|
Forums118
Topics9,217
Posts195,963
Members1,324
| |
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
|
|
|
7 registered members (dedication, Karen Y, Kevin H, Daryl, TheophilusOne, 2 invisible),
1,830
guests, and 4
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15427
09/12/05 01:57 PM
09/12/05 01:57 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
So as to not repeat arguments we have already discussed, I will just refer to a couple of points (by the way, in case you miss them, there are two small posts of mine before this last post of yours). quote:
Tom:Earthly rulers act as you say. However...
I'm not referring to earthly rulers, but to God. About this, what Ellen White says is:
“The Lord cannot give those who are insubordinate a place in his kingdom of peace. Satan and the angels that united with him were expelled from heaven because of insubordination, and men who choose evil rather than righteousness, unite with the great rebel, and they can no more enter the kingdom of God with their characters wholly unlike God's, than can Satan himself become an inhabitant of heaven.” {ST, April 27, 1891 par. 3}
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.” (DA 759)
God will win the Great Controversy using His principles alone, truth and love, and NOT the principles of His enemy, which is compelling force.
This text has been greatly misunderstood. When Ellen White speaks of compelling force here, she isn’t at all referring to Satan and the way God would deal with him, but to the other inhabitants of the universe. She is not saying that if God destroyed Satan, He would be using force towards Satan. She is saying that, by destroying His opponent, God would be forcing all the inhabitants of the universe to choose His side. This would be compelling force. Instead, He opted for letting Satan live and make manifest the fruits of his government, so that the inhabitants of the universe could choose God’s side by themselves. Then He could safely destroy Satan.
Commenting on Satan’s rebellion in heaven, she says:
“God sees that the same course of action is being pursued the world over. Men and women come to the place where the road diverges: it is either right or wrong. Thousands upon thousands clothe themselves in what they suppose to be an impenetrable disguise, and choose the wrong. To make their course plain to others by abrupt disclosures would only cause a larger number to choose the side of wrong. Thus the wrongdoers would be sustained and many souls would be ruined. God does not force anyone. He leaves all free to choose. But He says, ‘By their fruits ye shall know them.’ The Lord will not write as wise those who cannot distinguish between a tree that bears thorn berries and a tree that bears olives.” (18MR 362.4)
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15428
09/13/05 03:55 AM
09/13/05 03:55 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
R:I'm not referring to earthly rulers, but to God. About this, what Ellen White says is: “The Lord cannot give those who are insubordinate a place in his kingdom of peace. Satan and the angels that united with him were expelled from heaven because of insubordination, and men who choose evil rather than righteousness, unite with the great rebel, and they can no more enter the kingdom of God with their characters wholly unlike God's, than can Satan himself become an inhabitant of heaven.” {ST, April 27, 1891 par. 3} Tom:If you include a bit more of the context, it makes it easier to respond. This is why I do the "Old Tom" thing. I've got to go back hunting around to figure out what you're talking about. I don't know, maybe your way of doing things is better, as it keeps the posts shorter, but it makes the post harder for me to read. Here's what you wrote originally: quote:
A ruler establishes the rules for his kingdom and gives all his subjects time to accept or reject those rules, telling them plainly that all those who reject the rules will not be permitted to remain in the kingdom. Rebels are not only a threat to the loyal subjects but also make the kingdom an unhappy place. After the time expires, is he using force if he expels the rebels from his kingdom?
I responded to this that this is true of earthly rulers, and presented a quote demonstrating that God's kingdom is unlike any earthly kingdom, and explained how, in particular, the kingdom of God does not use force to get its way. Instead it uses the principles of love and truth because it is a moral government. The quote you have included in no way suggests that God uses force to get His way. God does not use force, because it is not a principle of His government.
The following quote brings out why God does not need to use force to expel His subjects from heaven:
quote:
A life of rebellion against God has unfitted them for heaven. Its purity, holiness, and peace would be torture to them; the glory of God would be a consuming fire. They would long to flee from that holy place. They would welcome destruction, that they might be hidden from the face of Him who died to redeem them. The destiny of the wicked is fixed by their own choice. Their exclusion from heaven is voluntary with themselves, and just and merciful on the part of God. (GC 542, 543)
There's no need for God to use force to expel beings from heaven, or keep them out. Those who do not have characters in harmony with its principles have no desire to be there. The presence of God is a consuming fire. They would prefer destruction.
Old Tom:“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.” (DA 759)
God will win the Great Controversy using His principles alone, truth and love, and NOT the principles of His enemy, which is compelling force.
R:This text has been greatly misunderstood. When Ellen White speaks of compelling force here, she isn’t at all referring to Satan and the way God would deal with him, but to the other inhabitants of the universe.
Tom:Why would you think God deals with Satan any differently than anyone else? God deals with all inhabitants of the universe the same. He gives His blessings to the just and the unjust. Those who open their hearts to respond to God's love are blessed. Those who steel their hearts against God condemn themselves.
The following quote makes it clear that God does not treat Satan any differently than others, and that Satan's destruction is not due to a use of force on God's part.
quote:
This (the destruction of Satan and those who unite with him) is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God....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}
Force is not a principle of God's government. "Force is the last resort of every false religion" (7 SDABC 976) If force is God's last resort too, then His principles are the same as every false religion.
R:She is not saying that if God destroyed Satan, He would be using force towards Satan. She is saying that, by destroying His opponent, God would be forcing all the inhabitants of the universe to choose His side. This would be compelling force.
Tom:I don't see her saying this at all. It appears to me you're reading your own ideas into her quote. She explicitly denies that God uses force to destroy Satan ("it is not an act of arbitrary power") but explains that it is his own action which leads to his destruction: Satan places himself so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to him a consuming fire.
It is because Satan's destruction would have been misinterpreted as something God was doing to him rather than as the inevitable result of sin that God allowed things to continue, so the principles of the respective governments could be seen. It wasn't until the death of Christ that these principles were seen, and the destruction of the wicked could be understood.
It is no coincidence that the destruction of the wicked is included in the chapter "It Is Finished". This chapter deals with things which were accomplished by Christ's death. Christ's death made clear what death is. It's not something which God does to somebody, but it's the result of sin. Once this principle is understood, it's safe to allow Satan to suffer the inevitable results of his sin (which is the glory of God results in his destruction), without the event to be misunderstood as something which God is accomplishing.
The principles of God's government are love and truth, not force. "Rebellion was not to be overcome by force."
R:Instead, He opted for letting Satan live and make manifest the fruits of his government, so that the inhabitants of the universe could choose God’s side by themselves. Then He could safely destroy Satan.
Tom:This is not what she wrote. She wrote this:
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}
At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand this. Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin. A doubt of God's goodness would have remained in their minds as evil seed, to produce its deadly fruit of sin and woe. {DA 764.2}
What is the "this" that the angels did not understand? According to your view, it should be that God uses force to destroy Satan, and this is just, because all have seen what the principles of Satan's government are. But is that what she wrote? No! She wrote:
quote:
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" is that Satan himself formed the character which caused God's glory to be to him a consuming fire. *That's* what the angels did not understand.
There's also a problem of God's saying, "Do what I tell you, or I'll kill you." This does not speak well of His character, as well as being totally out of harmony with what He has revealed of Himself in the life and character of His Son.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15429
09/13/05 03:59 AM
09/13/05 03:59 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
R:Yes, this would be fine? A father calling the next-door neighbor to expell his children from his house? What about the last great day – who will God call to do this at that day? Tom:God won't have to "call" anyone. The wicked voluntarily choose to be destroyed rather than remain in heaven: quote:
A life of rebellion against God has unfitted them for heaven. Its purity, holiness, and peace would be torture to them; the glory of God would be a consuming fire. They would long to flee from that holy place. They would welcome destruction, that they might be hidden from the face of Him who died to redeem them. The destiny of the wicked is fixed by their own choice. Their exclusion from heaven is voluntary with themselves, and just and merciful on the part of God." (GC 543)
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15430
09/12/05 04:06 PM
09/12/05 04:06 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
R:But why did you say what you said? The truth is this:
Old R:The difference between God and Satan is in the motivation for destruction (killing).
Old Tom:Wrong acts are not sanatized by right motivations.
Old R: Then you have to prove that killing is always wrong.
R:You implied that it’s not right for God to kill because killing is always wrong, independently of the motivation for doing so. To which I said, Then prove that killing is always wrong, and you will have proved your point. I think this is logical, isn't it?
Tom:Not really. Regardless of whether killing is always wrong does not impact whether or not wrong acts are sanatized by right motivations. What you should have said is that while you agree with the principle that wrong actions are not sanatized by right motivations, this principle does not apply to this specific case because killing is not always a wrong action. That would have been logically sound.
What you actually wrote is not logically sound because it asserts than one must prove that killing is wrong in order to establish the principle that wrong acts are sanatized by right motives.
[ September 12, 2005, 04:34 PM: Message edited by: Tom Ewall ]
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15431
09/12/05 07:52 PM
09/12/05 07:52 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Sorry Mike, I think I missed your post in the midst of the others. Mike:Tom, there is no evidence to support the idea that God simply stopped holding in check the inevitable, impending forces that caused the Flood. Even if such an idea were true, it doesn't make God any less responsible than if He had commanded the waters that killed millions of unsaved sinners. Tom:It makes all the difference in the world. It involves how we see God's character. Is He really like Jesus Christ revealed Him to be while on this earth? Or is Jesus' picture defective? It it really true that sickness, suffering and death come from the antagonistic power, or it is the case that they come from God? Is it really true that force is not a principle of God's government? Is it really true that all that we can know of God was revealed in the life and character of Christ in His humanity? These are important questions, and there is a difference between the two ways of looking at things. Mike:Nature obeys fixed laws. True, God upholds the laws, but He isn't running around preventing the forces of nature from disobeying His laws. Tom:He is "running" around protecting us from the havoc which sin wreaks. There are black holes, stars dying. The impact of sin upon the universe is indescribably vast. The second law of thermodynamics (the law of entropy) impacts every nook and cranny of the universe. There is no place where God is not at work protecting us. It is only our great ignorance which closes our eyes to the great work God is doing to protect and sustain us. quote:
We cannot know how much we owe to Christ for the peace and protection which we enjoy.(GC 36)
This statement is just as true in the natural realm as is in the spiritual. To the death of Christ we owe even this earthly life. It's impossible to overestimate how much we owe to God's love and protection.
Mike: As you have pointed out so many times - God is not a God of force.
Tom: Amen!
Mike:No, Tom, the holy angels were not confused by the actions God took during the Flood. Yes, they did not clearly understand Satan's accusations until the Cross, but that doesn't have anything to do with God killing millions with a Flood.
Tom:This has got to be one of the most ironic things I've ever read.
Mike:They rejoiced with Jesus in that the world was purged of evildoers.
Tom:This is confusion. They rejoiced that the world was purged of *sin*. One needs to differentiate between evil and evildoers. God was sad that the evildoers perished. This is obvious when one understands His character, and the Biblical record itself bears this out.
quote:
5And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart (Gen. 6:5,6)
Mike:Yes, Jesus revealed the character of God when He walked the earth as a man. But to force your favorite SOP quote to mean Jesus never killed anyone in the OT, or that He will not kill anyone in the lake of fire, is putting words in her mouth that do not belong there.
Tom:She wrote that *all* that *can* be known of God was revealed in Christ's life and character in His humanity. What I have been asking you to do is to explain how your views of God's character are seen in Christ's life and character. I'm not putting any words into her mouth at all. I've been issueing a challenge to you, which you have so far not responded to.
That your views are contrary to what Christ's life revealed is the weakest point, IMO, of your position. How many times did Christ kill or physically harm in any way someone who disagreed with Him? How many times did Christ ascribe to God some act which led to suffering or death?
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15432
09/13/05 12:39 AM
09/13/05 12:39 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2020
4500+ Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,583
USA
|
|
Tom, I agree that we Adventists tend to overlook some of the scripture and EGW passages that you are focused on. So what you are saying is needed. My question is whether you balancing it with the rest of scripture and Ellen White’s writings. I don’t think you are because for example you insist that God’s justice is the same as His mercy, and you do not concede valid points regarding the destruction of the idolatrous Hebrews at the golden calf, the Egyptians at the Red Sea, the antediluvians at the flood. When you are up against some of these points, you resort to the plea that Christ is the full picture – other scripture that appears to show another side to the character of God can be overruled by the life of Christ which is a complete revelation.
You therefore virtually discard large portions of the Bible. Many parables of Christ teach God’s involvement in judging the wicked.
When Babylon is finally judged, the saints are commanded to rejoice because God has avenged their blood. With your theology, I do not see how you will be able to obey that command. I picture you saying to yourself, no, God didn’t do that. How can I rejoice? That was Satan’s work! Those sentiments would be as out of harmony with the spirit of the occasion as it would be for you to stand weeping by the Red Sea for Pharoah and his men while Merriam lead the hosts of Israel in rejoicing before God, and which the Jews today still thank God for – rightly. If God commands us to rejoice in His deliverance, will you weep?
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15433
09/13/05 02:52 AM
09/13/05 02:52 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Mark, Before I address your post specifically, I would like to ask a few favors. The first favor is that you respond to the posts I write. You write a post asking questions and making points, and I answer the post, making counterpoints and asking you questions. It would be nice if you responded in some way. The second favor is that you read my posts with some care. For example, regarding mercy and justice you wrote of me: quote:
You say that the justice of God is his mercy and grace.
I never said that! I looked at every post in this thread to make sure, and verfied that I never said this. What I originally wrote was this:
quote:
Tom: I'm certainly in favor of justice. However, there is a difference between God's justice and man's justice. Man's idea of justice is eye for eye and tooth for tooth. It's based on retribution. However, God's idea of justice is based on love, mercy and compassion.
"18 Therefore the LORD will wait, that He may be gracious to you;And therefore He will be exalted, that He may have mercy on you.
For the LORD is a God of justice;
Blessed are all those who wait for Him.(Isa. 30:18)"
God is a God of justice. Therefore He longs to be gracious to us.
"This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another."(Zech. 7:9)
This is God's idea of justice -- showing mercy and compassion.
You made no attempt to consider any of the Scriptural evidence I presented. You just wrote, "this is confusion". Since you didn't respond to the quotes, I requoted them, and wrote this:
quote:
What we see from the above Scriptures is that justice in Scripture involves setting things right. The way that God sets things right is by mercy and compassion.
to which you respond
quote:
My question is whether you balancing it with the rest of scripture and Ellen White’s writings. I don’t think you are because for example you insist that God’s justice is the same as His mercy ...
which is again something I never wrote. What I actually did write was that God sets things right by mercy and compassion. Do you really think this is incorrect? God does not set things right by mercy and compassion?
In the first post I wrote, "This is God's idea of justice -- showing mercy and compassion." I based this on the Scripture presented, which said "This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'Administer true justice; show mercy and compassion to one another." If God says "Adminster true justice; show mercy and compassion" and I write, "This is God's idea of justice -- showing mercy and compassion" this certainly like a reasonable conclusion to me.
Does it not to you? If not, why not? It sure looks to me that I'm simply taking the Scripture as it reads and repeating what it said!
What do you think, Mark? Am I making valid points here, or am I all wet?
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15434
09/13/05 03:36 AM
09/13/05 03:36 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
Tom, I agree that we Adventists tend to overlook some of the scripture and EGW passages that you are focused on. So what you are saying is needed. My question is whether you balancing it with the rest of scripture and Ellen White’s writings. I don’t think you are because for example you insist that God’s justice is the same as His mercy, and you do not concede valid points regarding the destruction of the idolatrous Hebrews at the golden calf, the Egyptians at the Red Sea, the antediluvians at the flood. When you are up against some of these points, you resort to the plea that Christ is the full picture – other scripture that appears to show another side to the character of God can be overruled by the life of Christ which is a complete revelation.
1)I never wrote, let alone insisted, that God's justice is the same as His mercy. I dealt with this in the previous post.
2)What valid points am I not conceding?
3)How can there be "another side" of God's character?! You appear to be suggesting that there is antoher side to God's character other than what Jesus Christ revealed.
Here's what the Spirit of Prophesy said:
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.... 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}
It was for the reason that God's character was misunderstood that Jesus Christ came! If Christ failed to correctly reveal God's character, then He failed in His mission.
quote:
...the whole purpose of His own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.(ST 1/20/90)
But Christ didn't fail! He really and truly did completely and fully reveal God's character.
quote:
All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son. (8T 236)
This demonstrates conclusively that there is not "another side" to God's character. Don't you agree? If not, why not?
4)You write that I am overuling "other Scripture" which shows "another side" of God's character, but this seems to me to be backwards. My whole point is that Christ's life and revelation is the complete revealtion of God's character (see the above 8T quote) and therefore if there *appears* to be something in Scripture which contradicts this, that appearance must be in error.
Consider the words of Christ. He said He did what He saw the Father do and spoke what He heard of the Father say. What Christ presented was His vision of the Father. What we see in Christ is what He saw in His Father. Therefore if we see something other than what Christ represented, we are really saying that Christ's vision of His Father's character was wrong.
Mark:You therefore virtually discard large portions of the Bible.Many parables of Christ teach God’s involvement in judging the wicked.
Tom:How am I disregarding any portion of Scripture by believing that it must be in harmony with the revelation of God given by Christ's life and character? I don't understand this.
Here's another quote from the Spirit of Prophesy:
quote:
The sacrifice of Christ as an atonement for sin is the great truth around which all other truths cluster. 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 that streams from the cross of Calvary. (GW 315)
This is something I have found lacking in this thread. Where is the cross of Christ? According to the Spirit of Prophesy, every truth to be properly understood must be studied in the light that streams from Calvary. How are these views of a destructive God related to Calvary?
I'm not "resorting" to a plea, but reaffirming a principle -- Jesus Christ really and truly was the complete revelation of God's character. It really is true that *all* that man needs to know or can know of God was revealed by His life and character. Therefore any theory we have of God's character MUST be found in His life and character.
So far this point has not been addressed.
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15435
09/13/05 03:46 AM
09/13/05 03:46 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
When Babylon is finally judged, the saints are commanded to rejoice because God has avenged their blood. With your theology, I do not see how you will be able to obey that command. I picture you saying to yourself, no, God didn’t do that. How can I rejoice? That was Satan’s work! Those sentiments would be as out of harmony with the spirit of the occasion as it would be for you to stand weeping by the Red Sea for Pharoah and his men while Merriam lead the hosts of Israel in rejoicing before God, and which the Jews today still thank God for – rightly. If God commands us to rejoice in His deliverance, will you weep?
This seems callous to me. The wicked here might be your sister or mother or wife or child. Do you really want me to rejoice while your loved ones are suffering and dying?
|
|
|
Re: Who or What caused the Flood?
#15436
09/13/05 11:38 AM
09/13/05 11:38 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2020
4500+ Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,583
USA
|
|
By placing a one-sided construction on the passages you quote, you have arrived at a position where you will not be in harmony with God. It should give you pause.
To answer your last question, it will be no more callous of me to rejoice than it was for the Hebrews to rejoice at their deliverence. Christ said 'Who are my mother and brothers and sisters?' We know how He answered that. Was He callous?
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
