I agree with what Thomas wrote.

Then let us do this POLL also here.

When God allows us to be tried and tested, so that we can grow and mature in the fruit of the Spirit, does the end justify the means? single choice
	Yes
	No
Votes accepted starting: 12/13/06 06:03 PM You must vote before you can view the results of this poll.

Here is the actual quote:



Since *this* is the actual quote for the question, and I am the one who requested the poll, not MM, and I am the one asking the question, not MM, I would prefer the question read, "Does the end justify the means."

The actual poll which MM suggested is trite. Who could answer "no" to the question as phrased? This is not an interesting poll.

Since the actual quote talks about rape, that could be included in the poll, which would make it more interesting. For example, the question could read:



This would be more in harmony with the question being asked. However, I think my original request, "Does the end justify the means?" is a better choice, as it doesn't lead the responder either possible answer, which, unfortunately, the actual poll does.

I am pleasantly surprised MM that you allowed this openness to God.

It does propose that the circumstances are not entirely brought about by God, and that He must needs react to circumstances not of his choosing.

I agree with this.

Do you agree?

If the truth is that sin causes suffering and death, how would God's sending holy angels to cause suffering and death teach us this truth? Wouldn't it instead teach us the "truth" that God, by way of holy angels, causes suffering and death?

If God does the same thing as Satan, how are they different? Just by identity?

If good and evil look the same, what's the difference? Just who does the deed?

JB: It does propose that the circumstances are not entirely brought about by God, and that He must needs react to circumstances not of his choosing. I agree with this. Do you agree?

MM: I agree. God did not make the GC happen. Given the circumstances, He is forced to deal with the sin problem in a way that allows suffering and death. Of course God wishes things were different. He is very much looking forward to the day when suffering and death are no longer necessary to teach us the truth about good and evil.

TE: If the truth is that sin causes suffering and death, how would God's sending holy angels to cause suffering and death teach us this truth?

MM: Good point. I believe there is a difference between the 1) unrestrained natural consequences that occur when we sin and 2) God commanding holy angels or permitting evil angels to cause specified consequences in response to our sin. Not all sinning cause natural consequences. Telling a white lie, for instance, does not cause hardened people to suffer or die.

When someone overdoses on drugs, and God chooses not to override the natural consequences, they experience suffering and sometimes death. These consequences are not the same as when God commands holy angels or permits evil angels to cause suffering and death and destruction as punishment for sinning.

TE: Wouldn't it instead teach us the "truth" that God, by way of holy angels, causes suffering and death?

MM: In some cases, yes.

TE: If God does the same thing as Satan, how are they different? Just by identity?

MM: Again, Satan is not allowed to do anything that God does not permit.

TE: If good and evil look the same, what's the difference? Just who does the deed?

MM: Good and evil do not look the same. That’s the truth about good and evil.

TE: If the truth is that sin causes suffering and death, how would God's sending holy angels to cause suffering and death teach us this truth?

MM: Good point. I believe there is a difference between the 1) unrestrained natural consequences that occur when we sin and 2) God commanding holy angels or permitting evil angels to cause specified consequences in response to our sin. Not all sinning cause natural consequences. Telling a white lie, for instance, does not cause hardened people to suffer or die.

When someone overdoses on drugs, and God chooses not to override the natural consequences, they experience suffering and sometimes death. These consequences are not the same as when God commands holy angels or permits evil angels to cause suffering and death and destruction as punishment for sinning.

If sin results in death and destruction, God's killing and destroying would not teach us that sin kills and destroys but that God kills and destroys.

TE: Wouldn't it instead teach us the "truth" that God, by way of holy angels, causes suffering and death?

MM: In some cases, yes.

Which would obscure, rather than teach, the truth that sin causes suffering death.

TE: If God does the same thing as Satan, how are they different? Just by identity?

MM: Again, Satan is not allowed to do anything that God does not permit.

This doesn't address the question.

TE: If good and evil look the same, what's the difference? Just who does the deed?

MM: Good and evil do not look the same. That’s the truth about good and evil.

Previously you were arguing they were the same, right? You seemed to be writing whether evil or holy angels destroyed, it didn't make any difference. So good and evil would look the same. Unless you think the evil angels were doing good, and destruction and death are always good, since it only happens from evil angels when God permits.

This is going around in circles. Someone introduce something new or we all just agree to disagree and move on.

Does the end justify the means? = Do two wrongs make one/it right?