Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence

This is an interesting book. Our author, Jon D. Levenson, is both a monotheist and a believer in God's Omnipotence.This is curious because omnipotence is not here conceived as mere fact but, as our author puts it, "... a dramatic enactment: the absolute power of God realizing itself in achievement and relationship." Omnipotence is not rejected by our author; it is just not always enacted by God. - For reasons that always remain inscrutable. Our author pointedly denies writing a theodicy in the 1994 preface. Why? In the Bible (the O.T.) Gods people want Him to Act, not explain. ...But theodicy is, above all, an explanation (of evil, suffering, etc.).So, who or what is God acting upon (or against) when He Acts? Chaos! Thus "...the world is good; the chaos it replaces or suppresses is evil." Levenson maintains that the 'nothing' (in the biblical doctrine of creation out of nothing) is not mere void, absence, privation. No. It is "something - something negative." What? Our author states that for the Jews of those times "it seems more likely they identified 'nothing' with things like disorder, injustice, subjugation, disease and death." If you philosophically identify God with Perfect Being, its opposite is nothing. But the world of the Hebrew Bible did not contain philosophers...Our author also maintains that the biblical understanding is that, "history, no less than nature, slips out of God's control and into the hands of obscure but potent forces of malignancy that oppose everything He is reputed to uphold." Why does this happen? Again, God's Will and Ways are Inscrutable and Mysterious. Yes, God entered into Covenant with His people. Why then are they so often forsaken? "The possibility of an interruption in His faithfulness is indeed troubling, and I repeat that I have ventured no explanation for it."The God of the Philosophers, the All, the One, Knows no Other, except nothing (void). Levenson argues that this is not the God of Israel. While the God of the Philosophers seems to lead some commentators in the direction of an 'All is God' position, our author will have none of it. "The notion of the God who sustains all things, though derived from some common biblical affirmations, is difficult to reconcile with the old mythological image of the divine warrior at combat with the inimical forces."When I picked up this book from Amazon I thought I was purchasing a theodicy. The 1994 preface, briefly considered above, disabused me of that. The preface was written to display what our author opposes:"the residue of the static Aristotelian conception of deity as perfect, unchanging being; the uncritical tendency to affirm the constancy of divine action; and the conversion of biblical creation theology into the affirmation of the goodness of whatever is."I was also surprised by his advocacy of a liturgical, indeed theurgical, understanding of the Hebrew Bible. Levenson argues that what is needed today, "is an appreciation of the theurgic character of religious acts in the Hebrew Bible, the way these affect God and move him from one stance to another."I think, btw, that the position of Levenson, while strongly rejecting the Aristotelian conception of god, might have some affinity with the Platonic. Plato (in the Timaeus) taught that 'The God' created the world out of preexisting matter (Chaos). Plato, in his dialogues, also seems to indicate that Order is always imposed. I cannot think of anywhere that Plato displays the confidence in Natural Order that Aristotle does. It is the perfect 'unmoved Mover' of Aristotle who leads, eventually, to the philosophical conception of deity that Levenson here so strongly disputes.God's Kampf with Chaos (Order versus Chaos) continues to this day. ...And the days to come. The argument of this book strikes a realistic note that more pollyannaish commentators and theologians do not. Four stars for a thoughtful presentation of a post-progressive theology. With the hopes that had been invested in secular universalism drying up in our wretched postmodern world, I expect to see more realistic and pessimistic theologies in the future.A Note on Creatio and TheodicyNow, there are several ways to think of the origin of the World. The first, and simplest, is that it (World, Cosmos, All-That-Is) has always existed and always will exist. One certainly avoids a great deal of theoretical problems with this conception! But if one denies this then one must believe the World came to be. But how?In the various religious traditions, there are only three or four ways the world came into being:1. Creatio ex Nihilo: out of nothing.This is the way an omniscient, omnipotent God calls the world forth. - Our very familiar Aristotelianized (according to our author) understanding of Genesis. However, in Doing everything, this God comes to be thought of as Responsible for Everything - including Evil. In this book, Levenson wants us to read Genesis very differently.2. Creatio ex Materia: out of some pre-existing material, typically co-eternal with the god.As mentioned above, this is what is argued in Plato's Timaeus. Here,'The god' imposes Order on (an aleardy existing) Chaos. (And again, note that (imo) there is no natural Order anywhere in Plato. Order is always imposed. I consider this the fundamental difference between Plato and Aristotle.) Now, this Chaos is then thought to be 'responsible' (that is, it is the cause) of Evil in the World. Chaos is typically thought to be mindless and without will, so technically we say 'cause' instead of assigning 'responsibility' to it. But, in either case, 'The god's' hands are clean.3. Creatio ex Deo: out of God.This is the emanationism that we find, not only in neoplatonism, but in most gnostics too. Why do they say 'emanate'? Because the One (the Source) did not Will to Create! But this emanation (actually, series of emanations: One -> Nous -> World Soul -> world) is not an accident. Just the opposite! It is an Unwilled Necessity. It is the God's Nature to overflow. The theory of emanations means that even 'gross matter' cannot be evil since it too ultimately derives from the One.4. ex Errore: our of error.But what of Evil? It is certainly thought (save a few philosophers and mystics) to be undeniably Real. The Gnostics thought Evil was very real too. It is here, and only here, that we can speak of 'creatio ex errore'. For the gnostics, who are almost always emanationists, there were only two possible answers to the evil in the world. Either the god (i.e., demiurge) who created our material world was ignorant or evil. For the gnostics there are many Levels of Reality (i.e., of Emanations) and typically the gnostics will make the last emanation (the last 'god') in the chain of emanations either ignorant of the Source of All, or outright evil. If the former, the god is often called Sophia. If the latter, he is usually thought to be the old testament Jehovah. In both cases, 'the creator god' (as an emanation) of the gnostics is very distant from the Source, and it is this distance that is generally thought to be the cause of the ignorance or evil.Our author can be said to be attempting to put some elements of the Creatio ex Nihilo tradition and some elements of the Creatio ex Materia position together. But of course his interpretation leans in a monotheist direction. Eventually, God will win.It is not clear to me that this last must be an axiom of the Creatio ex Materia position.

Though published 1988, Jon Levenson’s “Creation and the Persistence Evil: The Jewish Drama of Omnipotence” still breaths invigorating and lively words into the hearts and minds of modern readers who seek to understand Yahweh in the ancient context of creation. From the outset, he approaches the issue of God’s mastery over the universe from a Rabbinical Jewish perspective. That’s not to say that he only uses Rabbinic sources; rather, after observing the ancient Near East context of creation, he seeks to see how those ideas are reflected within Rabbinic literature. The first section of the book is structured around understanding how God is master in regard to creation, pointing out that it ultimately comes down to creation as “the emergence of a stable community in a benevolent and life-sustaining order” (12). Following, Levenson explores the “character”, if you will, of Chaos through the lens of the Hebrew Bible, drawing out the role of Chaos in sustaining Order and the power and reality of unchecked evil. Of course, the religion of ancient Israel expects that, eventually, God will win in that final future battle. In other words, while God’s enemies last, “YHWH is not altogether YHWH, and his regal power is not yet fully actualized. Rather he is the omnipotent cosmocrater only in potential” (38).After briefly summarizing the previous chapters, he explores the later development of Israelite thought in regard to evil, which, based on Psalm 104, seems to be the development of God’s absolute power. However, in the midst of that absolute mastery over creation, evil is still persistent. Tracing strands important to his tradition, Levenson spends the next three chapters exploring the interrelations between seven days of creation, the temple as a microcosm of creation, and the driving purpose behind Sabbath. In synthesizing these observations, it’s observed that the cultic life of Israel was structured in such a way as to be Order within a world of Chaos. “It is through obedience to the directives of the divine master that his good world comes into existence” (127).Transitioning into more practical issues of this exploration of the persistence of evil and God’s mastery over the universe, Levenson briefly explores the dynamics of lordship and submission in regard to how God is omnipotent. Levenson suggests, based on his developed argument, that mankind is both autonomous and heteronomous to God. Importantly, he notes that there should be no distinction between the two as it was in the ancient world, no dichotomy. With that strand, he proceeds to explore and explain these two aspects of covenant, provided by God, in terms of obedience and argument. As he puts it, “an innocent sufferer makes just claims against God and, upon submitting and recanting, comes to know anew the justice and generosity of his lord” (155). Levenson concludes that too often people attempt to make life, creation itself, a anthropocentric issue; rather, it is a theocentric issue in which evil persists, but God maintains the Order.Levenson’s unique approach to understanding creation and the persistence of evil in biblical thought is unique because it expands beyond the realm of theological traditions. It approaches Genesis on its own terms and follows the close ties between various aspects of biblical thought. Most importantly, though, he is clear about explaining why it matters for the average Joe. His study is not an ethereal work of scholarship that goes over the head of the reader. Rather, it is a down to earth and easy to grasp study of why Genesis matters and how any person should read it. For Jews and Christians, it explores the idea of how God is master, how God is omnipotent. For me, his study and conclusion were satisfactory because it answered questions that have rolled around in my mind for years, questions no person has fully answered.In conclusion, Levenson’s exploration of the persistence of evil is an excellent read for any serious student of biblical studies, whether scholar, student, or lay person. Although it may be a challenge for the lay person, it is definitely worth the read, as it will further a solid understanding of Scripture and also provide spiritual nourishment for relating to God’s mastery over the universe. Of the plethora of biblical literature I’ve read, Levenson’s “Creation and the Persistence of Evil” by far stands as the number one book to this day. It’ll be hard to find a book that has had such an impact on my very being.Originally posted: https://thebiblicalreview.wordpress.com/2014/10/27/creation-and-the-persistence-of-evil-by-jon-levenson/

The product and delivery as described.