Yes, Job is an interesting case where God allowed the devil to do things that would hurt Job in, for instance, the death of his children.

In this instance, God actually allowed the devil to bring about the death of Job's children.


Why did God permit the devil to bring about the death of Job's children?

Was this an example of God using the devil to execute God's judgment upon Job's children?

I thought I responded, but I don't see it.

MM wrote somewhere that he doesn't believe Satan was guilty of sinning when he killed Job's children, and inflicted him with boils etc.

Job shows that when bad things happen, it is not necessarily because the person to whom these things are happening did something wrong.



Satan is the author of sin and all its results. He leads men to look upon disease and death as proceeding from God.

TV: Since when is Job an example of a full-cup sinner being destroyed by evil angels? He was destroyed by evil angels but hardly for being such a sinner that God lost hope of him... As for Jerusalem 70 AD...

MM: The point in Job’s case is that God gave evil angels permission to destroy his children. Job gave God the credit, thus honoring and glorying God. Yes, as for the destruction of the Temple and the slaughter of Jews in AD 70. Clearly God gave evil angels permission to influence the Roman soldiers to wreak havoc, but not beyond the limits God established and maintained.

TV: That God is portrayed as doing something, does that mean that God is actually doing it? Satan is busy portraying God as doing a lot of less than flattering things. My point here is that image and reality is not nessessarily the same thing.

MM: The Bible, not the Devil, clearly portrays God doing things He commands or permits. Who are we to question God’s perspective?

TV: Gods actions during the flood, somehow providing lots and lots of water... and also keeping a wooden boat from destruction.

MM: So, who do you think caused the Flood? God? Satan? Nature? Why didn't God prevent the Flood?

TE: You still haven't answered my question, which is if they look the same, then what's the difference? You point out that when God commands holy angels to destroy then this is not evil. Fine, then it's good. In what way does it differ from evil? Just the identity of the one doing or commanding the act makes the difference in your view. Isn't that correct?

MM: Moses, Joshua, Gideon, Samuel, David, Elijah, etc., did not perceive it as “evil” when God blessed them with victory, with the death and destruction of their enemies. On the contrary, they wrote beautiful songs and hymns to commemorate the slaughter.

How do you explain the joyous and jubilant response of God’s chosen people to the death and destruction of fellow humans beings made in the likeness and image of God?

The circumstances that exist which force God to command or permit the destruction of sinners is not good, that is, the circumstances themselves are not good. By circumstances I am referring to the fact people choose to sin. Sinning creates circumstance that forces God to do things He wishes were not necessary. It is God’s great desire to save everyone.

God is not guilty of evildoing when He commands or permits sinners to be destroyed. Nor are the results evil. They are not evil by virtue of the fact God commanded or permitted them. God is good, not evil. And everything He does is good. It is too bad circumstances force Him to do things He wishes were not necessary.

The fact evil angels delight in destroying sinners, when God gives them permission, is evil. To answer your question - that is what makes the difference. Holy angels do not delight in the death and destruction of sinners. True, they rejoice in the results, that is, they praise God for doing the right thing, but they take no pleasure in destroying sinners.

…………………..

TE: What plagues do you think 14MR 3 are dealing with? There are other SOP statements which state the same thing as 14MR 3. (that the seven last plagues come about as a result of God's withdrawing His protection).

MM: The insights articulated in 14MR 3 (LDE 242) are dealing with things God is allowing evil angels to do now. It is not talking about the seven last plagues. And the GC 614 quote you posted describes how unsheltered sinners will behave under the influence of evil angels. It does not describe them causing the destruction associated with pouring out the seven last plagues.

Again, the Bible is clear about who pours out the seven last plagues:

Revelation
15:1 And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.
15:6 And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts girded with golden girdles.
15:7 And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever.

Tom, what is about this description that makes you insist evil angels will pour out the seven last plagues?

…………………………..

TE: The point is that sometime Scripture presents God as doing that which He permits, of which I gave several examples. So you cannot on the basis of a text which says, "God did such and such" know whether God actively did the thing or simply permitted the thing to happen. Yet you frequently do this very thing.

MM: Since God portrays Himself as doing the very things He commands or permits it is clear that is how God views it. I agree with God. I do not pretend to be able explain why or how, but I believe what God says about Himself.

………………………..

TE: It seems to me he's saying exactly the same thing I am. Of course Thomas knows God is all-powerful and nothing can happen except God permits it. But Thomas has been careful to point out that just because God allows something to happen, does not mean this is something God wanted to happen. He gave several examples to show this. This is exactly the same point I was making.

MM: Thomas made it clear that Joey’s death was not the result of God’s passive or permissive will. He plainly stated that it was result of human free will, that God was in no way involved, that He did permit it. Which disagrees with your point of view. Here is how he explains it:

TV: All these later things are either planed and directed by satan or his minions, or simply the fruit of the free will of humans. God has at times judged people and will in the end judge everyone and Gods judgements are just. All this vanton violence that we can observe every day until suffering fatigue overtakes our capability of compassion, that is neither just nor caused or expressidly permitted by God. It all passes under the blanket permission that is known as human free will. And while God can interviene and protect those who call on Him, does not mean that the opposite is true that God gives individual permission to ever atrocity or sin commited on earth. This is what I believe about this subject.

MM: The idea that “just because God allows something to happen, does not mean this is something God wanted to happen” is, by itself, misleading. It does not explain why God allows it to happen. The reason God commands or permits things to happen is because, given the circumstances, it makes sense to Him. True, God wishes circumstances did not force Him to command or permit it to happen. He hates the circumstances. But He wants to do what is right.

DF: Was this an example of God using the devil to execute God's judgment upon Job's children?

MM: Here is an interesting insight I just found:

LDE 242
God will use His enemies as instruments to punish those who have followed their own pernicious ways whereby the truth of God has been misrepresented, misjudged, and dishonored.--PC 136 (1894). {LDE 242.3}

TE: Satan is the author of sin and all its results. He leads men to look upon disease and death as proceeding from God.

MM: There are times when God uses disease to punish sinners. Not all diseases are the result of unrestrained natural causes. For example, God punished Miriam with leprosy. Of course, who can forget the plagues of Egypt? And, God will use disease to punish sinners during the seven last plagues:

Revelation
16:2 And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and [upon] them which worshipped his image.

Job assumed God was responsible because he was ignorant of Satan.



It is to Job's credit that he was willing to trust God, even though he was unaware as to what was really happening, but God's preference is not that we "honor" and "glorify" Him by ignorantly falling along with that which the great deceiver seeks to do, which is to conceal his own work. He loves to blame God for what he does, and is delighted when his lies are appropriated.

TE: You still haven't answered my question, which is if they look the same, then what's the difference? You point out that when God commands holy angels to destroy then this is not evil. Fine, then it's good. In what way does it differ from evil? Just the identity of the one doing or commanding the act makes the difference in your view. Isn't that correct?

MM: Moses, Joshua, Gideon, Samuel, David, Elijah, etc., did not perceive it as “evil” when God blessed them with victory, with the death and destruction of their enemies. On the contrary, they wrote beautiful songs and hymns to commemorate the slaughter.

How do you explain the joyous and jubilant response of God’s chosen people to the death and destruction of fellow humans beings made in the likeness and image of God?

The circumstances that exist which force God to command or permit the destruction of sinners is not good, that is, the circumstances themselves are not good. By circumstances I am referring to the fact people choose to sin. Sinning creates circumstance that forces God to do things He wishes were not necessary. It is God’s great desire to save everyone.

God is not guilty of evildoing when He commands or permits sinners to be destroyed. Nor are the results evil. They are not evil by virtue of the fact God commanded or permitted them. God is good, not evil. And everything He does is good.

This looks like you are answering my question the way I suggested you would, which is that there is nothing different between good and evil, except the identity of the one performing the act. If this is not really what you think, please clarify.

It is too bad circumstances force Him to do things He wishes were not necessary.

The fact evil angels delight in destroying sinners, when God gives them permission, is evil. To answer your question - that is what makes the difference. Holy angels do not delight in the death and destruction of sinners. True, they rejoice in the results, that is, they praise God for doing the right thing, but they take no pleasure in destroying sinners.

Ok, this is going a bit further than just identity. Here you seem to be saying that what makes the difference is not the act being committed, but the attitude of the one performing the act. Although you aren't consistent with this, because you stated in the course of Job that you did not think the evil angels were guilty of sin, which here they would have been because of their delight in destroying sinners.

…………………..

TE: What plagues do you think 14MR 3 are dealing with? There are other SOP statements which state the same thing as 14MR 3. (that the seven last plagues come about as a result of God's withdrawing His protection).

MM: The insights articulated in 14MR 3 (LDE 242) are dealing with things God is allowing evil angels to do now. It is not talking about the seven last plagues.



This certainly seems like a description of the last plagues. "We shall see more terrible manifestations of his power than we have ever dreamed of." It's difficult to understand how one would not see this description as dealing with the last plagues.

And the GC 614 quote you posted describes how unsheltered sinners will behave under the influence of evil angels. It does not describe them causing the destruction associated with pouring out the seven last plagues.

Here is the description from GC 614:



It's even harder to see how one could not perceive that this is dealing with the last plagues. Contrary to your assertion, this is not simply dealing with how unsheltered sinners will behave. Notice it says, "Unsheltered by divine grace, they have no protection from the wicked one." They are then plunged into a great, final trouble. The 14 MR quote brings out the Satan is working with great wrath, causing terrible manifestations of his power, in the form of storms and temptests. This is obviously describing destruction which takes place at the time Christ leaves the heavenly sanctuary, which is the time of the seven last plagues.

So we see that the time is right (Christ leaving the heavenly sanctuary), and the events are right (Satan's causing destruction, a great time of trouble). You would have to hypothesize that God is working hand in hand, along with Satan, destroying those who have rejected God's Spirit the same time as Satan.

How could you tell which was which? That is, someone is destroyed. "Who did that?" someone might ask. Your answer would be, "Either God or Satan." as to your way of looking at things, they do the same thing.

Again, the Bible is clear about who pours out the seven last plagues:

Revelation
15:1 And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God.
15:6 And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts girded with golden girdles.
15:7 And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever.

Tom, what is about this description that makes you insist evil angels will pour out the seven last plagues?

In reading Scripture, a good idea is to consider all of Scripture, not just one text or passage. The Scriptures make clear what God's character is (He is just like Jesus Christ), and we have many examples of Scripture presenting God as doing that which he permits. We know this is dealing with what God permits both by understanding His character, and by the things revealed from the Spirit of Prophecy.

…………………………..

TE: The point is that sometime Scripture presents God as doing that which He permits, of which I gave several examples. So you cannot on the basis of a text which says, "God did such and such" know whether God actively did the thing or simply permitted the thing to happen. Yet you frequently do this very thing.

MM: Since God portrays Himself as doing the very things He commands or permits it is clear that is how God views it. I agree with God. I do not pretend to be able explain why or how, but I believe what God says about Himself.

You should also believe what He says about Satan. God presents Himself as doing that which He permits because He is gracious and humble. Those who know Him understand His character. What God does can be distinguished from what God allows by knowing His character.

………………………..

TE: It seems to me he's saying exactly the same thing I am. Of course Thomas knows God is all-powerful and nothing can happen except God permits it. But Thomas has been careful to point out that just because God allows something to happen, does not mean this is something God wanted to happen. He gave several examples to show this. This is exactly the same point I was making.

MM: Thomas made it clear that Joey’s death was not the result of God’s passive or permissive will. He plainly stated that it was result of human free will, that God was in no way involved, that He did permit it. Which disagrees with your point of view. Here is how he explains it:

TV: All these later things are either planed and directed by satan or his minions, or simply the fruit of the free will of humans. God has at times judged people and will in the end judge everyone and Gods judgements are just. All this vanton violence that we can observe every day until suffering fatigue overtakes our capability of compassion, that is neither just nor caused or expressidly permitted by God. It all passes under the blanket permission that is known as human free will. And while God can interviene and protect those who call on Him, does not mean that the opposite is true that God gives individual permission to ever atrocity or sin commited on earth. This is what I believe about this subject.

MM: The idea that “just because God allows something to happen, does not mean this is something God wanted to happen” is, by itself, misleading. It does not explain why God allows it to happen. The reason God commands or permits things to happen is because, given the circumstances, it makes sense to Him.

No, this is an unwarranted assumption.

True, God wishes circumstances did not force Him to command or permit it to happen. He hates the circumstances. But He wants to do what is right.

God always does what is right, but God has given free will to His creatures, and *they* do not always do what is right. Whenever they do no do something which is right, they act contrary to God's will. If God's will were always followed, the world would be at perfect peace; men would live as Christ did.

Regarding disease and death, these things come from Satan. "Satan is the author of sin and all its results." "He leads men to look upon disease and death as proceeding from God." These are statements from EGW.

If Satan is the author of sin and all its results, then he is the author specifically of disease and death. "He leads men to look upon disease and death as proceeding from God."

It's true that Satan does this, but we do not have to believe him.

TV: Since when is Job an example of a full-cup sinner being destroyed by evil angels? He was destroyed by evil angels but hardly for being such a sinner that God lost hope of him... As for Jerusalem 70 AD...

MM: The point in Job’s case is that God gave evil angels permission to destroy his children. Job gave God the credit, thus honoring and glorying God. Yes, as for the destruction of the Temple and the slaughter of Jews in AD 70. Clearly God gave evil angels permission to influence the Roman soldiers to wreak havoc, but not beyond the limits God established and maintained.

-Historical records show that Roman soldiers hardly needed any external influence to destroy some foreign peoples temple or city. They where doing that for a living all around the empire where they had conquered and meet hard resistance.

TV: That God is portrayed as doing something, does that mean that God is actually doing it? Satan is busy portraying God as doing a lot of less than flattering things. My point here is that image and reality is not nessessarily the same thing.

MM: The Bible, not the Devil, clearly portrays God doing things He commands or permits. Who are we to question God’s perspective?

-And the examples of bible passages where the "doing" changes from one account to the next?

TV: Gods actions during the flood, somehow providing lots and lots of water... and also keeping a wooden boat from destruction.

MM: So, who do you think caused the Flood? God? Satan? Nature? Why didn't God prevent the Flood?

-You playing games with me? What in my above post is unclear? the "provide lots of water" part eh?