Christians, many of you answered `God didn`t create evil` to a recent question....?

Question

Yet your own bible states...

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.`

So is this the word of your god or isn`t it??

Do any of you actually read your own book?

Previous question...
http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Av0Uo6TUcv6J7uae2EmL3TLAFQx.?qid=20070604141716AAVsgVE&show=7#profile-info-Puhr7aXbaa

Fish - no offense, but rubbish! You`re making excuses for something that is stated very clearly. Why is this passage not to be taken as is and others are? Because you just don`t want it to be?

Answer 1

Someone told me once that Isaiah 45:7 should actually be translated as "allow calamity" instead of "create evil".

Of course that causes a lot of problems in the Hebrew text.

For example, "In the beginning God allowed the heavens and the earth..."

And, "From the Tree of Good and Calamity thou shalt not eat."

-----

edit: FISH <><, when has George Bush taken responsibility for anything? Perhaps you should try learning Biblical Hebrew and reading this stuff for yourself, instead of listending to the ramblings of Apologist, trying to peice together a hard boiled egg after it's been scrambled.

edit2: What revisionism we have here. Instead of trying to find an English translation you like, why not read it the way it was written? The Hebrew word RA is almost always translated as "evil" or "wickedness". If the author of Isaiah wanted to express "calamity" or "disaster" there were other words he could have chosen.

You have to examine the Bible in it's historical context. Originally the Jews believed in many Gods (even though they may have only worshipped one, according to tradition.) This is called Henotheism. And you cannot Biblically deny this. The power of other Gods is firmly attested to in the Old Testament. There is one story in particular where Yahweh was rendered powerless in battle because Isreal's enemy sacrificed to their god Chemoth.

The author of Isaiah was expressing the relatively new concept of Monotheism, that only one God exists. If only one God exists, and he is the creator of everything, then that God created good and evil. Live with it people. It's your myth!!!!

-----

edit3: Dagah, I'm loaded with facts. Dispute some of the facts I've provided above instead of attacking me, and sterotyping all atheists in the process. (O ye hypocrite)

Answer 2

Amos 3:6, “… shall there be evil in the city, and the Lord hath not done it?”

Do not take the answers of everyone as being indicative of what the Bible DOES say!

Christianity has become a travesty over the past thirty years, and has degenerated into little more than a religious surrogate for worldliness. Sound biblical doctrine has been all but eliminated; and replaced by feel-good fluffiness, and religious imitation of the world.

You have done exactly what anyone should: You take - NOT what so-called Christians tell you; but what the Word of God states. Find a Bible - not some modernistic "translation" - and investigate for yourself precisiely what the Bible does say about any given topic.

Any single verse can be taken out of context, and misused and abused, to suit any bizarre notion of man. Scripture always interprets scripture. Always.

Do people read their own book? Yes, they probably do; and that depends upon what "book" they are using. Note the difference, between an old Bible, and a new book:

Example 1. In the text at 1 Corinthians 7:1, the Authorised Version notes that “…it is good for a man not to touch a woman.”
The same text, in the modernised version, states that “it is good for a man not to marry.” [International Bible Society, Holy Bible: The New International Version Grand Rapids: Zondervan]

Since when is immoral touching, the same as marriage?

The text at Luke 1:15 states that “he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb”, which is to say, obviously, as an unborn person. {as in Galatians 1:15}

The modern translations however, make the appropriate, popular change which coincidentally, just happens to suit the philosophy of modern times, and accordingly has the text read instead: “he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth.” [NIV]

One states that a child is a child, in the womb. The other is careful to change it to after the time of birth.

There are multitudes of modern books purporting to be "bibles", that have edited out and eradicated essential doctrine. People hear things from the pulpit, and cannot even be bothered to check to see if "these things be so". They hear, and then blindly repeat what they hear, to others.

"They feared the Lord, and served their own gods…”
[2 Kings 17:32]

Do not ridicule the Bible, because multitudes today have not the first idea of the doctrines that are contained within it.

Regards,
Philip Livingstone
www.theforgottenbible.org

Answer 3

Even if the translation were "allow calamity" how exactly is that better than create evil?

There is no way to reconcile the amount of evil in the world, whether it be the evil of men, or the suffering caused by natural disasters with an all powerful, all knowing, and all good creator.

christian interpretations of the bible state that because of original sin man has been cursed with the inclination to sin and do evil, if god is all knowing and all powerful than it was impossible for him not to know that adam would eat from the tree, and that subsequently would be cursed to be sinful. So ultimately, if it is in fact mankinds nature to sin that the responsibility unequivocally rests on gods shoulders for our sinfulness, as he trapped us into being this way.

In a similar vein, it is impossible for god to escape the responsibility of natural disasters. If we are to accept that god is all knowing and all powerful than it is within his ability to stop earthquakes and hurricanes and tornadoes but he never does.

Each year in the american midwest (the bible belt) tornadoes and hurricanes destroy entire towns, seperate parents from their children and mercilessly drown innocent people. If godd is omniptent and omniscient than we can only conclude that he is slaughtering innocent followers. this is an act of evil no matter how you look at it.

Some people will say that the morals of men are insuffucient to judge the god, however it is those exact same morals of men that are used to determine that god is good in the first place. So we are left with this little bit of hipocrasy; our morals are perfectly capable of dertmining the goodness of god but not the badness.

this mental backflipping is wholly disingenuous. Either god created, and regularly commits acts of evil upon his loyal followers (and therefore not good) or he does not exist. those are the only two reasonable answers.

Answer 4

Unfortunately, you are correct that a lot of Christians have never read more than the Easter story and a few Psalms. But the fault does not lie with them. Roman Catholics were taught for years that they were not able to understand the Bible so they should not read it, (I suspect because of what happened in Martin Luther's case). I don't believe they teach that anymore, but not being a Catholic, how would I know? As for Protestants, there is no coherent study of the Bible. It is hit and miss, and, of course, who is going to go to every Bible study?

I didn't start to read and understand the Bible until I stopped attending church. I'm not recommending that for everyone, and I'm sure a lot of fundamentals would say that I was a heathen. But a lot of Christians/Pharisees have been anesthetized by "nicey-nice/stab my sister in the back, we're all a bunch of saints" drivel and don't feel the need to give what it is that God really wants, our attention.

My position gives me an odd perspective, I can see both sides of the argument without having to compromise my faith. And I have time to read the Bible.

Answer 5

In defence of my fellow Christians, the question, "Did G-d create evil?" is a very deep theological question. Not many people have the knowledge or understanding of any of the three Abrahamic religions to answer that question, but would try to in their ignorance. Each of the three religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam) have the same general opinion, but a passage from an interpretation of the Koran (The Koran for Dummies, by Sohaib Sultan) best sums it up for me: "Satan," (evil), "is seen as an important part character in the human experience; without this "avowed enemy" (2:168) humans could never be tested in sincerity of faith."

Judaism sees the battle between yetzer hatov (good inclinations) and yetzer harah (evil inclinations) as necessary and constructive. The battle between the two is to serve as a source of inspiration for good works. The view of Christianity is very much the same, just without the Hebrew words.

In conclusion, I'd like to say that you shouldn't take the words of a small group of Christians, or members of anyother group and use it against other members. Also, I'd like to commend you on your knowledge of the Bible, for someone who doesn't seem to be a Christian or Jew.

Answer 6

Yes some of us we do. the question is to take a laeflet of your book as the expession goes is that ifyou atheist could actually turn the pages of o book otherwise you should have read in Contract Social by Rousseau that Catholic Church is the same as fantisism.Yet contrary to Roussau expectations Christianity did survive. Now it 2 centuries since Rousseau times and more. Do not be sure that Atheism is going to survive even a century more, expect if it declared as endangerd species

Answer 7

Is God really the one who created evil? To answer the question we must first look at how the word for evil "rah" is used in the Bible, examine the context of the Isaiah 45:7 passage, and look at other passages on the same subject.
First of all, the Hebrew word for evil "rah" is used in many different ways in the Bible. In the KJV Bible, it occurs 663 times. 431 times it is translated as "evil." The other 232 times it is translated as "wicked", "bad", "hurt", "harm", "ill", "sorrow", "mischief", "displeased", "adversity", "affliction", "trouble", "calamity", "grievous", "misery", and "trouble." So we can see that the word does not require that it be translated as "evil." This is why different Bibles translate this verse differently. It is translated as "calamity" by the NASB and NKJV; "disaster" by the NIV; and "woe" by the RSV;
Second, the context of the verse is speaking of natural phenomena.

"I am the Lord, and there is no other; Besides Me there is no God. I will gird you, though you have not known Me; 6That men may know from the rising to the setting of the sun That there is no one besides Me. I am the Lord, and there is no other, 7The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the Lord who does all these." (Isaiah 45:5-7).

Notice that the context of the verse is dealing with who God is, that it is God who speaks of natural phenomena (sun, light, dark), and it is God who is able to cause "well-being" as well as "calamity." Contextually, this verse is dealing with natural disasters, and human comfort issues. It is not speaking of moral evil; rather, it is dealing with calamity, distress, etc.

Third, there are other verses that clearly show that God is pure and that He cannot approve of evil.

“The Rock! His work is perfect, For all His ways are just; a God of faithfulness and without injustice, righteous and upright is He," (Deut. 32:4).
"Thine eyes are too pure to approve evil, and Thou canst not look on wickedness with favor," (Hab. 1:13).
We can see that the Bible teaches that God is pure and does not approve of evil, that the word "rah" (evil) in Hebrew can mean many things, and that contextually, the verse is speaking calamity and distress. Therefore, God does not create evil in the moral sense, but in the sense of disaster, of calamity.

Answer 8

That's probably not the translation of the word from the original hebrew text, which the old testament was written in. What he means is that he is in control of all. He is not the source of evil, Satan is. He tells Satan that he can only do so much. Scripture should never be taken out of context. That's a dangerous thing to do. When reading the Bible, one must ask the Lord for wisdom and understanding of what it is actually saying. The word says to "Lean not unto thine own understanding". I'm glad to have the opportunity to be a witness to someone. Praise God!

Answer 9

The problem is much in their book has been changed by man. Though when god Kills it is not evil but when we do it can be. When God steals it is not evil because he owns everything. But man imitates him. So originally all qualities we have God has but it can become perverted within this material world. So Yes and no to the evil question. It has to be understood properly. For the original new Testament before king Constantine changed so many things google gospelofthenazirenes.com The truth will set you free.

Answer 10

The NRSV states "I form light and create darkness." You have pointed out the errors in trying to use scripture to proof text ideas. Scripture is read and interpreted. We ask questions of the text, who was the original audience? What is the original language? In spite of what people frequently do, you can't just pull out a verse here and there to prove or disprove a point.