GC and Arnold, do you think the following summary of Tom's view is fair and accurate?


PS - I just saw where you, GC, said you agree with my summary. Thank you.

Tom, let's consider the one point of my summary of your view you object to. (Can I assume you agree with the rest of my summary?)


You said, "Bad things may be caused by . . . inanimate forces." Given the rules of the English language, the summary of this one point is accurate. Which is surprising since you so vehemently oppose it.

i find this so confused....so many issues all jumbled together, such as free will, the power of satan...no i take that back, those issues appear to be completely disregarded as if they didnt exist.

how exactly do some of you understand quotes such as these:

The angels' work is to keep back the powers of Satan (MS 17, 1893).

from the impending conflict of the great controversy

but you seem to be saying this is the work of God...


my God is the One in bold green below:
Satan has charged injustice upon God, and at various times has set in motion all his supernatural agencies, in order to cut off from men the knowledge of God, to turn their attention from the temple of God, and to establish his own kingdom in the earth.

At different times he has almost succeeded in spreading idolatry throughout the world. The history of the past shows that he has striven to obtain the mastery upon earth, and that his strife for supremacy has seemed to be almost wholly successful. He has worked in such a manner that the Prince of heaven has seemed to be lost sight of. It has seemed that the confederacy of idolatry has borne supreme sway, and that Satan had indeed become the god of this world. But the only begotten Son of God has looked upon the scene, has beheld human suffering and misery. With pity he has seen how his human agencies have been blinded by the deceptions of the enemy, and have become victims of Satanic cruelty. He has seen how Satan has exalted men simply for the purpose of casting them down, how he has flattered them, in order to draw them into his net and destroy them. He looked upon the schemes by which Satan works to blot from the human soul every trace of likeness to God; how he led them into intemperance so as to destroy the moral powers which God gave to man as a most precious, priceless endowment. He saw how, through indulgence in appetite, brain power was destroyed, and the temple of God was in ruins. He looked with compassion upon men who were becoming corrupted, ruined, murdered, and lost, through choosing a ruler who chained them to his car as captives, and yet these slaves were so bewildered, so beguiled and deceived, that they were actually pleased with their slavery as they moved on in gloomy procession toward eternal ruin,--to death in which is no hope of life, toward night to which comes no morning. He saw human beings possessed by devils, saw Satanic agencies incorporated with men, saw the bodies of men become the habitations for the degrading indwelling of demons. Man, made for the dwelling-place of God, became the habitation of dragons. The senses, the nerves, the passions, the organs of man, were worked by supernatural agencies in the indulgence of the grossest, vilest lust. The very stamp of demons was impressed upon the countenances of men, and human faces reflected the expression of the legions of evil with which they were possessed. Such was the prospect upon which the world's Redeemer looked. What a horrible spectacle for the eyes of infinite purity to behold! Wherein can he behold his image? And yet God, the infinite One, "so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son [for such a world!], that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." {RH, October 22, 1895 par. 5}

to compare that God, our holy, good, awesome God, Who came down and suffered and died for us, Who loves us so much with such a person as this "holds us in His hand like an egg that He can either drop down the side of a building or crush in His hand....

I'd put it this way. God protects us from a thousand dangers, all of them unseen, and when He is caused to remove His protection, the things which He was protecting us from can happen.



This seems rather vague.



This communicates no useful information. Nothing ever happens that God doesn't let happen. God is omnipotent. This should just be skipped.



No, this is wrong. I'm not saying this. I don't see how this makes any sense. If God permits the unseen dangers from which He is protecting us to occur, how can this be seen as arbitrary or unnatural? It seems to me you have this completely backwards. It's certainly not anywhere near being accurate as a representation of what I've been saying.



It doesn't make sense to say that inanimate forces "participate." The word "participate" implies volition, which inanimate forces don't have.



Of course? No, it's not assumed at all. You're communicating the opposite of what I'm saying.



You're making something very simple convoluted and garbled, IMO. Just put it this way. God protects us from a thousand dangers, all of them unseen. When He is caused to remove His protection from us, these unseen dangers may impact us.

That's a simple, short, accurate summary of what I've been saying.

I responded point by point to your summary just before this post.



What's surprising to me is that you make no allowance for things I've already said. *I* explained to you that nature is not self-acting. *I* was the one who brought this up. You know this to be true. So it hardly makes sense for you to attribute to me an idea which is the opposite of what I communicated to you! And to be "surprised" that I oppose it makes as little sense as attributing to me something you know I don't believe.

I don't understand why you're doing this.

Teresa,

The best way I can attempt to explain the "discrepancy" is that there are multiple levels, or layers of concept, involved here.

For example, going back to the Garden of Eden, who cursed the ground which then brought forth thorns and thistles, and would no longer yield fruit in such abundance?

Did Satan do this? If Satan did it, how did he do it? Did God permit Satan to mess with the DNA which God Himself had so freshly created? If God did permit Satan to do this, WHY? Why would a loving God permit such pain? ...and women to have pain in childbirth?

There are, of course, several "layers" upon which we could build an answer here. The topmost layer answers the following question:

1) Did God Himself create the thorns and thistles, or did He permit Satan to do so?

Depending on one's answer to layer one, we get to the next level of question. The next layer, however, double-branches, depending on one's concept of God. If one is questioning God's wisdom, the question will be one of the following:

2a) Was God unloving to create the thorns and thistles?
2b) Was God unloving to permit Satan to create the thorns and thistles?

If one is not questioning God's wisdom, the question will be one of the following:

2c) How do God's thorns and thistles benefit us?
2d) How has God made good come of something Satan created?

A cloud has two sides. God showed Himself to the COI via a cloud which was BOTH shade from the hot sun, and a pillar of fire at night. When we try to limit our view of God to one side only, we only do ourselves a disservice. God cannot be boxed in according to our ability to comprehend. He far exceeds our understanding.

Therefore, I see the same loving God you do. Yet I also see that God's love is not a "permissive parent" type love which never ever punishes the favorite child. God loves us enough to correct us!

For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth. (Proverbs 3:12, KJV)

Does a parent hold and cuddle the child he loves? Certainly. Does the parent also spank the child when he bites the neighbor boy? If the parent does nothing, did the parent really love the child?

Those quotes from Mrs. White show one side of God. She shows the other side in other quotes which you may not wish to see. However, taken together, there can be balance. Mike, Arnold, and me are willing to accept the broader picture of God. Perhaps others who are more tenderhearted are not ready to see anything more than "God loves me." You may not be ready to examine all of God's words, such as those which He spoke concerning Esau.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Christ never planted the seeds of death in the system. Satan planted these seeds when he tempted Adam to eat of the tree of knowledge, which meant disobedience to God. Not one noxious plant was placed in the Lord's great garden, but after Adam and Eve sinned, poisonous herbs sprang up. In the parable of the sower the question was asked the master, "Didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? From whence then hath it tares?" The master answered, "An enemy hath done this." [Matthew 13:27, 28.] All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with tares.{16MR 247.2}

But while it is true that God could thus be discerned in nature, this does not favor the assertion that after the fall a perfect knowledge of God was revealed in the natural world to Adam and his posterity. Nature could convey her lessons to man in his innocence; but transgression brought a blight upon nature, and intervened between nature and nature's God. Had Adam and Eve never disobeyed their Creator, had they remained in the path of perfect rectitude, they could have known and understood God. But when they listened to the voice of the tempter, and sinned against God, the light of the garments of heavenly innocence departed from them; and in parting with the garments of innocence, they drew about them the dark robes of ignorance of God. The clear and perfect light that had hitherto surrounded them had lightened everything they approached; but deprived of that heavenly light, the posterity of Adam could no longer trace the character of God in his created works. {RH, March 17, 1904 par. 3}

The things of nature upon which we look today give us but a faint conception of Eden's beauty and glory; yet the natural world, with unmistakable voice, proclaims the glory of God. In the things of nature, marred as they are by the blight of sin, much that is beautiful remains. One omnipotent in power, great in goodness, in mercy, and love, has created the earth, and even in its blighted state it inculcates truths in regard to the skilful Master Artist. In this book of nature opened to us,--in the beautiful, scented flowers, with their varied and delicate coloring,--God gives to us an unmistakable expression of his love.... {RH, March 17, 1904 par. 4}

Teresa,

Context is important. I know you think this is "man's opinion," at least you rebuked me last time for emphasizing context, but I am unruffled in this. Context is important.

The first quote there....what is its context? What "death" is Mrs. White speaking of? What were the "tares" that Jesus spoke of? Yes...it was a parable. What did it mean? Was Jesus speaking of literal weeds? Nay. He was speaking of people.

Here's the context:



So, the first quote is not directly related to our current discussion. It is speaking of "drugs" as "seeds of death," and referring to the death of people. Nor are the words "thorns" or "thistles" ever mentioned at all. The word "noxious" refers to the poisonous plants. God, when He cursed the ground, did not mention poisonous plants. Only plants with thorns and thistles.

The second and third quotes both state facts related to the transgression, but have no specifics as to how these things came about. They are relevant to our discussion, but not very enlightening. Basically they say that we see nature marred as a result of sin. This is true. God cursed the ground as a result of sin. Satan was given more freedom to roam the earth as a result of sin. But how exactly came the thorns and thistles? Neither of these statements indicates an answer.

Can you find something that speaks more clearly to the source of the thorns? To say that because Adam sinned, thorns just happened all by themselves because God withdrew His protection from the forces of nature just doesn't satisfy me. I know it cannot be any more true than that life spontaneously generated from primordial soup. Somebody designed and/or created those thorns.

I believe the same is true of the plagues. They were orchestrated by a supernatural power. The Bible says that power was God.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I think what can be explained is that MM is suddenly caught up on "caused". For example, the depression in the ground is caused by the large rock. Therefore, the rock is self-acting?

I and others have struggled with this idea. If God didn't create thorns, then did Satan or evolution? Thorns do seem like created new information from the evolutionary perspective. And by thorns, I don't mean modified stems as they are easy to accept. But I mean thorns like on a honey locust tree. I may be wrong, but they seem designed for a specific purpose and no concept of stem about them. Once, I heard someone say something about them being like a growth caused by a bacteria or something, but have never found anything of the sort after the internet came into being.

Once, someone brought up an idea and, which to me, I think answering the following question can help with answering the thorn one:

Did God create platelets?