Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented?

Posted By: Tammy Roesch

Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/11/06 02:59 PM

quote:
This fear of death comes from viewing God in a way that is false, misrepresented, perverted. What Satan did was to represent God and his word with Satan’s own attributes of Character and thought. Thus he perverted what was a counsel into a threat.

The above quote was from Tom, from another thread.

I agree, Tom, that much of our misunderstandings of truth, is a result of having accepted a wrong understanding of the character of God. Therefore, it seems that one of the very most important studies we could begin would be to study the character of God. As I started this, this morning, and I came upon this quote:

quote:
“The coming of the bridegroom was at midnight--the darkest hour. So the coming of Christ will take place in the darkest period of this earth's history. The days of Noah and Lot pictured the condition of the world just before the coming of the Son of man. The Scriptures pointing forward to this time declare that Satan will work with all power and "with all deceivableness of unrighteousness." 2 Thess. 2:9, 10. His working is plainly revealed by the rapidly increasing darkness, the multitudinous errors, heresies, and delusions of these last days. Not only is Satan leading the world captive, but his deceptions are leavening the professed churches of our Lord Jesus Christ. The great apostasy will develop into darkness deep as midnight, impenetrable as sackcloth of hair. To God's people it will be a night of trial, a night of weeping, a night of persecution for the truth's sake. But out of that night of darkness God's light will shine. {COL 414.3}
He causes "the light to shine out of darkness." 2 Cor. 4:6. When "the earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep," "the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light; and there was light." Gen. 1: 2, 3. So in the night of spiritual darkness, God's word goes forth, "Let there be light." To His people He says, "Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee." Isa. 60:1. {COL 415.1}
"Behold," says the Scripture, "the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people; but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and His glory shall be seen upon thee." Isa. 60:2. {COL 415.2}
It is the darkness of misapprehension of God that is enshrouding the world. Men are losing their knowledge of His character. It has been misunderstood and misinterpreted. At this time a message from God is to be proclaimed, a message illuminating in its influence and saving in its power. His character is to be made known. Into the darkness of the world is to be shed the light of His glory, the light of His goodness, mercy, and truth. {COL 415.3}
This is the work outlined by the prophet Isaiah in the words, "O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God! Behold, the Lord God will come with strong hand, and His arm shall rule for Him; behold, His reward is with Him, and His work before Him." Isa. 40:9,10. {COL 415.4}
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love. The children of God are to manifest His glory. In their own life and character they are to reveal what the grace of God has done for them. {COL 415.5}
The light of the Sun of Righteousness is to shine forth in good works--in words of truth and deeds of holiness. {COL 416.1}

Some points that really jumped out at me from this quote are:

1. We must be in just about the “darkest period of this earths history”, as it seems the coming of Jesus is right around the corner. And yet, we have all this wonderful technology, learning, etc. It isn’t like the Dark Ages of before…so what makes it so “dark”? It has to be the fact that even with all the knowledge available today, we have lost the knowledge of God’s character.

2. God’s character “has been misunderstood and misinterpreted.” Then she says, “At this time a message from God is to be proclaimed, a message illuminating in its influence and saving in its power. His character is to be made known.” I believe this is our commission…what an awesome responsibility we have…

3. This is the last message to be given to the world! But, do we really know what God’s character is like? How can we give this message, if we don’t really know it?

4. We are told that this misrepresentation of God’s character started in Heaven.

quote:
"He (Satan) sought to gain control of heavenly beings, to draw them away from their Creator, and to win their homage to himself. Therefore he misrepresented God. (DA 21).

5. Then we are told that,

quote:

“The Pharisees and the religious teachers so misrepresented the character of God that it was necessary for Christ to come to the world to represent the Father. Through the subtlety of Satan, men were led to charge upon God Satanic attributes.” (ST, August 20, 1894.)

History repeats itself….how do we know that the “Pharisees and the religious teachers” of our day, have not done the same thing as those of old did? I believe they have.

Posted By: John Boskovic

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 07:31 AM

Thanks Tammy for starting this topic. This is the controversy between good and evil; between Christ and Satan.
That statement you quoted was written by me, but Tom will be willing to own it too. [Smile]

Is it not rather a profound thought that so much; life or death; is constituted in knowing God. The Lord said:
Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. So the true knowledge of God is “life eternal”. It is easy to see then that, since Satan holds one in bondage through fear of death, his strength is in the false picture of God.

The point you raised in #4 is at the heart of the matter. That point would establish that what one perceives as God is actually Satan; and what one perceives as Satan is only a distraction.

I hope we will really open this subject.

2Co 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/11/06 11:30 PM

I was quoting John in that quote. I agree with the sentiment.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/11/06 11:44 PM

This is my motivation for discussing two subjects I discuss a lot, which are the satisfaction theory of the atonement and the destruction of the wicked. I perceive that these ideas present God's character in a way which is diametrically opposed to how it is in truth, presnting Him to be one who is arbitrary, severe, and cruel.

What many call "justice" is in reality arbitrary creulty. God is neither arbitrary nor cruel. He will not torture those who have rebelled against Him in molten lava either for a few days or for all eternity. He doesn't need to torture His Son in order to forgive us.

quote:
It is Satan's constant effort to misrepresent the character of God, the nature of sin, and the real issues at stake in the great controversy. (GC 569)

What are the issues of the Great Controversy? How did it begin? What is it God is trying to accomplish? These are good questions to consider in relation to this topic.

Here's another good character of God quote:

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." Mal. 4:2.

Posted By: Tammy Roesch

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 02:07 AM

Tom, have you ever read a book called, "Behold Your God", by Fred Wright? Some of the things you say, make me think perhapas you have...let me know...

Posted By: Tammy Roesch

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 03:31 AM

quote:
Thanks Tammy for starting this topic. This is the controversy between good and evil; between Christ and Satan.
That statement you quoted was written by me, but Tom will be willing to own it too.

Sorry I got you two mixed up... [Roll Eyes]

quote:
I hope we will really open this subject.

I hope we can, too. I believe it is very important....

I'm not sure we are coming from the same perspective...but...hopefully, with the help of the Holy Spirit, it will all fit together.

I think better in the morning, so don't want to get into it too much tonight. Al and I go to bed early, usually about 8, and we are up at 3:30. My mind is so much clearer in the morning... Have a good night!

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 05:02 AM

I believe the pendulum has swung the other way. The picture people are painting of God nowadays is one that portrays Him as too kind and loving to punish and destroy unsaved sinners in the lake of fire. It insists that God has never punished or destroyed anyone, that He merely ceased holding back the inevitable results of sin and sinning. I believe this idea is just as dangerous as the other end of the pendulum.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 05:33 AM

MM, the following statement brings out the wicked will be destroyed by the inevitable results of sin:

quote:
At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand this. Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin. (DA 764)

Regarding God's destroying people, it is true that God will destroy the wicked:

quote:
The light of the glory of God, which imparts life to the righteous, will slay the wicked. (DA 106)

The thing to notice is that it is the same thing which gives life to the righteous that slays the wicked, not some arbitrary action on God's part. The same sun which melts the ice bakes the clay. What is the light of the glory of God? It is the revelation of the truth of His character. The wicked will not be able to bear this. However it will be life itself for the righteous, because to know God is life eternal.

Regarding the lake of fire, explain to me how you think this works. Well maybe I'll explain how I think you think it works, and you can correct me if I'm wrong.

God records the sin of each one in books. Each sin requires a certain amount of punishment, to be infliced by God upon the sinner, because God is just. God inflicted Christ with the necessary punishment, so that anyone who accepts Christ can avoid the punishment. Those who choose not to accept Christ must face the infliction of the punishment.

The punishment is to be case into a lake of fire, which is something akin to molten lava. There's a problem in that if one were to be cast into a lake of fire, one would die with a matter of seconds. I doubt any person could survive even 10 seconds. But some suffer for many days. So God must supernaturally keep them alive so that they can suffer the pain from the molten lava which they deserve because of their sins. God must thus punish them because He is just.

Is this an accurate representation of your view?

Posted By: John Boskovic

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 08:11 AM

quote:
I believe the pendulum has swung the other way. The picture people are painting of God nowadays is one that portrays Him as too kind and loving to punish and destroy unsaved sinners in the lake of fire...I believe this idea is just as dangerous as the other end of the pendulum.

If it is just the pendulum swinging; oh well it will swing back and forth, and back and forth, and nothing really changes except the passing of time since everything still hangs on the same axis. God is mean; God is nice-nice; God is in-between. I don’t know why you should be concerned about pendulum swings anyway since they all rest on the same axis, and keep the clockwork going.

This, what we are talking about is enough to dismantle that clock forever. This is about the realization of where the problem and solution really is; where there is victory and growth. This has to do with eternal life vs. death; between righteousness and sin; and I hope you don’t see those as just a pendulum swing.

There is the sinner’s way of seeing God, which is sinful and false.
There is Christ’s way of seeing God, which is righteous and true.

And these are not pendulum swings.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 09:29 AM

quote:
What we are talking about is enough to dismantle that clock forever.

Cool.

Posted By: Tammy Roesch

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 12:06 PM

Tom,
Maybe you missed my question, "Have you read that book, 'Behold Your God' by Fred Wright?" Thanks!

Posted By: Tammy Roesch

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 12:11 PM

Sorry Tom. I hadn't checked my PM's before I went to this page, so I didn't see you had responded to my question there. I understand better where you are coming from, now...I thought I had just asked you before if you ever heard of Fred Wright...so I didn't think I was asking the same question twice. Sorry for the confusion. I'll start a new thread about Fred Wright. I think he is a big part of the problem here....

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/12/06 10:37 PM

I think we're getting off track here. If you will look at the first post I wrote in this topic, I brought up several themes, none of which involve F. T. Wright's ideas in the slightest. I brought up ideas which were being discussed by men who preached at the General Conference over 100 years ago.

If you look at Ellen White's writings, you will see that she presents the idea over and over again that Satan's means of fighting the Great Controversy is to misrepresent God's character as arbitrary, severe, harsh and cruel; as not having our best interests at heart. Given this is Satan's goal, we might ask just how it is that he goes about doing this.

Posted By: Colin

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 06:08 AM

Originally posted by Tom

quote:
This is my motivation for discussing two subjects I discuss a lot, which are the satisfaction theory of the atonement and the destruction of the wicked. I perceive that these ideas present God's character in a way which is diametrically opposed to how it is in truth, presnting Him to be one who is arbitrary, severe, and cruel.

What many call "justice" is in reality arbitrary creulty. God is neither arbitrary nor cruel. He will not torture those who have rebelled against Him in molten lava either for a few days or for all eternity. He doesn't need to torture His Son in order to forgive us.

You asked more recently in this thread how Satan goes about misreprenting God with his own evilness (a point without contention!), but your point quoted above that God should not be portrayed as arbitrary and cruel is also a problem, given the portrayal is about "justice": God's "justice" is about a point of law, and you're avoiding it like hell fire, no pun intended, I don't think. Objecting to the atonement concept involving punishment for sin as arbitrary and cruel fails to deal with the legal aspect of breaking God's law.

So, it clearly isn't just Satan misrepresenting God's character: erroneous teachings do, too, but the atonement issue is on the other thread - re: God's wrath, at this time, and hopefully it can stay there.

Posted By: John Boskovic

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 07:19 AM

Rom 10:3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

Character certainly has to do with one's righteousness and how they stand for it. And when we are dealing with righteousness we cannot escape dealing with salvation.

Is our picture of God as one of the scrbes and pharises, so that therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not?

Is our concept of God, that we are do what he says, and not do what he does?

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 08:51 AM

quote:
Thus says the LORD of hosts:
Execute true justice,
Show mercy and compassion
Everyone to his brother. (Zech. 7:9)

This is God's justice. God sets things right by showing mercy and compassion.

quote:
Therefore the LORD will wait, that He may be gracious to you;
And therefore He will be exalted, that He may have mercy on you.
For the LORD is a God of justice;
Blessed are all those who wait for Him. (Isa. 30:18)

God's justice in manaifest by His mercy and grace.

quote:
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. (ST 1/20/90)

This is the justice of God once again, God setting things right. He sets us right with Himself by revealing Himself to us through His Son Jesus Christ.

quote:
-- This is the at-one-ment; this is why He bore our griefs and carried our sorrows, that He might do that for us by breaking down all those things which separate hearts from hearts, both human and divine.

Notwishstanding this, we did esteem Him striken smitten of God, and afflicted. That was what we thought about it. We said, God is doing all this; God is killing Him, punishing Him, to satisfy His wrath, in order to let us off. That is the pagan conception of sacrifice. The Christian idea of sacrifice is this. Let us not the contrast. "God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

That is the Christian idea. Yes, sir. Indifference keeps, hatred keeps, selfishness keeps, or gives, if at all, but grudgingly, counting the cost, and figuring on some larger return at some future time. But love, and love only, sacrifices, gives freely, gives itself, gives without counting the cost; gives because it is love. That is sacrifice, whether it is the sacrifice of bulls and goats, or of Him who is the Lamb of God. It is the sacrifice that is revealed throughout the entire Bible. But the pagan idea of sacrifice is just the opposite. It is that god is always offended, always angry, and His wrath must be propitiated in some way....

I pray that God will let the sunlight of His truth shine into my heart, and into all of our hearts. Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows that He might bring us to Him; but we esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. That is what we thought; that is what we esteemed; not what was, but what we thought was. Now, every text in the Bible that speaks of reconciliation, makes God the one who makes the reconciliation,-- God in Christ. Every text in the Bible that speaks of the atonement, when we get it right, makes God the one who makes the atonement in Christ; not Christ simply, but God in Christ; just as God in Christ creates, redeems, reconciles, He makes the atonement. And every time the atonement, reconciliation, or propitiation are mentioned, it leads us right back to the character of God. (GCB 1897; Fifield)

Posted By: Tammy Roesch

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 03:22 PM

quote:
If you look at Ellen White's writings, you will see that she presents the idea over and over again that Satan's means of fighting the Great Controversy is to misrepresent God's character as arbitrary, severe, harsh and cruel; as not having our best interests at heart. Given this is Satan's goal, we might ask just how it is that he goes about doing this.

I agree with your statement here...BUT, so would have FRED WRIGHT. His misconception of the character of God, causes him to misrepresent God's character and how God deals with humans.

Posted By: Tammy Roesch

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 03:31 PM

quote:
So, it clearly isn't just Satan misrepresenting God's character: erroneous teachings do, too,

Exactly, Colin. She says,

quote:
It is through false theories and traditions that Satan gains his power over the mind. By directing men to false standards, he misshapes the character. {DA 671.1}

Posted By: John Boskovic

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 03:47 PM

quote:
It is through false theories and traditions that Satan gains his power over the mind. By directing men to false standards, he misshapes the character.

So what is the character of God?

Posted By: Darius

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 05:22 PM

quote:
Originally posted by John Boskovic:
So what is the character of God?

If you wish to understand the character of God you have to do it by proxy since no one has seen God at any time. The easiest way to understand the character of God is to understand the character of man and the rest of Creation. He cannot be worst than the best humans can be and are.

Posted By: Colin

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 06:31 PM

Originally quoted by Tom

quote:
-- This is the at-one-ment; this is why He bore our griefs and carried our sorrows, that He might do that for us by breaking down all those things which separate hearts from hearts, both human and divine.

Notwishstanding this, we did esteem Him striken smitten of God, and afflicted. That was what we thought about it. We said, God is doing all this; God is killing Him, punishing Him, to satisfy His wrath, in order to let us off. That is the pagan conception of sacrifice. The Christian idea of sacrifice is this. Let us not the contrast. "God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (GCB 1897, Fifield)

I have to disagree with our brother Fifield on two counts, at least. "Esteeming" the suffering servant punished by God isn't as Fifield has eloquently put it - that we think it is punishment when it isn't; rather Isaiah's "esteeming" is the perception at Golgotha that Jesus deserved it!!

This part

quote:
We said, God is doing all this; God is killing Him, punishing Him, to satisfy His wrath, in order to let us off. That is the pagan conception of sacrifice.

is also wrong, in that the pagan notion of sacrifice excluded divine wrath, and pagan sacrifice isn't offered by the h e a t h e n diety but by the worshipper!

Obedience and disobedience to God's law is the most obvious lesson in the Bible: the result of sinning is death (Rom 6:23), and Jesus' death on our behalf was primarily to save us all from that death - in the name of love. Love was the motivation, dying our death was the need.

That you disregard that need brings into question what you regard separates us from God: after all, since our God is a consuming fire, it's not just a misunderstanding between man and God about God's character.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 06:47 PM

quote:
I agree with your statement here...BUT, so would have FRED WRIGHT. His misconception of the character of God, causes him to misrepresent God's character and how God deals with humans.

Well so might Hitler and Satan. That's not at all relevant. Truth is truth, regardless of the author. If even the devil says something that's true, it's still true.

If you're worried about my having been influenced by Fred Wright, my ideas are my own. John hasn't read Fred's book, I don't think, and he's in harmony with the ideas I've been presenting. I can't think of any ideas I have now that I didn't have before reading Fred's book. I like the way he lays out principles and illustrations, but I've been studying these things for many years, several decades, and didn't read Fred's book until recently. So this is a non-issue; a red herring. We can talk about Fred on the other topic you created for that purpose.

Allow me to repeat my question:

quote:
If you look at Ellen White's writings, you will see that she presents the idea over and over again that Satan's means of fighting the Great Controversy is to misrepresent God's character as arbitrary, severe, harsh and cruel; as not having our best interests at heart. Given this is Satan's goal, we might ask just how it is that he goes about doing this.

Has Satan been successful in his goal? If so, how?

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 06:53 PM

quote:
Obedience and disobedience to God's law is the most obvious lesson in the Bible: the result of sinning is death (Rom 6:23), and Jesus' death on our behalf was primarily to save us all from that death - in the name of love. Love was the motivation, dying our death was the need.

I agree with this. Well I guess not quite. It (Christ's death) was primarily to win the Great Controversy and secure eternally the universe. But certainly saving us from death was a primary purpose for Christ's death.

quote:
That you disregard that need brings into question what you regard separates us from God: after all, since our God is a consuming fire, it's not just a misunderstanding between man and God about God's character.

I'm not disregarding the need you bring out. As I stated, I agree with what you wrote in the first paragraph.

This explains the separation:

quote:
This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown. God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life. He is "alienated from the life of God." Christ says, "All they that hate Me love death." Eph. 4:18; Prov. 8:36. God gives them existence for a time that they may develop their character and reveal their principles. This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice. By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire. (DA 764)

Where I disagree with your perspective is that the problems we have are not legal ones, but ones having to do with mind, heart and character.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 07:31 AM

quote:
So what is the character of God?

The whole purpose of Christ's mission was to reveal God's character. The character of God is exactly what we see when we look at Christ. When we've seen Jesus, we've seen the Father.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 07:33 AM

quote:
If you wish to understand the character of God you have to do it by proxy since no one has seen God at any time. The easiest way to understand the character of God is to understand the character of man and the rest of Creation. He cannot be worst than the best humans can be and are.

This is certainly true. The first sentence sounds like John 1:18:

quote:
No one has ever seen God. The only Son, who is truly God and is closest to the Father, has shown us what God is like.(CEV)

Posted By: Tammy Roesch

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/13/06 11:46 PM

Don't want you to think I'm putting you off...I'm not...and will back soon as I can...Sorry for the delay! [Smile]

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 12:57 AM

Fifield: We said, God is doing all this; God is killing Him, punishing Him, to satisfy His wrath, in order to let us off. That is the pagan conception of sacrifice.

Colin: [this] is also wrong, in that the pagan notion of sacrifice excluded divine wrath, and pagan sacrifice isn't offered by the h e a t h e n diety but by the worshipper!

This quote doesn't address who's making the sacrifice, but the purpose of the sacrifice. Fifield correctly identified the pagan concept of sacrifice, which is that a sacrifice is being made to appease God's wrath. Note: "God is killing Him, punishing Him, to satisfy His wrath, in order to let us off."

Posted By: Colin

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 03:47 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Tom Ewall:
Fifield: We said, God is doing all this; God is killing Him, punishing Him, to satisfy His wrath, in order to let us off. That is the pagan conception of sacrifice.

Colin: [this] is also wrong, in that the pagan notion of sacrifice excluded divine wrath, and pagan sacrifice isn't offered by the h e a t h e n diety but by the worshipper!

This quote doesn't address who's making the sacrifice, but the purpose of the sacrifice. Fifield correctly identified the pagan concept of sacrifice, which is that a sacrifice is being made to appease God's wrath. Note: "God is killing Him, punishing Him, to satisfy His wrath, in order to let us off."

Do you understand propitiation as separate to expiation? It's not the ongoing debate out there that I'm concerned about, but that some modern Bible translations (e.g. RSV) use expiation while the rest use propitiation. Propitiation involves Christ/God appeasing God's wrath against sin; expiation involves efforts to appease a diety who has no wrath against sin.

quote:
The word propitiation carries the basic idea of appeasement, or satisfaction - specifically towards God. Propitiation is a two-part act that involves appeasing the wrath of an offended person and being reconciled to them. (from gotquestions.org)

Rom 5:9 has us being saved from God's wrath. Fifield was wrong. Pagan sacrifice doesn't appease divine wrath.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 07:25 AM

quote:
The word propitiation carries the basic idea of appeasement, or satisfaction - specifically towards God. Propitiation is a two-part act that involves appeasing the wrath of an offended person and being reconciled to them.

The only reason it says "specifically towards God" is because of the theory you are asserting. You can't prove something is true by assuming it's true. That's just arguing in circles.

The second sentence is true. Propitiation is an offering made to bring about a reconciliation. The error is in confusing who the party is that needs to be reconciled.

Allow me to provide an illustration. Some time ago I was dating a woman. The two of us were at a party. I paid some attention to another friend, a female friend (married) at the party. My girl friend became jealous, and made it clear that she was upset at me.

I was totally innocent in this. My conscience was clear. However, I could see my girlfriend was upset, and I didn't want her to stay that way. So I thought about what I could do.

I decided to take a day off work. Without warning here, I took the day off and drove 3 hours or so to visit her. When I arrived, she didn't see me come. I could see her head hanging down. She was still upset.

When she saw me, her face lit up. She displayed a mixture of joy and surprise. We were reconciled! (I love this illustration; brings back happy memories).

This is an illustration of how God propitiated us with the gift of His Son. We were the ones who were unreasonably upset; we were the ones who needed to be reconciled. God's feelings towards us have never changed. He so loved us He gave us His Son.

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 04:46 PM

The opinion that Jesus destroys unsaved sinners by ceasing to hold in check the inevitable results of sinning is, in my opinion, false and dangerous. Either way, though, Jesus is directly responsible for destroying them. Whether He causes or allows it to happen doesn't change the fact that He is responsible.

The idea, however, that He is too loving to cause the death of anyone is foreign to truth. The idea that it contradicts His character to cause, rather than merely allow, the punishment and destruction of unsaved sinners is false and dangerous. Why? It contradicts the truth. It ascribes to something else the authority of God.

To allow something else to receive the credit that alone belongs to God is to jeopardize the security of the universe. If Jesus is not the one responsible for defeating sin and death, if something else wins the great controversy, then we are no better off than at the beginning of the great controversy.

Posted By: Colin

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 06:27 PM

That propitiation involves appeasing God's wrath is commonly accepted in all conservative Christian circles. I'm not assuming it's true so much as taking this acceptance as given. The Bible is clear that there is divine wrath against sin. How it occurs is another topic, but it's there, while pagan sacrifice excludes appeasing divine wrath. The heavenly/heathen divine differences making mistaken understandings of propitiation are about wrath being involved in the appeasement, as well as who is reconciled. You are leaving out the appeasement part of heavenly propitiation, mistaking it for the pagan version.

quote:
This is an illustration of how God propitiated us with the gift of His Son. We were the ones who were unreasonably upset; we were the ones who needed to be reconciled. God's feelings towards us have never changed. He so loved us He gave us His Son.

Your personal experience is touching, but you allude to reconciliation: propitiation has two parts, and you constantly deny that. Your denial doesn't change the fact that propitiation appeases as well as reconciles.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 08:06 PM

The opinion that Jesus destroys unsaved sinners by ceasing to hold in check the inevitable results of sinning is, in my opinion, false and dangerous.

Why would it be dangerous? If sin really is dangerous, and God warns us from the dangers of pursuing it, and we insist anyway, and God allows us to have our way in choosing death, how is it dangerous for God to allow the consequences to occur of what He said would happen? Isn't this exactly what DA 764 is saying?

quote:
This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown. God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life. He is "alienated from the life of God." Christ says, "All they that hate Me love death." Eph. 4:18; Prov. 8:36. God gives them existence for a time that they may develop their character and reveal their principles. This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice. By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them.

At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand this. Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin. A doubt of God's goodness would have remained in their minds as evil seed, to produce its deadly fruit of sin and woe. (DA 764)

Either way, though, Jesus is directly responsible for destroying them.

This is what the whole Great Controversy is about. God says Satan is directly responsible. Satan says God is. We as free moral agents get to choose who we will believe.

Whether He causes or allows it to happen doesn't change the fact that He is responsible.

Satan is responsible as the author of sin, suffering and death. Those who choose to align themselves with Satan in his rebellion share responsibility. God is totally 100% innocent.

quote:
The fall of our first parents, with all the woe that has resulted, he charges upon the Creator, leading men to look upon God as the author of sin, and suffering, and death. Jesus was to unveil this deception. (DA 24)

The idea, however, that He is too loving to cause the death of anyone is foreign to truth.

Your way of phrasing this leads me to believe you have not ascertained the nature of issue involved. It's not a question as whether or not God is loving enough for something to occur or not occur, but whether sin really is dangerous. Does sin have destructive power? That's really the question that needs to be considered.

The idea that it contradicts His character to cause, rather than merely allow, the punishment and destruction of unsaved sinners is false and dangerous. Why? It contradicts the truth. It ascribes to something else the authority of God.

If sin is dangerous and causes death, and God warns us this is the case, and what God says would happen actaully does happen, how does this ascribe to something else the authority of God? God's authority is not threatened by truth.

To allow something else to receive the credit that alone belongs to God is to jeopardize the security of the universe. If Jesus is not the one responsible for defeating sin and death, if something else wins the great controversy, then we are no better off than at the beginning of the great controversy.

I don't understand your motivation regarding stating that Jesus be the only one responsible for defeating sin and death. There's no question about this. The cross defeated sin and death by revealing the truth. This is how the Great Controversy was won. Jesus gets the credit because He is the One who died on the cross. God gets credit too for giving His Son for our fallen race.

I also don't understand the comment about "if someone else wins the Great Controversy." The Great Controversy has already been won. It was won at the cross. Who else to do you think could win, and how could they win?

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 08:28 PM

That propitiation involves appeasing God's wrath is commonly accepted in all conservative Christian circles.

Even if this were true, which it isn't, it wouldn't prove anything. The Eastern Orthodox church, for example, does not hold to this view. Unless you don't want to consider them conservative Christians.

Truth is not established by numbers. You believe that Christ corporately justified the human race, don't you? That Christ's sacrifice corporately justifies the human race is not accepted in conservative Christian circles. Should this idea be rejected for this reason?

I'm not assuming it's true so much as taking this acceptance as given.

I'm not understanding the distinction here. It seems to me you are assuming it's true, and then stating that assumption as if it were proof, or had some sort of weight.

The Bible is clear that there is divine wrath against sin.

I agree with this. God hates sin.

How it occurs is another topic, but it's there, while pagan sacrifice excludes appeasing divine wrath. The heavenly/heathen divine differences making mistaken understandings of propitiation are about wrath being involved in the appeasement, as well as who is reconciled. You are leaving out the appeasement part of heavenly propitiation, mistaking it for the pagan version.

Where in Scripture is presented the appeasement part of heavenly propitiation?

Tom:This is an illustration of how God propitiated us with the gift of His Son. We were the ones who were unreasonably upset; we were the ones who needed to be reconciled. God's feelings towards us have never changed. He so loved us He gave us His Son.

Colin: Your personal experience is touching, but you allude to reconciliation: propitiation has two parts, and you constantly deny that. Your denial doesn't change the fact that propitiation appeases as well as reconciles.

I mentioned the two parts. There was me and my girlfriend. She was reconciled (or appeased, if you prefer that word) by my coming down to visit her. Similarly, we are reconciled by the gift of God.

I mentioned Wieland twice, as one who shares my view of "propitiation" in Rom. 3:25 and "wrath" in Rom. 5:9. I was guessing you would be one who favors Wieland's presentation of these issues. Was I wrong about this?

quote:
Since the announcement to the serpent in Eden, "I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed" (Gen. 3:15), Satan had known that he did not hold absolute sway over the world. There was seen in men the working of a power that withstood his dominion. With intense interest he watched the sacrifices offered by Adam and his sons. In these ceremonies he discerned a symbol of communion between earth and heaven. He set himself to intercept this communion. He misrepresented God, and misinterpreted the rites that pointed to the Saviour. Men were led to fear God as one who delighted in their destruction. The sacrifices that should have revealed His love were offered only to appease His wrath. Satan excited the evil passions of men, in order to fasten his rule upon them. (DA 115)

It seems to me this quote brings out exactly the issues we are talking about. The sacrifice is for the purpose of revealing God's love, not appeasing His wrath.

Posted By: Colin

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/14/06 09:04 PM

The two parts to propitiation are its acions, not the parties to the action, or do you just disagree with that definition? That's the definition of our church, and, given the divine wrath against sin, appeasing that wrath is necessary to save us from sin's penalty!

Is it having divine wrath turned away from us to himself that you object to, or that Christ's death was a suffering of the actual death due us for sinning? Hope you've spotted the difference, there...

The Christian objection to God having wrath against sinners is mistaking wrath against sin for wrath against sinners. Then there's the nature of that wrath, and, given God's mercy to the sinner in providing the sacrifice of atonement for the sinner, the wrath is contrasted as clear as day for not being vindictive or arbitrary, but a matter of principle of holiness.

The Devil wants to misrepresent God's wrath as his own wrath - typical, and DA 115 cannot be saying something else, since Rom 1-3 is clear that Christ's ransom payment was also to appease God's holy wrath against unrighteousness. That quote of yours must also find its meaning from like statements, since it is ambiguous without further explanation.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/15/06 12:24 AM

quote:
In all who submit to His power the Spirit of God will consume sin. But if men cling to sin, they become identified with it. Then the glory of God, which destroys sin, must destroy them....The light of the glory of God, which imparts life to the righteous, will slay the wicked.(DA 108)

God's wrath is His turning over the sinner to the results of his choice, which is death. The problem is not that something needs to be done to God to convince or enable Him to set aside or redirect His anger, but that our hearts and minds are alienated from Him. We need to be brought into harmony with Him and the principles of His government. But we are selfish, and our natures are not in tune with God's ways. So God gave His Son in order to reveal His love to us, lead us to repentance, to effect our conversion. The goodness of God leads us to repentance, which is a change of mind, a change of heart. The cross accomplishes this. It does nothing to God but everything for us.

Note in the DA quote that men are destroyed because they identify themselves with sin. If they would give up sin, they would not be destroyed. Also note that it is not an arbitrary act on God's part that leads to their destruction, but simply God being God. This is seen in that it is the same thing which gives life to the righteous which destroys the wicked, which is "the light of the glory of God" which is simply the truth about His character (light=truth; God's glory is His character).

Is it having divine wrath turned away from us to himself that you object to, or that Christ's death was a suffering of the actual death due us for sinning? Hope you've spotted the difference, there...

I agree that Christ death was a suffering of the actual death due to us for sinning. I disagree that Christ had to die in order for God to have the legal right to forgive us. I disagree that the fundamental problem (or that it was a problem at all) was a legal one. The problem is one of alienated hearts and minds. This is why the Scripture so often emphasizes reconciliation. It doesn't emphasize at all legal problems.

The Christian objection to God having wrath against sinners is mistaking wrath against sin for wrath against sinners.
Then there's the nature of that wrath, and, given God's mercy to the sinner in providing the sacrifice of atonement for the sinner, the wrath is contrasted as clear as day for not being vindictive or arbitrary, but a matter of principle of holiness.

The Devil wants to misrepresent God's wrath as his own wrath - typical, and DA 115 cannot be saying something else, since Rom 1-3 is clear that Christ's ransom payment was also to appease God's holy wrath against unrighteousness.

Paul's point is the Christ revealed God's character, and that revealtion brings us into harmony with God. It's the same point that Ellen White makes, that Peter makes, that Paul makes in his other epistles, that John makes. It the whole story of Scripture.

You are simply repeating your own assertion over and over again. Where in Jesus' teachings can one find the view you are suggesting? Don't you think something as important as the reason for Christ's death is something He would have spoken about? Where does He suggest that His Father needed a legal right to forgive us? Where does He suggest that His Father's wrath against sin needed to be appeased, and that was the reason He was dying?

If one can only find support for a point of view in a portion of Scripture which is interpreted in dozens of different ways, that's a weak foundation.

Paul never speaks of "appeasing" God's wrath. I think he would cringe if he heard anyone suggesting that was his idea.

That quote of yours must also find its meaning from like statements, since it is ambiguous without further explanation.

You're saying the DA 115 text is ambiguous? This one?

quote:
(Satan) set himself to intercept this communion. He misrepresented God, and misinterpreted the rites that pointed to the Saviour. Men were led to fear God as one who delighted in their destruction. The sacrifices that should have revealed His love were offered only to appease His wrath. (DA 115)

What is it that's ambiguous? It seems clear to me the text is saying that it was Satan's plan to get men to offer sacrifices to appease God's wrath rather than see the sacrifices, as they should have been, as that which reveals God's love. This isn't clear?

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/16/06 07:05 AM

TE - Why would it be dangerous? If sin really is dangerous, and God warns us from the dangers of pursuing it, and we insist anyway, and God allows us to have our way in choosing death, how is it dangerous for God to allow the consequences to occur of what He said would happen? Isn't this exactly what DA 764 is saying?

MM – If God is unnaturally holding back the natural consequences of our sins it tells me He is responsible for the outcome of our choices. That is, if this idea is true, whether or not something happens when we sin depends on whether or not God causes or allows it to happen.

For example, did God unnaturally hold back the earthquake that eventually swallowed up Achan and his family? Or, did the quake occur on time as a result of Achan’s sin? That is, was there a natural time delay related to his specific sin? Or, did God cause the quake that killed them?

TE - Satan is responsible as the author of sin, suffering and death. Those who choose to align themselves with Satan in his rebellion share responsibility. God is totally 100% innocent.

MM – Again, are you suggesting that Satan is free to attack us any time he chooses? Or, does God decide when and what Satan can do? For example, was Satan free to attack Job according to his will and whim? Or, did God establish the rules and boundaries?

TE - I don't understand your motivation regarding stating that Jesus be the only one responsible for defeating sin and death. There's no question about this. The cross defeated sin and death by revealing the truth. This is how the Great Controversy was won. Jesus gets the credit because He is the One who died on the cross. God gets credit too for giving His Son for our fallen race.

MM – Jesus did not defeat sin and death on the cross as evidenced by the fact both are still alive and well today.

TE - I also don't understand the comment about "if someone else wins the Great Controversy." The Great Controversy has already been won. It was won at the cross. Who else to do you think could win, and how could they win?

MM – Jesus has not yet won the GC as evidenced by the fact it is still very much going on all around us today.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/15/06 08:42 PM

quote:
We should not try to lessen our guilt by excusing sin. We must accept God's estimate of sin, and that is heavy indeed. Calvary alone can reveal the terrible enormity of sin. If we had to bear our own guilt, it would crush us. (MB 116)

It is only by not recognizing the enormity of sin that we can be blind to what God is doing to protect us from it.

That is, if this idea is true, whether or not something happens when we sin depends on whether or not God causes or allows it to happen.

No convolution of logic can establish that God is responsible for our choices. We are. If we choose sin, we will die.

quote:
In all who submit to His power the Spirit of God will consume sin. But if men cling to sin, they become identified with it. Then the glory of God, which destroys sin, must destroy them.... The light of the glory of God, which imparts life to the righteous, will slay the wicked. (DA 106)

TE - Satan is responsible as the author of sin, suffering and death. Those who choose to align themselves with Satan in his rebellion share responsibility. God is totally 100% innocent.

MM – Again, are you suggesting that Satan is free to attack us any time he chooses?

I'm suggesting just what I wrote. Satan alone is the author of sin, suffering and death.

Or, does God decide when and what Satan can do? For example, was Satan free to attack Job according to his will and whim? Or, did God establish the rules and boundaries?

That God protects us from Satan is not in question.

TE - I don't understand your motivation regarding stating that Jesus be the only one responsible for defeating sin and death. There's no question about this. The cross defeated sin and death by revealing the truth. This is how the Great Controversy was won. Jesus gets the credit because He is the One who died on the cross. God gets credit too for giving His Son for our fallen race.

MM – Jesus did not defeat sin and death on the cross as evidenced by the fact both are still alive and well today.

This statement shocked me. Let's start a thread on it.

TE - I also don't understand the comment about "if someone else wins the Great Controversy." The Great Controversy has already been won. It was won at the cross. Who else to do you think could win, and how could they win?

MM – Jesus has not yet won the GC as evidenced by the fact it is still very much going on all around us today.

quote:
Christ did not yield up His life till He had accomplished the work which He came to do, and with His parting breath He exclaimed, "It is finished." John 19:30. The battle had been won. His right hand and His holy arm had gotten Him the victory. As a Conqueror He planted His banner on the eternal heights. Was there not joy among the angels? All heaven triumphed in the Saviour's victory. Satan was defeated, and knew that his kingdom was lost.(DA 758; emphasis mine)

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/16/06 06:42 PM

quote:
Ok, so does God prevent us from immediately suffering the consequences of our sins? Certainly. If He didn't, we would be dead, because the inevitable result of sin is death.

In my mind, God is “supernaturally” modifying the promised consequences of sinning, namely, instant death – not 900 years of suffering and sadness and gradual decay. The consequences of sinning, as we it, was not part of the original promise - Thou shalt surely die. Do you agree? I would like to know if you agree with these insights. They are important to my understanding of sin and death and suffering.

1SM 230
Christ, in counsel with His Father, instituted the system of sacrificial offerings; that death, instead of being immediately visited upon the transgressor, should be transferred to a victim which should prefigure the great and perfect offering of the Son of God. {1SM 230.1}

The fact Eve did not die the very instant she sinned, exactly as God promised, strongly suggests that death is not the natural cause and consequence results of sinning, at least not in the same way lopping off a head causes someone to die immediately. The relationship between sinning and death is different than lopping off heads and death. Do you agree?

The plan of salvation was not implemented until after Adam sinned, therefore, it is not the reason why our first parents did not die immediately. Some other reason accounts for why they didn’t die instantly. Otherwise, Eve would not have survived long enough to tempt Adam later on. Do you agree?

But I do not believe death is the natural result consequences of sinning based on the fact God was constrained to prevent us from eating the fruit of the tree of life. Why? Because we would live forever in a sinful state. “And now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever.” (Gen 3:22) Obviously, there is more to death than merely sinning.

TM 133, 134
Adam and Eve and their posterity lost their right to the tree of life because of their disobedience. "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of Us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever: therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the Garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken." Adam and Eve transgressed the law of God. This made it necessary for them to be driven from Eden and be separated from the tree of life, to eat of which after their transgression would perpetuate sin. "So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the Garden of Eden cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life." Man was dependent upon the tree of life for immortality, and the Lord took these precautions lest men should eat of that tree "and live forever"--become immortal sinners. {TM 133.3}

If, as you seem to believe, death is the natural consequences of sinning, and not imposed or inflicted by God, how could sinners live for ever?

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/17/06 07:11 AM

MM – That is, if this idea is true, whether or not something happens when we sin depends on whether or not God causes or allows it to happen.

TE - No convolution of logic can establish that God is responsible for our choices. We are. If we choose sin, we will die.

MM- Convoluted logic? Please, Tom, be kind and Christlike and avoid harsh words and insulting comments. We are two brothers in Christ trying to study the truth together, right? So please, refrain from insulting me. Thank you.

God does not force us to think, speak or behave in one way or another. We are free to choose to abide in Jesus. Otherwise, we abide in sin and death by default. We do not have to choose to sin, we only have to neglect to choose to abide in Jesus and we will sin instinctively. There is no neutrality.

Yes, we manage the choices, but Jesus manages the consequences. Just because a sad and sorrowful soul chooses to jump off a cliff doesn’t mean they will die. We do not always succumb to the laws of nature when we sin. Whether or not we die or suffer or whatever when we sin is totally dependent upon how Jesus chooses to manage the outcome of our choices.

TE - Satan alone is the author of sin, suffering and death.

MM – Satan did not create sin, suffering, or death. God is the creator, not the Devil. Satan cannot create anything. He can only distort what God has created. Lucifer is the first free moral agent to sin. That’s all. He did not create sin. Sinners suffer when they sin because God modified the death penalty. The suffering they experience is managed by Jesus. Sometimes He causes it directly, and other times allows evil angel to cause it to happen.

MM – Jesus did not defeat sin and death on the cross as evidenced by the fact both are still alive and well today.

TE - This statement shocked me. Let's start a thread on it.

MM – Why? Do you doubt that sin and death are still happening?

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/17/06 07:19 AM

TE - I also don't understand the comment about "if someone else wins the Great Controversy." The Great Controversy has already been won. It was won at the cross. Who else to do you think could win, and how could they win?

MM – Jesus has not yet won the GC as evidenced by the fact it is still very much going on all around us today.

MM – It is not a question of whether or not Jesus will win the GC. It has been known from eternity that Jesus would win the GC. No question about it. So, I should qualify what I posted by adding – The GC is not yet over. Whether or not Jesus will win it is not in question. He knows the end from the beginning, so He can assure us that affliction shall not rise up a second time.

quote:
Yet Satan was not then destroyed. The angels did not even then understand all that was involved in the great controversy. The principles at stake were to be more fully revealed. And for the sake of man, Satan's existence must be continued. Man as well as angels must see the contrast between the Prince of light and the prince of darkness. He must choose whom he will serve. {DA 761.3}

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/16/06 09:01 PM

quote:
The world has been committed to Christ, and through Him has come every blessing from God to the fallen race. He was the Redeemer before as after His incarnation. As soon as there was sin, there was a Saviour. (DA 210)

Some other reason accounts for why they didn’t die instantly. Otherwise, Eve would not have survived long enough to tempt Adam later on. Do you agree?

No, I disagree. The reason they didn't die immediately is the same reason we don't. It's because of the grace of God.

But I do not believe death is the natural result consequences of sinning based on the fact God was constrained to prevent us from eating the fruit of the tree of life. Why? Because we would live forever in a sinful state. “And now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever.” (Gen 3:22) Obviously, there is more to death than merely sinning.

I don't know what you're saying here. Sin has death wrapped up in it. You can't have sin and not get death. On the other hand, you can't have death without sin. Sin results in death. The cross demonstrates this.

If, as you seem to believe, death is the natural consequences of sinning, and not imposed or inflicted by God, how could sinners live for ever?

They can't. It's only by the grace of God that we live at all. Had Christ agreed to become our Savior, man would have died immediately, tree or no tree.

Eternal life does not come from a tree.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/16/06 10:55 PM

OK. I'll to stay clear of "convoluted." Somehow that made it past the editor.

What you said before was this:

quote:
If God is holding back the natural consequences of our sins it tells me He is responsible for the outcome of our choices.

(I removed the word "unnaturally"). This is at odds with what inspiration repeatedly teaches us, which is that we are responsible for the outcomes of our choices. For example:

quote:
The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown. God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life...God gives them existence for a time that they may develop their character and reveal their principles. This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice. (DA 764)

God does not force us to think, speak or behave in one way or another. We are free to choose to abide in Jesus. Otherwise, we abide in sin and death by default. We do not have to choose to sin, we only have to neglect to choose to abide in Jesus and we will sin instinctively. There is no neutrality.

I agree there is no neutrality, and this reason is expressed here:

quote:
The light shining from the cross reveals the love of God. His love is drawing us to Himself. If we do not resist this drawing, we shall be led to the foot of the cross in repentance for the sins that have crucified the Saviour. (DA 176)

It should be empahsized that God is drawing us to Himself, and we must resist in order to be lost. So in this sense we could say that being saved is what will happen by default, since we have to do something, which is to resist, in order to be lost. Of course, it can also be said we must do something in order to be saved, but the point is if we don't resist, we will do what is necessary to be saved.

Yes, we manage the choices, but Jesus manages the consequences.

This would be arbitrary. God is not arbitrary. The consequences come as a result of the choices. Take a look at DA 764 above. "This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice." Look at the whole paragraph. GC 35, 36 brings this out as well.

TE - Satan alone is the author of sin, suffering and death.

MM – Satan did not create sin, suffering, or death. God is the creator, not the Devil. Satan cannot create anything. He can only distort what God has created. Lucifer is the first free moral agent to sin. That’s all. He did not create sin.

Yes he did.

quote:
The fall of our first parents, with all the woe that has resulted, he charges upon the Creator, leading men to look upon God as the author of sin, and suffering, and death.(DA 24)

Satan seeks to lead us to view God as responsible for creating sin, suffering and death, but these things are Satan's inventions.

Sinners suffer when they sin because God modified the death penalty.

Modified? The death penalty is that sin results in death. There's nothing to be modified.

The suffering they experience is managed by Jesus. Sometimes He causes it directly, and other times allows evil angel to cause it to happen.

Sin causes suffering, not Jesus. Before there was sin, there was no suffering. After there is sin no more, there will be no more suffering. Jesus will continue, however.

MM – Jesus did not defeat sin and death on the cross as evidenced by the fact both are still alive and well today.

TE - This statement shocked me. Let's start a thread on it.

MM – Why? Do you doubt that sin and death are still happening?

This shocked me:

quote:
Jesus did not defeat sin and death on the cross.

If true, this statement would pretty much wipe out the entire New Testament. The thread's been started. I'll see what you have to say there.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/16/06 11:04 PM

quote:
Satan in heaven had hated Christ for His position in the courts of God. He hated Him the more when he himself was dethroned. He hated Him who pledged Himself to redeem a race of sinners. Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss.

The heart of the human father yearns over his son. He looks into the face of his little child, and trembles at the thought of life's peril. He longs to shield his dear one from Satan's power, to hold him back from temptation and conflict. To meet a bitterer conflict and a more fearful risk, God gave His only-begotten Son, that the path of life might be made sure for our little ones. "Herein is love." Wonder, O heavens! and be astonished, O earth! (DA 49; emphasis mine)

quote:
Remember that Christ risked all. For our redemption, heaven itself was imperiled. (COL 196)

Heaven itself was imperiled until the victory Christ won at the cross. Notice Satan's reaction:

quote:
All heaven triumphed in the Saviour's victory. Satan was defeated, and knew that his kingdom was lost. (DA 758)

You seem to be denying that anything happened at the cross. It was the cross that won the victory. That's when Satan knew he had lost. That's because that's when Satan did lose.

So, I should qualify what I posted by adding – The GC is not yet over. Whether or not Jesus will win it is not in question. He knows the end from the beginning, so He can assure us that affliction shall not rise up a second time.

The reason sin won't arise again is because the principles related to the Great Controversy have been made known. That's what the cross accomplished.

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/17/06 06:54 PM

Tom, it is clear we disagree on fundamental points. I believe God punishes and destroys unsaved sinners. I do not believe it is the result of natural law. You believe He merely ceases holding in the check the inevitable cause and effect relationship between sinning and instant death. I believe sinners could live indefinitely if God allowed them to eat freely of the tree of life. You believe they would die instantly in spite of the tree. I believe eternal life depends upon us eating regularly of the tree of life, even in the New Earth. Do you agree?

I believe the results of sinning as we know it were never part of the original promise, which was – In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. These past 6,000 years of gradually decaying and dying was made possible when Jesus implemented the plan of salvation. Otherwise, the human race would have ended with the immediate death of our first parents, not a long lingering death. Do you agree?

I believe the plan of salvation was implemented after Adam sinned. The SOP describes how Jesus and the Father wrestled over the decision to employ or not to employ the plan of salvation, and that they wrestled with this decision after Adam sinned. This implies that the plan of salvation was not in operation when Eve or when Adam sinned. Do you agree? If not, then how do you explain what Sister White wrote about when the plan of salvation was implemented relative to when they sinned??

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/18/06 07:29 AM

Tom, it is clear we disagree on fundamental points. I believe God punishes and destroys unsaved sinners.

Me too.

I do not believe it is the result of natural law.

I've never said this.

You believe He merely ceases holding in the check the inevitable cause and effect relationship between sinning and instant death.

There's no doubt God does do this. We'd all be dead if not for the grace of God. If we had to bear the guilt of our sin, it would crush us. I'm not sure how you're understanding what's going on here. I think there may be more to it than what you are thinking, so the "merely" may be misplaced. Not sure.

I believe sinners could live indefinitely if God allowed them to eat freely of the tree of life.

No, this wouldn't be possible, unless God were to continuously allow such by grace. God is a consuming fire to sin whereever it is found. The light of the glory of God, which gives life to the righteous, slays the wicked. The only reason this doesn't happen is because God shrouds His glory. Eating fruit from a tree would not help.

You believe they would die instantly in spite of the tree. I believe eternal life depends upon us eating regularly of the tree of life, even in the New Earth. Do you agree?

I think you're missing the point of the tree completely. Eternal life comes from God.

I believe the results of sinning as we know it were never part of the original promise, which was – In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. These past 6,000 years of gradually decaying and dying was made possible when Jesus implemented the plan of salvation. Otherwise, the human race would have ended with the immediate death of our first parents, not a long lingering death. Do you agree?

Yes. If we had to bear the guilt of our sin, it would crush us. As soon as their was sin, there was a Savior. Christ immediately began bearing the sin of man, which makes the continued existence of man possible. We live by the grace of God. To the death of Christ, we owe even our earthly life.

I believe the plan of salvation was implemented after Adam sinned. The SOP describes how Jesus and the Father wrestled over the decision to employ or not to employ the plan of salvation, and that they wrestled with this decision after Adam sinned. This implies that the plan of salvation was not in operation when Eve or when Adam sinned. Do you agree?

No. As EGW points out, as soon as their was sin, there was a Savior.

If not, then how do you explain what Sister White wrote about when the plan of salvation was implemented relative to when they sinned??

There's nothing to explain. As soon as their was sin, there was a Savior. That what she says. A little thought would show this would have to be the case. I believe her.

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/18/06 07:31 AM

TE - This is at odds with what inspiration repeatedly teaches us, which is that we are responsible for the outcomes of our choices.

MM – According to the original promise, which was – In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die – the outcome of the choice to sin was supposed to have been instant death, not nine centuries of suffering and gradual decay. Do you agree?

If so, then do you also agree that the plan of salvation changed or modified the original outcome of sinning? That is, do you agree that the plan of salvation created a new and different relationship between sinning and the original promise regarding instant death?

If so, then do you also agree that there are times when the results of sinning defy natural law? That is, do you agree that there are times when God modifies the natural cause and effect relationship between sinning and its normal, predictable consequences?

If you can agree with these insights, then you should be able to agree that God, and not natural law, is in control of the consequences or outcome of our choices to sin. Please understand that I’m not talking about reaping what we sow in the lake of fire.

I’m speaking specifically about the results of sinning that happen the moment we choose to sin, not the final results of sinning that we will reap in the lake of fire (if we refuse to be saved). Do you see what I mean?

TE - It should be empahsized that God is drawing us to Himself, and we must resist in order to be lost. So in this sense we could say that being saved is what will happen by default, since we have to do something, which is to resist, in order to be lost. Of course, it can also be said we must do something in order to be saved, but the point is if we don't resist, we will do what is necessary to be saved.

MM – I believe the emphasis is that we must choose to consent and cooperate with the heavenly agencies in order to be saved in heaven, and that if we refuse to consent and cooperate we are lost by default. I suspect we will never agree on this point.

We also disagree regarding sinning. I believe the potential for sinning will exist throughout eternity. I do not believe Satan created it. The potential for sinning came into existence when God created free moral agents capable of choosing to sin. Lucifer was the first FMA to sin, but he did not create it.

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/18/06 07:39 AM

MM – It is not a question of whether or not Jesus will win the GC. It has been known from eternity that Jesus would win the GC. No question about it.

TE - Sure there was a question.

MM – Not so. Jesus knew He would succeed on the cross. He never doubted it. That was the essence of His victory on the cross, that is, He never doubted the promises and prophecies that described Him succeeding on the cross. Here’s one of the many ways Sister White describes it:

TMK 37
Christ came to this world for no other purpose than to manifest the glory of God, that man might be uplifted by its restoring power. All power and grace were given to Him. His heart was a wellspring of living water, a never-failing fountain, ever ready to flow forth in a rich, clear stream to those around Him. His whole life was spent in pure disinterested benevolence. His purposes were full of love and sympathy. He rejoiced that He could do more for His followers than they could ask or think. His constant prayer for them was that they might be sanctified through the truth, and He prayed with assurance, knowing that an almighty decree had been given before the world was made. He knew that the gospel of the kingdom would be preached in all the world; that truth, armed with the omnipotence of the Holy Spirit, would conquer in the contest with evil; and that the bloodstained banner would one day wave triumphantly over His followers. {TMK 37.2}

TE - You seem to be denying that anything happened at the cross. It was the cross that won the victory. That's when Satan knew he had lost. That's because that's when Satan did lose.

MM – How so? If the Devil has already lost the GC, if Jesus has already won the GC, why, then, are we still living in a world full of sinners, a world dominated by sin and evil, suffering and death?

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/17/06 08:21 PM

Tom, do you think regularly eating of the tree of life will be necessary in the New Earth in order to live eternally?

Also, I'm glad we were able to agree that instant death, not a long lingering death, was the original punishment for sinning, and that things were greatly modified when the plan of salvation was implemented.

It is clear, though, that we thoroughly disagree as to how the relationship between sinning and suffering and death play out under the current rules of engagement.

MM - If not, then how do you explain what Sister White wrote about when the plan of salvation was implemented relative to when they sinned??

TE - There's nothing to explain. As soon as their was sin, there was a Savior. That what she says. A little thought would show this would have to be the case. I believe her.

MM - I agree with her. But how do you explain the fact that the plan of salvation was not implemented until after Adam sinned?

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/17/06 11:05 PM

TE - This is at odds with what inspiration repeatedly teaches us, which is that we are responsible for the outcomes of our choices.

MM – According to the original promise, which was – In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die – the outcome of the choice to sin was supposed to have been instant death, not nine centuries of suffering and gradual decay. Do you agree?

If so, then do you also agree that the plan of salvation changed or modified the original outcome of sinning? That is, do you agree that the plan of salvation created a new and different relationship between sinning and the original promise regarding instant death?

If so, then do you also agree that there are times when the results of sinning defy natural law? That is, do you agree that there are times when God modifies the natural cause and effect relationship between sinning and its normal, predictable consequences?

If you can agree with these insights, then you should be able to agree that God, and not natural law, is in control of the consequences or outcome of our choices to sin. Please understand that I’m not talking about reaping what we sow in the lake of fire.

I’m speaking specifically about the results of sinning that happen the moment we choose to sin, not the final results of sinning that we will reap in the lake of fire (if we refuse to be saved). Do you see what I mean?

The results of sinning is death. The only reason this isn't immediate is because of the grace of God. You're making an artifical disctinction where none exists.

TE - It should be empahsized that God is drawing us to Himself, and we must resist in order to be lost. So in this sense we could say that being saved is what will happen by default, since we have to do something, which is to resist, in order to be lost. Of course, it can also be said we must do something in order to be saved, but the point is if we don't resist, we will do what is necessary to be saved.

MM – I believe the emphasis is that we must choose to consent and cooperate with the heavenly agencies in order to be saved in heaven, and that if we refuse to consent and cooperate we are lost by default. I suspect we will never agree on this point.

Do you agree with this?

quote:
The light shining from the cross reveals the love of God. His love is drawing us to Himself. If we do not resist this drawing, we shall be led to the foot of the cross in repentance for the sins that have crucified the Saviour. Then the Spirit of God through faith produces a new life in the soul. The thoughts and desires are brought into obedience to the will of Christ. The heart, the mind, are created anew in the image of Him who works in us to subdue all things to Himself. Then the law of God is written in the mind and heart, and we can say with Christ, "I delight to do Thy will, O my God." Ps. 40:8. (DA 176)

We also disagree regarding sinning. I believe the potential for sinning will exist throughout eternity. I do not believe Satan created it.

The potential for sinning came into existence when God created free moral agents capable of choosing to sin. Lucifer was the first FMA to sin, but he did not create it.

You seem to be reasonably intelligent, yet you pretty frequently twist things. I don't know why. Are you confused about what we were talking about? It's hard to believe that. But it's even harder to believe you're doing this on purpose.

We weren't talking about the potential for sinning. Of course Satan didn't invent this. This comes from being a free moral agent, as you state. We weren't talking about this, and I've never said anything contrary to what you wrote. Why would you write this is something we disagree on?

You write "We agree on ..." when you know it's something we don't agree on, and write "We disagree on ..." on something we do agree on. This is very odd.

What we actually were talking about was who created sin. Not the potential for sin, but sin. Satan is the author of sin, suffering and death. He tries to lead us to believe that God is.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/17/06 11:13 PM

Tom, do you think regularly eating of the tree of life will be necessary in the New Earth in order to live eternally?

It's something we will do. God could have chosen some other mechanism, but chose this one. The mechanism doesn't matter. The imporant thing to realize is that life comes from God. That's what the meaning of the tree is.

Also, I'm glad we were able to agree that instant death, not a long lingering death, was the original punishment for sinning, and that things were greatly modified when the plan of salvation was implemented.

I've got a feeling you have an entirely different idea in mind than I do with these words. I very seriously doubt I agree with your ideas here.

It is clear, though, that we thoroughly disagree as to how the relationship between sinning and suffering and death play out under the current rules of engagement.

I'm not sure what you think. I have an idea. I think you think God is responsible for all the suffering and death that happens, and He just chooses different methodologies on how to implement the suffering and death that He imposes on people. Is that right?

I believe that God is like Christ. If we look at Christ's life and character, we can see what the relationship is between sin, suffering, and death.

MM - If not, then how do you explain what Sister White wrote about when the plan of salvation was implemented relative to when they sinned??

TE - There's nothing to explain. As soon as their was sin, there was a Savior. That what she says. A little thought would show this would have to be the case. I believe her.

MM - I agree with her. But how do you explain the fact that the plan of salvation was not implemented until after Adam sinned?

As soon as their was sin their was a Savior. You said you agree with this. Why your quesiton then? What is there to explain? It was some time after; it was right when it happened. "As soon as their was sin there was a Savior." Note the words "as soon." That doesn't mean "after."

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/18/06 06:26 PM

Tom, do you agree that instant death, not years of gradually dying, was what Jesus meant when He said - In the day ...? If so, then we are in agreement. Period. No hidden agenda.

You still haven't explained why you believe Jesus and the Father thrice discussed whether or not to implement the plan of salvation. If it was already implemented, why did they have to discuss it three times?

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/19/06 05:05 AM

MM, I've spoken about this in great detail in the past. It clearly brings out the faultiness of your views that the future is fixed.

The short answer is that the plan had been discussed, but until it was needed it was only a potential plan. When man sin, then came the time to discuss whether the plan should be placed into operation.

The plan involved the possibility that Christ could be lost forever, which is why God was reticent to allow Christ to go through with it. There was great risk involved. This is why is was a struggle for God.

quote:
Said the angel, "Think ye that the Father yielded up His dearly beloved Son without a struggle? No, no." It was even a struggle with the God of heaven, whether to let guilty man perish, or to give His darling Son to die for them. (EW 127)

quote:
Satan in heaven had hated Christ for His position in the courts of God. He hated Him the more when he himself was dethroned. He hated Him who pledged Himself to redeem a race of sinners. Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss.

The heart of the human father yearns over his son. He looks into the face of his little child, and trembles at the thought of life's peril. He longs to shield his dear one from Satan's power, to hold him back from temptation and conflict. To meet a bitterer conflict and a more fearful risk, God gave His only-begotten Son, that the path of life might be made sure for our little ones. "Herein is love." Wonder, O heavens! and be astonished, O earth! (DA 49)

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/20/06 07:01 AM

Faultiness of my views? Come on, Tom, not more verbal abuse. You continue to post comments that are insulting and impertinent. Why? Such remarks are unnecessary. They do nothing, absolutely nothing, to help us study together.

Please, Tom, please stop saying things that are rude and offensive. Just speak the truth in love – without the inflammatory barbs. Thank you. Jesus never resorted to wounding people that way, right? Should you?

I believe the plan of salvation was implemented, was put into operation, after Adam sinned. You do not. I believe something else was at work that allowed Adam and Eve to exist in a state of sin until the decision was made to implement the plan of salvation. You do not.

I believe Jesus knew all along that He would be successful on the cross, that He never once doubted it. You do not. I believe the idea that God risked failure and eternal loss means something other than Jesus did not know for sure in advance that He would succeed on the cross. You do not.

You believe you are right, and that I am wrong. As of now, that's how things stand.

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/20/06 07:06 AM

In response to the original post that started this thread I posted the following comments:

quote:
Originally posted by Mountain Man:
I believe the pendulum has swung the other way. The picture people are painting of God nowadays is one that portrays Him as too kind and loving to punish and destroy unsaved sinners in the lake of fire. It insists that God has never punished or destroyed anyone, that He merely ceased holding back the inevitable results of sin and sinning. I believe this idea is just as dangerous as the other end of the pendulum.

Is the character of God being misrepresented by people who believe God merely allows things to happen rather than also, at times, causing them to happen or commanding holy angels to make them happen? I believe it does. why? Because I think it contradicts the truth as revealed in the Bible and the SOP. Here's an insight this view clearly contradicts:

GC 614
A single angel destroyed all the first-born of the Egyptians and filled the land with mourning. When David offended against God by numbering the people, one angel caused that terrible destruction by which his sin was punished. 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 614.2}

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/19/06 08:34 PM

MM, two points. First of all, to assert that God's character is misrepresented because it's contrary to some idea you have which you think is truth doesn't really address the question as to how it's misrepresented. That is, in what way is God's character misrepresented if:
a)God protects us from the ill which sin causes
b)God withdraws His protection

as opposed to
a)The ills we suffer are due to God's direct action.

It would appear to me that this makes God's character look worse, not better.

I would also ask you where in Christ's life we see the misrepresentation you think you see. Since the Spirit of Prophecy tells us "all" that we can know about God was revealed in the life of Christ, then we should be able to find such a revelation there. I've asked you this many times, but you've never answered it, I don't think. That's a big hole in the point of view you are representing, I think.

If all that man needs to know or can know of God was revealed in Christ, then we should be able to find whatever character trait we think we see in God there. So if you think it's a trait of God's character to at times directly afflict us with sickness or death, then if all that we can know about God was revealed in the life and character of His Son (during His earthly life), then we should see that there. That makes sense, doesn't it?

Regarding the GC quote, taking a single sentence of out of context is not much of an argument. Here's what she writes immediately preceeding the sentence you quoted:

quote:
When He leaves the sanctuary, 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. God's long-suffering has ended. The world has rejected His mercy, despised His love, and trampled upon His law. 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 of God cease to hold in check the fierce winds of human passion, all the elements of strife will be let loose. The whole world will be involved in ruin more terrible than that which came upon Jerusalem of old. (GC 614)

Notice she points out:
a)The restraint upon the wicked is removed.
b)Satan has control of the impenitent
c)God's longsuffering has ended
d)Unsheltered by divine grace, they have no protection from the wicked one
e)Satan plunges the world into a time of trouble
f)The angelse cease to hold back the winds of strife.

If you look at the destruction of Jerusalem, you will see that these are the very same principles she outlines there.

Immediately after the sentence you plucked out of context we read the following:

quote:
Those who honor the law of God have been accused of bringing judgments upon the world, and they will be regarded as the cause of the fearful convulsions of nature and the strife and bloodshed among men that are filling the earth with woe. The power attending the last warning has enraged the wicked; their anger is kindled against all who
have received the message, and Satan will excite to still greater intensity the spirit of hatred and persecution.

When God's presence was finally withdrawn from the Jewish nation, priests and people knew it not. Though under the control of Satan, and swayed by the most horrible and malignant passions, they still regarded themselves as the chosen of God. The ministration in the temple continued; sacrifices were offered upon its polluted altars, and daily the divine blessing was invoked upon a people guilty of the blood of God's dear Son and seeking to slay His ministers and apostles. So when the irrevocable decision of the sanctuary has been pronounced and the destiny of the world has been forever fixed, the inhabitants of the earth will know it not. The forms of religion will be continued by a people from whom the Spirit of God has been finally withdrawn; and the satanic zeal with which the prince of evil will inspire them for the accomplishment of his malignant designs, will bear the semblance of zeal for God. (GC 614)

We note the following:
a)Satan excites still greater hatred and persecution against those who honor God.
b)God's presence is withdrawn from those who think they are following God as they attack God's true followers.
c)The Spirit of God will be finally withdrawn.

If you read through the context of the single sentence you took, you will see that there is nothing at all which supports your point of view that God causes the plagues in any other way than withdrawing His protection. He withdraws His Spirit, and commands the angels to cease holding back the winds of strife.

Regarding the plauges, EGW also wrote:

quote:
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. He warns, corrects, reproves, and points out the only path of safety; then if those who have been the objects of His special care will follow their own course independent of the Spirit of God, after repeated warnings, if they choose their own way, then He does not commission His angels to prevent Satan's decided attacks upon them. It is Satan's power that is at work at sea and on land, bringing calamity and distress, and sweeping off multitudes to make sure of his prey. And storm and tempest both by sea and land will be, for Satan has come down in great wrath. He is at work. He knows his time is short and, if he is not restrained, we shall see more terrible manifestations of his power than we have ever dreamed of. {14MR 3.1}

From this we see regarding the plagues:
a)They do not come directly from God
b)The wicked place themselves beyond God's protection
c)God does not commission His angels to protect the wicked against Satan's attacks against them.
d)Satan comes down with great wrath.

Ok, so if the single sentence you plucked out of context agrees with how you understand it, you should be able to:

a)Find some example in Christ's life which agrees with your point of view
b)Reconcile it with the context, and the principles EGW brings to the forefront in these quotes I've provided, as well as other places (like the Destruction of Jerusalem chapter, which brings out these same points).

I doubt you'll try to do either of these things.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/19/06 08:50 PM

Sorry MM. I should have written "what I perceive to be your faulty view." It's a bit exasperating to write many, many pages regarding a topic, and you act as if I've never responded to a given question which you've already asked many times in the past. It's like I never wrote anything. It makes me wonder if you've read what I've written.

I believe the plan of salvation was implemented, was put into operation, after Adam sinned. You do not.

"As soon as their was sin, there was a Savior." (DA 21) I've quoted this several times. You may continue to believe it was implemented after, and I will continue to agree with Ellen White's statement. Her statement also agrees with Scripture and common sense. We only live by the grace of God. That's a truth which is communicated in dozens of different ways in both Scripture and inspiration. For example:

quote:
Calvary alone can reveal the terrible enormity of sin. If we had to bear our own guilt, it would crush us. But the sinless One has taken our place; though undeserving, He has borne our iniquity. (MB 116)

If Adam and Eve had to bear their own guilt, it would have crushed them. Christ had to bear their guilt from the moment they sinned, just like He has to bear our guilt.

I believe something else was at work that allowed Adam and Eve to exist in a state of sin until the decision was made to implement the plan of salvation. You do not.

"Something else." What would that be? There's one thing that allows us to live even though we are sinners, and that's the grace of God.

I believe Jesus knew all along that He would be successful on the cross, that He never once doubted it. You do not. I believe the idea that God risked failure and eternal loss means something other than Jesus did not know for sure in advance that He would succeed on the cross. You do not.

Not only did God risk failure and eternal loss, Christ did as well:

quote:
Remember that Christ risked all. For our redemption, heaven itself was imperiled. At the foot of the cross, remembering that for one sinner Christ would have laid down His life, you may estimate the value of a soul. (COL 196)

I'd be curious how we can remember that Christ risked all while simultaneously there was no chance He could fail.

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/21/06 06:29 AM

Tom, I agree that Jesus demonstated, while here, the truth regarding the character of God. But Jesus has been doing that since the beginning of the GC. When we take into consideration the entire testimony of Jesus we have a complete picture of God. In the OT Jesus demonstrated certain traits more clearly than He did in the NT. I realize you disagree with this insight.

The GC quote I posted above is not one sentence divorced from its context. Instead, it is an entire paragraph. Nothing that she wrote before or after it changes the point she clearly made, namely, Jesus has employed holy angels and evil angels to work death and destruction on earth, and that He will give both permission to do things that account for the seven last plagues. It is the Bible that describes holy angels pouring out the vials. See Revelation 16.

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/21/06 06:43 AM

TE - It makes me wonder if you've read what I've written.

MM - I´m sorry you feel that way. I do read what you post, it's just that I don't always agree with you.

TE - You may continue to believe it was implemented after, and I will continue to agree with Ellen White's statement.

MM - She also says that the decision to implement the plan of salvation was made after they sinned, which tells me that they, especially Eve, were in a state of sin for awhile before the plan was implemented. I realize you do not agree.

TE - "Something else." What would that be? There's one thing that allows us to live even though we are sinners, and that's the grace of God.

MM - I agree. God extended a form of grace that enabled them to exist for a time in a state of sin without dying immediately.

TE - I'd be curious how we can remember that Christ risked all while simultaneously there was no chance He could fail.

MM - Me to. But that's exactly what the inspired record says. Jesus knew He would succeed on the cross. That is clear. It also says a form of risk was involved. Just exactly what that means is not clear, but one thing is clear - it cannot mean that Jesus did not know He would succeed on the cross.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/22/06 07:54 AM

Tom, I agree that Jesus demonstated, while here, the truth regarding the character of God. But Jesus has been doing that since the beginning of the GC.

The character of God was misunderstood by both man and angels. That's why Christ came in human flesh, to clear up the misunderstandings. We shouldn't throw away the new wine to keep the old. Christ came for a purpose, which the Spirit of Prophesy outlines here. I was going to quote something, but I guess their still down. Let's see if I have it elsewhere:

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)

Good, I did have it. I get the quotes from the online egw site, so feel kind of handicapped without it. At any rate, notice that she points out that the earth was full of misapprehension of God (i.e. misunderstanding). To clarify, God sent His Son. Even holy angels did not understand the truth until the cross.

When we take into consideration the entire testimony of Jesus we have a complete picture of God.

No, this is not what the Spirit of Prophecy tell us, which is:

quote:
All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son." (8T 286)

Please notice the word "all." I highlighted it to make it stand out. That little word means that *everything* it is possible for us to know about God was revealed during Christ's lifetime here with us in the flesh. This was the very purpose of His mission; to reveal God.

It's a sad thing if one insists on throwing this revelation away, to go outside of it, to try to "know" something about God which cannot be known.

In the OT Jesus demonstrated certain traits more clearly than He did in the NT. I realize you disagree with this insight.

Not I, but Sister White. I do agree with her, however.

The GC quote I posted above is not one sentence divorced from its context. Instead, it is an entire paragraph. Nothing that she wrote before or after it changes the point she clearly made, namely, Jesus has employed holy angels and evil angels to work death and destruction on earth, and that He will give both permission to do things that account for the seven last plagues. It is the Bible that describes holy angels pouring out the vials. See Revelation 16.

I quoted what she wrote before and after. I also quoted other things she wrote, where she is clear that the plagues spoken of in Revelation come from God's withdrawing His Spirit. 14MR 3, GC chapter 1, and the paragraphs immediately preceeding and following the sentence you pulled out all make this clear.

It is true the Bible describes holy angels pouring out the vials, and a study of Scripture will help us to correctly understand the meaning. To understand the meaning of any Scripture it is necessary to study it according to the truth revealed at the cross (EGW says this, btw, although the principle can be seen from Scripture).

Christ revealed a God who was not arbitrary or cruel, as the adversary has portrayed Him to be. In GC 35 we are told that destruction is often understand as a decree of God, and that this is how the deceiver hides his work.

Remember it has been the desire of the adversary to misrepresent God from the very beginning. The whole Great Controversy is about the truth of God's character. Christ came to reveal the truth.

The truth is that God is just like Jesus revealed Him to be. When we've seen Jesus, we've seen the Father.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/21/06 08:05 PM

TE - It makes me wonder if you've read what I've written.

MM - I´m sorry you feel that way. I do read what you post, it's just that I don't always agree with you.

That's not the problem. Many people disagree with me. The problem is you ask a question as if you've never asked it before, when you've already asked it many times and I've answered it many times. If you want to reask a quesiton for clarification, that's fine, but please present the question in that way.

TE - You may continue to believe it was implemented after, and I will continue to agree with Ellen White's statement.

MM - She also says that the decision to implement the plan of salvation was made after they sinned,

No, she doesn't say this. First of all, this would contradict her saying, "As soon as sin there was a Savior." She doesn't contradict herself. Secondly, it wouldn't be possible, because as soon as Adam sinned, he needed a Savior, whether she said so or not. Adam (and we) only live by the grace of God. The fact that we live, although we are sinners, demonstrates that God's grace is active in our behalf.

Another way of seeing this is from her statement that if we had to bear the guilt of our sin it would crush us. Adam would have been crushed had he had to bear the guilt of his sin, so Christ immediately began bearing it for him.

which tells me that they, especially Eve, were in a state of sin for awhile before the plan was implemented. I realize you do not agree.

Yes, I disagree. Your idea here makes no sense to me, for the reasons I've explained. I haven't seen you present any evidence for your view. I did present evidence for mine, which you have not dealt with, as far as I can determine.

TE - "Something else." What would that be? There's one thing that allows us to live even though we are sinners, and that's the grace of God.

MM - I agree. God extended a form of grace that enabled them to exist for a time in a state of sin without dying immediately.

And us as well. The form of grace God extended is the same for them as for us. It was the gift of Jesus Christ which allowed them to live, the same as us. FW 21, 22 is another place which clearly explains this. It says something like, "the reason the race was not immediately annhiliated was because God so loved the world that He gave His Son."

TE - I'd be curious how we can remember that Christ risked all while simultaneously there was no chance He could fail.

MM - Me too. But that's exactly what the inspired record says. Jesus knew He would succeed on the cross. That is clear. It also says a form of risk was involved. Just exactly what that means is not clear, but one thing is clear - it cannot mean that Jesus did not know He would succeed on the cross.

When inspiration speaks of Jesus "knowing" He would succeed, He was speaking on the basis of faith. As was God when He inspired the prophets to write of His success. Faith counts things that do not exist as if they did. This does not counterman risk. It is not necessary that we hold to a position which is logically impossible.

Posted By: Mountain Man

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/22/06 07:32 AM

Tom, I think your last post above summarizes our differences nicely. Thank you.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/23/06 01:22 AM

quote:
MM - She also says that the decision to implement the plan of salvation was made after they sinned,

TE - No, she doesn't say this. First of all, this would contradict her saying, "As soon as sin there was a Savior." She doesn't contradict herself. Secondly, it wouldn't be possible, because as soon as Adam sinned, he needed a Savior, whether she said so or not. Adam (and we) only live by the grace of God. The fact that we live, although we are sinners, demonstrates that God's grace is active in our behalf.

Another way of seeing this is from her statement that if we had to bear the guilt of our sin it would crush us. Adam would have been crushed had he had to bear the guilt of his sin, so Christ immediately began bearing it for him.

MM - which tells me that they, especially Eve, were in a state of sin for awhile before the plan was implemented. I realize you do not agree.

TE - Yes, I disagree. Your idea here makes no sense to me, for the reasons I've explained. I haven't seen you present any evidence for your view. I did present evidence for mine, which you have not dealt with, as far as I can determine.

You are welcome to present evidence for your view, if you choose.

Posted By: Tom

Re: Is The Character of God Being Misrepresented? - 03/23/06 01:51 AM

Returning to the question of God's character being misrepresented, which is what this topic is about, MM wrote the following:

quote:
We know Jesus felt the woe and wrath of God, that He realized God’s hatred toward sin. Jesus had become sin for us and He felt the full brunt of God’s anger against sin – as if He were sin itself. We cannot know how much God hates sin, but we know He treated Jesus as if He were sin itself.

I cannot imagine God cutting sin any slack. I cannot imagine Him withholding one ounce of hatred and anger. I see, with limited perception, God unleashing all His pent up wrath and anger. To minimize how God treated Jesus on the cross is to undermine how much He hates sin.

And Jesus endured the combined wrath of God against sin as if He were sin itself. If we view things in this manner, rather than remembering how much the Father and Son love each other, I believe we can better understand just how much wrath Jesus really felt at the hands of an angry God.

It is easier for me to envision God taking out His hatred and vengeance upon sin than it is for me to imagine Him taking it out on Jesus. As such, I cannot begin to fathom the soul anguish Jesus suffered. Nor can I imagine God withholding His anger, or limiting His vengeance for any reason.

Here are some difficulties I have with these statements:

1)The love of God is not mentioned at all, except in the sense that to better understand the atonement we shouldn't remember how much the Father and Son loved each other.

2)God is presented as pouring out "hatred and anger" "unleashing pent up wrath and anger" "taking out His hatred and vengeance upon sin." The emphasis is on the negative, things like hatred, anger and vengeance. I agree that God hates sin, but the main purpose of the cross is to reveal the love of God. It is the love of God shining from the cross that draws us to Himself (DA 176). His goodness leads us to repentance (Rom. 2:4).

3)There is the statement here that God treated Jesus as if He were sin. That is to say, God treated Jesus with anger and hatred. The idea is that our salvation is dependent upon God's unleashing His "pent up" wrath and hatred upon Jesus as if Jesus were sin. God needed to be just as hateful and vengeful upon Jesus as if Jesus were sin.

I'm interested if anyone is perceiving God's character in the way MM has outlined here.

My perception of God's character is that God is love, and that it was love which prompted God to give us His Son. The whole purpose of Christ's mission was to reveal God to us, that we might be set right with Him. The cross is the zenith of this revelation. It is the cross which reveals the height and depth of God's love.

quote:
Such love is without a parallel. Children of the heavenly King! Precious promise! Theme for the most profound meditation! The amazing love of God for a world that did not love Him! The thought has a subduing power upon the soul, and brings the mind into captivity to the will of God. The more we study the divine character in the light of the cross, the more we see mercy, tenderness, and forgiveness, blended with equity and justice, and the more clearly we discern innumerable evidences of a love that is infinite, and a tender pity surpassing a mother's yearning sympathy for her wayward child. (Bible Training School 12/1/08)

This expresses how I feel. As does this:

quote:
When I survey the wondrous cross
on which the Prince of Glory died;
my richest gain I count but loss,
and pour contempt on all my pride.

Were the whole realm of nature mine,
that were an offering far too small;
love so amazing, so divine,
demands my soul, my life, my all.

The cross reveals the character of God because it reveals His love. Christ was willing to be forever lost, not seeing through the portals of the tomb. Which is to say, He chose to save us, even if the cost to Him were to be lost eternally. When we remember that Christ was God in human flesh, this tells us something absolutely incredible about God! God so loves us, that He counts even His eternal existence as less important than procuring our salvation! This is an incomprehensibly amazing thing to contemplate. Words cannot express the theme. And when we consider that for just one Christ would have died, ... what can one say?