That was how it came across to me. Maybe it's just my experience with those pushing that theology that causes me to see it that way, but that was my impression.

I don't know that it was satan who did it. Could have been. Could just as more likely have been what happened in Sodom and Gomorrah, the earth was ready to open up and God prevented it up to that time. Don't know.

But in your comparison to Elijah, the fire from God did not destroy any person, did it? A little different I would think. Not a valid comparison...

The quote you listed says nothing to make a dramatic judgment of such. God is often said to be doing things He doesn't. A new thing, it was. Not natural. Doesn't mean God hurts people. People get hurt from lack of protection.

dedication,

Do you "love" having a vengeful God, or do you just follow the Biblical evidence where it leads? Do you find your ideas as to who God is in opposition to the Bible, or in the plain reading of the Bible?

I guess if some people on this forum have kids and they have ever punished them for anything at all they love vengeance and are very vengeful. I guess, though, they bring in the neighborhood psychopath to "discipline" their kids so they can look the other way and then claim they have no moral responsibility for the "discipline" that sicko administers to their own children.

We act out how we view God in our lives so that must be how they relate to their kids.

I can just see it, Since you kids have been disobeying me, I'm calling in the psychopath, so I won't have to discipline you myself because that would be vengeful on my part.

Myself, I'm with David. Let me fall into the hands of our merciful God for my punishment/discipline. I don't want the devil turned loose on me. He's far too cruel. I've seen far to much of his kind of "love".

Are you sure?
What about the priests and prophets of Baal -- what happened to them?

The quote appears to be quite plain --




"They dared to attribute God's judgments to Satan,...
It was this act that sealed their doom."

It also seems to me that attributing satan's motives to God's acts of judgment is equally bad.

Your comment troubles me --
[
What does that mean? -- it sounds like we can't trust the Bible, it often tells us things that aren't really that way????


This whole theory troubles me -- why?

Because, when I read it, the theory seems to leave me with only two options, neither of them appealing.

1. Believe the theory and don't trust the Bible, it often tells us things that aren't really that way? (That places one on very shaky ground, if we can't trust what scripture says)
OR
2. If we do take the Bible as it reads, those pushing this theory picture God's justice and deliverance from powerful sinners as tyranny and murder, and greatly smear the character of God by attributing satan's motives to God's acts of justice. (That destroys God's character, His sovereignty and holiness, it does not vindicate it AT ALL)


God is NOT out to hurt anyone -- that is not his purpose.
God is LOVE -- yes, infinite love, in holiness, justice, and redeeming grace. Love so great it's "amazing grace"!!!
It's true that God's purpose isn't to hurt anyone -- He seeks to redeem, to save, to restore. But we can't deny that in order for many to be saved, those who are fully given to destroy truth must be checked, a loving God can't allow the destroyers of truth to completely block salvation from his children.

All heaven is interested and working for our salvation. But what must be understood is that this includes keeping incorrigible sinners from completely obscuring and obstructing truth to reach those who would be responsive to God's grace. It includes God working to actively deliver His trusting people, from those who would destroy them.


People talking about the "character of God" couldn't really love and understand God's character, when they stoop to making the comments that they do concerning God's justice in dealing with incorrigible sinners. In their efforts to twist away from what the Bible and spirit of prophecy actually says about judgment, too often they make it sound terribly mean and hideous, which simply ends up making the God of scripture sound terrible.

It troubles me greatly --
and I may close this thread if it develops into that sort of thing, I have no desire to witness again where these discussions end up.
God's name is sacred, holy, yes amazing grace and love, and righteousness, justice and goodness.
We've kind of wandered away from the original theme anyway--the
legal work and the healing work of Christ in bringing us salvation -- I was hoping we could see how they worked together to form the complete picture.
But I guess that won't happen.

Pantheism/panentheism.





APL has not yet rejected all of the truths to which this spiritualistic theory will lead, but those points of error underscored in the above represent some that he appears already to have imbibed.

"preternatural"


This is notable, because APL seems to think "sin" produces death as its "natural" result.

"do away with the necessity for the atonement"

This is notable, because APL doesn't believe in the substitutionary atonement.


"make His word of no effect"

This is notable, because wherever the Word says God kills, destroys, or punishes, APL doesn't accept the plain reading, but reinterprets it to be something else, usually rather opposite in meaning, such as that Satan did what the Bible says God did.

"God being removed from His position of sovereignty"

This is notable, because APL relegates to "sin" the ultimate power attributed to God in the Bible--that of putting an end to sin by destroying sin and sinners.

dedication - what does the ... say in your quote? WHY do you not include it? And while you are at it, read the WHOLE chapter. The accusation were that MOSES and AARON had cause the death of Korah by the power of satan. But you have not left that fact out 3 times. You can't leave that out. And when taking the chapter as a whole, the facts come out. The people were condemned for accusing Moses and Aaron. And in the end: God works by the manifestation of His Spirit to reprove and convict the sinner; and if the Spirit's work is finally rejected, there is no more that God can do for the soul. The last resource of divine mercy has been employed. The transgressor has cut himself off from God, and sin has no remedy to cure itself. There is no reserved power by which God can work to convict and convert the sinner. "Let him alone" (Hosea 4:17) is the divine command. {PP 405.1}

And when God gives the sin what they want, the results are not pretty.

Your underlined portion says that people destroyed them. Not God. The comparison is not the same.

Back to.... Who killed Saul. The Bible says God did. The Bible says Saul did. Can we trust the Bible?



Setting people on fire seems to be out to hurt people.
Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?
Seems like there's a thread on socialism, forced coercion.....

Let's look at some absurdly deceitful logic that has just been displayed in this thread.



Who in their right mind would argue that God has no moral responsibility for the death of the prophets of Baal? It was at His direct command that the killings took place.

This is like the wealthy person who has been harassed by his neighbor repeatedly. The neighbor has repeatedly turned the entire neighborhood against him through deceit and misrepresentation. The harassed man has finally had enough so he goes out and finds someone who will kill the nasty neighbor for him. He pays off the assassin after the neighbor is killed, and then thinks, I'm sure glad I found someone to kill that jerk. Now I don't have any blood on my hands.

According to apl and kland this man who hires his killing done bears no moral responsibility whatsoever. According to them the way to be free of moral responsibility for the killing of your enemy is to have someone else do the killing for you.

This is so patently absurd it is ridiculous. It denies all sense of morality for the ultimate cause of a killing is free of all moral responsibility if someone else does the killing.

I don't see how any honest person can even begin to make this argument. It goes against everything the Bible teaches on moral accountability.