that was an answer to the part in blue? i mean that is how you interpret the messenger of the Lords statement?

im very confused by your answers, they seem to be saying that God does not consider slavery, divorce, and such as heinous sins. or as long as God limits what can be done they are not sins in His sight. is that what you are saying?

Do you think God used the Romans “as instruments to punish” and the Jews? I do. I think God used the power of influence to direct the Romans. I also think that He worked hard to ensure things played out according to His will, that things didn’t get out of hand and play out differently than He purposed.


Tom, I cited several examples of how Ellen White used the term “instrument”. As you can see, it is reasonable to conclude she uses it to explain how God uses the power of influence to motivate people to act out His will and desire. “God will use His enemies as instruments to punish those who have followed their own pernicious ways whereby the truth of God has been misrepresented, misjudged, and dishonored. {LDE 242.3}

You interpret her statement to mean God uses the evil deeds of His enemies as instruments to punish sinners. Whereas I believe it means God uses "His enemies” as instruments to punish sinners. Please note that she doesn’t say God uses the evil deeds of His enemies. Instead, she plainly says God uses "His enemies" as instruments to punish sinners. I agree with the idea that God can use the evil deeds of His enemies to accomplish His purposes. It’s just that I also believe He can use "His enemies" to accomplish His purposes.


Yes, I believe God has directed people in practices that were contrary to His ideal will. However, you still haven’t answered my question. Do you think in so doing that God was also directing them in the practice of sinful behavior?


Not if God directs them. Do you agree?


Are you saying you are not one of those who think "these commands seem to be contrary to the spirit of love and mercy enjoined in other portions of the Bible"? Are you suggesting it makes perfect sense that such commands are “in truth the dictates of infinite wisdom and goodness"? Ellen White describes it this way:


The quotes above make it clear that Jesus and His holy angels torn down the walls of Jericho so that Joshua and his soldiers, acting "as His instruments to punish" sinners, could utterly destroy its inhabitants. That is, Jesus used Joshua and his soldiers like a slaughtering weapon to cut down His enemies. Do you agree?

PS - The following quote beautifully explains how God uses the power of influence to accomplish His purposes (this principle acts like a two-edged sword, it cuts both ways):

Angelic agencies, though invisible, are cooperating with visible human agencies, forming a relief association with men. Is there not something stimulating and inspiring in this thought that the human agent stands as the visible instrument to confer the blessings of angelic agencies? As we are thus laborers together with God, the work bears the inscription of the divine. With what joy and delight all heaven looks upon these blended influences, influences which are acknowledged in the heavenly courts! Human agencies are the hands of heavenly instrumentalities, for heavenly angels employ human hands in practical ministry. Their acts of unselfish ministry make them partakers in the success which is a result of the relief offered. This is Heaven's way of administering saving power. The knowledge and actions of the heavenly order of workers, united with the knowledge and power which are imparted to human agencies, relieve the oppressed and distressed. {ML 305.2}

I'm still waiting for you to answer my question. As soon as you do, I will be more than happy to answer your question.

HINT: If you look closely you'll see my answer near the question I underlined above. Now, I hope you will answer my question.

My last post to Tom above addresses this question.

PS - The current discussion speaks to the question that serves as title for this thread in that the "judgments and laws" that God commanded the COI to obey included utterly destroying the inhabitants of the Promised Land.

Mike, if divorce and polygamy aren't sins, neither are slavery and private vengeance. These and other sins were temporarily tolerated by God, but they are condemned by the law of God, and God designed to gradually lead His people to that understanding. Meanwhile, God made provisions in the civil laws that He gave to Israel, in order to lessen or minimize the evils caused by these ancient customs.

"This merciful provision [the cities for refuge] was rendered necessary by the ancient custom of private vengeance, by which the punishment of the murderer devolved on the nearest relative or the next heir of the deceased. In cases where guilt was clearly evident it was not necessary to wait for a trial by the magistrates. The avenger might pursue the criminal anywhere and put him to death wherever he should be found. The Lord did not see fit to abolish this custom at that time, but He made provision to ensure the safety of those who should take life unintentionally." {PP 515.2}

Rosangela, I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you saying God directed the COI, through "judgments and laws" which "were only the principles of the Ten Commandments amplified", in the practice of heinous sins?

I think He did in the manner I explained.



You're saying God influenced the Romans to kill the Jews?



Get out of hand? Have you read the account?



Out of hand?



You're saying that God acted in such a way to make sure that this happened? Just like this? No less and no more?



But this is what she meant, which is the important thing. This is clear simply by reading her writings as a whole. She simply doesn't have the concept of God's character which would be required to have intended for things to be understood as your interpreting them.

We're talking about the destruction of Jerusalem here. She has dozens of statements to explain her meaning in regards to this event.





MM, I don't understand how you can read her description of what happened and come to the conclusions you have. She could not have said more clearly that the punishment which befell the Jews came about as a result of their causing the Spirit of God to be withdrawn from them, leaving them defenseless. There is no indication that God inspired the Romans to do these cruel things. Cruelty is Satanic.



God would hardly influence anyone to act in a Satanic fashion.



Do you think that practices that are contrary to God's ideal will can be, or should be, characterized as sinful practices? Let's consider one in particular: polygamy. Do you believe that polygamy is contrary to the law of God?



I don't think so, if I'm understanding you correctly. Let's consider some act, say X. If X is a sin, it's a sin because it's contrary to the moral law. The fact that God directs the people in X doesn't make X not a sin.

I think your reasoning is that if God directs them in some activity, it can't be a sin. But if we look at the things God gave the Israelites counsel regarding, this includes things like polygamy, which we know is contrary to the moral law, and thus a sin.



I think I answered your question.





God was defending the Canaanites. He was their defense. When forced to withdraw, they were defenseless against the Hebrews, but it was not God's will that they gain the land by warfare.

No, I'm saying that God gave in the civil laws rules about slavery, divorce, polygamy and private vengeance, in order to lessen or minimize the evils caused by these ancient customs.