It is a tug of war

There is indeed a tug of war, but it is NOT as Paul McCartney put it (in his 1982 album of the same name); it is NOT a tug of war to try to outdo or outscore one another.

It is a tug of war alright, but is NOT about Paul before salvation
No, Romans 7:14-24 was NOT a painting of a life of the Apostle Paul before salvation. It was an illustration by Paul, using his own experience of life as a believer, of what it was like to live a Christian life. It was his attempt to stress that we MUST WILL to follow the ways of God despite having entered into salvation. It was NOT and it is NOT “Abra-cadabra, and you now (upon born-again) automatically follow all the ways of God”. Nor is it “voila or presto and your will is perfectly aligned to that of God - no more struggle!”

Romans 7:14-25, 8:1-15
Romans 7:14-25 - 14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.

16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good.

17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

21 So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; 23 but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members.

24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?

25 Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.


Romans 8:1-15 - 1 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, 4 in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.

5 Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.

6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; 7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8 Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. 9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.

10 But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.

12 Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. 13 For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live, 14 because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. 15 For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.”

The above passage is indeed a long passage; but really, to do meaningful study of the Word, often it is necessary to look at big chunk of scriptures at a go, for Bible authors, such as Paul, wrote with great flow, often with singular theme running over many verses and chapters.

3 grounds it was NOT a flashback
A number of people have argued that Romans 7:14-24 was a flashback by the Apostle Paul of the time he was NOT a believer yet; and so, such people are arguing that Paul was talking about the struggles in him before he became a believer. In isolation, perhaps, one could say that, but if one reads the verses following, which was a continuation of the same theme, in Romans 8:12, we find the answer that Paul was NOT doing a flashback.

In fact, the present tense used for Romans 7:14-25 already painted to us a picture that Paul was NOT doing a flashback, for NORMALLY, if it were a narration of the past, past tense would have been used by the author.

Let’s us look at what Romans 8:12 said.

Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it (Rom 8:12).

Remember now, this epistle of Paul was written to the believers in Rome, and in Romans 8:12, we read that Paul used the word, “brothers”, meaning he was referring to the Roman believers. Paul said, “we”, meaning, the Romans believers and himself (Paul), in other words, believers generally, have an OBLIGATION {or be a debtor to, KJV}. Now, if Romans 7:14-25 was a flashback, about Paul’s life and struggles before becoming a believer, then accordingly, Romans 8:1-11 must be referring to the change upon and after salvation or born-again. Indeed, Romans 8:1-11 was talking about what happens upon salvation or born-again, and post born-again. But was Romans 7:24 the question Paul posed before his salvation, and Romans 8:1-11, the answer to that question, we have to determine.

In brief, there are 3 grounds for NOT believing that Paul was doing a flashback:
1. Present tense used
2. How Paul was before conversion, and how he was being converted
3. If sinful nature is NOT relevant or dead, why talk about obligation to it

The first is clear-cut, and has been explained above; we will look at the remaining two grounds.

Have you forgotten how Paul was and how he was being converted?
Now, how was Paul converted? People who argued Romans 7:14-24 was a flashback erred on NOT taking into account how Paul, previously known as Saul, was converted and the kind of life he was having before conversion. Paul did NOT hear the Gospel, felt somewhat convicted, but continued to do the evil of persecuting the believers, and then one day, on hearing a good preaching, accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior. Saul’s conversion was NOT the run-of-the-mill conversion.

Below was how Paul had narrated his past, before believing and how he became converted:

Acts 22:3-10 - 3 “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. Under Gamaliel I was thoroughly trained in the law of our fathers and was just as zealous for God as any of you are today. 4 I persecuted the followers of this Way to their death, arresting both men and women and throwing them into prison, 5 as also the high priest and all the Council can testify. I even obtained letters from them to their brothers in Damascus, and went there to bring these people as prisoners to Jerusalem to be punished. 6 “About noon as I came near Damascus, suddenly a bright light from heaven flashed around me. 7 I fell to the ground and heard a voice say to me, ‘Saul! Saul! Why do you persecute me?’ 8 “‘Who are you, Lord?’ I asked. “ ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting,’ he replied. 9 My companions saw the light, but they did not understand the voice of him who was speaking to me. 10 “‘What shall I do, Lord?’ I asked. “ ‘Get up,’ the Lord said, ‘and go into Damascus. There you will be told all that you have been assigned to do.’ 11 My companions led me by the hand into Damascus, because the brilliance of the light had blinded me.

Even when Paul was testifying before King Agrippa, he gave a similar account; here is a part of it (Acts 26:15-18):
15 “Then I asked, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ “ ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,’ the Lord replied. 16 ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen of me and what I will show you. 17 I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them 18 to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’
This was what Paul told King Agrippa concerning what he, Paul, had been doing most zealously before his supernatural encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus:
9 “I too was convinced that I ought to do all that was possible to oppose the name of Jesus of Nazareth. 10 And that is just what I did in Jerusalem. On the authority of the chief priests I put many of the saints in prison, and when they were put to death, I cast my vote against them. 11 Many a time I went from one synagogue to another to have them punished, and I tried to force them to blaspheme. In my obsession against them, I even went to foreign cities to persecute them. (Acts 26:9-11).

I submit to you, Paul, before conversion, did NOT struggle the struggles painted in Romans 7:14-24. He was deceived and in deception, he thought he did right, and he, before he became a believer was bent on persecuting believers, and was so obsessed with it that the Lord said Saul was persecuting Him, the Lord Himself! The sentiment expressed by Romans 7:24 – “What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?” could NOT have been that of Paul’s before his conversion. His conversion was one of those “you have no choice”, so to speak; God had chosen him, he “could not” refuse. Rather, the sentiment expressed in Romans 7:24 was that of a man, truly had had experienced God, and understood his own utter wretchedness despite having been born-again. Romans 7:14-24 could NOT be a flashback of Paul’s condition before conversion, rather it was a speaking of the struggles that he, Paul, still had to put up with, to pursue the course that the Lord had designated him to take, as he himself had testified, before King Agrippa (Acts 26:15-18), above.

[Added 27/07/2011: The Apostle Paul also exhorted, in Gal 5:13, 16-17, BELIEVERS to live by the Spirit, and NOT to gratify the desires of the sinful nature: 13 YOU, MY BROTHERS {cap, mine}, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. (Gal 5:13) 16 So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. 17 For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. (Gal 5:16-17 – notice the similar fashion of expression of the struggle – the tug of war!)]

Some misconceptions
It is a misinterpretation and a lie, on the part of many overly grace preachers and believers, that the Apostle Paul taught perfection (righteousness and all) upon born-again or salvation. All over, in many epistles of Paul, he wrote about the need to grow and mature. This passage of Romans 7:14-25 was one such admission of even himself still needing to put up with battling against that which Satan had stacked against Man. The above text of Acts 26:15-18 recorded for us what Jesus had taken hold of Paul, and in Phil 3:12, we read Paul expressed his imperfection and the right posture of a believer –

Not that I {Paul} have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me (Phil 3:12).

Some argued that it is preposterous to say, the God-appointed Apostle Paul was still so unspiritual, and he did what he had NOT wanted to do, and did what he hated to do (Romans 7:14-15) even after he was born-again. What these people did NOT realize was that those words were a lamentation of a contrite heart of a mature believer. A mark of true growth in a Christian life is increased sensitivity to sinfulness; NOT only the person leaves sin, he abhors it, just as God would. Here is NOT the place to elaborate on “You are a new creation upon born-again”, but central to this new creation fact, is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and as a believer continues to be increasingly yielded to the Holy Spirit, his sensitivity and abhorrence of sin increases, and his awareness of his own utter carnality or wretchedness increases.

How could Paul, while saying he was unspiritual, said the law is spiritual (Romans 7:14)? In fact, 2 verses earlier, in Romans 7:12, Paul said, “the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good”. This is again another mark of maturity, and a more mature believer knows that he can get to understand God a little more through His many precepts, and appreciates what the psalmist said in Ps 119:104, that “Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.” Again, it is misinterpretation, and by many, to say Paul taught that laws (commandments, precepts) are NOT important or irrelevant to the Christian’s life.

We come back to Romans 8:12 – about obligation
In Romans 8:12, Paul said that we, believers, have an OBLIGATION {or be a debtor to, KJV}, but it is NOT to the sinful nature, and it is NOT to live according to it. If sinful nature was NO longer an issue, why would Paul have talked about the possibility of believers (including himself) having an obligation to it? If sinful nature is non-issue or completely done away with, upon born-again, why talk of obligation to it. Very obviously, Paul was NOT talking about, before salvation sinful nature was an issue, and after salvation it was a non-issue or dead. Paul did NOT say, “Abra-cadabra, you are born-again, sinful nature no more; or voila or presto, now you automatically sin no more.” Worst still, some believers actually believe they cannot sin (impossible to sin; erroneous interpretations of 1 John 3:9 & 1 John 5:18a – those interested, can read my separate article – “Please, 1 John 3:9 does not mean a believer cannot (unable to) sin!”).

It is precisely because there is still the sinful nature still operating and the Holy Spirit operating, that we, believers, have to choose. If sinful nature is no longer operating in a believer, then there is no need to choose. Paul was painting a matter of choice; don’t believe, see what the subsequent verse, Romans 8:13 said:

13 For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

Now, some people still insist on saying Paul was painting the picture generically, meaning if a person, if he decides NOT to be born-again, then he is making the decision of living according to the sinful nature, he will die, but if he decides to be born-again, he will live. If we look at the verse in isolation, yes, that is a possible interpretation, but we have just looked at the verse before it (v12) and we read loud and clear, who Paul was talking and referring to, “Therefore, BROTHERS, WE have an obligation ….”. Yes, believers, including Paul himself. In fact, the “For” at the start of verse 13, is the same as the conjunctive, “since”, meaning verses 12 & 13 are to be read together. In other words, verses 12 & 13 could read like this:

Therefore, BROTHERS, WE have an obligation, but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it SINCE if you live according it, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,(Romans 8:12-13 joined and rephrased, substituting “since” for “for”)

If you still insist to think that Paul was addressing the believers, but NOT that they, the believers, were posed the choice, but rather non-believers had to decide, then let me tell you it was unlikely that Paul or for that matter, any man writing to instruct another, to instruct on non-existing scenario. It is as good as we, telling our sons this: “Son, tonight, when you sleep in the park (camping), and when a dinosaur comes into the camp, you are to pretend to continue to sleep and not move, so that the dinosaur will think that you are dead and will not eat you up.” The boys will say you are crazy, for there are no more dinosaurs! If sinful nature is dead, do you think Paul would say, “BROTHERS, WE have an obligation … not to the sinful nature”?

People are just kidding themselves if they think upon born-again, sinful nature is dead, and Satan is dead. The overall counsel of the Word did NOT paint such pictures as sinful nature is dead or Satan is dead or if you are a believer, it is now alright for you to give in to the sinful nature in you (exercise NOT self-control), because you are now a born-again.

What really is that tug of war?
For a believer, 2 “parties” are operating in him; one, Iniquity or Sin or sinful nature (this is NOT the mere act of wrongdoing, but it is in the like of iniquity {“evil”} of Eze 28:15, KJV) which we all inherited from the Original Sin (from the Fall), and two, the Holy Spirit {I tell you a revelation: even the Apostle Paul interpreted the relevant verses of Eze 28 as depicting the fall of Lucifer (aka Satan) – read 1 Tim 3:6 if you do NOT believe!}. Before conversion, a man is a slave to Iniquity or sinful nature; the man has almost no means of resisting, for Satan who replicated Iniquity into Man, has authority over all unregenerate men (or men NOT born-again). At conversion, God put His Holy Spirit into the person, and the born-again man has the Holy Spirit indwelling him. At the Fall, Satan replicated Iniquity or sinful nature into Man, at born again or salvation, God put a deposit of His own Spirit (also called the Holy Spirit or Spirit of Christ) into Man. Jesus, the Son of God, has defeated Satan (but Satan is NOT dead), and wrestled back, that authority over Man which was lost in the Fall of Man, in the Garden of Eden.

Because, in the first place, God created Man with free-will, even when Jesus had wrestled back that authority, God only held it until a man gives his life over to Jesus. God gave that authority back to the man entering into born-again. It amounts to God saying to the man, “Now, so-and-so, Satan no longer has authority over you. That authority over your life is now vested back into your hand. You, once again, have free-will, to decide if you will obey me, God, and live, or if you still want to choose to re-give that authority to Satan, all over again, in which case, you will die.”

Now, that Satan, has no real authority over a believer does NOT mean that he has no more powers; there is a difference between authority and power. Against a believer, unless he has re-given the authority to Satan, Satan has NO authority over the believer, even though he, Satan, has powers. What it means is that as a believer, we can refuse Satan, and he cannot exercise authority over us. But he, Satan, has powers (NOT yet removed from him) to tempt a believer, to deceive a believer, even powers to perform signs and wonders and miracles. To level out the playing field, in fact, more than level out the field, so to speak, God put His Spirit to indwell you upon your born-again, even as Satan had Iniquity (or sinful nature) indwelled you.

There is a war on, a war between God and Satan (lopsided, nevertheless, a war), and there is a tug of war within us, and that is between the dictates of the Holy Spirit and that of Iniquity or sinful nature. But because God did NOT take away a believer’s free-will, we have to choose which side of the tug of war we are on, to follow the dictates of the Spirit of God against the misdeeds of sinful nature or to still choose to allow ourselves to be enslaved by the sinful desires of the sinful nature, even though we are freed at born-again. Isn’t that what Romans 8:12-13 is painting to us?:

Therefore, BROTHERS, WE have an obligation, but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it SINCE if you live according it, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,(Romans 8:12-13 joined and rephrased, substituting “since” for “for”)

Why an obligation? Because Jesus died to set you and I, believers, free from the slavery of sinful nature. Indeed, we, believers, have an obligation to the Spirit of God, and to live by it (Him); and it is only by the Spirit we can put to death the misdeeds of the flesh (sinful nature resides in the flesh), and live.

Verse 14 (of Romans 8), i.e. the next verse, went on to say that those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. Why did Paul said that, when the Holy Spirit already adopted our spirits as sons of God? The answer is this (another revelation!): God adopts us, that is His part; when we allow ourselves be led by His Spirit, that is when we are acknowledging God as our Father. Isn’t it also so, for the human father and son? A man begot a son, the son did no part, but we know, that son, acknowledges the man as his father when he allows himself be led by that man.

Indeed, there is that tug of war within every believer, a pull from the Father of perdition through Iniquity or Sin or sinful nature, and a pull from the Father of Heaven through the Holy Spirit. At the base of it all, love is a choice (that’s another revelation for some). Your choice is your love. Do you choose your Creator? Do you choose the One who first loved you by giving of His Son to die on your behalf? Do you choose the One who adopted us first, as sons of Heaven? Often not easy, even Paul experienced that, yet which side are you on? Do you pull to the tune of the Holy Spirit, or to that of Iniquity?


Anthony Chia, high.expressions – Fear not Iniquity or sinful nature or Satan, for you and I have received NOT a spirit of timidity but a Spirit of sonship. He, who is in us, the Holy Spirit, is greater than he who is outside us (in the world), Satan {from 1 John 4:4}. The Holy Spirit is in us, but Satan is NOT, if you permit him NOT. Only Iniquity or sinful nature is in us, but we have God in us. Amen.

PS: We can put to death the misdeeds of sinful nature. Sinful nature dies only when we die, for then the body is no more, until replaced by an incorruptible body.

Comments are welcome here. Alternatively, email them to me @: ... {click on it to reveal complete address}

Or just email me your email address so that I can put you on my blog (new entry) notification list. To go back to blog main page, click here.

Did God create evil?

Preamble: For this article, I ask that readers do NOT put any of their comments on this blog. Instead, please email to me. The reasons are these: 1. This is a highly controversial topic. 2. It can be very confusing too. 3. There are various assumptions and definitions that people adopt to argue their cases, even though the short answer is either a “Yes” or a “No” 4. A “Yes” may be a correct answer, even as “No” can possibly be a right answer, too, depending on how you arrived at your conclusion; the Lord knows, and He shall weigh your thought processes.

Another point is that the view expressed in this article, does NOT represent the view of any body, church or otherwise, which the author is part of, or is affiliated to; it is solely a personal view of the author.

Article’s key verses – Isaiah 45:7 & Eze 28:15
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things (Isaiah 45:7, KJV).

Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee (Eze 28:15, KJV).

Contexts of verses
The context of Isaiah 45:7 is this: This was a prophecy whereby God spoke, through prophet Isaiah, concerning His faithfulness that He would, in the exile to come (Judeans would be exiled to Babylon), He would be using King Cyrus of Persia as His shepherd (Isa 44:28), His anointed vessel (Isa 45:1) to capture Babylon and to allow the exiled Judeans to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the city and the temple of God (subsequently to be destroyed by the Babylonians). This was despite Cyrus did NOT acknowledge Him, and God said He would be using Cyrus still, to free his people, and in the process, enabling him (Cyrus) to receive honors; it was all because His faithfulness towards corporate Israel, His servant, His chosen nation. In this foretelling, Isaiah spoke about how God was making revelation about Himself to Cyrus, and verse 45:7 was one such verse.

The context of Eze 28:15 is this: From Eze 28:11-12a, we know that it was to be a lament concerning the king of Tyre:

“The word of the LORD came to me: "Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says:”” (Eze 28:11-12a)

Of course, here, the words were given by the LORD Himself. But immediately, from verses 12b-14, the narration was definitely NOT referring to a man:

'You were the model of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. 13 You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone adorned you:
ruby, topaz and emerald, chrysolite, onyx and jasper, sapphire, turquoise and beryl. Your settings and mountings were made of gold; on the day you were created they were prepared. 14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were on the holy mount of God; you walked among the fiery stones (Eze 28:12b-14).

He was a model of perfection, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. He was in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone adorned him, ruby, topaz and emerald, chrysolite, onyx and jasper, sapphire, turquoise and beryl. He was an anointed guardian (chief) angel ordained by God; he was on the holy mount of God; he walked among the fiery stones. Surely, he was NOT a man.

There are people who argue that the passage was a figurative description of King Tyre, but you can see for yourselves that even if one uses the beauty of a butterfly (just an example) as the metaphor for a man (ok, maybe a woman), the butterfly, in the first place must be, as described (with beautiful colored and patterned wings, and most elegant in its form, etc). Just as the butterfly was NOT imaginary or a fake, the creature of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty, who was in the garden of Eden of God; most beautifully adorned with previous stones, anointed and ordained of God as a guardian angel, and walked on the holy mount of God, was NOT imaginary or a fake; I believe Lucifer (aka Satan) was being described.

Without going at length, the “fallen-ness” predicament, that all of men are facing, started with Lucifer; he set the precedent, and all fallen men are reckoned or counted with him, the fallen Lucifer or Satan. Lucifer fell first, and from that incidence, a precedent, demanded by holiness, kicked in. So, here, in this Ezekiel passage, King Tyre was reckoned with Satan, and so, in the lamentation by God, God spoke of the fall of Lucifer, first, before He connected it back to King Tyre (in vv 18 & 19; v20 onwards was about Sidon).

Expounding Isaiah 45:7
The phrase, “God created evil” can be seen in Isaiah 45:7.

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and CREATE EVIL: I the LORD do all these things (Isaiah 45:7, KJV).

First, I believe people should NOT read too much into the present tense used. There are those who argue, because they see the tense used was in the present form, they conclude that God did, does and continue to do evil. If we apply it to “evil” then we must apply it to “light”, “darkness” and “peace” as well. We all know that light was already created. God said, “Let there be light”, and there was light (Gen 1:3-5). Are we to think that God is making more “light” every now and then?

Second, there are those who argue that we are NOT talking about “light” as in the “light” bulb or the “light” of the sun, nor “darkness” was referring to “darkness” as in pitch black dark room with no light. Arguably, they were saying, “light” means, just to quote a catch-all word, “goodness” or “good”. If it were the case, “darkness” must mean, all the “badness”, isn’t it? The issue with this argument is this, “Whatever that is good, pure, praiseworthy, they argued, it is covered in the “good” or “light”, but moral evil, sin or wrong are argued to be NOT in the “bad” or “darkness”. Extending it to “peace” or “prosperity” or “well-being” and the many other words one can chuck into the Hebrew word, “Shalom” (H7965), and “evil” or “disaster” or “calamity” or “distress” and again the many other words one can fit into the Hebrew word, “Ra” (H7451), the proponents argued moral evil, sin or wrong CANNOT be part of what we are talking about. Not many people can stomach this, arguing that, the proponents, without support, were simply insisting God could NOT do bad things, particularly morally wrong things and sins, and so, are simply substituting less offensive or mild words into the verse while insisting that the verse was in present tense (active particle). The point is that if one insists on interpreting the verse on the basis that God cannot do bad things, then one has to back it up with scriptures to show that indeed God cannot do bad things, in other words, letting scriptures to interpret scripture.

As I have said above, the context was, God was making a revelation of Himself to Cyrus, and verses 5 & 6, before this verse 7, both have this - “there is no other (God)”. In other words, God was stressing to Cyrus, despite he did NOT acknowledge Him, there was really no other (God).

I am the LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God.
I will strengthen you, though you have not acknowledged me, (v5) so that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting men may know there is none besides me. I am the LORD, and there is no other (v6).

So, what God wanted to say to the Persian King, Cyrus, was that he shouldn’t be believing there was another (god). It is believed that, in those days, some, in Persia, believed, the “good” was controlled by one god, and the “bad”, another. God was saying, no, there were no separate gods. The LORD was and is the only God, author of the creation; and after that, He was and still is in charge, and so, He then said verse 7 –

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things (Isaiah 45:7, KJV).

So, we have now fully understood the intent of verse 7; the question still remain as to whether or not, verse 7 was pointing to “evil” was created by God, or God was, is and will be creating “evil”.

Now, it is one thing to say that God is an author of creation, and after that, He was and still is in charge, it is another to say that God is still forming (those arguing for active participle) the light, and creating darkness, making peace, and creating evil.

As a “statement of fact” about Himself, the latter (active participle), sure did NOT fit in, as least in my understanding of God. It is like now, here we are, in the sanctuary of my church, and I pray for a sick to be healed by God, and He heals him, and, for another person nearby, God just inflicts him with a sickness; or God grants one with wisdom, and zap another’s mind and made him stupid. Similarly, God grants shalom to one, and for another, torments him with distress or disaster (all are His people or children)? Also, this interpretation makes the verse sounded like saying, “I kill people, you-know!” without qualifying that you are the death-convict executioner; you will frighten the hell out of people! I do NOT think God intended it to mean he is habitually doing all of that.

I submit to you that it was because God was saying, after creation, He was and is still in charge, and was/is the only one in charge, that the present tense was used. This means that one can simply read the verse in the past tense. One can just go a little further in the same Isaiah passage to verse 18, and find that for the same Hebrew words, such as yatsar (form), bara' (create), `asah (make, do), even with same tense guidelines given in the Strong’s Lexicon, Bible translators simply translated them in the past tense. Why? Just because they saw the presence of the words, “heavens” and “earth”!

For this is what the LORD says — he who created (bara') the heavens, he is God; he who fashioned (yatsar) and made (`asah) the earth, he founded it; he did not create (bara') it to be empty, but formed (yatsar) it to be inhabited — he says: (Isaiah 45:18).

What is my point? My point is that Isaiah 45:7 should be interpreted literally, to mean God was saying He formed the day (light), and created the night (darkness); He made peace, which was that which was agreeable to Him (divine peace means that), and created that which was NOT agreeable to Him (evil); He, the LORD, did all those things, and He was and still is in charge. It is only in the sense that all of creation is still sustained by God, that, at all, active participle tense can be said to be applying to Isaiah 45:7, but it is NOT in the sense that God is forming more light every now and then.

Yes, by the above paragraph, I have ascribed my meanings to the various key words: light, darkness, peace and evil. I have chosen the physical darkness meaning, instead of the metaphorical meaning (“bad”), for “darkness” (choshek, H2822). Accordingly, the light was also the physical light, and NOT “good”; the opposite of “light” is “darkness”.

What is shalom? Peace, yes, but when does one truly get shalom? We get shalom when we are in full agreement with God. Just think about it; was there NOT shalom when creation was done (by God); there was shalom, not just for Man but for entire creation, until Satan came along, and successfully tempted Man in the Garden of Eden. If shalom or divine peace comes with full agreement with God, then righteousness was implied. In other words, God made “righteousness” even as we said He made “peace”. What is the opposite of “righteousness”? Yes, it is “unrighteousness”. How would one describe “unrighteousness”? NOT in agreement with God; and what is that? An iniquity or disobedience or sin. When did God first create righteousness and iniquity? Was it in the Garden of Eden? No, I believe it was earlier! This is where Ezekiel 28 must be brought in.

Relevance of Ezekiel 28:15
Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee (Eze 28:15, KJV).

Remember, we have, in the earlier part of this article, established that Lucifer (aka Satan) was being referred to, in this verse 15. Satan was perfect in all his ways from the day he was created, meaning Satan was created righteous.

The Godhead, Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, must be in perfect agreement with one another, and therefore, each is righteous relative to one another. Righteousness, apart from that within the Godhead, without created creatures has no meaning, for righteousness is about in agreement with God; when there is no creature, there is none to agree to God. In this way, we can understand that righteousness, apart from that within the Godhead, came into being on creation of creatures by God, and since we know NOT other knowledge other than angels were created before Man, righteousness can be said to come into being with the creation of angels, and if we take the creation of Lucifer (I believe Lucifer was NOT just a chief angel, but THE chief angel) as representing the creation of angels, righteousness with God acquired meaning with the creation of Lucifer.

Now the verse said that Lucifer was perfect in his ways from the day he was created; this means that he was created righteous, and continued to be righteous, and in full agreement with God – there was no unrighteousness or no iniquity or evil ever existed. By the way, evil, ra`(H7451) of Isaiah 45:7, can mean that which is in vicious disposition against God (or God’s holiness); in simple terms, a wrong, iniquity or evil can give rise to that disposition. I am NOT saying that evil is a person or being, in the same way, we do NOT say the holiness (of God) is a person or being, but it is something so much integrated into the nature, that holiness is inseparable from God, and evil, from Satan. This evil or the term used in Ezekiel 28:15, “iniquity” (`evel, H5766; meaning unrighteousness, wrong or injustice), God said, came into being, and become inseparable from Satan, the moment Lucifer turned unrighteous against God. How did it happen, how did Lucifer turn unrighteous? Verse 17 of the same Ezekiel passage gave us the answer; God said this, of Satan:

Your heart became proud on account of your beauty, and you corrupted your wisdom because of your splendor. So I threw you to the earth; I made a spectacle of you before kings (Ezekiel 28:17).

With this understanding, righteousness and iniquity (or evil) were NOT created at the same time, although the stage was set at the same time, when free-will was given at creation by God. In a sense, it is NOT wrong to say that evil was created by God; but it did NOT come in the manner that God created the good camp, and God created the evil camp. It is NOT even the case of God created an evil angel, Satan, in the first place; when God created Satan as Lucifer, the latter was created perfect in all his ways, completely righteous. It was Satan turning from agreeing with God (righteousness), and becoming proud before God that evil was born or got created. Alright, it was relative to holiness of God that evil was of meaning, and so, it was also NOT wrong to say that it was the very opposition to God’s very nature that created evil. But was God to be blamed for His very nature, and decision to grant free-will to His creatures? I do NOT blame God for that, do you? Is God morally culpable if a man abuse his choice? Or would you rather be a robot?

Even as God was speaking to Cyrus, who was going to be raised by Him as a redeemer, a kind of shadow Messiah (Isaiah 44:28 – 45:1), God was probably remembering how iniquity entered his creation in the first place, for these verses, subsequent to Isaiah 45:7, were so pointing to the circumstance of how Lucifer fell:

8 “You heavens above, rain down righteousness; let the clouds shower it down. Let the earth open wide, let salvation spring up, let righteousness grow with it; I, the LORD, have created it. 9 “Woe to him who quarrels with his Maker, to him who is but a potsherd {pottery piece (fragment)} among the potsherds {pottery pieces} on the ground. Does the clay say to the potter, ‘What are you making?’ Does your work say, ‘He has no hands’? (Isaiah 45:8-9).

It was unrighteousness that brought about the creation of iniquity or evil, and it was Lucifer NOT wanting to do as God desired, “quarrelling with his Maker”, that iniquity or evil was given life through Satan. Here, God was expressing his desire even as He was “commissioning” Cyrus to be His redeemer. God was lamenting on those who had gone astray. God’s prescription was righteousness; righteousness to rain down from heavens, righteousness to grow on earth; salvation could only come through that. God’s warning was the same, quarrel NOT with your Maker, God Himself, agree with Him, and agree to His ways. He is God, we are His creation, He is the potter, we are the clay; we do NOT go against His wishes, thinking that we know better. That would be pride and that would corrupt any wisdom that we might have, and we would be guilty of the same that Lucifer was guilty of.

Conclusion
1. Can this NIV version of Isaiah 45:7 – “I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things,” be allowed to stand? If you subscribe to this (including it being in the present tense), you have to be sure in yourself, that despite God’s creating darkness and disasters against you, He still has your best interest at heart. You have to believe those darkness and disasters (against you) are for a good reason. There are scriptures, and some are scattered all over in this article, that give us assurances of God’s goodness towards His children.

2. In any case, Isaiah 45:7 should NOT be taken to mean God is going round doing good AND bad; granting peace AND creating disaster to His children. Please do NOT use this verse to support good and evil that we are experiencing are ALL coming from God.

3. Isaiah 45:7 was meant to say to Cyrus that there was no other god, beside the LORD; there were no separate gods for the good and the bad (Please, Satan is NOT a god, he is a spiritual being, a fallen angel, but NOT a god). Creation was by the LORD, and He is still in charge. And so, very simply, ONE way of interpreting Isaiah 45:7 was to say that God formed the day (light) and created the night (darkness), and He created with shalom given through righteousness, and He created evil through lapse of righteousness, on exercise of free-will, on the part of His creation.

4. Ezekiel 28:15 clarified that God indeed created Satan righteous (and other angels and Man, too). Evil or Iniquity (I prefer to capitalize the “i” to differentiate it from subsequent mere iniquities or wrongs) was created with Satan refusing to agree with God’s wishes. Pride and the consequent corrupted wisdom became the downfall of Satan (Eze 28:17). Evil was given life in Satan (and in Man, with the Fall of Man). – this is the important thing to take away with this article.

5. The creation of evil by God was NOT a direct one. Evil or Iniquity became found in Satan, on his first going against the desire of God (Eze 28:15, 17). Evil or Iniquity also got “ingrained” into Man when Man similarly, first, went against the wish of God, by eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, on the instigation of the fallen Lucifer or Satan.

6. Now, it is true that, just as holiness is the very nature of God, evil had become the very nature of Satan. What Satan had done subsequently was he had replicated the evil nature of his, into Man, at the Garden of Eden. The unregenerate man is therefore counted or reckoned with Satan.

7. Therefore, if at all, God could be said to have created evil, it was when Lucifer fell; even then, I will argue that God did NO evil. God NEVER do evil, NOT so much as the definition of evil is relative to God, but indeed God is good, and is good all the time. What this means is that His thoughts and actions towards us are NEVER evil; the KJV version of Jer 29:11 said it well - For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end. (Some more scriptures to show indeed God is NOT evil, are given at my sign-off below) We may NOT understand some of the things that happened to us, but that does NOT mean that God intended evil for us, his children. Frankly speaking, many of us do NOT know what is important to us, but the Lord does, and it is NOT even necessarily tied to this earthly life. We often have limited knowledge and understanding of the good intentions of God.

8. Judgments and chastisements of God are NOT evil in the eyes of God. If you cannot accept that, it is most likely that you may think that God can be evil at times. Lam 3:33 said that God does NOT inflict willingly. Please seek to accept that.

9. Can God use evil? Yes, God can use anything under the sun, on earth, above the sky, under the seas or in Heaven. God can use evil spirits, evil or wicked people, even bad things, but for His children, He uses them only according to Romans 8:28 - And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purpose.

10.Ultimately, God is holy; this means that evil is opposed to God, and one cannot expect God’s longsuffering to continue for all eternity. A time will come when judgment is made, and those failing to pass the judgment will have to live apart from God, in the burning lake of fire in Hell, where Satan, and all those reckoned or counted with him will go.


Anthony Chia, high.expressions – God is holy (Rev 4:8; Isa 6:3); He is NOT evil; there is NO evil whatsoever in Him (Ps 5:4); He cannot think evil or act evil (Job 34:10, Ps 89:14a {NIV},Deu 32:4); He may make use of evil but He uses it for our good, never evil; evil cannot even tempt God (Jas 1:13); He chastises, but it is NOT evil, BUT there is eventually a punishment-in-finality from His righteous judgment, and we have to face that. We are to live our lives to pass that final judgment if we indeed do love our God, in return, for He already first loved us.

Comments are welcome here. Alternatively, email them to me @: ... {click on it to reveal complete address}
Or just email me your email address so that I can put you on my blog (new entry) notification list. To go back to blog main page, click here.