|
Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,198
Members1,325
| |
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
|
|
|
6 registered members (Karen Y, dedication, Kevin H, 3 invisible),
2,766
guests, and 7
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15491
08/19/05 01:36 PM
08/19/05 01:36 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
R:Tom,
Before thinking about which view I would adopt, it would help to have a list of, at least, the main incidents and to whom they are ascribed.
It seems some ascribed only to God, some only to Satan and some to both. Is this correct?
Tom: I agree. The only other possibility would be some to God and some to Satan and not to both.
There are also bad things that happen which are ascribed to someone other than God or Satan (such as humans).
Examples of events ascribed to both would be:
1)The cross.
2)The final judgments of God before Christ's coming.
3)David's numbering of Israel.
4)The destruction of Jerusalem.
5)The bad things that happened to Job.
6)Bad things that happened to Israel, such as crop failures, being invaded, etc.
Examples of events ascribed to Satan only are not so easy to think of. My mind is drawing a blank on this, but I'm sure there are things where inspiration speaks of Satan causing some plague or destruction without also speaking of God doing it.
Example of event ascribed to God only are:
1)The plagues in Egypt.
2)The flood.
3)Soddom and Gomorrah.
4)The slaying of some thousands of Assyrians and others by angels.
5)Herod's death.
6)Anais and Saphira.
That's enough to start with.
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15492
08/19/05 01:53 PM
08/19/05 01:53 PM
|
Active Member 2011
3500+ Member
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,965
Sweden
|
|
I wonder if the example of Jesus life on earth can be used for this question. His mission was to reach out to the sinner, to heal the broken, to set captives free, just as is our mission today. But there comes a day when the objective changes, which is described in SOP(1). It is the same Jesus who gives these words and yet they bring less comfort to those who persist as His enemies. The great and terrible day of the Lord, the day when every person who lives on earth has filled his or her cup, some with iniquity, some with Gods Holy Spirit. May this day come soon.
/Thomas
(1)John the revelator
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15493
08/19/05 04:28 PM
08/19/05 04:28 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
The question I am asking is what principle should we use in trying to understand who is performing some "bad" act which is ascribed to God in Scripture. At times the same "bad" act is ascribed to both God and Satan. In such a case, do we give Satan the benfit of the doubt? If only God is given as the actor, then do we say it is God in these cases? If one says "yes" to both of these questions, then the principle seems to be the following:
If a "bad" act is ascribed to God only by inspiration, then God is the being responsible;however, if the "bad" act is ascribed to God and some other being, then the other being is responsible.
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15494
08/28/05 05:12 AM
08/28/05 05:12 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
If a "bad" act is ascribed to God alone by inspiration, then God is the being responsible;however, if the "bad" act is ascribed to God and some other being, then the other being is responsible.
Is this correct?
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15495
08/29/05 12:35 PM
08/29/05 12:35 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
Not in all instances (see, for instance, the statement of 2 Thess. 2:11, that "God sends upon them a strong delusion"). The whole context of the Bible must be examined.
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15496
08/30/05 02:24 AM
08/30/05 02:24 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
Not in all instances (see, for instance, the statement of 2 Thess. 2:11, that "God sends upon them a strong delusion"). The whole context of the Bible must be examined.
What is the exception you have in mind for 2 Thess. 2:11? I don't understand why it would not fall under the principle I suggested. Please explain.
What does it mean that the whole context of the Bible must be examined? I had framed my principle in terms of "inspiration", which would include the Spirit of Prophesy. Are you suggesting that the Spirit of Prophesy should be left out of the principle?
Thanks for your input.
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15497
08/30/05 01:15 PM
08/30/05 01:15 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
Tom,
I thought of the principle in terms of the Bible, and there the “strong delusion” is attributed only to God. If you include the EGW writings, then the principle seems to be correct.
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15498
08/30/05 04:37 PM
08/30/05 04:37 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
Tom,
I thought of the principle in terms of the Bible, and there the “strong delusion” is attributed only to God. If you include the EGW writings, then the principle seems to be correct.
So if we did not have the benefit of Ellen White's writings, given that the Bible speaks only of God's sending a strong delusion, you would have understood this as something God actually did rather than something He permitted. Is that correct?
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15499
08/30/05 11:07 PM
08/30/05 11:07 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
quote:
So if we did not have the benefit of Ellen White's writings, given that the Bible speaks only of God's sending a strong delusion, you would have understood this as something God actually did rather than something He permitted. Is that correct?
No. I’m just trying to define the correctness of the principle you formulated.
“If a ‘bad’ act is ascribed to God alone by inspiration, then God is the being responsible; however, if the ‘bad’ act is ascribed to God and some other being, then the other being is responsible.”
Considering only the Bible, the principle is false, because the “strong delusion” is ascribed only to God, but this would contradict other passages, therefore the whole context of the Bible must be examined.
Considering the Bible and EGW, the principle seems to be true, because EGW always makes clear when God does something and when He permits something.
|
|
|
Re: God or Satan?
#15500
08/31/05 04:18 AM
08/31/05 04:18 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
No. I’m just trying to define the correctness of the principle you formulated.
So we could understand that God's sending a strong delusion was not something He actively did, even without the Spirit of Prophesy? Is that correct?
quote:
“If a ‘bad’ act is ascribed to God alone by inspiration, then God is the being responsible; however, if the ‘bad’ act is ascribed to God and some other being, then the other being is responsible.”
Considering only the Bible, the principle is false, because the “strong delusion” is ascribed only to God, but this would contradict other passages, therefore the whole context of the Bible must be examined.
This is really hard to follow. You write:
1)Considering the Bible, the principle is false
2)Because the "strong delusion" is ascribed only to God.
3)But this would contradict other passages
4)Therefore the whole context of the Bible must be examined.
Why would the principle be false considering only the Bible? You write it's because "strong delusion" is ascribed only to God, but why would this make the principle false? Then you write "this" would contradict other passages. What is "this"? Is it the idea that God sends a strong delusion means that God actively did it. It is the principle suggested?
Of course the whole context of the Bible must be considered. This is my point. The Bible presents God as doing that which He does not permit. That's the underlying principle. Understanding that principle allows us to understand the Bible without having to refer to Ellen White, who of course agrees with the Bible, being inspired by the same Spirit. So I agree with your point, but I don't understand the connection you had in mind in making it.
quote:
Considering the Bible and EGW, the principle seems to be true, because EGW always makes clear when God does something and when He permits something.
You seem to be suggesting her that the principle is true if one takes into account EGW because she is always clear when God does something and when He permits something, whereas if one took only the Bible into account, then the principle would not be true because, I assume, the Bible is not clear when it is God and when it is not.
Therefore those followers of God who do not make use of the Spirit of Prophesy have no way of understanding when God is actually doing something or not. This seems to me to be the only possible conclusion to what you have written. Have I correctly understood you?
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
