Yahweh claimed to have created evil

Yadon said:

For an action to exist the mechanisms that make it possible must be created.

God would of inherently created everything, including those mechanisms.

Unless you want to argue that God didn't create everything?

Click to expand...

no argument there

But he created things to fit within a certain purpose. Anything outside of their set purpose is not his doing.

Its like gun makers. They create the hunting guns to be used strictly for hunting purposes and they have guidelines how how the gun should be operated. Is it their fault if someone takes the gun and uses it in a way that its not designed or in a way contrary to the purpose they build it for??

Pegg said:

no argument there

But he created things to fit within a certain purpose. Anything outside of their set purpose is not his doing.

Its like gun makers. They create the hunting guns to be used strictly for hunting purposes and they have guidelines how how the gun should be operated. Is it their fault if someone takes the gun and uses it in a way that its not designed or in a way contrary to the purpose they build it for??

Click to expand...

The JW Bible says in Isaiah 45:7 that god creates calamity.Assuming this is the correct translation of "ra`" in Isaiah 45:7, any idea why god wants a world filled with disaster, catastrophe, tragedy, cataclysm, adversity, tribulation, affliction, misfortune, and misadventure?

Skwim said:

________________
[/INDENT]Assuming this is the correct translation of "ra`" in Isaiah 45:7, any idea why god wants a world filled with disaster, catastrophe, tragedy, cataclysm, adversity, tribulation, affliction, misfortune, and misadventure?

Click to expand...

Maybe all the willful ignorance ****es Him off too.

Skwim said:

The JW Bible says in Isaiah 45:7 that god creates calamity.

"I form light and create darkness, I make peace and create calamity; I, Jehovah, am doing all these things."
​

_________________________________________________________________
ca·lam·i·ty
kəˈlamitē/
noun
noun: calamity; plural noun: calamities
1.
an event causing great and often sudden damage or distress; a disaster.
"the fire was the latest calamity to strike the area"
synonyms:disaster, catastrophe, tragedy, cataclysm, adversity, tribulation, affliction, misfortune, misadventure​

_____________________________________________________________________
​

Assuming this is the correct translation of "ra`" in Isaiah 45:7, any idea why god wants a world filled with disaster, catastrophe, tragedy, cataclysm, adversity, tribulation, affliction, misfortune, and misadventure?

Click to expand...

its not a matter of 'wanting' calamity or disaster. But in the administration of justice, calamity is often the result.

He enforced the penalty for sin upon Adam and that has been an evil upon all mankind. So evil is not always synonymous with 'wrongdoing'. The Flood of Noah’s day was an example of swift justice upon the wicked...it was an evil carried out for a righteous purpose.


he will do what is necessary against the wicked. And that is what the context of Isaiah is about. He is calling an executioner, Cyrus, to bring his justice upon the wayward Isrealites. Yes he was going to bring them to justice...the evil was brought upon them as a punishment.

Pegg said:

its not a matter of 'wanting' calamity or disaster. But in the administration of justice, calamity is often the result.

He enforced the penalty for sin upon Adam and that has been an evil upon all mankind. So evil is not always synonymous with 'wrongdoing'. The Flood of Noah’s day was an example of swift justice upon the wicked...it was an evil carried out for a righteous purpose.

Click to expand...

all those wicked little babies and animals?

Pegg said:

its not a matter of 'wanting' calamity or disaster. But in the administration of justice, calamity is often the result.

Click to expand...

Then the same can be said for the peace he created, "its not a matter of 'wanting' peace. But in the administration of justice, peace sometimes happens.

He enforced the penalty for sin upon Adam and that has been an evil upon all mankind. So evil is not always synonymous with 'wrongdoing'.

Click to expand...

So doing evil can be a good thing?Gotta say, none of these corresponds to the notion of "good." So I can only conclude that you're using "evil" in a very non-standard way, which begs for clarification. So, just how are you redefining "evil"?

The Flood of Noah’s day was an example of swift justice upon the wicked...it was an evil carried out for a righteous purpose.

Click to expand...

Now you're saying that the flood, a result of god's will, was an evil act. Again, just how do define "evil"?

he will do what is necessary against the wicked. And that is what the context of Isaiah is about. He is calling an executioner, Cyrus, to bring his justice upon the wayward Isrealites. Yes he was going to bring them to justice...the evil was brought upon them as a punishment.

Click to expand...

Not only against the wicked, but the innocent as well.

Skwim said:

Then the same can be said for the peace he created, "its not a matter of 'wanting' peace. But in the administration of justice, peace sometimes happens.

So doing evil can be a good thing?

​

Click to expand...

Skwim said:

__________________________________________________________________
​

Gotta say, none of these corresponds to the notion of "good." So I can only conclude that you're using "evil" in a very non-standard way, which begs for clarification. So, just how are you redefining "evil"?

Click to expand...

im not redefining it... but I dont think its helpful using an english word and meaning for a hebrew word. Why not look at the hebrew meanings? You know the hebrews didnt speak english...the english word evil did not exist back then, nor did its english meaning.

ra' on the other hand means various things. It literally pertains to something which results in pain, sorrow, or distress. And its variously translated as “bad,” “gloomy,” “ugly,” “evil,” “calamitous,” “malignant,” “ungenerous,” and “envious,” depending upon the context.

Skwim said:

Now you're saying that the flood, a result of god's will, was an evil act. Again, just how do define "evil"?

Not only against the wicked, but the innocent as well.

Click to expand...

it was a 'calamity' or 'disaster' brought about to rid the world of the wicked people at that time.

It wasnt morally wrong. It was righteous justice.

Brickjectivity said:

As Jayhawker Soule already translated, it doesn't clearly state that. As the context indicates it doesn't mean that, either. Seriously its not saying what you claim.

Click to expand...

And I think that's the problem, it always never means what it says. Why read a book that literally READS He "created" evil but somehow the meaning is SECRETLY hidden to mean this. If I write a letter to someone stating, "You won $1 Million.", do I really mean they will win it if they do this or that? It leaves it up to the reader to make their own intrepretation and be right. So technically, I'm right since I BELIEVE it means that. But also you're right because you BELIEVE it means something else. What kind of sense does that make?

HEB said:

And I think that's the problem, it always never means what it says. Why read a book that literally READS He "created" evil but somehow the meaning is SECRETLY hidden to mean this. If I write a letter to someone stating, "You won $1 Million.", do I really mean they will win it if they do this or that? It leaves it up to the reader to make their own intrepretation and be right. So technically, I'm right since I BELIEVE it means that. But also you're right because you BELIEVE it means something else. What kind of sense does that make?

Click to expand...

Its not secrecy. Its meaning is sealed but not concealed. It is holy, and the way to read the Bible is to study the law. . The Bible is like a huge public building, but you are expected to enter through the main entrance. If you try to come in the wrong way, then you cannot get in easily. No matter what if you try to enter without going through the door you've only yourself to blame.

Besides, Bible commentaries can tell you that it doesn't mean 'Evil'. The translation is lacking, and the meaning of the English word evil has changed over time. English changes a lot in a hundred years.

Brickjectivity said:

Besides, Bible commentaries can tell you that it doesn't mean 'Evil'. The translation is lacking, and the meaning of the English word evil has changed over time. English changes a lot in a hundred years.

Click to expand...

So then my conclusion is that the biblical God can't possibly be omnipotent because there are things that exist that He didn't "create". I think too many Christians want to believe that the biblical God is all good, and that he allows evil to continue for the purpose of teaching us lessons? I'm assuming. But I would think that an ALL powerful and knowing God would just eliminate sin and evil since He wants everyone to make it to His Kingdom. Oh no it can't be that easy.

Brickjectivity said:

Besides, Bible commentaries can tell you that it doesn't mean 'Evil'. The translation is lacking, and the meaning of the English word evil has changed over time. English changes a lot in a hundred years.

Click to expand...

Well, in all honesty, we don't know what the author(s) really meant to say. The word he used is the same word used for "evil" in other places in the Bible , so it's more an interpretation of what we think the author meant. If even scholars have come to different conclusions over the years, I can't say that this scholar or that scholar are the better source for knowing the right translation. Maybe the author didn't mean God either? Maybe he was talking about Molok or Baal but called him God? It's all down to how literal or not we're taking the author's words and intentions.

Pegg said:

it was a 'calamity' or 'disaster' brought about to rid the world of the wicked people at that time.

Click to expand...

So the question is really if God is bringing disasters, destruction, and pain to the world.

It wasnt morally wrong. It was righteous justice.

Click to expand...

Well, I would disagree since many innocent were victims as well. I don't believe in capital punishment--killing babies in the name of Justice for the adults.

If the word wasn't meant to mean evil, I'd say based on that "justice" it should be called evil anyway.

Ouroboros said:

So the question is really if God is bringing disasters, destruction, and pain to the world.


Well, I would disagree since many innocent were victims as well. I don't believe in capital punishment--killing babies in the name of Justice for the adults.

If the word wasn't meant to mean evil, I'd say based on that "justice" it should be called evil anyway.

Click to expand...

Which makes me happy that all evidence indicates it never really happened.

Ouroboros said:

So the question is really if God is bringing disasters, destruction, and pain to the world.


Well, I would disagree since many innocent were victims as well. I don't believe in capital punishment--killing babies in the name of Justice for the adults.

If the word wasn't meant to mean evil, I'd say based on that "justice" it should be called evil anyway.

Click to expand...

If God does bring a disaster, he will inform mankind first. He will explain what is going to happen and why its going to happen....and he'll also tell us what they need to do to remain safe.

Amos 3:7*For the Sovereign Lord Jehovah will not do a thing unless he has revealed his confidential matter to his servants the prophets.

People were informed about the flood and were given the opportunity to live through it.... but they chose not to listen. Their own decision is what caused the death of their children.

Pegg said:

If God does bring a disaster, he will inform mankind first. He will explain what is going to happen and why its going to happen....and he'll also tell us what they need to do to remain safe.

Amos 3:7*For the Sovereign Lord Jehovah will not do a thing unless he has revealed his confidential matter to his servants the prophets.

People were informed about the flood and were given the opportunity to live through it.... but they chose not to listen. Their own decision is what caused the death of their children.

Click to expand...

How does that make it fair and just that their children should suffer along with their parents? Why could not have God simply removed them from the world that was to be flooded? And what about all the animals? What did they do wrong?

#H.E.B.Knowledge said:

And I think that's the problem, it always never means what it says. Why read a book that literally READS He "created" evil but somehow the meaning is SECRETLY hidden to mean this. If I write a letter to someone stating, "You won $1 Million.", do I really mean they will win it if they do this or that? It leaves it up to the reader to make their own intrepretation and be right. So technically, I'm right since I BELIEVE it means that. But also you're right because you BELIEVE it means something else. What kind of sense does that make?

Click to expand...

depends what language you write the letter in.

To an english person it will mean exactly what you've written. But what if you from a nation who speaks a different language and it doesnt have the word million in it.

What if the closest word to million is 500,000? Anyone reading it in that language will think you only won 500,000, right?


This is the issue with reading the bible. It was written in Hebrew and Greek. But we read it in english....and many translations are good attempts at relaying the original language but not necessarily entirely accurate.

Secondly, English has changed quite since the 1500's when it was first translated into english. So we have newer translations which are more accurate, but now there are different translations and its assumed these are all different 'versions' of the bible and they contradict one another. Some people are still using old english bibles, others are using modern english bibles...english words have developed different meanings over time.

Hell is an old english word meaning to 'cover' something. 'Helling Potatoes' was the practice many centuries ago of burying potatoes in a pit and covering them over to protect them... now it means a place of fire and torment where the devil and demons roan and torture the dead.


So this is the real issue here.

nazz said:

How does that make it fair and just that their children should suffer along with their parents? Why could not have God simply removed them from the world that was to be flooded? And what about all the animals? What did they do wrong?

Click to expand...

its not just... but its what the parents choose.

God has entrusted the care of children to parents. If parents choose to let their children die, thats their choice. God would much rather they repent and be saved... but for some strange reason people dont want to do that.

Pegg said:

If God does bring a disaster, he will inform mankind first. He will explain what is going to happen and why its going to happen....and he'll also tell us what they need to do to remain safe.

Click to expand...

Was Katrina, Sandy, 9-11, etc acts of God?

Amos 3:7*For the Sovereign Lord Jehovah will not do a thing unless he has revealed his confidential matter to his servants the prophets.

Click to expand...

The problem is to know who is a prophet or not. How many prophets do we have today who told us in the 80's the end is coming in the 90's, and in the 90's the end was to come in 2000. A few years ago, it was told that the end was coming in 2012. Now it is 2014 or maybe 16. Then it will be 2020 or something. Then 2036 (Apophis, I think). And so on...

I didn't hear much of any prophet shouting out before Katrina or Sandy that a huge storm was to destroy people's lives.

People were informed about the flood and were given the opportunity to live through it.... but they chose not to listen. Their own decision is what caused the death of their children.

Click to expand...

Very cruel and awful. It sounds like a vengeful, egotistic, and despotic God. It's not a nice picture. Not very good in my opinion. Or moral.

nazz said:

How does that make it fair and just that their children should suffer along with their parents? Why could not have God simply removed them from the world that was to be flooded? And what about all the animals? What did they do wrong?

Click to expand...

All animals did wrong except for the ones God saved. Two of every kind, and more of the "clean" ones, and so on. So some animals were righteous enough to be saved, while the rest had to drown, suffering a terrible death. Oh, and the dinosaurs were all unholy. Couldn't save them. No space on the ark!