I don't understand why these questions are being asked. I'm not following your thought here. What are you thinking?



Jesus prayed that God forgive His persecutors. I wouldn't characterize this as His telling God what to do.

I explained in detail what I meant in regards to forgiveness. There are two aspects, as I explained. One aspect involves the disposition of the offended party. The other involves the healing of a relationship, which involves the offending party recognizing being in error, and accepting the forgiveness offered by the offended party. Christ's prayer manifests God's disposition to forgive.



The disposition on God's part to forgive, and actually forgiving in the sense of not holding anything personally against others (God is agape) does not result in the offending party experiencing or receiving forgiveness because such requires that the offending party recognize and acknowledge wrongdoing, and accept the offered forgiveness. To go to heaven one must have the characteristics required to be happy in heaven.



You mean prayed that Jesus forgave them, right? You don't perceive your prayers as your telling God what to do, do you? I don't know why you're characterizing Jesus' prayer in this manner. One thing we can learn regarding the final judgment is how God feels towards the lost.



The character of the wicked has been fixed. How could God save them? Why would Jesus plead for something which is impossible?



Could be. I don't see why this would matter.



What about them?



I already addressed this. I said it's not my job to judge what's in the heart of another or sit on them in judgment, but their actions did not appear to indicate that they would be in heaven. Why are you bringing this up?

Not in the sense that you do. I've repeatedly stated what I believe.

I'm not asking you why you think Jesus commanded Moses to stone the sinner to death. I'm simply asking if you believe Jesus commanded it. I believe the Bible clearly says Jesus commanded Moses and the COI to stone the sinner to death. True, it doesn't explain why Jesus did so, but it is also true that's not what I'm asking you. Either you believe Jesus commanded it or you don't. Which is it?

Jesus used what the OT says about the final judgment to establish the truth about it. He didn’t add to or take away from the OT to tell the truth about it. The OT, therefore, clearly explains the truth about the final judgment. My question is – Where in the OT is it described? Which passages did Jesus use to tell the truth about it? Imitating Jesus’ example in this matter will help us arrive at the truth. Do you agree? Or, do you think we should ignore the passages Jesus used to tell the truth about it?


Jesus prayed, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” Do you hear Jesus merely acknowledging the fact that God is, by nature, a forgiving God? That’s it? You don’t think Jesus was pleading on their behalf for God to in reality forgive them for killing Him?


So, you don’t think this was what Jesus was pleading for?


What difference does God’s feelings make so far as the actual pardon of sinners is concerned? Do you think the sinners who killed Jesus were in reality pardoned? Do you think that’s what Jesus was pleading for?


Do you think Jesus’ prayer on the cross represents God’s attitude toward the wicked during final judgment? If so, do you think the wicked “know not what they do”?


You believe Jesus would have pardoned them like He did the adulteress were it not for the stiff-necked Jews. The fact He commanded Moses to kill them instead suggests they died in a saved state, that they will be in heaven. I suspect you are mistaken.


If you suspect they won’t be in heaven, why, then, do you believe Jesus would have treated them the way He did the adulteress? Do you think forgiving them would have led them to live holy and obedient lives thereafter and that they would have died in a saved state?

It's what I've been saying. I think God's counsel regarding capital punishment is of the same character as His counsel regarding polygamy and divorce. I think God's idea will in this matter is reveled in Christ. In particular, we see this in how Christ treated the woman caught in adultery.

I'll also repeat that I've suggested many times that if we wish to understand God's character, the way to do so is to build a foundation based on what we see in Christ first, and then come back to the OT. You've steadfastly rejected this idea. I don't think focusing on the OT first works. I think focusing on the revelation of Christ first works.

Is it your idea that Jesus Christ had no light not in the OT? That He was a sort of lesser light? If I'm understand you correctly here, I think you've got this upside down. The OT was written to testify of Christ. *He* is the light.

The OT was a dim reflection of the bright sun which is Christ.





I think Jesus was pleading for something which He was feeling, and that in doing so He was revealing the heart of God. I didn't say anything about Christ's "acknowledging" anything, but "revealing" something. I'd encourage you not to switch the words I'm using for other words which mean something different.

For example, I spoke of Christ's praying, and you changed this to Christ's "telling" God what to do. I spoke of Christ's "revealing" the heart of God, and you changed this to Christ's "merely acknowledging" something. I hope you can see the difference between what I said and your re-phrasing.



It represents God's attitude in that God is agape, and loves them, in spite of what they do, or have done. "I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked." "Why will you die?" "Oh Absalom, my son, Absalom. Would to God that I had died instead of thee. Oh my son, Absalom, my son." are others that express the heart of God.



I don't know what "this" is. I think Jesus' prayer was heart-felt, and reveals the heart of God.



It's the goodness of God that leads to repentance. Understanding God's feelings helps leads us to repentance, which makes it more likely that actual pardon will occur.



There's an SOP statement that comes to mind. I remember the gist of it, but not specifically enough to find it. She speaks of how the prayer of Christ took in the entire world, which is guilty of the death of Christ, but unless we individually repent, we will perish. It's the same idea I shared earlier about the two aspects of forgiveness. From God's side, He forgives us. But we need to acknowledge our wrong-doing and repent in order to appropriate that forgiveness as our own.



I addressed this above.



??? Where do you get this from? I didn't say anything like this.



I think you're completely confused here, in regards to what I said. I'll repeat my point. My point was simply that God's ideal will was revealed in Christ, and we see His attitude towards capital punishment in how He treated the woman caught in adultery. One other point I made was in response to your point that the sabbath-breakers were not repentant while the woman caught in adultery was. I pointed out that this was incorrect.

That's all I said. Your conclusions don't seem to bear any correspondence to with what I said.



Because Jesus doesn't treat us according to our goodness, but according to His. Nobody before being converted is on their way to heaven. God's goodness leads us to repentance. Either a person responds or he doesn't. God's goodness has to come first, before a person responds.



These questions seem highly speculative to me. What I'm suggesting is that we focus on Christ's revelation of the Father. The more I suggest this, the more questions come in regards to the OT.

The question is, is the Bible as clear as you suggest it is?

Answer: Does the Bible clearly say that God killed Saul?

kland,

If you and Tom wish to continue bringing up all of the side issues in order to avoid addressing the central ones, please continue to do so at your own spiritual risk. A lie repeated enough times will be sincerely believed as truth. Our own words have a tremendous impact upon our own beliefs. Therefore, it is wise to be careful of what we say until we have a solid basis for saying it.

The Bible says God killed Saul. The Bible also says the Philistines killed Saul. The Bible also tells how Saul fell upon his own sword. Which of these three statements is false? If one of them is false, you better start throwing away your Bible, because it is full of error. But if all three are true, then we have a starting point to find some grander truths in the midst of this apparent dichotomy.

Here is the grander truth, eloquently expressed by Mrs. White:


I would like to suggest here that the case of Saul is one of those special places in the Bible where this curtain of which Ellen White speaks is drawn aside, and we can see that although it appeared man was taking the situation into his own hands, God was really in control.

Of course, with regard to the MM's point, there is not even an apparent dichotomy--God has clearly given the orders for the capital punishment.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I don't understand why you feel you should or must make personal comments as opposed to sticking to the issues. It's ironic (and somewhat clever) that you would do so while expressing concern that the ones you are addressing are avoiding addressing the issues.

kland's point in bringing out that the Bible says that God killed Saul is that inspiration of presents God as doing that which He permits. Given that inspiration often does this, how do you know when inspiration says that God is doing something that He is actually doing it Himself as opposed to allowing it to happen?

This is a core issue.

Tom,

I am concerned for you. It is risky to pick and choose what to believe, and to only accept something from the Bible if it fits with one's own ideas.

The Bible is not lying to us. The Bible tells us God killed Saul. You are trying to change the Word of God into "God did not kill Saul, but only permitted him to be killed." That is not true. God ordained that Saul should die. God was in control of the situation. Had Saul not fallen upon his sword and hastened his own death, he had already been mortally wounded at the hands of God's agents, the Philistines. Had Saul not been thus wounded, he would not have been thus induced to take his own life. Because God's spirit had forsaken Saul, he was reduced to a desolate soul, ready to die.

Inspiration presents God as doing that which He has controlled. I think this differs from merely "permit" in that God was master of the outcome. Yes, God does permit things to happen. But He never permits things to go beyond His control.

A king may give you permission to open a store in his town. Does that now mean that your store is beyond his control? Hardly. Thus it is with God's permission. He permits things to happen, if and when they are in accordance with His will. Are bad things in accordance with His will? Yes, they are--as a lesson to the universe of the true character of sin, and because God does not force people to refrain from sin. Does God Himself do the bad things? Of course not. But it is in accordance with His will that His creatures should have the liberty to choose for themselves. Thus He also allows them to rebel against His law for a time. However, His patience with them will not last forever. There is an end to probationary time for sin.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.