Is destruction inevitable by a loving Creator?

[skyblue888]

Thanks, sky, for that thoughtful and thought-provoking post. I like what you wrote but I'm not sure that it can explain all the texts in the Bible on this subject.

You mean this:

Originally Posted By: John317

Look at a few examples of God's wrath, or anger, in the Old Testament:

1) Numbers 11: 33. What was the result of the wrath of the Lord?

2) Number 16: 44-49

3) Numbers 25: 3-5. What did the anger of the Lord result in?

4) 2 Sam. 6: 6-8.

How would you characterize God's wrath in these passages? In what ways-- if any-- is this wrath similar to human wrath, and how is it different?

___________________________________________________________________

Thanks Jonhn. I just read these passages you gave to us. In order to know what "the anger of the Lord" is we need to compare 2 Sam.24:1 and 1 Chron.21:1. These two passages clearly reveal that Satan is the anger of the Lord. I will share with you why he is called "the anger of the Lord" before the end of this post.

If you compare one of the passages you mentioned, Numbers 25:3 with 2 Sam.24:1 and 1 Chron.21:1 it becomes clear that when it says "and the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel" it simply means that the Lord permitted Satan to afflict Israel because of their sins.

Jeremiah the prophet understood this when he wrote these words:

"Behold, the whirlwind of the Lord goes forth with fury, a continuing whirlwind; it will fall violently on the head of the wicked. The fierce anger of the Lord will not return until he has done it, and until he has performed the intents of his heart. In the latter days you will consider it."

Then in chapter 23, verse 20 the prophet says, "The anger of the Lord shall not return, until he has executed, and till he has performed the thoughts of his heart; in the latter days you will consider (understand) it perfectly."

We are in the "latter days" of this prophecy and we may understand perfectly what "the anger of the Lord" or "His wrath" is. As we compare these passages of Scriptures with 2 Sam.24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 we may know that Satan is indeed "the anger of the Lord" in the sense that he is the prosecutor against all who break the law of God, that he is the one who always wants to make sure that the sinner is punished for his sin. His claim is that he has a perfect right to afflict or destroy those who transgress the law of God. After all, was he not bannished from Heaven and will he not be annihilated on account of his having transgressed the law of God? So he wants justice to be done against all transgressors. So Satan is the great legalist, the prosecutor and the executioner of the sentence against transgression. It is in that sense that the Scriptures teach us that he is "the anger of the Lord."

One more proof that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression." G.C.36. It is for that very reason that "We are not to regard God as waiting to punish the sinner for his sin." 1 S.M.235.

Satan is the prosecutor and the executioner of the sentence as soon as God permits or as soon as He gives His angels the command to no longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy, as we have seen in previous quoted statements.

Remember how Jeremiah the prophet said that in the "latter days" a people would consider this and that they would understand it perfectly. In chapter 29 and 23 Jeremiah talked about "the whirlwind of the Lord," or "the fierce anger of the Lord."

When Elijah the prophet was in the cave and the Lord said unto him, "Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord. And, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and broke in pieces the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind. And after the wind an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake. And the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire, and after that a still, small voice." 1 Kings 19:11,12.

This is the very lesson that both John the Baptist and Elijah had to learn, that God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but that Satan is. Please read D.A.215,217 very carefully and prayerfully.

God bless,

sky

_______________________________________________________________

Thanks John. I am glad that at least you thought it was a thoughful and thought-provoking post. It is indeed. You like what I wrote but your still not convinced how to explain all the texts in the Bible. It is easy John. All we need to do is to built upon the foundation and that is that God is never the accuser, the prosecutor, or the executioner of the sentence against transgression. Satan is. It shouldn't be too difficult to believe. Satan is the one who always wants to make sure that you are punished for your sin. Therefore "We are never to regard God as waiting to punish the sinner for his sin."

If it were not for Christ pleading His divine merits in our behalf, all of us would die at the hand of the destroyer. The reason why sinners continue to live is because God and His angels are holding back the winds of strife and holding in check the malice and enmity of Satan and his angels.

"We cannot know how much we owe to Christ for the peace and protection which we enjoy. It is the restraining power of God that prevents mankind from passing fully under the control of Satan. The disobedient and unthankful have great reason for gratitude for God's mercy and long-suffering in holding in check the cruel, malignant power of the evil one. But when men pass the limits of divine forbearance, that restraint is removed. God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression; but He leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown. Every ray of light rejected, every warning despised or unheeded, every passion indulged, every transgression of the law of God, is a seed sown which yields its unfailing harvest. The Spirit of God, persistently resisted, is at last withdrawn from the sinner, and then there is left no power to control the evil passions of the soul, and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan. The destruction of Jerusalem is a fearful and solemn warning to all who are trifling with the offers of divine grace and resisting the pleadings of divine mercy. Never was there given a more decisive testimony to God's hatred of sin and to the certain punishment that will fall upon the guilty." G.C.36.

sky

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Richard

Something to think about. It's hard to believe all these texts are saying something other than what they really mean.

Consider that "God sent fiery serpents against the Isrealites" means "God permitted the fiery serpents which had been there the whole, and from which He had been protecting them from, to attack the Israelites." Would you say this is an example of a text "saying something other than what it really means"?

As we study the Bible on this topic, it consistently says things like, "God sent...," "God destroyed...," "God killed," etc. God could have inspired the prophets to write, "God permitted....," etc. How do you explain this? Do you believe that the prophets had the wrong understanding?

Personally I have no trouble accepting these passages just as they read. God is above all law, since God Himself precedes law. In fact, God IS the law; that is, He is the standard. There is no standard of right and wrong apart from Him. He is righteousness itself, just as He is love itself. Therefore, it is impossible for law to be above God.

What is the difference between a mother killing her child and a mother allowing someone else to kill her child? In either case, isn't she responsible for the death of her child?

[pnattmbtc]

As we study the Bible on this topic, it consistently says things like, "God sent...," "God destroyed...," "God killed," etc. God could have inspired the prophets to write, "God permitted....," etc. How do you explain this? Do you believe that the prophets had the wrong understanding?

[pnattmbtc]

John317, did you read #278089?

[skyblue888]

John, God is not above the law. He did not give us a law that He Himself can break. It would be like the powers that be enacting laws for the people at large while they themselves could transgress that law without fear of punishment. You said it yourself, He is the law and in Him there is no unrighteousness.

Like you I accept the Bible as it reads. For example, when the Bible says that "God hardened Pharaoh's heart," I accept that. I do believe that He did harden Pharaoh's heart but how? That is the question. How does the Lord harden a man's heart. When we understand what He means by these words we are made to realize that the heardening is never a direct act from God but that the Lord sends light and if that light is rejected there is a hardening that takes place which makes it more difficult to accept that same light the second time it is presented.

This is how the Lord hardens the heart. In fact He doesn't. What it is saying is that when He sends light to soften the heart and that light meets resistance, this is how He hardens the heart. God hardens the heart ty trying to soften it. That is why we read, "It is not God that blinds the eyes of man or who hardens their hearts. He sends them light to correct their errors, and to lead them in safe paths; it is by the rejection of this light that the eyes are blinded and the heart hardened. Often the process is gradual, and almost imperceptible. Light comes to the soul through God's word, through His servants, or by the direct agency of His Spirit; but when one ray of light is disregarded, there is a partial benumbing of the spiritual perception, and the second revealing of light is less clearly discerned. So the darkness increases, until it is night in the soul." D.A.322.

Does that make any sense to you John?

We must accept the Bible as it reads but that is not the end of the matter. We must sit at the feet of Jesus and be taught of Him and who can teach like Him! We cannot afford to act as though we didn't have the Testimonies to enlighten us. We Adventists have no excuse. We are not in the same position as the people of the other churches who do not have the Testimonies.

As we study the Testimonies, we will be better prepared to explain the Scriptures to others as to what God means when He says that He did this or that He did that or that He will do this or that.

back to you,

sky

[John317]

Thanks John. I am glad that at least you thought it was a thoughful and thought-provoking post. It is indeed. You like what I wrote but your still not convinced how to explain all the texts in the Bible. It is easy John. All we need to do is to built upon the foundation and that is that God is never the accuser, the prosecutor, or the executioner of the sentence against transgression. Satan is. It shouldn't be too difficult to believe. Satan is the one who always wants to make sure that you are punished for your sin. Therefore "We are never to regard God as waiting to punish the sinner for his sin."

I certainly don't see God as the accuser, nor do I see Him as waiting to punish the sinner for his sin. God is love and the Savior. So, for me, that's not the problem. The problem is that I need to be able to harmonize what I believe the Bible is saying with what other people say the Bible means.

Could you explain Ex. 14: 26-31; 15: 19, 21? What happened?

Also Numbers 16: 28-35.

[teresaq]

As we study the Bible on this topic, it consistently says things like, "God sent...," "God destroyed...," "God killed," etc. God could have inspired the prophets to write, "God permitted....," etc. How do you explain this? Do you believe that the prophets had the wrong understanding?

Personally I have no trouble accepting these passages just as they read. God is above all law, since God Himself precedes law. In fact, God IS the law; that is, He is the standard. There is no standard of right and wrong apart from Him. He is righteousness itself, just as He is love itself. Therefore, it is impossible for law to be above God.

[John317]

i have read various understandings as to why God does that, but the one that makes the most sense to me is youngs understanding that the hebrew has both a permissive and causative tense. some of the older commentators appear to be in agreement with that.

Is the "permissive tense" used as regards the Flood, the destruction of Sodom, or the events described in Numbers 25: 1-18?

Let's look at Numbers 25:

1) The Lord's anger was aroused against Israel. v. 3

2) The Lord ordered Moses to hang ["impale"- NRSV] the offenders "out in the sun so that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel." v. 4.

3) Phinehas killed a man and a Midianite woman, and this stopped the plague. vv. 6-8.

4) 24, 000 people died in the plague which was due to God's anger at the immorality of the people. vv. 3, 8, 9.

5) The Lord rewarded Phinehas for his killing of the man and the Midianite woman. vv. 10-13.

6) The Lord ordered Moses and the Israelites to harass and attack the Midianites. vv. 16-18. Please compare Judges 7: 24, 25 for an instance of how this was put into effect.

How does the concept of "the permissive tense" help us understand the above examples?

[John317]

John, God is not above the law. He did not give us a law that He Himself can break. It would be like the powers that be enacting laws for the people at large while they themselves could transgress that law without fear of punishment. You said it yourself, He is the law and in Him there is no unrighteousness.

I don't mean to imply that God "breaks" His own law. But take the example of the commandment, "You shall not murder."

When God orders humans to take human life, are we right to understand it to mean that God is violating the commandment not to murder?

If not, then is He violating His law if He Himself takes human life?

I believe the answer to both questions is no.

[John317]

[quote name="teresaq(sda)

so, my brother, how would you explain to a predestinationist this verse:

Exo 4:21 And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.

First of all, I would point them to Romans 9: 17-22.

Pharaoh's heart was hardened in response to God's activity. God knew that Pharaoh would be stubborn and refuse to let the people go.

There are some passages of Scripture dealing with the subject under discussion which can be explained in the same way. 2 Sam.24:1 and 1 Chron.21:1 are two examples. The death of Saul is another.

But that explanation seems to be unsatisfactory when it comes to events such as the Flood, Sodom, and many other passages of Scripture, including the death of the wicked.

Check out my post where I referred to Numbers 25, for instance.

[John317]

John317, did you read #278089?

No, not yet, but I will. I've been offline for most of the last few weeks. I'm working my way back kinda slowly. :-) Thanks.

[teresaq]

the bible and sop says:

Quote:

The wicked are filled with the same hatred of God that inspires Satan; but they see that their case is hopeless, that they cannot prevail against Jehovah. Their rage is kindled against Satan and those who have been his agents in deception, and with the fury of demons they turn upon them. {GC 671.2}

Saith the Lord: "Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God; behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness. They shall bring thee down to the pit." ... Ezekiel 28:6-8, 16-19. {GC 672.1}

and twilight says:

I have posted a small study on the Prince of Tyrus thread.

I think this shows that we should be cautious developing a doctrine based on the idea that the Prince of Tyrus is specifically Satan...

And that he will be killed by man.

i think we know who ill stick with.

[John317]

Like you I accept the Bible as it reads. For example, when the Bible says that "God hardened Pharaoh's heart," I accept that. I do believe that He did harden Pharaoh's heart but how? That is the question. How does the Lord harden a man's heart. When we understand what He means by these words we are made to realize that the heardening is never a direct act from God but that the Lord sends light and if that light is rejected there is a hardening that takes place which makes it more difficult to accept that same light the second time it is presented.

This is how the Lord hardens the heart. In fact He doesn't. What it is saying is that when He sends light to soften the heart and that light meets resistance, this is how He hardens the heart. God hardens the heart ty trying to soften it. That is why we read, "It is not God that blinds the eyes of man or who hardens their hearts. He sends them light to correct their errors, and to lead them in safe paths; it is by the rejection of this light that the eyes are blinded and the heart hardened. Often the process is gradual, and almost imperceptible. Light comes to the soul through God's word, through His servants, or by the direct agency of His Spirit; but when one ray of light is disregarded, there is a partial benumbing of the spiritual perception, and the second revealing of light is less clearly discerned. So the darkness increases, until it is night in the soul." D.A.322.

Does that make any sense to you John?

Yes, it does. I believe the same. But I have yet to read compelling, sensible, biblical explanations of the Flood, Sodom, and many other Bible passages dealing with the death of the wicked.

I'm OK with God destroying the wicked at the Flood, the people of Sodom, etc.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: John317

Let's assume for the sake of the discussion that God has never taken the life of any human being and never will.

With that view in mind, please explain what happened in the following verses, particularly the ones in bold type, taken primarily from the first four books of the Bible. What do the verses say?

...

It's not simply the case that God doesn't kill, but God is not violent at all. One can be violent without killing. But God is not violent in any way, and force is not a principle that He uses to govern His kingdom.

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. This could not be done by force. The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority. Only by love is love awakened. 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." Malachi 4:2.(DA 22)

This speaks out to the same theme we've been discussing, that Jesus Christ revealed the character of God, and brings out the key point that the exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government. If it's contrary to the principles of His government, we can conclude just on the basis of this that He didn't use force, in spite of His apparently being portrayed as doing so in the many violent episodes of Scripture.

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)

This again brings out that force is not a principle of God's government. It's a principle of the enemy, not of God, and whenever one sees coercion of any form whatsoever, whether by violence, or by trying to beat someone over the head verbally, or argumentatively, one can be sure that it is not a principle of the kingdom of God that is being exhibited.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

i have read various understandings as to why God does that, but the one that makes the most sense to me is youngs understanding that the hebrew has both a permissive and causative tense. some of the older commentators appear to be in agreement with that.

Is the "permissive tense" used as regards the Flood, the destruction of Sodom, or the events described in Numbers 25: 1-18?

Let's look at Numbers 25:

1) The Lord's anger was aroused against Israel. v. 3

2) The Lord ordered Moses to hang ["impale"- NRSV] the offenders "out in the sun so that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel." v. 4.

3) Phinehas killed a man and a Midianite woman, and this stopped the plague. vv. 6-8.

4) 24, 000 people died in the plague which was due to God's anger at the immorality of the people. vv. 3, 8, 9.

5) The Lord rewarded Phinehas for his killing of the man and the Midianite woman. vv. 10-13.

6) The Lord ordered Moses and the Israelites to harass and attack the Midianites. vv. 16-18. Please compare Judges 7: 24, 25 for an instance of how this was put into effect.

How does the concept of "the permissive tense" help us understand the above examples?

[skyblue888]

John, a little while ago you gave us several passages from the Scriptures dealing with "the anger of the Lord" and other passages were produced which showed that Satan himself is "the anger of the Lord." That he is the one who is the accuser of the brethren and the prosecutor and the executioner of the sentence against transgression if permitted.

This is the very lesson that both Elijah and John the Baptist needed to learn. Both had misundertood the character of God and therefore they did not understand the nature of Christ's kingdom. Speaking of John the Baptist, Mrs. White says,

"He expected Jesus to take the throne of David, and as time passed and the Saviour made no claim to kingly authority, John became perplexed and troubled. He had declared to the people that in order for the way to be prepared before the Lord, the prophecy of Isaiah must be fulfilled; the mountains and hills must be brought low, the crooked made straight, and the rough places plain. He had looked for the high places of human pride and power to be cast down. He had pointed to the Messiah as the One whose fan was in His hand, and who would thoroughly purge His floor, who would gather the wheat into His garner, and burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. Like the prophet Elijah, in whose spirit and power he had come to Israel, he looked for the Lord to reveal Himself as a God that answereth by fire." D.A.215.

They both had seen God in a false light!

I am afraid we are no better than they were in discerning the true character of God in His dealing with men and with sin. They did not know God as it was their privilege to know Him anymore than we do today.

Both John the Baptist and Elijah needed to learn that God is not responsible for the fierce whirlwinds or hurricanes, the earthquakes, or the fires that so often take the lives of so many people on this planet. Satan is the one who is behind all these calamities as we are told in Ezekiel 28 and The Great Controversy, p.589.

"Satan works through the elements also to garner his harvest of unprepared souls. He has studied the secrets of the laboratories of nature, and he uses all his power to control the elements as far as God allows. When he was suffered to afflict Job, how quickly flocks and herds, servants, houses, children, were swept away, one trouble succeeding another as in a moment. It is God that shields His creatures and hedges them in from the power of the destroyer. But the Christian world have shown contempt for the law of Jehovah; and the Lord will do just what He has declared that He would--He will withdraw His blessings from the earth and remove His protecting care from those who are rebelling against His law and teaching and forcing others to do the same. Satan has control of all whom God does not especially guard. He will favor and prosper some in order to further his own designs, and he will bring trouble upon others and lead men to believe that it is God who is afflicting them."

Now let us resume what the pen of inspiration has to say about John the Baptist and Elijah, how both of them had misundertood the nature of Christ's mission and why.

"To John was opened the same truth that had come to Elijah in the desert, when "a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake: and after the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire:" and after the fire, God spoke to the prophet by "a still small voice." 1 Kings 19:11, 12. So Jesus was to do His work, not with the clash of arms and the overturning of thrones and kingdoms, but through speaking to the hearts of men by a life of mercy and self-sacrifice." D.A.217.

When Jesus comes the second time it will not reveal Himself as a God that answereth by fire anymore than at His first coming. And when He shall appear on the walls of the New Jerusalem after the 1000 years He will not reveal Himself as a God that answereth by fire to destroy the multitides of the unsaved of all ages including Satan and his angels. No, the wicked will destroy themselves and Satan will, at last, fall at the hand of those whom he had deceived. The wicked will be as though they had never been and the love and justice of God will forever be vindicated. It will indeed be seen by all that

God is love!

sky

[teresaq]

[quote name='teresaq(sda)

so' date=' my brother, how would you explain to a predestinationist this verse:

Quote:

Exo 4:21 And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.

First of all, I would point them to Romans 9: 17-22.

Pharaoh's heart was hardened in response to God's activity. God knew that Pharaoh would be stubborn and refuse to let the people go.

There are some passages of Scripture dealing with the subject under discussion which can be explained in the same way. 2 Sam.24:1 and 1 Chron.21:1 are two examples. The death of Saul is another.

But that explanation seems to be unsatisfactory when it comes to events such as the Flood, Sodom, and many other passages of Scripture, including the death of the wicked.

Check out my post where I referred to Numbers 25, for instance.

[teresaq]

..

I'm OK with God destroying the wicked at the Flood, the people of Sodom, etc.

the vast majority of the world is also. that is one of the unifying beliefs of all religions.

[John317]

the bible and sop says:

Do you believe that humans will be the ones to destroy Satan?

Satan, of course, is a spirit being, not subject to attacks from physical beings such as people. For humans to be able to destroy Satan, God would have to change Satan's nature and make it possible for it to happen.

But there's also the problem that the book of Revelation and Ellen White's Great Controversy do not support this view. According to the clear language of Rev. 20: 9, "Fire comes down from God out of heaven and devours" Satan and the rest of the wicked.

I believe that GC 671 is talking about people attacking other people, not spirit-beings.

Check out GC 673 where it speaks of "the fire of destruction." Particularly pay attention to the first full paragraph of that page as well as the last paragraph on page 672. Ellen White states clearly that "fire comes down from God out of heaven" and that "the earth's surface seems one molten mass-- a vast, seething lake of fire."

She does not say that the wicked kill each other off or that they kill Satan. Satan is still alive long after everyone else is dead. He dies in the lake of fire, not at the hands of human beings.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

..

I'm OK with God destroying the wicked at the Flood, the people of Sodom, etc.

the vast majority of the world is also. that is one of the unifying beliefs of all religions.

So, if God told you that He destroyed the wicked in the Flood, would you have a problem with Him?

[John317]

John, a little while ago you gave us several passages from the Scriptures dealing with "the anger of the Lord" and other passages were produced which showed that Satan himself is "the anger of the Lord."

I agree that there are passages which show that God uses Satan to punish the wicked, just as He used the Babylonians. But that does not cover all the verses dealing with God's wrath. See, for instance, Romans 9: 22, 23.

[skyblue888]

John did u miss this post? I think we would profit from considering what Mrs. White had to say about John the Baptist and Elijah, as to how they too had misunderstood the words of Isaiah to mean exactly what many of us think today.

A little while ago you gave us several passages from the Scriptures dealing with "the anger of the Lord" and other passages were produced which showed that Satan himself is "the anger of the Lord." That he is the one who is the accuser of the brethren and the prosecutor and the executioner of the sentence against transgression if permitted.

This is the very lesson that both Elijah and John the Baptist needed to learn. Both had misundertood the character of God and therefore they did not understand the nature of Christ's kingdom. Speaking of John the Baptist, Mrs. White says,

"He expected Jesus to take the throne of David, and as time passed and the Saviour made no claim to kingly authority, John became perplexed and troubled. He had declared to the people that in order for the way to be prepared before the Lord, the prophecy of Isaiah must be fulfilled; the mountains and hills must be brought low, the crooked made straight, and the rough places plain. He had looked for the high places of human pride and power to be cast down. He had pointed to the Messiah as the One whose fan was in His hand, and who would thoroughly purge His floor, who would gather the wheat into His garner, and burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. Like the prophet Elijah, in whose spirit and power he had come to Israel, he looked for the Lord to reveal Himself as a God that answereth by fire." D.A.215.

They both had seen God in a false light!

I am afraid we are no better than they were in discerning the true character of God in His dealing with men and with sin. They did not know God as it was their privilege to know Him anymore than we do today.

Both John the Baptist and Elijah needed to learn that God is not responsible for the fierce whirlwinds or hurricanes, the earthquakes, or the fires that so often take the lives of so many people on this planet. Satan is the one who is behind all these calamities as we are told in Ezekiel 28 and The Great Controversy, p.589.

"Satan works through the elements also to garner his harvest of unprepared souls. He has studied the secrets of the laboratories of nature, and he uses all his power to control the elements as far as God allows. When he was suffered to afflict Job, how quickly flocks and herds, servants, houses, children, were swept away, one trouble succeeding another as in a moment. It is God that shields His creatures and hedges them in from the power of the destroyer. But the Christian world have shown contempt for the law of Jehovah; and the Lord will do just what He has declared that He would--He will withdraw His blessings from the earth and remove His protecting care from those who are rebelling against His law and teaching and forcing others to do the same. Satan has control of all whom God does not especially guard. He will favor and prosper some in order to further his own designs, and he will bring trouble upon others and lead men to believe that it is God who is afflicting them."

Now let us resume what the pen of inspiration has to say about John the Baptist and Elijah, how both of them had misundertood the nature of Christ's mission and why.

"To John was opened the same truth that had come to Elijah in the desert, when "a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake: and after the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire:" and after the fire, God spoke to the prophet by "a still small voice." 1 Kings 19:11, 12. So Jesus was to do His work, not with the clash of arms and the overturning of thrones and kingdoms, but through speaking to the hearts of men by a life of mercy and self-sacrifice." D.A.217.

When Jesus comes the second time it will not reveal Himself as a God that answereth by fire anymore than at His first coming. And when He shall appear on the walls of the New Jerusalem after the 1000 years He will not reveal Himself as a God that answereth by fire to destroy the multitides of the unsaved of all ages including Satan and his angels. No, the wicked will destroy themselves and Satan will, at last, fall at the hand of those whom he had deceived. The wicked will be as though they had never been and the love and justice of God will forever be vindicated. It will indeed be seen by all that

God is love!

sky

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

John317, did you read #278089?

No, not yet, but I will. I've been offline for most of the last few weeks. I'm working my way back kinda slowly. :-) Thanks.

I just posted it today. I'll repost it now. (It was the last post on the page, so I think it got missed).

Quote:

John317:With that view in mind, please explain what happened in the following verses, particularly the ones in bold type, taken primarily from the first four books of the Bible. What do the verses say?

Once one understands the principles involved, there's no point in going through every instance in Scripture of violence attributed to God. Certainly the amount of violence attributed to God in Scripture is staggering, as Lutz's chart points out. So we can come to the conclusion that either:

a.God is an extremely violent Person.

b.There's some other explanation to the incidents of violence attributed to God in Scripture.

In the Old Testament, the concept of Satan's doing evil was not developed. To this day, the Jews do not view Satan as an evil angel. Instead of attributing evil to Satan, it was attributed to God. God was seen as being responsible for all that happened, whether good or evil. Now we know in some circumstances, I'll name a few, that it was not God who did the things He "took credit" for. If this can happen some of the time, why not all of the time?

1.God killed Saul.

2.God sent fiery serpents upon the Israelites.

3.God destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

4.God moved David to number Israel.

5.God sent a lying spirit to Ahab.

We know, either from Scripture itself, or from the Spirit of Prophecy, that God did not a one of these things. Yet they are all attributed to Him. Why? Because God presents Himself as doing that which He permits. Once we grasp this principle, we can explain every act of violence attributed to God in Scripture.

An alternative to this principle, that God presents Himself as doing that which He permits, would be something like the following: If it says in Scripture that God did something violent, then He did it. Unless it says somewhere else that He didn't. Or unless God sends a prophet saying that He didn't.

Now personally I find this principle of interpretation far less appealing than the other one.

However, none of this gets to what is, to me, the core issue, the reason, above all others, that I personally believe that God did not do the violent things attributed to Him. The reason I don't believe that God did these violent things is because:

1.I believe God is just like Jesus Christ.

2.I believe that Jesus Christ was completely non-violent.

Not only "non-violent" but "anti-violent." That is, Jesus Christ was totally against violence. I think everything about His ministry demonstrates this, both in His actions and teachings. "Turn the other cheek." This is what Jesus Christ taught, and what He lived. He chose to go to be crucified rather than violently defend Himself, as Peter was ready to do. Jesus Christ never used violence, and never advocated it.

So if we can agree that Jesus Christ was non-violent, or anti-violent, we're halfway there.

The second half, that God is just like Jesus Christ, can be established by Scripture, and by the SOP. In Scripture, the Gospel of John particularly speaks to this theme. No one has seen God at any time; His only Son, who knew Him best, has shown us what God is really like. John 1:18. If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father. How do you say, show us the Father? John 14. I have declared Thy glory. I have manifest Thy name. John 17.

From the SOP:

Quote:

The very attributes that belonged to the character of Satan, the evil one represented as belonging to the character of God. Jesus came to teach men of the Father, to correctly represent him before the fallen children of earth. Angels could not fully portray the character of God, but Christ, who was a living impersonation of God, could not fail to accomplish the work. The only way in which he could set and keep men right was to make himself visible and familiar to their eyes. That men might have salvation he came directly to man, and became a partaker of his nature....

Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God. In Christ was arrayed before men the paternal grace and the matchless perfections of the Father. In his prayer just before his crucifixion, he declared, "I have manifested thy name." "I have glorified thee on the earth; I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do." When the object of his mission was attained,--the revelation of God to the world,--the Son of God announced that his work was accomplished, and that the character of the Father was made manifest to men. (ST 1/20/90)

This brings out that Christ's purpose, His whole purpose, was to reveal the Father. That was His mission.

Quote:

All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son. "No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him." John 1:18.Taking humanity upon Him, Christ came to be one with humanity and at the same time to reveal our heavenly Father to sinful human beings. He was in all things made like unto His brethren. He became flesh, even as we are.(8T 286)

This last statement tells us that all that man can know of God was revealed by Jesus Christ while here in the flesh. So this begs the question, where did Jesus Christ reveal that God is violent?

It's not simply the case that God doesn't kill, but God is not violent at all. One can be violent without killing. But God is not violent in any way, and force is not a principle that He uses to govern His kingdom.

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. This could not be done by force. The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority. Only by love is love awakened. 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." Malachi 4:2.(DA 22)

This speaks out to the same theme we've been discussing, that Jesus Christ revealed the character of God, and brings out the key point that the exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government. If it's contrary to the principles of His government, we can conclude just on the basis of this that He didn't use force, in spite of His apparently being portrayed as doing so in the many violent episodes of Scripture.

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)

This again brings out that force is not a principle of God's government. It's a principle of the enemy, not of God, and whenever one sees coercion of any form whatsoever, whether by violence, or by trying to beat someone over the head verbally, or argumentatively, one can be sure that it is not a principle of the kingdom of God that is being exhibited.

_________________________

Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.

[skyblue888]

[Guest]