Who wrote this?

She says the reason God poured out the plagues was to “compel” Egypt to “acknowledge” His power, authority, and superiority over and above other gods. She also says, “He would now punish them for their idolatry, and for their proud boasting of the mercies bestowed upon them by their senseless gods.” Do you have a problem with believing God employed the plagues, His miraculous works, to "compel" and "punish" Egypt?

In addition to these reasons for afflicting Egypt with plagues, God also did it so that 1) “other nations might hear of his power and tremble at his mighty acts”, and so that 2 ) “his people, by witnessing his miraculous works, should fully turn from their idolatry to render to him pure worship.” You seem to be saying "his miraculous works" are in reality the works of nature or evil angels.


Their cup of woe and wrath was full. The time had come for mercy and justice to swap places. Their hearts were hardened beyond hope. They were beyond saving. “He would now punish them for their idolatry, and for their proud boasting of the mercies bestowed upon them by their senseless gods.”


In what sense do you think God managed the forces of nature in the out pouring of plagues on Egypt?


Are you suggesting that when God withdraws His protection that the laws of nature step up to the plate and manages the forces of nature to cause death and destruction? Also, what do you mean by saying you don’t believe “God places every molecule where He wants it”?


All of the cases above have the same thing in common, namely, holy angels caused death and destruction. Yes, God commands holy angels to cause death and destruction because sinners force it. There is nothing capricious about it. But, what do you mean by “He allows them to receive the results of their choice”? You seem to be saying the angels named above caused death and destruction by allowing nature or evil angels to do it. Am I hearing you correctly? Did their sins cause nature to do what happened? If so, how?

"The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits." In what sense do you think the "destructive power" exercised by both holy and evil angels is the "same"? What similarities do they share?

But your example does not address my question.


Are you suggesting nature is self-acting, that it can act independent of God, that it doesn’t need the management of God to cause death and destruction?


Are you saying “physical laws and forces”, and not God, are managing the forces of nature as nature is causing death and destruction?


You seem to be arguing that nature, and not God, manages itself to cause death and destruction.


Are you saying that if A&E had not sinned that God would not have had to work to prevent the forces of nature from causing death and destruction? If so, what changed? Did eating the forbidden fruit upset the balance in nature? That is, did eating a piece of fruit cause the forces of nature to become violent and dangerous? If so, how?


I addressed this question in my last post to you. Ellen White explains the reasons why God employed the plagues in Egypt. I agree with her.


God employed the plagues in Egypt to 1) “compel” Egypt to acknowledge His power, authority, and superiority over and above other gods, 2) to “punish” Egypt for practicing idolatry and for boasting how their gods provide for all their needs, 3) to cause other nations to tremble at His mighty acts, and 4) to impress the COI to worship Him and no other gods.


Jerusalem was ransacked and many people killed because the Jews defied the Roman army. If the Jews had complied with the terms and condition of peace, the Roman army would have spared the city, the temple, and their lives. The Jews were working under the false assumption that God would fulfill the restoration promises if they rebelled against Rome. In this sense it didn’t have anything to do with rejecting Jesus or the apostles.

But we weren’t talking about the destruction of Jerusalem. Instead, we were talking about the effects of being in the presence of Jesus while He was here in the flesh and when He returns the second and third time. All the quotes I posted described the different effects. Do you agree with my observations?

These insights agree with the SOP.

Is that "yes" or "no"? Is what I wrote above accurate in so far as what you believe? Or do you see some difference between what I wrote here and your understanding of what Ellen White said? If so, what?



You said you believe God accomplished everything He set out to do. That's not true. God's primary purpose was the salvation of the Egyptians.



God was caused to remove His protection. In mercy, God limited the damage to specific areas, the things indicated by the rod.



I've noticed that virtually always when you ask me a question that starts "Are you suggesting" the answer is "No," and invariably it's for the same reason, which is you're asking me if I've said something different than what I've said. I hope there's some more effective way we can communicate. I'm open to suggestions.



No.



I mean that it is not the case that the location of every molecule is determined by God.



IMO, you are misunderstanding what's happening. Satan is the one who causes death and destruction, not God.











This last one is particular interesting.

1.Satan is the destroyer.
2.He is constrained to permit Satan to accomplish his destroying work.
3.We see all sorts of calamities, because the Lord is not exercising His restraining power.
4.The Noachic world is mentioned in this context (of calamities which come about due to the Lord's not exercising His restraining power).



This suggests that God does not smite, by the wording. Justice smites, which God permits, although it grieves Him to do so.



This says that plagues come when God does not prevent them, which implies that God is not causing them, because it doesn't make sense to say that the plagues happen because God does not prevent Himself from causing them.



This is an odd comment. I haven't suggested they were capricious. Why are you making this point?



I mean they have chosen to resist the Spirit of God, and have caused Him to withdraw, as GC 35 says. Having withdrawn, they reap the results of their choice.



I'm not sure what you're asking, as there are different cases involved. I can answer them all in a general way by saying that God protects us in a thousand ways, all of them unseen. When He is caused to remove His protection, bad things can result, whether directly caused by evil angels or not. The cause is God's being caused to withdraw. The result of this choice is the occurrence of one of the thousand unseen things of which God is protecting from.



Let's look at the context.





As quoted above:



Another quote discussing plagues:



So going back to the quote you asked about. We see from the immediate context before that

1.The restraint which has been upon the wicked is removed, and Satan has entire control of the finally impenitent.
2.The wicked have passed the boundary of their probation; the Spirit of God, persistently resisted, has been at last withdrawn.
3.Unsheltered by divine grace, they have no protection from the wicked one.

From the immediate context after:

4.There are forces now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere.

It appears to me that you must think that the forces now ready, only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere are holy angels. But that doesn't agree with the context preceding nor with the other quotes i've presented, which bring out that Satan is the destroyer, the destroying power, not the Lord, and that plagues come about when God ceases to prevent them.

To answer your question, it is evident the power exercised by holy angels is a restraining power.



This is the command God will give to the holy angels.

Yes it did. You asked what forces of nature were involved. I said there were too many to list, and gave an example of one (a force of nature) in answer to your question.



No.



No.



No.



I guess so. That's a bit tricky, with the double negative. Without sin, there would be no destructive forces to prevent, right? Unless you count Satan. God would still have had to work to prevent him from destroying.



Yes. It increased Satan's license to do damage, to name one way.





No you didn't.



But I didn't ask this. What I asked, and am still asking, is why you think the criticism that God used force and violence to get His way is unjust. Is it because the things which happened were not violent? Or is there some other reason?



Once again, this isn't what I was asking you. I was asking you if God used force and violence to achieve His purposes, and if not, why not.



The SOP claims it was a direct result of the cross.



I think the principles in all the events are similar. The effect of rejecting truth is more pronounced the more light there is. The destruction which takes place happens because of the rejection of truth, which is the light that gives life to the righteous.

You wrote, “The way you perceive God as acting is that He escalated the use of His power until Pharaoh gave in.” What did I say above that gives you this impression?


Not according to Ellen White. At this time in history Egypt was beyond hope, beyond saving. God’s primary purpose is articulated in my comments above.


You didn’t answer my question. You seem to implying God stopped managing the forces of nature and permitted someone or something else to do it. Is that what you think?


How about actually answering my questions in a way that leaves no doubt as to what you think or believe? You are usually vague if not unresponsive. After all this time I still have no idea what you think or believe about it. Right now all I know is that you believe when God stops managing the forces of nature bad things happen. You do not believe the laws of nature take over and manage the forces of nature to cause bad things to happen. So, who or what takes over managing the forces of nature when God stops doing it? What causes nature to behave destructively?


Who or what, then, determines where molecules are located and how they will behave when nature is being destructive?


You wrote, “Justice smites”. This is the closest you’ve come to answering my question. Thank you. So, “justice” is the “who or what” that takes over when God stops managing the forces of nature. To be clear, are you saying “justice” manipulates the laws and forces of nature to cause death and destruction when God gives it permission?


Just stating the obvious. Sometimes it is helpful.


To be clear, are you saying reaping the results of their choices means God stops managing the forces of nature and gives “justice” permission to manipulate them to cause death and destruction?


Are you saying, no, the holy angels named above did not personally cause the death and destruction described above? Please take the time to address the five cases and quotes above – 1) Jericho, 2) Assyria, 3) Herod, 4) First-born, and 5) David. If holy angels did not personally cause the death and destruction described above, who or what, then, do you think did, and how did they do it? Please post inspired quotes that clearly articulate your view of each case. Thank you.


Tom, I have always agreed that there are times when God permits evil angels to cause death and destruction. I’m not disputing this point. Please believe me. However, I believe there are also times when God commands holy angels to cause death and destruction. You seem to reject this point.

I asked, “’The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits.’ In what sense do you think the ‘destructive power’ exercised by both holy and evil angels is the ‘same’? What similarities do they share?” And you responded by saying, “To answer your question, it is evident the power exercised by holy angels is a restraining power.”

You seem to be saying, destructive power = restraining power. If so, then you also seem to be implying evil angels will exercise the same restraining power exercised by holy angels. But this doesn’t sound right to me. It is the same thing as saying evil angels will restrain evil angels. If this is indeed the truth, who or what, then, will pour out the seven last plagues? Will “justice” do it? If so, who or what is “justice”?

Also, do you know of any inspired passages that specifically say evil angels will cause the death and destruction described in the seven last plagues? Ellen White wrote the following about it:


Some people attempt to make the following passage apply to the seven last plagues, but is evident from the context that she is not referring to them:

I was shown that the judgments of God would not come directly out from the Lord upon them, but in this way: They place themselves beyond His protection. He warns, corrects, reproves, and points out the only path of safety; then, if those who have been the objects of His special care will follow their own course, independent of the Spirit of God, after repeated warnings, if they choose their own way, then He does not commission His angels to prevent Satan's decided attacks upon them. {LDE 242.1}

The following link contains the context. It is a short letter. God's Protecting Power Removed From Those Who Refuse His Warnings

Mike,

I don't believe it is possible to create a hard link to a specific document in the White Estate's database. This seems to be a function of the particular script they are using to access their database. However, I believe the quote you refer to can be found here:

God's Protective Power Removed From Those Who Refuse His Warnings.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Are you saying dinosaurs were a force of nature God managed to cause death and destruction?


“No” doesn’t explain what you believe. All I know is what you don’t believe about it. Please tell me.


So, are you saying it wasn’t A&E’s sin that upset the balance of nature and caused it to become violent and dangerous? Or, are you implying what changed is Satan’s right to “control the elements” (GC 589) of nature and that he makes them behave destructively? If so, doesn’t this imply God prevents nature from causing death and destruction by restraining Satan from exercising his power over nature?


Here’s what I wrote about it:


Does this answer your question? If not, why not? BTW, you didn’t address the following question and comment (from my comments above):

1. Do you have a problem with believing God employed [or permitted] the plagues, His miraculous works, to "compel" and "punish" Egypt?

2. You seem to be saying "his miraculous works" are in reality the works of nature or evil angels. Are you?


Do you think the explanation Ellen White provided (see my comment above) describes God using force or violence or even permitted force or violence?


I don’t think God used force or violence because I believe what Ellen White said about it, namely, that God punished Egypt. Punishment is not force or violence. It is “infinite justice” or “retributive justice”. Elsewhere she wrote:

God does not work on the plan of man. He can do infinite justice that man has no right to do before his fellow man. Noah would have displeased God to have drowned one of the scoffers and mockers that harassed him, but God drowned the vast world. Lot would have had no right to inflict punishment on his sons-in-law, but God would do it in strict justice. {LDE 241.2}

The power and authority of the divine government will be employed to put down rebellion; yet all the manifestations of retributive justice will be perfectly consistent with the character of God as a merciful, long-suffering, benevolent being. {GC 541.2}


Do you agree with what I wrote above? Also, where did she say what you’re saying?


Do you agree that the light that radiates from God’s presence will cause sinners to suffer pain similar to the light radiating from Moses’ face caused the COI to suffer pain?