What are "Good" and"Evil?"

1 Peter 3:8–17 ESV

8 Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind. 9 Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing. 10 For “Whoever desires to love life and see good days, let him keep his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking deceit; 11 let him turn away from evil and do good; let him seek peace and pursue it. 12 For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayer. But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.” 13 Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, 15 but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, 16 having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. 17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God’s will, than for doing evil.

New Dictionary of Biblical Theology Introduction

Every language contains words for ‘evil’—that which ought not to be. A distinction is sometimes made between physical/metaphysical evil (misfortune, woe) and moral evil (offence, wrong), and the Bible includes terms for both kinds. The Hebrew ra‘ occurs about 640 times, and 40 per cent of these cases refer to some calamity. There are many other words both for mishaps (*e.g. šô’â, trouble, storm) and for moral fault or sin. In NT Greek, the word kakos has a wide application: it is used to denote Lazarus’ poverty and sores (Luke 16:25), the harm caused by a venomous snake-bite (Acts 28:5), and the moral evil of which Jesus and Paul are innocent (Mark 15:14; Acts 23:9) and which issues from the human heart (Mark 7:21); the word and its cognates occur 121 times. The other common NT words for evil are ponēros and ponēria (derived from ponos, toil or pain, Col. 4:13; Rev. 16:10–11), which occur 85 times; these refer to physical evil, to the bad condition of the eye (Matt. 6:23) and to pain resulting from plague (Rev. 16:2), but more often to that which is wicked and worthless, the store from which men and women, being evil, draw the evil things they do and say (in Matt. 12:35 ponēros is used three times; cf. v. 34).

New Dictionary of Biblical Theology Biblical Contrasts

The Bible powerfully affirms the goodness of all that exists. The refrain in the prologue (Gen. 1), ‘and God saw that it was good’, is heard seven times, with a concluding superlative (v. 31). Scripture contains countless songs of praise and (from the wisdom writers) commendations of cosmic orderliness, summed up in Paul’s statement that ‘Everything God created is good’ (1 Tim. 4:4, NIV; cf. Titus 1:15a). Since in biblical monotheism only God and his *creatures exist, this means that everything is good.

New Dictionary of Biblical Theology Biblical Contrasts

At the same time, the Bible stands out among sacred texts for its preoccupation (some might say ‘obsession’) with evil. From Genesis 3 (the Fall) to Revelation 22 it repeatedly denounces human unrighteousness (see Rev. 22:11, 15, 18; cf. Mic. 3:8). Prophetic and apocalyptic discourse overflows with descriptions and predictions of calamities, bloodshed and destruction. People of God shudder at the pervasive nature of evil: ‘The whole world is under the control of the evil one’ (1 John 5:19); this age is ‘the present evil age’ (Gal. 1:4). The Lord’s declaration ‘that every inclination of the thoughts of [man’s] heart was only evil (raq ra’) all the time’ (Gen. 6:5) proves to be true in every generation (Ps. 14:1–3; Rom. 3:9–18; Matt. 12:34, 39). And at the centre of the biblical narrative is the horrendous instrument of torture invented by Rome for its slaves, the cross.

Every language contains words for ‘evil’—that which ought not to be. A distinction is sometimes made between physical/metaphysical evil (misfortune, woe) and moral evil (offence, wrong), and the Bible includes terms for both kinds. The Hebrew ra‘ occurs about 640 times, and 40 per cent of these cases refer to some calamity. There are many other words both for mishaps (*e.g. šô’â, trouble, storm) and for moral fault or sin. In NT Greek, the word kakos has a wide application: it is used to denote Lazarus’ poverty and sores (), the harm caused by a venomous snake-bite (), and the moral evil of which Jesus and Paul are innocent (; ) and which issues from the human heart (); the word and its cognates occur 121 times. The other common NT words for evil are ponēros and ponēria (derived from ponos, toil or pain, ; ), which occur 85 times; these refer to physical evil, to the bad condition of the eye () and to pain resulting from plague (), but more often to that which is wicked and worthless, the store from which men and women, being evil, draw the evil things they do and say (in ponēros is used three times; cf. v. 34). In classical Greek, ponēros may have been the stronger term, suggesting hardened malignity (R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament [London, 81876], pp. 304–305), but in the NT, while it is used more frequently than kakos to refer to moral evil, the latter is an equally strong word (*cf. and the parallel ).

Every language contains words for ‘evil’—that which ought not to be. A distinction is sometimes made between physical/metaphysical evil (misfortune, woe) and moral evil (offence, wrong), and the Bible includes terms for both kinds. The Hebrew ra‘ occurs about 640 times, and 40 per cent of these cases refer to some calamity. There are many other words both for mishaps (*e.g. šô’â, trouble, storm) and for moral fault or sin. In NT Greek, the word kakos has a wide application: it is used to denote Lazarus’ poverty and sores (), the harm caused by a venomous snake-bite (), and the moral evil of which Jesus and Paul are innocent (; ) and which issues from the human heart (); the word and its cognates occur 121 times. The other common NT words for evil are ponēros and ponēria (derived from ponos, toil or pain, ; ), which occur 85 times; these refer to physical evil, to the bad condition of the eye () and to pain resulting from plague (), but more often to that which is wicked and worthless, the store from which men and women, being evil, draw the evil things they do and say (in ponēros is used three times; cf. v. 34). In classical Greek, ponēros may have been the stronger term, suggesting hardened malignity (R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament [London, 81876], pp. 304–305), but in the NT, while it is used more frequently than kakos to refer to moral evil, the latter is an equally strong word (*cf. and the parallel ).

H. A. G. Blocher, “Evil,” ed. T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner, New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 465.

If only God and his creatures exist, and they are good, it follows that evil has no independent existence. This view, taught by Origen and by Augustine after he broke from Manichaeism (in which evil is an eternal substance), is firmly grounded in Scripture. Several Hebrew terms relating to evil connote nothingness or vacuousness, e.g. the four words in translated ‘deceit’, ‘lie’, ‘false’ and ‘vain’ in NIV. The first of these, āwen (fraud, vanity) was linked to ’ayin (‘there is not’), by Gesenius’ etymology, and is paired with it in the parallel of and 29 (J. A. Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah [Leicester, 1993] p. 318). The gods of heathenism are ’elı̂lı̂m, worthless nothings (), not ’ēlı̂m nor ’elōhı̂m. In Greek, the prefix a- is negative (*adikia, anomia, etc.), as are the common symbols of evil: darkness; disease; destruction.

H. A. G. Blocher, “Evil,” ed. T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner, New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 466.

To view evil as the loss or absence of good yields no ground to minimizing theories. Evil is no optical illusion, no mere local imperfection that promotes universal harmony. Evil is real, drawing its reality from created things; it is the perversion and corruption of the good. This makes it more heinous than it would be if it had independent existence. B. Hebblethwaite expounds the meaning well: ‘The monstrous and, in a sense, positive fact of a malicious and perverted human will is still not, in itself, a substance. It is the perversion of something inherently and in God’s intention good, namely a human being’ (in Christ, Ethics and Tragedy, p. 135). Biblical evidence supports this theory (by key words, metaphors and statements, e.g. in ; , ‘a warped and crooked generation’, echoed in ).

H. A. G. Blocher, “Evil,” ed. T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner, New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 466.

Christian Dogmatics The Norm of Good Works

Perfect conformity to the Law of God is of the essence of good works. First, only that is a good work which agrees with the norm and standard set up by God. Man is not autonomous, but is under God. Neither his own will57 nor the will of others should determine his actions. Works which are done in obedience to the commandments of men instead of in obedience to the commandments of God lack the quality of good works. “In vain do they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men,” Matt. 15:9; Mark 7:7. Neither can good intention change an evil work into a good work. The only norm for good works is God’s will.

Setting aside the divine norm is, according to Scripture, nothing less than rebellion against God and idolatry. One who makes his own will the standard of action is actually deposing God as his Lord and Master and putting himself in place of God. And if he permits the commandments of other men to regulate his actions, he eo ipso puts them in place of God. Furthermore, by obeying men rather than God, man degrades himself; he forgets the glorious dignity for which he was created and for which he was redeemed—to serve God alone (Matt. 4:10) and not to become subservient to his fellow creatures. “Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men,” 1 Cor. 7:23.

Perfect conformity to the Law of God is of the essence of good works. First, only that is a good work which agrees with the norm and standard set up by God. Man is not autonomous, but is under God. Neither his own will57 nor the will of others should determine his actions. Works which are done in obedience to the commandments of men instead of in obedience to the commandments of God lack the quality of good works. “In vain do they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men,” ; . Neither can good intention change an evil work into a good work. The only norm for good works is God’s will.

Setting aside the divine norm is, according to Scripture, nothing less than rebellion against God and idolatry. One who makes his own will the standard of action is actually deposing God as his Lord and Master and putting himself in place of God. And if he permits the commandments of other men to regulate his actions, he eo ipso puts them in place of God. Furthermore, by obeying men rather than God, man degrades himself; he forgets the glorious dignity for which he was created and for which he was redeemed—to serve God alone () and not to become subservient to his fellow creatures. “Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men,” .

Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, electronic ed., vol. 3 (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1953), 37–38.

Conscience, therefore, is not an echo or abode of an immediate divine self-attestation, but an active consciousness of a divine law established in man’s heart; for all self-consciousness of created natures capable of self-consciousness, is naturally at once a consciousness of their dependence on God, and a consciousness of their duty to allow themselves to be determined by the will of God, and consciousness of the general purport of that will. That which is said by ancients and moderns of the conscience as God’s voice in us, has in it this truth, that the testimony of conscience certainly rests on a divine foundation woven in our natural condition, scil. on a divine law in man, ordained with his created constitution, the existence of which, its claims and judgments, are removed from his subjective control. If a man know his doing to be in harmony with this law, his conscience is ἀγαθή (; , ; , ), καλή (), καθαρά (; ), ἀπρόσκοπος (). If his doing be evil, so also is his conscience, inasmuch as it is consciousness of such evil (πονηρά, ): it is μεμιασμένη (; ), so far as the evil deeds shadow themselves in it like blots; or κεκαυτηριασμένη (), so far as it bears them in itself ineradicably and indelibly like brands. All these characteristics prevail in the so-called subsequent conscience. In respect of the so-called precedent conscience, prevails in Scripture generally the fundamental position that man is to act in proportion to himself, i.e. according to the measure of his conviction and his faith (; comp. , ), without thereby exalting the conscience to an infallible oracle. The precedent conscience may be right or wrong, weak or strong (ἀσθενής, ἀσθενοῦσα, , ); it may err and waver in that which is right before God; but in all cases it remains the norm, or law, for the occurrent doings of man. For action without conscience is, as such, absolutely blameable, although action according to conscience is not absolutely on that account right before God. For man, even on account of the confusions and perversions of his conscience, is responsible to God; and the weakness of conscience, which depends on deficiency of right knowledge (), and is to be spared (), may, in its exercise of judgment upon the freedom of conscience of another (), result in a self-induration and vain-gloriousness most perilous to the soul.

Franz Delitzsch, A System of Biblical Psychology, trans. Robert Ernest Wallis, Second Edition., vol. XIII, Clark’s Foreign Theological Library, Fourth Series (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1885), 165–166.