Why does God allow Evil?

[Sergeant Thorne]

Frankly it's useless to approach the question without a deep respect for and a firm grasp of the primary source of everything we know about God--the Bible.

Can you build a nuclear reactor without first accepting and necessarily building upon the basic teachings and assumptions of chemical science? What a fool someone would be to refuse to acknowledge the basics, and at the same time reach for the top. But everyone I've ever seen who criticizes God or the Bible itself does so while refusing to acknowledge the basics--the Bible's history--the Bible's explanations--the building-blocks of the very things they are incredulous of.

[Foil]

2. What about natural evil (natural disasters, disease, etc... all the causes of pain and suffering not caused by us)?

...Genesis pretty much answers those questions solidly.

It just postpones the problem. Sure, Genesis says that there are natural disasters because someone sinned 8,000 years ago.

I don't agree, Genesis doesn't say that at all, unless you're willing to stretch the meaning well beyond it's intent.

Duper, I'm assuming you're referring to the curse God pronounces in Genesis 3 after the first sin:

..."Cursed is the ground because of you"...

Read it in context, the structure of the passage makes it quite clear that God is referring to the struggle Adam (and by implication, humanity) will have in obtaining food from the earth. This fits with the theme of the curses given to Eve as well - difficulty and pain in life.

Taking it to be a statement about the reason for natural disasters is misguided at best. At worst it's an example of dishonestly deforming the truth of scripture to contrive an explanation for a tough question.

---------

"What about natural disasters?" / "Why did God put us in a world that causes pain?" is a good question - it's a tough one, and it deserves better than the typical 'pat' answers.

[Jeff250]

I don't agree, Genesis doesn't say that at all, unless you're willing to stretch the meaning well beyond it's intent.

Fair--I should have just said, "Even if Genesis says that there are natural disasters because someone sinned 8,000 years ago..." so as to have washed my hands of issues of what Genesis *really* says all together.

[flip]

I'm not so sure it's not a simple answer. God put man in the Garden Of Eden. There was no strife there, no work, the ground freely produced food and Man and all the animals lived at peace with one another.

God tells them both(paraphrased): \"All that you see is yours. I give you dominion over it all. One thing I ask of you. DO NOT eat of this tree.\"

They did and were cast out of Eden to live by their own devices. They no longer had that hedge of protection around them and the world was thrown into chaos. BUT, even after that, as we see with men like Job, lived under God's \"hedge\" because they chose to live righteous lifestyles.

It was a serious thing that happened because it shifted the whole balance of power from man(intended) to Satan(the consequence).

You ask then, why did God put that tree there? Why put a stumbling block in their paths? That may be the real question right there.

[Duper]

Remember that God is omnipresent. He is in \"eternal future\" as well as \"eternal past\" simultaneously.

And no Foil, that isn't the verse i was thinking of. In fact, I wasn't thinking of a particular verse, but arching concepts as to what happened in the garden based in many verses.

What you should be asking is: \"Why is it that the entirety of the creation was condemned and brought to ruin through the action/decision of one man.\"

If you can understand that, then you should be able to find the answers you asked.


Flip, think of it this way. The Garden is a spiritual place. Think of the name of the tree. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. It was something that existed within God. it was something we were not ready for or never supposed to attain. We don't know. we aren't told. for that matter, it's not really relevant anymore as Jesus absolved us from this consequence of that sin. To look back on it and wonder is one thing, to look back, point our finger and say \"it's not fair!\" and get hung up on it is another. I'm not entirely sure we as humans from God's perspective REALLY know what \"fair\" is.

[flip]

Duper, that was a rhetorical question . We are still living under some of those consequences and yes I agree totally. It seemed more than fair to me. He gave us all, and kept only one thing for his self. Yet this shows his unfathomable mercy. He put the stumbling block there, because what is freewill if it's not tested. Yet, when we failed the test, he took our place and still gave us a way out. AWESOME

[Sergeant Thorne]

Where do you get off spiritualizing the account of the Garden of Eden, Duper?

[Foil]

And no Foil, that isn't the verse i was thinking of. In fact, I wasn't thinking of a particular verse, but arching concepts as to what happened in the garden based in many verses.

Duper, I fully understand the concept of "the fall" of mankind as tied to the first sin. That's made pretty clear in Genesis and other places, and I fully agree with what you and Flip and Thorne have said about sin and redemption.

What I'm taking exception to is this vague stretch from the fall of mankind to a fall of creation. Sure, it's a convenient argument; it makes a nice little answer for the tough issue of natural evil... but it doesn't fit.

The account in early Genesis describes mankind's sin and the consequences, including pain and hardship - our relationship to God changed. Stretching/distorting that to include a change in the nature of creation is just plain poor interpretation - it's reading something into the story that's not there.

Think about it. In the account, Adam & Eve are simply sent out of the Garden of Eden. Not a change in the Garden, not a change in the world outside... a change in mankind's place.

The change was in mankind's place in the world, not the world around us.

What you should be asking is: "Why is it that the entirety of the creation was condemned and brought to ruin through the action/decision of one man."

Again, there's no reference whatsoever to a ruin of the entirety of creation; the consequences in the story affect mankind and our relationship with God, not the rest of His creation.

So the better question really becomes: "Why is it that the fall of mankind requires us to live in danger?"

[Sergeant Thorne]

It's obvious that the fall of man brought death/decay, through sin, into all the world (the Universe? where is it restricted?). The why itself may be a bit difficult, because I can't remember it being addressed specifically, but there is plenty of evidence of the fact in Genesis. Animal sacrifice, for one (Abel's sacrifice, for instance). If Adam alone fell, and merely the ground was cursed, how is it that animals die now also? Where did God get the animal skins for Adam and Eve's first clothes? Have any of you ever given any thought to just what the curse of the ground entails? Now he must toil to receive its fruit. Why? Well, for one, obviously the things he grows die at some point or the toil would not be on-going. There you have decay. So we've got death in man, animals, and plants. It's obvious that all of these things were not waiting for some later event to fall. I think it's safe to say that when man fell everything else fell with him.

As Ken Ham has said, there is an awful lot that the Bible does not tell us; What it does is give us the big picture.

It's not the why, but I think the how is unavoidable.

Let me take a shot at the why: In short, man and everything he had dominion over were separated from the life of God.

[Foil]

If Adam alone fell... how is it that animals die now also? Where did God get the animal skins for Adam and Eve's first clothes?
...So we've got death in man, animals, and plants. It's obvious that all of these things were not waiting for some later event to fall.

You're assuming that nothing ever died before the first sin?

Ah, wait... I suppose you're getting that from Romans 5:12? Again, you cannot read things into scripture that are not there. What is that passage referring to? Death of all living things? No. Read it again - it's talking about mankind; no reference whatsoever to anything else.

"Fall of mankind = fall of all creation" is a popular one (especially among those who hold to young-earth / literal-24-hour-Genesis-days interpretation), but it's just not supported in scripture.

So my question still stands, reworded: "Why did God create such a dangerous universe?"

[Maybe mankind was never intended to be outside God's protection (as Adam & Eve were in the Garden)...?]

[Sergeant Thorne]

It's obvious... I can't remember it being addressed specifically...

It's not specifically addressed, yet somehow obvious?

Yes. The why is not specifically addressed, which is to say that nowhere in the Bible does it come right out and say that the whole of creation fell at this time for this reason. However, the when is very obvious in reading Genesis--it happened when Adam and Eve fell.

You're assuming that nothing ever died before the first sin?

Absolutely. The Bible says that death is an enemy. When God was finished with creation he said that everything was "very good." There is nothing stated that would indicate that this changed up until the point at which Adam and Eve fell.

So my question still stands: "Why did God create such a dangerous universe?"

[Maybe mankind was never intended to be outside God's protection (as Adam & Eve were in the Garden)...?]

Well, if you believe the Bible you have to believe that the universe was not a danger up until the time of the fall. There have been times since when it ceased to be a danger to various men of God: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego; Daniel; Jesus; ...

[Foil]

The Bible says that death is an enemy. When God was finished with creation he said that everything was "very good." There is nothing stated that would indicate that this changed up until when Adam and Eve fell.
...if you believe the Bible you have to believe that the universe was not a danger up until the point that humanity fell.

Again, you're basing your logic on scriptures which are referring to death among mankind (e.g. the "enemy of death" you referred to in I Corinthians).

As I said, the idea that nothing died before the first sin is convenient (it makes for a nice 'pat' answer to the difficult question of natural evil), but it's just not supported in scripture. Unless of course, you're willing to read things into the passages that aren't really there.

----------------

From my perspective, the cycles of birth and death in our world are intentional. Maybe mankind was not originally intended to die that way, but I see the intricacies of that system as a stunningly beautiful part of God's creation.

[Sergeant Thorne]

Well let me turn it around on you and ask you where you get life-cycles as God's original plan in scripture? The food chain is an intricacy of the system we know as well, shall that have been part of God's plan, on that basis?

Why can't \"death\" be \"death\"?

It would help us out if you could answer, with brutal honesty: why must death be a natural cycle, and part of God's original plan? What have you got riding on this, so to speak?

[flip]

Romans 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

I usually think it would take several scriptures together to make a solid case, but just the fact that this scripture says the \"whole creation\" suffers together I would tend to begin thinking along those lines.

[Maybe mankind was never intended to be outside God's protection (as Adam & Eve were in the Garden)...?]

My point exactly. I would start thinking along those lines.

[Duper]

Duper, that was a rhetorical question . We are still living under some of those consequences and yes I agree totally. It seemed more than fair to me. He gave us all, and kept only one thing for his self. Yet this shows his unfathomable mercy. He put the stumbling block there, because what is freewill if it's not tested. Yet, when we failed the test, he took our place and still gave us a way out. AWESOME

well done.

Sarge. It's common theology that the Garden of Eden is considered both a spiritual and physical place. I believe Paul and the writer of Hebrews make reference in that affect. The physical was destroyed in the flood of course. The Garden (the presence of God) was reopened with the resurrection of Christ and His atonement for sin.

Foil, I'm not basing my ideas on a few paragraphs in Genesis. There is further reference throughout the entire Bible. in the prophets, the psalms, many of the New Testament letters. I don't have them handy right here, so I can't give you specific verses.

[Bet51987]

...particularly in this case where all you were looking to do is write me off as somehow unloving or cold.

I'm not in the mood to talk about the bible right now but I just wanted to tell you that I don't think of you as unloving or cold. I just wanted to argue that the bible is a book of contradictions and not a good guide to what is right or wrong. So, again, I don't think of you that way.

Bettina