Excellent search engine skills. Might help to understand contextual language, and even the original language, since King James early modern English isn’t actually what was spoken or written, but kudos for being able to type “evil” and “God” into a box and return several results that suited your perception. “Evil” as described by English, particularly in the King James text, doesn’t mean “sinful” or “unjust.” It means horrifying, ghastly, destructive, and contrary to the original perfect intention. The death of a man, for example, is not the desire of a good and honorable judge. Any human death is perceived as an evil by a man who loves justice and his fellow man. The decision to take a life, even in the name of justice, is burdensome and takes a toll on the soul, as it is, at minimum, wasteful, but also carries the burden of its impact on the family, friends and community of the one being lawfully executed. It is, however, necessary at times to carry out a death sentence for a remorseless or egregious killer, regardless of its effect in the short term. It is a “necessary evil” as we have come to describe it. It is still, however, just and righteous to do so. The same is even more true for God and His infinite wisdom. He knows not only the deeds but the minds of those who committed the deeds. His orders, whether to stay or slay, make even the staunchest and most prudent of human judges appear as whimsical or even foolish. He demanded that infants be slaughtered, from limited human perception, a great evil, but also asserts that he knows the entirety of every being from the first stitchings in the womb. Would He not, in that case, know what would occur if those infants were permitted to live? Would He, in infinite divine, rather than finite human wisdom, be able to prevent great injustices and even greater bloodshed by ordering this “evil” be carried out?