I
Just to be clear, yuu believe evil is nothing?
I believe Evil is the decomposition (rot) of a good thing, the abuse of a good thing, or the absence/lack of a good thing.
Generally speaking - Sin is Death they go hand in hand, and rot is inevitable where Death is at. Death however is not an entity imposing itself, but a lack of an entity necessary; IE: Life, God, Goodness, all that “IS”.
Sin is a “no-thing” as it ‘decomposes’ a “thing” to cause its effects. This is my understanding.
Another way of looking at it, is that starvation isn’t caused by a “starvation virus” - it is caused by a lack of necessity, like food, water, and etc.
"]The existance and place of evil is a big question, but I still think traditional theologies have a bigger problem here than universalism does. At least I can affirm, with scripture, that one day God will wipe away every tear from every eye - and mean it!
…
I think the biggest problem many people have with universal reconciliation is the idea that God would save both victims and villains. That’s a tough one! Jonah and the prodigal’s elder brother had problems with it too. But the Bible teaches that God’s grace really is that big.
"]Evil is being crushed forever because it’s better that it remains separate from God forever rather than become part of Him, otherwise it means that either God is a mixture of good and evil or evil isn’t as bad as we think it is.
*At least I can affirm, with scripture, that one day God will wipe away every tear from every eye - and mean it! *You say that as though Universalism doesn’t have it’s share of verses that it has to qualify and explain away.
*Alex raises a good point about the redemptive potential of suffering, *But it seems you’ve always confused evil with suffering. However more seriously are you suggesting all evil is redemptive?
…
*I think the biggest problem many people have with universal reconciliation is the idea that God would save both victims and villains. *You’ve missed my point. That the act of the villain is actually for the victim’s good.
"]Was there a time when there was no evil? Yes. So it shouldn’t surprise you that there can be a time in the future when there is no evil again. ECT denies this by insisting on keeping in locked up (only physically, mentally and spiritually evil is rampant in hell!). On the other hand, EU allows God to completely eradicate it, and that’s not by absorbing it. e.g. how can darkness hide in light?? Remember He has eradicated the evil in you, so He can eradicate the evil in someone else, and someone else, etc.
…
Anyway, evil & suffering are linked. Would there be any suffering if there was no evil? Do you see evil as the absence of good, or something in it’s own right? If it’s something in it’s own right, who created it? Can Satan actually create anything new? I was under the impression he could only distort, twist and hinder people from doing good?
"]Luke
You ask about evil in my theology. I have always had a soft spot for Augustine’s idea that evil is a privation. It is not a “thing,” a “substance” but a lack in a thing.
So evil will have no place in the new creation. But, on such a view, the eradication of evil does not require the eradication of any of God’s good creation. For God to have to permanently amputate parts of creation in order to remove evil would, it seems to me, amount to a failure on God’s part.
You wonder about the place of evil in the overall scheme of God. Well, on that I am somewhat agnostic. I remain unpersuaded by all theodicies (though I think that all of them may have something helpful to contribute). I don’t think universalism per se requires any specific approach to theodicy. My point in the book is simply this—universalism makes theodicy easier (for “all shall be well”) than its denial. I do not claim that it offers an explanation for why God allows evil in the meantime—it does not.
But classical theology, it seems to me, also fails to offer a convincing explanation as to why God allows evil (we have that in common) AND ALSO comes close to saying that evil will partly thwart God’s purposes. Evil is powerful but it is not THAT powerful. God is bigger.
I sometimes feel like the one bringing bad news (I was recently told you can say such a person is a debbie downer 
) when I say horrendous evil is a problem we can’t solve or excuse the Almighty. I am talking about the really horrible stuff like the methods of torture used against the witches in Europe. Sure, we are taugth a grand lesson of evil here, sure it’s not eternal and sure many complex things are at work, but I don’t think we have the right to say we understand it or can explain it. Bear in my mind I say this as one who has NEVER considered ECT scriptural.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines thing as:
- An entity, an idea, or a quality perceived, known, or thought to have its own existence.
2a. The real or concrete substance of an entity.
2b. An entity existing in space and time.
2c. An inanimate object. - Something referred to by a word, a symbol, a sign, or an idea; a referent.
Evil and sin are things, and in response to your example, starvation a thing, it is the quality of lacking of nutrients.
God is the creator of Evil, Sin and Starvation because He created all of creation with the intrinsic quantity of lack, ruin, destruction to occur.
Isaiah 54:16 "Behold, I Myself have created the smith who blows the fire of coals and brings out a weapon for its work; and I have created the destroyer to ruin.
God is the creator of everything in this Creation. There is nothing within all creation that He did not create, both material and immaterial, concrete and abstract, idea or entity, existing in space and time.
Isaiah 45:6,7 That men may know from the east and the rising of the sun and from the west and the setting of the sun that there is no God besides Me. I am the Lord, and no one else. I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and I create evil [RA]; I am the Lord, Who does all these things.
Now presented with the facts, we need to come to terms in what exactly is the ontological good which Evil, Sin and Death have within creation God has created; not, whether or not God created it.
P.S. It is very clear after many years of study, and learning about the life and doctrine of Augustine, that he was very much flawed in his premises to arrive to an accurate conclusion of who God really was.
P.S. “Nothing” is also a thing, regardless that it is the quality of lacking things. The moment it was quantified by the word “Nothing” it revealed that it itself is a thing, but I won’t go into that discussion since most people have problems understanding lack as a thing in the first place. 
Lets use an example to illustrate what I mean in my use of “thing”, vs. “no-thing”.
Lies don’t exist. Lies are a “no-thing”. Truth exists, truth is a “thing”.
No matter how much I lie to a man and say that distilled water is very, very nutritious, the truth of the matter is that it isn’t. Even the “quality” I attribute to distilled water as being full of nutrients, is a falsehood which is without existential ability. In essence; it simply isn’t true, and therefore it simply “isn’t”.
Evil is the same way, a presentation of something as real, that is false. Acting upon that falsehood leads to bad consequences which are a furtherance of that non-existent “lie”. A lie may spread, it may even be supported, but it is never ‘real’, lies are by definition something that isn’t a “reality”, in the philosophical understanding of something that is reality.
Show me one lie that is true, and evil may yet exist.
God is Good, infinitely good. God is Truth. Anything morally evil is not good, and therefore not true. Something that isn’t true is a lie, something that isn’t good is therefore - a lie, in my humble opinion.
I believe moral evil isn’t a creatable entity any way. God himself is the standard of Good, of Right, for he is eternally and has always been these things. Moral evil is “missing the mark” of these standards in what ever expression that “miss” may take.
God is good, and is an uncreated (in that he has no finite origin, or superior origin; he is self-emanating) entity. If Goodness is self-emanating and uncreated, then deviation from that Goodness as a concept is likewise uncreated. However, “in the beginning, God” - God is the only ‘thing’ that exists in the full expression of eternalness. He alone is I AM.
Basically, before “everything else” there was only, (and for sake of language; which is a poor communicator of truths):
IS and “Isn’t”.
Now, IS, is God. Goodness, omniessential. Existence, being the only existing thing in this pre-creation state of being. Isn’t therefore, cannot be a thing. Nothing cannot be a “thing” as understood in the way that God or Reality are “things”.
Evil is an expression of that which “Isn’t”. Because God who is the standard of “right and wrong” - IS. Evil isn’t a “thing”, because it is an expression of the uncreated “isn’t” which…doesn’t exist, for only God existed (Eternal standard of Right and Wrong) in “pre-creation”.
It is a very complicated sort of thing, and so I have trouble putting it into words - but it is the best I can do.
Perhaps this might help illustrate.
Abc <-- this letter is God.
B <-- this letter is Creation.
<-- this letter is Moral Evil.
It is not whether we believe something to be true, it is what is true and accurate. Addressing these things will cause us to discover the truth, but ignoring them and insisting them not to be, is not productive.
All things created, both good and evil, were created ontologically good. Even the moral evil which exists is ontologically good for the reason it was created. So perhaps it is the phrase, “onotologically good” that leads to the confusion.
Ontology: the branch of metaphysics that studies the nature of existence or being as such.
I believe these to be true and accurate.
- God is all-powerful
- God is all-knowing
- God is all-good
God says plainly that He created Evil, He spoke it into existence, and it was.
Isaiah 45:7I create darkness…I create evil; I am the Lord, Who does all these things.
Jeremiah 18:11 The Lord creates evil.
Lamentations 3:38 It is from the mouth of the Most High that evil go forth.
The existence of evil in God’s creation must therefore have a purpose that is for the good of God’s creation; otherwise, God is demonstrated to be not all-powerful, not all-knowing, or not all-good.
God says plainly that everything He created was very good.
Genesis 1:31 God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good.
Being omniessential does not require being a puppet-master.
If moral evil comes as a natural result of distance from God, then distance from God is the source of that moral evil, not God himself. This is the simplest expression of what I find scripturally and philosophically, as well as experientially.
God can use even distance from himself, and knows of it. He may even distance himself for a good purpose, but he himself is not the source of moral evil, as a concept. It is utterly disgusting to him.
Nobody here is talking about a puppet master, your barking up the wrong tree with that, especially me.
God does not perpetrate moral evil, but He created it within His creation by the very fact that it exists. So if you are one who perpetrates moral evil upon others, God will be very disgusted with it, and you will reap the consequences of such lifestyle.
If God has the power to save a child from being raped and killed and dumped in a lake, but does nothing but distance Himself, then God is responsible for moral evil by that mere lack of action. Especially since your definition of evil, is ‘lack’.
The more you try to defend your position, the less and less your position stands up to scrutiny.
No, you’ve simply misunderstood.
The whole “God had to create evil in order to be God” argument, in my opinion, is nothing more than an expression of the “God must be a puppet-master in order to be God” argument. In other words, it is just another way of saying that God must play toy soldiers with people (or circumstance, or “everything”), directly or indirectly, in order to be God - in my humble and honest opinion. And of course, I don’t think it is true that he cannot be God unless he created moral evil (which I don’t believe to be a created thing anyway, moral evil isn’t a tornado, or a tsunami - it is an emptiness of good, which Goodness is a thing, for God is Good).
God’s all-knowingness, all-goodness, all-powerfulness (especially) does not require that he be the source of Moral Evil. He doesn’t have to make the puppet that is moral evil, and wiggle all of its strings in order to be Sovereign.
The same argument one might apply to “free will” (free choice) in saying that God is not all powerful unless he makes a person rape another, or murder another, or steal from another is just as poor as the argument that God cannot be all powerful unless he makes the moral evil which drives a person to rape, murder, or steal from another to begin with.
Omnipotence, and the rest of his omniessentialness does not require all-controlling tyranny, neither does it require that moral evil came from him. He can be thoroughly sovereign and omniessential if Moral Evil did not come out of his heart to be created by his mouth through The Word. This is what I mean by “puppet-master”.
He doesn’t have to make the evil dog bark, and he doesn’t have to make the barking dog evil in order to be the Sovereign God.
If he created it, he was the first to perpetuate it. The pebble pusher causing the avalanche is the one at fault for killing thousands of people underneath the mountain side. If he did it on purpose, then he is not innocent, and in the case of Moral Evil being the “pebble” here; he’d be morally evil for having pushed it.
God did not have to throw the pebble, all He had to do was know that the pebble was coming and not stop it and thus is responsible for the avalanche that comes.
As you missed, since you reply so fast, lol. Based on your belief, God’s lack of action in any situation where moral evil is committed, makes Him accessory to it. Your definition of evil as being ‘lack of good’ and then saying God distances himself did not create evil, makes your position less and less credible and only makes my belief even stronger.
You keep speaking in terms that God is a linear minded man.
I do not suppose that it is God distancing himself, I can’t speak for what God is doing. But when a human being distances himself from God, and acts out that distance on another human being…well, the distance isn’t on God’s part but the man’s.
On the other hand, if God sent the rapist or the killer to do it, or directly made the evil which drove the sinner to do it - then he is directly, absolutely, and thoroughly at moral fault. God becomes the rapist, the murderer, the liar (hiding the body) - all he did was use the human as his , his weapon, and his dumper.
At the end of the day, it perhaps becomes a choice.
Do we believe that God is the rapist, or do we believe that God is good, that only good (chastisement is good also) comes from him, and has purposes for which he allowed a thing deviant from him to happen?
I’d rather go with the latter - at least that god is not an appalling Hellion. You’re welcome to believing in the Divine Sinner, but I will not.
You’d rather he made the pebble, pushed it on purpose, and giggled as it rolled the way down?
No, I just prefer to think of him as higher than your strange idea.
The logic you present is that, its perfectly okay if my father shoots me in the kneecap, and breaks my spine for no good reason - because he is my father. Better to be shot in the kneecap and my spine broken by a family member than by a stranger.
Of course, that is a ridiculous notion to me. That is the notion I see from your logic anyway, I’d rather hope it wasn’t what you are stating - but that’s what I see.
Again, you think like God is a individual who like man. God is not a man, nor does He behave or act like a man. God is God, and from God all things comes, including rapists and killers. If not for God, none of these men could exist, and if God had not given them permission to act, none of these men could perpetrate moral evil on one another.
No. At no time have I ever had that position.
In fact, it is your example and regardless whether or not God made the pebble and pushed it on purpose, He did not enjoy it, nor was it something He was pleased to do. He flooded the earth to annihilate mankind, He brought upon Egypt the plagues which He promised resulting in the death of innocent first born, and many unwilling participants in His dealings with Pharaoh and the Hebrew people.
So, once again your position is not credible based on your own extrapolations.
God is not altogether alien of man - we are in his image.
God makes children, and fathers and mothers make children too. If their children grow up to be serial killers it is the fault of the serial killer, ultimately, for being one. Not the parents who brought him into being with the premise that he would, should, and shall be a good child.
God does not have to make moral evil, in order to be God any more than the parents have to train their child how to slaughter after a certain pattern in order to be parents.
God is a being, a sentient being. So of course I think of him like a sentient being, who should certainly behave himself if he expects his children to behave.
That is what “God created Moral Evil” amounts to. He might not exactly “giggle” but none the less, he’d still be making the pebble, pushed it down on purpose, and watched it roll.
Cataclysm for chastisement, even unto death - is not moral evil. The flooded, the first born, and others like Sodom shall be restored. Moral Evil is altogether atrocious and serves no good purpose in and of itself. It is not good, has no goodness in it, and therefore I believe it did not come out of God.
You’re welcome to believe that if you wish.
It still comes down to a choice it seems; God is the monster who made moral evil, and sent it out to torture his creation for what ever reason or another - or he didn’t create it, and is steadfastly ridding his creation of it, making it more like himself, by filling the void that evil is with Himself who is Goodness.
I form the light and **create **darkness
He IS the light, (God is love). “I form the light”
He IS LOVE.
But darkness “is created”, just like a shadow is created when the sun is temporarily blocked from view. When the light is temporarily blocked from the view, when love is temporarily blocked from view, when GOD is temporarily blocked from our view.
Darkness is CREATED by the blockage. But the sun itself holds no darkness. The sun itself is WHOLLY light.
In the darkness, it is cold, we cannot see, fear is present, etc.
God does not cause man to do things that are not loving. God is NOT the CREATOR of rape, murder, torture, jealousy, greed, etc. These are things that are created in mankind when mankind turns AWAY from Love/Light (God.)
But this is only a temporary walk… or climb rather, through the tree of knowledge of good and evil. (or love and non-love).
There is no where we can go too far into the darkness, where His hand cannot reach.
Non-love will be exhausted until we finally all see it for the pathetic, weak, yet destructive thing that it is.
And all will rejoice when the knowledge that LOVE CONQUERS ALL fills every heart. When the knowledge that LOVE is the most powerful thing in existence. When all finally have the knowledge that God IS LOVE.
Just thinking out loud…
peace,
sparrow
Lovely thoughts, sparrow! Thank you!
It would be interesting to get some feedback on this from one who knows Hebrew. There may be nuances of meaning that definitions do not adequately convey.
Is 45:7 I form (yatsar) the light, and create (bara’) darkness: I make (asah) peace, and create (bara') evil: I the LORD do (asah) all these [things].
yatsar = to form, fashion
bara’ = to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)
`asah = to do, work, make, produce
Sonia
I agree, I would like to hear from someone who knows Hebrew as well.
“we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed instead with our heavenly dwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life.” 2Cor
Paul didn’t think the earth was a rocky planet orbiting a star, but rather the terrible ocean of dark chaos in which we dwell. ie: all that we see in the night sky. (“The earth was formless and void…”) This ocean is bounded, and therefore part of God’s far larger world. (Is it a mere pool in the Wood between the Worlds?) Being earthly, being mortal, being exiles from Eden, we drink in chaos even as it oozes into God’s creation from outside. Fortunately for us, the earth (the dark ocean and all that is in it) is subject to God’s sovereign will and is being transformed into something good. God-with-us enters our darkness. This darkness is no-thing and is destroyed, swallowed up, by being filled with light. Or in Paul’s words, God works, “so that what is mortal (dark) may be swallowed up by life (light).”
In modern parlance, our universe is a bounded sub-set of a much greater reality. It is mostly cold, dark, lifeless, empty and entropic, yet almost paradoxically evolves astounding complexity. This evolution is not arbitrary or meaningless, but the work of supreme intelligence. The final result will the the complete union of our reality with ultimate reality.