Forums118
Topics9,224
Posts196,102
Members1,325
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
5 registered members (dedication, Karen Y, 3 invisible),
2,231
guests, and 8
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: Tom]
#100394
07/01/08 03:47 PM
07/01/08 03:47 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tom, I am tempted to say - Amen! However, you left out a very important aspect, an important truth. It was the Son of God who told Moses to stone the Sabbath-breaker to death. And, while here in the flesh Jesus did not undermine the law of Moses. When the Jews brought the adulteress to Him and asked what should be done about it, Jesus instructed them to obey the law of Moses. Then it's clear that the law of Moses can be kept without stoning anyone! Yes, of course. The law of Moses is based on mercy. It allowed for forgiveness. I should have made this point more clear. Thank you for stating the obvious. Case in point: Moses was unclear what to do about the guy caught breaking the Sabbath. Should he be forgiven or stoned to death? So, he inquired of God. The Lord knew the man's heart, and He commanded Moses to stone him to death. Of course, God could have withdrawn His protection and given evil angels permission to kill him, but He chose rather to permit the Jews to do it. What does this tell us about the law and character of God?
|
|
|
Re: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: Tom]
#100397
07/01/08 04:07 PM
07/01/08 04:07 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
MM, I asked the following: I'm asking if you think they are God's will now. Do you think God wants Sabbath-breakers to be stoned now? Do you think He wants women's hands cut off? Notice under the law that only women's are cut off, but not men's. How does this reflect God's ideal will? How does it reflect God's ideal will that (according to you) it was (is, I suppose, if the law of Moses is still in effect) OK for a man to have multiple wives, but not a woman to have multiple husbands? Why was it OK for a man to divorce a woman, but not a woman to divorce a man? The first two questions I've been asking of both you and GC for some time now, and, to the best of my knowledge, neither of you have answered it. My apologies if you have, and I missed it. Also Scott asked you the following question: Do you think that Jesus’ words, to those who caught the woman in adultery, would have been the right words in Moses’ time to someone who caught a woman in adultery? I'm interested in your answer to this too. Timing is everything, as they say. The law of Moses outlined very specific punishments for specific crimes. They were administered under a Theocracy. Nowadays, we are no longer a Theocracy, right? So, things have changed. I do not pretend to understand everything God outlined in the law of Moses. At times I am tempted to think certain aspects of it were unfair. But I immediately recognize such thoughts as the voice of Satan. I am convinced that the law of Moses represented God's will for the COI. I am in no way confused as to whether or not it reflects a compromise to accommodate their hard hearts and sinfulness. Regarding Scott's question - Yes, of course, it would have been. Why? Because under the circumstances, where they led her into sin, Jesus would have commanded Moses to handle the case accordingly. Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and tommorow.
|
|
|
Re: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: Tom]
#100398
07/01/08 04:14 PM
07/01/08 04:14 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
You two seem to think the various "strange acts" in the Bible reflect God behaving in a way contrary to His law in order to reach and teach sinners. However, when sinners behave contrary to the law, it is considered a sin. If your view of God is true, how is He not also guilty of sinning? Basically God's strange act is when he allows sinners to reap that which they have sown: 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) God will leave Satan and his followers to reap the full result of their sin. That's the strange act. Why would this involve God's sinning? I really don't understand this: You two seem to think the various "strange acts" in the Bible reflect God behaving in a way contrary to His law in order to reach and teach sinners. It seems to me this is what *you've* been saying. We've been maintaining that God never acts contrary to His law. God's law was perfectly expressed in the person of Jesus Christ, who perfectly revealed God. God acts like Jesus Christ. That's not how the Bible describes the "strange acts" performed by God. Please show me in Bible where it says such a thing. God has never acted contrary to His law in order to accommodate hard-hearted sinners. The law of Moses describes under which circumstances a man may have more than one wife at the same time. Men who obeyed these laws were not guilty of sinning. Do you agree?
|
|
|
Re: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: scott]
#100399
07/01/08 04:25 PM
07/01/08 04:25 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Another couple of questions I would like answered are:
1. Did Jesus fulfill the law of Moses when He didn’t demand the death of the adulteress?
2. Can we trust that the way Jesus acted toward sinners was the intent of the law Moses or was Jesus doing something new?
scott 1. Although Jesus did not "demand" her death, He did, nevertheless, allow for it. "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." 2. Jesus always acted in harmony with the law of Moses. He was acting in harmony with it when He commanded Moses to stone the Sabbath-breaker to death. He was acting in harmony with it when He commanded Elisha to give Naaman permission to bow with his master leaning on his hand before a false god in the house of Rimmon.
|
|
|
Re: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: Tom]
#100400
07/01/08 05:35 PM
07/01/08 05:35 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2021
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,003
The Orient
|
|
MM, I asked the following: I'm asking if you think they are God's will now. Do you think God wants Sabbath-breakers to be stoned now? Do you think He wants women's hands cut off? Notice under the law that only women's are cut off, but not men's. How does this reflect God's ideal will? How does it reflect God's ideal will that (according to you) it was (is, I suppose, if the law of Moses is still in effect) OK for a man to have multiple wives, but not a woman to have multiple husbands? Why was it OK for a man to divorce a woman, but not a woman to divorce a man? The first two questions I've been asking of both you and GC for some time now, and, to the best of my knowledge, neither of you have answered it. My apologies if you have, and I missed it. Also Scott asked you the following question: Do you think that Jesus’ words, to those who caught the woman in adultery, would have been the right words in Moses’ time to someone who caught a woman in adultery? I'm interested in your answer to this too. Scott and Tom, do you think that everything that happens is God's will? Do you think it was God's will that there should be a flood? Of one thing I am certain--that Satan had no part in bringing on the flood beyond the fact that he had led mankind to such depths of evil as to provoke this response from God. Ellen White tells us he feared he would lose his own life during that flood because of its intensity. Certainly he would not have wanted to throw his own life away. Would it have been good of God to just "forgive" the antediluvians and not to have cleansed the earth of their wickedness? Would it be good of God to not punish the wicked? Would this be more just and fair? Would it be good of God to simply turn away from wickedness and see it not, nor do anything to check its evil tide? If you can truly answer "yes" to all of these last five questions, then there is no need for me to attempt an explanation of my view regarding the punishments of God. However, doubting this to be the case, let me make a feeble attempt... As Ellen White echoes some of my sentiments well in the following paragraph, let me begin here. Love no less than justice demanded that for this sin judgment should be inflicted. God is the guardian as well as the sovereign of his people. He cuts off those who are determined upon rebellion, that they may not lead others to ruin. In sparing the life of Cain, God had demonstrated to the universe what would be the result of permitting sin to go unpunished. The influence exerted upon his descendants by his life and teaching led to the state of corruption that demanded the destruction of the whole world by a flood. The history of the antediluvians testifies that long life is not a blessing to the sinner; God's great forbearance did not repress their wickedness. The longer men lived, the more corrupt they became. {RH, February 11, 1909 par. 18}
If God, in His wisdom, needs to punish sinners to teach them necessary lessons ("For whom the Lord loveth, he correcteth..."), then it seems only natural that there must be consequences to misdeeds. If one of the rules says, "Do not squeeze a man's 'family jewels' to inflict pain upon him," and if the punishment is to have one's hand chopped off, then there can be no excuse for not meeting such an infraction with its due justice. God was basically telling women to keep their hands off a man's private parts. Considering the punishment a wife would have received to have slept with that man fighting her husband (getting even better acquainted with those "secrets"), getting her hand removed is quite merciful by comparison. Let the punishment fit the crime, as we say. As MountainMan stated, during the time of Moses, the government was a Theocracy. Nowadays, if you were to cut off a woman's hand, you would be imprisoned by our non-theocratic government. You would be looked upon by society with disdain, and in so doing would besmirch the name of Christ. God expects us to "obey them that have the rule over you." This means we are no longer expected to comply with the civil laws which Moses had commanded under the Theocracy where they are trumped with our current government's laws, for they have essentially been replaced by the laws of the authorities God has allowed to rule over us. So, to be as clear as I can be: In Moses' time, I believe it was God's will that the hands be cut off of women who broke this specific law; whereas in our time today, it is not God's will that we should seek to administer justice this way. Now, has this answer satisfied your question? Blessings, Green Cochoa.
We can receive of heaven's light only as we are willing to be emptied of self. We can discern the character of God, and accept Christ by faith, only as we consent to the bringing into captivity of every thought to the obedience of Christ. And to all who do this, the Holy Spirit is given without measure. In Christ "dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in Him." [Colossians 2:9, 10.] {GW 57.1} -- Ellen White.
|
|
|
Re: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#100401
07/01/08 06:23 PM
07/01/08 06:23 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Yes, of course. The law of Moses is based on mercy. It allowed for forgiveness. I should have made this point more clear. Thank you for stating the obvious. This is sarcastic. Case in point: Moses was unclear what to do about the guy caught breaking the Sabbath. Should he be forgiven or stoned to death? So, he inquired of God. The Lord knew the man's heart, and He commanded Moses to stone him to death. Of course, God could have withdrawn His protection and given evil angels permission to kill him, but He chose rather to permit the Jews to do it. What does this tell us about the law and character of God? To know God's character, we should look to Jesus Christ, not Moses. We see how God would have acted in how Jesus treated the woman caught in adultery. You wrote: And, while here in the flesh Jesus did not undermine the law of Moses. When the Jews brought the adulteress to Him and asked what should be done about it, Jesus instructed them to obey the law of Moses. So we have: 1.Jesus did not undermine the law of Moses. 2.Jesus' instruction was that the law of Moses should be obeyed. 3.The woman was not stoned. So there's your answer.
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: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: Tom]
#100402
07/01/08 06:34 PM
07/01/08 06:34 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Timing is everything, as they say. The law of Moses outlined very specific punishments for specific crimes. They were administered under a Theocracy. Nowadays, we are no longer a Theocracy, right? So, things have changed. I do not pretend to understand everything God outlined in the law of Moses. At times I am tempted to think certain aspects of it were unfair. But I immediately recognize such thoughts as the voice of Satan. Maybe you're confusing voices here. I am convinced that the law of Moses represented God's will for the COI. I am in no way confused as to whether or not it reflects a compromise to accommodate their hard hearts and sinfulness. You seem to be confused to an extent, because you cannot answer a simply question like why God would want women's hands to be cut off. You just say, "I don't know." That sounds like confusion. Regarding Scott's question I'll repeat it, to make the post easier to follow: Scott's question: "Do you think that Jesus’ words, to those who caught the woman in adultery, would have been the right words in Moses’ time to someone who caught a woman in adultery?" Yes, of course, it would have been. Why? Because under the circumstances, where they led her into sin, Jesus would have commanded Moses to handle the case accordingly. Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and tommorow. I agree with the "yes, of course" part, but the explanation is a bit disappointing as it appears you don't believe Jesus responded the way He did because of His character, but because of special circumstances. You seem to take this same stance in general, that a thing is not a sin because it violates the law in general, or is wrong in general, but whether a thing is right or not depends upon the circumstances. E.g., polygamy is a "sin," it is "contrary to the will of God," a "violation of the law," "not sanctioned by God in a single instance," yet you see it as being not necessarily a sin, depending on the circumstances. You appear to take this same position in other contexts, so I commend you on being consistent. Do you see exceptions as being possible for any violation of the law? Is it limited to polygamy and killing? Or are their circumstances when lying and stealing, for example, might not be sin?
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: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: Tom]
#100403
07/01/08 06:47 PM
07/01/08 06:47 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
That's not how the Bible describes the "strange acts" performed by God. Please show me in Bible where it says such a thing. Ok. Here's an example: And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, neither is there any water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.
And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died. (Numbers 21:5,6) God has never acted contrary to His law in order to accommodate hard-hearted sinners. This is a really strange thing for you to assert, as it's meaningless for you. For example, God's law says, "That shalt not kill" (or "thou shalt not murder" if you prefer). You believe that God killed people, but it wasn't a violation of His law, because He was doing it. If someone else did it, it would have been a violation of His law, but God cannot violate His own law. So your assertion that God has never acted contrary to His law is meaningless, as, by definition, you interpret anything that God does as not being contrary to His law, regardless of what God does. Scott and I, otoh, do believe that God has never acted contrary to His law. He has always acted like Jesus Christ. Regarding your question on polygamy, my answer is that polygamy is contrary to God's will, was never sanctioned by Him in a single instance, and is a violation of His law.
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: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: Tom]
#100404
07/01/08 07:26 PM
07/01/08 07:26 PM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Scott and Tom, do you think that everything that happens is God's will? Clearly not. All one need do is take a look at the world, and it is clear to see that many things happen which are not God's will. Any time anyone sins, or is sinned against, something happens contrary to God's will. Jesus taught us to pray "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." If His will were being done here, this prayer would be unnecessary. Do you think it was God's will that there should be a flood? Permissive, yes. Ideal, no. He saw that men had become so evil that their every thought was evil, and repented that He made man. He would rather that had not happened. Of one thing I am certain--that Satan had no part in bringing on the flood beyond the fact that he had led mankind to such depths of evil as to provoke this response from God. Ellen White tells us he feared he would lose his own life during that flood because of its intensity. Certainly he would not have wanted to throw his own life away. Many have seen this as evidence that Satan *did* have a part in the flood. He feared for his own life because he didn't realize the repercussions of his actions. I'm not saying this is what I think, just that other people have taken this very passage and come to the opposite conclusion that you have. Would it have been good of God to just "forgive" the antediluvians and not to have cleansed the earth of their wickedness? How could God have forgiven the antediluvians without repentance? If they had repented, that would certainly have been preferable. Would it be good of God to not punish the wicked? Would this be more just and fair? Your question is assuming a false premise. You are assuming that it's possible for God to punish or not punish the wicked, as if this were an arbitrary decision God makes. Punishment comes upon the wicked because of their own choices and decisions, not because of something God arbitrarily does to them: 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) Would it be good of God to simply turn away from wickedness and see it not, nor do anything to check its evil tide? That wouldn't help the wicked any, because they would still be enslaved by sin. Repentance is necessary. The goodness of God leads to repentance. God, by being good, does all He can to lead people to repentance, and heal them of their sin. If you can truly answer "yes" to all of these last five questions, then there is no need for me to attempt an explanation of my view regarding the punishments of God.... I'm not following your explanation regarding women's hands being cut off. In what way does the punishment fit the crime? Isn't cutting a woman's hands off about as out of proportion with the crime as can be? If this is fair punishment, why didn't it apply to men as well as women? As MountainMan stated, during the time of Moses, the government was a Theocracy. Nowadays, if you were to cut off a woman's hand, you would be imprisoned by our non-theocratic government. You would be looked upon by society with disdain, and in so doing would besmirch the name of Christ. Let's say that one were in a situation like the Taliban had in Afghanistan, where one could cut off a woman's hands without reprisal from the government. Then would it be OK? Or is the law of Moses only applicable in a theocracy? If it's only applicable in a theocracy, and since there is no theocracy, how can you be upset with the idea that it's no longer in force? God expects us to "obey them that have the rule over you." This means we are no longer expected to comply with the civil laws which Moses had commanded under the Theocracy where they are trumped with our current government's laws, for they have essentially been replaced by the laws of the authorities God has allowed to rule over us.
Previously you quoted from Christ who stated that not one jot or tittle of the law would pass away, and applied other Scriptures which I would say apply to the moral law. I would say that these passages mean we should obey God rather than man, and do what is required by the law, regardless of the government. You are making an exception to the law based on the government. You are saying in some circumstances the law applies, in others it doesn't. But that doesn't match with Christ's words. He didn't teach "follow the law if doing so doesn't conflict with the government." So, to be as clear as I can be: In Moses' time, I believe it was God's will that the hands be cut off of women who broke this specific law; whereas in our time today, it is not God's will that we should seek to administer justice this way.
Now, has this answer satisfied your question? I appreciate your addressing it. I have the questions I addressed above, such as why you think God wanted women's hands to be cut off, but not men's. It seems very easy to see that this law was not reflecting God's ideal will, but was heavily influenced by the culture of the Israelites. Otherwise there wouldn't be a reason for women to have been treated the way they were. Surely it's not God's ideal will that women be treated worse than men.
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: Does polygame violate the 7th commandment?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#100419
07/02/08 06:01 AM
07/02/08 06:01 AM
|
|
Another couple of questions I would like answered are:
1. Did Jesus fulfill the law of Moses when He didn’t demand the death of the adulteress?
2. Can we trust that the way Jesus acted toward sinners was the intent of the law Moses or was Jesus doing something new?
scott 1. Although Jesus did not "demand" her death, He did, nevertheless, allow for it. "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." 2. Jesus always acted in harmony with the law of Moses. He was acting in harmony with it when He commanded Moses to stone the Sabbath-breaker to death. He was acting in harmony with it when He commanded Elisha to give Naaman permission to bow with his master leaning on his hand before a false god in the house of Rimmon. Hi MM, If Jesus fulfilled the law of Moses when He didn’t stone the adulteress then would you say that anyone at anytime could have fulfilled the law of Moses without killing those who broke it? If Jesus commanded Moses to stone the Sabbath breakers in the OT, but in the NT he told them that they could only stone them if they had no sin in their lives would it be a ok to suggest that those meeting out the punishments in the OT also could have turned and walked away feeling that the sin in their lives was too great to meet judgment and punishment on others? Jesus is, after all, the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow! scott
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|