A Discussion of the Cause of the Flood

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

Mark has argued that force and violence are a part of God's character. I'm curious if everyone who takes the position that God will burn people alive who disobey Him agree with this idea, that force and violence are a part of God's character.

I am arguing that the Bible clearly shows that God uses violent judgements.

Would you mind if I responded like this:

Pnatt has continually represented the idea that God is a pacifist. I am curious if anyone has a text to support this idea that I can only see as deriving from human reasoning and humanism.

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

We also have a way to see that they are a part of Gods character.

1. Statement from the bible that God destroys through man and Angels.

2. Statements from the SOP that God destroys through man and Angels.

So you were, in fact, making an argument that force and violence are a part of God's character. So my question if there are others who feel this way was, and is, a valid question, not being unfair to you in any way.

In regards to how I would feel in regards to your asking a question of my position, I like it when my positions are accurately represented, and especially like to be quoted. I've brought to your attention several times when you've said things about my positions which weren't documented, and I'd prefer that not to happen.

I am sorry if they came across wrong pnatt. :-)

But yes, the bible does show that God uses violence.

As does the SOP.

The only way we can avoid that, is if we say that it does not mean what it says.

Mark :-)

[pnattmbtc]

That just means that yes, God does not use force to make you obey. You have free will. But on judgment day he is going to force the wicked to die, just like he has said he would throughout scripture.

No, it doesn't just mean that. She says specifically that rebellion would not be overcome by force. If you violently kill your enemies, you are overcoming them by force.

She doesn't say, "The Lord's principles are not of this order, except in the judgment." Nor "truth and love are its prevailing powers, except in the judgment."

In GC 541-543, she makes the specific point that the principles of "kindness, mercy and love" are used in the judgment.

It's an error to think that God's principles change during the judgment. They don't. His character is the same, and the principles He runs His government by are the same. What changes is that the prevailing powers of His government, truth and love, are revealed to the wicked. Because of their having ruined their characters by choosing sin over agape, they cannot handle that.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Richard

That just means that yes, God does not use force to make you obey. You have free will. But on judgment day he is going to force the wicked to die, just like he has said he would throughout scripture.

No, it doesn't just mean that. She says specifically that rebellion would not be overcome by force. If you violently kill your enemies, you are overcoming them by force.

Then God overcame by force.

When He ordered Saul to kill the Amelakites Pnatt...

Mark

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

No, it doesn't just mean that. She says specifically that rebellion would not be overcome by force. If you violently kill your enemies, you are overcoming them by force.

[/quote']

Then God overcame by force.

When He ordered Saul to kill the Amelakites Pnatt...

Mark

I'm guessing this is your argument.

1.God ordered Saul to kill the Amelakites.

2.If what I wrote above were true, that violently killing one's enemies is overcoming them by force, then God here would be overcoming by force.

3.But the EGW statement says God does not overcome by force.

4.Therefore my comment, that violently killing one's enemies is overcoming them by force is incorrect.

Am I correct that this is your argument?

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

So you were' date=' in fact, making an argument that force and violence are a part of God's character. So my question if there are others who feel this way was, and is, a valid question, not being unfair to you in any way.

In regards to how I would feel in regards to your asking a question of my position, I like it when my positions are accurately represented, and especially like to be quoted. I've brought to your attention several times when you've said things about my positions which weren't documented, and I'd prefer that not to happen.

[/quote']

I am sorry if they came across wrong pnatt. :-)

But yes, the bible does show that God uses violence.

As does the SOP.

The only way we can avoid that, is if we say that it does not mean what it says.

Mark :-)

Thank you for you apology. Again, I try very much to represent the positions of others accurately and fairly. If I miss the mark, I do hope you'll let me know.

Regarding your comments:

1.It's not the only way we can avoid that. We can accept the principle that God is often presented in Scripture, especially the OT, as doing that which He permits. This is extremely common.

2.This particular post wasn't dealing with this point, but with whether or not force and violence are a part of God's character.

I'd like to try to get at the practical implications of this a bit. As Christians, our desire should be to become more and more like He is in character. This is a reason why it's so important to understand His character. A law of the mind is that we become like those we admire. By beholding, we become changed.

If we believe in a violent God, and behold a violent God, and perceive God's character to include force and violence, we will become like the God that we believe in and behold. We will become more forceful and violent, like we perceive God to be.

If we believe that God will burn people alive for hours or days, we will become, in character, like the Being whom we believe does these sorts of things.

[wayfinder]

God is righteous and just. He is not violent when He pours out His judgments on the guilty anymore than a human judge who convicts a criminal of His crime and pronounces judgment on them.

Violence=1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violation, damaging, or abusing. 2. The abusive or unjust exercise of power; an outrage; a wrong.

If God were violent He then would have to answer for His violent acts. If God's actions were lawful and just than there would be no questions about His charicter. I say without a doubt God's actions are lawful and just. When He metes out His judgments He gives the reason for doing so.

Genesis 6:6-8 The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. The LORD said, " I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them."But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.

Noah did not perish in the flood because he was righteous.

Leviticus 20:2

"You shall also say to the sons of Israel: 'Any man from the sons of Israel or from the aliens sojourning in Israel who gives any of his offspring to Molech, shall surely be put to death; the people of the land shall stone him with stones.

Revelation 15:1

Then I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvelous, seven angels who had seven plagues, which are the last, because in them the wrath of God is finished.

When the seven bowls of wrath are finished so is the wrath of God forever.

Revelation 16:1-7

1 Then I heard a loud voice from the temple, saying to the seven angels, "Go and pour out on the earth the seven bowls of the wrath of God." 2 So the first angel went and poured out his bowl on the earth; and it became a loathsome and malignant sore on the people who had the mark of the beast and who worshiped his image. 3 The second angel poured out his bowl into the sea, and it became blood like that of a dead man; and every living thing in the sea died. 4 Then the third angel poured out his bowl into the rivers and the springs of waters; and they became blood. 5 And I heard the angel of the waters saying, "Righteous are You, who are and who were, O Holy One, because You judged these things; 6 for they poured out the blood of saints and prophets, and You have given them blood to drink. They deserve it." 7 And I heard the altar saying, "Yes, O Lord God, the Almighty, true and righteous are Your judgments."

Notice what the angel of the waters and the altar say.

[pnattmbtc]

Violence=1.Physical force exerted for the purpose of violation, damaging, or abusing. 2. The abusive or unjust exercise of power; an outrage; a wrong.

If God were violent He then would have to answer for His violent acts.

Ok, so you're disagreeing with Twilight's characterization of force and violence being a part of God's character, right?

The first definition speaks of physical force for the purpose of damaging. I gathered from your posts that you believe God does precisely this. Is that not right?

[wayfinder]

Did you read the rest of my post?

[pnattmbtc]

I'm guessing you're referring to where you said if God were violent, He'd have to answer for that. If so, yes, this is what I have in mind. This implies you disagree with what Twilight wrote, who argued that force and violence are a part of God's character. Your comment implies that God is not violent.

However, you cited a definition which, according to what I've understood from your posts, would have God to be violent. So your post appears to be self-contradictory, which is why I asked the clarifying questions I did.

[wayfinder]

That is not what I meant about God. I posted the definition to show that violence is not a just act. Judgments (penalty for a crime or crimes) is a just act and therefore not violence or violent.

[pnattmbtc]

The definition did not say that violence is an unjust act. It could be an unjust act, according to the definition, but it needn't be.

Leaving aside for the moment the definition, to see that I'm understanding you correctly, your point of view is that God is not violent because violence presupposes injustice, and God is not unjust. Have I understood you correctly?

[wayfinder]

You understand me correctly.

[Guest]

That took a long time.

[pnattmbtc]

Ok, wayfarer, going on (thanks for your response), you would disagree with Twilight's point that force and violence is a part of God's character. Thank you for answering my question if force and violence are a part of God's character.

The actual definition spoke of using force to damage another person. Your concept of violence is that it is force applied unjustly. So, from what you've said, I understand that God uses force, but just not unjustly. He also does "violent" things, just not unjust "violent" things. (I put "violent" in quotes, because I don't know what else to call it.)

I'd like to ask you a question I've asked John317. His view is that when the righteous are redeemed, one of their responsibilities will be to determine for how long those they are judging will be burned alive, including one's loved ones. Do you share this view?

[Guest]

It is also Ellen White's view. That's where John317 got it. And the Bible.

[wayfinder]

No I don't hold to the understanding that the wicked burn commensurate to their sin. The fire that comes from God consumes in an instant everything it comes in contact with.

1 Kings 18:33 Then he arranged the wood and cut the ox in pieces and laid {it} on the wood. 34 And he said, "Fill four pitchers with water and pour {it} on the burnt offering and on the wood." And he said, "Do it a second time," and they did it a second time. And he said, "Do it a third time," and they did it a third time. 35 The water flowed around the altar and he also filled the trench with water. 36 At the time of the offering of the {evening} sacrifice, Elijah the prophet came near and said, " O LORD, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, today let it be known that You are God in Israel and that I am Your servant and I have done all these things at Your word. 37 "Answer me, O LORD, answer me, that this people may know that You, O LORD, are God, and {that} You have turned their heart back again." 38 Then the fire of the LORD fell and consumed the burnt offering and the wood and the stones and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench.

2 Kings 1:9-18

9 Then {the king} sent to him a captain of fifty with his fifty. And he went up to him, and behold, he was sitting on the top of the hill. And he said to him, "O man of God, the king says, 'Come down.' " 10 Elijah replied to the captain of fifty, "If I am a man of God, let fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty." Then fire came down from heaven and consumed him and his fifty. 11 So he again sent to him another captain of fifty with his fifty. And he said to him, "O man of God, thus says the king, 'Come down quickly.' " 12 Elijah replied to them, "If I am a man of God, let fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty." Then the fire of God came down from heaven and consumed him and his fifty. 13 So he again sent the captain of a third fifty with his fifty. When the third captain of fifty went up, he came and bowed down on his knees before Elijah, and begged him and said to him, "O man of God, please let my life and the lives of these fifty servants of yours be precious in your sight. 14 "Behold fire came down from heaven and consumed the first two captains of fifty with their fifties; but now let my life be precious in your sight." 15 The angel of the LORD said to Elijah, "Go down with him; do not be afraid of him." So he arose and went down with him to the king.

This is an example of fire used justly.

[skyblue888]

The answer to these passages of Holy Writ lies in the fact that Elijah looked for the Lord to reveal Himself as a God that answereth by fire. He was plagued with a serious misconception of His character and he was not the only one.

Speaking of John the Baptist, we read, "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.

"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.

It is now clear, from reading these statements, that that fire did not come DIRECTLY out from the Lord. It came from the destroyer. The Lord allowed Satan to kill these men by fire because they had placed themselves beyond the circle of God's protection.

sky

"I was shown that the judgments of God would not come directly out from the Lord but in this way--they place themselves beyond His protection." MR 14, 3.1.

[wayfinder]

These men were never under God's protection, they were Ahab's solders. The fire is called the fire of God, if you want to say that this fire came from Satan you would have to say Satan is God.

2 Kings 1:12 Elijah replied to them, "If I am a man of God, let fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty." Then the fire of God came down from heaven and consumed him and his fifty.

The commander of the last group of fifty showed respect for and acknoledged the true God.

15 The angel of the LORD said to Elijah, "Go down with him; do not be afraid of him." So he arose and went down with him to the king.

The Angel of the Lord is none other than Michael/Son of God.

[skyblue888]

Are we to go to you for light? do you accept the Testimonies?

[Guest]

His reasoning is sound, his point is right on this. And he's using the Bible.

[skyblue888]

I agree with your first sentence though.

This is exactly what I said, these men had placed themselves beyond the circle of God's protection and that fire came from the destroyer. It is said that it came from God out of heaven in the sense that the Lord permitted Satan to destroy them. We know from inspiration that the judgments of God do not come directly out from the Lord.

The fire does not come down from Heaven, from where God is, but from heaven, the first heaven where Satan and his evil angels are.

sky

[wayfinder]

I will stick with it the way it is stated, fire came out of heaven from God (not from Satan).

[Guest]

Here is some inspiration that says otherwise.

Satan rushes into the midst of his followers and tries to stir up the multitude to action. But fire from God out of heaven is rained upon them, and the great men, and mighty men, the noble, the poor and miserable, are all consumed together. I saw that some were quickly destroyed, while others suffered longer. They were punished according to the deeds done in the body. Some were many days consuming, and just as long as there was a portion of them unconsumed, all the sense of suffering remained. Said the angel, "The worm of life shall not die; their fire shall not be quenched as long as there is the least particle for it to prey upon." {EW 294}

[skyblue888]

stick with it with your limited understanding if you wish but I will not.

The Bible is its own interpreter.

Did you not read 1 Kings 19:11,12?

sky