The whole question is what the fire from heaven is. If you simply quote something that says the "fire from heaven" is "fire from heaven," that's not helping. If, on the other hand, we say something like



that does help. This is dealing with what a Biblical phrase meant.



The point I was making is that it's not surprising that the same spot would be struck twice. You said it's pretty amazing that lighting would strike twice in the same area, so I was explaining why it's not.

Regarding Elijah's being on a hill, that's just one factor. There are other factors. I mentioned one; Elijah could have been near a tree or trees while the others weren't. Another factor is Elijah wasn't wearing metal, while the soldiers were likely wearing armor, probably bronze with copper, which would conduct electricity well. I understand that, in particular, the Syrians' armor had a lot of copper in it, and they adorned themselves with armor from head to toe.



I hadn't considered the armor angle before. Bringing that into account, it's not so extraordinary. If you took a bunch of soldiers arrayed in armor standing close to one another, it doesn't seem so surprising they could all get zapped.



So the question, "Hmm....and while we're at it, why would God ask people to do His "dirty work?" doesn't seem to you to be putting God in a bad light? You have no qualms about speaking of God's doing "dirty work"?



To me it's astounding, and rather scary, to see one write something like this. It's astounding because the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill" should make it clear that God is against killing. In addition, the life and teachings of Christ should have made that clear, even if we didn't have the commandment. It's scary because if you don't think God is against killing, you might be inclined to kill yourself.

The question if God asks others to kill is one that has considered at length in another thread. In particular, I've had this discussion with MM. There's a story about a father who's son is a hunter that brings out the point well, I think.



I don't think this is stating things accurately. I tend a lot more to respond to the points and questions others make than to bring up these things myself. If you look through the thread, I think you'll find this is the case here as well.



I, of course, believe that God acts in justice. I don't think He acts in violence. It seems from your statement that you don't think it's possible to have justice without violence. This is what you think? If not, I don't know how to make sense of your assertion here.



I think it's a pity that you think God can only take vengeance by acting violently. At least, this appears to be what you think. I disagree with this idea.



I can't follow your train of thought at all here, GC. What I've been saying is that I believe that force and violence are not principles by which God governs. I think the following makes this clear:



There are many such statements in the SOP. I think we need to bear in mind these, and similar principles, when we seek to interpret Scripture.

Secondly, I don't believe we can properly understand God's character without taking into account Christ's life and teachings. The whole purpose of Christ's mission on earth was the revelation of God. Given this is the case, shouldn't we consider it?

I find it incredible that in post after post on this subject, Jesus Christ isn't even mentioned.

This last sentence of yours may explain where you have not understood my post. Perhaps you should read it.

I just counted the references to God in it, excluding quotes from your post, i.e. my own material. I counted 31, including God, Lord, Savior, Lamb, Jesus, Christ, etc. This only includes my most recent post, as the post before that also mentioned God. Yes, this tally includes, in part, the statements from Mrs. White which I quoted. However, those statements say what I believe on the subject, and as such, represent my thoughts here. Nor have I seen you answer regarding them. Does not Mrs. White say explicitly that God commanded the killing? Do you wish to reject Mrs. White, Tom?

Of course, if God and Jesus are different in your eyes, maybe we need to start a thread on that too.

Mrs. White and the Bible are inspired by the Holy Spirit, and I feel safer being guided by them than by a mountain of human interpretation or opinion, including my own. All of us wrestle with understanding God and His character. We may never understand fully. God is more than any one word or thought can capture.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Regarding the meaning of "fire of the Lord," saying it is merely "lightning" falls far short of its true meaning.


However, I would not choose to call God "lightning", nor view Him as "Zeus."

Remember the "Pillar of Fire"?

Tongues of fire came down upon the disciples in the upper room at Pentecost. The burning bush story never mentions lightning, nor was the bush burned. In other words, I do not view the "fire of the Lord" as being equivalent to the natural phenomenon we call "lightning." It is different. Just as there was a difference in the temple between "holy fire" and "common fire" or "strange fire," so also is there a difference between ordinary fire and the fire of God.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

This is rather confusing. You start out by saying that to consider that "fire from heaven" is "merely lightening" falls far short of its true meaning, and then quote some verses which seem to have nothing to do with the subject. In the one hand, we have "fire from heaven," which evidently refers to some physical phenomenon, then on the other are a number of verses which refer to God Himself -- not a physical phenomenon. Is it your contention that the "fire from heaven" was God Himself (as opposed to literal fire or literal lightening)?



It seems to me that you actually do view Him rather like Zeus. He sits in heaven destroying His enemies by violent means, just as Zeus would do.



I think what the Bible Encyclopedia said is more plausible. There doesn't seem to be any evidence in Scripture that the "fire from heaven" which destroyed the soldiers was some odd kind of fire. Even less that had anything to do with the tongues of fire that came upon the disciples on Pentecost.

I think it's interesting that you bring up the burning bush in this regard. It seems to me that it's the bush that has the uncommon characteristic (of not being consumed by fire) rather than the fire being unusual.

But this whole line of reasoning seems to be circular. You have a view of God that causes you to view the story in a certain way. There's certainly nothing that precludes the statement of The Bible Encyclopedia from being the case.

This seems to me to be rather sarcastic and hurtful. Do you disagree? (specifically "Perhaps you should read it." Something like "It appears you didn't understand my post" would not have been sarcastic.)



My point was that no attempt has been made to consider Jesus Christ's life and teachings in attempted to understand God's actions. Mrs. White explicitly says that all that we can know of God was revealed in the life and character of His Son (the context being, while here in the flesh). That being the case, doesn't it make sense that we should study His life and character to understand the violent actions we see in Scripture ascribed to God?

Regarding God's commanding, often in inspiration we see God being portrayed as doing that which He permits. For example:



There are many examples of this in inspiration. God killed Saul. God sent fiery serpents upon the Israelites. God sent His armies to destroy Jerusalem. Yet in each of these case, inspiration tells us God Himself did *not* do these things.

So how do we know if, when we read somewhere that God did something, whether or not God actually did it, or if it was something He permitted? I submit we can only correctly determine which is the case by studying the life and character of His Son Jesus Christ.



This has been my whole point, that God is like Jesus Christ. Jesus said, "When you've seen me, you've seen the Father." You are suggesting behavior of God which I don't see in Jesus Christ. Is it possible that God and Jesus are different in your eyes? And perhaps you are unaware that this is the case?

It seems to me that God and Jesus are different in all of our eyes. This is one of the problems we have. John speaks to this here:



Because we *didn't* know what God was like, God became flesh, so that we could see what He is really like. You can see how excited John was about this here:



He brings out how he saw Jesus, heard Him, and touched Him. Here was God made flesh, God in a tangible form, that could be apprehended by humans. Then Jesus tells us that this God, made visible by Himself, is just like He is.

Now your view of God presents Him as violent and vengeful. So, given that Jesus Christ is like God, where in Jesus' life and character do you see Jesus being violent or vengeful?



Given you feel safe being guided by her, let's consider some of her guidance:







He we have wonderful counsel as to how we can understand God's character.

both the bible and sop tend to use God to refer to the Father to differentiate between the members of Deity. as in God was in heaven while Jesus was here on earth. i could use some tactics of others at this point but i wont.

i have never seen any evidence of antitrinitarianism in tom so im not sure what the point is here, unless were starting to deal with the person instead of the issue.

but having read the thread start to finish it is clear, at least as i understood the posts, that tom is saying we should be taking Christs life into consideration of what God would or would not do.

Tom,

No, of course I am not trying to hurt you, nor was I speaking sarcastically. I'm sorry if you understood it that way.

Regardless of the point you were making, to say that Jesus Christ was not mentioned when such was not actually the case is well...I preferred to believe you just hadn't read carefully (which is why I offered you the advice on reading it). Did you really mean to say, after having read it, that my post made no mention of Him?

I'm not understanding something here.

Nevermind all that. What I would like an answer to is whether or not you accept that it was an angel of the Lord that brought death to thousands of the Israelites as David's punishment. Mrs. White and the Bible both say so. Do you accept this?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

this is sounding rather intimidating. i hear, believe as i do or else. here are a couple of items turned up in doing a search on "investigate".

Cannot you question and investigate with one another? Indeed you can. But the great trouble is that self is so large in us all that just as soon as we begin to investigate, we will do it in such an unchristian manner. It has been done here in Battle Creek; it was done in Minneapolis; it has been done in many other places. God is not in any such work as that at all; it is the devil that is in such work as that. We want to come to the Scriptures with humble hearts. If God has a work for us we are ready for it, and we want to know that it is the truth for ourselves, and thus you be driven to your Bibles. You must be driven to them. {1888 565.1}

Those who have entered upon the work of teaching, or who have been called to any position of responsibility, should not be satisfied to take the product of the researches of other minds, but they should investigate truth for themselves. If they do not form the habit of investigating themes of truth for themselves, they will become superficial in their life and acquirements. The opinions of your associates may be of value to you, but you should not rely upon them and have no definite ideas of your own. You should examine the truths you have been led to believe, until you know that they are without a flaw. You lose much when you do not bring every point of faith you hold to the law and to the testimony, for you do not see or appreciate the truth as it is. Oh, that all our youth might appreciate the privilege that God has given! It is His will that you should go to the source of all light, and receive the enlightenment of His Spirit (for this will be given to every humble seeker for truth), and then you will know that the Spirit and the Word agree, and know that you know what is truth. What assurance this knowledge gives! You can then speak with power, proclaiming what you have learned as truth, knowing that you have not followed cunningly devised fables.--TSS 58-61. {CSW 33.1}

In the days of Christ there were many who incurred deep guilt because they denounced His teaching without carefully investigating its claims to their attention. . . . {11MR 292.1}

I am glad that a time has come when something will stir our people to investigate the points of our faith for themselves. . . . My cry has been: Investigate the Scriptures for yourselves, and know for yourselves what saith the Lord. No man is to be authority for us. If he has received his light from the Bible so may we also go to the same source for light and proof to substantiate the doctrines which we believe. The Scriptures teach that we should give a reason of the hope that is within us with meekness and fear.--Letter 7, 1888, pp. 3, 4. (To Brother Healey, December 9, 1888.)

Tom, I am guided by both the Bible and Mrs. White. It is possible that with too narrow a base, I may be misguided. The Bible says the following, which helps me to understand Mrs. White's words.

Together with the verse you quoted about no man having ever seen God at any time, John 1:9 tells me that every time in the Old Testament that we see "God" dealing with the children of Israel, speaking to Abraham face to face, speaking to Moses face to face, etc. it is really speaking of "Jesus." Jesus was not yet begotten in those days. He was not yet named "Jesus" nor "Christ." Yet He led His people, and He was God.

So, when speaking to Old Testament issues, to speak of God is to speak of Jesus. For example "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." We know from other verses in the Bible that it was Jesus who created everything.

Once we have this understanding, it lays the groundwork for the next one which is that Jesus has been revealing His character from the very beginning, and not only during His human life here. All through the "Old Testament" history we see how Jesus has revealed to us His character.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

first the bible:
Eph 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

now the sop.
The Father and the Son engaged in the mighty, wondrous work they had contemplated, of creating the world. The earth came forth from the hand of the Creator exceedingly beautiful.... {1SP 24.1}
After the earth was created, and the beasts upon it, the Father and Son carried out their purpose, which was designed before the fall of Satan, to make man in their own image. They had wrought together in the creation of the earth and every living thing upon it. And now God says to his Son, "Let us make man in our image." ... {1SP 24.2}

yes, this was Jesus. but notice that it doesnt say God, which in the ot would have been elohiym.
Gen 18:1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;

but toms point comes from the direct counsel of ellen white.