What do you think?
Rate this book
Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence
This paperback edition brings to a wide audience one of the most innovative and meaningful models of God for this post-Auschwitz era. In a thought-provoking return to the original Hebrew conception of God, which questions accepted conceptions of divine omnipotence, Jon Levenson defines God's authorship of the world as a consequence of his victory in his struggle with evil. He traces a flexible conception of God to the earliest Hebrew sources, arguing, for example, that Genesis 1 does not describe the banishment of evil but the attempt to contain the menace of evil in the world, a struggle that continues today.
200 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
53 people are currently reading
394 people want to read
About the author
Jon D. Levenson
20 books20 followersJon D. Levenson is the Albert A. List Professor of Jewish Studies at the Harvard Divinity School.
He is a scholar of the Bible and of the rabbinic midrash, with an interest in the philosophical and theological issues involved in biblical studies. He studies the relationship between traditional modes of Biblical interpretation and modern historical criticism. He also studies the relationship between Judaism and Christianity.
Levenson's foci include: Theological traditions in ancient Israel (biblical and rabbinic periods); Literary Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible; Midrash; History of Jewish biblical interpretation; Modern Jewish theology; Jewish-Christian relations.
He is a scholar of the Bible and of the rabbinic midrash, with an interest in the philosophical and theological issues involved in biblical studies. He studies the relationship between traditional modes of Biblical interpretation and modern historical criticism. He also studies the relationship between Judaism and Christianity.
Levenson's foci include: Theological traditions in ancient Israel (biblical and rabbinic periods); Literary Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible; Midrash; History of Jewish biblical interpretation; Modern Jewish theology; Jewish-Christian relations.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
December 27, 2019
Levenson explores an oft-neglected theme of the Hebrew Bible—the cosmogonic combat myth of forces that Yahweh overcame as Creator. Though muted in Genesis 1-2, this theme is loud and clear in both the Psalms and Prophets. He addresses both these texts and related stories from the ANE. I don’t agree with all his conclusions, but I certainly do agree that this part of the creation story—largely unknown in the church—deserves a broader hearing.
January 31, 2010
I'd give it 2/5 ("It was Okay."). But I bump it up a point because it is pretty scholarly and I will concede that much of it I didn't follow because of this. There is a lot of Hebrew and Jewish terms that I had to look up, and much of what went with them I did not know. Also a lot of referencing pagan texts and myths. Which is all fine and good, but contras that with the Preface in which he said his goal was to make the book not scholarly but readable.
So even after admitting that, I feel like the book was lacking unity and continuity. I think that he touched on too many very different things for a book of this sort/size.
He is dancing in the playground of the problem of evil. He touches on it, he jabs it, but it's not his goal. This is rather frustrating. In the introduction he says it is not his task to solve it, or explain it away. So in this book he sets out to describe what he sees as a more accurate theology of Creation. He works against creatio ex nhilo. And constructs a very non-Hellenistic God. And much more--I don't care to give summaries so much :P.
At the very end he brings up Job, and then says,
"Humanity must learn to adjust to a world not designed for their benefit and to cease making claims (even just claims) upon its incomprehensible designer and master" (156).
There's also a theme that God limits his power in order to allow his divine drama (combating evil and chaos) to unfold. And that though Levenson says humans are called to be co-creators with God in creating health and order out of chaos, only God will ultimately set everything right.
(Note: If I didn't mention it up there^, it should be known that this is a Jewish scholar writing for a Jewish perspective.)
So even after admitting that, I feel like the book was lacking unity and continuity. I think that he touched on too many very different things for a book of this sort/size.
He is dancing in the playground of the problem of evil. He touches on it, he jabs it, but it's not his goal. This is rather frustrating. In the introduction he says it is not his task to solve it, or explain it away. So in this book he sets out to describe what he sees as a more accurate theology of Creation. He works against creatio ex nhilo. And constructs a very non-Hellenistic God. And much more--I don't care to give summaries so much :P.
At the very end he brings up Job, and then says,
"Humanity must learn to adjust to a world not designed for their benefit and to cease making claims (even just claims) upon its incomprehensible designer and master" (156).
There's also a theme that God limits his power in order to allow his divine drama (combating evil and chaos) to unfold. And that though Levenson says humans are called to be co-creators with God in creating health and order out of chaos, only God will ultimately set everything right.
(Note: If I didn't mention it up there^, it should be known that this is a Jewish scholar writing for a Jewish perspective.)
July 27, 2017
This is a really profound meditation on God's role in creation and the reality of evil within it, backed up by deep scholarship and reverence. The book itself, however, feels somewhat cluttered and disorganized. Levenson bounces between different thematic ideas from chapter-to-chapter, which makes it a little hard to follow a through-line argument. It's really too bad, because he clearly has the academic chops to deliver a powerful "theodicy" for today, rooted in ancient Jewish theology.
There are strong insights scattered throughout: the role of the 7 days in Genesis 1, some posited ideas about the origin of that number, the role of the law in Israel for mirroring God's creative act, and the ordering of creation as opposed to 'creatio ex nihilo.' But as this list reads like a scattered potpourri, so too does the book.
I'm still thankful I read this - especially for the way in which Levenson utilizes the Psalms heavily (something that Christian theology sorely lacks) in developing his doctrine of creation, as well as the general insight he brings as a Jewish scholar. Especially if you are tired of worn-out Christian (particularly Reformed) theodicies, then this is still recommended.
There are strong insights scattered throughout: the role of the 7 days in Genesis 1, some posited ideas about the origin of that number, the role of the law in Israel for mirroring God's creative act, and the ordering of creation as opposed to 'creatio ex nihilo.' But as this list reads like a scattered potpourri, so too does the book.
I'm still thankful I read this - especially for the way in which Levenson utilizes the Psalms heavily (something that Christian theology sorely lacks) in developing his doctrine of creation, as well as the general insight he brings as a Jewish scholar. Especially if you are tired of worn-out Christian (particularly Reformed) theodicies, then this is still recommended.
March 2, 2015
A brilliant study of the basic question of theodicy--if God's so good, how come so much bad stuff happens? Though Levenson is a lot more eloquent than that. And so insightful, learned and instructive. I studied with him at the Div School at Harvard and he was one of the best teachers I've ever had. I constantly refer people to this book when these questions arise--though I doubt many bother to follow up. But YOU should, because YOU are on Goodreads, which means you are a reader.
January 20, 2015
Very valuable for its presentation of ANE and Egyptian precedents and parallels to the OT's accounts of God's activity in creation. (I have heard that Walton presents some of the same ideas.) Challenging, but not insuperable, for anyone who holds to creation ex nihilo. Unfortunately, Levenson does not do justice to NT instances of the same themes, especially in the Apostle Paul.
March 8, 2025
For a book that is 150 pages, Levenson’s work is dense and rich. If you take the time to read and sit with his insights that challenge with technical terms, provocative statements, and ancient Near Eastern parallels, you will be rewarded. Levenson’s title to the book presents a paradox he wants to communicate to the reader. God is an omnipotent creator who cannot be resisted but he is in conflict with a persistent evil in a great cosmic drama.
Rather than seeing the creation narrative through the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo, he argues that the essence of the Israelite religion is God’s mastery over evil forces. Though, evil’s survival in the present world often challenges YHWH’s rule. In faith, God’s people must confess his primordial kingship in spite of their suffering in the present, and hope for God’s final and complete “blasting away” of evil.
Although, God does not leave his people unable to deal with chaos here and now. Instead, he calls humanity to reenact his creative and redemptive acts by participating in his ordering of the world through temple worship. Levenson argues that the message of Genesis 1:1–2:3 is that “it is through the cult that we are enabled to cope with evil, for it is the cult that builds and maintains order, transforms chaos into creation, and ennobles humanity, and realizes the kingship of God who has ordained the cult and commanded that it be guarded and practiced. It is through obedience to the directives of the divine master that his good world comes into existence” (p. 127).
The faith of Israel is complex and nuanced involving both elements of Creation and Covenant. In the face of persistent evil, Israel must appeal to God’s promises that evil’s survival is temporary and autonomously choose to argue with God to do what is just and obliterate his foes when evil rears its head. However, they must also recognize YHWH is the Lord who proved his rule over creation, who cannot be resisted, and should submit to him without question. Though evil challenges God’s claim to kingship—and Israel’s faith in that reality—it is the unquestionable obedience of God’s people that counteract evil’s persistence. By confessing God’s rule in the past, present, and future, God’s people bring the “new heavens and new earth”, and eternal Sabbath hoped for in the present, until God’s kingship is fully realized in all creation (especially within human hearts) at the end of all things.
I really enjoyed Leveson’s insights. This was a difficult book for me, and I had to pour over it again and again (and have my dictionary open beside me). This is a poor imitation of the contents of this book, but I definitely recommend it. Levenson’s thesis is thoroughly proven with close readings of the HB, connections to the aNE backgrounds, and showing continuity with later Jewish and Christian thought. It is a powerful and compelling read that will challenge you and raise a lot of good questions too.
Rather than seeing the creation narrative through the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo, he argues that the essence of the Israelite religion is God’s mastery over evil forces. Though, evil’s survival in the present world often challenges YHWH’s rule. In faith, God’s people must confess his primordial kingship in spite of their suffering in the present, and hope for God’s final and complete “blasting away” of evil.
Although, God does not leave his people unable to deal with chaos here and now. Instead, he calls humanity to reenact his creative and redemptive acts by participating in his ordering of the world through temple worship. Levenson argues that the message of Genesis 1:1–2:3 is that “it is through the cult that we are enabled to cope with evil, for it is the cult that builds and maintains order, transforms chaos into creation, and ennobles humanity, and realizes the kingship of God who has ordained the cult and commanded that it be guarded and practiced. It is through obedience to the directives of the divine master that his good world comes into existence” (p. 127).
The faith of Israel is complex and nuanced involving both elements of Creation and Covenant. In the face of persistent evil, Israel must appeal to God’s promises that evil’s survival is temporary and autonomously choose to argue with God to do what is just and obliterate his foes when evil rears its head. However, they must also recognize YHWH is the Lord who proved his rule over creation, who cannot be resisted, and should submit to him without question. Though evil challenges God’s claim to kingship—and Israel’s faith in that reality—it is the unquestionable obedience of God’s people that counteract evil’s persistence. By confessing God’s rule in the past, present, and future, God’s people bring the “new heavens and new earth”, and eternal Sabbath hoped for in the present, until God’s kingship is fully realized in all creation (especially within human hearts) at the end of all things.
I really enjoyed Leveson’s insights. This was a difficult book for me, and I had to pour over it again and again (and have my dictionary open beside me). This is a poor imitation of the contents of this book, but I definitely recommend it. Levenson’s thesis is thoroughly proven with close readings of the HB, connections to the aNE backgrounds, and showing continuity with later Jewish and Christian thought. It is a powerful and compelling read that will challenge you and raise a lot of good questions too.
July 28, 2025
This is a really profound look at the theme of creation as a divine battle against chaos, something that is somewhat overlooked in Genesis (depending on how you look at it) but very loud in other parts of the Bible. This is definitely a challenging and scholarly read and compares Hebrew scripture with other ANE myths, which I loved. This work was at its best when it explored these themes in the rest of the Hebrew Bible, not just Genesis, and gave me a lot to chew on. Sometimes it can feel a little all over the place but if you are tired of the usual explanations of “theodicy” and want an interesting perspective on it then read this!
August 3, 2023
Creation and Persistence continues a trend in my reading. I've found the better I understand the Old Testament, the better I understand the New. The better I understand how Israel interpreted their Scriptures, the better I understand how Christians should interpret theirs. To this end, I've been reading the rabbis. I'm frequently fascinated by how these very non-Jesus ideas support a very pro-Jesus conclusion.
Levenson was a bit of a departure. Some good thoughts here (also some weird ones). I finished this book more let down than enlightened.
Levenson was a bit of a departure. Some good thoughts here (also some weird ones). I finished this book more let down than enlightened.
November 24, 2024
If you are interested in religion, philosophy, mythology, or any or all of the above, this is a very interesting read, comparing, as it does, Hebrew scripture with, chiefly, Babylonian mythology. I found it a clear and concise analysis, although I did have to look up a number of terms. Philosophy and theology majors will no doubt not have this problem. I learned something, had my brain cells stimulated, and enjoyed the process. Recommended for those not looking for a romance or a murder mystery. But if you were, you would not have gotten past the title.
December 7, 2017
Extremely helpful in rethinking how classical theology has viewed God as creator of the world, shedding more light on the Genesis story as an Ancient Near Eastern text than as a work of Greek philosophy driven by already preconceived ideas about what God must/must not do. Highly recommended.
July 22, 2021
This book is the best book of this year! I have no words to express how important this book becomes to me and how much this book change and charge my mind about creation, evil, God, humanity, faith, and more. Jon Levenson becomes one of the most important authors of my theological experience.
March 21, 2022
Como todo lo que escribe Levenson, este libro es muy informativo. Tras su lectura, la experiencia del mal se aprecia más como una dialéctica entre autonomía y heteronomia comprension e inefabilidad.
Lo recomiendo
Lo recomiendo
January 17, 2022
Brilliantly written. Discusses critical concepts and their theological implications.
Read
July 22, 2023A valuable read, although its main argument can be obtained fairly easily just from reading the preface
April 27, 2025
Really illuminating book with some takes that I had not heard before or at least not in this detail.
September 17, 2025
This was tough going for me, and I've read two other books by him. He's definitely smart, articulate, and a good writer. The other books were better - that is, smoother and easier to follow. Even so, what he had to say on this topic was new to me, and interesting. The parts of the book that were clear and powerful made up for the slow spots. If you need help following what's happening here ("you know somethings happening, but you dont' know what it is"), I suggest asking ChatBBT for help. That helped me. :-)
Read
April 1, 2025Skimmed, but Levenson's argument against ex nihilo creation, something taken for granted in the Christian and Jewish theology and philosophy of religion I've encountered, is fascinating.
"I have now discussed three related intellectual tendencies that have historically led scholars away from a proper understanding of creation in the Hebrew Bible and related literature: 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 an affirmation of the goodness of whatever is. In my view, the overall effect of these three ways of thinking has been to trivialize creation by denying the creator a worthy opponent. Creation becomes self-referential, a tautology, a truism: no serious alternative can be entertained, since chaos or cosmic evil has been identified with non-being and unreality." (xxv)
"The identification of "nothing" with a void rather than with chaos has certain affinities with the extreme forms of the theology of grace. Both have the indirect effect of denying the moral and interactive character of God's action. When God creates something in a void, his act of creation is no longer a victory for justice and right order, nor can it be continued or reenergized by human action." (xxvii)
"But in the Hebrew Bible, it is possible, as we have seen and shall see again, to fault God himself for the suffering and to dare him to act as the magisterial world-orderer that the old myth celebrates." (49)
"But the priority of "evening" over "day" [in the Genesis creation narrative] reminds us of which is primordial and recalls again that chaos in the form of darkness has not been eliminated, but only confined to its place through alternation with light." (123)
"The obedience YHWH requires of Israel is not the conformity of an automaton with its computer programmed by God, but the obedience of an ancient Near Eastern vassal, that is, a kind loyal to a greater king." (140)
"...there is, nonetheless, an exquisite irony in the received text [of the book of Job]: just as the comforters said, it is when Job submits and recants that his is restored (the epilogue), but he is innocent all the same, just as he said in answer to them [his friends and accusers] (the prologue). In short, an innocent sufferer makes just claims against God and, upon submitting and recanting, comes to know anew the justice and generosity of his lord. (154-155)
"But in the prose epilogue [of Job], with its optimistic account of Job's restoration, we find the covenantal counterpoint to this severely heteronomous and theocentric idea of creation: open and unconditional submission to the God of creation grants humanity a reprieve from the cold inhumanity of the radically theocentric world. The recognition of God's inscrutable yet unimpugnable mastery is always painfully difficult...but it does result in the good life in which God reinstates his justice and renews his generosity." (156)
"Though the persistence of evil seems to undermine the magisterial claims of the creator-God, it is through submission to exactly those claims that the good order that is creation comes into being. Like all other faith, creation-faith carries with it enormous risk. Only as the enormity of the risk is acknowledged can the grandeur of the faith be appreciated." (156)
"I have now discussed three related intellectual tendencies that have historically led scholars away from a proper understanding of creation in the Hebrew Bible and related literature: 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 an affirmation of the goodness of whatever is. In my view, the overall effect of these three ways of thinking has been to trivialize creation by denying the creator a worthy opponent. Creation becomes self-referential, a tautology, a truism: no serious alternative can be entertained, since chaos or cosmic evil has been identified with non-being and unreality." (xxv)
"The identification of "nothing" with a void rather than with chaos has certain affinities with the extreme forms of the theology of grace. Both have the indirect effect of denying the moral and interactive character of God's action. When God creates something in a void, his act of creation is no longer a victory for justice and right order, nor can it be continued or reenergized by human action." (xxvii)
"But in the Hebrew Bible, it is possible, as we have seen and shall see again, to fault God himself for the suffering and to dare him to act as the magisterial world-orderer that the old myth celebrates." (49)
"But the priority of "evening" over "day" [in the Genesis creation narrative] reminds us of which is primordial and recalls again that chaos in the form of darkness has not been eliminated, but only confined to its place through alternation with light." (123)
"The obedience YHWH requires of Israel is not the conformity of an automaton with its computer programmed by God, but the obedience of an ancient Near Eastern vassal, that is, a kind loyal to a greater king." (140)
"...there is, nonetheless, an exquisite irony in the received text [of the book of Job]: just as the comforters said, it is when Job submits and recants that his is restored (the epilogue), but he is innocent all the same, just as he said in answer to them [his friends and accusers] (the prologue). In short, an innocent sufferer makes just claims against God and, upon submitting and recanting, comes to know anew the justice and generosity of his lord. (154-155)
"But in the prose epilogue [of Job], with its optimistic account of Job's restoration, we find the covenantal counterpoint to this severely heteronomous and theocentric idea of creation: open and unconditional submission to the God of creation grants humanity a reprieve from the cold inhumanity of the radically theocentric world. The recognition of God's inscrutable yet unimpugnable mastery is always painfully difficult...but it does result in the good life in which God reinstates his justice and renews his generosity." (156)
"Though the persistence of evil seems to undermine the magisterial claims of the creator-God, it is through submission to exactly those claims that the good order that is creation comes into being. Like all other faith, creation-faith carries with it enormous risk. Only as the enormity of the risk is acknowledged can the grandeur of the faith be appreciated." (156)
September 30, 2013
Levenson does a pretty good job of grappling with the larger creation narrative in scripture and how that relates to theodicy. I of course don't hold the same critical presuppositions that he does, and question his overall thesis that the Genesis creation account denotes God's mastery, rather than creatio ex nihilo, but he did have a lot of good insights that present a refreshing alternative to the "unmoved mover" God of classic theology.
One major complaint from me was section 2 of the book. I had a hard time understanding how it contributed to his overall thesis.
One major complaint from me was section 2 of the book. I had a hard time understanding how it contributed to his overall thesis.
May 20, 2015
5 stars even though I don't ultimately agree with all of Dr. Levenson's theological conclusions about his profound observations. That said, this is how scholarship should be done at the highest level.
August 23, 2007
religion,philosophy,nonfiction
October 26, 2012
Interesting perspective on the creation story and its connection to theology. I may need to incorporate some of this into my classes...
Read
March 21, 2018This 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 Theodicy
Now, 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.
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 Theodicy
Now, 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.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews