Isaiah 45:7 The creator of evil? (LONG!)
Chris Ashton Chris Ashton <cashton@engr.arizona.edu>
Sat, 18 Oct 1997 16:33:49 -0700 (MST) (00877239229, Pine.OSF.3.95.971018145608.22902A-100000@engr.arizona.edu)
> GOD (supposably)
> Isaiah 45:7
> "I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity
> and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things."
>
> MATT
> The answer to the question in your subject heading 'Isaiah 45:7 The creator
> evil?' is answered in your own quote in the body of your message, '"I form
> the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I,
> the LORD, do all these things."
>
> Disaster is not Evil!!!
Congrats, Matt, you just stepped on a land mine. :-)
First, like any military stragist, I want to seal off any possibility
of escape. By this response, I can see that you believe that this
verse reflects the nature of God. Where it says "disaster", you believe
it actually means that God creates disaster, and so I could assume
that -IF- the passage actually said "evil", you would logically have
to conclude that God creates evil. If not, could you give me an
explanation why you could believe this verse if it said "disaster" but you
would consider it allegorical if it said "evil"?
But let's take a fair balanced view of what Isa 45:7 says.
One of the first questions to ask is "what is the Hebrew word translated
'evil'?" (in the KJV and YLT at least: "woe" in the RSV, "disaster" in
the NIV and "calamity" in the NASB). A quick glance at your Strong's
Concordance reveals that the word used is "ra" (7451). Out of the 663
times it is used in the Bible, the top three translations in the
Authorized Version are:
442 times "evil"
59 times "wickedness"
25 times "wicked"
Isaiah uses the word 21 times, and pretty much all of them are
translated "evil" or "wickedness" [1]. So I think it is quite accurate to
say the word Isaiah used does indeed mean "evil".
However, having said that I must admit it's possible that 'ra' has
more than just one meaning. After all, 'ra' is translated "trouble" 10
times and "affliction" six, both agreeing with Matt's interpretation
(where it is translated such, however, I do not know). Just like in
English some words may have more than one meaning.
I think it's good to point out, however, that if Isaiah *meant*
"destruction", he certainly could have used many other words that are more
precise. There is the word "`eyd" (Strong's 0343) which Isaiah
never uses (Jeremiah uses quite frequently) and means "calamity" or
"destruction". There is "sheber" (7667) which Isaiah uses 9 times for
"destruction" [2], and also "tsarah" (6896) which he uses seven times for
"trouble" [3]. I would have to wait for a REAL Hebrew scholar to clarify
more what words would be used for "destruction" (I know no Hebrew myself)
but I think this points out there are a few other BETTER words Isaiah
should have used it that is what he meant.
However, there is a point that one could argue Matt's interpretation.
The immediate context around this verse is describing God's uniqueness -
that all things are attributable to God. Unlike other pagan Gods, each
who have a specialized "function" (one creates good, the other that
creates evil; one that creates light, the other that creates darkness) ...
Isaiah seems to be stressing the point that BOTH of these pairs of
opposites is what God does. In other words, there is a parallel structure
that suggests that just like "light" and "darkness" are antonyms, so
should "peace" and "evil" be antonyms. The word for "peace" in Isa 45:7
should come as no surprise - it's "shalom" (7999) which actually MEANS
"peace" (or "wellness" as translated a few odd times). So technically if
"ra" MEANS evil, it should be paired with "good" (or "towb", 2896). So
there IS a little leeway to translate it as 'creates peace AND war' (or
destruction, etc.), however, I still think an interpretation of 'creates
peace AND evil' is also appropriate. Given the context that Isaiah seems
to be emphasizing that God is a creator of all things, it's accurate
to say that Isaiah probably did agree that God created not only good but
also evil.
Now it's possible that you can accept this verse as meaning "evil"
without having to change your doctrinal standpoint. Perhaps Isaiah was
speaking metaphorically, perhaps pulling out one "proof text" isn't enough
to justify an entire change in theology. If, perhaps, Isaiah was
considering the origin of evil and concluded "God created Evil", then it
would be much more convincing. Unfortunately the Bible never really goes
much into the origin of evil - the book of Job, for instance, discusses
evil but never really comes to a conclusion of where it comes from. I
suppose another possible doctrinal position is to admit that since God
created all things, he also created evil as well as good - but who cares!?
He's God and can do whatever he wants! (this view has some Biblical
support, for example Isa 45:8-9, also Romans 9:20-21). This would put God
above the realm of "right" and "wrong", and whatever God does would be,
ipso fact "good", despite how abhorrent it may seem.
So in conclusion I think the evidence as I see it points strongly
towards a reading of "evil" in Isaiah 45:7. I think a lingusitical study
of the word in question, plus a reading of the verses in the immediate
context both justify this interpretation. I also think a good case can
be made for admitting that the Bible portrays God as all-creating and yet
beyond human criticism for what He has made.
- Chris
[1] 'ra' is used in Isa 3:9,11, 5:20, 7:5,15,16, 13:11, 31:2, 32:7, 33:15,
45:7, 47:10,11, 56:2, 57:1,7, 59:7, 59:15, 65:12, and 66:4.
[2] 'sheber' is used in Isa 1:28, 15:5, 30:13,14,26, 51:19, 59:7, 60:18,
and 65:14.
[3] 'tsarah' is used in Isa 8:22 30:6, 33:2. 37:3, 46:7, 63:9, and 65:16.
----------------------------------------------------------------
WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above because my
cats have apparently learned to type.
Visit The Other Side: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~cashton/atheism/