HOME CHAT ROOM #1 CHAT ROOM #2 Forum Topics Within The Last 7 Days REGISTER ENTER FORUMS BIBLE SCHOOL CONTACT US

Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine Christian Family Fellowship Forums
(formerly Maritime SDA OnLine)
Consisting mainly of both members and friends of the Seventh-day Adventist Church
Welcomes and invites other members and friends of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to join us!

Click Here To Read Legal Notice & Disclaimer
Suggested a One Time Yearly $20 or Higher Donation Accepted Here to Help Cover the Yearly Expenses of Operating & Upgrading. We need at least $20 X 10 yearly donations.
Donations accepted: Here
ShoutChat Box
Newest Members
ekoorb1030, jibb555, MBloomfield, Dina, Nelson
1323 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums118
Topics9,189
Posts195,525
Members1,323
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
Seventh-day Adventist Church In Canada Links
Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada

Newfoundland & Labrador Mission

Maritime Conference

Quebec Conference

Ontario Conference

Manitoba-Saskatchewan Conference

Alberta Conference

British Columbia Conference

7 Top Posters(30 Days)
Rick H 16
kland 15
Daryl 4
March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Member Spotlight
Kevin H
Kevin H
New York
Posts: 625
Joined: November 2004
Show All Member Profiles 
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Live Space Station Tracking
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
Last 7 Pictures From Photo Gallery Forums
He hath set an harvest for thee
Rivers Of Living Water
He Leads Us To Green Pastures
Remember What God Has Done
Remember The Sabbath
"...whiter than snow..."
A Beautiful Spring Day
Who's Online
3 registered members (Karen Y, 2 invisible), 2,747 guests, and 4 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 66 of 105 1 2 64 65 66 67 68 104 105
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #132532
04/10/11 01:40 AM
04/10/11 01:40 AM
Tom  Offline
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
Quote:
NJK: My approach is to take passages as they exegetically read and use this a building blocks towards a Theology which will, when necessary self-produce such harmonization, so in a way, I am working from a bottom-up view.

Tom: I don't think this accurately describes what you do.

NJK:Well, I know it accurate does and what I have been using for over 13 years now. You just are not seeing/comprehending this. I have thus “overturned” many incorrectly viewed positions. The bottom-up approach also emphasizes this thorough re-examination approach.


It would be interesting to see how others on this thread view your approach.

Quote:
NJK: On the other hand, I see you working from a top down view citing Jesus Christ as the top view,

Tom: I would say I use Jesus Christ as the foundation, as the building block, the corner stone, to build upon.


NJK:That may be you sincere intention however by not including all building blocks designed for that building (i.e, the entire Bible) in your construction, your “building” is literally full of holes and shaky.


Jesus Christ is the corner stone for the building. All the Bible is included, but Jesus Christ is the corner stone. z
"All building blocks" isn't limited to just the Bible, as the Bible isn't the only means which God uses.

Quote:
NJK: seconded by EGW seemingly wholly supporting statements to the fact and thus you virtually ignore any revelation that may have been made in the OT. I do not see Jesus making such a claim, per se, of only considering what He has done to understand the Bible’s Theology.

Tom: I think you've misunderstood the point here. What I've been saying is that to correctly interpret the OT, we need to *first* have an understanding of God's character.

NJK:And my bottom up approach is to understand God’s character within each of these building block episodes asking the right question based on given a default benefit of the doubt to God on the many expression of what His character is and of course believing that He is sinless, perfect, all-knowing and all-wise.


If your "bottom up approach" winds up with a picture of God's character which looks very different than Jesus Christ, that's a big problem.

Jesus Christ said when we've seen Him, we've seen the Father. It can't be the case that what Jesus Christ said is true, and that the Father has a character different than Jesus Christ.

Quote:
You indeed wrongly see e.g., that since Jesus never execute a judgement in the NT then that must mean that God never did in the OT. That is not the purpose of EGW’s counsel here. It is rather to help us to indeed understand “why” God did those judgements in the OT and not merely if He did them or not. Indeed in Jesus we see the same principles resulting in utter physical judgement.


What I've been saying is that the character of God the Father was fully revealed by Jesus Christ. You say that Jesus Christ revealed the same principles resulting in physical judgment. I claim that Jesus Christ revealed principles stated by the SOP such as:

1.Force is contrary to the principles of God's government.
2.God does not stand before the sinner as an executioner, but leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves.

Where do you see that Jesus Christ revealed "the same principles resulting in utter physical judgment"?

Quote:
T:Otherwise, we'll get it wrong.

NJK:You actually start on a “wrong” course when you don’t let God speak for Himself in the OT and then resume this starting with the Book of Acts right through the Book of Revelation (e.g., 7 Last Plagues and the distinct “anger and passion of God”.) I am not this form of Gospel-only Christian. Furthermore, with the SOP, there really should not be a issue today of not much better understanding God actions in the OT and other places outside of the Gospels.


What I'm saying is that we need to first understand God's character in order to rightly interpret Scripture. I assume you agree with this.

Then I'm saying that in order to do this, we need to go to Jesus Christ. He is the corner-stone for our understanding. If we come up with a view of God's character which disagrees with what we see in Him, then we've got it wrong.

You don't disagree with this, do you?

A third thing I've asserted is that Jesus Christ is a full and complete revelation of the Father; that we don't need to go outside of Christ to know what God is like.

I think this is the point that you're disagreeing with. What you think is that we need to combine what Jesus Christ lived and taught with the rest of Scripture in order to come up with an accurate picture of God's character. Is this correct? That is, you agree with the first two points just mentioned above, but disagree with the third one?

Quote:
T:I've said that Jesus Christ got it right, and that what He said and what He did was precisely what He say in the OT. So if we have any picture of what happened in the OT as being different than what Jesus Christ said and did, we're getting it wrong.

NJK:The problem with your view is that you also selective choose what you’ll allow Jesus to get right. You thus obliviously, summarily dismissively and mindlessly, self-justifyingly excise any that counters that view for also Christ’s statements and teachings, So it is not really Jesus who is being the arbitrator here, but you supposition of what a God is suppose to be like. I feel like I am dealing with the Gospel of Tom instead. And the SOP however sincere and well-meaning EGW was, is not that final arbitrator.


I'm not the only one who holds the view I hold. We can take me out of the question here. Have you ever read any of Ty Gibson's books? My view is largely the same as his.

Robert Wieland is another who has taught principles related to God's character that I believe to be true.

In Ellen White's time, George Fifield eloquently expressed views I hold to be true.

There are thousands of people that hold the view I hold. I'm not arguing that this makes it right, but you write as if what I'm sharing is something that I just made up. The ideas I'm sharing are not original to me.

Regarding the final arbiter, that is God. He is the One who will judge how well we've understood His character, and how well we've treated one another. If our view of God's character does not lead to our treating one another as Christ did, it's not much good.

Quote:
T:Also, if there is a disconnect between what we perceive happening in the OT, and what Jesus Christ said and did, then we're actually disagreeing with Jesus Christ's perception of what happened in the OT. We should defer to Jesus Christ's perception.

NJK:Christ perception is only objectively discernable when explicitly expressed.


Christ did so by His words and teachings.

Quote:
Otherwise we are dealing with the reader’s subjective view. Also the context of the New Covenant is to be kept in mind if any perceived different is seen.


What do you mean by this?

Quote:
However I really only see a heightening of what was being said in the OT in Christ’s teaching and life. Also as God is no longer most tangibly and visibly present in the midst of a people in the NT era, is a major reason why some OT law are no longer enforced by God and certain thresholds for immediate judgements have been lessened.


You don't believe that Jesus Christ was a tangible and visibly present representation of God?


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.
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #132533
04/10/11 01:55 AM
04/10/11 01:55 AM
Tom  Offline
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
Quote:
NJK: Jesus did not come to do away with the Law and the Prophets (=OT) but to fulfill them.

Tom: He did so by His life and teachings ("You have heard it said, 'an eye for an eye' ... but I say unto you, love your enemies," etc.).

NJK:Your are quite wrongly causing a mixed up Christ’s statement here.


I was simply referring to the Sermon on the Mount. You didn't understand this?

Quote:
Also where in the OT does it say to “hate your enemies’.


The point is that the Old Testament was not understood. I've never said there was anything wrong with the Old Testament.

What I said was that if we see Jesus Christ acting or teaching differently than what we see in the OT, then there's something wrong. It doesn't sound like you're disagreeing with this, but simply repeating the same thing I said.

Quote:
NJK: He, and where it was necessary, reinstituted these OT contributions where they were always meant to be.

Tom: He tried to correct the misconceptions what people had about the law.


Indeed as you had knee-jerkly (i.e., through defaultly deferring to your paradigm) done in your objecting comments to the underlying laws addressed in Matt 5:38-47. As Christ implied in conclusion, God’s OT Law, when rightly restored to what it was always meant to be, is “”Perfect” (Matt 5:48; James 1:25) Indeed it thus “restores the soul’ (Gr. “psyche" Psa 19:7).


If this is the definition of "knee-jerkedly," then everything you write is also such. You can't get outside of your paradigm. You can allow your paradigm to change, however. And this is what Jesus Christ does. He is constantly challenging our paradigm. He presents a picture of God which is different than the one that we presently hold, always and forever. If we are willing, we can allow Him to mold our view of God to that it becomes more and more like what God is truly like.

The very first step in doing so is to recognize that our paradigm is faulty, and that we need His help. If we think we see, our blindness remains. If we think we are sound, we won't seek the help of a physician.

Quote:
Tom: Do you think that when we believe in Christ that we, at that moment, have eternal life?

NJK:The Bible [+SOP] fully teaches that with such a genuine faith, our sins are forgiven and will, in persisting in this faith, be all blotted out in the judgement, and thus we can have the unshakable assurance that Jesus will one day in the future let us enter into Heaven to access the Tree of Life so that we can ingest the life-perpetuating supernatural powers contained therein. However show the Second Coming tarry, we can and will die in this life.


Is this yes or no? Do you believe that when we believe in Jesus Christ we, at that moment, have eternal life?

Quote:
NJK: As I said, the two compliment each other, and it is manifestly from the Water of Life flowing from the Father’s throne that the needed, life perpetuating “supernatural power” is injected in the Fruit of the Tree of Life. However, without accepting Jesus, Fallen Man will not have access to that physical provision and thus not life eternally. So both Jesus’ statements to this end and the tangible reality of the Tree/Fruit of Life harmonizingly present the Theological Truth of how Man, and now Fallen Man, lives eternally.

Tom: I think this is getting a bit removed from the important question. The important question is, "Is there an organic relationship between sin and death?" (and similarly between faith and life).


NJK:We’ve been down that road before. My explicitly citing Bible/SOP answer is “No”. Sinful man can live eternally with access to the Tree.


This could only be the case if sin were a physical problem only. But sin involves more than the physical. It involves the mind, and the longer a person lives contrary to the principles of God's government, the principles of agape, the worse and worse he becomes, and this isn't something a tree can fix, but only Christ.

Quote:
T:If we don't perceive an organic relationship between sin and death, we will perceive what is happening in the final judgment very differently than if we do. We will see the second death as being the result of something God does to the wicked in justice as a punishment as opposed to something that the wicked have brought upon themselves by the choices they have made, and which God permits.

NJK:The Bible is clear that the destruction of the wicked in Hell, the Second Death, as well as the General First death at the second advent are both direct acts of God.


This is simply seconding what I wrote.


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.
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #132534
04/10/11 02:11 AM
04/10/11 02:11 AM
Tom  Offline
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
Originally Posted By: NJK
(quoting EGW)Christ designed that the Pharisees should answer as they did. He designed that they should condemn themselves. His warnings, failing to arouse them to repentance, would seal their doom, and He wished them to see that they had brought ruin on themselves. He designed to show them the justice of God in the withdrawal of their national privileges, which had already begun, and which would end, not only in the destruction of their temple and their city, but in the dispersion of the nation.

NJK:It was because Jesus “designed/wished” to have this due judgement justly and deservingly come upon the Jewish Nation


That's not what EGW wrote! She didn't say that Jesus "designed/wish" to have this due judgment come upon the Jewish nation, but that He designed that His hearers respond the way they did. Surely you can see the different here, can't you?

In the quote she says exactly the same thing I've been saying all along:

Quote:
His warnings, failing to arouse them to repentance, would seal their doom, and He wished them to see that they had brought ruin on themselves.


The underlined portion is what He wished them to see, which is, again, what I've been saying all along.

Quote:
and these leaders that he, throughout His ministry worked to veil, until it was inevitably too late, any element in his public teaching that may help to avert that destruction.


You're saying that Christ wanted God to kill them, and He veiled the truth from them, so that God could kill them, rather than save them? The parable that Christ spoke to them said that God would kill them and given their land to another. So if what you're asserting were true, then my question at the beginning of this paragraph would follow.

Quote:
Therefore this is a clear declaration of the destruction of Jerusalem being accomplished by God's acting directly.


The symbolism indeed indicates this. However Christ’s actively inducing “designs” as stated by EGW in DA 597.3 in leading these leaders to pronounce and seal their own doom and future destruction mirrors in principle EGW’s understanding of how Jerusalem was going to be destroyed. I.e., by these Jewish leaders having here spoken their own doom. So the future physical destruction could indeed have been sent by God, at least, in part at first and not really contradict the SOP view here. (However for the reasons cited in a prior ost my jury is still out on EGW’s application of this Second indirect destruction method on the 70 A.D. as well as all of the the 7 Last Plagues.


Why do you think it's right for you to set yourself as a judge of Ellen White's writings? If God sent her as a prophet, shouldn't her writings judge you?

Quote:
NJK:I don’t believe the SOP ever “corrects” the Bible. That “correction” element is only One Way. I.e., the Bible corrects the SOP. So if the Bible says something and the SOP says something that seems or is opposite to it, such as here that Christ indicated “direct judgement” and EGW “indirect judgement” then the SOP is always to be deemed as wrong.


Where does she say this? Or is this an idea of yours? Or do you think the Scripture teaches this, that God's prophets should be correct by Scripture?

I don't see this taught at all. What I see is that God's prophets should be judged by Scripture, not corrected by it. That is, if a person is speaking for God, then that's person's teachings will be in harmony with Scripture, and will not need to be corrected by it. If the person's teachings are not in harmony with Scripture, then that person's teachings should be rejected, as well as the idea that this person was a prophet.

Quote:
T:What's your methodology here? Is it the following?

1.Determine the truth by exegetical analysis of the key passage(s).

2.If Ellen White agrees with that analysis, fine, but if not, then conclude she is mistaken.

NJK:1. Definitely, Yes. 2. Sadly, Yes.


Why not conclude that your exegesis may be wrong, or that you may be misunderstanding what she wrote?


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.
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #132535
04/10/11 02:31 AM
04/10/11 02:31 AM
Tom  Offline
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
Quote:
NJK: For example, (and correct me if I mis-restated your view) in our discussion on the Fruit of Life, I see and say that in God’s perfect plan (i.e., before sin was ever a factor in anything), we were meant to live forever by our partaking of the Fruit of Life. You categorically say no and point to the post-sin provision made by Christ on the Cross as the only means to live eternally, and that the Tree of Life was only a substantively vacuous object lesson of that.

Tom: You misunderstood my view. What I emphasized was that life comes from God, and that the Tree of Life was a means for God to teach us of our dependence upon Him. I never said that the Tree of Life was an object lesson for the post-sin provision made by Christ on the cross, and don't see that this would make any sense, since the tree of life existed before sin came about.

NJK:Fair enough, I perhaps did misunderstand your view. However your clarification that: “the Tree of Life was a means for God to teach us of our dependence upon Him” confirms and further heightens my observation of substantive vacuousness.

Again, and this is not a rhetorical question: How was man to live forever before sin? By “learned dependence” osmosis??? You, uniquely in this thread, blindly and unbiblically refuse to see any ‘life-perpetuating “supernatural power” in the Fruit of Life’.


I don't believe this is the case. If you think otherwise, please quote something I've written to support your idea here.

Quote:
Even Jesus does not endorse your view (e.g., Rev 2:7 and many other SOP statements confirm this fact.)


What you're suggesting is my view isn't my view.

Quote:
Do we need the Tree of life in Heaven to supposedly continue to learn dependence on God???


It's obvious that God doesn't need the Tree of Life to give us life, isn't it? Assuming you agree this is the case, then God must have deliberately chosen to have us eat of the Tree of Life in order to live, just as He has chosen to have us breathe in order to have life. So why did God choose to have us eat of the Tree of Life when He didn't have to? Clearly, to my mind, it is because there are spiritual lessons that He wants us to learn by so doing.

Quote:
T:The real important point I was bring out, which is where the whole Tree of Life discussion began, is that there is an organic relationship between sin and death, and between faith and life. You denied this, using the Tree of Life as an argument against this idea.

NJK:Indeed I did, and still do, because the Bible and SOP are clear that sinners can live forever (Gen 3:22-24; PP 60.3). Your rationalizations trying to disprove these Biblical facts are mere human reasonings. Indeed, and especially in our day when the many lessons of sin have been learned, if sinners today had access to the Tree of Life, they of all generation would be able to live forever as they would like, as most seek to do now, and given many advances in knowledge, science and technologies, would staunchly live by at least the last 6 commandments and ignore the first 4.


I think you have to ignore a lot of teaching in both Scripture and the SOP to hold to this view. Both the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy teach that there is an organic relationship between sin and death. The number of statements in both far surpass the statements regarding the tree of life.

Consider Scripture, for example. There is one statement regarding the tree of life. There are many direct statements regarding the relationship between sin and death, as well as many stories and parables which illustrate the theme, such as "The soul that sins shall die," "The wages of sin is death," "Sin, when it is finished, brings forth death," "The sting of death is sin."

If what you are asserting were true, that any organic relationship between sin and death should be rejected, then somewhere in Scripture some Bible writer should have tempered what he wrote in regards to the relationship between sin and death with a mention of the tree. But the tree is never mentioned in this context, not even once.

If we consider the Spirit of Prophecy, we have the specific statement that "the inevitable result of sin is death." It is not possible to articulate the principle any more clearly than this, and, indeed, in the context this statement is made, she repeats over and over again that death (the second death) comes upon the wicked as a result of the choices they have made. She writes that had God left Satan and his followers to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished. And then, had He done so, onlookers would not have understood that the inevitable result of sin is death.

There is absolutely no connection to the tree of life here. We have the clearly stated principle that "the inevitable result of sin is death" in a context which cannot have any dependency upon the tree of life (since it's dealing with Satan).

The idea of Scripture, and the SOP, is the following:

1.We have all been bitten by the serpent (i.e., we have all sinned) and, because of such, need divine healing.
2.That healing comes by Jesus Christ (by believing in Him).
3.If we don't avail ourselves of the healing that Jesus Christ brings, we will die because of our sin.

I believe the Tree of Life is incidental. It's not necessary to form an accurate and complete theology. It's nice that God has provided this detail for us, but if He hadn't, it wouldn't make any difference, as I perceive things. That is, if He had simply said that in the new earth people would live forever because of their faith/obedience, that wouldn't materially change anything.

On the other hand, it appears that the Tree of Life forms the cornerstone of your theology. The cornerstone of mine is supported by literally thousands of statements. The cornerstone of yours is supported by something like two or three.


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.
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: APL] #132538
04/10/11 04:27 AM
04/10/11 04:27 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: SOP DA 466
In the work of redemption there is no compulsion. No external force is employed. Under the influence of the Spirit of God, man is left free to choose whom he will serve.


That is indeed true. However I suspect this was quote because God’s judgements are confused as acts to compel obedience. People are always free to choose whether they will obey God or not. However that does not bar Him from executing due and timely judgements. He indeed amply has throughout the Bible and billions still have refused to believe in Him. OT Israel is the most prominent example. Just give them a generation, or even a day (e.g., Num 16:31, 32, 35, 41) Even acts of miraculous intervention do not affect this as seen with the Golden Calf debacle just after the Red Sea Crossing. In the “secular world” The earth changing event of the Flood did not “compel obedience”. Indeed with the Ark probably still intact and visitable, the people soon after the Flood, in order to continue to live against the will of God decided, to built a tower to escape the flood. (Not much can also be said of the conduct of Noah and his son some time after the flood.)

So God’s effectuated judgement are not for any compelling purposes as, as many examples have shown, it is only those who want to fear God, who will let these judgements bring them in line with His will, (e.g., Acts 5:11) soon leading, again if they further want to, to a more friendly/loving relationship with him.

I think, given the great advantage of the life and eternal life that God can and will give, that it is quite a loving act on his part to seek to fair impress fallen men who cannot see Him to seek to “fearfully” know him. Clearly God realizes that “blind dating” is not always, with all, realistic expectation for a chance at a relationship.

Originally Posted By: SOP DA 469
With solemn dignity Jesus answered, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM." {DA 469.4}
Silence fell upon the vast assembly. The name of God, given to Moses to express the idea of the eternal presence, had been claimed as His own by this Galilean Rabbi. He had announced Himself to be the self-existent One, He who had been promised to Israel, "whose goings forth have been from of old, from the days of eternity." Micah 5:2, margin. {DA 469.5}


Originally Posted By: APL
Jesus was God in the flesh. Everything that we need to know or can know about God was revealed by Christ.


Indeed Jesus is so, and that “everything” includes the ministry of Divine judgement/wrath/(zeal/passion)! Again all in realistic (i.e., non-manufactured simply to ‘explicitly replicate’) dealing with the circumstances and pointed and forbearing purposes then, especially during His ministry. But upon ample warning, given one’s level of knowledge, for waywardness, like the OT model and principle, judgement is deservingly allowed to happen, even directly done (cf. e.g., Acts 5:1-11).

Quote:
Originally Posted By: SOP DA 471
It was generally believed by the Jews that sin is punished in this life. Every affliction was regarded as the penalty of some wrongdoing, either of the sufferer himself or of his parents. It is true that all suffering results from the transgression of God's law, but this truth had become perverted. Satan, the author of sin and all its results, had led men to look upon disease and death as proceeding from God ,--as punishment arbitrarily inflicted on account of sin. Hence one upon whom some great affliction or calamity had fallen had the additional burden of being regarded as a great sinner. {DA 471.1}
Thus the way was prepared for the Jews to reject Jesus. He who "hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows" was looked upon by the Jews as "stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted;" and they hid their faces from Him. Isaiah 53:4, 3. {DA 471.2}
God had given a lesson designed to prevent this. The history of Job had shown that suffering is inflicted by Satan, and is overruled by God for purposes of mercy. But Israel did not understand the lesson. The same error for which God had reproved the friends of Job was repeated by the Jews in their rejection of Christ. {DA 471.3}

Originally Posted By: APL
All suffering, all death, is the result of what Satan has done.


I see/think that EGW had an “ultimate” sense in mind here, i.e., Satan as the author of sin, was ultimately responsible for ‘all the results of sin’. However there are a plethora of clear cut episodes in the Bible, and also the SOP, that show that God, in acts of judgement, effectuates punishment and death for sins. Even by simply commanding capital punishment for certain sin, that Israelites carried out, God had effectuated that death, yet the ultimate being responsible for it was Satan. So that text cannot be used as a platform to say that God never effectuates any death or suffering. The Flood also is another immovable example of this Theological/Biblical Fact. Satan, and this is what EGW was seeking to dispel, wants to make it seem that God is responsible for this, and as I understand it, all, vindictively, out of the fact that God had taken measure to prevent sinful man to live forever.

Originally Posted By: DA 473
The blind man answered, "Whether He be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see." {DA 473.3}
Then they questioned again, "What did He to thee? how opened He thine eyes?" With many words they tried to confuse him, so that he might think himself deluded.


No explanatory words from you at all here. It is thus hard to exactly understand what you mean with this quote?


“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: Tom] #132539
04/10/11 04:29 AM
04/10/11 04:29 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
I do not see, at least, full agreement. Perhaps, in thematic part, only with Adam Clarke’s comment.

Albert Barnes’ point was way off the mark. It physically spoke of ‘a pressing of the throng/crowd to now hear Jesus’ and that merely because they surfacely wanted to obtain the supposed immediate blessing, (like Black Friday/Boxing Day shoppers).

How also would that “similar physicality’ be different from ‘what had occurred/been suffered up to John vs. the Kingdom proclamation now’, as Jesus put it?

My problem with such early “scholarly work” is exegesis in never documented, so one has to either do it on their own to validate that view or just take their word for it. That was fine for the 19th and early 20th century, but not today, at least not for me. I want to see the transparent and objective proof for any beliefs. So defaultly using such works really causes double work, at least for my interests.

Originally Posted By: Tom
My own idea, based on just reading the text, was similar to what you wrote, that Jesus was referring to a mental bias that people had.


Not this “own idea” of yours:

Originally Posted By: Tom
My original thought upon reading this verse was the intended meaning is "the violent seek (or "attempt") to take it by force," that is, that the word "seek" is implied. I don't know if this is a viable idea or not.


Where the notion of “‘similar mental bias’ here??


“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: Tom] #132540
04/10/11 04:29 AM
04/10/11 04:29 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Quote:
NJK: So my point has been from the start that God only uses the sentence of death when sin threatens life. Of course Tom (unbiblically, in my understanding) said and says that ‘sin organically always is life threatening’

Tom:I haven't said this. This doesn't mean I disagree with it, but the fact that you use quotes here is a bit confusing, since quote marks usually indicate that you're quoting someone. What I've said is that there is an organic relationship between sin and death; that the inevitable result of sin is death.


I follow the convention of using single quote for a paraphrase. Since it seemed to me that you had indeed said that ‘the sinner must die because of the “organic relationship between sin and death; that the inevitable result of sin is death”’, thus sin is also threatening to the sinner himself’, I added that understood understanding in that paraphrase.

Originally Posted By: Tom
As James puts it, sin, when it is finished, brings forth death.


As already said, I see this as fully blown/accomplished sin/sinful behavior. You are not giving the proper weight to the word “finished/completed” (Gr. #658 which is not ‘merely committed’ which was here expressed as “birthed”). Indeed the intended illustrative ‘development progression’ by James is: “conception” (#4815)... “birth” (#5088) and “finishing completion” (#658) = “fully lived and aged life” which, as it naturally really does, likewise then ends in a natural death; and all this stemming from the committed “union” act of ‘having given in to temptation’ (vs. 14).

-I also do not see in the Bible (or even in direct revelation in the SOP) a consuming fire type of destruction at the end of the 6000 years of GC.

Originally Posted By: Tom
Also the sting of death is sin; the wages of sin is death; the soul that sins shall die; convey the same thought. God Himself said one of these, and inspired others to say the rest.


Succinctly said, out of exegetical, and not your “proof-texting”, reasons:

the sting of death is sin - (1 Cor 15:56) = sin is the ‘sharp goading point’ reason that make it why death can occur in sinning created beings, and that by the barring of access to the Tree of Life!
the wages of sin is death - (Rom 6:23) = “wages” are optionally received - Already discussed here - Also implied ed in this verse: no work done at all to be due, actually outrightly “given”, a “gift”. So sin is also shown as being more taxing/demanding than God’s salvation.
the soul that sins shall die - (Ezek 18:20 (God )) = ‘the living being who has committed the wrong (= sin) will pointedly be held responsible and die. vs. a generalized/indiscriminate judgement (Ezek 18:1-32)

I don’t see these as ‘conveying your inevitable result thought’, but rather that sin is what makes death: possible (1 Cor 15:56); justly and pointedly deserved (Ezek 18:20); duly “collectible” (Rom 6:23); and when not externally carried out in judgement; self-inflictable at the reached end of its “completed/full blown” stage (James 1:15).

Quote:
NJK: however I see that, as God Himself has said, sinners can live forever if they had access to the Fruit of the Life (Gen 3:22-24; PP 60.3). So in the Flood destruction, as God said in Gen 6:5, 11, 12 that an extreme sinful state had been reached where ‘the sinners ‘ wickedness was great and their thoughts was towards evil continually, all flesh had corrupted their ways and the earth was filled with violence.’

Tom: If they are filled with violence, then they're killing others, and the Tree of Life is no help in this case. It doesn't resurrect the dead. Eventually only one would be left, the strongest, most cunning violent person (or the luckiest), and then that person would kill himself or herself. Given what we know to be the case about sin, this seems like a very plausible scenario. What prevents things like this from happening is not the Tree of Life, but the grace of God. Take away the grace of God, and the scenario I've traced out, or a worse one, would take place so fast it would be head-spinning.
...
We simply have no idea of the "sinfulness of sin," as EGW often said, not giving the credit we should to the grace/kindness/mercy of God, because we don't perceive its importance.


Those were conditions with sinning people after the tree of life was removed. As I already addressed here things could have been drastically different without that measure. And just as a comparison, why don’t you see that “killing everywhere” debacle in our world today?? (as I’ll later point out)

I have, during this discussion, come to ponder why God took that measure which seems unjustified vs. allowing sinful man to live on this planet without Him being present at all, but having access to the Tree of Life, as taking away the Tree and thus perpetual life solely because these are choosing to live apart of at least one of God’s law would seem like a petty: ‘...or else I’ll take my ball and go home’ act on the part of God, however in your response above, I have seen the reason why. You say it is the ‘grace of God’ that prevents a total debacle on the earth which could also be understood as “mercy”. So I see that God really had two option here:

Option #1 - Let sinning man indeed live on his own with the Tree of Life, but without His tempering Spirit and also under the full control of Satan, but also procreating. As I see it, it is because of the total absence of His Spirit then, that your scenario may indeed come to occur here. However I see it that Satan would have here his opportunity to grow his kingdom of rebellion, so he would not be, like he is now, seeking to vindictively lead these “subjects” to destruction, but would set himself up as a god over them and, ironically enough, probably have something similar as the last 6 commandments to maintain this needed life and livelihood, just as secular societies do today.

Also the GC war would go on as new territory and resources beyond this planet would come to be needed to and since Satan cannot created he would seek to overtake other worlds. So this would resemble “George Lucas’s Intergalactic Star Wars”. And for a fight to be considered as fair, it would have to be (Sinning) Humans vs. (Unfallen) Humans and not Angels vs. Humans. So other unfallen worlds would inevitably be drawn into this war and also their death, completely undeserved would then be likely to occur, despite having access to the Tree of Life. (That is another reason why I understand, derived from my understanding of Gen 3:22-24, that it is not sin itself that causes death but a forceful act is to be taken to effectuate (a deserved) death.

Option #2 - (Chosen option) Remove the Tree of Life and instead allow His Spirit to ‘strive with even sinful men, His outrightly undeserving creation’ (Gen 6:3a), until there, as it was the case by the Flood, no longer any redeemable “thoughts” in them for Him to work with (Gen 6:5). This option also allows for the fairer and safer demonstration of the GC. Hence God’s Choice was perfectly wise. And the only way in which this world will come into a total sinful debacle is when, in the utter, past probation end, in the last Plague, God will become indivisibly “empassioned” and thus no longer have any sort of grace/mercy while the 4 winds that affect human passions will also have been allowed to blow, culminating in the 7th Plague utter suffering and chaos.


“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: Tom] #132541
04/10/11 04:31 AM
04/10/11 04:31 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: Tom
You don't see the difference between an active action and a passive action?

Indeed no, especially by now...

Originally Posted By: Tom
First of all, it's hard to believe that you don't see the difference between these two things.

The reason why is that both these active and passive actions by God directly come from God Himself or by His allowance. I therefore now see that the real difference is not in what God Himself actively or passively does, but rather what God (actively or passively) does vs. what, though He also allows it, Satan (actively or passively). I see that Satan acts “passively” when he merely inspires people to do wrong and they freely choose to act out those suggestion, then not having the Spirit of God to offset this evil spirit. So the real issue is between God vs. Satan actions. So e.g., God allowing the serpents was a passive act of God and not one of Satan. However, in the ultimate sense, the deadliness of the serpents goes back to author of sin, Satan. Unless taken control of by Satan, which may not be possible, serpents and any other animal are equal opportunity killers in regards to any human or other living creation.

So I do see many passive acts of Satan, especially on individuals, when allowed, as shown to EGW in 14MR 1-3. That of course can have a collective effect such as in the destruction of Jerusalem, at least in part because mercy was demonstrated there (Matt 24:22) So as brought forth by APL from DA 471.3:

Originally Posted By: SOP DA 471.3
The history of Job had shown that suffering is inflicted by Satan, and is overruled by God for purposes of mercy


That is why I see that the destruction of Jerusalem was not entirely under the total merciless “passion” of God principle, nor will it be for all of the Last Plagues.

Originally Posted By: Tom
Secondly, if you don't see a difference, then why argue against my point of view? At the very least, if there's no difference, then my point of view, from your perspective, should be a possibility.


On top of the specifying reasons that I have just related, I have a distinct difference and opposition to your view because it has thus far been wrongly, selectively oblivious. You unexegetically tried to make all judgements in the Bible fit your, at least passive view, which you then tried to claim that God was thus not at all responsible for the judgement, (e.g., your world in constant chaos argument for the Flood). As your view was going against the clear Word God never (upon closer study if necessary) actually opposed in the SOP, I did not see any light in it (Isa 8:20). That’s just the natural category for which it fit in for me.


“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: Tom] #132542
04/10/11 04:32 AM
04/10/11 04:32 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
Originally Posted By: Tom
It doesn't seem to matter. You said you don't see the difference. If you don't see the difference between God's sending poisonous serpents upon the Israelites, and God's permitting serpents which were already there to act, what difference would it make how many examples I provided?


Interesting rationalization here, though substantively off issue/point. Since your view that ‘Jesus did no judgement so that must also be the case everywhere for the OT God’ then you need to demonstrate this to uphold your view!! That the only way to prove that it is valid!

[So do continue past your posted explanation of the Flood which I’ll address later. By the way, you could potentially say: God (scientifically) saw that it would happen for everything however: (A) that would not explain why the Bible and SOP say and describe God as actively doing many of these things and (b) if we indeed have free choices and the future is, at least to you, “Open”, (“inexistent” to me), the timeliness in the needed elements of Location, Time, Force, etc., in crucial combination to even spontaneous free choices.]

Last edited by NJK Project; 04/10/11 04:49 AM.

“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Re: Why did God command people to stone, scorch, and smite sinners to death? [Re: NJK Project] #132543
04/10/11 05:11 AM
04/10/11 05:11 AM
NJK Project  Offline
Banned Member
Dedicated Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,098
Laval, Quebec
By the Way the perfect Mercy and Justice of God in regards War is clearly stated in Deut 20:10-18. It states the reason why He allowed Israel to use military force for Canaan cities (vs. 18) and also how He tried to avert it with further cities (vs. 10ff).


“Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.” Matt 25:45 NJK Project
Page 66 of 105 1 2 64 65 66 67 68 104 105

Moderator  dedication, Rick H 

Sabbath School Lesson Study Material Link
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
Most Recent Posts From Selected Public Forums
Seven Trumpets reconsidered
by Karen Y. 03/27/24 09:35 AM
Are the words in the Bible "imperfect"?
by Kevin H. 03/24/24 09:02 PM
The Story of David and Goliath
by ProdigalOne. 03/23/24 08:06 PM
Global Warming Farce
by kland. 03/22/24 10:17 AM
Carbon Dioxide What's so Bad about It?
by kland. 03/21/24 12:34 PM
The Value of Bible Types
by TruthinTypes. 03/17/24 06:22 PM
Orion Which Every One on the Globe Can See
by Rick H. 03/16/24 06:26 PM
'Prophet' Summons UFOs
by ProdigalOne. 03/16/24 02:19 AM
Will You Take The Wuhan Virus Vaccine?
by dedication. 03/11/24 06:31 PM
Get That Razor Wire Up!
by kland. 03/05/24 12:49 PM
Messages for This Time
by ProdigalOne. 03/04/24 05:54 AM
The Lake of Fire is Hell
by Rick H. 03/02/24 05:01 PM
Adventist Agriculture
by kland. 02/29/24 12:33 PM
Most Recent Posts From Selected Private Forums of MSDAOL
The Wound Is Healed! The Mark Is Forming!
by Rick H. 03/27/24 10:36 PM
Are we seeing a outpouring of the Holy Spirit?
by Rick H. 03/24/24 06:50 PM
Time Is Short!
by Rick H. 03/24/24 06:45 PM
Climate Change and the Sunday Law
by Rick H. 03/24/24 06:42 PM
WHAT IS THE VERY END-TIME PROPHECY?
by Rick H. 03/23/24 06:03 PM
Digital Identity Control
by Rick H. 03/23/24 02:08 PM
A.I. - The New God?
by Rick H. 03/23/24 01:59 PM
Christian Nationalism/Sunday/C
limate Change

by ProdigalOne. 03/16/24 08:38 PM
Perils of the Emerging Church Movement
by Rick H. 03/16/24 06:30 PM
Is There A Connection Between WO & LGBTQ?
by Kevin H. 03/12/24 09:20 PM
A Second American Civil War?
by Daryl. 03/04/24 06:14 PM
Forum Announcements
Visitors by Country Since February 11, 2013
Flag Counter
Google Maritime SDA OnLine Public Forums Site Search & Google Translation Service
Google
 
Web www.maritime-sda-online.com

Copyright 2000-Present
Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine (formerly Maritime SDA OnLine).

LEGAL NOTICE:
The views expressed in this forum are those of individuals
and do not necessarily represent those of Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine,
as well as the Seventh-day Adventist Church
from the local church level to the General Conference level.

Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine (formerly Maritime SDA OnLine) is also a self-supporting ministry
and is not part of, or affiliated with, or endorsed by
The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland
or any of its subsidiaries.

"And He saith unto them, follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men." Matt. 4:19
MARITIME 2ND ADVENT BELIEVERS ONLINE (FORMERLY MARITIME SDA ONLINE) CONSISTING MAINLY OF BOTH MEMBERS & FRIENDS
OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH,
INVITES OTHER MEMBERS & FRIENDS OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD WHO WISHES TO JOIN US!
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1