I suggest that whenever the bibleauthor is quoting God, the words should be understood as having the obvious meaning unless interpreted by the same or another bible author.

/Thomas

//I agree with what Rosangela wrote

What do you do in the case that the Spirit of Prophesy gives a different interpretation?

Are you suggesting that Ellen sometimes contradicts the bible?

/Thomas

You wrote:

quote:

---

I suggest that whenever the bibleauthor is quoting God, the words should be understood as having the obvious meaning unless interpreted by the same or another bible author.

---

Your principle here seems to saying that if an incident is credited to God, than you should consider that God did it, unless somewhere else in the Bible it says otherwise. So basically you seem to be agreeing with principle number 2 I suggested:

If inspiration presents God as doing something "bad", then we assume that it is He who is doing the thing, unless some other text in inspiration shows it is not really God, but Satan, in which case we understand that it is really Satan.

However, you stated the principle a little different than I did, because you didn't include the Spirit of Prophesy in here, but just the Bible. So you are suggesting if a Bible author reinterprets an event, then go by the reinterpretation. I'm asking you what you do if the Spirit of Prophesy reiterprets an event.

Old Tom: My question is that there are times in the Bible which state that God did something. How do we know if it is speaking of something He permitted, or did Himself?

RR: Tom,

I think the first thing is to pay attention to what the Bible itself says, for most of the times the Bible itself clears things up.

Tom: This is assuming the conclusion, isn't it? You would only know that most of the time the Bible clears itself up if you assume that the only things to be cleared up are what the Bible or the Spirit of Prophesy clears up. But that's exactly what's under discussion. How do you know if something needs to be cleared up? Are the only possible things that need to be cleared up which the Bible missed things which the Spirit of Prophesy cleared up?

R: About David's numbering of Israel, for instance, 1 Chron. 21:1 explains 2 Sam. 24:1; about the bad things that happened to Job, Job 2:3 is explained by Job 1:12. About the destruction of Jerusalem, it was permitted by God, not caused by God, because pagan kings are controlled by Satan.
The power which caused the destruction of Jerusalem has even received a name: the abomination of desolation (Dan. 9:26,27; Matt. 24:15).

Tom: Your idea about the destruction of Jerusalem is not one I've heard before. It's not the one given by the Spirit of Prophesy. Here's what she wrote:

quote:

---

The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown. Says the prophet: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;" "for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity." Hosea 13:9; 14:1. Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work. By stubborn rejection of divine love and mercy, the Jews had caused the protection of God to be withdrawn from them, and Satan was permitted to rule them according to his will. The horrible cruelties enacted in the destruction of Jerusalem are a demonstration of Satan's vindictive power over those who yield to his control. {GC 35.3}

---

Can you substantiate the points made by the Spirit of Prophesy from the Bible?

R: God's sending a strong delusion to those who have rejected the truth means He permitted, not caused, them to be deluded, since other passages say that God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:4), and that He does not wish “that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9).
As to the seven last plagues, I don’t see Ellen White as saying that they were not sent by God.

Tom: I know you don't believe this, which is why I used the wording the final judgments of God, because that's the language the Spirit of Prophesy used.

R: About the The plagues in Egypt, the flood, Soddom and Gomorrah, the slaying of people by angels, Herod's death, Ananias and Saphira, as you said, they are all ascribed only to God, both in the Bible and in the writings of EGW. So what reason would we have to think that they were not caused by God?

Tom: This is what I'm asking. We have a number of passages, such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the final judgments of God, or however you want to call it, where God is presented in Scripture as actively doing something which the Spirit of Prophesy presents Him as permitting.

quote:

---

When Christ ceases His intercession in the sanctuary, the unmingled wrath threatened against those who worship the beast and his image and receive his mark (Revelation 14:9, 10), will be poured out.

---

quote:

---

When He leaves the sanctuary, darkness covers the inhabitants of the earth. In that fearful time the righteous must live in the sight of a holy God without an intercessor. The restraint which has been upon the wicked is removed, and Satan has entire control of the finally impenitent. God's long-suffering has ended. The world has rejected His mercy, despised His love, and trampled upon His law. The wicked have passed the boundary of their probation; the Spirit of God, persistently resisted, has been at last withdrawn. Unsheltered by divine grace, they have no protection from the wicked one. Satan will then plunge the inhabitants of the earth into one great, final trouble. As the angels of God cease to hold in check the fierce winds of human passion, all the elements of strife will be let loose. The whole world will be involved in ruin more terrible than that which came upon Jerusalem of old.

---

These are both from GC, "The Time of Trouble". This seems to me to be describing the same event. You seem to have a view where God and Satan are working together to do the same thing; both of them inflicting disease, maiming, and destroying the wicked. This doesn't make sense to me. If one passage presents God as doing something active (e.g. pouring out His wrath, visiting judgments upon thme) and another presents God as permitting Satan to have control over them, then it seems to me that we can understand that God's turning them over to Satan's control IS His executing judgment upon them and pouring out His wrath.

For example, from "The Destruction of Jerusalem"

quote:

---

The destruction of Jerusalem is a fearful and solemn warning to all who are trifling with the offers of divine grace and resisting the pleadings of divine mercy. Never was there given a more decisive testimony to God's hatred of sin and to the certain punishment that will fall upon the guilty. {GC 36.1}

---

There can be no more decisive testimony of God's hatred of sin and the certain punishment that will fall upon the guilty than the destruction of Jerusalem. Many times Ellen White compares the destruction of the end of time before Christ comes to the destruction of Jersualem, explaining that God's Spirit, persistently resisted, is finally withdrawn. This is spoken of as God's wrath, His hatred for sin, His judgments, and His punishment of sin. She also says the same thing with regard to the destruction of the wicked:

quote:

---

This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown. God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life. He is "alienated from the life of God." Christ says, "All they that hate Me love death." Eph. 4:18; Prov. 8:36. God gives them existence for a time that they may develop their character and reveal their principles. This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice. By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them. {DA 764.1}

---

Look how similar these are:

1) Destruction of Jerusalem:
"The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown." {GC 35.3}

2) Before Christ's coming:
"Then shall they that obey not the gospel be consumed with the spirit of His mouth and be destroyed with the brightness of His coming. 2 Thessalonians 2:8. Like Israel of old the wicked destroy themselves; they fall by their iniquity. By a life of sin, they have placed themselves so out of harmony with God, their natures have become so debased with evil, that the manifestation of His glory is to them a consuming fire." {GC 37.1}

3) The judgement of the wicked:
"By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them." {DA 764.1}

These three events have much in common. They all describe the principles of God's wrath. God works through His Spirit to woo those who are not right with Him, warning them of the results of choosing their own way. If they persist in their course, God's Spirit is finally withdrawn, and ruin is the inevitable result.

Since this is already long, I'll follow up with another post dealing more directly with an excellent question you asked.

So the question really is whether we have accepted the divine revelation of the character of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Is Christ the meaningful guideline of undertanding truth?

Has our concept of justice been born again in Christ?

Jesus said, "Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise" (John 5:19) Also "I speak that which I have seen with my Father" (John 8:38).

Where did Jesus see what the Father did and hear what He said? From the Scriptures, the Old Testament, the only Bible He had.

What we see in Christ is something beautiful. The beauty we see in Christ, is the beauty He saw in His Father, in the Old Testament.

If we see something different when we look at the God of the Old Testament than we see when we look in Christ, then we are seeing something different than Christ saw. Because what Christ saw is what He was.

Whose vision of God will we believe; His or ours?

Old Tom: Can you substantiate the points made by the Spirit of Prophesy from the Bible?

Rosangela: About the destruction of Jerusalem, I see no discrepancy whatever between what the Bible says and what Ellen White says.

Tom: Just to be clear about my own view, I'm not suggesting there's a descreprancy. I believe the Bible is saying the same thing as the Spirit of Prophesy because I believe God is presented, as a general principle, as doing that which He permits.

Regarding your response, Mark 12 says:

"Therefore what will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the vinedressers, and give the vineyard to others."

and Matthew 26

"But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city."

This language presents God as being active in the destruction of Jerusalem. If you look at other commentaries, I doubt you will find any of them taking the position that Ellen White lines out in the first chapter of The Great Controversy, which is that Satan was responsible for their destruction, passing it off as something God was doing in order to cover his own work. It is this principle I was asking you to substantiate from Scripture.

Rosangela: She says that the destruction of Jerusalem was not caused by a direct decree of God, and this is true, because the abomination of desolation is a power controlled by Satan, which opposes God.

Tom: The Bible says it was by a direct decree of God. "But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city."

Rosangela: She says that the Jews brought destruction upon themselves, quoting the Bible (Hosea 13:9 ;14:1), and this is true, because they rejected God (John 19:15), choosing therefore to yield to the control of Satan. Satan led them to rebel against the romans, who in turn destroyed them.

Tom: It's always true that when God is rejected they yield to the control of Satan, which leads to their ruin. This is a universal principle, not something limited to the Jews.

Old Tom:This seems to me to be describing the same event.

Rosangela: The plagues are described in Rev. 15 as something God sends. The winds are described in Rev. 7 as something God permits. These passages clearly refer to the same period of time. The problem is exactly to determine if they are describing the same event or if they are describing parallel/distinct events. I’m inclined to think that they describe distinct events, but I wouldn’t take a radical position.

Tom: If you take the position that God is on the one hand actively maiming, inflicting disease, etc. on the wicked at the same time Satan is doing the very same things, this appears to me to be problematic.

Rosangela: About Ahab. Of course Micaiah had a vision in the form of a parable. If God wanted Ahab to be deceived He wouldn’t have told him the truth and warned him through Micaiah.

Tom: It is possible that God would want Ahab to be deceived? Would His character allow this? Is the only reason we know the Ahab story is a parable because of Micaiah?

Old Tom:So the short version of the long answer to your question is that God does not do bad things because it is contrary to His character. We have enough evidence regarding His character to know that when He is presented as doing something bad it means He is permitting the bad thing to happen.

Rosangela: Most of the times this is true. But sometimes God has to do something bad to prevent the occurrence of something worse.

Tom: If it's every true that God does bad things to prevent something worse, then Marx was correct: the ends justify the means.

Is this the principle by which God runs His governemnt? The ends justify the means.

This sounds like a good topic.

“Love no less than justice demanded that for this sin judgment should be inflicted. God is the guardian as well as the sovereign of His people. He cuts off those who are determined upon rebellion, that they may not lead others to ruin. In sparing the life of Cain, God had demonstrated to the universe what would be the result of permitting sin to go unpunished. The influence exerted upon his descendants by his life and teaching led to the state of corruption that demanded the destruction of the whole world by a flood. The history of the antediluvians testifies that long life is not a blessing to the sinner; God's great forbearance did not repress their wickedness. The longer men lived, the more corrupt they became. So with the apostasy at Sinai. Unless punishment had been speedily visited upon transgression, the same results would again have been seen. The earth would have become as corrupt as in the days of Noah. Had these transgressors been spared, evils would have followed, greater than resulted from sparing the life of Cain. It was the mercy of God that thousands should suffer, to prevent the necessity of visiting judgments upon millions. In order to save the many, He must punish the few.” {PP 325}