reading about the "merits of Christ" between the lines of the Bible?

[pnattmbtc]

If I stand by and let somebody get beat to death, when I could easily have stopped it just by lifting a finger, or speaking a word, am I not just as responsible as the one who did the beating?

Next you'll say God was powerless to stop it, even if he wanted to. Because the person placed himself outside of God's protection.

I know the drill. The problem with that is that you can't apply that to every situation under the sun. When God says He will destroy evil, He doesn't mean that He's going to wait until Satan finally gets around to destroying himself.

If that's what you want to believe, fine. But when you start trying to teach others that the Bible doesn't really mean what it says, or Ellen White either for that matter. Then you are on dangerous ground.

[pnattmbtc]

It was not to appease God that Christ suffered and died but to satisfy the demands of the broken law.

[pnattmbtc]

God doesn't magically see Jesus when He sees me. He sees me, a sick child who He wants to heal, but I have to trust Him first.

I think this is clear and gets to the heart of the issue. Our misunderstanding of God's character is our problem. To be healed, we must respond to God's overtures, but how can we do so if we hate Him, mistrust Him, believe He's out to get us, etc.?

[whatisthis]

beautifully expressed pnattmbtc (don't know you by name yet)

[pnattmbtc]

You can call me "pnat." Thanks, whati.

[fccool]

Quote:

You basically ignored my entire post. I answered your post point by point, making counterarguments and asking you questions. To carry on a discussion, please respond to my counterpoints and answer my questions.

I'll then be happy to answer any further points or questions that you have.

I did answer your question with an implied question. Your view of "evil" is from human perspective. Your idea is in fact that God does not command nor he directly kills anyone. It's silly. Do I have to give you Biblical examples that it is not true?

YES, God brings calamity, but the calamity is to punish the wicked on behalf of the just. LOVE IS PROTECTIVE. THESE ACTS ARE NOT EVIL!

If somebody was raping and murdering your wife, and you just stood and watched there... IT'S NOT LOVE! There are times when God takes imposers for merely lying and misrepresenting His character in order for church to remain pure (Ananias and Sapphira). These people did not just have a heart attack randomly. They were unbelievers with an agenda to abuse the church, and God struck them down seeing that. Did God do evil? No, He did not. He likewise did not do evil by flooding the earth to save it. And likewise He will not do evil by purging it with fire.

So, when I speak of God's wrath, His wrath is on behalf of the righteous. The calamity He brings is in fact to protect the righteous from evil.

If you really need some Biblical examples, I'll be happy to give it to you.

Does the above answer your question?

There's of course a greater dimension of the unknown as far as why God lets certain things happen now, but we know that in the end the wicked, who abused the righteous will be punished.

Either way, your view of love that just lets the violence flow... is a sick one. What father would stand and watch one child raping and murdering other because he loves them both? That's a sick and perverted view of God.

God strikes people down to protect righteous. Have no mistake about that. Again, there's a dimension of the future that's unknown to us, but known to Him... in which case He does let certain things happen to bring about the greater good (Nineveh and Prodigal Son example)... and perhaps this is the side of the character of God that you emphasize, yet we can't separate it from the wrath on behalf of people who He loves.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: sky

It was not to appease God that Christ suffered and died but to satisfy the demands of the broken law.

But who gave the law?

A law simply represents the will and mind of its originator. Indeed we are told that the law of God is a transcript of His character.

You cannot divorce God from His law. If the problem which Christ's death solved is simply, or primarily, a legal problem, then it's a problem of God's own actions. But this can't be right. Whether or not there was any law, Christ's death would still have been necessary.

pnatt

______________________________

pnatt, I have been around long enough to know that the law is a transcript of God's nature. :smile:

"God's throne remains. God could not change nor alter one precept of His law in order to save man; for the law is the foundation of His government. It is unchangeable, unalterable, infinite. In order for man to be saved, and for the honor of God to be maintained, it was necessary for the Son of God to offer Himself as a sacrifice for sin. He who knew no sin became sin for us. He died for us on Calvary. His death shows the wonderful love of God for man, and the immutability of His law." 1 S.M.240.

So it was not to appease God that Christ died for us. The law had been broken and because the law is a transcrip of God's nature, only One who was equal with God could atone for the broken law. Because that law is unchangeable, unalterable, infinite, only One who was equal to the law could offer Himself as a sacrifice for the transgression of that law.

And through the merits of that atoning offering or sacrifice all who have a sense of their uttter helplessness can come to God and be accepted and receive the infinite blessings of pardon and peace and light and joy in the Holy Spirit if they will only accept the offer of appropriating to themselves the all-sufficient merits of that infinite sacrifice.

sky

[fccool]

And now, I'd like to point out the archetypal example of the Divine love.

The nation of Israel's way out of the Egypt is full of blood and suffering of the Egyptians. Lot's of death and suffering resulted from DIRECT ACTS OF GOD. It was not simply things that God permitted to happen. But why did God do those things? Here's a small example of why kind of nation the Egypt was at that time:

Quote:

Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: "Throw every newborn Hebrew boy into the Nile River. But you may let the girls live.

And here's a perfect example of the wrath on behalf of people who God loves:

Quote:

Hence I tell you: Let my son go, that he may serve me. If you refuse to let him go, I warn you, I will kill your son, your first-born.

Also, notice that the plagues were progressive. The last and the most severe case of death comes when people see God and choose to go against him, by hurting and killing those who He loves. God closed up the Red sea, causing the wicked to drown.

So, here's the question for you. Was it evil for God to do what he's done to Egypt, if in fact He directly did those things and did not merely let these happen?

[skyblue888]

pnatt to Richard and fcool: Many statements from both Scripture and Ellen White have been presented. Simply stating that "the Bible doesn't really mean what it says" is facile. As has many times been pointed out to you, the Bible says

1.God killed Saul.

2.God moved David to number Israel.

3.God sent fiery serpents upon Israel.

4.God would destroy Jerusalem.

5.God sends strong delusion upon those who do not love the truth.

Yet you don't believe God did any of these things. So you "teach others that the Bible doesn't really mean what it says."

pnatt

_____________________________________

pnatt, I always say to people that God did kill Saul, that He did move David to number Israel, that He did destroy Jerusalem, and that He does send strong delusion to those who do not have the love of the truth. After all, this is what the Bible says He did or does. But I always ask them, How? How did God kill Saul? how did God move David to number Israel and thus to sin? how did God destroy Jerusalem? how does God send strong delusion?

And when it is found out how He did or does all these things, one can only begin to marvel at the truthfullness of these words: "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways, says the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts." Isa.55:8,9.

sky

[skyblue888]

fc, you stated that God strikes people down. He does just as it is written that He sends strong delusion, but not directly.

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

This is how God "strikes" people down. He will do everything He possibly can to save or to protect but there comes a time when He can no longer save or protect without forcing His presence there and that He cannot do. When He is forced to withdraw His restraining power from an individual, a city, or a nation, or of the whole world for that matter, the sinner(s) is (are) left without power to control the evil passions of the soul and with no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan who is the destroyer.

Then the command is given:

"Men have reached a point of insolence and disobedience which shows that their cup of iniquity is almost full. Many have well-nigh passed the boundary of mercy. Soon God will show that He is indeed the living God. He will say to the angels, 'No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy. Let him work out his malignity upon the children of disobedience; for the cup of iniquity is full. They have advanced from one degree of wickedness to another, adding daily to their lawlessness. I will no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing His work." E.G. White, Review and Herald, Vol.4, p.335.

Is there not enough said in the two statements above to convince us to reassess our thinking?

Jesus said, "How readest thou?"

sky

[fccool]

You are quoting:

Quote:

I will no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing His work

Yet, it's not Satan that flooded the earth. Neither it was Satan that struck down Ananias.

You can't apply the action of "letting happen" to every action that God is to do or not do. Sometimes God lets things happen. Sometimes He does it by acting directly.

Did Satan part the sea, or did Moses do it? I think not. It was certainly God, and He's done it directly. Likewise, He let the waters go on Egyptian army.

Can Satan turn people into a pillar of salt?

Satan is not seeking to destroy all people. He is seeking to destroy the church, and enslave the rest to worship him. A house divided against itself can not stand, so why would Satan destroy his followers? It makes no sense.

I've met many people who really think that God is a liar, and that Satan is actually better compared to God. Satan delights in people like that. That's his ultimate goal, is to misrepresent God.

[skyblue888]

fcool, you stated that Satan is not seeking to destroy all people.

It is true that for now, while Jesus in the sanctuary, pleading His divine merits in behalf of all mankind, Satan is restrained and he cannot destroy all people but when that restrain shall be removed, it will be a different story. It is also true that in order to further his own work, he does favor and prosper some and brings trouble upon others to lead them to believe that it is God who is afflicting them.

"Satan works through the elements also to garner his harvest of unprepared souls. He has studied the secrets of the labaratories of nature, and he uses all his power to control the elements as far as God allows. When He suffered Job 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... Satan has control of all whom God does not especially guard. He will favor and prosper some in order to further his work, and he will bring trouble upon others to lead men to believe that it is God who is afflicting them." The Great Controversy, p.589.

"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 Great Controversy, p.36.

"When Christ leaves the sanctuary, darkness (spiritual darkness) covers the inhabitants of the earth. In that fearful time the righteous must live in the sight of a holy God without an Intercessor. The restraint which has been upon the wicked is removed, and Satan has entire control of the finally impenitent. The wicked have passed the boundary of their probation; the Spirit of God, persistently resisted, has been at last withdrawn. Unsheltered by divine grace, they have no protection from the wicked one. Satan will then plunge the inhabitants of the earth into one great, final trouble. As the angels cease to hold in check the winds of human passion, all the elements of strife will be let loose. The whole world will be involved in ruin more terrible that that which came upon Jerusalem of old." The Great Controversy, p.614.

fcool, God did not part the Red Sea to destroy the Egyptian army but to open the way for His people to cross over. Can Satan turn a human being into a pillar of salt? Whether he can or not is irrelevant. We may be sure that God did not directly turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt any more than He directly sends strong delusion to people who care nothing for the truth for, as it is everlastingly true, "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." G.C.36.

We may not always be able to explain what exactly happened or how it happened but one thing is for sure and that is that the principles of His dealing with men are ever the same. When we accept these principles, we are standing on solid rock, and not upon the shifting sand of human theories and speculations.

God's judgments do not come direclty out from the Lord upon the disobedient. They place themselves beyond His protection. Just because someone cannot explain how the flood occured, that it was not brought down upon the people by the direct decree of God is no reason to reject the inspired statement that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression."

Today, we may not understand how the flood was not caused by the direct decree of God but we will some day.

sky

[Guest]

You can call me "pnat." Thanks, whati.

Hahaha, whati. Now thats funny right there, I don't care who you are.

[pnattmbtc]

Regarding the pillar of salt:

Quote:

"This remarkable happening is stated matter-of-factly, with no suggestion that it was a special miracle or divine judgment. Lot’s wife "looked back" (the phrase might even be rendered "returned back" or "lagged back") seeking to cling to her luxurious life in Sodom (note Christ’s reference to this in Luke 17:32,33) and was destroyed in the "overthrow" (Genesis 19:25,29) of the city. There are many great deposits of rock salt in the region, probably formed by massive precipitation from thermal brines upwelling from the earth’s deep mantle during the great Flood. Possibly the overthrow buried her in a shower of these salt deposits blown skyward by the explosions. There is also the possibility that she was buried in a shower of volcanic ash, with her body gradually being converted into "salt" over the years following through the process of petrifaction, in a manner similar to that experienced by the inhabitants of Pompeii and Herculaneum in the famous eruption of Mount Vesuvius.

- Henry Morris (taken from: "The Defenders Study Bible")(http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/lotswife.html)

[pnattmbtc]

so why would Satan destroy his followers?

So they don't repent and change sides.

[fccool]

Originally Posted By: fccool

so why would Satan destroy his followers?

So they don't repent and change sides.

I don't believe he is an idiot . It would be like Hitler killing off his army. Without an army of followers to validate him, Satan has no case. That's why he dragged the other angels into it by further misrepresenting God... and he certainly does that for humans.

[wayfinder]

1Timothy 18 This command I entrust to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you fight the good fight,

19 keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to their faith.

20 Among these are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan, so that they will be taught not to blaspheme

It would seem that Paul does agree with you pnat. Paul readily and agressively uses Satan to punish those who seemingly are doing Satan's will (blaspheming) or according to Paul they are.

1 Corinthians 5:5 I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Paul clearly states that Satan will distroy this mans flesh so that his spirit may be saved!

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

so why would Satan destroy his followers?

So they don't repent and change sides.

I don't believe he is an idiot . It would be like Hitler killing off his army. Without an army of followers to validate him, Satan has no case. That's why he dragged the other angels into it by further misrepresenting God... and he certainly does that for humans.

You ignored the point. You don't think people change sides?