The problem comes in interpreting the scriptures. As you know, you then need to use reasoning - regardless of what theological framework you take (i.e. Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, various Protestant denominations, whatever biblical exegesis (see What is good biblical exegesis?) folks use here, etc.)
Besides, the scriptures you have referred to have been addressed, in previous links I’ve shared:
Christian Courier
CARM
God and Science
Got Questions
The Problem of Evil
Why does one need to interpret a direct statement?
I find it amusing that people will believe man made theology ie “the trinity” and disregard direct statements revealed in the scriptures that need no further explanation or interpretation. You either believe what is written or you don’t.
AV Jn 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Just because someone doesn’t agree with a revealed truth, doesn’t mean it needs to be interpreted to make it fit with what they believe.
Let’s take a simple example regarding lumps of sugar in tea. Did the lion get his lumps of sugar?
Does Laurel know what the caller intended?
Does Costello correctly understand what’s happening on the baseball field?
Anyway, the previous post links were all Protestant. I’ll share here a couple Eastern Orthodox ones for everyone.
Suffering and the Problem of Evil
Why does evil exist?
The first link contains this quote:
And do you know Greek and Hebrew? Perhaps you might find this interesting? (just remember this - we are reading English translations of Greek and Hebrew texts)
Does Isaiah 45:7 teach that God created Evil?
Doesn’t Isaiah say God made Evil?
Does Isaiah 45:7 teach that God creates evil?
False dichotomy first of all. We can only use human reasoning to understand scripture and to interpret it in the first place. Using reasoning is perfectly legitimate - we just need to make sure it’s underpinned with a reverence for the authority of scripture, or more precisely the authority of God exercised in part, through scripture.
Isaiah 45:7 doesn’t tend to get translated as ‘evil’ nowadays and there are good reasons for that. In no small part, that’s due to the fact that the word that you’ve copied out from the CLV translated as ‘good’ is ‘shalom’ - which means welfare/completeness/peace. It doesn’t really mean ‘good’. Because there are obvious parallels being used here (“light and darkness”), it’s clear that the two words here have to be two ‘opposite’ words. Yet the opposite of peace/well-being (‘shalom’) is not technically evil - it would be something like ‘calamity’ or ‘disaster’ or ‘distress’, which is how this verse tends to get translated.
On top of that, the Hebrew word here translated as ‘evil’ is ‘rah’, which can and does mean ‘evil’ many times in the Old Testament but certainly does not exclusively mean this.
For example, in Deuteronomy 28:35 it says,
The word translated that gets translated here as ‘grievous’ is this same word ‘rah’. Clearly the word does not mean ‘evil’ - boils themselves cannot be morally evil 
- but of a particular physical punishment, which is along the sort of lines of how I believe it is meant in Isaiah 45:7.
Actually, human reasoning is the only kind we possess, and if we don’t use it at all, then we don’t have even the ability to believe anything. But let’s suppose we take the scriptures at face value. Suppose we want to find out who incited David to number Israel. We find an answer to our question:
Again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go, number Israel and Judah.” (2 Samuel 24:1 ESV)
Okay. The verse from 2 Samuel is straightforward, isn’t it? Nothing to interpret here. The LORD (Yahweh) incited David to number Israel. Then we run across another verse which also answers our question:
Then Satan stood against Israel and incited David to number Israel.)1 Chronicles 21:1 ESV)
I am puzzled as to how we can believe both statements! If we use no human reasoning at all, we would not even check the rest of the story to see whether both statements are giving an account of the same event. Can you allow us just a bit of human reasoning to examine the passages in order to check that out?
Okay, if you can permit that, I have checked it out, and they seem to be relating the same event. But that fact makes it even more difficult to believe both statements.
How are you going to answer someone who asks you who incited David to number Israel—just by the scripture alone with no human reasoning? Will you, today, answer “the LORD” perhaps? And maybe, “Satan” tomorrow?
I am intensely interested in your answer. Then, if you’re curious, I can tell you how I answer it, employing human reasoning.
2 Corinthians 3:14-16 But their minds were hardened. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
2 Corinthians 4:6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
To me, these verses mean that we are to read the Old testament in the light of what we know about God through Christ. Otherwise we could end up believing something that has been misinterpreted, translated incorrectly, or misunderstood.
Human reasoning.
Be renewed in the spirit of your mind.
To be carnally minded is death, to be spiritually minded is life and peace
6 Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; 7 but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery …
“Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard,
And which have not entered the heart of man,
All that God has prepared for those who love Him.”
For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.
Human reasoning is not enough, on its own, but anyway, it is what the spirit illuminates, or not lol 
…
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them. 7 The Lord said to Satan, “From where do you come?” Then Satan answered the Lord and said, “From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it.” 8 The Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered My servant Job? For there is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, fearing God and turning away from evil.” 9 Then Satan answered the Lord, “Does Job fear God for nothing? 10 Have You not made a hedge about him and his house and all that he has, on every side? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions have increased in the land. 11 But put forth Your hand now and touch all that he has; he will surely curse You to Your face.” 12 Then the Lord said to Satan, “Behold, all that he has is in your power, only do not put forth your hand on him.” So Satan departed from the presence of the Lord.
Did Satan afflict Job? or did God afflict Job? Did God interact with the adversary in similar manner when David numbered Israel? Not unreasonable to think so, even just by human understanding.
This is quite ambiguous… “human reasoning is not enough” only when combined with “the spirit” which cannot be observed by a third party. Don’t you think some of you have accepted an hypothesis when you should really only reject it or leave it as is? Think of what many have done. By accepting the hypothesis that the Bible is the perfect word of God with no errors, you have essentially locked a puzzle piece in which may not fit correctly… But because you think it does, you must try and make the rest of the puzzle pieces fit by forcing some pieces in where they don’t belong (for example, some of the ridiculous far fetched explanations that people make when they don’t want to admit a possible contradiction, or a different view of doctrine, etc…). Rather, shouldn’t we leave it open as a possibility that there could be a contradiction or a different explanation? It seems to me if something doesn’t quite fit, we hold off until we can make it fit naturally or find that maybe it fits somewhere else in the great puzzle. Paidon’s posts is a good one and the most reasonable explanation to me is progressive revelation or the possibility that there is an error in the scriptures. The idea that God can be said to be the same as Satan because God controls or allows Satan is really, really, far fetched. It is the least likely answer and is only required because one hypothesis was rejected and one was accepted, resulting in forcing this piece which probably doesn’t fit. Maybe I am so open minded that my brain leaked out. Taken from a Steve Taylor song, where from his Christian standpoint, having an open mind is a bad thing.
Actually, there are many theories and approaches to explain inconsistencies in scripture. One need only peruse through the Wiki article Internal consistency of the Bible, for various approaches to this topic. We should also remember that for the Old Testament, we should not only look to insights of Christian scholars and theologians - but also Jewish scholars and theologians for input (with perhaps an occasional injection from Western academic scholars).
It’s interesting to look at the topic heading modern:
For my rendering, as an Anglo-Catholic with a love for elements of Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic theology (although grounded in a conservative Anglican framework), I’ll run with the infallibility approach.
Thank you, Gabe. The thoughts you have expressed help us all to face reality to a greater extent.
**No **
“Come let us reason together says the Lord” Isaiah 1.18
I just finished my review of Stephen Campana’s book, The Calvinist Universalist, here at dgjc.org/optimism/book-reviews.
Campana makes the strong argument that to claim that perfect Adam fell into sin because of his free will is pure silliness. No doubt everyone is familiar with the arguments, but if Adam was perfect, he would not have chosen to sin in the first place.
Campana then proposes that Adam (and Eve) were created, not perfect, but with a sinful nature, or at least a weakness that allowed for disobedience to enter the world. So I share Campana’s understanding that Adam’s nature was already less than perfect the moments before he actually disobeyed. However, I have concluded that God created the world perfect and called it very good. However some time after the ‘very good’ and before the fall, God ordained the brokenness of our sinful natures in Satan and then Adam. This is what is meant be the words ‘God subjected’ and ‘God bound’ in the book of Romans.
So we may be a small difference in the timing of the subjection of creation to vanity, but my greater agreement with Campana is that God himself is the reason that brokenness is in the world. God ordained the existence of sin. Campana finds this to be the clear teaching of Romans 8 and Romans 11:32, as do I. Furthermore the reason that God did this almost terrible thing is so that he could demonstrate an even more glorious thing, his grace.
Well I think all of this has been said, but I just wanted to invite people to check out Campana’s book.
So we may be a small difference in the timing of the subjection of creation to vanity, but my greater agreement with Campana is that God himself is the reason that brokenness is in the world. God ordained the existence of sin. Campana finds this to be the clear teaching of Romans 8 and Romans 11:32, as do I. Furthermore the reason that God did this almost terrible thing is so that he could demonstrate an even more glorious thing, his grace.
Yes I think to blame Adam and Eve is an attempt to believe the concept that God has nothing to do with evil in the world and that it’s all related to mans sins. The phrase “very good” could simply mean everything was very good for the purpose it was created for. “Very good” does not mean perfect.
Lastly this verse “the man knowing good and evil has become like us” simply tells us it is a necessary thing for mankind to know or experience good and evil to mature into children of God. Paul said God speaks about things that are not yet as though they are and I think this applies to this previous verse in that it is prophetic.
Good point. That is also a reasonable explanation.
If I get time I wanted to look at Romans 8:20 and Romans 11:32 to see if the Greek verb tenses add information to the question. That is when God ‘subjected’ creation to vanity, does the underlying Greek help us to know whether this subjection was part of the act of creating or an act of God upon creation after it was already created, thus after the ‘very good’ but before Satan and mankind’s rebellion.
Also the idea that ‘death entered the world’ adds data to the discussion.
As an aside some people interpret Romans 8:20 to mean that the ‘subjection’ was the curse AFTER Adam sinned. However, to me it seems clear that Paul is speaking to the more primary question, that is how did sin enter the world in the first place? The answer… God ordained it to be.
That, to me, is the worst thought in the world. It is wrong, and impugns the character of our Father. Maybe a caricature of ‘sovereignty’ might not be shocked at the suggestion, but any simple heartfelt love would.
God the Father, (and his human and exalted Son) - hate sin, hate evil and do NOT need evil to show their Glory. God the Father was glorious before He created this world - this solar system - this galaxy - this supercluster of galaxies - this universe - or any other universes. To suggest that He would ordain His children to be killed, raped, starved, enslaved, tortured, - to show His glory?
I’m sorry to be so blunt.
Time to re-read this:
wizdum.net/book/moral-argument-against-calvinism-1809
Actually, it makes perfect sense to me. 
Jeff’s logic is every bit as solid and sound as the guy’s wife in this video. And I don’t even need to look up professional theologians commentaries on Romans 8:20, to see if they agree - since I buy both Jeff 's and the video wife’s logic It’s equal to the devil causing this: 
It’s true - I need to lighten up a bit; I came off as personally attacking Jeff when I was only reacting to that one statement. I stand by what I said, but Jeff please don’t take it as an assault on you or your judgment on the matter, which is totally up to you to choose.
Randy - do you in fact have a video for every circumstance?
Your thinking is totally sound, Dave! Thanks for expressing your thoughts and feelings about this matter. That which you said, needed to be said. Now I don’t have to say it.
Please don’t be sorry. Rejoice that you were able to uphold the glorious character of our God who is pure LOVE.
Hi Dave B, you wrote:That, to me, is the worst thought in the world. It is wrong, and impugns the character of our Father. Maybe a caricature of ‘sovereignty’ might not be shocked at the suggestion, but any simple heartfelt love would.
God the Father, (and his human and exalted Son) - hate sin, hate evil and do NOT need evil to show their Glory. God the Father was glorious before He created this world - this solar system - this galaxy - this supercluster of galaxies - this universe - or any other universes. To suggest that He would ordain His children to be killed, raped, starved, enslaved, tortured, - to show His glory?
Your thinking is totally sound, Dave! Thanks for expressing your thoughts and feelings about this matter. That which you said, needed to be said. Now I don’t have to say it.
I respectfully disagree as this thinking doesn’t match up with reality. The reason we disagree about why evil exists is because we are never precisely told so we form opinions. If God hates evil then I know of no reason he wouldn’t stop it. Supposedly allowing free will is the common answer but man’s free will is violated every day. Allowing one man to commit an evil in the name of free will is violating the victim’s free will who would freely choose not to be a victim.
Additionally there are evils caused by natural events every day like floods, fires , hurricanes etc. People starve to death every day against their free will.
If God hates evil and if evil served no purpose God would stop it or greatly reduce it, it is not a free will issue. The only explanation that makes sense IMHO is that evil does serve a greater purpose beyond our suffering which is that we must experience it as a race. The race of mankind must experience it to be sons of God.
So in summary, God does hate evil, Go is love yet God knows from an eternal perspective what is needful for us as a race.