Some Random Comments on the Origin of Evil
Posted 11/06/2008 - 19:59 by Noel Rude
Sin, according to Paul, entered “into the world [εἰς τὸν κόσμον]” (Rm 5:12) through the agency of Adam. But must this mean that all evil originated with Adam?
The Scriptures, as far as I know, do not have much to say about any pre-adamic world, world order [κόσμος] or age [αἰών], though it might be noted that Scripture recognizes different worlds, as where Peter (2Pet 3:6) speaks of the pre-flood (or according to some pre-adamic) order, “Whereby the world that then was … [δι᾽ ὧν ὁ τότε κόσμος …]”
Let me suggest that evil originated prior to the creation in Genesis. If God is both eternal and creator then surely he must have been eternally creating. But Genesis begins its chronology only some six millennia in the past, and the Torah seems pretty well silent in regard to anything before that—including the origin of Satan.[1] In the New Testament this archangel of evil is omnipresent. Now if the Scriptures are inspired by God then this should not suggest an evolution in human speculation but rather a difference in divine perspective.[2] The Torah is silent about fallen angels—their existence is presupposed in the New Testament. The question then is: Did Satan fall before God began creating in Genesis?
According to Jesus (Jn 8:44), “He was a murderer from the beginning [ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς], and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.” The “beginning” here suggests Genesis (Gn 1:1) as in the Septuagint—“In the beginning … [ἐν ἀρχῇ …]” Might this mean that when God began his Genesis creation there was already an adversary in the background?
The epistle to the Hebrews makes much of the idea that whereas this world is subject to angels it will not be so in the world to come. The reasoning is based on Genesis 1 and Psalms 8 which is a kind of midrash on Genesis 1. Throughout chapters 1 and 2 of Hebrews Adam is taken as Messiah, and just as Adam was given dominion over all the creatures at the end of the sixth day, so Messiah will be given dominion over all the nations in the world to come. Hebrews (Hb 1:6), for example, quotes the Septuagint (which differs from the Hebrew): “And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him [καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῶ πάντες ἄγγελοι θεοῦ].” [3] Then after a long introduction proving from the Scriptures the greatness and superiority of Adam-David-Messiah we are told (Hb 2:5), “For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come [τὴν οἰκουμένην τὴν μέλλουσαν], whereof we speak.”
The concept is reminiscent of a passage in the Jewish aprocryphal Book of Adam where Satan is speaking (as translated from the Georgian original by J.-P. Mahe): “Then Michael came; he summoned all the troops of angels and told them, ‘Bow down before the likeness and the image of the divinity.’ And then, when Michael summoned them and all had bowed down to you, he summoned me also. And I told him, ‘Go away from me, for I shall not bow down to him who is younger than me; indeed, I am master prior to him and it is proper for him to bow down to me.’” (The Book of Adam 14 : 1-3)[4]
Now if, as I said, God has been eternally creating then man is a late comer upon the scene of the larger cosmos. And according to the epistle of Hebrews he was meant to rule in a cosmos already beset by rebellion in the ranks of the divine court. When Adam sinned this brought sin into his dominion, his lineage, but the New Testament authors see in the very Genesis story the type that foreshadows an ultimate Adam from that same lineage who would triumph and ascend the throne in Jerusalem and replace the rule of angels.
When did this rule of angels begin? I suppose one could argue that it began when Adam and Eve submitted to the serpent even though their stated purpose was to rule over such creatures (Gn 1:26). Snakes were brought forth on the sixth day (Gn 1:24-25), but in the New Testament the serpent that deceived Eve and thence the whole world is the devil (Rv 12:9). So the question is whether the animal created on the sixth day merely symbolized a spiritual adversary who was already there before the sixth day when God said (Gn 1:24-25), “Let the [land] bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing [רֶמֶשׂ], and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the [land] after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.”
In rabbinical thinking Israel inherits Adam’s office—as in (Ezek 34:31), “Ye are Adam [אָדָם אַתֶּם]”, and as explained in the Talmud (Yebamot 61a), “You are called Adam, but the nations of the world are not called Adam.” Israel’s king is the son of Adam [בֶּן־אָדָם], and thus it is the king in Jerusalem who inherits Adam’s office. This, I believe, is the underlying presupposition in the epistle of Hebrews.
The Eternity of Evil
It should go without saying that if and when God grants autonomy and free will—whether to angel or man—evil will enter the world. One only has to be the parent of teenagers to know this.
I have always had a problem with ultimate beginnings. But then I have a problem with past eternity. I can conceive of neither. Nevertheless if God has been eternally creating there are likely an infinity of angels. No angel would be infinitely old, but for every angel there would always be those who were older. It does not take much imagination to see that as far back into past eternity that God has been creating free agents there has been evil. Evil, just as good, has always been with us.
But God is good (Ps 25:8; Ps 34:8; Ps 100:5; Ps 106:1; Ps 107:1; etc.) and thus in the overall the creation is good. Go out in the sunshine and behold the marvels of creation and see how good they are. Nevertheless here and there in the shadows there lurks some evil, a tick or a tapeworm or a deadly virus, but in the overall the creation is very good. I have a book by the Harvard physicist Sheldon Glashow where he says that no scientist ever discovers anything new unless he somehow feels deep in his bones, all evidence to the contrary, that things are good. All others—the pessimists of science—simply work out the details of the theories of others or else serve as devil’s advocates.
Even though the possibility for evil necessarily exists, and even though in reality evil does exist, I find it interesting that logic itself comes down on the side of the good. Those self refuting statements, statements such as, for example, There is no truth, always seem to be negative statements. The positive statement, There is truth, is not self refuting.
But one has to ask: would good even exist except over against evil? Is there any virtue apart from a deliberate moral choice? Could we tell a story if there were no evil? In a perfect world could there even be a literature? All narratives introduce a problem, called a discourse tension (Longacre 1983). Imagine a world where only good things happen, where only pleasant things are said, where people constantly smile at one another, where there is no struggle against evil, where there is only truth and no error to fight against.
Yes, there is coming a great millennial Sabbath where God ceases his work and we can all rest from the struggle. At that time, as it says (Is 11:9), “They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.” But how much virtue will be brought forth in that millennial day of rest?
In the book of Revelation the people of the seventh era are pictured by the Gentile city of Laodicea (Rv 3:14-22)—which evidently means, for what it’s worth, something like, “City of Righteous People.”
But though everything seems to be going fine those righteous people are told (Rv 3:17-19), “Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.” And so we read (Rv 20:7-8), “And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth …”
Yes, the story ends well (Rv 21:4), “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.”
But then does the story really ever end?
Finally man will replace the rule of angels on this planet and all who have ever lived will be given the choice to enter into immortality. But maybe that is only a beginning for even greater works. And great works require risk. Should we expand into the universe someday and become creators ourselves, does this not guarantee there will be problems? And thus a literature chronicling great adventures yet to come?
Common sense suggests that free will and determinism are not compatible—not at the same time. God cannot determine all of my fate and at the same time extend to me the freedom to determine all of it. Yes, God hardens hearts (Ex 4:21; etc.) and he softens them (Ezek 11:19; 36:26; etc.). God closes and opens minds (Is 44:18): “They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand.” But as he promises (Is 29:18), “And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.”
The Creator is not the emasculated deity of Deism—rather he is the Hebrew God of history, just as the king of Babylon was to learn (Dan 2:21): “And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding:” Job understood this also (Job 12:23): “He increaseth the nations, and destroyeth them: he enlargeth the nations, and straiteneth them again.” The God of Israel proclaims (Is 45:7):
יוֹצֵר אוֹר וּבוֹרֵא חֹשֶׁךְ
I form the light, and create darkness:
עֹשֶׂה שָׁלוֹם וּבוֹרֵא רָע
I make peace, and create evil:
אֲנִי ה׳ עֹשֶׂה כָל־אֵלֶּה׃
I the LORD do all these things.
In his address to the Congress of the United States on December 26, 1941, Winston Churchill said: “If you will allow me to use other language, I will say that he must indeed have a blind soul who cannot see that some great purpose and design is being worked out here below of which we have the honor to be the faithful servants.”[5]
Now the historic Christian doctrine (I’m no theologian) seems to be that evil entered God’s perfect world at one point and will be erased never to return at some future point. Let me suggest that there has always been evil and there ever shall be. No, evil will never ultimately triumph because God is good and has power and the final say. But evil exists because it must if God is to be the Creator of other minds.
Natural Evil
Now if natural evil—meaning earthquakes and tsunamis and mass extinctions such as befell the dinosaurs—was there in the world long before Adam—as the fossil record shows—then was that evil the result of Adam’s sin? Was it put in place knowing that Adam would sin and thus deserve an imperfect world? Say by a deity with a time machine?
The theologians, in my untutored opinion, depart too much from Scripture and common sense.[6] In Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views and God & Time: Four Views, I see only Gregory Boyd and Nicholas Wolterstorff arguing from Scripture. To the degree that God grants free agency to others he does not determine—or know for sure beforehand—the outcome of the agency he has created.
Einstein’s space-time is beyond the conceptual powers of the human mind—we cannot imagine it, we can only mathematically model it—which perhaps should raise at least some eyebrows in light of Gonzalez and Richards (2004) thesis that the cosmos was “designed for discovery”. Criticizing Einstein is nearly as much a taboo as criticizing Darwin, but it is my sense that doing away with the notion of our progress through time, that the future is determined in the present (now dismissed as “subjective time”), serves to undermine the concept of Design—unlike, I might add, the “bizarre” mind-over-matter interpretation of quantum reality.
But Agents require a stable world within which to implement their powers of design. Can an artist paint without paint and canvas? Can we build aircraft without materials that hold their place? And so it is that God foregrounded agents against the background of a material creation. We may be sequestered in the safest nook of the cosmos (Gonzalez and Richards 2004), but there are still dangers. Continents implies nuclear powered volcanism, cooling the tropics requires hurricanes, an over population of gazelles necessitates lions, etc.
Now if, as I think the fossil record shows, mankind has been here since long before Adam, then are we to say that the suffering and ignorance of those humans came as the retroactive wrath of a Creator who knew in advance that Adam—maybe not even their progeny—would sin?
Why not just say that the creation is a dangerous place? The galaxy is filled with dangers that will have to be faced should God permit our progeny to advance to the stars.
This kind of evil is not necessarily meant as punishment. The problem is that we need God’s protection. This is the promise to Israel (Dt 7:15): “And the LORD will take away from thee all sickness, and will put none of the evil diseases of Egypt, which thou knowest, upon thee; but will lay them upon all them that hate thee.”
Natural evil—perhaps even some diseases—are a natural hazard of the creation. God had his reasons for causing or allowing the mass extinctions we see in the geological record, and I doubt those reasons had anything to do with Adam’s sin.
But that does not mean that we do not see the results of sin in the geologic record. Was part of it due to rebellion in the heavenly host? Perhaps. Certainly if the human race long antedates Adam, as official science would have it, then the rule of rebellious angels that Adam was created to replace would have been a source of evil in that world.
Israel’s choice was to accept or reject God’s protection—protection not just from natural evil but also from the curse of divine justice (Lv 26; Dt 28). David Klinghoffer (1998)[7] drew a firestorm of invective when he made this observation, as did Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson with their comments on September 13, 2001, just after the terror attacks of 9/11. One can wince at their sense of timing and taste, but from a biblical perspective it is surely true that spurning the God of Israel invites calamity by way of divine judgment and the removal of divine protection. If we reject God we face not only his wrath, we may find ourselves alone in a dangerous world.
But there’s still this: Lightening strikes churches, the righteous sometimes suffer from terrible diseases, innocent children are abused. Why? Well, when God withdraws his favor it is the poor and downtrodden who are most vulnerable and the rich and powerful who are the most likely to find a way of escape. When the king is evil the people suffer—the most innocent of the people often suffering the most.
The Bible does not hold out complete protection in this world at this time. It is as though a certain dominion has been extended by divine decree to the fallen angels such that they could cry out (Mt 8:29), “What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?”
Thus Satan is “the god of this age [θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου]” (2Cor 4:4) who was likely already there before the six days when “the ages were framed by a word of God [κατηρτίσθαι τοὺς αἰῶνας ῥήματι θεοῦ]” (Hb 11:3). His time will cease when the God of Israel begins to right all wrongs and dry all tears. From the New Testament perspective the Messiah has already defeated Satan (Mt 4:1-11; etc.) but has yet to replace him on the throne in Jerusalem.
There are two thrones—the Father’s throne and the son’s throne—and as the son says to those of that future era (Rv 3:21), “To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.” Thus the apostle speaks of the son (Acts 3:21), “Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” Until then fallen angels hold sway in the courts of this world.
Thus the highest office—the throne in Jerusalem at the geographic center of the land mass of this privileged planet—still awaits its rightful heir—Adam as in Genesis 1 and in Psalms 8—“Adam who is the figure of him that was to come [ἀδάμ ὅς ἐστιν τύπος τοῦ μέλλοντος]” (Rm 5:14)—“Adam the son of God [ἀδὰμ τοῦ θεοῦ]” (Lk 3:38).
That government is reserved for the sons of God who are born of God (Jn 3:3-8; 1Jn 3:1-3; 1Cor 15:50-52), “and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection” (Lk 20:36). Thus Messiah is “the firstborn from the dead” (Col 1:18; Rv 1:5), “the firstfruits of them that slept” (1Cor 15:20). As Paul begins his theology (Rm 1:3-4), “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead”.
Being the firstborn implies others, as Paul suggests when he calls Israel’s Messiah (Rm 8:29) “… the firstborn among many brethren.”
So what are we waiting for? Well, maybe the world is waiting for us!
Romans 8
19 ἡ γὰρ ἀποκαραδοκία τῆς κτίσεως τὴν ἀποκάλυψιν τῶν υἱῶν τοῦ θεοῦ ἀπεκδέχεται·
19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20 τῇ γὰρ ματαιότητι ἡ κτίσις ὑπετάγη, οὐχ ἑκοῦσα ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸν ὑποτάξαντα, ἐφ᾽ ἑλπίδι
20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21 ὅτι καὶ αὐτὴ ἡ κτίσις ἐλευθερωθήσεται ἀπὸ τῆς δουλείας τῆς φθορᾶς εἰς τὴν ἐλευθερίαν τῆς δόξης τῶν τέκνων τοῦ θεοῦ.
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 οἴδαμεν γὰρ ὅτι πᾶσα ἡ κτίσις συστενάζει καὶ συνωδίνει ἄχρι τοῦ νῦν·
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
Added to Hebdomad.com July 31, 2006
References
Boyd, Gregory A. 2001. The Open Theism View. In Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views, edited by James K. Beilby and Paul R. Eddy, pp. 13-47. Downers Grove, Illinois: InverVarsity Press.
Dembski, William. 2001. The Problem of Error in Scripture. In Unapologetic Apologetics: Meeting the Challenges of Theological Studies, edited by William A. Dembski and Jay Wesley Richards, pp. 79-94. Downers Grove, Illinois: InverVarsity Press.
Glashow, Sheldon L. 1991. The Charm of Physics. Masters of Modern Physics, Volume 1. Touchstone Books.
Gonzalez, Guillermo, and Jay Richards. 2004. The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery. Washington, DC.: Regnery Publishing, Inc.
Klinghoffer, David. 1998. Anti-Semitism Without Anti-Semites. First Things 82 (April 1998):10-13.
Longacre, Robert E. 1983. The grammar of discourse. New York and London: Plenum Press.
Wolterstorff, Nicholas. 2001. Unqualified Divine Temporality. In God & Time: Four Views, edited by Gregory E. Ganssle, pp. 187-213. Downers Grove, Illinois: InverVarsity Press
[1] Hebrew שָׂטָן śāṭān ‘adversary’ occurs in the Torah only in (Num 22:22, 23) where the angel of the LORD [מַלְאַךְ ה´] encountered by Balaam was sent to him ‘for an adversary’ [לְשָׂטָן].
[2] The rabbis say that the Torah is primarily a book of civil law with everything else “discreetly covered with a veil”—as Rabbi Munk explains at the beginning of his commentary on Mishpatim (Ex 21:1-24:18): “אֲשֶׁר תָּשִׂים — That you shall place. Moses was told that it is not sufficient to simply state the substance of the law, repeating it until the people have learnt it. The law must be presented with all its reasoning and explanations laid out in detail, as one sets a table before a person about to eat (Rashi).
This principle applies to the laws of social justice, but when it comes to the laws dealing with sacred practices and metaphysical concepts, such as the underlying principles of faith, the Torah generally tends to be brief and ambiguous. Thus, the meaning of Rosh Hashanah, the nature of the human soul, and the particulars of the world of angels, are hardly mentioned in the Torah (R´ Bachya to Leviticus 23:24). Whatever enters the realm of the sacred is discreetly covered with a veil, like the Holy of Holies in Hashem’s Temple. But within the domain of civil and penal law, which this Sidrah of Mishpatim introduces to us, the text is detailed and precise.” (Rabbi Elie Munk, The Call of the Torah: An anthology of interpretation and commentary on the Five Books of Moses. Exodus, page 293. New York: ArtScroll Masorah Series.)
[3] Deuteronomy (Dt 32:43)—
Septuagint (tr. by Sir Lancelot Brenton)
KJV
Masoretic
εὐφράνθητε οὐρανοί ἅμα αὐτῷ καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντες υἱοὶ θεοῦ εὐφράνθητε ἔθνη μετὰ τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐνισχυσάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντες ἄγγελοι θεοῦ ὅτι τὸ αἷμα τῶν υἱῶν αὐτοῦ ἐκδικᾶται καὶ ἐκδικήσει καὶ ἀνταποδώσει δίκην τοῖς ἐχθροῖς καὶ τοῖς μισοῦσιν ἀνταποδώσει καὶ ἐκκαθαριεῖ κύριος τὴν γῆν τοῦ λαοῦ αὐτοῦ
Rejoice, ye heavens, with him, and let all the angels of God worship him; rejoice ye Gentiles, with his people, and let the sons of God strengthen themselves in him; for he will avenge the blood of his sons, and he will render vengeance, and recompense justice to his enemies, and will reward them that hate him; and the Lord shall purge the land of his people.
Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.
הַרְנִינוּ גוֹיִם עַמּוֹ כִּי דַם־עֲבָדָיו יִקּוֹם וְנָקָם יָשִׁיב לְצָרָיו וְכִפֶּר אַדְמָתוֹ עַמּוֹ׃
[4] See at http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/pseudepigrapha/TheBookOfAdam.htm (last accessed 3-05-06)
[5] Read at http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/ww2/churchill122641.html (last accessed 3-05-06).
[6] The theological deafness to Scripture is old and not altogether unwarranted—reason and revelation, to the extent that each is valid, ought to converge on the same truths. But materialism has dulled our hearing and a serious consideration of the Scriptures has mostly vanished from polite society. Fundamentalism and a belief in any kind of inerrancy are the surest tickets to academic oblivion. The best antidote against this malaise is Intelligent Design, and the best recent statement in favor of scriptural reliability that I have seen is Dembski (2001).
[7] See http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9804/opinion/klinghoffer.html (last accessed 3-05-06).
