Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,214
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
|
|
9 registered members (Karen Y, dedication, Daryl, daylily, TheophilusOne, 4 invisible),
2,521
guests, and 9
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#83620
01/06/07 06:43 PM
01/06/07 06:43 PM
|
Active Member 2011
3500+ Member
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,965
Sweden
|
|
Or create us and we wouldnt have sinned? Was that ever a possibility?
Galatians 2 21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
It is so hazardous to take here a little and there a little. If you put the right little's together you can make the bible teach anything you wish. //Graham Maxwell
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#83637
01/07/07 02:04 AM
01/07/07 02:04 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Tom, please show me where it says what God foresaw did not involve the fall and death of FMAs.
Why would I do that? That's the opposite of what I've been saying. That would be like me asking you to show me where it says that the future is not like a T.V. rerun.
The following quote says God knew man would sin but that it did not deter Him carrying out His "eternal" purpose. You cannot get more "original" than eternal.
AG 129 But the defection of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the Omnipotent, and yet it did not deter Him from carrying out His eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish His throne in righteousness. {AG 129.2}
No, Tom, God did not want us to sin. He did not create us to sin. He designed us to be holy and righteous, just like Jesus. He only had two options, 1) to create us and deal with the sin problem, or 2) not to create us and not have to deal with the sin problem. The same logic applies to the angels.
Your logic is wrong here. It assumes that God could only create man in such a way that he would sin. That is, you're leaving out a third possibility: 3) to create us, and not have to deal with the sin problem (in human beings; there still would have been a sin problem to deal with) because we chose not to sin, as God intended.
Obviously He chose to create us. Why? Because "the Lord would establish His throne in righteousness." That's why! That's the only reason we are given as to why God chose to create us in spite of the fact He knew we would sin and that some of us would reject Jesus and despise His sacrifice and die in the lake of fire.
You have a habit overstating things, which leads to your having to backtrack. Here you are stating that "that's the only reason we are given" when you should state instead, "that's the only reason I've come accross."
God did not create us with the intention that we should sin, as you seem to be suggesting. You are stating that there were only two possibilities: 1)God could not create us 2)God would create us, and we would sin. You are further reasoning that God created us anyway because He would establish His throne in righteousness, making it sound as if it was part of God's plan that we should sin, so that He could establish His throne in righteousness. I think I'll stop here to see if you agree with this.
Again, I ask, does the end justify the means?
This would imply that the means are immoral, and need justifying. Again, I answer, "no." The end does not justify the means. I like (I think it was JB? who put it this way) the idea that the means are validated by the end. But the phrase "the end justifies the means" implies there is something faulty with the means, which is justified by the end result.
In other words, God is going to lose a majority to save a minority, so, does the end justify the means?
This is taking a myopic view of things. God created millions of worlds who did not sin. The vast majority of creation will not be lost. We're just a tiny speck. God safeguarded the universe, even though a tiny minority will be lost.
Or, would it have been better if God had chosen not to create us in the first place? It would have saved Him losing the majority, right?
No. God created millions of worlds, and any of these millions of worlds could have sinned. He would have had to refrain not just from creating us, but these millions of worlds as well, and refrained from creating the angels as well. As soon as God created sentient beings with the ability to love and be loved, the possibility for sin existed. You can't have the one without the other. (I'm speaking of the possibility of sin here; it was by no means necessary that this possibility be realized, but God foresaw the possibility, and was ready for it)
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#83641
01/07/07 03:44 AM
01/07/07 03:44 AM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
MM, you did not respond to this question yet. Would you please?
It is simpler to think on a personal basis.
Simply put:
Is your salvation affected by your choice, or God leaves nothing to your choice.
The issue of the great Controversy is after all a personal matter. You are one part of it, and God deals with each one of us individually.
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: John Boskovic]
#83651
01/07/07 03:39 PM
01/07/07 03:39 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
TV: Or create us and we wouldnt have sinned? Was that ever a possibility?
MM: Obviously not. Otherwise, that's how God would have done it.
AG 129 But the defection of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the Omnipotent, and yet it did not deter Him from carrying out His eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish His throne in righteousness. God knows the end from the beginning. {AG 129.2}
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#83653
01/07/07 03:45 PM
01/07/07 03:45 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
TE: I'm speaking of the possibility of sin here; it was by no means necessary that this possibility be realized, but God foresaw the possibility, and was ready for it.
MM: That's not how Sister White put it. She said God knew FMAs would choose to sin - not that He knew it was a possibility.
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#83655
01/07/07 03:50 PM
01/07/07 03:50 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
JB: Is your salvation affected by your choice, or God leaves nothing to your choice. The issue of the great Controversy is after all a personal matter. You are one part of it, and God deals with each one of us individually.
MM: "Is your salvation affected by your choice ..." Yes. I must choose to serve Jesus. The choice to be lost is made by default.
"You are one part of it ..." Yes, but a very small part of it. Whether I choose to serve Jesus or not will not change the outcome of the GC. God will win the GC with or without me.
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#83662
01/07/07 04:26 PM
01/07/07 04:26 PM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
"You are one part of it ..." Yes, but a very small part of it. Whether I choose to serve Jesus or not will not change the outcome of the GC. God will win the GC with or without me. This is what misses the mark! The winning of the GC is in your heart and mine. It is the eternal life that he offers to save us from the power of sin and death.
God does not have a political agenda to establish some sort of utopia, while millions of sacrifices fall by the wayside as he tramples them on the way.
Rather, he feels keenly for each soul, and there is great joy for one sinner that repents.
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: John Boskovic]
#83665
01/07/07 07:16 PM
01/07/07 07:16 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
The default is to be saved. One must fight to be lost. The sinner may resist this love, may refuse to be drawn to Christ; but if he does not resist he will be drawn to Jesus; a knowledge of the plan of salvation will lead him to the foot of the cross in repentance for his sins, which have caused the sufferings of God's dear Son. {SC 27.2} Not only must one choose to be lost, but it is a difficult thing to do: Yet do not therefore conclude that the upward path is the hard and the downward road the easy way. All along the road that leads to death there are pains and penalties, there are sorrows and disappointments, there are warnings not to go on. God's love has made it hard for the heedless and headstrong to destroy themselves. {MB 139.1} Notice the part that says, "God's love has made it hard for the heedless and headstrong to destroy themselves." This means that God's love has made it hard to be lost. Thank the Lord for the good news of the Gospel! The gospel is not that it is hard to be saved, and by default that we are lost, as if God were making it hard for us to get to heaven. God is working hard not to keep us out, but to get us in! His love makes it hard for us to destroy ourselves. (I like how she puts this as well. Hard for us to destroy ourselves, as opposed to, "hard for us to avoid His killing us because we don't obey His rules.") Not only is the good news that God has made it hard for us to destroy ourselves; it is even better than that! God has made provision that we may become like unto Him, and He will accomplish this for all who do not interpose a perverse will and thus frustrate His grace. {MB 76.2} God will not only justify us, if we don't resist His drawing, but He will perfect us as well. The Good News is good!
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: Tom]
#83666
01/07/07 07:23 PM
01/07/07 07:23 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
TV: Or create us and we wouldnt have sinned? Was that ever a possibility?
MM: Obviously not. Otherwise, that's how God would have done it.
This comment brings out the problems in your philosophy. First of all, this idea is directly contrary to inspiration. Secondly, it speaks very badly of God. Thirdly, it misstates things. I'll take things in reverse order.
It misstates things because it puts things as if whether or not man would sin was something controlled by God. It puts God in a bad light, because it makes Him, rather than Satan (and man) responsible for man's sin. Thirdly it directly contradicts inspiration because inspiration tells us that the entrance of sin is a mystery for which no explanation can be given. Clearly "Otherwise, that's not how God would have done it." is providing an explanation (i.e., God created things in such a way that man would sin) where we are told none should be given. (to explain the entrance of sin is to excuse it).
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Does the end justify the means?
[Re: Tom]
#83667
01/07/07 07:48 PM
01/07/07 07:48 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
TE: I'm speaking of the possibility of sin here; it was by no means necessary that this possibility be realized, but God foresaw the possibility, and was ready for it. MM: That's not how Sister White put it. She said God knew FMAs would choose to sin - not that He knew it was a possibility. No, that's not what she said. She said this:AG 129 But the defection of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the Omnipotent, and yet it did not deter Him from carrying out His eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish His throne in righteousness. {AG 129.2} You are interpreting this to mean what you think it means, but you are not taking into account other things which she wrote on the subject. She suggests that we (just like when we study Scripture) take into account all her writings on a subject, not just take one thing. For example, she wrote the following:Satan in heaven had hated Christ for His position in the courts of God. He hated Him the more when he himself was dethroned. He hated Him who pledged Himself to redeem a race of sinners. Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss. {DA 49.1}
The heart of the human father yearns over his son. He looks into the face of his little child, and trembles at the thought of life's peril. He longs to shield his dear one from Satan's power, to hold him back from temptation and conflict. To meet a bitterer conflict and a more fearful risk, God gave His only-begotten Son, that the path of life might be made sure for our little ones. "Herein is love." Wonder, O heavens! and be astonished, O earth! {DA 49.2} This makes it crystal clear that EGW did not view the future as you do, as being like a T.V. rerun (T.V. reruns have no risk!).
In the Story of Redemption we are told, " It was not the will of God that this sinless pair should have any knowledge of evil." (p. 34). This means it was not God's will that man would eat of the forbidden tree. According to you, if God had not wanted man to sin, "that's how God would have done it."
There's nothing wrong with how God did things! Sin arose not because of God's desire that man should sin, but in spite of His desire that man sin. To suggest that man sinned because of God is to blight His character. God is not willing that any should perish.Sorrow filled heaven, as it was realized that man was lost and that world which God had created was to be filled with mortals doomed to misery, sickness, and death, and there was no way of escape for the offender. The whole family of Adam must die. I saw the lovely Jesus and beheld an expression of sympathy and sorrow upon His countenance. Soon I saw Him approach the exceeding bright light which enshrouded the Father. Said my accompanying angel, He is in close converse with His Father. The anxiety of the angels seemed to be intense while Jesus was communing with His Father. Three times He was shut in by the glorious light about the Father, and the third time He came out from the Father, His person could be seen. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and doubt, and shone with benevolence and loveliness, such as words cannot express. {SR 42.1} Here we see that God mad with Jesus three times. What was the purpose of this meeting?Said the angel, "Think ye that the Father yielded up His dearly beloved Son without a struggle? No, no. It was even a struggle with the God of heaven, whether to let guilty man perish, or to give His beloved Son to die for him." Obviously if God always knew man was going to sin at this precise moment, and knew what He would do (send His Son at the risk of failure and eternal loss), there could not have been any struggle. Everything about the account of man's fall makes it clear that it was a real emergency that had to be met. God had foreseen the possibility of man's fall, but it was not an inevitable event, as everything about the account indicates.
Therefore your interpretation of AG 129.2 must be rejected, as it does not fit with the rest of the evidence.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|