51

CHAPTER 4

THE FALL: THE BURIED TRUTH OF THE ORIGIN OF EVIL

By this point you are aware of the implications of creation in Genesis 1-2 across all domains of life. The corollary truths of God, man, and nature shape how you ought to think in matters of theology, prayer, worship, philosophy, mathematics, science, economics, labor, marriage, and family living. An obedient Christian cannot confine these creation truths off to the side in some religious closet, nor can he pretend to be “neutral.” In each area they compel us to chose between the Word of God and paganism.

I have stressed repeatedly that behind every form of paganism lurks the agenda of the carnal mind that is at enmity with God and cannot be subject to His Word. To justify its autonomy, the carnal mind always seeks some way to mutilate the revelation of God in creation with various idolatries. It must bury every reminder of His Presence with an “acceptable” re- interpretation. If this phenomenon ubiquitously affects all men to some degree, where and when did it originate?

The origin of evil must be included in any story of origins. The conscience of all men everywhere testifies there is a state- of-affairs that “ought” to exist but doesn’t. People do things to you that they “ought” not to do. Babies are born with horrid defects in their tiny bodies. Tornadoes, floods, famines, earthquakes, and plagues cause human suffering everywhere. Human language is filled with “ought” statements.

In this chapter I will show you the biblical story of how evil began (the “fall”) over against the different story told by the pagan origin myths. To start the chapter I will repeat what I did in Chapter One. I give you an actual example of a pagan origin myth from biblical times so you can see what the carnal mind creates on its own versus what minds sanctified by the Spirit of God produced in the Bible. After noting the similarities and contrasts, I will discuss the implications for our knowledge of God, man, and nature as well as the great human dilemma of suffering.

COMPARING THE BIBLICAL “FALL” WITH PAGAN MYTHS

Before proceeding, read Genesis 3 and its New Testament interpretations in John 8:44; Romans 5:12-21; 8:18-39; I Corinthians 15; II Corinthians 11:3-4; I Timothy 2:14-15; Revelation 21:1-4; 22:1-3.

Here are more excerpts from the ancient Babylonian myth I cited in Chapter One, Enuma elish, from Dr. Heidel’s translation. In this story you remember the primeval water-gods, Apsu (male) and Tiamat (female). They produced other gods, and after “many years” these progeny began to cause the “parents” problems.

“The divine brothers gathered together. They disturbed Tiamat and assaulted(?) their keeper; Yea, they disturbed the inner parts of Tiamat, Moving (and) running about in the divine abode(?). Apsu could not diminish their clamor, And Tiamat was silent in regard to their [behavior]. Yet, their doing was painful [to them]. Their way was not good.” Apsu calls his helper, Mummu, to help him persuade Tiamat that all three of them should destroy the noisy progeny: “Their way has become painful to me, By day I cannot rest, by night I cannot sleep; I will destroy (them) and put an end to their way, That silence be established and then let us sleep!” As the mother, Tiamat vehemently protested: “Why should we destroy that which we ourselves have brought forth? Their way is indeed very painful, but let us take it good naturedly!”[1] Apsu, however, persisted and announced the coming destruction of the gods. Both he and Tiamat were destroyed instead in the great war of the gods that followed. From these evil gods and goddesses man was created in an environment already afflicted by evil. Keep this narrative in mind as you consider the modern pagan story of evolution. According to the modern story, evil always existed in some form. Indeed, natural evil in the form of death is the very means of natural selection so essential in the alleged eventual evolution of man. The story of evolution is the maxim “blessed are the fittest, for they shall survive.”

Similarities with Genesis. For the same reasons I noted in Chapter One, there some similarities between Genesis and ancient pagan stories. Heidel recounts the Babylonian Adapa Legend in which a half-god, half-man being called Adapa is called to heaven to answer for something he did on earth. While there he is offered “food of life” and “water of life” which, if he partakes of it, will convey to him immortality. He refuses and is sent back to earth to die. Since he was in some respect a representative of man, Heidel concludes that “by refusing to eat and to drink, Adapa missed the chance of gaining immortality for mankind as well.”[2]

In modern times the Southeast Asian Karen people cited in Chapter 1 still remember the fall of man in their tradition about the creator “Y’wa”: “Y’wa formed the world originally. He appointed food and drink. He gave them the ‘fruit of trial’. He gave detailed orders. Mu-law-lee deceived two persons. He caused them to eat the fruit of the tree of trial. They obeyed not; they believed not Y’wa. . . . When they ate of the fruit of trial, They became subject to sickness, aging, and death. . . .[3] Such parallels with Genesis 3 shows that the Karen people as well as other tribes in ancient times had access to original revelation passed down through Noah (Isa. 40:21). Contrasts with Genesis. As I noted in Chapter One, it is the contrasts between Genesis and the pagan stories that show the effect of the carnal mind’s re-interpretation of revelation. These contrasts are a virtual study in human depth psychology for understanding how sin works in our hearts.

Earlier we learned that there were two major areas of contrast regarding origins. There was a contrast between the Creator-creature “two-level” view of reality and the pagan Continuity of Being “one-level” view of reality. Then a second contrast was found between the Personal Sovereignty of God and the Impersonal Chance/Fate of paganism. In the matter of the origin of evil there are also two major areas of contrast.

1. Bounded Evil vs. Eternal Evil. In Enuma elish you observed that even the original divine pair of water deities were selfish parents who precipitated the outbreak of evil throughout all the universe. Heidel comments on the Babylonian stories: “Of the Babylonians can be said what Cicero has said with reference to the poets of Greece and Rome: ‘The poets have represented the gods as inflamed by anger and maddened by lust and have displayed to our gaze their wars and battles, their fights and wounds, their hatreds, enmities and quarrels. . . .’ Since all the gods were evil by nature and since man was formed with their blood, man of course inherited their evil nature. . . .Man, consequently, was created evil and was evil from his very beginning. How, then, could he fall? The idea that man fell from a state of moral perfection does not fit into the system or systems of Babylonian speculation.”[4]

Evil, in other words, always has been a part of existence according to paganism. Strictly speaking paganism in the end does to the origin-of-evil question what is does with the origin- of-the-universe question: it never comes up with a true temporal origin! Both the universe and evil somehow always existed.

Moreover, it always will be a part of existence. From Enuma elish to Socrates to Darwin evil is an inescapable component of existence. Thus to escape the horror of an eternal existence with evil, some forms of oriental religion devised the only conceivable escape: going into a state of “non-existence”. Non- existence would be preferable to an existence with eternal evil.

By contrast the Bible insists that both Satan and Adam were created perfect without evil (Ezk. 28:15; Gen. 1:31). Whether Satan fell before God created man or afterward is a debate discussed in Appendix A. In either case, the point remains the same. Neither of these creatures was created evil. Evil according to the Bible had a beginning, and for the redeemed inhabitants of the New Universe (Rev. 21-22), evil will have an end. Evil according to the Bible is bounded or “bracketed.” Evil, just like the universe, has a definite temporal origin. Paganism has buried this truth because to admit it would be to admit its own vanity.

2. Responsible Guilt vs. Victimization. Pagan stories like the Adapa Legend try to explain man’s suffering and dying on the basis of innocent foolishness or victimization. Adapa unwisely rejected the offer of the “food and water of life”. Heidel notes: “The problem of the origin of sin does not even enter into consideration. Consequently, it is a misnomer to call the Adapa Legend the Babylonian version of the fall of man. The Adapa Legend and the biblical story are fundamentally as far apart as the antipodes.”[5] In Enuma elish it was the original divine parents who selfishly abused their children, and mankind merely followed in their footsteps. Since evil was a corollary to existence itself, no personal responsibility for evil’s origin is given. Mankind is just a passive victim to what is.

Genesis 3 narrates a different story. The woman when faced with two contradictory claims (from God, “you will die”; from Satan, “you will not die”), sought in the grand tradition of the autonomous mind to be “neutral” and to treat both claims as inherently equal. Thus by treating the Creator’s word on the same plane as the creature’s word, she immediately denied the Creator-creature distinction. (You will be asked in the following exercise to examine some of the details.) Adam deliberately followed. Both tried to deny responsible guilt for the event when confronted by God. By holding both responsible, God denied the victimization theory.

The attempt by both Adam and Eve to deny responsible guilt is developed in paganism into a virtual art form. Modern paganism continues the victimization tradition by offering elaborate “explanations” to excuse aberrant behavior on the basis of genetics, early socialization, and economic hardships.

Exercise 4.1

1. If paganism were true, evil would be an inevitable part of existence. What would be some ways you would then have to cope with evil? (HINT: Think about the various ways used by such groups as “Christian Science” and Hinduism.)

2. Assuming Ezekiel 28:14-15 speak of Satan “behind” the King of Tyre in the same way the Messiah is spoken of “behind” King David, what does it tell us about the time of the origin of evil relative to creation? How many times in Genesis 1 is creation called “good”?

3. Study the text of Genesis 3:1-13. Try answering these questions: a. Compare the words of Satan in Gen. 3:1 and of the woman in 3:2-3 with God’s words in 2:16-17. List the differences in words and grammatical emphasis. b. What do Satan’s words in 3:4-5 imply about God’s character? What attributes are denied? c. When the woman decides between God and Satan what has she already done to the authority of God’s Word? d. Trace the attempted avoidance of responsibility in the counseling dialogue of 3:9-13. ------------------------------------------------------------

EVIL UNDER GOD

The story of the fall is opposed at every point by the fleshly mind of paganism. I now turn to the first area of this “great debate”--the character of God as Creator of a world that became evil. Over the centuries unbelievers have taken great delight in pointing to what they have convinced themselves is a glaring contradiction between the existence of evil and the existence of an omnipotent, sovereign, and loving God. “Either your God must be loving and powerless,” they taunt, “or He is powerful and hateful.”

God and Responsible Creature-choices That Originate Evil. Clearly the story of the falls of Satan and of Adam separate the origin of evil from the origin of the universe. You saw above how Genesis 3 differs from Enuma elish and the Adapa Legend in that the pagan stories really have no origin of evil at all; evil always was there. The Bible insists there was a span of time between the origin of all things and the fall:

                                     A
                    B
x-------------------x...............    creation fall

In the interval “A”, there was existence without evil, something denied in all forms of paganism. This is not speculation. It is true history. So the question, then, doesn’t directly concern creation itself. Rather, it concerns post- creation history. Was it “right” for God to have created creatures with responsible choice who, though created without evil, would certainly originate evil after some interval “A” (obviously the God of the Bible wasn’t surprised by their choice)?

God could have created creatures with responsible choice who would not ever originate evil (everlasting “A”). Angels had choice, but not all of them rebelled with Satan. Men had choice, but one (Jesus) did not rebel. Heaven and the New Universe contain responsibile creatures without any further origination of evil. Because in the Bible evil is limited under God, the question arises why He did not limit it down to the point of elimination altogether.

God Trusted Without a Full Answer. In facing a major question about the Christian faith like this one, you must return to the basic procedure you learned in Chapter 1--begin within the biblical framework. How does the Bible itself answer this question? In every major passage that treats the question of why God allows evil and suffering (e.g, Gen. 3; 22; Job; Romans), the Bible never gives a comprehensive, ultimate answer. As John Frame notes, God in each case turns the complaint around as being disobedient, denies He owes us such an answer, and expects us to trust Him that He has a just and sufficient reason.[6]

How can He be so trusted? Go back to the Creator-creature distinction. Remember the relationship between the (Q)uality of omniscience and the (q)uality of human knowledge? Between the (Q)uality of holiness and the (q)uality of conscience? The human intellect and moral sense are similar to God’s attributes of omniscience and holiness so that we yearn for a reason and a moral justification. There must be one. The Bible doesn’t present us with an irrational, existential absurdity (in spite of some modern theologians’ claims).

Nevertheless, the human intellect and moral sense are not identical to omniscience and holiness so that “the” reason and justification, though existing in the Creator, may never fully be grasped by and exist in the mind of the creature. There are, after all, two levels of reality in the biblical worldview. How, then, do we trust Him for such a reason and justification without being able to fully understand it?

We trust His character as He has so far chosen to reveal it to us. When Job finally saw God in Job 38-42 for Who He really Is, he dropped his demand for a reason and a justification (42:1- 6). Today, after the additional revelation since Job’s day, you and I have more evidence that God does indeed possess a reason and justification for creating a universe in which responsible creatures would originate evil.

We see Jesus as God Incarnate. Through His behavior we can see more of the character of God. Outside the tomb of His friend Lazarus, Jesus weeps at the consequences of evil (John 11:35). As Francis Schaeffer pointed out years ago, He can be upset at evil without being upset at Himself.[7] Evil truly grieves Him. Moreover, He absorbs evil to Himself and bears its judgment at the Cross to make a way of escape. Whatever His reason for allowing evil, then, God doesn’t remain aloof like Allah in Islam but bears the pain along with His creatures. Does this display of His love not attest to the presence somewhere of a sufficient reason and answer to it all?

This action of the Cross, as Frame points out from Romans 3:26, already resolves part of the problem of evil. It resolves the apparent conflict in the Old Testament between the holiness of God and His forgiveness of evil which must have seemed like a logical contradiction: “Justice, as defined by the prophets, cannot be merciful, or so it seems. But God does solve the problem, in a way that none of us would likely have expected, in a way that amazes us and provokes from us shouts of praise. . . .Here is the lesson for us: If God could vindicate his justice and mercy in a situation where such vindication seemed impossible, if he could vindicate them in a way that went far beyond our expectations and understanding, can we not trust him to vindicate himself again?”[8] In other words, after the display of Jesus and the Cross, can we not trust that He can also resolve the rest of the “apparent contradiction” between His omnipotence and love on one hand and the existence of evil on the other? What further surprises does He hold in store for future history?

In the end, the pagan criticism of God and evil dissolves in its own vanity. By demanding that the Creator submit immediately to the human intellect and conscience, paganism once again has put the Creator and creature on the same level. But once this Continuity of Being dogma is asserted, both intellect and conscience disappear. Finite human knowledge can’t support by itself universal truths, nor can the human conscience by itself justify its own moral authority.

The fall reveals that God did not create an evil universe. Responsible creatures, not God, originated evil. God sovereignly bracketed their evil for reasons known fully only to Himself. Yet He came into full contact with the suffering of evil so we are assured that He is the kind of God Who has a sufficient

reason and justification for His plan. Until He reveals it, we must trust Him for it.

EVIL IN MAN

If evil, then, is confined wholly to the creature and does not touch the Creator, we are left with evil man and evil nature. We must learn well the effect of evil on both man and nature, or else we will never appreciate God’s redemptive project. A wrong diagnosis of a disease usually produces a wrong prescription of a cure. Non-Christian and sub-Christian religions inevitably fail because they trivialize evil and end up with a works-based, trivialized salvation.

Follow me as I utilize what we learned about man in Chapter 3. Watch the effect of evil on man’s design and on man’s institutions! Oh, what we have done with what God created!

Sin-Damage to Man’s Design. We were created in God’s image in both body and spirit. Sin has so damaged His image that we are a tragic relic of that great theomorphism we once were. Full restoration to His image in both spirit and body can only come through regeneration and resurrection in His Son.

1. The Body. What happened at the fall to the body? God promised a new thing--death. Man would be torn asunder. His spirit would leave the body, and his body would disintegrate back to the earth from which it was made (Jas. 2:26; Gen. 2:17; 3:19). A sentence of capital punishment has been placed upon Adam and all his progeny corporately. On some long-lived people this sentence may take time just like God’s sentence upon Shimei (I Kings 2:37,39 uses the same Hebrew construction as Gen. 2:17), but His countdown never stops until the zero point is reached. Neither physical exercise, vitamins, hormones, miraculous cures, nor any future genetic engineering can ever thwart death.

Death was a new thing added to the original creation. In Adam the body has become abnormal to what it “ought” to be by virtue of creation. Pain and an apparently disturbed metabolizism causing “sweat” are never far from daily life. All mankind senses this abnormality. Custance puts the matter well: It is an odd situation, this ambivalence we have about the value of the body. Here we have a tumbled-down house for the spirit, which the spirit is nevertheless deeply attached to--so deeply that it faces separation with grave concern.

Citing Romans 6:6,12; 7:24 Custance continues: Hiddenly, our living body is as inwardly diseased as a leper’s body is outwardly so. And this is because it has been unnaturally mortalized and is, in fact, already as good as dead. . . .When man dies, he dies an unnatural death, a death which he has been dying all his life. For many this process is delayed in such a way as to conceal the fact of decay and almost to hold out a promise of immortality. But as soon as the spirit departs, the illusion is destroyed. The disintegration of the body is rapid indeed. And it is doubtful if man finds anything quite as distressing to look upon as a decomposing human body. It is a terribly disturbing sight for man. . . .[9]

So that which God had once created to Incarnate Himself in, we destroyed in disobedience!

2. The spirit. And what happened at the fall to the human spirit? I noted in Chapter 3 that the spirit reveals its presence by exhibiting the God-like phenomena of choice, conscience, love, and knowing. Each of these have been perverted by the tragedy of the fall.

The (q)uality of choice that resembles God’s (Q)uality of sovereignty was created so that man as “underlord” could obey with thanksgiving and praise his “Overlord.” At the fall it became rebellious and defiant. None of Adam’s progeny naturally seek after God (Rom. 3:10-13). All men choose themselves as ultimate authorities, as counterfeit overlords, just as Satan did (Isa. 14:13-14; I Tim. 3:6). To justify this choice they immediately have to pervert the revelation in and around them of the Creator (Rom. 1:21-23). Even while fully knowing such truths, they chose not to welcome them into their heart (Rom. 1:28-32; I Cor. 2:14).

The (q)uality of conscience that resembles God’s (Q)uality of holiness remains after the fall within man (Prov.20:27; Rom 2:15; II Cor. 4:2) but becomes what biblical writers call “defiled” and “seared” (I Cor. 8:7; I Tim. 4:2). Moral judgments continue, but now they are no longer directed inwardly. Martin Luther in his commentary on Romans 2 put this point well: “While the righteous make it a point to accuse themselves in thought, word, and deed, the unrighteous make it a point always to accuse and judge others.”[10]. After the fall man’s conscience is kept from exercising authority over the self. The pagan characteristic “victimization” replaces honest responsibility before God. Of course, this limiting of the zone of conscience immediately dissolves any truly universal moral judgment. The replacement of the Creator and Holy Authority by the self disintegrates the integrity of fallen man’s “oughts”. Darwin’s protagonist, T. H. Huxley, clearly saw the implications of this modern paganism: “The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution. . .is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call bad than we had before.”[11]

The (q)uality of love that parallel’s God’s (Q)uality of love is radically altered. Instead of loving others out of a secure position under God, man reverts to self-protection. No longer secure because of his guilt before a holy God, man’s greatest priority is seeking a replacement security for himself. Other potential objects of his love, creatures of his own kind, become threatening, competing selves that seek their own security at his expense just as he now seeks his security at their expense.

Finally, the (q)uality of knowledge that is a finite replica of God’s (q)uality of omniscience turns into a vaporous “vanity” as the Bible calls it. It loses its foundation and all justification. Finite man obviously cannot generate infinite universals (“always”, “never”, etc.). He no longer can tell whether his thoughts fit real truth in the world or are merely electro-chemical phenomena of his brain. In the pagan perspective Morris Kline rightly asks of his own professional field of mathematics: “Is then mathematics a collection of diamonds hidden in the depths of the universe. . .or is it a collection of synthetic stones manufactured by man. . . ?[12]

So then, both man’s body and his spirit were systematically damaged in the fall. None of Adam’s progeny have been normal, physically or spiritually, save One. Sin damaged every area of man’s original design. Humpty-Dumpty had a great fall, and all of the kings men and their political, economic, and psychological programs cannot put him back together again.

Sin-Damage to Man’s Institutions. In Chapter 3 we spoke of three social structures of man--responsible dominion, marriage, and family--that God instituted at creation. With the fall so damaging to man, it is to be expected that each of these institutions would reap the sad results.

1. The first divine institution of responsible dominion became perverted but not taken away. Instead of a peaceable, godly dominion over all the earth under God and His Word, man fights and claws his way to a counterfeit dominion built of his own works (cf. Jas 4:1-4). Note two aspects of this perversion.

One aspect is quantitative. Production from the rebellious ground costs far more; it is radically less efficient, yielding instead of easy harvests of sweet fruit the unintended “thorns and thistles” after hours of “sweat” (Gen. 3:17-19). Not only is the ground out of control, but man’s social behavior is out of control. Unrestrained perverted addictions thwart every attempt to control them (Rom. 1:24-32).

A second aspect of perverted dominion is qualitative. In a previous section we saw that labor invites evaluation or imputation of value by a person (“pricing”). God’s imputation is objective and absolute; society’s imputation is subjective and relative. At the fall, man’s value-system changed. Ever since man prices his work based upon his own autonomous judgment--evil becomes good and good becomes evil.

2. The second divine institution of marriage received very severe blows from the fall. Instead of harmonious teamwork in dominion, competing rivalry occurs. The man is cursed in his job as provider; the woman in her role as mother (Gen. 3:17-19 vs. 3:16). The man must exert great effort to lead over against his wife’s tendency to control him (note Gen. 3:16b parallels the Hebrew construction in 4:7b). The man can look elsewhere than his wife to satisfy him (Prov. 5:18-21), while the woman can exert tremendous pressure through nagging and resentment (Prov. 19:13b; 21:9). Divorce is an all-too-common post-fall feature (Matt. 19:3-9).

3. The third divine institution of family, like marriage, experienced the devastation of the fall as the history of the first family reveals (Gen. 4:8ff). The parents can neglect their responsibility to train their children for God, either by being overbearing and unfair (Deut. 21:15-17; Eph 6:4) or by being too lenient (I Sam. 2:29; 3:13; Prov. 13:24; 14:18; 22:15). The children can rebel by disrespecting the fundamental authority of the parents (Exod. 20:12; Deut. 21:18-21; Eph. 6:1-2).

When faced with the corruption in each of these social structures, fallen man responds in several ways. One way is to reinterpret the struggles with sin in terms of economics (Marx’s “class war”) or of race (white and black racists) or of psychology (Freud and others). Another cope-out is to abandon the institutions themselves as outdated, arbitrary social “conventions” that need “re-engineering”. All such responses, however, are costly failures to the societies that try them. In the end, they reflect the pagan mindset that denies the responsibility of the fall and the abnormality of evil. Exercise 4.2

1. State in your own words how the Bible does not deny that there is a just and sufficient reason for the presence of evil in history.

2. State in your own words how there can be a just and sufficient reason for evil without man knowing it.

3. List evidences in biblical history that God is not aloof from man’s suffering under evil.

4. Get a copy of the Genesis 3:14-19 text and mark by each verse comments that point to implications in as many areas of life as you can think of.

EVIL IN NATURE

Evil permeates both sides of the man-nature distinction. When Adam fell, God cursed the ground because of his sin, a fact crucial to Paul’s exposition of the resurrection hope in Romans 8:18-23. Evil damaged nature as it did man. Sin-Damage to Nature’s Design. While it is still true after the fall that nature reveals its Creator, it is also true that much chaos has come into the message. Nature has become abnormal. There is now natural evil: storms, earthquakes, plagues, and famine. Nature even pollutes itself! Gases and vapors from natural decay pollute the atmosphere. A classic example is the Los Angeles basin. Long before the automobile and white man’s industrialization, native American Indians referred to the area as “the place of the burning eyes”. It seems that trees growing in the basin area secreted a volatile organic compound that strongly irritated human tissue.

Paganism interprets such natural evil as a normal occurrence. The pagan mind cannot imagine nature without evil in it. Evil has always been and will always be. Thus evolutionary theory relies on natural evil (struggle for survival) to bring forth life. That, says the pagan, is the message of nature.

Once this “revelation” is accepted, a counterfeit moral code quickly arises. For example, Sir Arthur Keith, a British anthropologist who had just survived Hitler’s bombing of Britain could write these amazing words in 1947: “To see evolutionary. . .morality being applied to the affairs of a great nation we must turn to Germany of 1942. We see Hitler devoutly convinced that evolution produces the only real basis for a national policy.”[13] American business tycoon John D. Rockefeller made the same inference: “The growth of large business is merely survival of the fittest. . . .This is not an evil tendency in business. It is merely the working out of a law of nature.”[14]

Sin-damage to nature confuses the creation message in many of its parts. Chaos and apparently useless features appear in enough places that Christians’ argument-from-design (teleological argument for existence of God) is difficult to state precisely. Nature is not normal, and therefore does not perfectly reveal God’s original workmanship. [15] Sin-Damage to Man’s Rule over Nature. You saw above that sin damaged man’s first divine institution of responsible dominion both in its extent and in its quality. Let’s look further at this damage. Strangely, the cursing of nature has had some beneficial results for man in his falleness. We are forced to work together to produce whether we like it or not. A number

of other effects also follow. North makes very insightful observations: “There are no free lunches in a cursed, scarce world. . . . Given the perverse nature of man, a less productive world is a necessity. Having to work is. . .a way of draining energy that might have been put to perverse ends. Men have less free time to scheme and pillage. They have less strength. . . .An expenditure of time, capital, and energy in increasing the productivity of the land could not be used simultaneously in order to commit murder and mayhem. . . .The curse of the ground is also a blessing for the ground. Men in a scarce world must treat the creation with care if they wish to retain the productivity of the ground.[16]

Again the pagan mind can’t interpret the situation correctly. Thinking evil has always been part of existence, the carnal mentality sees labor as inherently toilsome with no higher calling. From ancient Greece to many in America’s present labor force, work (especially “blue collar” work) is treated with derision and avoidance where possible.

The biblical Christian, on the other hand, knows that labor was the first occupation of God and of man. A creative person cannot help but labor over nature to produce worthwhile fruit. He knows that the thorns and thistles in every job are not what labor is all about. They are merely abnormalities added because of sin. Later in this series I will show how the spiritual life closely parallels physical labor. We struggle with that part of nature closest to us--our flesh--to bring it into subjection under Christ that His fruit, and not thorns and thistles, might be produced. Sadly, Christians often drift into pagan modes of thought, looking for some “secret” that will subdue the flesh without labor (note God’s words to Cain in Gen. 4:7).

LIVING WITH EVIL: BASIC COPING STRATEGIES

I now turn to the practical matter of living with evil. You have read and understand the implications of Genesis 1-3 across all areas of life. As with the creation event, so with the fall event: you and I are driven to chose between the Word of God and the carnal thoughts of paganism. Perhaps the worst conflict lies in the area of living with sorrow, hurts, sickness, death, and natural catastrophes. To cope with such evil in everyday life, you already have developed some sort of “semi-automatic” strategy. Is it compatible with worship and obedience to the Lord?

Pagan Coping Strategies. Because the carnal mind cannot be subject to God, it buries the key truths of the fall: (1a) evil is bounded and abnormal; and (2a) responsible guilt for its origin rests upon us. In their place the carnal mind substitutes falsehoods: (1b) evil is unbounded, eternal, and normal; and (2b) we are non-responsible victims. These falsehoods powerfully shape unbelieving coping strategies for everyday living.

One such strategy is to try to deny evil really exists. The founder of the cult of Christian Science, Mary Baker Eddy, wrote: “Sickness, sin, and death are. . .illusion; the mirage of error.”[17] But this “it’s-all-in-your-head” kind of approach never works well in day-to-day practice. Mrs. Eddy herself confirmed the reality of pain when, toward the end of her life, she received injections of morphine and had her (real) bad teeth removed.

Another strategy is to try to deny our sense of conscience, our sense of something being abnormal and wrong. The fault, it is claimed, lies in our too-sensitive conscience. Good and evil are just part of the evolutionary struggle--the yin and yang of existence. Keith, quoted above, said: “Christian ethics are out of harmony with human nature and are secretly antagonistic to Nature’s scheme of evolution.”[18] In this view we are supposed to seek a practical “balance”, a golden mean, between good and evil.

Sensitive and intelligent paganism, however, historically keeps returning to what modern existentialism calls the sense of the Absurd. Accept the reality of evil, accept the reality of our conscience’s condemnation of it, and live with the conflict, they say. Square pegs have difficulty fitting into round holes; moral personalities have difficulty fitting into an amoral, impersonal Chain of Being.

Having come to terms with the Absurd, you are left with the coping strategy atheist philosopher Walter Kaufmann urged: “Man can stand superhuman suffering if only he does not lack the conviction that it serves some purpose. Even less severe pain, on the other hand, may seem unbearable, or simply not worth enduring, if it is not redeemed by any meaning.” And where do you get this purpose and meaning from given the pagan presupposition that the Infinite Personal Creator doesn’t exist? Kaufmann continues: “It does not follow that the meaning must be given from above; . . .that nothing is worth while if the world is not governed by a purpose. . . .We are free to give our own lives meaning and purpose, free to redeem our suffering by making something out of it. . . .The plain fact is that not all suffering serves a purpose; . . .and that if there is to be any meaning to it, it is we who must give it.”[19] In other words, even though you know the whole cosmos is purposeless and evil, pretend as though it isn’t so inside your head!

The average pagan finds it a lot easier to “eat, drink, and be merry” as Paul acknowledged (I Cor. 15:32). Once the horror of living with evil forever is faced, the coping strategy of choice is some form of anesthesia: alcohol, drugs, sexual or musical ecstasy, and finally suicide. This pagan tendency toward a clear and deliberately chosen strategy of hopelessness was foreseen by Solomon (Ecclesiastes) and repeatedly mentioned by Paul (I Cor. 15:17-19,32; I Thess. 4:13).

Biblical Coping Strategy. When God met Job, He did not coddle him, pat him on the head, and say, “poor boy” (Job 38-42). Why was God seemingly so uncompassionate? When God took Paul through his grief over seeing his fellow Jews missing salvation in Christ, He led Paul to an almost fierce awareness of His total sovereign power (Rom. 9). Why not a little more gentleness?

The answer lies in the very nature of suffering. Suffering with evil shocks us because of its very abnormality. We weren’t created for a fallen world. In suffering our emotions are already highly charged. Our minds, therefore, are most vulnerable to the Evil One and least able to subdue our flesh. We need to meet God anew in all His glory. The biblical coping strategy, therefore, has a deliberate structure.

1. Back to basics. In suffering we face the destruction of creation itself due to sin--both man and nature. We can’t deny evil; we can’t deny our conscience; and we can’t accept the Absurd. In our shocked state, we must be jerked sharply away from self-pity (victimization) and autonomy, or we will quickly find ourselves defaming God’s character. Go back to the basics of the Creator-creature relationship. Does He have a plan in His omniscience for you that your mind may not now know much about? Is His sense of justice better or worse than yours?

2. How much limit on evil now? Instead of asking, “how can a loving God send people to Hell or have evil like this go on?”, ask another question: “how can a just God send people to heaven and give a gracious respite from immediate judgment right now?” Instead of why there is so much suffering, why is there so little of it, given the fall’s real existence? Remember that the cry to end evil, is a cry for final judgment! Do you really want that in light of the need for more people to come to repentance (II Pet. 3:9)? The argument here is an argument over where God ought to set the limits on evil. Shall the creature instruct the Creator?

3. Patterns of suffering. The Bible points to definite patterns of cause-effect in suffering. By studying these patterns you may find it easier to trust Him with suffering in your life. The patterns of suffering reveal enough design to point to the existence of an overall plan on His part. Unlike the dilemma of atheist Kaufmann who can only suggest a let’s- pretend-there’s-meaning strategy, you have available in the Word of God assurance that every detail of your suffering has a purpose, whether God chooses to share it with you or not.

Remember all evil originated through creatures’ rebellious choices; evil wasn’t there at creation. In both angelic and human spheres evil can be traced back to responsible post- creation choices that had suffering consequences. All suffering, therefore, has an aspect of directness for its origin. Yet not all suffering is due to the immediate choices of those afflicted.

For example, what did an infant do to deserve to suffer and die in infancy, or what did we do as unbelievers to merit God’s “wake-up” call to salvation? Jesus warned in John 9:3 against falsely concluding that suffering is always in a simple one-to- one relationship to the sufferer. There is an indirectness, too, in suffering whereby it is an “interference” into a person’s life and is not directly “asked for”. The patterns of suffering, therefore, which follow are divided into direct and indirect categories. Some apply to all men; other apply to only unbelievers or believers.[20]

DIRECT SUFFERING PATTERNS (Clear consequences of creatures’ choices)

1. General existence of sickness & death (physical and spiritual): law of Gen. 2:17 was disobeyed by Adam and Eve and consequences spread throughout world (Rom. 5:12-14; 8:19-23); the “fall event” vindicates God’s Word as reliable. Applies to all men. 2. General existence of “self-induced misery” (intensified physical, mental, and spiritual deterioration): law of Gal. 6:7 works out through the first divine institution of responsible labor; continued rebellious living yields corrupt fruit of foolishness showing again that God’s Word stands (Rom. 1:24-32; Eph. 4:17-19). Applies to all men. 3. General judgment pattern on nations and families: law of Gal. 6:7 works out through the third and fourth divine institutions (see Chapter 6 for fourth divine institution); preserves opportunities for repentance among those inside these nations and families (Exod. 20:5-6; Num. 14:18; Acts 17:26-27). Applies to all men.

4. Eternal existence of Hell and Lake of Fire: Justice of God originally directed against the fall of angels but which a man comes to share through Adam’s fall, if he never responds to God’s grace in this mortal life (Matt. 25:41,46; Rev.20:10-15); provides for a permanent exclusion of evil from the new universe to come. Applies to unbelievers only.

5. Judgment in Mortal Life of Believers: God the Father disciplines every believer as a spiritual parent when he rebels against His authority; warning to confess sin and be restored to fellowship (I Cor. 11:29-31; Heb. 12:5-13; Rev. 3:19-20); can include physical death; can work simultaneously with authorized church discipline (Matt. 18:17-18; I Cor. 5:1-5). Applies to believers only.

6. Judgment after Resurrection of Believers and Denial of Rewards: Jesus Christ evaluates fruit of believers whether produced in obedience to His Spirit or produced in the energy of the flesh (I Cor. 3:10-15; II Cor. 5:10-11; II Tim. 2:11-13). Applies to believers only.

INDIRECT SUFFERING PATTERNS (God personally intervenes but not as a direct consequence of some particular choice by the individual)

7. Evangelistic “Wake-up Call”: specially designed suffering can shock arrogant unbelieving self- confidence in pagan idolatries and self-righteousness (I Sam 5; I Kings 18:21-40; Jonah 3; Acts 9:1-9); provides an extra opportunity for repentance unto salvation independent of choices of unbeliever. Applies to unbelievers only.

8. A “Nudge” to Spiritually Advance: specially designed suffering to immunize against arrogant autonomy and protect a sense of dependency upon God’s grace (Deut. 8:2-6; Psa. 119:71,75; II Cor. 12:1-10; I Pet. 1:5-9; 5:5-10); provokes growth and preparation for coming service to others (II Cor.1:4-7). Applies to believers only and to the Lord Jesus Christ (Heb. 2:10; 5:8).

9. Evidence for Evangelization of Unbelievers: specially designed suffering to convince unbelievers of the reality of the gospel (I Tim. 1:16; I Pet. 2:12- 3:17). Applies to believers only and to the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 2:13-18). 10. Evidence for Edification of Believers: specially designed suffering to convince other believers of the adequacy of the gospel (II Cor. 1:5-15; 4:7-18; Heb. 12:1). Applies to believers only and to the Lord Jesus Christ (Phil 2:5-9; I Pet. 2:21-23).

11. Evidence in the Unseen Angelic Conflict: specially designed suffering that has unknown (to us) ramifications in the angelic conflict between God and Satan (Job 1-2; Lk. 22:31-32; I Cor. 6:2-3; 11:10; Eph. 3:10). Applies to believers only and to the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt. 4:1-11; 26:53-54).

Here, then, I have sketched eleven distinct patterns of suffering, each of which reveals that the limits of evil are very carefully controlled with a real purpose. Now, let’s go to the last element in a biblical coping strategy.

4. A faithful worship and obedience. The goal of the biblical strategy toward evil is an inner peace that comes from looking at your Lord and knowing, really knowing, He has a perfect plan for you. But you can’t get this quiet conviction “that all is well with my soul” by thinking and reacting with the carnal mentality. As long as there lurks in your heart the notions that evil is a never-ending mystery, you will always be tempted to think of yourself as an innocent victim. You will frantically search for an autonomous coping strategy based upon hopelessness, mostly likely some anesthetic to dull the soul- pain.

The Word of God calls to us not to try to blank out the mind, not to go to sleep, and not to be drunk with wine. Our perfect role model, the Lord Jesus Christ, when faced with suffering always concentrated His mind away from all distractions. Until He settled the matter before His Father, He avoided normal daily food (Matt. 4:2), sleep (Matt. 26:40-41), and medicine (Matt. 27:34). Once He could faithfully worship and obey, then He resumed as much normalcy as possible under the circumstances (Matt. 4:11; 27:48).

We are spiritual creatures, and we must resolve issues with God to restore a clean conscience and a true faith. In the struggle with evil, whether directly a clear consequence of our bad choice(s) or indirectly a not-so-clear “intrusion” into our lives, we ought not to rest until we can handle it by faith. Unlike those without hope, we don’t turn off our minds and flee to some irrational anesthetic. We flee to our Creator and Savior honoring His character by trusting its love and power over all evil.

Exercise 4.3

Either look up all the verses cited in the eleven patterns of suffering, or develop your own references.

END NOTES FOR CHAPTER 4

1. Alexander Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis (Chicago: Phoenix Books, 1963 edition of original University of Chicago Press, 1942), p. 19.

2. Ibid., p. 124.

3. Don Richardson, Eternity in Their Hearts (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1981), p. 78.

4. Heidel, p. 125f.

5. Ibid., p. 124.

6. For an excellent discussion of the problem of evil with alot of Scriptural material, see John M. Frame, Apologetics to the Glory of God (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Pub. Co., 1994), Chapters 6 and 7 with Jay Adams’ response in Appendix B.

7. Francis A. Schaeffer, He Is There and He Is Not Silent (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1972), p. 32.

8. Frame, p. 184.

9. Arthur C. Custance, Two Men Called Adam (Brockville, Ontario, Canada: Doorway Publications, 1983), pp. 116-118.

10. Martin Luther, Commentary on Romans (trans. J. Theodore Mueller, Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1976), p. 52.

11. Quoted in Cyril Bibby, T. H. Huxley (New York: Horizon Press, 1960), p. 58f.

12. Morris Kline, Mathematics for the Non-mathematician (New York: Dover Press, 1985), p. 545.

13. Sir Arthur Keith, Evolution and Ethics (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1947), p. 28.

14. Cited in R.E.D. Clark, Darwin: Before and After (Chicago: Moody Press, 1967), p. 106.

15. See discussion of how failure to take seriously the effects of the fall into setting up the argument from design hurt 19th century apologetics in John C. Hutchison, “Darwin’s Evolutionary Theory and 19th-Century Natural Theology”, Bibliotheca Sacra (Vol 152, No. 607, July-Sept 1995), especially page 354.

16. Gary North, The Dominion Covenant: Genesis (Tyler Texas: Institute for Christian Economics, 1982), p. 115.

17. Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures (Boston: First Church of Christ Scientist), p. 243.

18. Keith, p. 49.

19. Walter Kaufmann, The Faith of a Heretic (Garden City: Doubleday [Anchor ed.], 1963), pp. 165, 166.

20. Much of the concept of these patterns of suffering were given to me by R. B. Thieme, Jr., Christian Suffering (Houston, TX: Bible Ministries, 1987).