theory only.

Of course being omniscient; God knew this. He knew that as soon as He "did" something; there would be an equal and opposite reaction to what ever He did. He knew that what ever action He took; it would bring this theoretical opposite of Him into reality. (Because to every action is an equal and opposite reaction.) This is what I believe was the knowledge of good and evil that God possessed.

So, for as much as an oxymoron as this is going to sound like: this created a "dilemma" for God. He had to come up with a plan to adequately compensate for the opposite that would come as a result of His action. Now God being good, holy, righteous, just etc - the opposite of such would be evil, sin, wickedness, injustice etc. So how could God overcome this "reaction"? Well, since God is eternally existent; it would seem to me that His incorporating His own presence into His original action (i.e. being incarnated into His own creation, sending His Spirit etc.) does not create another "reaction" because God always existed.

So thus is the nuts and bolts of my "scientific" theory. (Admittedly, likely still needs some refining!) Evil was inherent in the act of creation itself because it was the opposite reaction to God's action. Could God have created a world where there would be no reaction to His action? I don't know; maybe on some other dimension or level He has? As for us though and what we understand of our physical universe; we could not exist without these contrasting duel addition to this though; this theory also lends explanation to why God could create something He knew was going to fall and still legitimately call it good. (Which the "good" in Hebrew really means "pleasant". I.E. God was happy with what He'd made. It "pleased" Him; which there is another whole dimension to that application - which maybe I'll tackle later.) Any how; ultimately God is not responsible for the fall because He did not create evil; nor did He plant within man the seed that would lead to transgression. All that transpired was a byproduct of the act of creation itself.

The tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil

What of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil than? The tree was just the vehicle that clued man into what was already present in his world. It simply opened the door to the knowledge of both good and evil; but it didn't create either! Remember it's the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil"; not the "tree of good and evil".

The tree was necessary for that knowledge though; and that knowledge was necessary in order for humanity to truly know God. You see it was still possible for Adam and Eve to behave in ways that displeased God; they just had no knowledge of it because they had no commandments. The only instruction they'd had from God was to take care of the garden and not to eat the fruit off this tree. See "evil" had entered into the world even though sin had not, because sin is disobedience to God! So long as Adam and Eve didn't disobey; sin didn't enter, even though "evil" was still present.

Kinda weird huh

In regards to sin itself. Even if there was no tree; God would eventually given them a commandment that they wouldn't have kept. Think of all the trouble a person could get themselves into out of sheer ignorance. God is not simply going to sit back and ignore actions that offend Him. So, as long as they obeyed; the knowledge of any offense of action they may have done was hidden from them. As far as any offenses they'd committed against God? Up until the point they actually disobeyed; apparently they had done (or failed to do) something that warranted God to tell them to care for the garden. Once He had instructed them to do so; obviously they obeyed, so still sin hadn't entered.

The word "good" in Genesis:

OK, now that we know "good" in Genesis didn't mean "unable to be corrupted". What did it mean? "Now I didn't really plan on putting "this" "here" but it's a good place for it. I'll explain what the word "good" means in the Hebrew and how the applied to Genesis and even the current underpinnings of how this creation is constructed.

This word "good" basically means "pleasing"; although pleasing in a natural way, not so in the connotation of lust or perverse desire for something. It's the same word used to describe Abraham's wife Sarah; she was "beautiful" she was "pleasant (or pleasing) to look at". She appealed to other men as an object of physical beauty. This word, or derivatives there of; is used in description of attractive men too and even other living things; i.e. physical qualities that would make them attractive - like health, strength, vigor, vitality of complexion / hair etc.

We see this concept of "good / pleasing" being inherent in the biology of the physical world. Some researchers at one point did an international study to come up with a composite of what human beings considered to be physically attractive or desirable in other human beings. The point of the study was to see if there was an underlying consistency in who people would consider to be the opposite parent to their individual future offspring. Of course, on account of the nature of this study - it only included heterosexual individuals of a probable reproductive age.

The questions were posed with line drawings of human forms and the findings were interesting. The consensus was that people preferred a reproductive mate that was not too fat or too thin, who's body was symmetrically proportional and who's skin and hair had a healthy appearance. The next most important attribute for both genders was the appearance of the face and head. Was the face symmetrical and did the head appear to have the proper skull capacity to be associated with good intelligence. Another attribute that was some what of a surprise to the researchers, yet none the less important to both genders was the appearance of a person's hands. Hands were generally thought of in relation to a person's propensity to be industrious.

Contrary to what the western fashion industry portrays to us; men generally were not attracted to women who were too much taller than they, who's breasts were either too large or too small and who's hips appeared too narrow. Both these portions of anatomy were considered vital to reproductive capacity: a pelvis who's breadth was adequate to safely deliver a baby and breasts that would produce the appropriate amount of milk to feed the child. The "universal ratio" came out to be an hour glass figure where the waist was roughly 10 inches smaller than the bust and hips.

For women, proportion was also of notable interest. Women ranked higher in considering the size and shape of a man's head as intelligence was generally believed to be related to temperament. (An ill-tempered strong man doesn't make a good mate.) That ranked just as high for women as a man who's body appeared to be healthy and physically fit. The "ideal shape" for men was the diamond (or kite) shape; head, neck, shoulders being the top of the diamond and chest, abdomen, hips being the bottom. Interestingly enough, even in industrial societies the size and shape of man's pelvis were considered important too. Even though women in industrial societies couldn't identify why a man's ability to run well seemed important; they considered it to be an attractive attribute. In hunter gatherer type societies - obviously this was attributed to a man's ability to catch food.

Now as for the reproductive attractiveness of people who have less than perfect bodies; this is where personality became much more important. This was especially true of people born with handicapping genetic defects. Here is where perseverance and the development of a specific skill set became vital to these individuals' survival.

So as interesting as all this research was - what does it have to do with the word "good" in Genesis? It goes to show us that what we find to be naturally "pleasing" or "attractive" is inherent in the make up of creation itself. Our inclinations and natural drives toward these things are there in us because they first existed in God. The good pleasure of God was made inherent in the world He created. (It's reflected in the reproductive process of every thing on this planet.) What is "good" gives us joy, just as the creation God had made gave Him pleasure. This goodness and joy we see extended even in areas of our lives that have nothing to do with our own sexuality. We find good pleasure in our children, our pets, our friends and family, our hobbies, the outdoors - what ever gives us pleasure.

Of course there is a "flip side" to this too. Our "good pleasure" can be corrupted into something perverse. This is where there is addiction to substances, sexual behavior, the pursuit of wealth or power and prestige. None of these things (drugs, alcohol, sex, money, authority, respect) are evil in and of themselves; but the corrupted desire for them is. This corrupted desire is what makes evil apparent in this world. Born out of corrupted desires comes hatred, jealousy, malice, envy, strife, prejudice, greed etc. Their manifest deeds being: criminal violence, theft, lies, unjust treatment, inequality, immoral behavior etc. These culminate in death and destruction; the final say of it all being the wrath of God.

The knowledge of good and evil had a profound impact upon this universe!

Evil began when God found it inside Lucifer/Satan's heart (Ezekiel 28:13-15)

God created Lucifer as the "light bearer". The angels witnessed God creating the Earth (Job 38:4-7) Also see When did God create the angels?

Once Lucifer had iniquity/sin, he became Satan (or "Enemy"), he possessed a snake in the Garden of Eden and tempted Eve to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

When man ate the fruit, sin/evil enter the World, and Death came in thru Sin (Romans 5:12)

All Iniquity, sin, death, and evil began in the heart of Lucifer, which turned him into "Satan".

Here is what Lucifer was thinking when God found the iniquity in his heart (Isaiah 14:12-14)

The Darkness that existed before Creation was not EVIL in itself. It was simply "emptiness" and void of all light. God calls the Darkness "Night" and by separating it from the light of "day", he creates evening and morning or day and night. Therefore Night/evening/darkness is part of God's creation and God calls ALL His creation Good, even the Darkness (Genesis 1:31).

The nighttime is not Evil in itself. Outer space is not evil. It's just void of light. Evil is when you have the light (like Lucifer the light bearer) and you STILL sin against God. This is the definition of Evil... to have the light of God but still sin against Him.... to try and put yourself in the place of God.... to have the knowledge of God and still hate Him by disobeying His commands and His will.

 

[Tone]

The "first phase" of the conquering is that God became part of His creation in the incarnation with the purpose of redeeming it. Evil can not overcome that action of God because it's not equal to God's power, knowledge, presence, everlastingness and God is ultimately not killable.

God overcame evil in that the ultimate enemy of evil is God Himself. The payment for transgression that plunged the creation into the position of being under God's wrath was overcome by God Himself.

It really is a genius plan!

This sounds interesting, I'll have to read the OP.

 

[The Righterzpen]

This sounds interesting, I'll have to read the OP.

LOL - a lot of people should read the OP.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Evil began when God found it inside Lucifer/Satan's heart (Ezekiel 28:13-15)

God created Lucifer as the "light bearer". The angels witnessed God creating the Earth (Job 38:4-7) Also see When did God create the angels?

Once Lucifer had iniquity/sin, he became Satan (or "Enemy"), he possessed a snake in the Garden of Eden and tempted Eve to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

When man ate the fruit, sin/evil enter the World, and Death came in thru Sin (Romans 5:12)

All Iniquity, sin, death, and evil began in the heart of Lucifer, which turned him into "Satan".

Here is what Lucifer was thinking when God found the iniquity in his heart (Isaiah 14:12-14)

I'll check these out. See if they answer the question!

 

[Tone]

True - lol - but it doesn't answer the OP question. And if you are using that verse as the answer saying Satan's heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked - how did that come to pass?

Failure to do as created to...which is wickedness...

How did he disobey? Through lie.

How lie? He is the father of that...I don't think I want to know the answer.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Failure to do as created to...which is wickedness...

How did he disobey? Through lie.

How lie? He is the father of that...I don't think I want to know the answer.

Interesting response!

 

[Jonathan Mathews]

PLEASE DELETE.

 

[The Righterzpen]

PLEASE DELETE.

Please delete? Delete the thread? Why?

 

[Jonathan Mathews]

Please delete? Delete the thread? Why?

NO! I need the moderators to delete that post of mine. It won't let me. This is a great thread.

 

[His student]

I don't have the time or inclination to read the short book that is the O.P. and I seriously doubt that many have done so.

But I think I have the general idea and I'll take a crack at it or at least some of it.

The first words of Genesis start out with "In the beginning". This phrase is in "construct state" and has a "Beth" prefixed preposition to it. The construct state declares that the state of one noun is dependent upon the action of another. In this case the state of heaven and earth are dependent upon the action of God. (Yeah, I know that's an "uh duh" type of observation.) Now as for the Beth prefixed preposition, it indicates the location or instrumentality of the action. So in other words, the action of what happened "in the beginning" began with God. (Yeah, I know; another "no brainer".) This is important to understand though, because what it is really saying is that all subsequent happenings (including the presence of evil) did not exist before the beginning ............................it appeared to me that evil was already present from the point that God began the creation process. I'd thought that it may have even predated creation itself ................................ From a little closer look at this word / phrase "in the beginning" though it seems that from the very commencement of any action of God - evil appeared.

It seems to me that you are assuming that the creation of the "heavens" include the heaven of spirit beings, as it were. I don't think it is necessary to read that into the passage in Genesis. He doesn't say that He created all of the 3 heavens when He created the earth. He does speak of 2 of the heavens - but not the 3rd, where He supposedly has His throne and where angels live.

"To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."

That's a law of physics and applies to this “physical” universe. I doubt very much that it is a law which touches on the origin of evil which is not a physical concept but a philosophical one. The manifestation of evil was always possible from the 1st that beings were created and given free will.

He had to come up with a plan to adequately compensate for the opposite that would come as a result of His action.

I can't buy into your idea that "physics" (which concern the "physical universe") have any bearing on the non physical origin of evil.

Is Satan a fallen angel? I know churches teach that; I haven't found enough in Scriptures to be convinced that is actually true though. Reason would have it that if this evil predated the creation it's-self than the origins of evil could not be of some fallen angel God had made. Since nothing God would create was even in existence yet.

Evil did not predate creation. It apparently predated the creation of this universe. But it did not predate all of creation since that would make evil an attribute of God and we know that cannot be.

And I think you agree that evil did not predate creation.

Good - then we are OK on that - if you mean before the creation of the physical universe.

But if you mean before any creation at all - I will disagree with you on that.

Yet do you acknowledge that the knowledge of good and evil had to exist prior to creation.

Absolutely. God is omniscient.

Which brings us to what I "think" is going on here.

The "Word of God" (the Son of the Father) has always from eternity reflected the glory of the His Father including all of His attributes. It has always been the Father's great pleasure to shower all that He is and all that He knows on His Son.

It has always been the great pleasure of the Son to return any glory He receives from the Father to the Father from whence comes all things.

Scriptures are available. But I'll bet that everyone here knows what they are or can find them if they try.

While the Holy Spirit is a bit more mysterious - although He is also a "person" - I believe He is the "by product" of this mutual "love" which encompasses the entire nature of God.

The creation was spoken into being to display God and "magnify" (His word) His glory.

Speaking of the Son - the scriptures say that "all things were created by Him, for Him, and in Him all things exist. That includes all things in the spirit world and in this physical universe.

IMO - God wishes to include every aspect of Who He is in this display of Himself.

One of those attributes is His inherent "knowledge of good and evil". That is - not evil itself but the "knowledge" of evil as well as good. Evil - is any rebellion against God's perfect will.

It is my opinion that, through the rebellion of Satan in heaven and mankind on earth, God is displaying "the knowledge of good and evil" in this age (at least in representative form) so that He can show in the ages to come what it is and what comes from rebellion against God's will. I believe He will wrap the “mechanism” for this display up when He moves on to "ages to come" - without having to repeat it again and again on the new earth or in any future worlds, whatever they may consist of.

IMO - God (being omniscient) knew full well the consequences of creating Satan and the rest of the angels as well as mankind with the ability to make "free will" choices.

What we see playing out in Heaven and earth - through the actions of the Son, in whom we (and everything else) live and move and have our "being" is exactly what He has done for eternity - namely receive what the Father gives to Him and return it to the Father give glory to the Father.

God is sovereign in all that He does and will accomplish all that He sets out to accomplish - or, more precisely, what He sends His Son forth to do.

"My Word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent It." Isaiah 55:11

Now if we don’t like what He is doing - we, as believers, can bow our necks or receive it with humbleness as His servants.

I for one am happy to play a small part in His overall plan – even if I can’t understand it all (or even like it much).

This is particularly so because, in His grace, He has promised to “reward me” for that part I played (as painful as it was in this life) with unspeakable glory in the ages to come and all eternity.

That’s not a bad deal in the end – at least for the Son and for the elect of God, which are His bride and part of His "body".

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Of course being omniscient; God knew this. He knew that as soon as He "did" something; there would be an equal and opposite reaction to what ever He did.

This is dualism. It is a form of heresy.

So, for as much as an oxymoron as this is going to sound like: this created a "dilemma" for God. He had to come up with a plan to adequately compensate for the opposite that would come as a result of His action. Now God being good, holy, righteous, just etc - the opposite of such would be evil, sin, wickedness, injustice etc. So how could God overcome this "reaction"? Well, since God is eternally existent; it would seem to me that His incorporating His own presence into His original action (i.e. being incarnated into His own creation, sending His Spirit etc.) does not create another "reaction" because God always existed.

This is also dualism which is incompatible with Christianity. Furthermore, God did not have to "come up" with anything. Remember, He is omniscient.

 

[The Righterzpen]

This is dualism. It is a form of heresy.

This is also dualism which is incompatible with Christianity. Furthermore, God did not have to "come up" with anything. Remember, He is omniscient.

It's not talking about dualism. Did you read the entire post?

 

[Ken C.]

I guarantee - you have not read this before!

The basis of the theory is that evil is a byproduct of God's creative action.

"To every action is an equal and opposite reaction."

IMO, if what you are saying is correct, then God couldn't have said that all He did was good.

 

[Cis.jd]

satan is the hardest thing to believe out of all the elements in the christian faith. I just can't get any logical and scriptural reasoning for him. Everything is just so incoherent and makes less sense than anything. I admit on my ignorance but I have to say more than 50% thinks he doesn't exist.

 

[Ken C.]

Why would the Creator be subject to physics?

I agree. God is a Spirit. If He were to step off a curb in the path of an oncoming car, the car would pass right through.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

In a prior study I did concerning what had occurred "in the beginning"; I'd stated that I didn't know where evil came from. (I'm still not sure I know?) In that study, it appeared to me that evil was already present from the point that God began the creation process. I'd thought that it may have even predated creation itself. From a little closer look at this word / phrase "in the beginning" though it seems that from the very commencement of any action of God - evil appeared.

I'm pretty sure it came from free will. We humans are created in the Image of God. That is widely, interpreted that we are a little microcosm that resembles God abstractly (rather than literally like Mormons and a few radical Protestants I've talked to take it). Anyway we humans would rather be in relationship with people and creatures that love us and associate with us voluntarily, and well I believe God is the same way. God allowed Lucifer and Adam and Eve a choice not to follow him. And today even with the us having the Holy Spirit we still sometimes have to deal with that sort of issue at times. (Which I'm sure will trigger some strong Calvinists and Augustinians!)

 

[akaDaScribe]

I’ve read through most of the posts. There are some interesting thoughts here.

I submit that God created good and evil by defining what is good and what is evil. In simplest terms, God’s opinion is fact.

 

[Kenny'sID]

The basis of the theory is that evil is a byproduct of God's creative action.

The basis of the theory is that evil is a byproduct of God's creative action.

"To every action is an equal and opposite reaction."

Thanks, I pretty well got that from the first few sentences but didn't want to read the rest just to see if I missed something.

So much overthinking and not quite enough simple logic.

Evil originates in the mind of the individual evil doer.