|
Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,218
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
|
|
|
8 registered members (Daryl, Karen Y, dedication, daylily, TheophilusOne, 3 invisible),
2,454
guests, and 12
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15407
09/08/05 04:50 PM
09/08/05 04:50 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
R: Tom, While you keep saying that God can’t do this or that because Jesus didn’t do this or that while He was on earth, you fail to offer an explanation for the passages which go against your viewpoint. Tom:I don't know what this is referring to. I've been offering explanations for hundreds of posts. R:Jesus couldn’t possibly do everything while He was on earth. He didn’t establish a tribunal to judge anyone while He was here, He didn’t reign as King, however this doesn’t mean He wouldn’t do so at a later point in History. Tom:Jesus didn't have to do everything while on earth. Just what was necessary to reveal God's character completely, which He did, since all that we can know about God's character was revealed in His life. Old Tom:This text shows that God's angers is manifest in His forsaking the one against whom He is angry. R:And Numbers 25:3,4 shows that God’s anger is also sometimes manifest in inflicting direct punishment on transgressors. Tom:So you see what happened in Numbers 25 to be fundamentally different than Deut. 31? I don't understand the difference. Here's another passage: quote:
"They come to fight with the Chaldeans, but it is to fill them with the dead bodies of men, whom I have slain in mine anger and in my fury, and for all whose wickedness I have hid my face from this city.
." (Jer. 33:5)
I don't see the difference. It speaks here of God slaying in His anger, and explains this is equivalent to His hiding His face.
R:“The Lord is regarded as cruel, by many, in requiring his people to make war with other nations. They say that it is contrary to his benevolent character. But he who made the world, and formed man to dwell upon the earth, has unlimited control over all the works of his hands; and it is his right to do as he pleases, and what he pleases, with the work of his hands. Man has no right to say to his Maker, Why doest thou thus? There is no injustice in his character. He is the ruler of the world, and a large portion of his subjects have rebelled against his authority, and have trampled upon his law. ... God has borne with them until they filled up the measure of their iniquity, and then he has brought upon them swift destruction. He has used his people as instruments of his wrath, to punish wicked nations who have vexed them, and seduced them into idolatry.
“A family picture was presented before me: A part of the children seem anxious to learn and obey the requirements of the father, while the others trample upon his authority, and seem to exult in showing contempt of his family government. They share the benefits of their father's house, and are constantly receiving of his bounty; they are wholly dependent upon him for all they receive, yet are not grateful, but conduct themselves proudly, as though all the favors they received of their indulgent parent were supplied by themselves. The father notices all the disrespectful acts of his disobedient, ungrateful children, yet he bears with them.
“At length, these rebellious children go still further, and seek to influence and lead to rebellion those members of their father's family who have hitherto been faithful. Then all the dignity and authority of the father is called into action; and he expels from his house the rebellious children, who have not only abused his love and blessings themselves, but tried to subvert the remaining few who had submitted to the wise and judicious laws of their father's household.
“For the sake of the few who are loyal, whose happiness was exposed to the seditious influence of the rebellious members of his household, he separates his undutiful children from his family, while at the same time he labors to bring the remaining faithful and loyal ones closer to himself. All would honor the wise and just course of such a parent, in punishing most severely his undutiful, rebellious children.
“God has dealt thus with his children.” {1 SP 329, 330}
Tom:These passages explain God's motivations. We agree that God's motives are pure, and that action must be taken to counteract Satan's plans. The question is if God uses the methods of Satan in order to accomplish His plans.
quote:
"God could have destroyed Satan and his sympathizers as easily as one can cast a pebble to the earth; but He did not do this. Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. His authority rests upon goodness, mercy, and love; and the presentation of these principles is the means to be used. God's government is moral, and truth and love are to be the prevailing power." The Desire of Ages, 759.
"The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority." ibid., 22.
"Earthly kingdoms rule by the ascendency of physical power; but from Christ's kingdom every carnal weapon, every instrument of coercion, is banished." The Acts of the Apostles, 12.
"In the work of redemption there is no compulsion. No external force is employed. Under the influence of the Spirit of God, man is left free to choose whom he will serve. In the change that takes place when the soul surrenders to Christ, there is the highest sense of freedom." The Desire of Ages, 466.
"Force is the last resort of every false religion." (ST 5/7/97)
These statements make it clear that force is not a weapon of God to accomplish His will, but rather a weapon of Satan. Force is the last resort of every false religion, but is not the last resort of God, or any resort at all.
Old Tom:You keep flip-flopping on this. You started out saying there was no difference, and I asked you if you didn't think there was a difference, why did you argue so strongly against the idea. And you said, "Can I be honest?" You said you could respect a God who said, "If you are not worthy, I will take your life away." Now you are back to saying it doesn't make any difference.
R:It is you who are not understanding what I say. What I’m saying is that, in terms of responsibility for the act, there is NO difference. In each case, you are the sole responsible for the death of those involved.
Tom:The Spirit of Prophesy says time and time again that the wicked reap what THEY have sown, that God is NOT responsible. God is not responsbile because He can kill them and blame their death on someone other than Himself, but because their own actions bring about their own destruction. She makes this very point many times.
R:(In the example of the dam, which mayor is less guilty of the death of the whole city? He who opened the floodgates or he who removed the reinforcement system?) In terms of honesty, the second is worse, because you are just trying to evade or hide your responsibility in the death of those involved.
In the case of the Egyptians, for instance, God was controlling nature. Nature was just an instrument of God. Satan wasn't controlling it and nature wasn't controlling itself.
Tom:This is a faulty explanation, because it doesn't bring out the role of stubborn resistance involved. A better one is the one which God provided Himself through Jesus Christ in the parable of the murdered Son. Servents were sent to convey the vineowner's wishes, which were murdered. More servants were sent, and they were murdered too. Finally the owner's own son was sent in the hope that he would be well received, but he was murdered too. After all this, God withdrew His protection.
We see the same thing in the case of Satan. It wasn't a one time sin, but continued sin, and continued resistance to the Holy Spirit, continued refusal to repent and be pardoned, which led to his downfall. God is patient, and it takes a great deal of effort to get Him to leave you alone. However, eventually God will give the one who has rejected Him up, exaclaiming, "How can I give you up?"
In regards to the Egyptians, you can be sure that God's Spirit was telling them the whole time to stop in their persecution of the Israelites, that this would lead to their death. They persisted in their rebellion until the very end, but God had no desire that they should die. They died only because they entered the Red Sea, which was a dangerous area to enter, because one could only survive there under God's protection. Because they had steadfastly persisted in rebellion against God, they forfeited His protection. God did not pick up the Red Sea and hurl it at them in order to kill them. They did the equivalent of walking across a busy street, and God did not protect them from their foolish action. If they had not entered the Red Sea, they would not have died. They brought their death upon themselves.
Old Tom:Wrong acts are not sanatized by right motivations.
R:Then you have to prove that killing is always wrong.
Tom:Which means if I don't then wrong acts are sanatized by right motivations?
Old Tom:The basic premise is that God gives favor to individuals or nations on the basis of obedience to His law. When an entity is disobedient, then ruin follows.
R:Look, there are emergency situations in which God cannot just sit and expect ruin to follow.
Tom:God doesn't have to expect it to follow. It does follow. There's no way it could not follow. If God removes His blessings, then ruin comes that very moment. There's no delay, because it is impossible for there not to be ruin apart from the blessings of God. God must actively do something to counteract the force of sin. Sin is deadly. It is not benign; it is not neutral. It is a destructive force which must actively be counteracted.
R:Satan didn’t want the antediluvians to die, but to live in defiance of God’s law.
Tom:Satan is happy when any humans die because that causes pain to God, whom he hates.
R:Maybe they would have destroyed themselves, but by then there would no longer be a single righteous on the face of the earth. For the sake of those 8 righteous, who would preserve God’s knowledge and the lineage of the Messiah, and for the sake of the antediluvians themselves, who were spoiling themselves and one another, these people must die. You spoke about God restraining the subterranean waters, although you failed to provide solid evidence that God has to continually protect us from nature. But, besides that, it had never rained before. Who sent the rain from heaven? Or was this another thing that God has to protect us from?
Tom:The evidence is in MH 416. There are black holes which destroy, asteroids which destroy, viruses which destroy. God didn't allow the large animals to continue to exist, because man in His diminished capacity could no longer deal with Him. If God did not keep the earth in its course, man would be destroyed. Why does God need to do this? That is, why would the earth go off course? Because of sin. There are so many ways that God protects us from nature, it is mind boggling.
Nature is not self-acting. It must be actively and carefully managed by God. Sin has caused tremendous changes to nature, which has made it dangerous. If it weren't for God's active sustaining and protective care, all life would perish. See the section in MH 416. The principles are laid out there.
I understood your assertion that I had not presented evidence that God protects us from nature, to which I responded. I didn't understand the rest of what you were writing.
I'm suggesting there were destructive forces which God was keeping in check, caused by sin, just as He is doing now. When God releases His protecting or sustaining hand, terrible things happen. This must be the case, unless we believe God is doing nothing.
Old Tom:According to the Scriptures, God killed Saul, and God destroyed Jerusalem. So He did appoint them to destruction.
R:The Jews are alive and well on earth and will still have a part in the last-day events.
Tom:Does this means that God did not appoint Jerusalem to destruction? Were the Scriptures are wrong about this? And what about Saul? The Scriptures say God killed Saul. Wouldn't that be appointed to destruction?
Old Tom:God doesn't do any dirty work. God is good. He is just like Jesus.
R:There is dirty work to be done in order to clean God’s kingdom from evil but, according to you, the dirty work will be done by itself.
Tom:God is pure. He always acts in harmony with the principles of His government, which involves nothing dirty.
Old Tom:Or Satan. Shouldn't he be included in the list?
R: No, I don’t believe God uses Satan as His instrument. He overrules Satan’s perversity and uses what Satan meant for evil to accomplish His purposes, as in the case of Job, or Joseph.
Tom:If I'm understanding your thought, it is that it would be dishonest of God to not destroy Himself. So God does this by using His agents, which are nature, or His angels, or His people. But you admit that God often permits destruction to occur by His permissive action. So how is God not being honest in these cases, where He describes Himself as destroying, but it's really Satan? For example, in the Scriptures, God is presented as *actively* destroying Jerusalem. Since it was not really God, but Satan, who did this, how is this portrayal not, according to your own terms, "dishonest"?
Old Tom:According to this way of thinking, God kills everybody.
R:I believe that God keeps the heart beating in the sense that it was He who implanted the principle of life in our cells, but I don’t think that it is God who stops the heart (except, of course, in cases like that of Ananias and Sapphira). However, I think that God can, sometimes, prolong life.
Tom:The cells do not work in and of themselves. See MH 416. God is active in keeping us alive. He must do something proactive, or else we die. We can't live by ourselves. Our heart doesn't beat by itself; God makes it beat.
R:I'll stop here. This has become a very long (quilometrico) post.
Tom:Ok. I'll await your next response, but I'd like to repeat that I haven't seen any effort to harmonize your view with the fact that everything we can know of God was revealed in the life of His Son. If this is true, then there should be something in Christ's life which reveals the principles you are suggesting. Otherwise the statement would be false, and there are things we can know about God which were not revealed in Christ's life.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15408
09/08/05 11:32 PM
09/08/05 11:32 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tom, the idea that Jesus revealed everything we can know about God's character overlooks alot. Rosangela named a few.
Are you suggesting that since Jesus didn't kill anyone in the NT that Jesus never killed anyone in the OT?
Even if Jesus kills some people by withdrawing His protection He is, nevertheless, still responsible for their death. Since they would have continued living if Jesus hadn't withdrawn His protection He is, very clearly, responsible.
Do you believe planet earth is a ticking time bomb that would have exploded and killed Adam and Eve, if Jesus hadn't intervened, the moment they sinned?
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15409
09/09/05 03:13 AM
09/09/05 03:13 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Mike:Tom, the idea that Jesus revealed everything we can know about God's character overlooks alot. Rosangela named a few. Tom:Here's frin the Spirit of Prophesy: quote:
All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son...Taking humanity upon Him, Christ came to be one with humanity and at the same time to reveal our heavenly Father to sinful human beings. {8T 286.1}
What is the "a lot" which she missed? I can't think of anything myself.
Mike:Are you suggesting that since Jesus didn't kill anyone in the NT that Jesus never killed anyone in the OT?
Tom:I'm suggesting that all that man can know about God was revealed in the character and life of His Son displayed in His humanity. If you "see" something different than what Christ revealed, then what you see is something we can't know about God, because everything we can know about God was revealed there.
The points I'm making are made more eloquently by the authors I've been quoting in the Jesus reveals God topic. The concept is very simple, when we've seen Christ, we've seen the Father.
Mike:Even if Jesus kills some people by withdrawing His protection He is, nevertheless, still responsible for their death.
Tom:No, the wicked are responsible. This is why the Spirit of Prophesy states they reap what they sow. For example:
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. (DA 764)
quote:
God destroys no man. Everyone who is destroyed will have destroyed himself. (COL 84)
quote:
Pharaoh sowed obstinacy, and he reaped a harvest of the same in his character. The Lord could do nothing more to convince him, for he was barricaded in obstinacy and prejudice, where the Holy Spirit could not find access to his heart. Pharaoh was given up to his own unbelief and hardness of heart. (RH 2/17/92)
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 36,37)
The wicked die because they cut themselves off from God. They reap what they sow. God is innocent, and He will be vindicated.
Mike:Since they would have continued living if Jesus hadn't withdrawn His protection He is, very clearly, responsible.
Tom:No, God is not responsible, and this is what the whole Great Controversy is about. It is Satan who argues that God is responsible.
quote:
The fall of our first parents, with all the woe that has resulted, he charges upon the Creator, leading men to look upon God as the author of sin, and suffering, and death. Jesus was to unveil this deception.(DA 25)
quote:
To the last, he refused to acknowledge his own course to be deserving of censure. When the consequence of his disaffection became apparent, and it was decreed that with all his sympathizers he must be forever banished from the abode of bliss, the arch-deceiver threw the blame wholly upon Christ. With one accord, Satan and his hosts declared that had they not been reproved, the rebellion would never have occurred, thus making Christ responsible for their course. Thus stubborn and defiant in their disloyalty, seeking vainly to overthrow the government of God, yet blasphemously claiming to be themselves the innocent victims of oppressive power, the arch-rebel and all his sympathizers were at last banished from Heaven. (The Spirit of Prophecy Volume Four, page 318)
From the very beginning Satan has attempted to blame God for what he himself does.
quote:
It is Satan's constant effort to misrepresent the character of God, the nature of sin, and the real issues at stake in the great controversy. His sophistry lessens the obligation of the divine law and gives men license to sin. At the same time he causes them to cherish false conceptions of God so that they regard Him with fear and hate rather than with love. The cruelty inherent in his own character is attributed to the Creator. {GC 569.1}
Mike:Do you believe planet earth is a ticking time bomb that would have exploded and killed Adam and Eve, if Jesus hadn't intervened, the moment they sinned?
Tom: There's no doubt that Adam and Eve would have immediately died had Christ not intervened. See FW 21, 22. Satan would have died too, without God's intervention. See DA 764 (although in Satan's case, his existence is prolonged not to redeem him, which is not possible, but to demonstrate the principles of God's and Satans governments respectively)
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15410
09/09/05 12:48 PM
09/09/05 12:48 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
quote:
Tom:I don't know what this is referring to. I've been offering explanations for hundreds of posts.
True, but you have failed to give a reasonable explanation to many passages, like the one that I quoted in one of my last posts:
“‘Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites,’ was the divine command; ‘afterward thou shalt be gathered unto thy people.’ This mandate was communicated to Israel, not as the word of Moses, but of Christ, their invisible leader; and it was immediately obeyed. ... The men who promptly and speedily executed the divine judgments upon those heathen nations have been pronounced harsh and unmerciful in destroying so many human lives. But all who reason thus, fail to understand the character and dealings of God. ... Then their day of probation ended, the door of mercy was to them closed, and the mandate went forth from Him who can create and can destroy, ‘Vex the Midianites, and smite them; for they vex you with their wiles.'" {ST, January 6, 1881}
It would be ridiculous to say that God removed His protection from the Midianites; or that the idea arose among the Israelites and God just permitted it. Ellen White says clearly that the mandate went forth from God Himself. Besides, she says that the Israelites were neither harsh nor unmerciful for obeying God’s command.
quote:
Tom:Jesus didn't have to do everything while on earth.
Exactly. That’s why it makes no sense to say that He had to destroy someone to prove that it is legitimate for God to destroy. God gave us a whole Bible, not just the gospels. If God destroys in mercy, He doesn’t destroy as an act of force, and this is completely in harmony with His character. Nothing could be clearer.
quote:
Tom:So you see what happened in Numbers 25 to be fundamentally different than Deut. 31? I don't understand the difference.
What do you mean? That God “removed His protection” from the idolaters? Does God have to protect us from our own brethren otherwise they will kill us?
quote:
Tom:These passages explain God's motivations. We agree that God's motives are pure, and that action must be taken to counteract Satan's plans. The question is if God uses the methods of Satan in order to accomplish His plans.
What do you mean? That a father can expel the rebellious children from his house by just removing his protection, or hiding his face?
quote:
Tom:The Spirit of Prophesy says time and time again that the wicked reap what THEY have sown
When God destroys, of course the wicked are reaping what they have sown. Their destruction is their own fault.
quote:
God did not pick up the Red Sea and hurl it at them in order to kill them.
No, God just closed the sea in order to kill them.
There is no protection involved here. The opening and the closing of the sea were acts dependent exclusively on God’s will.
quote:
Tom:Which means if I don't then wrong acts are sanatized by right motivations?
No, which means killing is not always a wrong act.
quote:
If God removes His blessings, then ruin comes that very moment.
It took forty years to come to Jerusalem.
quote:
Tom:Satan is happy when any humans die because that causes pain to God, whom he hates.
Not when the life of those humans causes more pain to God than their death.
PP 99 – “He had delighted to control so powerful a race, and desired them to live to practice their abominations and continue their rebellion against the Ruler of heaven.”
quote:
Sin has caused tremendous changes to nature, which has made it dangerous. If it weren't for God's active sustaining and protective care, all life would perish.
It seems Mike expressed it correctly when he said you think planet earth is a ticking time bomb ready to explode at any moment!
quote:
Tom:Does this means that God did not appoint Jerusalem to destruction? Were the Scriptures are wrong about this? And what about Saul? The Scriptures say God killed Saul. Wouldn't that be appointed to destruction?
No. Both in the case of Jerusalem and of Saul, what happened to them was a result of their own wrong choices. But what happened to the cannanite nations was different – God commanded His own people to utterly destroy them.
quote:
Tom:If I'm understanding your thought, it is that it would be dishonest of God to not destroy Himself.
It would be dishonest to recognize that you need an unpleasant task to be done, but evading doing the unpleasant task yourself. Sodom and Gomorrah’s inhabitants, for instance, must be destroyed – they were like a cancer on earth. But God couldn’t do it, so (I assume this is your view) He used Satan to do it. (Again, this is completely different from what happened to Jerusalem.)
quote:
Our heart doesn't beat by itself; God makes it beat.
Then God makes it to cease beating. Therefore, it isn’t Satan who has the power of death, as the Bible says – it is God.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15411
09/09/05 12:58 PM
09/09/05 12:58 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tom, when did Jesus, while on earth, withdraw His protection and someone died? when did He command His enemies to punish and kill an unsaved sinner? when did He sit in judgment to determine the fate of mankind? when did He create worlds?
You see, there are many things about God that Jesus didn't reveal while He walked the planet as a man.
Again, we cannot overlook or ignore the plain passages that describe Jesus killing millions of unsaved sinners during the Flood. Perhaps we should read through chapter seven - The Flood - in Patriarchs and Prophets to answer the question - Who or What caused the Flood? Qouting unrelated passages doesn't address the issue very well, does it?
You seem convinced God didn't cause the Flood. But what does it say in the Bible and the SOP? If Jesus caused the Flood then what can we learn about the justice and mercy of God? If He didn't cause the Flood then what does it say about God?
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15412
09/09/05 01:26 PM
09/09/05 01:26 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Mike:Tom, when did Jesus, while on earth, withdraw His protection and someone died? Tom:We see this principle most clearly in the fig tree. Also several parables He tauge explain this principle. Mike:when did He command His enemies to punish and kill an unsaved sinner? Tom:When indeed. Mike:when did He sit in judgment to determine the fate of mankind? when did He create worlds? Tom:Much of what Christ did and taught demonstrated the principles of the judgment. John B. could do a good job explaining this. He's talked a lot about it. It would be an interesting topic to start. The miracle of changing water into wine and the feeding of the 5,000, and the 4,000( ?, there was another one of that number, wasn't there?) demonstrate God's creative power, as well as His commanding the temptest cease. Mike:You see, there are many things about God that Jesus didn't reveal while He walked the planet as a man. Tom:Nope, there's not a one. As God has revealed to us: quote:
All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son. Testimonies for the Church, 8:286.
Mike:Again, we cannot overlook or ignore the plain passages that describe Jesus killing millions of unsaved sinners during the Flood. Perhaps we should read through chapter seven - The Flood - in Patriarchs and Prophets to answer the question - Who or What caused the Flood? Qouting unrelated passages doesn't address the issue very well, does it?
You seem convinced God didn't cause the Flood. But what does it say in the Bible and the SOP? If Jesus caused the Flood then what can we learn about the justice and mercy of God? If He didn't cause the Flood then what does it say about God?
Tom:I see that you are unable to present anything from the life or character of Christ which agrees with your view. But rather than adjust your view and admit it is lacking, you are instead trying to prove that the inspired statement is not true. Interesting.
What the counsel is telling us is to look to the life and character of Christ in order to understand God's character. But you are looking everywhere else *but* there. That's not going to work. Even the angels were confused until Christ came. What makes you think you will be able to understand these things without looking to Christ when even holy angels couldn't?
I have asked you repeatedly to show me where in Christ's life and character in His humanity the views of God's character you hold to are seen. Let's deal with this question first, and then we can look at the other things you're mentioning. (which, by the way, have been treated througout this thread)
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15413
09/09/05 04:39 PM
09/09/05 04:39 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Old Tom:I don't know what this is referring to. I've been offering explanations for hundreds of posts. R:True, but you have failed to give a reasonable explanation to many passages, like the one that I quoted in one of my last posts: “‘Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites,’ was the divine command; ‘afterward thou shalt be gathered unto thy people.’ This mandate was communicated to Israel, not as the word of Moses, but of Christ, their invisible leader; and it was immediately obeyed. ... The men who promptly and speedily executed the divine judgments upon those heathen nations have been pronounced harsh and unmerciful in destroying so many human lives. But all who reason thus, fail to understand the character and dealings of God. ... Then their day of probation ended, the door of mercy was to them closed, and the mandate went forth from Him who can create and can destroy, ‘Vex the Midianites, and smite them; for they vex you with their wiles.'" {ST, January 6, 1881} It would be ridiculous to say that God removed His protection from the Midianites; or that the idea arose among the Israelites and God just permitted it. Ellen White says clearly that the mandate went forth from God Himself. Besides, she says that the Israelites were neither harsh nor unmerciful for obeying God’s command. Tom:I see the underlying principle would be similar to the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man. Jesus intentionally told a parable which had theological error. quote:
In this parable Christ was meeting the people on their own ground. The doctrine of a conscious state of existence between death and the resurrection was held by many of those who were listening to Christ's words. The Saviour knew of their ideas, and He framed His parable so as to inculcate important truths through these preconceived opinions. He held up before His hearers a mirror wherein they might see themselves in their true relation to God. He used the prevailing opinion to convey the idea He wished to make prominent to all--that no man is valued for his possessions; for all he has belongs to him only as lent by the Lord. A misuse of these gifts will place him below the poorest and most afflicted man who loves God and trusts in Him. {COL 263.2}
If God's people will not keep step with them, then He will humble Himself to keep step with them. The Israelite's steadfastly refused to God's will. This is seen throughout their history. They insisted on having a king; many examples could be given of their steadfast obstinancy. God's choice was to either reject them flat out for rejecting His methods, or to meet them where they were and try to teach them. God chose the latter.
If we would understand God's character, the place to go is Jesus Christ, especially the cross:
quote:
In order to be rightly understood and appreciated, every truth in the Word of God, from Genesis to Revelation, must be studied in the light which streams from the cross of Calvary, and in connection with the wondrous, central truth of the Saviour's atonement. Those who study the Redeemer's wonderful sacrifice grow in grace and knowledge. The SDA Bible Commentary, 5:1137.
The purpose of Christ's mission was to reveal the Father:
quote:
The earth was dark through misapprehension of God. That the gloomy shadows might be lightened, that the world might be brought back to God, Satan's deceptive power was to be broken. This could not be done by force. The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority. Only by love is love awakened. To know God is to love Him; His character must be manifested in contrast to the character of Satan. This work only one Being in all the universe could do. Only He who knew the height and depth of the love of God could make it known. Upon the world's dark night the Sun of Righteousness must rise, "with healing in His wings." Mal. 4:2. {DA 22.1}
quote:
Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God. In Christ was arrayed before men the paternal grace and the matchless perfections of the Father.... When the object of his mission was attained,--the revelation of God to the world,--the Son of God announced that his work was accomplished, and that the character of the Father was made manifest to men.(ST 1/20/90)
Old Tom:Jesus didn't have to do everything while on earth.
Rosangela:Exactly.
Tom:Hey! Wait! You can't cut that one sentence off by itself. It doesn't complete the thought.
quote:
Tom:Jesus didn't have to do everything while on earth. Just what was necessary to reveal God's character completely, which He did, since all that we can know about God's character was revealed in His life.
There! That's better!
A semicolon would have been a better choice than a period there, but surely you knew that sentence starting with "Just" was completing my thought.
Please don't cut a thought in half and write, "Exactly." That's not fair.
R:That’s why it makes no sense to say that He had to destroy someone to prove that it is legitimate for God to destroy. God gave us a whole Bible, not just the gospels. If God destroys in mercy, He doesn’t destroy as an act of force, and this is completely in harmony with His character. Nothing could be clearer.
Tom:The principle that we have is that all that we need to know or can know about God was revealed in the life and character of His Son:
quote:
"All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son." Testimonies for the Church, 8:286.
What this means is that there is nothing that we either need to know nor can know about God which was not revealed in the life and character of His Son. That's clear, isn't it?
Old Tom:So you see what happened in Numbers 25 to be fundamentally different than Deut. 31? I don't understand the difference.
R:What do you mean? That God “removed His protection” from the idolaters? Does God have to protect us from our own brethren otherwise they will kill us?
Tom:What I meant is that in the Deut. 31 passage it speaks of God slaying in His fury.
If we accept the principle that we can only live by God graciously protecting and sustaining us, and that as long as He does this we continue to live, then the only way the idolaters could die would be for God to cease His protecting and sustaining work. The idolators would not have died had they not rejected God's goodness which was leading them to repentance. God had no desire that they should die, because He takes no please in the death of the wicked. However, if the wicked refuse to respond to His goodness which draws them to repentance, if they insist on going their own way and drive Him away from them, then they will die.
That God did not intend that their fate be to be killed by sword is obvious when looking at the life and character of Jesus Christ. Where in His life do you see any picture which corresponds to the view of God's character which you are holding?
Old Tom:These passages explain God's motivations. We agree that God's motives are pure, and that action must be taken to counteract Satan's plans. The question is if God uses the methods of Satan in order to accomplish His plans.
R:What do you mean? That a father can expel the rebellious children from his house by just removing his protection, or hiding his face?
Tom:The motivations have to with motivations. So no, I didn't have in mind that a father can expel rebellious children from his house, since this is not a motivation but an action. I had in mind that God had to take action for the sake of preservation. Regarding actions, God has options available to us that we do not have, since we are not the Sustainer of the universe, and do not protect from the forces of nature and of the forces of evil.
Old Tom:The Spirit of Prophesy says time and time again that the wicked reap what THEY have sown
R:When God destroys, of course the wicked are reaping what they have sown. Their destruction is their own fault.
Tom:She doesn't make this argument. She makes this one:
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.(DA 764)
Old Tom:God did not pick up the Red Sea and hurl it at them in order to kill them.
R:No, God just closed the sea in order to kill them. There is no protection involved here. The opening and the closing of the sea were acts dependent exclusively on God’s will.
Tom:This is a half empty/half full glass argument. I don't see your view to be in harmony with the principles of God's government, nor the inspired statements I have presented. For example:
quote:
The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority. (DA 20)
Your view of things appears to me to be diametrically opposed to this principle. It appears to me that you believe that it is exactly by force and authority that God administers His government. Do what He says or He will kill you. But compelling force is to be found only under Satan's government:
quote:
Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government, The Lord's principles are not of this order. His authority rests upon goodness, mercy, and love; and the presentation of these principles is the means to be used. God's government is moral, and truth and love are to be the prevailing power.(DA 758)
God was holding the Red Sea open for the purpose of allowing the Israelites to depart. His power was protecting them from the Red Sea. Had He removed His protecting power from the Red Sea, the Israelites would have drowned. God was under no obligation to continue His protection once the Israelites had reached the other side for a people who had made it clear that they did not desire His protection.
Old Tom:Which means if I don't then wrong acts are sanatized by right motivations?
R:No, which means killing is not always a wrong act.
Tom:This doesn't follow. Here's the exchange:
quote:
Tom:Wrong acts are not sanatized by right motivations.
R:Then you have to prove that killing is always wrong.
Tom:Which means if I don't then wrong acts are sanatized by right motivations?
Your original statement asserts:
1)To prove that wrong acts are not sanatized by right motivations
2)It must be proven that killing is always wrong.
The contrapositive of this is the following:
1)If it is not proven that killing is wrong, then
2)Wrong acts are sanatized by right motivations.
This is elementary logic. My assertion ("Which means if I don't then wrong acts are sanatized by right motivations?") follows logically from your statement. Your statement ("No, which means killing is not always a wrong act.") does not logically follow from your original statement.
Old Tom:If God removes His blessings, then ruin comes that very moment.
R:It took forty years to come to Jerusalem.
Tom:It took longer than that. It took thousands of years. God is longsuffering and not willing that any should perish.
Old Tom:Satan is happy when any humans die because that causes pain to God, whom he hates.
R:Not when the life of those humans causes more pain to God than their death.
PP 99 – “He had delighted to control so powerful a race, and desired them to live to practice their abominations and continue their rebellion against the Ruler of heaven.”
Tom:Satan delights in death in any circumstances. He is the author of death.
Old Tom: Sin has caused tremendous changes to nature, which has made it dangerous. If it weren't for God's active sustaining and protective care, all life would perish.
R:It seems Mike expressed it correctly when he said you think planet earth is a ticking time bomb ready to explode at any moment!
Tom:The earth would be destroyed apart from the loving care which God provides. You seem to be mocking this. This principle is clearly explained in MH 416.
Old Tom:Does this means that God did not appoint Jerusalem to destruction? Were the Scriptures are wrong about this? And what about Saul? The Scriptures say God killed Saul. Wouldn't that be appointed to destruction?
R:No. Both in the case of Jerusalem and of Saul, what happened to them was a result of their own wrong choices. But what happened to the cannanite nations was different – God commanded His own people to utterly destroy them.
Tom:You are asserting that the destruction of the Canaanites was not due to their choice? Their choices in no way led to their destruction?
I believe the goodness of God was leading them to repentance, just as it did the Jews. I believe they refused to repent, just as the Jews, and that it was their refusal to repent which led to their destruction, just as with the Jews. Their choice not to repent led to their destruction, just as with the Jews.
Old Tom:If I'm understanding your thought, it is that it would be dishonest of God to not destroy Himself.
R:It would be dishonest to recognize that you need an unpleasant task to be done, but evading doing the unpleasant task yourself. Sodom and Gomorrah’s inhabitants, for instance, must be destroyed – they were like a cancer on earth. But God couldn’t do it, so (I assume this is your view) He used Satan to do it. (Again, this is completely different from what happened to Jerusalem.)
Tom:I'm surprised that I could have written as much as I have, and you've read all this, and not understand it. My view is that:
1)God does not act contrary to the principles of His govenment.
2)Force is not a principle of God's government.
3)All that we can know of God was revealed in the life and character of His Son.
4)Force is the last resort of all false religion.
5)God keeps us alive by His protective and sustaining actions. If He removes His protective/sustaining hand, ruin follows.
6)Destruction is the result of sin.
7)God does not destroy. God is the restorer. Satan is the destroyer.
Your view seems to hold that sin is powerless. It is not a destructive force. It does not require God to intervene to prevent destruction. I disagree with these ideas. Sin IS a destructive force, in more ways than we can imagine. It is only by virture of God's constant protective care that we can live, even for a moment. Not to mention His active sustaining role, which gives us life.
I see the view I hold is in perfect harmony with what Jesus Christ revealed in His life and character. He did no harm to those who did not appreciate Him. He simply departed. When urged to destroy, He replied, "Ye know not of what spirit ye are."
Old Tom:Our heart doesn't beat by itself; God makes it beat.
R:Then God makes it to cease beating. Therefore, it isn’t Satan who has the power of death, as the Bible says – it is God.
Tom: quote:
The fall of our first parents, with all the woe that has resulted, he charges upon the Creator, leading men to look upon God as the author of sin, and suffering, and death. Jesus was to unveil this deception.(DA 24)
quote:
14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
Death is of the devil. Christ came to destroy he who had the power of death, which is the devil.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15414
09/10/05 01:59 PM
09/10/05 01:59 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tom, when I read about the Flood in the Bible or the SOP it is very clear to me that Jesus used water from above and beneath the earth to punish and to kill millions of unsaved sinners. The holy angels were not in the least confused by it. In fact, they rejoice when Jesus punishes and kills the wicked. Obviously there is something about it that you are missing.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15415
09/10/05 07:10 PM
09/10/05 07:10 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2020
4500+ Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,583
USA
|
|
Tom, you would get more of the member's attention if your posts were shorter. Me thinks you protesteth too much. ![[Smile]](images/icons/smile.gif) Mike suggests you are missing something. I would suggest to you one aspect you're not paying enough attention to is the sovereignty of God. It is God who is the King. He enforces His laws. Everyone will give account to Him. We will all stand before His judgement seat. Satan wants us to either believe God is a dictator or that He is only merciful. But He is not only merciful. As King, he is also just.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15416
09/10/05 10:18 PM
09/10/05 10:18 PM
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tom Ewall:
Claudia: Who do you think is going to be doing this destruction?
Rv:20:9: And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
Rv:20:10: And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
Tom: Thank you for your input Claudia.
It's a bit ironic that Rev. 20:10 is THE proof text used by those who believe that hell is eternal. They argue that this is after all, what the text says. We argue that Scripture must be interpreted as a whole, and taking all of Scripture into consideration, that hell is not eternal, even though here it is.
The ironic thing is that the same arguments they use are being used here, and the answer to the argument is the same.
From The Desire of Ages we read:
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.
This brings out:
1)The destruction of the wicked is not an arbitrary act of power from God, but rather something the wicked cause themselves.
2)The reap what they have sown.
3)They cut themselves off from life.
4)The glory of God, who is love, destroys them.
In DA 108 she writes that "the light of the glory of God, which gives life to the righteous, slays the wicked."
In COL 84 she writes,
quote:
God destroys no man. Everyone who is destroyed will have destroyed himself.
Taking into account the above, it seems clear the answer to your question is that it is the wicked themselves who cause their destruction.
I'll respond to the GC Modern Revivals quote in the response to Mark's post.
I am replying to the above post by Tom that he posted on September 1st particularly the EGW quote which was:
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.
I am also placing the following that was just previous to the above quote sending at the sentence where the quote Tom posted bagan:
quote:
Then the end will come. God will vindicate His law and deliver His people. Satan and all who have joined him in rebellion will be cut off. Sin and sinners will perish, root and branch, (Mal. 4:1),--Satan the root, and his followers the branches. The word will be fulfilled to the prince of evil, "Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God; . . . I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. . . . Thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more." Then "the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be;" "they shall be as though they had not been." Ezek. 28:6-19; Ps. 37:10; Obadiah 16. {DA 763.4}
This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown.....
Who will destroy the prince of evil? God will as I am certain that the devil will not destroy himself.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
