Is God Evil?

March 2011 | Download (PDF)

1. Philosophical Objections
2. Justice
3. Specific Actions in the Bible
4. Hermeneutics
5. Descriptive versus Command
6. Specific Answers to Difficult Passages

"Is God evil?" is a question that has been asked since the beginning of human history. This is often the real concern at the forefront of people’s minds when they debate whether God exists. People point both to the events of the world and even the bible itself to give evidence that God’s character should be questioned. As Professor Antony from The Ohio State University puts it,

"Theists frequently appeal to the "argument from design" to show that belief in God is rationally justified. But the argument from design establishes, at most, only the so-called "natural powers" of God – omnipotence and omniscience. The argument does not establish that God is morally good.... When we add in textual evidence (from the Hebrew Bible) about the moral character of God, the case becomes overwhelming: if God exists, God is evil."[2]

Whether it is personal experience, philosophical curiosity, or historical objections, this paper seeks to discuss the question ’is God evil?’ with a focus on answers to philosophical and biblical objections. Most of us have doubted God’s benevolent nature at some point and these objections deserve a hearing if one is to be confident in his goodness. This question is often the driving force behind our consideration of God’s existence. An evil all-powerful God would be too terrible to imagine, a unjust God would be too capricious to follow, and an unrighteous God is not one whose judgments we could accept.

Philosophical Objections

God’s nonexistence is often argued to be a fact using the very question of his goodness itself. Consider a formulation of the classic problem by J. L. Mackie as quoted by LaFollette[4]:

A powerful God could create a perfect world and a loving God would, yet it is obvious to all that our world is imperfect, hence such a powerful loving God must not be there. Or in another way of thinking, one may argue:

This says that if everything originated from God himself, then the evil we see in the world must have also originated from him. Both of these can be countered in a similar fashion, by rejecting premise 3) from the first argument and qualifying point 3) from the second. A believer in God’s goodness could argue the following (a formulation of Alvin Plantinga’s Free Will Defense[5]):

1. Free will is of moral value. That is, a world with free will is better than one without it.

2. It is a contradiction to say that God brings it about that humans freely choose only the good

3. God has reason to bring about the best possible world in his capacity

4. Therefore: God has reason to create a world with free will

5. But then God is not responsible for evil, since it is not in his power to bring it about that men freely choose only the good.

To summarize, "It is possible that God, even being omnipotent, could not create a world with free creatures who never choose evil. Furthermore, it is possible that God, even being omnibenevolent, would desire to create a world which contains evil if moral goodness requires free moral creatures."[1]. This argument rejects 3) from the first objection by saying that it is not possible to create a world in which humans freely choose only the good. This leads to how point 3) is qualified from the second argument against goodness, namely, God is only the indirect creator of evil. The true author of evil is created beings who choose evil. This raises the question about what should be done with such beings who introduce or perpetuate evil in the world.

Justice

At the deepest core of most of the personal objections to God’s goodness is the idea of judgment. Is it evil for God to kill people? Is it wrong for him to damn people to hell? Are tales of people being judged by plagues, war, famine, or death showing God to be immoral? It depends on one’s view of justice and the reasons behind his actions. God is blamed for allowing evil to exist in the world and he is also blamed when taking steps to remove it. The free will defense helps to explain why evil has been allowed to exist. If free choosing beings are the ones who perpetuate evil, then they are the ones something must be done about. Now one must look at how God deals with evil.

First, it is worth it to note that punishment is only considered wrong when it is unjust. Criminals, villains, and those who are considered to have done wrong in society are punished intentionally and usually to the satisfaction of all but themselves. Our hearts yearn for tyrants, killers, rapists, and manipulators to be stopped and to get what they deserve. How can a perfect, good God allow crimes to go on forever? Can he let wrongs never be righted? The bible says that God is just and so he does punish wrongdoing. He punishes people for transgressions and does not punish those who have not transgressed¹. Unfortunately for us, there are plenty of reasons to correct each of us. Humanity, since its first members, has continually, consistently, and to an individual rejected what is right and done things that are wrong². Which of our wars, murders, sexual exploitations, or oppression have not been a result of the arrogance or greed of human beings? The vast majority of human issues are readily traced back to human origin. Humanity is not only wronging each other but also destroying the very earth we live on. The bible says, "there is no one righteous, not even one"³. Because everyone is partially guilty, everyone deserves punishment.

Some downplay personal responsibility, citing that our environment and those before us have worked against us. It is true that our forefathers and their decisions for good and bad affect us. The bible says that we inherited a broken world and sinful nature through Adam⁴. But we also inherited physical life from him. No one objects to the undeserved good they receive as a consequence of others actions, just the bad. This aspect of justice would be more of an issue if we had never done wrong ourselves, and were only being influenced by others. However, it is clear that we have done wrong also. We will not be personally held accountable for the influence of others but we will be held responsible for our part.

Others seek to reduce the seriousness of the crimes being committed. By saying that the judgment is too harsh, we are implicitly stating that the crimes are not very serious. This position is usually maintained by those who view themselves as outside parties. The ones who are starving from tyranny, whose family has been murdered by hate, or who have suffered personal exploitation typically cry out for justice. Only those who observe injustice from afar or who are unaware of the extent of injustice minimize its seriousness. Often they are perpetuating injustice themselves, whether they are aware of it or not. God must act and he will act. The present state is not indicative of how things will always be. It is also suspicious for us to be the ones raising objections, as we are the ones to whom the possibility of being judged is being threatened. Criminals rarely feel that their punishment is fair and continually justify and rationalize their own actions. They choose those actions initially for a reason, however off that reason may have been. For God to ignore evil in some universal sense would bring us back to the dilemma that he is doing nothing about it. Who sets the verdict, the one who is in charge of seeking justice, or the one who commits the crime? God is the one who should determine the degree of the sentence.

Therefore we all deserve the punishment that we receive. God is fully right and good to do so as he is not the author of evil but rather we are. Amazingly it is clear that he would rather not deal out punishment. He says, "the Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance"⁵. He has gone to great lengths to provide us with a secondary option, undeserved, to not be brought to justice. This is because he has fulfilled the requirements of justice himself and loves us very much. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life"⁶. Just as we inherited negative consequences through our fallen forefathers, we can inherit positive consequences from Jesus Christ. Christ took the punishment that we deserve so that "just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous"⁷. Jesus’ act of obedience can help us be righteous instead of our current guilt. God wants a relationship with us and for us to admit the reality of our situation without rationalizations and denial of our actions. "If you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved" ⁸. This means it is our responsibility to either believe in him and receive his offer or not. It is not a matter of our birthplace or family’s religion. These could be used to excuse us from responsibility. It is not by our deeds or good works. "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God- not by works, so that no one can boast"⁹. It is a free gift from a good God. He will punish evil and he will save whoever he can. Thus he can be both just and good, neither ignoring evil nor to be blamed in how he deals with it.

Specific Actions in the Bible

Many have claimed to find evidence of God’s immorality in the bible itself. The following is a list of cited references from Professor Antony. These cover a wide breadth of subjects that I believe includes the most frequent objections people find with God’s actions:

At first read this seems like a devastating attack on the stance of God’s goodness. Are these things true? Could we follow such a God? However, when many of these passages are viewed in a their proper context, and given a normal interpretation, these apparent evils are resolved. First I will give a couple guiding principles, then specific answers to the passages above.

Hermeneutics

A number of rules are normally taken into account when interpreting what a passage means. Things like syntax, structure, definitional meanings of words are all generally taken into account in anything you read. The style of the language and emphasis, such as the use of hyperbole, give us guidelines as to what an author is saying. All of these must be understood and can be missed when individual lines are pulled from their context or taken without an understanding of the whole. For instance comments like Jesus’ "I have come to turn ’a man against his father, a daughter against her mother..."¹⁰ are a quote of Micah 7:6. This passage is about the misery of Israel but the hope that a savior that will come: "For a son dishonors his father, a daughter rises up against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law- a man’s enemies are the members of his own household. But as for me, I watch in hope for the LORD, I wait for God my Savior; my God will hear me"¹¹. Jesus is using this quote to emphasize his importance as that predicted savior. It is a not command for people to hate their families. The context makes this clear. Following him is more important than loving family in priority. Not that loving families are bad. From a man who commands to love one’s enemies, loving families is expected. But what happens when faith and family come at odds, as they sometimes do? Jesus reassures that "everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life"¹². The bible is clear that it is not the leaving your family that saves you, people do this for terrible reasons all the time, but the fact that you believe in Christ. Believing in him enough to endure real sacrifice is merely one outward sign of this inward belief. Even were our families our enemies, we would be called to love them but we may also be called to leave them for the sake of Jesus and his message.

Descriptive versus Command

Another important principle is the idea of descriptive versus command. Many people are confused, particu- larly in the Old Testament, about this difference. The Old Testament contains a lot of narrative. It should be noted when a passage is telling people what to do versus merely describing what has happened. For instance, when one reads in a novel, "Jim went to the store", one does not take this as a command that we should go to the store. Even if Jim was a really good and admirable guy that does not make it a command. In the same way, we cannot take descriptive passages such as the Patriarchs marrying multiple wives, committing murder, or owning slaves as the bible commanding us to do so. We should look for imperative language such as "Go to the store!" to determine what it is explicitly telling us to do. These explicit commands help guide us in which actions are being recommended and which are not. Also, narratives are often given so that one may see the results of an action and act accordingly. The Old Testament does contain commands and God makes it clear what he wants to be followed but much of it is teaching by negative example. We know that the greatest command is "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind" and the second is "Love your neighbor as yourself"13. We are called to follow those and to follow Jesus’ example. The Old Testament is silent on some practices and in many of the stories it does not the time to explicitly condemn every mention of evil actions. It does describe many of the negative consequences that come from such actions. The New Testament is more explicit in some of these areas that modern people find objectionable (such as marrying multiple partners) and gives clear imperatives against them. In the bible’s view everyone is sinful and makes wrong choices so to see the Patriarchs and men of God doing the same only confirms its consistent view of humanity. God is not evil for describing how things are. Many of the things that happen in history are bad.

Specific Answers to Difficult Passages

These two principles go a very long way in explaining objectionable passages in the bible. When combined with our knowledge of justice and the need for God to act, one can explain each of these passages in turn.

As mentioned previously, consequences of choices are a thing that works two ways, negative and positive. We regularly enjoy positive consequences from our forefathers such as inheritance, where we are born (some of us), physical life, intelligence, beauty, etc. Yet we complain most harshly when consequences of others actions are negative. This is just how life works. Someone’s free choice can harm you or help you. We regularly harm others. By God’s goodness he uses this principle to help as well. We are able to benefit from Jesus’ actions which can have great positive consequences in our lives. Through him we may be saved, have a relationship with God, enjoy good things from God, and ultimately be perfected¹⁴. In the end this principle will work massively in our favor should we choose to trust God.

God felt this way in response to "how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time"¹⁵. Sorrow is an appropriate response to evil and this action was not taken arbitrarily, nor will it be taken arbitrarily in the future. See the previous section "Justice". All people deserve to be wiped out and only when God pardons us do we receive otherwise. The miracle is that humanity did not end here like it could have. We have gone on to do many terrible, and some noble, things.

God predicts that he will harden Pharaoh’s heart to further his purposes. It is worth noting that the first six times Pharaoh’s heart is hardened, it is Pharaoh who does it¹⁶. Despite the power of the miracles, which his own magicians say can only be God, and the fact that it starts happening only to Egypt and not the Israelites, making it clear it is not a chance circumstance, he repeatedly hardens his heart. Only after this does God strengthen the decision he has already made¹⁷. Pharaoh appears to repent but then decides to harden his heart again¹⁸. God uses this as an example throughout history that he is powerful and desires to rescue his people.

In this plague, like some of the others, those who fear God may escape the judgment by listening to him¹⁹. Anyone who followed God’s clear instructions could have avoided their first born’s death, including those slave girls of Egypt²⁰. They had an opportunity to prevent this by listening to God’s warning.

In the end, everyone deserves death and all people die. We will remain dead spiritually if we do not listen to God so an example of the importance of listening to him works well in our favor. Death itself is an enemy that God will destroy²¹. This is his ultimate purpose. "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away"²². Even though God resorts to killing in some situations, he will ultimately remove death’s power over people.

In the three points above, all are in the context of the special separation that God intended for his people Israel, that they may preserve and symbolize humanity’s relationship to God. In Exodus, he outlines his laws and how keeping them or ignoring them will affect later generations. It’s important to note he also says, "but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments" in the next verse²³. The emphasis is on how much good he’ll do to those who follow him, rather than the consequences of those who do not (e.g. four generations versus a thousand generations).

He ultimately works through this nation in many ways. Their betrayal of him is repetitive and profound, such as in Numbers 25. They "began to indulge in sexual immorality" and "bowed down before" the false gods²⁴. This is why God is furious. He has spent the previous forty years waiting for a generation that will take him up on his offer of their own land. These betrayals of his commands are morally wrong, compromising family relationships between the people and serving false gods. The also hurt God’s relationship with them. It would be like your family running off with people who are trying to kill you and your son rejecting you for a nonexistent father. They deserve punishment and correction. Unfortunately, the example is true with us. We do not put God first either, nor do we listen to his advice. As such we deserve the same things but in his mercy we may not get them if we ask instead for forgiveness. They should have asked for mercy. Note that the plague stops in 2 Samuel when David asks how he should atone and does what God says²⁵.

This is a well known and challenging passage. What makes it even more confusing is that 1 Chronicles 21:1 says, "Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel." A close comparison of the texts reveals that this is certainly the same event. Hence, Satan is the cause in one and God in the other, an apparent contradiction. Or is it? Taking the full context of scripture into account (Hermeneutics), we know that "when tempted, no one should say, ’God is tempting me.’ For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed"²⁶. God does not tempt or cause people to sin. Sin is abhorrent to him. So God did not cause David to sin as we may think of cause. Yet God is in ultimate control of all things and nothing happens that he does not allow to some capacity. Even though he is not the author of wrong he allows it to happen. Hence, God allowed David to be incited, while Satan incited him, and he chose it. As king his choices effected the nation just as going to war or a variety of other things would have done the same.

First, it should be noted that the Hebrew term naar translated youths (NIV), lads (NASB), and boys (NLT) can refer to a large range of ages. The above word children makes an English reader assume a group of six to eight year olds. The Hebrew is used to refer to soldiers²⁷, and Joseph at ages 17²⁸and 39²⁹. It could be referring to adolescents or young men as easily as children. Second, it is unclear whether this event is ordained by God for their blaspheme of his name and his servant Elisha, who had just taken over from Elijah and was being mocked in his attempt to follow his mentor, or a chilling coincidence to mark a point. Either way it does serve as an example that disparaging God’s authority, delegated or otherwise, is foolish indeed.

Some of this objection has to do with "Justice" (see summary above) and the question of whether God has the right to order punishment, even on the magnitude of death. It is worth it to note in Leviticus 20:10 that both the man and woman are held accountable. Unlike most ancient laws, the man and woman are held equally accountable. Sexuality is another area that people object any guidance on. Is God allowed to tell us what is right in this area or isn’t he? The answer to that question largely determines our view of his commands in this area. It is also important to note that the "exile" referred to above was temporary. It was one of several teaching lessons on the extreme purity of God. Other aspects are similar to the reason for the "ban". See below.

The above ideas relate to an event in Israel’s history know as the "ban" and to the distinctive life that the nation of Israel was called. Why would such a thing happen? It was not that Israel deserved the land or that they were righteous. God makes this clear, "after the LORD your God has driven them out before you, do not say to yourself, ’The LORD has brought me here to take possession of this land because of my righteousness.’ No, it is on account of the wickedness of these nations that the LORD is going to drive them out before you. It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations, the LORD your God will drive them out before you, to accomplish what he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Understand, then, that it is not because of your righteousness that the LORD your God is giving you this good land to possess, for you are a stiff-necked people"³⁰. It is not Israel’s righteousness that gives them the land but the nations of Canaan’s great wickedness. Activities that are mentioned as typical of the nations are incest, bestiality, child sacrifice, occultism, and violence. This destruction had been delayed for centuries to give the nations of Canaan time to repent. Genesis 15:16 says that God would delay giving the land for 400 years "because the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete". Only when beyond all hope would God remove them from the land. In other instances God shows his reluctance to judge until things reach a state of utter depravity. With Sodom, God stated that he would spare the entire city for the sake of ten who were not depraved. Even when ten could not be found he saved the one, Lot, and his family. Sodom and Gomorrah were populated by Canaanite people and happened in 2000 BC, thus giving the residents a 600 year warning before the destruction during Joshua’s time. God demonstrates his willingness to relent with the city of Nineveh which repents (Jonah 3:4-10). We can be sure that he waited until these nations had passed the point of no return.

These rules also applied to Israel in their dealing with the Canaanites. God gave them explicit instructions to avoid the same practices in Leviticus and punished those who violated it. Only the Canaanite nations were under this judgment, other nations of the area were offered terms of surrender³¹. The Israelites were also punished if they tried to exploit the wealth of the Canaanite nations for themselves. Most of this is summarized from the paper titled "The Ban" by Gary DeLashmutt [3]. For a more in-depth response, see his essay.

This was a dark period for the nation of Israel under the sporadic leadership of the judges. It is a period signified by evil and waywardness³². One of the most repeated phrases is "again the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the Lord". This episode is one of many horrible ones in which the lawlessness and evil come to a catastrophic end. Not only does a gang rape and murder occur in a Benjaminite town but the originally apathetic and heartless husband stirs up the other nations for justice³³. The other tribes rashly swear an oath to destroy Benjamin and go to war against it. These tribes confront the Benjaminites who refuse to punish one of their own and prefer war to justice, throwing away the good of the nation to protect criminals³⁴. They inquire what God would have them do only after the armies are already gathered³⁵. The bloody conflict that ensues kills thousands of Israelites and devastates the tribe of Benjamin. The tribes then decide to allow the survivors to kidnap young women and marry them so that Benjamin does not become extinct, another questionable move. In all of these events we must remember that Judges is describing what happened not giving us a rule of conduct, quite the opposite. The point of the book is that Israel, and by extension humanity, is incapable of leading itself well. Calling on God too little and too late leads us ever to sorrow.

The passage quoted says, "and the men of Judah raised the battle cry. At the sound of their battle cry, God routed Jeroboam and all Israel before Abijah and Judah. The Israelites fled before Judah, and God delivered them into their hands. Abijah and his men inflicted heavy losses on them, so that there were five hundred thousand casualties among Israel’s able men. The men of Israel were subdued on that occasion, and the men of Judah were victorious because they relied on the LORD, the God of their fathers. Abijah pursued Jeroboam and took from him the towns of Bethel, Jeshanah and Ephron, with their surrounding villages. Jeroboam did not regain power during the time of Abijah. And the LORD struck him down and he died"³⁶. This is clear that God gave victory to Judah because of their reliance on God and the evil of Jeroboam. Jeroboam is most well known throughout Kings and Chronicles as the one who built two golden calves for Israel to worship instead of God³⁷. His actions literally caused suffering for generations.

Asa is portrayed as a mixed character in Chronicles. In the beginning of his reign he removes idols and pleads for the Lord’s protection³⁸. Later in life, he abandons his trust of God for trust in other powerful kings³⁹. In this circumstance he cries out to the Lord and says, "LORD, there is no one like you to help the powerless against the mighty. Help us, O LORD our God, for we rely on you, and in your name we have come against this vast army. O LORD, you are our God; do not let man prevail against you"⁴⁰. He has a smaller army of 300,000 against a larger army of 1,000,000. The passage does not say that the purpose of the victory was to plunder. God was protecting them from a foreign invader. Looting did occur as was common in ancient times.

God is not pro-slavery but he did work within the existing slave system. Paul says, "if you can gain your freedom, do so. For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord’s freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ’s slave"⁴¹. It is good to be free. All men are of equal value in Christ, being neither slave nor free⁴². Ethic, gender, and social economic differences are not as important as whether we are in Jesus Christ or not, according to the bible. After all, until then we are all slaves to sin⁴³. Only when we wholeheartedly trust the Lord can we ever really be free. God shows himself more concerned with our spiritual slavery than our physical slavery. However, he repeatedly makes note of the oppressed.⁴⁴. Not only that but he came to earth not "to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many"⁴⁵. Jesus was willing to become our slave so that we could be freed. This is more extreme than others are willing to go. Who else would voluntarily become a slave to set their enemies free?

This is a distortion of the text which says, "When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her." There is no mention of rape. You may marry her and must treat her with respect. You must let her mourn for her family and may not sell her like a slave. In a time period when raping and pillaging was the norm, this is an explicit command for gentleness and respect.

This is also spoken to ancient Israel which was ruled as a theocracy. There is no call to go to war for the believer today. Also, the New Testament goes further to say that husbands should sacrificially love their wives⁴⁶ and never leave them⁴⁷.

Proverbs is a book of general wisdom. Children who are not disciplined when they are bad will grow up to be very foolish, not knowing right from wrong. This will lead them to foolish and dangerous decisions, ones that may ultimately result in their harm or death. All of Proverbs is written in black and white terms to paint general pictures. It uses a great deal of hyperbole. It does not say to beat them senselessly, arbitrarily, or to to their physical harm, merely that they must be disciplined for their own good.

It is notable that Deuteronomy 22 upholds the right of women. It contains explicit protection against men casting woman aside and slandering them (v.13-19). It says to punish the both the man and the woman for adultery, something that most ancient, man centered, religions did not instruct (v.22). If it is a situation where the woman was probably forced against her will, such as out in the wilderness, then just the man is to be punished. The man is also punished if he rapes a woman who is neither another’s wife nor engaged (v.28-29).

Having multiple wives is not spoken against directly until the New Testament but the description of having more than one wife is always negative throughout the Bible. The New Testament is clear that marriage is to be between one man and one woman. The picture in Genesis of God’s intent is also only one man and one woman.

In regards to human sacrifice God is clear that he finds it supremely wicked. "Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molech, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD"⁴⁸. The Bible says of Ahaz, "he did not do what was right in the eyes of the Lord his God. He walked in the ways of the kings of Israel and even sacrificed his son in the fire, following the detestable ways of the nations the Lord had driven out"⁴⁹. Psalms says reflecting back that many "sacrificed their sons and daughters to demons. They shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan"⁵⁰. Other verses of note are Isaiah 57:5 and Ezekiel 23:36-37. God does not want us to offer children to try to please him.

In 2 Kings 3 one should be careful in drawing a causal relationship between child sacrifice and success. The text does not say that this is why the victory was won, it merely describes what happened. Similarly in Judges 11, it is not stated that his oath is the decisive key in his trust of the Lord. This rash oath led to sorrowful consequences. When one passage is descriptive such as these two, and others are prescriptive, such as the direct commands against child sacrifice above, we know that God intends us to follow the prescriptive ones.

Genesis 22 is an interesting case as this command to Abraham is given before God’s laws were laid out through Moses in Leviticus and other prophets. Abraham obeyed God despite him finally receiving his long promised son, reasoning that God could bring him back from the dead⁵¹. In the end, God prevents him from sacrificing his son, an important detail, and provides a substitute. Thousands of years later he provides another substitute for us on that very same mountain when Jesus is crucified. Then the drama enacted by Abraham is made clear, foreshadowing God’s ultimate substitution. God does not want your child sacrificed, he was willing to sacrifice himself.

As given in the section on Hermeneutics, these verses are being taken out of context and hence the meaning is being missed.

Jesus is criticizing the Pharisees who claim to follow the law but are actually watering down the law and twisting commands to follow rules they have made up instead of God’s laws. He quotes Isaiah saying, "These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men."⁵² They are pledging money as holy to the Lord as a way of not taking care of their elderly parents. This pledge was invented by tradition and allowed one to keep their wealth but prevented them from giving it to others as it ’dedicated’ for the Lord. They are prevented by their selfishness and dark hearts. This was there that instead of spending money to take care of their parents, honoring them as God commanded, they could follow other rules made by men and keep their wealth.

Ephesians says to submit to husbands as you would submit to the Lord. This is not the same as saying husbands are gods. It also goes on to say, "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her" (5:25). In an ideal marriage wives will follow their husbands and respect them. Husbands will love their wives and give up their lives for them. This is a picture of sacrificial service and love, not authoritarian domination. 1 Peter 3 says that the respect and actions of wives have the potential to win over husbands who do not believe, and that true beauty is to be obtained is through character. This would be a loving service on the part of the wife.

1 Peter 3:7 also states, "Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner⁵³ and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers." Wives deserve consideration and respect as fellow partners. God is concerned enough with husbands treating their wives well that one’s prayer life could be hindered by abuse of that responsibility.

1 Corinthians 11 and 1 Timothy 2 are difficult and confusion over what it is stated about the role of women is much in debate. For a better look at this see,"The Role of Women in the Church" by Dennis McCallum.⁵⁴

The Bible does present a linear view of history, one in which the autonomous rule of humankind will end with the return of Christ. The bible says that there are real consequences to the misdeeds and evil done by humankind, and that each of us is a participant to some level. We are more evil and our choices bring down the world more than we realize. This is something that God will not stand and he will eventually end our ability to do these things. Everyone will be judged fairly or pardoned. This is God’s answer to "Why doesn’t He do something about how bad things are here?" He will.

To focus on this judgment is also one sided. The return of Christ will also usher in a period of fairness, peace, joy, prosperity, and thankfulness.

While an argument can be made for determinism in the Bible, I feel that the Free Will arguments make more sense and are better supported by scripture. I will not go into a full discussion here but notable points to think about are: Romans 8:29 (those he knew would choose him, he predestined to get their characters changed), Matthew 23:37 (Jesus wanted to care for Jerusalem but they were unwilling), James 4:4 (those who choose to be enemies of God), Proverbs 1:29-31 (those who choose to reject God and his advice will reap the consequences of their choice).

This is a misunderstanding of the text, see the discussion earlier.

It should be noted that all of these examples take place during Christ’s ministry. He, like John the Baptism, preached that one must be perfect in order to receive salvation based on the things that you do. Unfortunately, none of us are up to this task. The reason good works is taught so heavily is to lead us to this conclusion. "But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith."⁵⁵ Thus the necessity for Jesus to die so that we may be pardoned instead. The emphasis is on repentance throughout the rest of the New Testament letters. One example is Ephesians, which says, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God- not by works, so that no one can boast." (2:8-9).

Jesus said, "from everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more."⁵⁶ God judges based on the opportunities and information that people had, not on what they did not. He is just and fair. He is patient with people "not wanting any to perish but wanting everyone to come to repentance."⁵⁷ Peter and Paul lived before the reformation and taught justification by faith. At the same time Romans 1-3 discusses how God reveals himself through nature and the conscience so that people are without excuse.

The preceding verse says, "They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved" (2 Thessalonians 2:10). Since they refuse to believe the truth they end up believing a lie.

It was God’s whim to provide this gift or not. He certainly did not have to and would have been perfectly justified in condemning all of humanity. He chose to offer the gift and anyone can chose to receive it. "That if you confess with your mouth, ’Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."⁵⁸ If you chose to receive it you will be saved, that is not up in the air. "Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."⁵⁹

The idea that Jesus died for our sins and is God’s method and desire to reconcile us to himself is the central message of the bible, spoken of in many more verses than these. The bible starts out with the problem facing humanity, being separated from God. Every book in the Old Testament shows God laying out and giving proof for His plan to help humanity back on track. This plan is fulfilled when Jesus dies on the cross as an amending sacrifice in place of us. We are then able to be God’s friends and restored to the intended place with him as the New Testament unfolds.

Hebrews talks about this idea in depth. Only Jesus could offer this sacrifice for all-time as he does not die.⁶⁰ A sacrifice had to be made for wrong doing, in blood. "In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness."⁶¹ Jesus does not have to die over and over as he paid with his own blood.⁶² He is the only mediator of this agreement as he gave his life as a ransom for us.⁶³ Everyone needs this ransoming as we all fall short of God’s standard.64It is impossible to please God without faith⁶⁵ or by our own efforts.⁶⁶

Personal responsibility is taken seriously, so much so that everyone will go to hell to be held to account unless we seek Jesus’ help. Yet, our ability to absolve ourselves is impossible. Something else had to be done or we would all be condemned.

---

Notes

1. Romans 5:15

2. Romans 3 makes it clear that everyone has committed wrongs. Ezekiel 18 makes it clear that ’the one who sins is the one who will die’. That is, people are not punished for the injustices inflicted on them by others but only for the things they do. Of course, biblical definition of wrong includes NOT doing what you should. See James 4:17, "if anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them"

3. Romans 3:10

4. See particularly Romans 5, 1 Corinthians 15

5. 2 Peter 3:9

6. John 3:16

7. Romans 5:19

8. Romans 10:9-10

9. Ephesians 2:8-9

10. Matthew 10:35

11. Micah 7:6-7

12. Matthew 19:27-30

13. Matthew 22:37-39

14. See Romans 5 for many of the positive consequences that Jesus has given us when we choose to be associated with him

15. Genesis 6:5

16. Exodus 7:13, 7:22, 8:15, 8:19, 8:32, 9:7

17. Exodus 9:12

18. Exodus 9:34

19. Exodus 9:20, Exodus 12

20. Cf. Exodus 12:13

21. Revelation 20:14

22. Revelation 21:4

23. Exodus 20:6

24. Numbers 25:1-2

25. 2 Samuel 21:2

26. James 1:13-14

27. 1 Kings 20

28. Genesis 37:2

29. Genesis 41:12

30. Deuteronomy 9:4-6

31. Deuteronomy 20:10-18

32. Judges 2:16-19

33. Judges 19

34. Judges 20:13-14

35. Judges 20:18

36. 2 Chronicles 12:15-20

37. 1 Kings 12

38. 2 Chronicles 14-15

39. 2 Chronicles 16

40. 2 Chronicles 14:11

41. 1 Corinthians 7:21-22

42. Galatians 3:28

43. Romans 6

44. C.f. Exodus 2:23-25 God hears the slavery of the Israelites and moves to free them. He consistently reminds them that he is the God who brought them out of slavery. C.f. Leviticus 25:42 Israelites were not allowed to sell each other as slaves.

45. Mark 10:45

46. Ephesians 5

47. Matthew 19:8

48. Leviticus 18:21

49. 2 Kings 16:2-3

50. Psalms 106:37-38

51. Hebrews 11:19

52. Isaiah 29:13‌

53. Note that weaker partner, often translated weaker vessel, refers to the physical body as opposed to the spirit or soul. Men, who are typically physically stronger, should keep in mind the state of their wives and treat them with respect.

54. http://www.xenos.org/essays/role_of_women.htm

55. Galatians 3:23-24

56. Luke 12:48

57. 2 Peter 3:9

58. Romans 10:9-10

59. John 1:12

60. Such a high priest meets our need, one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself (Hebrews 7:26-27).

61. Hebrews 9:22

62. For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him (Hebrews 9:24-28).

63. 1 Timothy 2:5-6

64. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished (Romans 3:23-25).

65. Hebrews 11:6

66. Isaiah 29:13

References

[1] "Alvin Plantinga’s free will defense". Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Plantinga’s_free_will_defense. 15 March 2011.

[2] Antony, Louise. "Is it Reasonable to Believe that God is Good?" OSU Philosophy Club. University Hall, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. 24 May 2006.

[3] DeLashmutt, Gary. "The Ban". Xenos Christian Fellowship. Essays. http://www.xenos.org/essays/ ban. 15 March 2011.

[4] LaFollette, Hugh. "Plantinga on the Free Will Defense". http://www.hughlafollette.com/papers/Plantinga_on_the_Free_Will_Defense.pdf. 15 March 2011.

[5] McCallum, Dennis. "The Problem of Evil". Leadership Training Class. 3 March 2011.

Special thanks to the OSU philosophy club, of which I am a former member. "Philosophy club: Not just for commies anymore".