Did God Create Evil?

 Did God Create Evil?
Simple logic says that if everything in the world has its originator and evil exists objectively; God must have created evil. But how could an infinitely good God create evil? This is a question that has employed and still employs the minds of many laypeople and educated thinkers. In history, a whole theological discipline has been formulated, the so-called theodicy, which deals with justifying God for creating (or perpetrating) evil. A remarkable statement on this subject can also be found in the Old Testament (Isaiah. 45: 7): “I create light and create darkness, I create peace, and I create evil. I, the LORD, do all these things. “

In the light of previous knowledge, this whole problem is moving to a different level. When we stated that Creator’s intention to have a free-thinking being in the universe forced both the existence of deterministic and chaotic dynamics, then the problem of “becoming” good or evil shifts to the realm of various small stimuli (fluctuations) that are under certain favorable (or sometimes more unfavorable) circumstances able to program the development of systems in a specific direction, in the example of the influx of water, we can illustrate this very clearly: if the “butterfly” were above the ocean (or other large body of water) waving so that the relevant climate front pointed to the parched landscape, this dynamic would become “good.” However, if this (symbolic) waving forced rain clouds’ movement to sufficiently water-saturated localities, a flood would occur, and one would evaluate this dynamic as evil. Figuratively speaking, the “butterfly over the ocean” decides whether the lawful process develops into good or evil in this particular example.

In this way, it works in a completely general and universal way, both in the material and spiritual realm. Let us recall again that certain diseases (such as leukemia and AIDS) also occur in a mode of deterministic chaos. In practice, this means that slight fluctuations, of which there are always innumerable, can direct these diseases to a wide range of possibilities. Some of them can also represent the extinction of viruses, i.e., healing. While in some patients, these stimuli mean the development of the disease and eventually death, other fluctuations result in healing (without treatment), which the affected person qualifies as good. These cases are indeed observed in clinical practice.

Thus we conclude that God did not directly create either good or evil (at least not in some of their specific forms), but the “technology” used by him in the imminent creation of the world to have a thinker in it leads a similar being through small impulses to that the relevant phenomenon from the point of view of this being can develop as a good, resp. Like evil. In the area of ​​moral qualities, the situation is complicated by the fact that the free will of a rational being also enters the “game.” Genesis must, therefore, be sought in evolutionary “technology.” Teilhard de Chardin makes it clear when he writes: “If evolution is the only way God has created the world, then evil is a necessary side effect.”

Constructions spontaneously arise in every person’s brain, which can potentially transform into moral good or moral evil; for example, when meeting another person, the idea of ​​helping or killing him is spontaneously generated. However, God endowed man with the ability to decide for a variant freely. At the same time, at this stage, he provides instructions for action through a whole range of different factors: upbringing, education, environment, acquired and revealed information, etc. All this together will decide whether a person will act morally or amorally, t. j. whether it will present good or evil. Thus, God did not create the “good Abel” and the “evil Cain,” but both of these cases were generated within the framework of a mechanism that God had clearly set out for this world.

For the above explanation, we find a beautiful justification and confirmation in St. Fonts. God did not directly create wheat or cocoon. Both originated as a product of the evolution of inorganic and organic nature, the first representing good for man, the second evil. One may ask why God did not ensure that the fluctuations that lead to evil do not occur. Within the universal dynamics that are characteristic of our world, this would mean a direct divine intervention in cosmic events, miracles. Why doesn’t God do that? We also find a comprehensive answer to this in Scripture. In a certain, somewhat transformed form, it says (Mt 13:29): “Let the wheat and the cocoon grow, so that when you destroy the cocoon, you may not trample the wheat by accident.” this would also make it impossible for good to arise, and he probably does not want that. So what about the problem of good and evil in the world? Here, too, there is a clear instruction: “At the time of harvest, the cocoon is separated from the wheat and burned.” Thus, one should accept good and evil mechanisms, but one should reject evil and do good once that has arisen. He received from God the gift of free will and enough necessities, information, and grace; it is up to him to decide.

We have tried to show that the problem of good and evil – at least in its partial part – cannot be solved in the “static” plane (i.e., in the “a priori” plane of the existing categories), but in the dynamic plane, i.e., j. at the level of “becoming.” This approach provides us with some indications for a satisfactory solution to good and evil genesis. They should not be considered phenomena created “ad hoc” (we do not discuss here, of course, good and bad as absolute categories), but as products of two basic mechanisms of emergence of new qualities: deterministic and chaotic. The very existence of man as a free-thinking force both “technologies,” but how the divine creative activity has enabled and continues to enable can spontaneously generate both good and evil. Preventing the emergence of evil would at the same time prevent the emergence of good, therefore – as St. says. Font – wheat and cocoon must grow side by side. And only in due time to burn the cocoon.