Why Did God Create Evil?

[FLYINHAWAIIAN]

Question: "Why does Isaiah 45:7 say that God created evil?"

Answer: Isaiah 45:7 in the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that God did not create evil? There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity, affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB), “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.

(2) The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7 is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him. “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7 is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

Why does Isaiah 45:7 say that God created evil? | GotQuestions.org

None of that is changing my point

 

[FLYINHAWAIIAN]

Choosing between good(life) and evil(death) is the whole point of free will, otherwise we would just be pre-programmed dolls to do only what God tells us to do

From the beginning God made it clear that He created us to be independent, He shows us the means but it's up to each one to walk the path.

"If only you would pay attention to my commandments!; Then your peace would become just like a river; And your righteousness like the waves of the sea." Isaiah 48:18

Yall got to stop this shyt breh

 

[analog]

This question lies outside science and can't be verified or falsified using the scientific method.

That leaves philosophy/theology as the only means by which this 'guess' can even be grasped.​

We're not talking abut

This question lies outside science and can't be verified or falsified using the scientific method.

That leaves philosophy/theology as the only means by which this 'guess' can even be grasped.​

Science is the process we have in identifying if something is true. Given you've just stated this concept cannot be verified or falsified, would it not be wise to withhold belief until such a time we CAN as opposed to choosing to believe first and grasping at straws to support an unfounded position?

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Science is the process we have in identifying if something is true. Given you've just stated this concept cannot be verified or falsified, would it not be wise to withhold belief until such a time we CAN as opposed to choosing to believe first and grasping at straws to support an unfounded position?

I am a theological noncognitivist and I don't even consider the question of 'G-d's ' existence/non-existence valid as there is no coherent ontology by which to even form a position about it in the first place.​

 

[analog]

I am a theological noncognitivist and I don't even consider the question of 'G-d's ' existence/non-existence valid as there is no coherent ontology by which to even form a position about it in the first place.​

We have theists (eg Muslims) that prescribe to the faith and it's definition of Allah (Creator, all powerful,etc.). Then we have atheists (eg me) that look at the "evidence" brought forth by Muslims and find it wholly insufficient to be true.

I don't understand the position of a non cognitivist in that context where a clearly defined being including all it's attributes is too ambiguous to contemplate

Why not, as a skeptic, just reject a proposition until there's good reason brought forth to accept it as true. I clearly need to read more into this non cognitivism business to get a better understanding.

 

[Afrodroid]

None of that is changing my point

Good, it was never my goal/intention

Everyone is free to think whatever they want, that's free will

Yall got to stop this shyt breh

No

Listen, i'm not trying to preach to you or anyone who doesn't believe in God's will, but i have my convictions just as you have yours and there's nothing wrong with that

 

[EA]

Dunno if it’s been said already as I haven’t read the thread but from the time you’ve created ‘good’ and given people free will, you’ve created ‘evil.’ If you tell me all the things that make me good, the moment I choose to do the opposite, I’m evil

 

[FLYINHAWAIIAN]

Good, it was never my goal/intention

Everyone is free to think whatever they want, that's free will



No

Listen, i'm not trying to preach to you or anyone who doesn't believe in God's will, but i have my convictions just as you have yours and there's nothing wrong with that

I actually care whether things are true or not.
Im not holding onto a book to mind control me

 

[Emoryal]

Choosing between good(life) and evil(death) is the whole point of free will, otherwise we would just be pre-programmed dolls to do only what God tells us to do

From the beginning God made it clear that He created us to be independent, He shows us the means but it's up to each one to walk the path.

"If only you would pay attention to my commandments!; Then your peace would become just like a river; And your righteousness like the waves of the sea." Isaiah 48:18

Did you just boil down free will to doing good and evil? So free will only exists in of itself to induce evil and create a dichotomy. So what good is it then?

 

[Emoryal]

We have theists (eg Muslims) that prescribe to the faith and it's definition of Allah (Creator, all powerful,etc.). Then we have atheists (eg me) that look at the "evidence" brought forth by Muslims and find it wholly insufficient to be true.

I don't understand the position of a non cognitivist in that context where a clearly defined being including all it's attributes is too ambiguous to contemplate

Why not, as a skeptic, just reject a proposition until there's good reason brought forth to accept it as true. I clearly need to read more into this non cognitivism business to get a better understanding.

He isn't a skeptic he doesn't even consider the idea of a God because it's built from false ontological views.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

I don't understand the position of a non cognitivist in that context where a clearly defined being including all it's attributes is too ambiguous to contemplate

'G-d' isn't clearly defined whatsoever. You can't define something by using secondary, tertiary, negative, and relational attributes.

That's why I keep asking what people mean when they use the term.​

 

[joeychizzle]

Believing in religion in 2019 :thefukkmayne:
We have racism to destroy
Global warming to fix
Diseases to kill
Planets to explore
Secrets of the universe to unlock
We as a civilization are too far advanced to be following an old book.
Free yourself from the constraints of organized religion.

 

[chosenaledge13]

As long as you accept that the idea of God/Religion is something that is man-made/created so we can give life meaning and structure, then you will be good. There are no facts, only ideas that have been "agreed upon" regionally and socially, some by reason and others by opinion/teaching/programming over long periods of time. At some point all of these ideas will be challenged and changed, either by discovery or by our awareness being shifted by another being greater than us (mathematically they exist in the universe somewhere) presenting themselves, thus causing us to question the status quo.

I say all that to say, "good", "evil" and the full spectrum of everything in between exists just because it does, and it can. It's all energy and everything comes down to choice, and reaction to that energy. Nothing more, nothing less

 

[fscballin]

Yeah but why?

Why not just create a bunch of perfect people for his kingdom?

Robots?

 

[fscballin]

Did you just boil down free will to doing good and evil? So free will only exists in of itself to induce evil and create a dichotomy. So what good is it then?

What good is the desire to sin?