hi mm, im really confused as to how you could draw your question from the point tom was making.

I don't understand your question, or, rather, why you are asking this question. What I wrote was the things I mentioned are examples of things which God permitted which are not His ideal will.

Regarding your first two questions, of 107432, they don't make any sense to me.



It's an example of God's wrath.



Regarding the dung, I guess you're making a joke. Regarding Jerusalem, Jesus said He longed to gather them as a hen protects its chicks. That was present tense. Christ would have protected them, had they been willing. He longed for that. They refused.

Regarding Christ's revealing God's character, John writes:



According to Ellen White, this was the whole purpose of Christ's mission on earth.



Her motivation for writing this was John 17, which is evident by reading the context of what I quoted from here.

And, of course, there's the statement that all that man can know of God was revealed by Christ.

There are other texts too, such as Heb. 1:1-3, which tell us that Christ was the exact image of the Father.

Jesus said, "When you've seen Me, you've seen the Father."

What all the above tells us is that God is like Jesus Christ. So to understand the OT correctly, we need an interpretation which agrees with what we see that Jesus Christ revealed.

We've discussed this elsewhere and you argued Ellen said polygamy is a sin. You quoted the following passage to prove your point: "Polygamy . . . was no less a violation of the law of God . . ." {PP 145.1} Do you agree polygamy is a sin? If so, do you also believe God permitted it in the law of Moses?

I underlined what you wrote above about dung. You gave the answer above in response to my question as to why you think God commanded Moses to kill the Sabbath-breaker and the blasphemer. Burying dung and executing sinners should have been obvious to them. However, Moses and the Jews were so ignorant and sin hardened that, according to you, it forced God to explain things as simple as burying their dung and stoning sinners to death. But in so doing God ran the risk of being misunderstood by the onlooking nations (you cited your humane hunter story as proof). If this isn’t what you meant, then please explain what burying dung has to do with why you think God commanded Moses to kill the sinners. Thank you.


Yes, it is. But that’s not what I’m asking you. My question has nothing to do with examples of God manifesting His wrath. I am specifically looking for examples of Jesus employing the “withdraw and permit” method of causing death and destruction while He was here in the flesh. So far you haven’t posted an example. For awhile you were insisting that Jesus declaring, “Your house is left unto you desolate” is an example of this attribute of God’s character, but declaring such a thing is not the same as thousands of people dying.

Elsewhere on this forum it is being argued that Jesus merely repeated Ezekiel’s prophecy that the temple would be destroyed in 40 years after Jesus' death. As such, the prophecy predated Jesus’ incarnation by 500 years. It would not, therefore, be an example of Jesus demonstrating how God employed the “withdraw and permit” method of causing death and destruction. It would be an example of Jesus simply saying what God has promised to do, but it is not an explanation of why God did such things in the past, nor is it a demonstration of how He did such things.

I don't know what his point is or how it addresses the question. Do you?

Would you mind answering the question anyhow? If you do mind, then please let me know. Thank you.

My question precisely. Here's the answer I submitted above:


What do you think? Have you arrived at a conclusion yet?

from 107308




so you dont see "going against Gods will" or, "rejecting God to reign over them" a sin, is what you are saying?

from 107439












ok.

What?



What?



No, this isn't what I meant. I don't see how you could possibly come up with such an idea. Doesn't what you're suggesting seem rather odd?

My comment about dung was parenthetical, literally. Here's what I said, with the parenthetical portion removed:



Somehow you seem to have fixated on the parenthetical comment, and that impacted your understanding of what I was saying. That certainly wasn't my intent. Anyway, here's the thought again, without the parenthetical comment, which hopefully is clear.



I've posted several examples on different occasions.

MM, if you disagree with what's being said, that fine, you have that right, of course. But to assert that an example is not being given when one has been isn't fair. I not only posted Jerusalem as an example, but I posted other examples as well. You disagree with the underlying principle. How could you possibly agree with the examples of a principle you disagree with?

You've asked me this question several dozen times. I haven't ignored your question, but answered it. You didn't agree with my examples. That's fine. But don't assert I didn't address your question. Also, what's the point in continuing to ask a question that's been answered a couple of dozen times?

You're whole way of putting things is foreign to anything I've been communicating. Like this:



I've never said anything like this. I've said this:



I've simply said that the principles enunciated here apply to other cases besides Jerusalem. I've also said that behind any disaster, or bad thing happening, ascribed to God, the general principles spoken of here apply.