Board index ‹ Specific Bible verses, texts, and passages ‹ Isaiah

[Super Sleuth]

If god created evil, doesn't that make evil a good thing?

[jimwalton]

God didn't create evil.

Isaiah’s point in chapter 45 is that God is sovereign, and he’s the only king. He can use whatever and whoever he wants for his purposes. Just because he uses a heathen to do his work (a pagan emperor, for instance) doesn’t mean that he endorses what the emperor believes. But he’s God, and he can use even unbelievers to accomplish his purposes. He’s talking to his people, Israel, to explain to them that he will deliver them from Cyrus, the emperor of the first Persian Empire, but first he’s going to use Cyrus to accomplish some things.

Verse 7 is his climax of this particular section. Isaiah’s real point is that God is the only God, and there is no other deity. There may be other spiritual beings, but no other gods. Isaiah uses two illustrations of parallel pairs, one from nature (light and darkness) and one from history (prosperity and disaster). He uses a figure of speech using opposites to explain that God is king over all. No other being or force is sovereign as God is sovereign.

You can't create light without also bringing on darkness. Turn on any flashlight, and you’ll also create shadows. On a sunny day the shadows are the strongest. Isaiah is using these word pictures to express God's power and rule. When Isaiah says that "God created disaster," he is not claiming that God has been a jerk and done something wrong, or that he created evil. The word Isaiah uses is “ra”, which is the opposite of shalom. What Isaiah is saying is that if there are bad conditions in your life, it is because you are bearing the consequences of your own sin. It is the lack of God's prosperity (shalom). And if there is darkness, that is a lack of light. But even darkness and disaster exist in a universe where God is the ruling king.

[Super Sleuth]

The verse literally says god created evil.

[jimwalton]

That's why context is so important. The word 'ra, which is translated "evil," can mean other things. "Evil" is not its only possibility.

When I'm in front of my grocery store, there is a sign that says "No Standing." Does that mean we're all supposed to sit down? Am I to understanding that I can walk there but not stand? No, of course not. We know from the context that the sign means cars can't park there. But you could argue with me and say, "The sign literally says 'No Standing'." Of course it does, but that's not what it means.

The word "'ra" can also mean "calamity; disaster." It has a wide range of meanings, much like our English word "bad." I could say the pizza is bad, or I could say my girlfriend is a "bad" girl, and those mean VERY different things. You can't throw in my face that I'm talking about pizza in the same way I'm talking about my girlfriend because it "literally says 'bad'. "Bad" can mean moral evil ("Hitler was a bad man") or misfortune ("Yow, I'm having a bad day"), something against my preferences ("broccoli tastes bad to me"), or that which doesn't conform to some standard ("Ooh, this is a bad road").

Our English word "evil" almost always refers to some moral wickedness, but not so for the Hebrew word, so let's not force one into the other. At the beginning of the verse, Isaiah contrasts two opposites, light and darkness. OK, we get that. In this part of the verse, Isaiah contrasts shalom and 'ra. Now, if he wanted to talk about good and evil, he would not have used the word shalom. That's a cue he's talking about something different.

What Isaiah is saying is that if bad conditions exist in my life (those that aren't shalom, they are not there become some evil deity has thwarted the good intentions of some half-witted, partial-powered grandfather god who just doesn't have the means to do things right. The 'ra conditions—the bad conditions, the calamity, or the disaster—are probably there because of ME—I've sinned, or made poor decisions, or someone else has.

[Super Sleuth]

Why does Lord Jealous permit bad translations of his important message? He sounds lame and incompetent (or imaginary).

[jimwalton]

> Lord Jealous

Well, for one, this tells me you're not just interested in an objective dialogue. You wanted to know if God created evil, whether that made evil a good thing. So, first of all, God didn't create evil. Second, therefore, evil is not a good thing.

> permit bad translations of his important message

It's not so much that the translation is bad as that people are willing to distort it into deprecation of God without looking into it at all.

The NIV translates: "I bring prosperity and create disaster"
The CSB translates: "I make success and create disaster"
The ESV translates: " I make well-being and create calamity"
The ISV translates: "I make goodness and create disaster."
The Message: "I make harmonies and create discords"

Maybe (just wondering) the problem isn't with bad translations as people with bad attitudes looking for ways to accuse God of bad behavior.