Was there death already before Adam?

[Brother Bob]

kakos,-e,-on+
bad, evil, wicked (of pers., in moral sense) ... evil, injurious,
dangerous

 

[DHK]

kakos,-e,-on+
bad, evil, wicked (of pers., in moral sense) ... evil, injurious,
dangerous

"I create peace and I create evil.
Throughout the Book of Isaiah one finds that he writes very poetically. What we find here is a poetic parrallelism. The peace that Jehoah created is contrasted to the evil Jehovah created.
Knowint these facts Bob you are putting forth a heresy.
The truth of this verse is that as God creates peace in this world, as in a physical or even political peace, he also creates physical calamities such as war (evil) and other disasters (earthquakes, etc.)

With your interpretation, this being a parallelism you would have to have this interpretation:
Jehovah creates spiritual and moral peace (Christ); and spiritual evil (Satan).
Thus both Christ and Satan are created beings because both are the authors of peace and evil respectively. Jesus is called the prince of peace; the author and finisther of our faith the only one who can bring peace into this world. You have him here as a created being. He is being contrasted to evil, which you say is His antithesis (the evil that is found in Satan. So is this your belief?
DHK

 

[Brother Bob]

evil

I create peace and I create evil

First of all He said: I make peace and I create evil. (There is a big difference to match up with what I am saying). As in "love thy neighbor". Now when you don't love thy neighbor you are going against what God said was Good so you are doing evil.

The truth of this verse is that as God creates peace in this world, as in a physical or even political peace, he also creates physical calamities such as war (evil) and other disasters (earthquakes, etc.)

What about "peace of the soul" you ever consider that?

With your interpretation, this being a parallelism you would have to have this interpretation:
Jehovah creates spiritual and moral peace (Christ); and spiritual evil (Satan).

I am not saying "He creates the act" only that He creates what it is, there is a huge difference.

Heresy? You have a way with words that are free and loose with those you oppose. It is one thing to disagree but to say I speak heresy is not right.

I still say you either do not understand that I am not saying that God creates evil actions but just what evil is or you just do not want to understand. Again, I will say it is impossible to make good without creating evil. If I tell my child when she is going somewhere to "go to church". If my child does what I said she did "good", but if she goes somewhere else then she disobeyed me and did evil, for the Scripture says for children to obey their parents. I think it is very plain that the Scripture and also common sense tell you that when God made Good, the very act of making Good, created what evil is.

Where in all my posts did I say that Jesus was a created being. jeepers, Peace:Fish:

 

[DHK]

Where in all my posts did I say that Jesus was a created being. jeepers, Peace:Fish:

You imply that Jesus is a created being in as much as you state that God is the author of evil. That is the parallel. If God made peace (whom Jesus is) then he created evil (whom Satan is). The statement is a parallelism. But you refuse to see that the word "evil" has a different meaning than the one that you assign it. It has been shown to you over and over again through various posts and posters. But you are adamant. You don't accept Hebrew lexicons, The Greek Septuagint. other scholars, absolutely no one. You are your own authority. You have set yourself up for a heretical belief, an implication that Jesus is a created being. I hope that you can see this. Isaiah was writing in a poetic form. It is called a parallelism. If it is moral evil that he was talking about, then it is moral peace that is also referred to that can only be found in Christ. Did God "make" Christ? Is he a created being as you imply in your interpretation?

Secondly,
Your argument is highly philosophical and speculative. The Bible is not a book of philosophy, as it is not a book of science. You have mixed these two together and have come up with your own brand of mystic gnosticism--some kind of knowledge that only you are privy to.
The presence of one thing does not automatically mean the absence of another. I went to a village in a third world nation. They had no running water, no electricity, no modern washrooms, no televisions or computers, no paved roads, nothing that we would consider modern. The water that they drank was drawn from a canal, and was grey in color. They didn't even have a well. Their "houses" or dwelings were mud huts with grass thatched rooves, and florrs made out of dried dung mixed with straw. And yet they accepted the gospel the gladly. Does the presence of a simple way of life automatically mean an absence of an advanced civilization, if they have never seen one or heard of one?

If a tree falls in the middle of a forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a sound.

Philosophers have argued that for centuries. You are arguing the same type of thing. It is philosophical, non-empirical, and highly speculative.
DHK

 

[Brother Bob]

If a tree falls in the middle of a forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a sound.

Philosophers have argued that for centuries. You are arguing the same type of thing. It is philosophical, non-empirical, and highly speculative.
DHK

Nice to be rated with the philosophers!

I leave this to you with your assumptions along with the assumption that I said God created the very acts of evil or imply it. All of what you say that I said is false. You seem to be blinded to the fact when you move a mountain you have a flat land. You seem to be blind when you make war peace is gone. You seem to be blind to the fact when all are doing good there is no evil. You are the one blinded to your own self thoughts because you will not let you mind open up to the fact you could be wrong. You say others have given me the meaning to the words in Greek and I have looked up those meanings and they are not what I have found the word kakos to mean. It means wickeness, evil, iniquity but you are the one who will not accept it. You made up assumptions that the Chapter 45:7 was talking about war when in fact it is not. You deny that the Chapter is talking about God saying that He is God when I posted almost the whole chapter proving it. You sir are the one who lets yourself be blinded to the truth and live in your own little thoughts. Because someone in the past said "God created evil" meant something else does not affect me at all for they only had the same word I have. For someone to not see when God made Good the opposite of it was evil is to not broaden you mind. I made up nothing. I quoted Scriptures. You are the one who give your opinions of which I say are untruths.

Now, we are not going to agree for you sir will not change my mind because you will not accept what the Chapter is saying. I know I could never change yours. I haven't seen anyone on here change your mind on anything. I have read your posts and you have never to my knowledge accepted someone else's explanation if it differed with yours. So I will agree to respectfully disagree with you. Peace to you and all of yours. :wavey:

 

[DHK]

BBob,
Will you argue with God?

Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Is the evil that you speak of included in the "very good" that God speaks of? What evil did God create that He calls "very good"?
DHK

 

[Brother Bob]

Is the evil that you speak of included in the "very good" that God speaks of? What evil did God create that He calls "very good"?

No no no, but if you don't do what God made of all these things then and only then is it evil.

DHK;
You do fail to grasp the meaning of what I have been saying all along and this post proves it. When I say God created evil it is not to say the acts of evil but to say if you don't do all those things God made as Good and very Good then it is evil.
I am not the only one who believes this:

first it might seem that if God created all things then evil must have been created by God. However, there is an assumption here that needs to be cleared up. Evil is not a "thing" - like a rock or electricity. You can't have a jar of evil! Rather, evil is something that occurs, like running. Evil has no existence of its own - it is really a lack in a good thing. For example, holes are real but they only exist in something else. We call the absence of dirt a hole - but it cannot be separated from the dirt. So when God created, it is true that all that existed was good. One of the good things that God made was creatures who had the freedom to choose good. In order to have a real choice, God had to allow there to be something besides good to choose. So God allowed these free angels and humans to choose good or non-good (evil). When a bad relationship exists between two good things we call that evil, but it does not become a "thing" that required God to create it.

Just one of many many who believe as I do. In no way are we saying that God created the very acts of evil but that He created GOOD and to not do good is evil. peace DHK;

How could man do GOOD if EVIL were not present?

 

[Hope of Glory]

I thought the OT was written in Hebrew and not Greek and if it was written in Hebrew then it could of been:

That's why I specifically stated that I was referencing the LXX, and I also mentioned that the Hebrew used two different words as well.

I referenced the LXX because you brought up the Greek word adikos, and that's not the word used in Isaiah 45 in the LXX.

 

[BobRyan]

That's why I specifically stated that I was referencing the LXX, and I also mentioned that the Hebrew used two different words as well.

I referenced the LXX because you brought up the Greek word adikos, and that's not the word used in Isaiah 45 in the LXX.

This is actually a very good model.

It is Hebrew Jewish scholars that produced the LXX for the sake of Jews that were becoming Helenized and could no longer read Hebrew. So in cases where the Hebrew COULD have more the one meaning but the Greek is very discriminating it is very helpful to SEE what they chose because it shows how ancient Hebrew scholars were interpreting the Hebrew text.

 

[BobRyan]

Bro Bob
Just one of many many who believe as I do. In no way are we saying that God created the very acts of evil but that He created GOOD and to not do good is evil. peace DHK;

How could man do GOOD if EVIL were not present?

I keep asking this question and I am not sure I am getting an answer -

Are you talking about "Defining evil" or are you talking about MAKING evil beings??

Does there HAVE to be a murderer murdering today in order for me NOT to murder?

Or are you saying that murder has to be DEFINEd before I can "not" murder?

 

[Brother Bob]

Defining evil Bob

YOU GOT IT!!

I am saying that God made Good and in doing so defined what evil was.
Thou shalt not commit Adultery. Well if there was no such thing as adultery then there would be no evil concerning adultery. I hope I am making this clear.

murder had to be defined or not murder is Good.

So I used the word given me by Hope of Glory instead of the one he said I was using and here is the definition.

In no way am I saying that God created the very act itself. I mean when someone murders.

. kakos kak-os' apparently a primary word; worthless (intrinsically, such; whereas 4190 properly refers to effects), i.e. (subjectively) depraved, or (objectively) injurious:--bad, evil, harm, ill, noisome, wicked.

 

[Brother Bob]

That's why I specifically stated that I was referencing the LXX, and I also mentioned that the Hebrew used two different words as well.

I referenced the LXX because you brought up the Greek word adikos, and that's not the word used in Isaiah 45 in the LXX.

You said the word that was used in 45:7 was kakos. I looked it up and here is the definition;

kakos kak-os' apparently a primary word; worthless (intrinsically, such; whereas 4190 properly refers to effects), i.e. (subjectively) depraved, or (objectively) injurious:--bad, evil, harm, ill, noisome, wicked.
__________________

It certainly is not making war!! peace

 

[DHK]

No no no, but if you don't do what God made of all these things then and only then is it evil.

DHK;
You do fail to grasp the meaning of what I have been saying all along and this post proves it. When I say God created evil it is not to say the acts of evil but to say if you don't do all those things God made as Good and very Good then it is evil.
I am not the only one who believes this:

So when God created, it is true that all that existed was good. One of the good things that God made was creatures who had the freedom to choose good. In order to have a real choice, God had to allow there to be something besides good to choose. So God allowed these free angels and humans to choose good or non-good (evil). When a bad relationship exists between two good things we call that evil, but it does not become a "thing" that required God to create it.

Just one of many many who believe as I do. In no way are we saying that God created the very acts of evil but that He created GOOD and to not do good is evil. peace DHK;

How could man do GOOD if EVIL were not present?

Evil was not created though man had a choice. Your argument is simply philosophical in nature and not substantive nor Biblical. Try being theologically correct instead of being philosophically abstract.
God said everything was very good. I take him at His word. It is simple to believe God by faith. But you insist by your vain philosopy to disbelieve God.

It is true that God created man in his own image with a choice. The choice that He gave Adam and Eve was that they could eat of every tree in the garden except the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God gave them a command. What evil was present? None! There would only be evil if they had disobeyed. Had they eaten of the fruit of the Tree of Life instead one would assume that they would have been confirmed in a state of holiness like the angels and would have lived forever. There is no evil present unless the command is broken.

We are born with sin natures. Adam and Eve were created without sin, in a state of innocence knowing only good. There was no evil present. They knew evil only when they sinned. At that time evil and the knowledge thereof, was revealed unto them.
DHK

 

[BobRyan]

Brother Bob said -
Defining evil Bob

YOU GOT IT!!

I agree with you that God "defines what is evil" by "defining what is Good" because doing evil is certainly to NOT do Good -- it is to deliberately rebel against God's Law.

God says that "Where there is no Law there is no violation" in Romans 4.

However does God have to say to an Angel "you can not break anyone's leg, and you can not break their fingers either, and you can not steal the left shoe and you can not steal a glove" etc for it to be wrong?

Or does He simply outline general principles of love and selflessness along with some "specifics" now and then like "don't eat from this tree".

The point that there MUST be LAW for violation of law to exist is well taken.

That is why I pointed out the fact that Law and Justice are as enduring and eternal as they are part of the Character of God who IS Just.

But I don't think that this is what God means by "creating calamity" in Isaiah 45. He is not calling the "codification of His Law" the act of "creating Calamity". That seems like a very different thing to me.

 

[BobRyan]

DHK
We are born with sin natures. Adam and Eve were created without sin, in a state of innocence knowing only good. There was no evil present. They knew evil only when they sinned. At that time evil and the knowledge thereof, was revealed unto them.

This is true in the sense that they "experienced" only good and they had no "experience" of rebelling against God. If that is what is meant by "knowing".

But they did KNOW not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and they KNEW that to do so was evil.

They probably also knew that biting kicking and abusing each other was "wrong". Their natures were in complete harmony with God's. They had His Law written on the heart - by birth, by their very nature they were at peace with their loving Creator who IS Love.

 

[Brother Bob]

But I don't think that this is what God means by "creating calamity" in Isaiah 45. He is not calling the "codification of His Law" the act of "creating Calamity". That seems like a very different thing to me.

If you see that different than I do to what it is talking about then I respect that. I was just trying to say it is impossible to have good without evil present.


45:7 most of the whole chapter is talking about Israel having God as God and not another and His proving He was their God. So to do opposite would be evil is my take on it but I don't have a great desire to push that.

Sure glad I finally got through for I couldn't see how someone could not see when you make good you are also defining evil as you say.

I really think Hope knew what I was saying in his first post.

 

[BobRyan]

When God dealt with Adam HE said that "death" would come from eating of the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil.

When dealing with Israel at the end of Deuteronomy He says he will send them into capitivity, famine, sword, beasts etc if they choose evil.

So I think that bringing in this "I create calamity" idea fits in the Isaiah 45 context because from the very start God has been associating judgment, death and calamity with rebellion.

But when you say something like "Evil present" to mean "evil defined" then we would have to say that for all eternity in heaven "evil is present" becuase in reality "evil is defined".

Whereas I would claim that in this world evil is NOT ONLY defined - it is ALSO present. In heaven and in the New EArth it will be "defined" but not "present". (At least as I would word it)

 

[Brother Bob]

I thank the good Lord you saw what I was saying. I knew it was not heretic but was having a hard time getting my point across. Sometimes I think it is because of my age and speaking with this southern way. I do have college in engineering and wife had master degree and retired in teaching for over 30 years of which I helped her get through her college years including Bible studies but I still have my Applachian ways about me.

 

[BobRyan]

It is all good brother. I have read your posts in the past and I usually see that your point is well grounded so I was confused about your position on this topic and I wanted to follow it through. I see that we were viewing this in the same way -- but using different words.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

When God dealt with Adam HE said that "death" would come from eating of the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil.

When dealing with Israel at the end of Deuteronomy He says he will send them into capitivity, famine, sword, beasts etc if they choose evil.

So I think that bringing in this "I create calamity" idea fits in the Isaiah 45 context because from the very start God has been associating judgment, death and calamity with rebellion.

But when you say something like "Evil present" to mean "evil defined" then we would have to say that for all eternity in heaven "evil is present" becuase in reality "evil is defined".

Whereas I would claim that in this world evil is NOT ONLY defined - it is ALSO present. In heaven and in the New EArth it will be "defined" but not "present". (At least as I would word it)

You have made the point well Bob, which in my view puts us back at square one stating that "if good is present then so must be evil," is akin to heresy. When God existed in eternity without anything but Himself--the eternal Godhead (for all things were created), then God was present with evil accompanying him side by side. That is absurd! Because God is present does not mean evil must also be present. If that is true God and its counter part "evil" sit on two thrones together in heaven side by side. How absurd!
DHK