# Objectively evil is good



## Hippo (Apr 24, 2008)

I was reading Herman Hoeksema's excellent "The Triple Knowledge", an exposition of the Heidelberg Catechism and in relation to the the first question Hoeksema states that "evil is only relatively an evil, while absolutely it is a good". 

I find this approach very interesting as it really seems to reconcile the nature of God with his sovereignty, it reminds me a bit of:

As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.
Gen 50:20 (ESV)

Is this understanding orthodox?


----------



## Leslie (Apr 24, 2008)

How can anyone read the scriptures and embrace the sovereignty of God and yet NOT believe this? Yet it's very difficult to wrap one's mind around this concept, particularly as regards such events as the Holocaust.


----------



## KMK (Apr 24, 2008)

Hippo said:


> I was reading Herman Hoeksema's excellent "The Triple Knowledge", an exposition of the Heidelberg Catechism and in relation to the the first question Hoeksema states that "evil is only relatively an evil, while absolutely it is a good".
> 
> I find this approach very interesting as it really seems to reconcile the nature of God with his sovereignty, it reminds me a bit of:
> 
> ...





> Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].



I don't know exactly what Hoeksema is saying but I think the problem comes when we, as sinful humans, try to judge in and of themselves what is evil and what is good. We do not have that ability nor that authority. It 'appeared' that what happened to Joseph was evil and his brothers certainly meant to do evil but who are we to judge? It was God working good behind the scenes the whole time.

I guess that doesn't answer you question at all.



> WCF Chapter 5:IV. The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God so far manifest themselves in His providence, that it extends itself even to the first fall, and all other sins of angels and men;and that not by a bare permission, but such as has joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding, and otherwise ordering, and governing of them, in a manifold dispensation, to His own holy ends; yet so, as the sinfulness thereof proceeds only from the creature, and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.


The goodness of God manifests itself in the joining, bounding, ordering and governing of sin to His holy ends.

I don't know if you can go so far as to say that 'evil' is 'good'. You can say 'evil' is used by God to manifest His goodness.


----------



## Poimen (Apr 24, 2008)

John Gerstner basically said the same thing: there is evil good and good good. For Gerstner the problem of evil really doesn't exist. So Hoeksema is in good company.


----------



## KMK (Apr 24, 2008)

Poimen said:


> John Gerstner basically said the same thing: there is evil good and good good. For Gerstner the problem of evil really doesn't exist. So Hoeksema is in good company.



If evil doesn't exist, then why does the Bible have so much to say about it?

If one wants to say that 'good' describes evil then that is one thing. But it doesn't make sense to say that evil and good are the same thing. I can say, "Coffee is good." The word 'good' is describing coffee, but I am not saying coffee and good are the same things.


----------



## Poimen (Apr 24, 2008)

Gerstner does not deny evil _per se_; it still exists. It is the _problem_ of evil that is non-existent. For all evil is good (Romans 8:28) though it may appear to us to only have an negative effect.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Apr 24, 2008)

Poimen said:


> John Gerstner basically said the same thing: there is evil good and good good. For Gerstner the problem of evil really doesn't exist. So Hoeksema is in good company.



Amen Sir. Glad to know people still read Dr. Gerstner, one of the last orthodox Professors at PTS.


----------



## D. Paul (Apr 24, 2008)

I listen to so much audio I can't remember who I heard state it this way (in essence, not verbatim):

God created and all things were "good". There is no concept of "evil" without there first being the reality of good. Good is the reality; anything short of good or contrary to good is then "evil". This is also how it can be said that God is not the creator of evil. (I sure hope I didn't botch the thing)


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 24, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Poimen said:
> 
> 
> > John Gerstner basically said the same thing: there is evil good and good good. For Gerstner the problem of evil really doesn't exist. So Hoeksema is in good company.
> ...



You mean that they won't be giving R.C. Sproul the alum of the year award any time soon?


----------



## Grymir (Apr 24, 2008)

To use an analogy, it's like a thermometer. It measure's heat, we use cold as a relative term (ie, it's not cold, only an absence of heat), only 'heat' exists. Good exists, evil is a lack of Good. Crude analogy, but it helps explain the OP statement in a simple way that people can grasp easier. 

Dr. Gerstner is great reading!!


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Apr 24, 2008)

DMcFadden said:


> Backwoods Presbyterian said:
> 
> 
> > Poimen said:
> ...





To use one of R.C.'s favorite words, he is "anathema" at PTS...


----------



## Galatians220 (Apr 24, 2008)

Hippo said:


> I was reading Herman Hoeksema's excellent "The Triple Knowledge", an exposition of the Heidelberg Catechism and in relation to the the first question Hoeksema states that "evil is only relatively an evil, while absolutely it is a good".
> 
> I find this approach very interesting as it really seems to reconcile the nature of God with his sovereignty, it reminds me a bit of:
> 
> ...


 
Don't know the precise or likely idiosyncratically nuanced definition of the term "orthodox" here. I'm _struggling _with this Board and I thank you all for merely tolerating me... But if you're interested in Hoeksema and what he thought, a more detailed explanation of his theology of good and evil is in his "Behold He Cometh: an Exposition of the Book of Revelation," (RFPA, 2nd ed., 2000), which we bought around the time this second edition was published and which I'm going through as I'm reading the above responses. The book runs close to 800 pp., including its very inclusive index, and so I'm not going to do a "brief summary" here; suffice it to say that it's well worth obtaining and reading. As far as I know, it's still in print.

Another good Hoeksema reference, helpful to really get a "read" on the man, his doctrine and theology, is "Therefore Have I Spoken," a beautiful biography written by his daughter-in-law, Gertrude Hoeksema. We obtained it quite fortunately as a Grand Rapids bookstore was selling off its stock. It's become a difficult book to get hold of; it was also published by RFPA, in 1969.

The KJB, which Hoeksema used once he came here and preached in English, although, of course, he started in Dutch, translates Gen. 50:20 as "But as for you, ye thought evil against me, _but_ God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as _it is_ this day, to save much people alive." The 1599 Geneva renders the same verse, "When ye thought evil against me, God disposed it to good, that he might bring to pass as it is this day, and save much people alive."

Margaret


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 25, 2008)

Evil is not good; it is evil. 

God can use evil for God and use it for His good, but this does not make evil good.


----------



## Hippo (Apr 26, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> Evil is not good; it is evil.
> 
> God can use evil for God and use it for His good, but this does not make evil good.



The only reason that there is evil is in order that it may glorify God, Evil is part of God's plan and God is objectively incapable of doing anything but good.


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 27, 2008)

I repeat what I said above. God is not the cause of sin. He uses sin, but never condones it but judges it. 

To say that evil is good is to lie and blaspheme God and to make God a big hypocrite when God acts like He is mad at sin, when all along he is happy for this good thing.



To say that God works all things for good is one thing; to say that all things are good in themselves is quite another. 

Anyone who contradicts this is buying into the devil's lies.



God uses evil even for his own glory. This is different than saying that evil is good. 

Now that God has allowed evil to be let loose into the world he can shape it, permit it or channel it for good purposes...but again, this is different than saying that evil is good, which is an absolutely stupid statement.

God has decreeed for His own glory to allow the Fall and uses its effects greater to glorify Himself, but again this is different than saying that black is white and white is black. If evil is good, and we should only do good, let's all sin that grace may abound and God may get the more glory. Evil is not good, even though God uses all things for his own glory.


The sementics used by Hippo and others needs to be sharpened so as to defend God's absolute holiness. In the Qur'an, Allah might be the sovereign God who can deceive, but our God absolute pure and holy.


----------



## Hippo (Apr 27, 2008)

The punishment of evil glorifies God, evil is not an embarrasment or merely something that was "let loose". In glory we will see evil in its objective context as part of God's plan. 

I understand Pergamums concerns, I am not in the least arguing that evil is not relatively an evil. However on his anlaysis you do have a god of the Qur'an who can use something that is objectively evil for his own purposes, we have a God of absolute purity and holiness who is incapable of acting against this holy nature.


----------



## KenPierce (Apr 27, 2008)

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil.

Be very, very careful. The hidden things belong to God.

God is not the author of sin.


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 27, 2008)

One of the blessings of coming to a confessional baptist position has been re-discovering the riches of my own heritage in the 1689 LBCF. My polity class in seminary "referenced" the confession but only in an historical and antiquarian way. Only in recent years has it been a real part of the expression of my faith. On 3:1, the words aptly state what I believe about God's sovereignty taking into account the presence of evil. [I have bolded the modifications of the WCF.]



> God *hath decreed in himself*, from all eternity, by the most wise and Holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, *all things*, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin *nor hath fellowship with any therein*; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; *in which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree*.



BTW, if you have not ordered it yet, the Doxa Westminster Confession Commentary Collection package is just amazing for study as you can see from the demo on another thread (and VERY cheap). I pre-ordered on 12/29 for $5.95 from Doxa. It is available for $9.95 now with 8 resources!


----------



## john (Apr 27, 2008)

God is the first cause of all things, Col 1:16 *For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.*

Nothing is permitted or allowed by God, any decision a man makes he makes because God has determined it. God has determined all the actions, words and thoughts of His creatures before they came into existence, because He is Sovereign. To say otherwise is unscriptural. He sustains all things by His Powerful Word, Heb 1:3.

Is 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
PR 16:1 The preparations of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue, is from the LORD.

The idea that Adam was permitted or allowed to cause the death of God is false because scripture says it was God that bound man over to disobedience, (Rom 11:32.) Adam was compelled by God to take the fruit, anything other explanation is evil. (Evil being anything opposing God's word. 
God could only commit an evil act if He had created a law forbidding Himself from such an act. Since He is not under the law then it is impossible for Him to sin or commit evil regardless of our sensiblities.

Hippo, nice to meet you.



> However on his anlaysis you do have a god of the Qur'an who can use something that is objectively evil for his own purposes, we have a God of absolute purity and holiness who is incapable of acting against this holy nature.



I don't understand this statement. 

Do you mean God cannot act against His Nature, so to speak, therefore He cannot do what you think of as evil?



> God is not the author of sin.



*God is the Author of sin....* God has bound all men over to disobedience  Rom 11:32, 
Jews and Gentiles alike. With respect, KenPierce, you are wrong. Back up what you say with scripture please.



> God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and Holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin...



And the scripture please McFadderator? 

Do you disagree with this : 

*By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.* (John Calvin Institutes of the Christian Religion Book 3 chapter 21:5.)

Calvinism? 

john.


----------



## KenPierce (Apr 27, 2008)

John,

James 1:13-14.

Why are we to abhor what is evil, and cling to what is good, if God is some sort of divine Yin-Yang?

Both the WCF and the 1689 LBC agree on this point, and agree with Scripture, contra Hoeksema and Gordon Clark.

God decreed to allow the Fall, no question about that. Somehow, he did it while remaining free from evil himself. We can't say that he coerced Adam into doing what he had commanded Adam not to do --does that not go against James?

But, he did create knowing it would happen, and he also could have created a universe in which it did not happen --see Augustine.

Part of this is our philosophical construction of evil as a "thing" that can be "created," some sort of mythic ideal stuff. What is evil? It is simply disobedience to God. God created a universe with the potential of disobedience.

With all due respect, you are taking Romans 11:32 grossly out of context: ESV Romans 11:32 For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.
. 

If we read the rest of the verse the way you would have us read it, it would argue for the salvation of all men, would it not? But that is simply not what Paul is arguing. He is arguing, rather that God allows men to go and do what men, totally depraved, will do. And, he does that not by forcing them to do it. They do it by nature. And, he allows it to happen, why? So that he can have mercy on those whom he desires to have mercy: the "all" in view here.


----------



## Mushroom (Apr 27, 2008)

One question, perhaps not relavent:

Would it have been sin for God to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil? Why or why not?


----------



## KenPierce (Apr 27, 2008)

Brad, brother, that is one of those undue speculations Calvin said God spent eternity creating Hell for.  We might ask rather would it be right for God to lie.


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 27, 2008)

john said:


> > God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and Holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin...
> 
> 
> 
> And the scripture please McFadderator?



I'm sorry. My post announced that it was derived from 3.1 of the 1689 LBCF. The Scriptures listed for 3.1 are: Eph. 1:11; Rom. 11:33; Heb. 6:17; Rom. 9:15, 18; Jas. 1:13, 17; 1John 1:5; Acts 2:23; Matt. 17:12; Acts 4:27, 28; John 19:11; Prov. 16:33. Specifically on the issue of God and evil, the relevant passages were James 1:13, 17 and 1 John 1:5. 

Some theologians go further in their discussions of evil (cf. Hoeksema). Personally, I do not see that as the teaching of the 1689 LBCF.


----------



## Hippo (Apr 27, 2008)

john said:


> Hippo, nice to meet you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That is my point, there is an aspect of evil that concerns rebellion against God, which God cannot be guilty of. This is the root of all sin and while it may be sin for the rebel it is ordained by God and is not objectively (i.e. when looked at from the eternal) evil but good.

God uses evil, he sends lying spirits and such is not objectively evil. To say that they are is to say that God is capable of using evil which he is not, he is holy and pure.

We are created beings and in no way am I saying that when we do evil that we are doing good from our perpective, from the perspective against which we are judged we are sinning.

To say that when God uses evil it is objectively evil is to impugn the nature of God.

When we suffer under evil we can have peace in the knowledge that this evil under which we suffer will glorify God.


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 27, 2008)

Hippo:

I think what you are saying is correct, but your wording may lead others astray. God uses evil for good, but evil is not good. All things work for good, but all things are not good in and of themselves. I am glad that you verfied that God is absolutely pure and could do no evil.

And, John, your statement, "God could only commit an evil act if He had created a law forbidding Himself from such an act.." is naive - the law springs forth from God's moral nature and is a reflection of that nature. God and his law are not someway loose of each other.



I am note sure what is being pushed for in this post. A practical ramification of God's sovereignty is that God uses all things for His glory and even when we suffer, God will use it for His glory and the good of the Christian. 

But the post does not seem initially to be steered that way, but steered into some sloppy semantics of calling evil good.All Christians ought to oppose such statements as that.


----------



## john (Apr 27, 2008)

Ok Hippo, (God is guilty of nothing, (as if He was ever on trial?)), we go for the root of all sin. 

Col 1:16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.

What's the problem? Explain please. For by him all things were created... Is 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Our God is Mighty. He deals directly with disobedience, sin, evil. He creates it and sustains all things Does He not? Answer required. Scripture rules. 



> That is my point, there is an aspect of evil that concerns rebellion against God...



Evil hasn't an aspect of rebellion, it is rebellion, end of story ain't it? 



> To say that when God uses evil it is objectively evil is to impugn the nature of God.



I don't understand. Obective to who, (whom)? What do you mean by 'God's Nature'? Do I impugn His Name by saying : 

*By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.* (John Calvin Institutes of the Christian Religion Book 3 chapter 21:5.)


()ohn.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 27, 2008)

john said:


> *God is the Author of sin....*


Wrong!

Learn more about the Scriptures before you openly contradict what they actually teach. That God is not the author of sin is explicitly stated in the Scriptures.

This is not open for discussion. You may discuss compatibilism all day long but the moment you make God the proximate cause of sin you have left the reservation.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Apr 27, 2008)

Evil in scripture is not alway rendered wickedness nor something immoral. It can be used in the context of something horrific or terrible. Something that is full of destruction. Evil is not necessarily wickedness. By the way. God can not sin or be rebellious because he is holy and righteous and in him is no darkness. He uses the wicked for his revelation of goodness or judgment maybe but he can not do wickedly or go against his character of Holiness. 

We discussed the evil of death a while back and our good buddy Vic rendered this....



victorbravo said:


> ......On the other track, regarding your question to Paul about definition of evil, I skimmed my lexicons for Hebrew and Greek and saw that the respective words are used both for moral evil and for just plain calamity, natural illness, and the like. So it is fair (and Biblical) to say a neutral injury is evil and yet not immoral. It's not my point, but a point of information.





One must define evil and how it is being used.

Also remember....Adam was created good. The creation was created good.


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 28, 2008)

John,

In this area, the confessions are quite clear to affirm the absolute sovereignty of God AND to separate him from sin. That is the point of 3.1 in both the WCF and the LBCF.

Suggesting otherwise runs counter to the teaching of the confessions and settles the logical paradoxes at the cost of impugning the character of God.


----------



## stevestutz (Apr 28, 2008)

As far as the entire discussion goes. I have always had this idea: as humans, we categorize things as good or bad. In doing this, everything must fit under one category or the other, we take it to such an extent that we even categorize God under something, as if good and evil is a law that transcends even God's sovereignty. Wouldn't the biblical approach to this be that simply: God is good. Not that on the scale of good VS evil, God is more good than all else. NO, God, Himself, IS, GOOD. Anything that is contrary to him, is evil. Yes he has complete control over evil, and he allows it to exist, but he uses every action towards his goals, according to his glory. Vessels of mercy, vessels of wrath, all things work together for the good of those who love God, In HIM all things find their being, God is the sustainer of all, God is God. 

Not trying to make a particular viewpoint or argue, just stating what I thought at the moment.


----------



## john (Apr 28, 2008)

Semper Fidelis, (Administrator).

Are you telling me officially to stop discussing this subject?



> Learn more about the Scriptures before you openly contradict what they actually teach. That God is not the author of sin is explicitly stated in the Scriptures.



If that is true why do you not use scripture to refute me?

john.


----------



## john (Apr 28, 2008)

Hello PuritanCovenanter.



> Also remember....Adam was created good. The creation was created good.



GE 2:18 The LORD God said, "It is *not good* for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

Hello DMcFadden.



> In this area, the confessions are quite clear to affirm the absolute sovereignty of God AND to separate him from sin. That is the point of 3.1 in both the WCF and the LBCF.



I know. 



> Suggesting otherwise runs counter to the teaching of the confessions and settles the logical paradoxes at the cost of impugning the character of God.



No paradox exists to be unparadoxed does it?

I am here in particular for this discussion. Since I'm not sure if I've been told to shut up I will keep my answers short until I am told for sure whether I am allowed to speak or not.

God is Good, God is Sovereign and God created *all things*. Col 1:16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.

I do not impugn the character of God by using scripture do I? 

john.


----------



## john (Apr 28, 2008)

Hello steve.



> ...as if good and evil is a law that transcends even God's sovereignty.



Whatever God does is good. He is bound by no law but His will is done.

God created vessels of mercy and the vessels of wrath created themselves is a fine thing?
Some were made for noble purposes and the others made themselves for ignoble purposes. Two creators.

Romans 9:11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad--in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls--she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

God declares double predestination and it is for us to believe it, surely?

PS 139:13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.
PS 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

God creates sinners.

john.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 28, 2008)

john said:


> Semper Fidelis, (Administrator).
> 
> Are you telling me officially to stop discussing this subject?
> 
> ...



I imagine it is because I'm not as erudite as you. Are you obnoxious in real life or do you just type that way? Your statements as presented thus far are sub-Biblical and un-Confessional. Your ability to quote a Scripture is not the same as being able to properly handle the Scriptures.

I'll let my corpus on this site speak for itself. It appears to me that the only reason you've lasted as long on this site as you have is that you've finally typed enough to demonstrate that you are not as Confessional as you claimed to be when you applied. You may attempt to extricate yourself but my Confessional credibility is not in question here.

Type more in the current direction to announce to me that you desire to leave the board.


----------



## BJClark (Apr 28, 2008)

Evil is evil is evil, and can never be called good.

However, God certainly uses evil things to bring about good in the lives of those He loves. I only need look to my own life and see this truth.

When we act sinful to another or another acts sinful towards us, Satan desires to use that evil to destroy us, the relationship, break up a family, a church, destroy someone's reputation, yet God intends those things to grow people to be more like Himself, so they can help and encourage others who may go down that path later..


----------



## john (Apr 28, 2008)

Semper Fidelis.



> It appears to me that the only reason you've lasted as long on this site as you have is that you've finally typed enough to demonstrate that you are not as Confessional as you claimed to be when you applied.



As you can see I joined in 2004 and I am subject to change.

I have not hidden my faith nor have I acted to decieve. I thought my brothers and sisters would be kind enough to tolerate me but you will not?



> Are you obnoxious in real life or do you just type that way?



I've hardly said enough for you to judge me so quickly have I? A lot of people don't like what I say, that's for sure. 



> Type more in the current direction to announce to me that you desire to leave the board.



Of course I will desist. 
PR 16:1 The preparations of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue, is from the LORD.

NU 6:24 " ` "The LORD bless you
and keep you;

NU 6:25 the LORD make his face shine upon you
and be gracious to you;

NU 6:26 the LORD turn his face toward you
and give you peace." '


john.


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 28, 2008)

john said:


> Hello steve.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





John:

_*
God creates sinners?*_




Okay, despite my pet peeve being folks calling only gross error heresy, I think I am ready to shout HERESY at this statement.

The statement that God creates sinners is not only gross error but is worse than errors of arminianism and dispensationalism... I believe that if you really believe this, then this falls into the category of damning heresy.



You blaspheme God and need to repent.


----------



## regener8ed (Apr 28, 2008)

Are you sure about that Pergamum? Proverbs 16:4 "The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble."


----------



## Davidius (Apr 28, 2008)

regener8ed said:


> Are you sure about that Pergamum? Proverbs 16:4 "The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble."



Not to mention the potter analogy, which was mentioned above. He creates some vessels of wrath for dishonorable use. As someone relatively new to the reformed community who came here seeking consistency and refuge from appeals to mystery and irrationality, I sometimes am confused by what appears to me to be double-mindedness. We want to have our cake and eat it, too, presumably that we not push the Arminian _too_ far away.


----------



## stevestutz (Apr 28, 2008)

Unless good and evil is some sort of law that is above God, God allows evil, yes he must have created both good and evil. But the scriptures obviously state again and again that God detests evil, he is NOT evil, and that He wishes that his creation will be good. 

Just because God creates and allows evil does not mean he is the AUTHOR of it. He did not create evil in order that he would be the center of it, the cornerstone of evil. He allows evil because he works all things according to his good pleasure. Evil only shows just how good God truly is, and only adds to the glory that he deserves. 


"In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined _according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,_" -- Eph 1:11

14What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 15For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. -- Rom 9:14-18

19You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? -- Rom 9:19-21


----------



## Davidius (Apr 28, 2008)

If by "author" one means that God himself is the one down here committing the sins, then of course he's not the author of evil. No one would say that. In spite of its clunkiness, I would prefer saying "the one who commits sin" to "author," since it is rarely defined and is surely the cause of much confusion - unless, of course some mean to say by "author" that God is not sin's first cause. But if God is the primary cause of everything (if everything comes to pass by God's decree), how can God not be the primary cause of evil? To say that God is the author of evil, when one means thereby that God is the first cause but not the agent, is not to attribute the act of sin to God himself, which is what some seem to be afraid of. 

We have seen several passages of scripture which clearly show that God 1) creates "darkness" and "evil" 2) creates vessels of wrath 3) has created everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of destruction. Other passages can be added to this, such as the place where God sends a lying spirit to deceive Saul. Let these passages be category A. We have also seen passages which tell us that God himself does not commit evil. Another passage I think of is the one in James which tells us that God does not tempt. Let such passages be category B. There is no contradiction between A and B. God may not tempt, but it is obvious that he ordains temptation. The lying spirit which deceived Saul is only one example. See Ezekiel 14:9 for another example, where God says that he has deceived the false prophets and will hence destroy them.


----------



## Simply_Nikki (Apr 28, 2008)

> Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.
> 
> James 1:13-15


----------



## Pilgrim Standard (Apr 28, 2008)

Job 34:10 Therefore hearken unto me ye men of understanding: far be it from God, that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that he should commit iniquity.


1Cr 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.


----------



## Davidius (Apr 28, 2008)

I can do that, too.



Isaiah 45:7 said:


> The One forming light and creating darkness,Causing well-being and creating calamity;I am the LORD who does all these.





1 Kings 22:23 said:


> Now therefore behold, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the LORD has declared disaster for you.





2 Chronicles 18:22 said:


> Now therefore behold, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of these your prophets. The LORD has declared disaster concerning you.





1 Samuel 19:9 said:


> But an evil spirit from the LORD came upon Saul as he was sitting in his house with his spear in his hand. While David was playing the harp.





Amos 3:6 said:


> When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not the people tremble? When disaster comes to a city, has not the LORD caused it?



  


It would be more beneficial for us to attempt to reconcile the various teachings of scripture, which is what I was trying to do above. God is not the agent ("author", if you would prefer) of sin but must be the first cause, as he is the first cause of everything else.


----------



## Hippo (Apr 28, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> Hippo:
> 
> I think what you are saying is correct, but your wording may lead others astray. God uses evil for good, but evil is not good. All things work for good, but all things are not good in and of themselves. I am glad that you verfied that God is absolutely pure and could do no evil.
> 
> ...



I agree with you here, and at the very least some of the reactions caused by this thread show how dangerous these discusions can be. The Reformed often discuss and reconcile such difficult areas (let us not forget that election and reprobation are concepts seen as horific by the majority of the modern church) and it is always important that we are reminded of the boundaries of such discussions. Just like election it is also an area where trading seemingly oposing scripture quotes does not really help, we need to look at the full message of scripture.

Men and God see actions from different perspectives, evil is all part of God's plan that will work for his glory and on that note I will withdraw from this thread before I get shouted at by a moderator.


----------



## stevestutz (Apr 28, 2008)

Hippo said:


> Pergamum said:
> 
> 
> > Hippo:
> ...


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 28, 2008)

Davidius said:


> If by "author" one means that God himself is the one down here committing the sins, then of course he's not the author of evil. No one would say that. In spite of its clunkiness, I would prefer saying "the one who commits sin" to "author," since it is rarely defined and is surely the cause of much confusion - unless, of course some mean to say by "author" that God is not sin's first cause. But if God is the primary cause of everything (if everything comes to pass by God's decree), how can God not be the primary cause of evil? To say that God is the author of evil, when one means thereby that God is the first cause but not the agent, is not to attribute the act of sin to God himself, which is what some seem to be afraid of.
> 
> We have seen several passages of scripture which clearly show that God 1) creates "darkness" and "evil" 2) creates vessels of wrath 3) has created everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of destruction. Other passages can be added to this, such as the place where God sends a lying spirit to deceive Saul. Let these passages be category A. We have also seen passages which tell us that God himself does not commit evil. Another passage I think of is the one in James which tells us that God does not tempt. Let such passages be category B. There is no contradiction between A and B. God may not tempt, but it is obvious that he ordains temptation. The lying spirit which deceived Saul is only one example. See Ezekiel 14:9 for another example, where God says that he has deceived the false prophets and will hence destroy them.



God being the primary cause of all things is not in question here David. That God ordains sin does not make Him the author thereof is what the issue is:



> I. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeable ordain whatsoever comes to pass;1 yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin,2nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.3
> 
> 1 EPH 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will. ROM 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! HEB 6:17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath. ROM 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
> 
> ...



My rebuke against John is directed at a facile reading of certain texts that see God's ordaining of things as equivalent to removing the will of the creature or the contingency of secondary causes.

If the only thing that men here want us to agree upon is that God ordained sin along with every other thing that comes to pass then that is apparently obvious to the casual observer. What is not acceptable is a view of His ordination that places Him as the proximate agent of temptation.

As I stated earlier, some men are able to quote texts but they are not able to responsibly handle them. We have to take the full account of what the Scriptures say about both God's ordination of all things, temptation, man's agency, etc. There is such a thing as "good and necessary inference" and much of the inference in this thread has demonstrated the need for just that kind of inference.


----------



## john (Apr 29, 2008)

What do you know about the way I handle scripture Semper Fidelis, you cut me off with threats almost before I started?

Just one remark concerning Pergamum then I'll crawl back under the stone again...



> God is not the cause of sin. He uses sin, but never condones it but judges it. (post #15)



EX 4:21 The LORD said to Moses, "When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart *so that* he will not let the people go.

It was God that caused Pharaoh to refuse God's command.

john.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 29, 2008)

john said:


> What do you know about the way I handle scripture Semper Fidelis, you cut me off with threats almost before I started?
> 
> Just one remark concerning Pergamum then I'll crawl back under the stone again...
> 
> ...


You have demonstrated repeatedly a "prooftexting" handling of the Scriptures with no demonstration that you can marshall other texts on the same subject to present a full-orbed systematic presentation. This last post being the nail in the coffin - throw out a verse and then declare its full meaning in a single, inadequate sentence. No mature student of the Scriptures should be satisfied with such a presentation.

Come back to the board in the future if you ever decide you're Confessionally Reformed.


----------



## Amazing Grace (Apr 29, 2008)

Davidius said:


> If by "author" one means that God himself is the one down here committing the sins, then of course he's not the author of evil. No one would say that. In spite of its clunkiness, I would prefer saying "the one who commits sin" to "author," since it is rarely defined and is surely the cause of much confusion - unless, of course some mean to say by "author" that God is not sin's first cause. But if God is the primary cause of everything (if everything comes to pass by God's decree), how can God not be the primary cause of evil? To say that God is the author of evil, when one means thereby that God is the first cause but not the agent, is not to attribute the act of sin to God himself, which is what some seem to be afraid of.
> 
> We have seen several passages of scripture which clearly show that God 1) creates "darkness" and "evil" 2) creates vessels of wrath 3) has created everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of destruction. Other passages can be added to this, such as the place where God sends a lying spirit to deceive Saul. Let these passages be category A. We have also seen passages which tell us that God himself does not commit evil. Another passage I think of is the one in James which tells us that God does not tempt. Let such passages be category B. There is no contradiction between A and B. God may not tempt, but it is obvious that he ordains temptation. The lying spirit which deceived Saul is only one example. See Ezekiel 14:9 for another example, where God says that he has deceived the false prophets and will hence destroy them.





Here is an article that I found tremendously helpful on the subject. By posting the link I am not fully endorsing the person or the group, but when truth is spoken, it must be gleaned.

The Remnant


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Apr 29, 2008)

john said:


> Hello PuritanCovenanter.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Do I need to respond to this? 

I hope not. This is so out there as far as a comeback or refutation. But I will attempt to make it easy for someone.

Adam's nature was created good. That was the context. God creating Eve to give someone to Adam for fellowship is not what this discussion was about. Sad hermeneutics. Sorry John. You are very confused and lost on how to determine context. And it shows. 

Plus, if you knew anything about grace and God's working in man you would understand that God doesn't need to do anything to harden man's heart except remove his divine influence and presence from man. Man's heart is deplorable without God's influence and presence. His heart is hardened naturally when God removes himself from a man. God need not do anything active to make man wicked except remove his divine presence from a man. 

God is Holy and Good. 


Be Encouraged.


----------

