 |  |
The first point that we should like to make may be expressed as a simple statement of
fact:
(1)
"Good"(Heb. Tob) occurs in the record of Creation seven times (Gen. 1: 3 - 2: 3).
(2)
"Evil" (Heb. Ra) does not occur once in the record of Creation (Gen. 1: 3 - 2: 3).
(3)
"Evil" is introduced into the narrative of Genesis, where man, a moral agent, is
being tested (Gen. 2: 9).
We have stated these facts as baldly as possible. What do they imply? The fact that
"good" can be attributed seven times to creation in its varied forms, without the necessity
of "evil" as a foil, teaches us that "good" is positive and not dependent upon "evil".
Darkness may be the antithesis of light, but light is positive and does not depend upon
darkness, for we read that "God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all". "Good",
therefore, is not a relative term, but a positive one.
We observe, in the next instance, that "evil" is mentioned for the first time in
connection with the trial of a moral agent. While the narrative has to deal with sun,
moon and stars, beast, bird and fish, and even the fact of the creation of man, "evil" is
unknown. Not until man is called upon to choose does "evil" come into the narrative,
and not until desire leads to action does evil itself actually emerge. The tree of Gen. 2: 9
is not called "the tree of good and evil" but "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil".
The knowledge or perception did not reside in the tree itself, but was bound up with
man's reaction to the prohibition of which the partaking of this tree was the visible
emblem. The whole question revolved around the choice of the man, rather than the
nature of the tree. It does not matter what the "fruit" may have been, whether the
traditional pomegranate or the equally traditional apple; this makes no difference
whatever. Had man obeyed the voice of the Lord he would still have known "good and
evil", but it would have been an experience that was blessed, and under Divine favour.
Man, however, disobeyed, and attained to this knowledge under the Divine displeasure,
and it ended in forfeiture, sorrow, shame and death.
There is no such thing as "good" or "evil". "Good" or "evil" as such cannot be
created. It would be possible for "good things" or "evil things" to be created, but when
we deal with "evil" and its problem, we are not dealing with a substance that exists
somewhere in bulk, for evil is the result of thought, desire, choice, will. It is therefore
impossible to teach that "God is the Author of evil". For God to be the Author of moral
evil, it would necessitate that Adam should be compelled to disobey, which in the very
nature of things would be a contradiction. If Adam's "disobedience" really "obeyed" the
dictates of his Creator, then sin is no longer sin, for a disobedience which turns out to be
obedience is not only nonsense, it borders, by the very nature of its subject, upon
blasphemy.
Let us now turn to Gen. 3:, a chapter that is rightly considered as the seed plot of
Biblical doctrine.
In the account of the temptation of Adam and Eve, we find that something which was
hitherto understood to be a prohibited things, is presented in such a light as to be