What do you think?
Rate this book
The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea
This book examines the origins of the evil creator idea chiefly in light of early Christian biblical interpretations. It is divided into two parts. In Part I, the focus is on the interpretations of Exodus and John. Firstly, ancient Egyptian assimilation of the Jewish god to the evil deity Seth-Typhon is studied to understand its reapplication by Phibionite and Sethian Christians to the Judeo-catholic creator. Secondly, the Christian reception of John 8:44 (understood to refer to the devil's father) is shown to implicate the Judeo-catholic creator in murdering Christ. Part II focuses on Marcionite Christian biblical interpretations. It begins with Marcionite interpretations of the creator's character in the Christian "Old Testament," analyzes 2 Corinthians 4:4 (in which "the god of this world" blinds people from Christ's glory), examines Christ's so-called destruction of the Law (Eph 2:15) and the Lawgiver, and shows how Christ finally succumbs to the "curse of the Law" inflicted
by the creator (Gal 3:13). A concluding chapter shows how still today readers of the Christian Bible have concluded that the creator manifests an evil character.
by the creator (Gal 3:13). A concluding chapter shows how still today readers of the Christian Bible have concluded that the creator manifests an evil character.
224 pages, Hardcover
Published August 27, 2021
25 people are currently reading
536 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
February 15, 2023
Very interesting stuff.
Some fragments:
Seth-Yahweh was a donkey-shaped god of evil established in pre- Christian cultural memory and adapted by alternative Christian groups to express a hostility toward the Judean creator that had been voiced for centuries. This means that so- called Phibionite, Sethian, and Ophite Christians did not have to invent Yahweh as an evil character out of whole cloth. The wicked creator was already available, and his symbolic value was cashed out in new mythmaking practices that could be aimed not (or not only) at Jews but also at other Christian opponents who had adopted the Jewish creator as their chief deity.
[...]
I conclude that it was possible, from the words of Jesus in John 8:44, for early Christians to make five deductions— some direct, some by inference:
1. That the devil has a father (by the relational and/ or possessive reading)
2. This father is also the father of the fictional Jews (8:44a)
3. This father of the fictional Jews is the Jewish deity (based on traditional Jewish theology)
4. That the Jewish deity and the devil are liars and murderers (stated di- rectly given the relational reading)
5. That the Jewish deity had a hand in murdering Jesus (if “the Jews” do the same works as their father, according to John 8:41)
[...]
Chapter 3 studies Marcion(ite) interpretations of Jewish scripture whence derived the evil creator idea. Of chief importance was Isaiah 45:7, where the creator confessed to making “evils.” The creator also admitted to being jealous and enraged (Exod 20:5; Isa 5:25).
Marcion’s special talent was contrasting the divine character deduced from Jewish scripture with the divine character of Christ. For example: (1) the creator’s command to despoil the Egyptians with Christ’s exhortation to voluntary poverty, (2) the creator’s directive to punish “eye for eye” with Christ’s principle of non- retaliation, (3) the creator’s genocidal violence with Christ’s call to be free from anger.
[...]
Marcion(ites) understood “the god of this world” (2 Cor 4:4), to be the cre- ator because (1) this is one of the creator’s known scriptural titles, (2) it accords with his well- known function (ruling creation), and (3) it concurs with his past actions (cognitive incapacitation). According to Marcion, “the god of this world” joined forces with the blind “rulers of this world” who cru- cified Christ (1 Cor 2:8). This wicked alliance encouraged the idea that the creator was evil.
[...]
Patristic authors employed various strategies to confront the creator’s curse against Christ (Gal 3:13). Yet virtually all agreed that this curse must somehow be avoided or denied, despite Paul’s language that Christ “became” a curse. Early catholic writers like Epiphanius, Jerome, and Augustine must have had strong motives for overriding what was for them biblical language. One of these motives, I believe, was to protect the goodness of the creator against Marcionite— and later, Manichean— attacks. Marcionites and their interpretive heirs viewed the creator’s curse against Christ as incriminating the creator’s character.
[...]
To my mind, it is regrettable that these modern critics of the biblical god do not know enough of the history of biblical interpretation to realize the host of interpretive options available to them. They end up endlessly having to reinvent the wheel, even though much of what they have been saying was already said nineteen centuries ago in a more thoroughgoing and nuanced way.
[...]
By their precipitous rejection of the biblical creator, the so- called new atheists reverse the conclusions but maintain the hard- line mentality fea- tured among so- called orthodox Christian writers (past and present). These writers actively endeavored to uproot any interpretation that could be used to support the idea of an evil creator. But they were and continue to be unsuc- cessful. This dangerous and disturbing idea keeps cropping up even without the Marcionite trademark, among people with strikingly different social con- texts, cultures, and interpretive horizons.
Some fragments:
Seth-Yahweh was a donkey-shaped god of evil established in pre- Christian cultural memory and adapted by alternative Christian groups to express a hostility toward the Judean creator that had been voiced for centuries. This means that so- called Phibionite, Sethian, and Ophite Christians did not have to invent Yahweh as an evil character out of whole cloth. The wicked creator was already available, and his symbolic value was cashed out in new mythmaking practices that could be aimed not (or not only) at Jews but also at other Christian opponents who had adopted the Jewish creator as their chief deity.
[...]
I conclude that it was possible, from the words of Jesus in John 8:44, for early Christians to make five deductions— some direct, some by inference:
1. That the devil has a father (by the relational and/ or possessive reading)
2. This father is also the father of the fictional Jews (8:44a)
3. This father of the fictional Jews is the Jewish deity (based on traditional Jewish theology)
4. That the Jewish deity and the devil are liars and murderers (stated di- rectly given the relational reading)
5. That the Jewish deity had a hand in murdering Jesus (if “the Jews” do the same works as their father, according to John 8:41)
[...]
Chapter 3 studies Marcion(ite) interpretations of Jewish scripture whence derived the evil creator idea. Of chief importance was Isaiah 45:7, where the creator confessed to making “evils.” The creator also admitted to being jealous and enraged (Exod 20:5; Isa 5:25).
Marcion’s special talent was contrasting the divine character deduced from Jewish scripture with the divine character of Christ. For example: (1) the creator’s command to despoil the Egyptians with Christ’s exhortation to voluntary poverty, (2) the creator’s directive to punish “eye for eye” with Christ’s principle of non- retaliation, (3) the creator’s genocidal violence with Christ’s call to be free from anger.
[...]
Marcion(ites) understood “the god of this world” (2 Cor 4:4), to be the cre- ator because (1) this is one of the creator’s known scriptural titles, (2) it accords with his well- known function (ruling creation), and (3) it concurs with his past actions (cognitive incapacitation). According to Marcion, “the god of this world” joined forces with the blind “rulers of this world” who cru- cified Christ (1 Cor 2:8). This wicked alliance encouraged the idea that the creator was evil.
[...]
Patristic authors employed various strategies to confront the creator’s curse against Christ (Gal 3:13). Yet virtually all agreed that this curse must somehow be avoided or denied, despite Paul’s language that Christ “became” a curse. Early catholic writers like Epiphanius, Jerome, and Augustine must have had strong motives for overriding what was for them biblical language. One of these motives, I believe, was to protect the goodness of the creator against Marcionite— and later, Manichean— attacks. Marcionites and their interpretive heirs viewed the creator’s curse against Christ as incriminating the creator’s character.
[...]
To my mind, it is regrettable that these modern critics of the biblical god do not know enough of the history of biblical interpretation to realize the host of interpretive options available to them. They end up endlessly having to reinvent the wheel, even though much of what they have been saying was already said nineteen centuries ago in a more thoroughgoing and nuanced way.
[...]
By their precipitous rejection of the biblical creator, the so- called new atheists reverse the conclusions but maintain the hard- line mentality fea- tured among so- called orthodox Christian writers (past and present). These writers actively endeavored to uproot any interpretation that could be used to support the idea of an evil creator. But they were and continue to be unsuc- cessful. This dangerous and disturbing idea keeps cropping up even without the Marcionite trademark, among people with strikingly different social con- texts, cultures, and interpretive horizons.
January 3, 2025
Dawkins said that "the “Old Testament” god is “jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
Hard to argue that Yahweh is not those things. But what's most interesting is that some early Christian groups were thinking along similar lines. Why did some early Christians envision a malevolent creator? There is a lot of history there. For example, Egyptian influences which associated Yahweh with the malevolent Egyptian storm deity Seth, often depicted as a donkey. Ex. In the Birth of Mary, a Christian text, the high priest Zechariah is silenced and murdered after witnessing a donkey-shaped deity in the Jewish temple. The interpretatio Graeca linked Seth with Typhon (Greek adversary of Zeus), and extended this to Yahweh in anti-Jewish narratives.
Then there are Johnannine interpretations, like in John 8:44, where Jesus refers to "the father of the devil." Early Christians like the Peratics and Archontics used this verse to argue that Yahweh was the father of the devil. Yahweh’s jealousy and violence in the Old Testament (e.g., the flood in Genesis 6, his demand for exclusive worship in Exodus 20, and MANY MORE examples) were seen as traits of a malevolent being. That would contradict with Middle Platonist ideas of what a supremely good being would be.
The bulk of this book is focused on Marcion and his followers, who argued that the creator God of the Old Testament was not the same as the benevolent Father of Jesus Christ. Why was the creator of the material world evil?
Passages like Genesis 2 (God prohibiting knowledge of good and evil) and Genesis 3 (jealousy and the expulsion from Eden) demonstrated Yahweh's malicious character. Gnostic texts such as The Apocryphon of John present Yahweh as an arrogant demiurge, responsible for evil and suffering in the world (e.g., wars, natural disasters, conspiring to kill Jesus, plagues). Marcion rejected Old Testament scripture entirely and argued that the creator’s laws were arbitrary and cruel (e.g., the stoning laws in Deuteronomy 22).
The title “god of this world” (2 Corinthians 4:4) applies to the creator. Marcionite theology interprets this verse to imply that the creator was a tyrant over material reality, blinding people to the true God. Example: Yahweh’s hardening Pharoah's heart in Exodus 9, and many other examples.
Marcion’s theology positioned Jesus as a messenger of the true God, sent to rescue humanity from the oppressive control of the creator Yahweh and his laws.
The contrasting Yahweh with Jesus was very validating to read. Ex. poverty in pursuit of Jesus vs Israelites commanded to loot and deceive neighbours in Exodus. Or Jesus saying that children would inherit the kingdom of heaven, meanwhile, Yahweh sends bears to maul CHILDREN for making fun of Elijah's bald head. These contrasts are all over the place. Jesus really did come down and violate Jewish law all over the place, like violating the sabbath and touching lepers. Yahweh curses people on crosses, including Jesus, meanwhile Jesus blesses.
Overall, enjoyable read. These ancient "gnostic" groups shared the sensibilities and reasoning of a lot of atheists today.
Hard to argue that Yahweh is not those things. But what's most interesting is that some early Christian groups were thinking along similar lines. Why did some early Christians envision a malevolent creator? There is a lot of history there. For example, Egyptian influences which associated Yahweh with the malevolent Egyptian storm deity Seth, often depicted as a donkey. Ex. In the Birth of Mary, a Christian text, the high priest Zechariah is silenced and murdered after witnessing a donkey-shaped deity in the Jewish temple. The interpretatio Graeca linked Seth with Typhon (Greek adversary of Zeus), and extended this to Yahweh in anti-Jewish narratives.
Then there are Johnannine interpretations, like in John 8:44, where Jesus refers to "the father of the devil." Early Christians like the Peratics and Archontics used this verse to argue that Yahweh was the father of the devil. Yahweh’s jealousy and violence in the Old Testament (e.g., the flood in Genesis 6, his demand for exclusive worship in Exodus 20, and MANY MORE examples) were seen as traits of a malevolent being. That would contradict with Middle Platonist ideas of what a supremely good being would be.
The bulk of this book is focused on Marcion and his followers, who argued that the creator God of the Old Testament was not the same as the benevolent Father of Jesus Christ. Why was the creator of the material world evil?
Passages like Genesis 2 (God prohibiting knowledge of good and evil) and Genesis 3 (jealousy and the expulsion from Eden) demonstrated Yahweh's malicious character. Gnostic texts such as The Apocryphon of John present Yahweh as an arrogant demiurge, responsible for evil and suffering in the world (e.g., wars, natural disasters, conspiring to kill Jesus, plagues). Marcion rejected Old Testament scripture entirely and argued that the creator’s laws were arbitrary and cruel (e.g., the stoning laws in Deuteronomy 22).
The title “god of this world” (2 Corinthians 4:4) applies to the creator. Marcionite theology interprets this verse to imply that the creator was a tyrant over material reality, blinding people to the true God. Example: Yahweh’s hardening Pharoah's heart in Exodus 9, and many other examples.
Marcion’s theology positioned Jesus as a messenger of the true God, sent to rescue humanity from the oppressive control of the creator Yahweh and his laws.
The contrasting Yahweh with Jesus was very validating to read. Ex. poverty in pursuit of Jesus vs Israelites commanded to loot and deceive neighbours in Exodus. Or Jesus saying that children would inherit the kingdom of heaven, meanwhile, Yahweh sends bears to maul CHILDREN for making fun of Elijah's bald head. These contrasts are all over the place. Jesus really did come down and violate Jewish law all over the place, like violating the sabbath and touching lepers. Yahweh curses people on crosses, including Jesus, meanwhile Jesus blesses.
Overall, enjoyable read. These ancient "gnostic" groups shared the sensibilities and reasoning of a lot of atheists today.
February 7, 2024
Litwa traces what he calls "negative demiurgy" from it's origins in anti-Yahweh (and anti-Jewish) slander by Egyptians who were pretty pissed off about the Exodus story. We get to learn about this view in several alternative Christianities including that of the much maligned Marcionites. He concludes with modern atheism reinventing the concept.
I recommend this for anyone interested in the history of early Christian theologies.
I recommend this for anyone interested in the history of early Christian theologies.
June 11, 2025
After finishing this book, I discovered that there are at least two websites purporting to be an active Marcionite Church (the Marcionite Christian Church & Marcionite Church of Christ). I haven't delved far enough to discover how they are connected, focusing mainly on discovering if they held the same beliefs as discussed in this book (because if they did, I might just have had to join them).
No dice. They don't even believe in an evil creator!!
Here is a letter I submitted in four messages through the Contact page on one of those two websites, the Marcionite Church of Christ, asking for clarification on certain details. The Questions section of the website appears very thorough and I quoted their answers in my messages where I saw flaws and difficulties, specifically those on Yahweh not being the Evil Demiurge and those concerning Moral Evil, Natural Evil, and the nature of Satan, especially as it appears in the answer to the question "Who is the 'God of This World' Then?"
I sent the messages on June 8, 2025, and as of today (6/11/25) have received no response, either through an email (the contact form requires entering an email address) or as a blog update on the website. I became concerned, however, that if a response were publicly made, all of my messages may not be represented in full, likely through a technical error in sending one or more of the messages (which I made sure to address as Questions Concerning Evil, Questions 2, Questions Part 3, and Questions Part Four - Final). I would like to have a full record of my entire message; I can think of nowhere else to do so but here.
Message 1:
Hello,
I had just finished the excellent book "The Evil Creator" by Dr. M. David Litwa & looked up the Marcionite Church & was very surprised to discover multiple websites for what seems to be an active church. If it's alright, I do have some serious questions about the faith that seem to directly contradict the beliefs of the early Marcionites, & that seem to create theological problems for this modern version of it.
First, I was disappointed to see "No" as the answer for "Do you believe Yahweh is a Demiurge?" The Evil Creator was something Marcion believed in & the existence of such a being makes the entire passion narrative make sense. As I am sure you’re aware, people have mocked the theology of mainstream Christianity for years: a god sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself makes no sense whatsoever. If, however, an additional element is added—that of another being involved—it makes a great deal of sense. If an evil being has designed humanity & the world, suffering & evil are then easily explained. If that evil being has designed laws & rules & demands sacrifices, then the sacrifice of Jesus also makes sense: coming into a world designed by an evil entity, Jesus takes on the law & this evil being & through the cross is able to redeem humanity for the true God.
Second, the problem of Satan. The answer to “Who is the ‘God of this World’ then?” on this website says it most plainly: that God is allowing Satan/evil to intentionally blind people to Christ’s light. How is that in keeping with free will? Why would God allow Satan to construct “intellectual & spiritual fortresses that imprison the hearts & minds of humanity”? If Satan can blind “the minds of unbelievers to prevent them from perceiving the glory of Christ”, then there is no free will. Everyone Satan has been allowed to blind has had their free will taken from them, & they cannot be punished for it—that would be injustice in the highest degree.
End of message 1
Message 2:
If God has foreknowledge & the ability to see into the hearts & minds of every individual, then he knows exactly how to reach each soul on Earth in the right way to bring them know God. Simply saying that with his foreknowledge, God can tell who will believe in him & who won’t is not sufficient unless God is deliberately choosing to winnow the souls of earth down to a small number to bring to heaven. God can preserve free will while giving clear proofs that a soul would accept, but it seems the answers on this website declare the opposite: that free will is routinely abrogated & removed with God’s permission, either because God handed the reins to Satan & allowed Satan to deliberately block the light of Christ for certain individuals, or because God does not care to reach every human soul, only a select few.
Third, what is the point of the cross? This website states it is the ransom theory, that Jesus buys us out from under the power of Satan (which should mean all humans are free of Satan’s power, whether or not we personally profess faith in Jesus). But another problem arises: If God has foreknowledge & is all-powerful, why would he create Satan, give Satan all the powers that Satan has, allow Satan to intentionally & deliberately imprison the hearts of humanity so that they cannot come to God of their own free will, knowing that one day, thousands of years down the line, God will have to send himself down to the realm that Satan presides over & buy humanity back? All the more so if it means that salvation is conditional, that humans have to know the story of the cross & profess it themselves—which means God only wins a tiny portion of humanity back. God is alright with losing the vast majority of humans then? That God just accepts that he fashioned a situation where Satan takes most of humanity to the dark side & God will have to annihilate them in the end days? How does that preserve the goodness of the character of God?
End of message 2.
Message 3:
Fourth: People too often overlook the pain & suffering inherent in this world, choosing instead only to focus on moral evils that we may be able to control as humans. This is highlighted in the answer concerning “Natural Evil”—not one part of that response addresses anything other than human suffering & human responses to that suffering. But look at nature, without humans in it: it is a brutal world of pain & suffering. The entire planet revolves around a food chain that requires life eat life to sustain itself. The existence of carnivores, who must by their nature, tear apart living beings in the most horrendous ways possible simply to feed their babies, denies a loving creator. That’s before we even consider the further natural elements of this world—the natural disasters, severe weather, the fact that many species never live more than a single year on this planet either by design (naturally short life spans) or by necessity (drone bees not being allowed to overwinter in the hive so that those who remain will have enough food). But none of those things are addressed. Why do animals suffer? The reason given for human suffering is that we can have a chance to redeem that suffering through our responses to it. What then of the billions & trillions of animals who share this planet & the same suffering with us? What is the purpose of their indiscriminate suffering? If God has no redemption for them, then there is no purpose in their suffering—the God who either designs or permits such & does not address it, does not care about it, or allows it purely so some humans may have good moral responses is a flawed deity.
End of message 3.
Message 4:
Fifth: if it’s okay for Heaven to be a world without sin & sorrow, then why not Earth? Why not just start there, in a world without sin & sorrow? But how can Heaven be without sin & sorrow if there is free will? Do you lack free will in Heaven? Is it possible to be in Heaven without sorrow if people you knew & loved on Earth have been annihilated for being sinners? Does that mean God strips you of your love for them, or your memory of them, or just that he makes it impossible to be sorrowful?
I hope you understand that I am not meaning these to be attacks or polemics, or that I am some unhappy atheist who wants to tear religion down. I have always believed in God, but I have been unable to find a religion that settles these questions for me. When I first heard of the belief in an evil demiurge earlier this year, everything fell into place. While there are further theological questions that arise from such a belief—where did the two opposing deities come from & how do they interact with each other, where do our souls come from, & so on—I believe they at least solve the fundamental issues in mainstream Christianity that I have brought up in this message. It answers the problem of evil, the existence of suffering, allows for the promise of a better second world to come, & so on. I would dearly love a response to my concerns, as I am always interested in good responses & am ever hopeful to find answers in these matters of faith & God.
Thank you for your time!
End of message 4
Notes: I wrote the entire message down separately in a Word document and only discovered the character limit when I attempted to paste the entire thing into the contact box. I then went through to revise down as many characters as I could while retaining my message (hence using '&' instead of 'and'). There were many sections that were cut down quite a lot, unfortunately, but I think I succeeded in getting the main ideas through clear enough.
No dice. They don't even believe in an evil creator!!
Here is a letter I submitted in four messages through the Contact page on one of those two websites, the Marcionite Church of Christ, asking for clarification on certain details. The Questions section of the website appears very thorough and I quoted their answers in my messages where I saw flaws and difficulties, specifically those on Yahweh not being the Evil Demiurge and those concerning Moral Evil, Natural Evil, and the nature of Satan, especially as it appears in the answer to the question "Who is the 'God of This World' Then?"
I sent the messages on June 8, 2025, and as of today (6/11/25) have received no response, either through an email (the contact form requires entering an email address) or as a blog update on the website. I became concerned, however, that if a response were publicly made, all of my messages may not be represented in full, likely through a technical error in sending one or more of the messages (which I made sure to address as Questions Concerning Evil, Questions 2, Questions Part 3, and Questions Part Four - Final). I would like to have a full record of my entire message; I can think of nowhere else to do so but here.
Message 1:
Hello,
I had just finished the excellent book "The Evil Creator" by Dr. M. David Litwa & looked up the Marcionite Church & was very surprised to discover multiple websites for what seems to be an active church. If it's alright, I do have some serious questions about the faith that seem to directly contradict the beliefs of the early Marcionites, & that seem to create theological problems for this modern version of it.
First, I was disappointed to see "No" as the answer for "Do you believe Yahweh is a Demiurge?" The Evil Creator was something Marcion believed in & the existence of such a being makes the entire passion narrative make sense. As I am sure you’re aware, people have mocked the theology of mainstream Christianity for years: a god sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself makes no sense whatsoever. If, however, an additional element is added—that of another being involved—it makes a great deal of sense. If an evil being has designed humanity & the world, suffering & evil are then easily explained. If that evil being has designed laws & rules & demands sacrifices, then the sacrifice of Jesus also makes sense: coming into a world designed by an evil entity, Jesus takes on the law & this evil being & through the cross is able to redeem humanity for the true God.
Second, the problem of Satan. The answer to “Who is the ‘God of this World’ then?” on this website says it most plainly: that God is allowing Satan/evil to intentionally blind people to Christ’s light. How is that in keeping with free will? Why would God allow Satan to construct “intellectual & spiritual fortresses that imprison the hearts & minds of humanity”? If Satan can blind “the minds of unbelievers to prevent them from perceiving the glory of Christ”, then there is no free will. Everyone Satan has been allowed to blind has had their free will taken from them, & they cannot be punished for it—that would be injustice in the highest degree.
End of message 1
Message 2:
If God has foreknowledge & the ability to see into the hearts & minds of every individual, then he knows exactly how to reach each soul on Earth in the right way to bring them know God. Simply saying that with his foreknowledge, God can tell who will believe in him & who won’t is not sufficient unless God is deliberately choosing to winnow the souls of earth down to a small number to bring to heaven. God can preserve free will while giving clear proofs that a soul would accept, but it seems the answers on this website declare the opposite: that free will is routinely abrogated & removed with God’s permission, either because God handed the reins to Satan & allowed Satan to deliberately block the light of Christ for certain individuals, or because God does not care to reach every human soul, only a select few.
Third, what is the point of the cross? This website states it is the ransom theory, that Jesus buys us out from under the power of Satan (which should mean all humans are free of Satan’s power, whether or not we personally profess faith in Jesus). But another problem arises: If God has foreknowledge & is all-powerful, why would he create Satan, give Satan all the powers that Satan has, allow Satan to intentionally & deliberately imprison the hearts of humanity so that they cannot come to God of their own free will, knowing that one day, thousands of years down the line, God will have to send himself down to the realm that Satan presides over & buy humanity back? All the more so if it means that salvation is conditional, that humans have to know the story of the cross & profess it themselves—which means God only wins a tiny portion of humanity back. God is alright with losing the vast majority of humans then? That God just accepts that he fashioned a situation where Satan takes most of humanity to the dark side & God will have to annihilate them in the end days? How does that preserve the goodness of the character of God?
End of message 2.
Message 3:
Fourth: People too often overlook the pain & suffering inherent in this world, choosing instead only to focus on moral evils that we may be able to control as humans. This is highlighted in the answer concerning “Natural Evil”—not one part of that response addresses anything other than human suffering & human responses to that suffering. But look at nature, without humans in it: it is a brutal world of pain & suffering. The entire planet revolves around a food chain that requires life eat life to sustain itself. The existence of carnivores, who must by their nature, tear apart living beings in the most horrendous ways possible simply to feed their babies, denies a loving creator. That’s before we even consider the further natural elements of this world—the natural disasters, severe weather, the fact that many species never live more than a single year on this planet either by design (naturally short life spans) or by necessity (drone bees not being allowed to overwinter in the hive so that those who remain will have enough food). But none of those things are addressed. Why do animals suffer? The reason given for human suffering is that we can have a chance to redeem that suffering through our responses to it. What then of the billions & trillions of animals who share this planet & the same suffering with us? What is the purpose of their indiscriminate suffering? If God has no redemption for them, then there is no purpose in their suffering—the God who either designs or permits such & does not address it, does not care about it, or allows it purely so some humans may have good moral responses is a flawed deity.
End of message 3.
Message 4:
Fifth: if it’s okay for Heaven to be a world without sin & sorrow, then why not Earth? Why not just start there, in a world without sin & sorrow? But how can Heaven be without sin & sorrow if there is free will? Do you lack free will in Heaven? Is it possible to be in Heaven without sorrow if people you knew & loved on Earth have been annihilated for being sinners? Does that mean God strips you of your love for them, or your memory of them, or just that he makes it impossible to be sorrowful?
I hope you understand that I am not meaning these to be attacks or polemics, or that I am some unhappy atheist who wants to tear religion down. I have always believed in God, but I have been unable to find a religion that settles these questions for me. When I first heard of the belief in an evil demiurge earlier this year, everything fell into place. While there are further theological questions that arise from such a belief—where did the two opposing deities come from & how do they interact with each other, where do our souls come from, & so on—I believe they at least solve the fundamental issues in mainstream Christianity that I have brought up in this message. It answers the problem of evil, the existence of suffering, allows for the promise of a better second world to come, & so on. I would dearly love a response to my concerns, as I am always interested in good responses & am ever hopeful to find answers in these matters of faith & God.
Thank you for your time!
End of message 4
Notes: I wrote the entire message down separately in a Word document and only discovered the character limit when I attempted to paste the entire thing into the contact box. I then went through to revise down as many characters as I could while retaining my message (hence using '&' instead of 'and'). There were many sections that were cut down quite a lot, unfortunately, but I think I succeeded in getting the main ideas through clear enough.
September 8, 2025
This was an excellent book on an early Christian Theology. I really appreciate how Dr. Litwa put the idea of an evil demiurge into perspective via the views of ancient peoples, and I especially liked how he went into more detail about Sethian and Marcionite Christians than you usually see in other texts.
February 10, 2026
I found it very informative and easy to read and understand. There were very few instances where I needed to look up any words for clarification, as someone with probably a lower moderate lay understanding of early Christianity. Going into this book, I knew pretty much nothing about the Sethians so most of the information there was new to me.
I had heard quite a bit about Marcion over the years, but I never knew where he fit. A few of my misunderstandings were cleared up. I was already aware that labeling everything as Gnosticism was incorrect, but I had no idea what I was actually supposed to call Marcionites. It was nice to see 'negative demiurgy' as a solution. There were a lot of smaller misconceptions I had about Marcionites too. An example being I was always told Marcion used Luke, but he actually used Evangelion, which is only mostly(?) Luke. So I'm glad that was cleared up.
I highly recommend this for anyone who is like me and wants to know the basics of some of the early Christianities, but often struggles with where to look. I also found it incredibly useful to know that so many groups got their interpretations from scripture. Not all the same scripture, but a lot of the same. I think I had an impression that the canon of the Bible developed as a tool against what the catholics considered heresy, but it seems the other groups shared many of the same books.
Also, the author has a youtube channel. I've seen a few of his videos and they're very informative.
I had heard quite a bit about Marcion over the years, but I never knew where he fit. A few of my misunderstandings were cleared up. I was already aware that labeling everything as Gnosticism was incorrect, but I had no idea what I was actually supposed to call Marcionites. It was nice to see 'negative demiurgy' as a solution. There were a lot of smaller misconceptions I had about Marcionites too. An example being I was always told Marcion used Luke, but he actually used Evangelion, which is only mostly(?) Luke. So I'm glad that was cleared up.
I highly recommend this for anyone who is like me and wants to know the basics of some of the early Christianities, but often struggles with where to look. I also found it incredibly useful to know that so many groups got their interpretations from scripture. Not all the same scripture, but a lot of the same. I think I had an impression that the canon of the Bible developed as a tool against what the catholics considered heresy, but it seems the other groups shared many of the same books.
Also, the author has a youtube channel. I've seen a few of his videos and they're very informative.
January 4, 2023
During the early centuries of Christianity there were several groups that believed the god of the Hebrew Bible was not the true god but rather an evil creator being. You might suspect they were some pagan opponents of the Jews or something but you would be wrong; they were Christians.
These Christians believed the god that Jesus preached was incompatible with the jealous and vengeful Yahweh found in the Hebrew Bible and that Jesus had instead been sent by the Most High God who transcends all the created heavens and earth. They supported their beliefs with surprisingly plausible readings of otherwise orthodox works such as the Gospels and the letters of Paul.
While I knew the basics of their views going in, I learned a lot about the background philosophy and the specific readings they were using that I didn't know. The book is well written and easy to read while at the same being scholarly (plenty of footnotes). I highly recommend it to anyone wanting to learn more about Marcion and these other early Christian groups.
These Christians believed the god that Jesus preached was incompatible with the jealous and vengeful Yahweh found in the Hebrew Bible and that Jesus had instead been sent by the Most High God who transcends all the created heavens and earth. They supported their beliefs with surprisingly plausible readings of otherwise orthodox works such as the Gospels and the letters of Paul.
While I knew the basics of their views going in, I learned a lot about the background philosophy and the specific readings they were using that I didn't know. The book is well written and easy to read while at the same being scholarly (plenty of footnotes). I highly recommend it to anyone wanting to learn more about Marcion and these other early Christian groups.
October 20, 2024
A very readable and persuasive account of “negative demiurgy”. From free thinkers labelled heretics like Marcion, amid the radical diversity in early Christianity, it produced – in me at least – many a response of “Gosh, I thought so, too.”
May 7, 2025
I appreciated how concise Litwa kept his argument. Litwa gives a good perspective of the origin of the concept of a Demiurge. The references to biblical verses were relevant and I appreciated the non-marcionite reponses he included.
May 12, 2025
Takeaway:
The Jewish God is possibly based on Set, the Egyptian God of Chaos, or some other evil deity.
Jesus did not just come to "break the Torahs laws" and replace them with his laws but also to replace the Jewish God with himself.
The Jewish God is possibly based on Set, the Egyptian God of Chaos, or some other evil deity.
Jesus did not just come to "break the Torahs laws" and replace them with his laws but also to replace the Jewish God with himself.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews