Sin destroy's itself...

October 11, 2009

That's right, you have no scripture that backs up your claims about the final judgment, because it is something that has never happened before. There is scripture to compare it, to but none that helps your argument.

October 11, 2009

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

The position being made is this:

Unless God steps in, sin will destroy everyone and everything.

God by being inactive would "lose" the Great Controversy, because sin would destroy His whole universe.

Mark [/quote']

This sounds like what I've been saying. God stepped in by sending Jesus Christ to reveal His character. Otherwise sin would destroy those who practice it.

Back to my question. I got the impression from what you said before that God would win the Great Controversy by destroying those who sin; i.e. by force and violence. Specifically I asked:

Quote:

It seems the idea being expressed here is that God is losing the Great Controversy, and will continue to lose it, until He resorts to force and violence to win it. He'll win it, eventually, because He is stronger than anyone else, and so can apply greater force and violence than anyone else.

I have more to say on this topic, but before going on, I'd like to make sure I'm understanding your argument correctly.

Am I understanding you correctly? Yes or no please. If no, please explain what I've said that is different from what you were wanting to say.

Quote:

Why do I always get the impression you are trying to push people into a corner by specifying yes or no answers to your questions pnat? :-)

Mark

I'm trying to understand your position. In order to do so, I put your position, and ask you if I have it right. If it's not right, I'm asking you to correct it.

I pointed out that I have more to say on this topic, but I wanted to confirm that I'm understanding your position correctly before doing so. I'm still trying to ascertain this.

Have I understood your position correctly? Surely this is a reasonable question.

October 11, 2009

Originally Posted By: Richard

That's right, you have no scripture that backs up your claims about the final judgment, because it is something that has never happened before. There is scripture to compare it, to but none that helps your argument.

Your idea is that we cannot use the principles elsewhere in Scripture to understand the judgment?

Quote:

God said he would destroy the world by flood. And he did it!

Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for I am sorry that I have made them.

God said he was going to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah with fire. And he did it!

Gen 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;

Gen 19:26 But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar of salt.

It is of no consiquence to me if you believe the scientists over the Bible. It will only add to your lack of understanding.

Evidently not, since you are doing that here.

You asked me why I think God is presented as doing something which He will permit to happen, so I pointed out that God is presented as doing that which He permits. I mentioned several examples, including the death of Saul, the number of Israel, the sending of fiery serpents upon the Israelites, and the destruction of Jerusalem. It sounded like you were taking issue with this when you said:

Quote:

you have no scripture that backs up your claims about the final judgment, because it is something that has never happened before.

But then you did the very thing you were taking issue with, so I don't know why you wrote this.

Sky brought up an excellent point several days ago in saying that it's not simply a matter of quoting texts from hither and yon, but of using principles to construct a structure which is sound. I agree with this, and believe the place to start is with Jesus Christ, the cornerstone. From Jesus Christ, we learn what God is really like. This was the "whole purpose" of His mission (ST 1/20/90). According to the SOP, all that we can know of God was revealed by the Great Teacher while hear with us in the flesh.

So let's consider the question of what Jesus Christ was like. What adjectives would you use to describe Him? Do you see Him as countenancing violence?

If we consider principles from the SOP, we see principles such as the following brought out:

Quote:

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)

Quote:

How was God to be rightly represented to the world? How was it to be known that He was a God of love, full of mercy, kindness, and pity? How was the world to know this? God sent His Son, and He was to represent to the world the character of God. (1888 Mat. 75)

These same principles should be present in our lives:

Quote:

The characteristic of the Christian is the meekness of Christ. Benevolence, kindness, mercy, and love originate from Infinite Wisdom, while the opposite is the unholy fruit of a heart that is not in harmony with Jesus Christ. (Reflecting Christ, 300)

Quote:

The principles of kindness, mercy, and love, taught and exemplified by our Saviour, are a transcript of the will and character of God. Christ declared that He taught nothing except that which He had received from His Father. The principles of the divine government are in perfect harmony with the Saviour's precept, "Love your enemies." God executes justice upon the wicked, for the good of the universe, and even for the good of those upon whom His judgments are visited. He would make them happy if He could do so in accordance with the laws of His government and the justice of His character.(GC 541)

Here we see the very same principles at work, principles of "kindness, mercy, and love." Surely you can see that setting people on fire does not manifest these principles, nor would such an idea reflect the principle of "Love your enemies." Indeed, she brings out that so far from wishing them harm, God would make them happy if He could!

I said there were examples, but none that help your case. You still refuse to address the scripture and SOP quotes that speak most directly to this topic. "kindness, mercy, and love" is now, not then for the lost. Like mark said: you're reading the Bible with one eye closed. You really need to open up that other eye. Sometimes I think they are both closed.

October 12, 2009

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

God is often presented as doing that which He permits. (Saul' date=' the numbering of Israel, sending serpents upon the Israelites, the destruction of Jerusalem, etc.)[/quote']

Not a good answer. That leaves you hanging, concerning the final judgment, with nothing but speculation, innuendo, conjecture, and pre-supposition.

No it doesn't. God doesn't change ever. You call Him a liar if you think so. The way He dealt with Saul, David, Jesus...All the others where He says "I will cause" "I will do this to you"... It is all the same.

You think God sends strong delusion? Did God put an evil spirit upon Saul?

October 12, 2009

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

Given that sin destroys everyone who practices it, had God not sent His Son, all of humanity would have been lost. God so loved the world that He gave His Son, to save the world from the destruction of sin.

Going back to the post which spawned this, I said:

Quote:

It seems the idea being expressed here is that God is losing the Great Controversy, and will continue to lose it, until He resorts to force and violence to win it. He'll win it, eventually, because He is stronger than anyone else, and so can apply greater force and violence than anyone else.

I have more to say on this topic, but before going on, I'd like to make sure I'm understanding your argument correctly.

To the best of my knowledge, you haven't responded to this (my apologies if I missed a response.) Did I correctly represent your argument?

[/quote']

The position being made is this:

Unless God steps in, sin will destroy everyone and everything.

God by being inactive would "lose" the Great Controversy, because sin would destroy His whole universe.

Mark

The death of Christ revealed the truth about sin to the unfallen worlds. So now it is contained to just earth.

"To the angels and the unfallen worlds the cry, "It is finished," had a deep significance. It was for them as well as for us that the great work of redemption had been accomplished. They with us share the fruits of Christ's victory.

Not until the death of Christ was the character of Satan clearly revealed to the angels or to the unfallen worlds. The archapostate had so clothed himself with deception that even holy beings had not understood his principles. They had not clearly seen the nature of his rebellion." --DA 758

October 12, 2009

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

No it doesn't. God doesn't change ever. You call Him a liar if you think so. The way He dealt with Saul, David, Jesus...All the others where He says "I will cause" "I will do this to you"... It is all the same.

You think God sends strong delusion? Did God put an evil spirit upon Saul?

You call God a liar when you say he won't do what he says he will.

October 12, 2009

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

Your idea is that we cannot use the principles elsewhere in Scripture to understand the judgment?

Quote:

God said he would destroy the world by flood. And he did it!

Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for I am sorry that I have made them.

God said he was going to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah with fire. And he did it!

Gen 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;

Gen 19:26 But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar of salt.

It is of no consiquence to me if you believe the scientists over the Bible. It will only add to your lack of understanding.

Evidently not, since you are doing that here.

You asked me why I think God is presented as doing something which He will permit to happen, so I pointed out that God is presented as doing that which He permits. I mentioned several examples, including the death of Saul, the number of Israel, the sending of fiery serpents upon the Israelites, and the destruction of Jerusalem. It sounded like you were taking issue with this when you said:

Quote:

you have no scripture that backs up your claims about the final judgment, because it is something that has never happened before.

But then you did the very thing you were taking issue with, so I don't know why you wrote this.

Sky brought up an excellent point several days ago in saying that it's not simply a matter of quoting texts from hither and yon, but of using principles to construct a structure which is sound. I agree with this, and believe the place to start is with Jesus Christ, the cornerstone. From Jesus Christ, we learn what God is really like. This was the "whole purpose" of His mission (ST 1/20/90). According to the SOP, all that we can know of God was revealed by the Great Teacher while hear with us in the flesh.

So let's consider the question of what Jesus Christ was like. What adjectives would you use to describe Him? Do you see Him as countenancing violence?

If we consider principles from the SOP, we see principles such as the following brought out:

Quote:

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)

Quote:

How was God to be rightly represented to the world? How was it to be known that He was a God of love, full of mercy, kindness, and pity? How was the world to know this? God sent His Son, and He was to represent to the world the character of God. (1888 Mat. 75)

These same principles should be present in our lives:

Quote:

The characteristic of the Christian is the meekness of Christ. Benevolence, kindness, mercy, and love originate from Infinite Wisdom, while the opposite is the unholy fruit of a heart that is not in harmony with Jesus Christ. (Reflecting Christ, 300)

Quote:

The principles of kindness, mercy, and love, taught and exemplified by our Saviour, are a transcript of the will and character of God. Christ declared that He taught nothing except that which He had received from His Father. The principles of the divine government are in perfect harmony with the Saviour's precept, "Love your enemies." God executes justice upon the wicked, for the good of the universe, and even for the good of those upon whom His judgments are visited. He would make them happy if He could do so in accordance with the laws of His government and the justice of His character.(GC 541)

Here we see the very same principles at work, principles of "kindness, mercy, and love." Surely you can see that setting people on fire does not manifest these principles, nor would such an idea reflect the principle of "Love your enemies." Indeed, she brings out that so far from wishing them harm, God would make them happy if He could![/quote']

I said there were examples, but none that help your case. You still refuse to address the scripture and SOP quotes that speak most directly to this topic. "kindness, mercy, and love" is now, not then for the lost. Like mark said: you're reading the Bible with one eye closed. You really need to open up that other eye. Sometimes I think they are both closed.

You write that "'kindness, mercy, and love' is now, not then for the lost." But the GC 541 quote is specifically speaking about "then." The context is the final judgment. Her whole point was that God continues to use the principles of kindness, mercy, and love (as well as "love your enemies") even in the final judgment. He does so because such is His character. God is love.

Regarding the SOP comments and Bible texts, I have responded to these, if you're thinking of Rev. 20, EW and GC. If there's some other text you had in mind, you can quote it, and I'll respond.

You didn't respond to any questions I asked in my post, nor to the points I made. Please refrain from personal comments.

October 12, 2009

You call God a liar when you say he won't do what he says he will.

You misunderstand. I do not say that God isn't going to do it. How many times must I say this?

The same way He dealt with David, Saul, and all the other people that felt His wrath. Is going to be the same. God does it! It is all about understanding how He does it!

October 12, 2009

Does sin destroy itself?

Did Adam and Eve throw themselves out of the Garden? No, God did.

Did sin try to destroy itself by causing a world-wide flood.? No, God did.

Did Pharaoh drown himself and his army as punishment for chasing Israel? No, God did.

Did Sodom and Gammorah send fire onto themselves? No, God did.

Did sin execute Jesus Christ as the payment for the penalty for itself? No, God did.

If God did not spare His own Son in payment of the penalty for the sins of the Kingdom of Heaven, then why would He spare those who reject that same payment when they are given the opportunity to enter the Kingdom of Heaven and refuse to do so?

October 12, 2009

We were in agreement right up until you said "the sins of the Kingdom of Heaven" There are no sins in the Kingdom of Heaven. To say such a thing is blasphemy.

October 12, 2009

There are, in my estimation, probably hundreds of Scriptures like these:

But a man who commits adultery lacks judgment; whoever does so destroys himself. (Prov 6:32)

The integrity of the upright guides them, but the unfaithful are destroyed by their duplicity. (Prov 11:33)

For the waywardness of the simple will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them. (Prov 1:32)

Do not be overrighteous, neither be overwise — why destroy yourself? (Ecc 7:16)

________

Stewart

October 12, 2009

You asked me why I think God is presented as doing something which He will permit to happen, so I pointed out that God is presented as doing that which He permits.

Where did you get the idea that this is the only way God destroys?

That His permissive withdrawal is the only method used?

It could not have been the SOP, because that states the opposite.

Same for the bible.

How have you come to this conclusion when it is clear it is not the only principle?

The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits. There are forces now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere.--GC 614 (1911). {LDE 243.4}

It is clear from the above that both principles are in operation.

To say that God only acts one way to destroy means we have to get "around" the above plain statement and other plain statements.

It seems to me, that we could only come to that conclusion if we willfully ignored the other principles.

But the problem here is that yourself and Sky are trying to say Ellen White taught this, when in fact she did not.

You have taken some statements and ignored others (or tried to work around them) and now present them as "Ellen White believed".

I do not agree with that assessment.

I believe she taught as is outlined above, that both principles are in action.

Gods permissive destruction and Gods active destruction.

But if all you are going to do is keep pointing out the "permissive destruction" of God as the only principle, then you will confuse and mislead people.

With the best intentions and an honest heart I am sure, but you need to get back to simple plain exposition of scripture.

That means not moving from a position until all aspects have been considered equally.

Not just one viewpoint that then has to negate all other positions.

This has never been the way the Advent movement has established doctrine.

This has never been the biblical way to establish doctrine.

This is strange fire.

Mark :-)

October 12, 2009

All those texts are talking about people being destroyed, and figuratively at that.

Nowhere does it say sin destroys itself.

October 12, 2009

I'm trying to understand your position. In order to do so, I put your position, and ask you if I have it right. If it's not right, I'm asking you to correct it.

I pointed out that I have more to say on this topic, but I wanted to confirm that I'm understanding your position correctly before doing so. I'm still trying to ascertain this.

Have I understood your position correctly? Surely this is a reasonable question.

My position has been stated, please accept it as stated:

The position being made is this:

Unless God steps in, sin will destroy everyone and everything.

God by being inactive would "lose" the Great Controversy, because sin would destroy His whole universe.

Mark

October 12, 2009

Originally Posted By: Twilight

The death of Christ revealed the truth about sin to the unfallen worlds. So now it is contained to just earth.

"To the angels and the unfallen worlds the cry, "It is finished," had a deep significance. It was for them as well as for us that the great work of redemption had been accomplished. They with us share the fruits of Christ's victory.

Not until the death of Christ was the character of Satan clearly revealed to the angels or to the unfallen worlds. The archapostate had so clothed himself with deception that even holy beings had not understood his principles. They had not clearly seen the nature of his rebellion." --DA 758

It is this very point that shows that sin just does not "destroy" itself.

If Jesus had not come the sin would have been ever present as a seed in the minds of the citizens of the universe.

It would not have "destroyed itself" it would have kept growing.

But the enemy would love us to believe that God is a tyrant for carrying out His judgements.

Satan would love us to believe that God is not loving, if He destroys.

What an argument!

God is not allowed to destroy Satan and sin, because that means God is evil and sinful.

So we now have a doctrine that prevents Satan being destroyed by God...

Rather than just accepting that a loving God must destroy sin.

It is His universe and He will clean it up.

With justice and love.

Mark

October 12, 2009

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

You call God a liar when you say he won't do what he says he will.

You misunderstand. I do not say that God isn't going to do it. How many times must I say this?

The same way He dealt with David, Saul, and all the other people that felt His wrath. Is going to be the same. God does it! It is all about understanding how He does it!

The same way He dealt with David, Saul, and all the other people that felt His wrath. Is going to be the same. God does it! It is all about understanding how He does it!

The same way He dealt with David, Saul, and all the other people that felt His wrath. Is going to be the same. God does it! It is all about understanding how He does it!

The same way He dealt with David, Saul, and all the other people that felt His wrath. Is going to be the same. God does it! It is all about understanding how He does it!

The problem you have Lutz, is this is not the only principle that God uses when destroying sin.

But it is being presented as the "ONLY" principle.

The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits. There are forces now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere.--GC 614 (1911). {LDE 243.4}

October 12, 2009

Mark, here's my question:

It seems the idea being expressed here is that God is losing the Great Controversy, and will continue to lose it, until He resorts to force and violence to win it. He'll win it, eventually, because He is stronger than anyone else, and so can apply greater force and violence than anyone else.

I have more to say on this topic, but before going on, I'd like to make sure I'm understanding your argument correctly.

You responded:

Quote:

My position has been stated, please accept it as stated:

The position being made is this:

Unless God steps in, sin will destroy everyone and everything.

God by being inactive would "lose" the Great Controversy, because sin would destroy His whole universe.

No one is suggesting that God has been inactive. So your statement here is inadequate in regards to my question, which has to do with whether it is your position that God wins the Great Controversy by using force and violence.

I don't understand your reticence to specify your view regarding this point.

A follow up on what you said. How is it that you see that sin would destroy everything? In particular, how would it destroy other worlds where sin is not known, or unfallen angels?

October 12, 2009

Originally Posted By: Lutz13

The position being made is this:

Unless God steps in, sin will destroy everyone and everything.

God by being inactive would "lose" the Great Controversy, because sin would destroy His whole universe.

Mark [/quote']

The death of Christ revealed the truth about sin to the unfallen worlds. So now it is contained to just earth.

"To the angels and the unfallen worlds the cry, "It is finished," had a deep significance. It was for them as well as for us that the great work of redemption had been accomplished. They with us share the fruits of Christ's victory.

Not until the death of Christ was the character of Satan clearly revealed to the angels or to the unfallen worlds. The archapostate had so clothed himself with deception that even holy beings had not understood his principles. They had not clearly seen the nature of his rebellion." --DA 758

Quote:

It is this very point that shows that sin just does not "destroy" itself.

If Jesus had not come the sin would have been ever present as a seed in the minds of the citizens of the universe.

It would not have "destroyed itself" it would have kept growing.

But the enemy would love us to believe that God is a tyrant for carrying out His judgements.

Satan would love us to believe that God is not loving, if He destroys.

What an argument!

God is not allowed to destroy Satan and sin, because that means God is evil and sinful.

So we now have a doctrine that prevents Satan being destroyed by God...

Rather than just accepting that a loving God must destroy sin.

It is His universe and He will clean it up.

With justice and love.

Mark

You have said that if God did not intervene, sin would destroy everything. So if sin has the power to destroy, why would God have to take arbitrary action to destroy those who sin? Why not simply allow it to do its destructive work on those who have chosen sin?

October 12, 2009

We were in agreement right up until you said "the sins of the Kingdom of Heaven" There are no sins in the Kingdom of Heaven. To say such a thing is blasphemy.

The Kingdom of Heaven does exist on earth today and is currently filled with sinners. The Holy Spirit actively assists members of the Kingdom of Heaven in the process of Sanctification, which removes the sin from their lives and replaces that sin with the truth. If a person is in the Kingdom of Heaven it does not mean that they are not sinners, it means they are in the process of becoming righteous.

The five Wise bridesmaids and the five foolish bridesmaids as two separate groups are BOTH in the Kingdom of Heaven at the time when the Master returns to the Faithful and Wise Bondservant and his fellow bondservants. Both groups are asleep, but Jesus said that they made up the Kingdom of Heaven. At the point that Jesus returns (the midnight cry) both groups are still sinful. One group becomes righteous (the Wise) and enter the marriage feast (become righteous) along with the Faithful and Wise bondservant, his fellow bondservants and the Master.

When you say that there is no sin in the Kingdom of Heaven you are partly correct; there is no sin in the Kingdom of Heaven after the members of the Kingdom are sealed in righteousness. This happens first to the Faithful and Wise bondservant, then his fellow servants, then to the Wise bridesmaids; this happens before the release of the 4 winds of judgment on the world. Then those people prepare the bride for the Bridegroom during the Great Tribulation; those that choose to become members of the Kingdom of Heaven at that time become the bride. Those that don't are eventually thrown into the Lake of Fire with Satan, where they are destroyed forever.

October 12, 2009

Mat 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man who sowed good seed in his field:

Mat 13:31 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:

Mat 13:33 Another parable spoke he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

Mat 13:44 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; which when a man has found, he hides, and for joy thereof goes and sells all that he has, and buys that field.

Mat 13:45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking fine pearls:

Mat 13:47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:

It's called a parable MM. Look it up in your Bible dictionary.

October 12, 2009

It's called a parable MM. Look it up in your Bible dictionary.

Why put this in this manner? That is, why not simply say, "This is a parable."

October 12, 2009

Me and Musicman go way back. You wouldn't understand.

October 13, 2009

The following text is a parable and a prophecy. The parable is referencing an event that took place, David and Uriah and Bathsheba.

God does something very similar in Matthew 21 with the parable of the vineyard it is also a prophecy. The fact that a parable is used to explain a real/literal reality does not deminish the reality of the event.

There is a mistaken understanding of the bridesmaids prophecy, that it is a parable, it is not. The disciples asked Jesus to tell them about the end of the age and Jesus tells them. Jesus never uses the parable in that prophecy, He does use symbols to represent real things, this has been a consistant part of all prophecy that God has given us, for instance, a beast=kingdom, a horns=kings, sea=nations, tribes, tounges and people. The use of symbols in prophecy is a well understood fact and many groups have interpreted the symbols in many different ways, but this does not diminish the fact that there is a true and accurate representation for the symbol used.

2 Samuel 12:1-14

1 Then the LORD sent Nathan to David. And he came to him and said, "There were two men in one city, the one rich and the other poor. 2 "The rich man had a great many flocks and herds. 3 "But the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb Which he bought and nourished; And it grew up together with him and his children. It would eat of his bread and drink of his cup and lie in his bosom, And was like a daughter to him. 4 "Now a traveler came to the rich man, And he was unwilling to take from his own flock or his own herd, To prepare for the wayfarer who had come to him; Rather he took the poor man's ewe lamb and prepared it for the man who had come to him." 5 Then David's anger burned greatly against the man, and he said to Nathan, "As the LORD lives, surely the man who has done this deserves to die. 6 "He must make restitution for the lamb fourfold, R319 because he did this thing and had no compassion." 7 Nathan then said to David, " You are the man! Thus says the LORD God of Israel, 'It is I who anointed you king over Israel and it is I who delivered you from the hand of Saul. 8 'I also gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your care, and I gave you the house of Israel and Judah; and if {that had been} too little, I would have added to you many more things like these! 9 'Why have you despised the word of the LORD by doing evil in His sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword, have taken his wife to be your wife, and have killed him with the sword of the sons of Ammon. 10 'Now therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised Me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.' 11 "Thus says the LORD, 'Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own household; I will even take your wives before your eyes and give {them} to your companion, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight. 12 'Indeed you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and under the sun.' " 13 Then David said to Nathan, " I have sinned against the LORD." And Nathan said to David, "The LORD also has taken away your sin; you shall not die. 14 "However, because by this deed you have given occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born to you shall surely die."

October 13, 2009

The parable of the vineyard was a prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem:

Quote:

Christ would have averted the doom of the Jewish nation if the people had received Him. But envy and jealousy made them implacable. They determined that they would not receive Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah. They rejected the Light of the world, and thenceforth their lives were surrounded with darkness as the darkness of midnight. The doom foretold came upon the Jewish nation. Their own fierce passions, uncontrolled, wrought their ruin. In their blind rage they destroyed one another. Their rebellious, stubborn pride brought upon them the wrath of their Roman conquerors. Jerusalem was destroyed, the temple laid in ruins, and its site plowed like a field. The children of Judah perished by the most horrible forms of death. Millions were sold, to serve as bondmen in heathen lands.

As a people the Jews had failed of fulfilling God's purpose, and the vineyard was taken from them. The privileges they had abused, the work they had slighted, was entrusted to others. (COL 295, 296)

"The Great Controversy," chapter 1, covers the destruction of Jerusalem in detail. Here's an except:

Quote:

The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown. Says the prophet: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;" "for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity." Hosea 13:9; 14:1. Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work. By stubborn rejection of divine love and mercy,the Jews had caused the protection of God to be withdrawn from them... (GC 35)

From this we see the following principles taught by the parable of the vineyard:

1.By stubborn rejection of divine love and mercy, one may cause the protection of God to be removed.

2.The great deceiver works to present his own work of destruction as the work of God.

October 13, 2009

2.The great deceiver works to present his own work of destruction as the work of God.

So much so that he can get God to say: I will do this?

See that's where you err.

Sign In

Sin destroy's itself...

Recommended Posts

pnattmbtc

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

pnattmbtc

Guest

Lutz13

Lutz13

Guest

pnattmbtc

Lutz13

Musicman1228

Guest

Stewart (SDA)

Twilight

Guest

Twilight

Twilight

Twilight

pnattmbtc

pnattmbtc

Musicman1228

Guest

pnattmbtc

Guest

wayfinder

pnattmbtc

Guest

Join the conversation

Browse

Activity