Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,214
Members1,326
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
9 registered members (Daryl, dedication, daylily, TheophilusOne, Karen Y, 4 invisible),
2,516
guests, and 9
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#148772
01/05/13 08:56 PM
01/05/13 08:56 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
The areas of dispute in regard to God’s behavior surface in respect to the commandments “Thou shalt not kill,” “Thou shalt not steal,” and “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” In fact, it makes no sense to try to apply the law to God. It makes no sense to say that God must have no other gods before Him, that He mustn't make any images, that He must obey His parents, that He mustn't commit adultery, that He mustn't lie or covet.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Rosangela]
#148773
01/05/13 08:57 PM
01/05/13 08:57 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
God desires all men to be saved, but there are circumstances in which there is no longer any possibility to save them. However, although they themselves can no longer be saved, they can cause many others to be lost. If by removing the life of incorrigible sinners God can avoid those who can still be saved to be lost, what do you think God should do? Hm - let's see - who was it that caused all the misery and destruction? Satan. By your logic, God should have eliminated him in the beginning.
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#148774
01/05/13 09:00 PM
01/05/13 09:00 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
APL,
Letting Satan live was an evil or not?
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Rosangela]
#148775
01/05/13 09:03 PM
01/05/13 09:03 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
The areas of dispute in regard to God’s behavior surface in respect to the commandments “Thou shalt not kill,” “Thou shalt not steal,” and “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” In fact, it makes no sense to try to apply the law to God. It makes no sense to say that God must have no other gods before Him, that He mustn't make any images, that He must obey His parents, that He mustn't commit adultery, that He mustn't lie or covet. OH!! I see. The Christ could have done all these things and it would have been ok, for He was God! I get it. Sorry - I don't buy it. Do you remember when "the law" was added and why it was added? Christ came to fulfill the law, to keep the law. " All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son. . . . {FLB 17.3}" John 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? he that has seen me has seen the Father; and how say you then, Show us the Father?
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#148776
01/05/13 09:08 PM
01/05/13 09:08 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
“The Lord does not delight in vengeance, though he executes judgment upon the transgressors of his law. He is forced to do this, to preserve the inhabitants of the earth from utter depravity and ruin. In order to save some, he must cut off those who have become hardened in sin. Says the prophet Isaiah: ‘The Lord shall rise up as in mount Perazim, he shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that he may do his work, his strange work, and bring to pass his act, his strange act.’ The work of wrath and destruction is indeed a strange, unwelcome work for Him who is infinite in love. {ST, August 24, 1882} YES! How Does God execute Judgements? I've quoted EGW many times on this.
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Rosangela]
#148777
01/05/13 09:12 PM
01/05/13 09:12 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
APL,
Letting Satan live was an evil or not? By your definition it is evil. EGW: In the day of final judgment, every lost soul will understand the nature of his own rejection of truth. The cross will be presented, and its real bearing will be seen by every mind that has been blinded by transgression. Before the vision of Calvary with its mysterious Victim, sinners will stand condemned. Every lying excuse will be swept away. Human apostasy will appear in its heinous character. Men will see what their choice has been. Every question of truth and error in the long-standing controversy will then have been made plain. In the judgment of the universe, God will stand clear of blame for the existence or continuance of evil. It will be demonstrated that the divine decrees are not accessory to sin. There was no defect in God's government, no cause for disaffection. When the thoughts of all hearts shall be revealed, both the loyal and the rebellious will unite in declaring, "Just and true are Thy ways, Thou King of saints. Who shall not fear Thee, O Lord, and glorify Thy name? . . . for Thy judgments are made manifest." Revelation 15:3, 4. {DA 58.1}
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#148779
01/05/13 09:14 PM
01/05/13 09:14 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
The Son of God came voluntarily to accomplish the work of atonement. There was no obligatory yoke upon Him, for He was independent and above all law. The angels, as God's intelligent messengers, were under the yoke of obligation; no personal sacrifice of theirs could atone for the guilt of fallen man. Christ alone was free from the claims of the law to undertake the redemption of the sinful race. . . . {FLB 199.3}
Fits the genomic view perfectly. God does not have a genetic information system, which is the law on how all living organisms operate. ALL creatures do. Thus, only God, the creator, could solve the problem. When Christ came, He was born of a woman, under law.
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#148780
01/05/13 09:22 PM
01/05/13 09:22 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
OH!! I see. The Christ could have done all these things and it would have been ok, for He was God! I get it. No, because He came to live as a man, and became subject to the law. "He, the Majesty of heaven, the King of glory, laid aside his royalty, his position as Commander in the heavenly courts, came to our world as a man, and became subject to the law. And all this that man might become like his Master, obedient, not to the enemy of God, but obedient to his Father in heaven." {ST, July 22, 1897 par. 4} This doesn't mean that as God He is or must be subject to the law. Do you remember when "the law" was added and why it was added? It was added because of transgressions (in its present form). Man needed a standard to tell him what he should do and what he shouldn't do.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#148781
01/05/13 09:30 PM
01/05/13 09:30 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
R: Letting Satan live was an evil or not? APL: By your definition it is evil. And by your definition? Was it something good? After the entrance of sin, the choice for God has always been between an evil and a lesser evil. Letting Satan live was an evil, but taking his life at that time could cause a greater evil. Therefore, God chose the first option. Now, that the universe is already in possession of all the facts, the options for God are either letting Satan and his followers continue living or putting an end to their lives. Removing life is a strange act for God; it goes against His nature. But it is a lesser evil than letting sinful beings live for ever in misery and suffering.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Rosangela]
#148787
01/05/13 11:40 PM
01/05/13 11:40 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
R: Letting Satan live was an evil or not? APL: By your definition it is evil. And by your definition? Was it something good? After the entrance of sin, the choice for God has always been between an evil and a lesser evil. Letting Satan live was an evil, but taking his life at that time could cause a greater evil. Therefore, God chose the first option. Now, that the universe is already in possession of all the facts, the options for God are either letting Satan and his followers continue living or putting an end to their lives. Removing life is a strange act for God; it goes against His nature. But it is a lesser evil than letting sinful beings live for ever in misery and suffering. Wow. You just called God evil. Every ineteresting. You also are claiming that God does use force, which Ellen White says has no place in His government.
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|