How important is the jot or tittle of Scripture??
Did Jesus Have the same View of the inspiration of scripture as was common in his day??
I ask for this not to be a Westcott and Hort or Orgien disscussion but rather keep it scriptural
"For Verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in now wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Jesus Christ
Actually, Jesus had a better view of Scripture than was common in His day. He loved His Father's word.
Ezekiel 33:31-33
Pilgrim
Amen pilgrim777,
RE Pilgrim777 wrote "Actually, Jesus had a better view of Scripture than was common in His day. He loved His Father's word."
That is very true, But not well recognized today, there is a Used Christian book store in a City about 2 hours from my house every time I go there, I buy up all there books that I can afford on inspiration of scriptures to see what the different opinions are, I do not think that I have found one that matches exactly on how Jesus viewed the scriptures of His day. Probably the best book that I have found is by eta linnemann an ex student of Rudolf Bultmann.
Many of the books that I read say that Jesus just excepted the common belief of scripture that was held of his day. But I find the Bible says something completely different.
Rev 19:13 And He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood:
and His name is called The Word of God.
Amen Pilgrim and Annie! Jesus's view of the scriptures was different in John 5 v 38- 39 Jesus said to the Pharisees "You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is these that bear witness of Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me, that you may have life."
Jesus is The Word of God. That is why we need to Spirit led and filled when we read the Word otherwise we will interpret it the wrong way if we attempt to do so without the Holy Spirit!
Again I am reminded 2 Cor 3 v 6 for" the letter killeth but the Spirit gives life". Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit therefore His view or take on scriptures was different to what was the norm. Most of the time after teaching men responded by saying His sayings are hard!
Blessings in Christ Jesus
Did Jesus Have the same View of the inspiration of scripture as was common in his day??
Sorry to have given such a short answer earlier. I've been proof reading someone's transcription and making the needed corrections and figured you'd know what was meant by that one verse - but felt as I went offline for the day, that it wasn't enough.
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made.
Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew Him not.
Psa 33:6 By the Word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
"GOD With us" - "The Word made flesh".
He spoke the entire Old Testament because He was and is The Word of GOD, so He was GOD's Word while in the flesh as well. He spoke The Words of GOD while in the flesh. He knew the Old Testament because He was [is] The Word of GOD and is now "and His Name is called The Word of GOD" and when He returns. He didn't and doesn't cease being Who He was from Eternity past. He always spoke The Word of GOD while in the flesh and knew all that was spoken by Himself before He came in the flesh, so what could His "view" be of His Own Words?
Did He ever cease being GOD? Or The Word of GOD, Himself?
How does GOD "view the inspiration of" His Own Word - looking at the verses above?
Blessings!
Hi! ProudPapa
How important is the jot 'er title of Scripture?
Matt 5:18 and Luke 21:33 amply confirm the importance of every jot/title of Scripture. So, I'll leave well enough alone with that question.
But your additional question is a very intriguing and searching one. It deserves an answering. To paraphrase it: "How did Jesus view the inspiration of Scripture?".
For instance, compare verses 1Chron 21:14 with 2Sam 24:1. There is an apparent contraction between them. One states that it was God who commanded David to number the people of Israel while the other says it was Satan.
Look at the story of Abraham.
Some people would have us believe that our God is a god of multiple faces; a schizophrenic god, (if you will).
They correctly say that God placed in every man Creation Laws and a conscience to help him follow after them. Obviously, one of those Creation Laws was that murder was something exceedingly prohibited.
But now we have these same people claiming that God tempted Abraham to violate the very Creation Laws and conscience He had gifted him when He supposedly commanded Abraham to murder Issac.
Not only that, somehow they manage to square the contrariety against the Scripture saying: "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man", (James 1:13).
But then again they always have the fall-back position that these are mysteries and secrets reserved to God Himself. Our is merely the task of closing our eyes and walking into the unknown.
The Old Covenant had people testifying: "The secret things belong to the LORD our God". But we who live and have our being in the New Covenant, do not testify as this.
Those who love Jesus and serve Him faithfully have the blessed privilege of knowing that God “revealeth his secrets to his servants.” Jesus said that He would make Himself known to us as He would not unto the world.
Another thing worth asking too is what exactly do the terms "inspired" / "inspiration" mean? There are a lot of Christians who mistakenly think that the writers of the Bible experienced a trance of some sort and etched their narratives through extra-sensory automatic writing 'er something equivalent.
Some might be quick to answer saying, "The Lord works in mysterious ways". But my answer to them is the Scripture saying: "The Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God" and God's people have a share in this.
The Word of God is a creative force. It moves and echoes from out of eternity already passed and accomplishes in eternity now. It begins as a thought (inspiration) and when someone takes possession of it for himself, it immediately attaches to his inner-man and begins to create substance in and through that person.
So, how did Jesus regard the Scriptures? (and we should follow His example).
That can only be answered if you know exactly what the Word of God is ... it's origin and work.
It's jus' too long a story to tell here.
I would first have to empty people's heads and only then begin to re-fill them with new restorative thinking concerning the Word. God treats everyone the same; He remains entirely impartial about his people. It's not as if he loves you or me differently as individuals. So, I have every expectation that God will reveal Himself and accomplish His Word in everyone collectively and as individuals too.
=============================
nature of scriptures
by proudpapa on 2012/6/5 17:08:00
How important is the jot or tittle of Scripture??
Did Jesus Have the same View of the inspiration of scripture as was common in his day??
I ask for this not to be a Westcott and Hort or Orgien disscussion but rather keep it scriptural
=============================
God's will is God's Word and everything we need to know about how Jesus loved His Father's word more than His very own life we can find in the Scriptures.
Mark 14:36 - And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee, take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.
The love for God's word is demonstrated when one's own comfort is at risk.
"Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart. I have preached righteousness in the great congregation: lo, I have not refrained my lips, O Lord, thou knowest. I have not hid thy righteousness within my heart; I have declared thy faithfulness and thy salvation: I have not concealed thy lovingkindness and thy truth from the great congregation." Psalm 40:6-9
Only one who loves and values every jot and tittle of God's words can speak these verses with conviction.
Pilgrim
Great Replies everyone, I have to go to work now and not much time to write, but I have to say a word about contridictions they used to scare me and at one point almost caused me to give up the faith and probably would have If God would have let go of me.
I have found now that I love contridictions they throw of the wise of the World into unbelief but for someone as ignorant as me they are a means by which I can hear God. Expecialy between the accounts in kings and chronicals there are so many contridictions it almost seems unreal, But I have found When I read them and at first they almost always seem impossable, My heart will begain to beat fast I think this is a contridiction, I try to reason it out any way that I can no answer comes. So many times I have found that When I just descide to believe it anyhow despite the seeming contridiction and erase my thinking often times an answer comes and often times It sheds great light on the scripture and tells another story in which great scholers are blinded to because of unbelief. I can not begain to tell what a faith builder that doing this becomes.
We must remeber the Carnal, rational,natural (sarx) mind is enmity with God.
God is not bound by our natural laws and understandings.
Hi! ProudPapa
Actually, I think some readers might misinterpret what I was trying to say.
I certainly don't believe that there are "contradictions" in the Bible. Absolutely not!
There are only seeming-to-be contradictions; things which might appear at first glance to be contradictory for some people; especially for those Christians just beginning their spiritual journey.
Keep Smiling!
================================
great replies
by proudpapa on 2012/6/7 6:32:49
================================
Blayne wrote "Hi! ProudPapa
Actually, I think some readers might misinterpret what I was trying to say.
I certainly don't believe that there are "contradictions" in the Bible. Absolutely not!
There are only seeming-to-be contradictions; things which might appear at first glance to be contradictory for some people; especially for those Christians just beginning their spiritual journey.
Keep Smiling!"
Blayne, I knew you had a solid view of inspiration, It is obvious since you are not just another theolgy puppet or walking commentary.
What I wrote about contridictions was not in response to your post.
I always look forward to what you post.
Great points
RE: lindi1208 wrote" Amen Pilgrim and Annie! Jesus's view of the scriptures was different in John 5 v 38- 39 Jesus said to the Pharisees "You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is these that bear witness of Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me, that you may have life.""
Great verse, I have had some use this verse though to try to undermine scriptures authority and just say that believing in Jesus is all that matters. I find it interesting what the verses right after say:
John 5 v 38-47
38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
(from this verse you would think they believed scripture but lets read on)
40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
41 I receive not honour from men.
(Jesus did not care what Orthodoxy taught in his day, He was not afraid to be labled a Heretic)
42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.
43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?
(this was an important verse, are we worried about reading the scripture in the box of orthodoxy!! afraid to be labeled a heretic!)
45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.( by this you would think that they really believed the scripture the old testament,but lets read on)
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
(He now tells them that even though they claimed that they believed in Moses (old testament scripture) that they realy did not,they prided themselves in there view of inspiration, But they did not listen to it personally, they always had there tradition there theolgy there doctrines there commentaries there talmud that explained away all the passages.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
(this last verse is very powerful meditate apon it)
RE: indi1208 wrote "Again I am reminded 2 Cor 3 v 6 for" the letter killeth but the Spirit gives life". Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit therefore His view or take on scriptures was different to what was the norm. Most of the time after teaching men responded by saying His sayings are hard!"
GREAT POINT. BLESSINGS!!!
Was the Originals Of the Book of Moses available in Jesus Day , Or just copys of copys ??
How many Years from Moses to Jesus Day??
How Did Jesus go about to prove the Resurrection of the Dead to the sadducees???
Lets slay the Wicked Head of Historical Criticism!!!
Inerrancy
Quote from what you should know about inerrancy by Charles C. Ryrie p.58
/If we find that He(Jesus) only used or taught in a general way about the Bible,then we may conclude that He believed in its reliability generally. If on the other hand,we find that He relied on the minutia of the Bible as accurate,then we must conclude that He believed it to be inerrant down to its details./
So what think ye, Did Jesus use the Bible Generally or trust in its minutia details???
Hi! ProudPapa
Maybe the answer to your question can be found within yet another question:
Did the writers of the Scriptures compose their narratives in something near a trance-like state of direct divine inspiration or did the writers compose them using the insights and knowledge which they had obtained for themselves at the time?
======================
nature of scriptures\t |
How important is the jot or tittle of Scripture??
Did Jesus Have the same View of the inspiration of scripture as was common in his day??
I ask for this not to be a Westcott and Hort or Orgien disscussion but rather keep it scriptural
======================
HI, Blayne thank you for the thought provoking question.
Having not meditated deeply on this thought I will throw out What first comes to mind.
RE: Blayne asked "Did the writers of the Scriptures compose their narratives in something near a trance-like state of direct divine inspiration or did the writers compose them using the insights and knowledge which they had obtained for themselves at the time?"
We can not say that the Bible is totaly writen from a means of mechanical dictation, in that we can see Each of the Writers own personalitys whithin there writings, Such as a different personality from Paul and Peter or from Paul to John. Yet It all is of the same Spirit and the exact thoughts and even words as what God Him self Inspired.
Some verses that come to mind are 1 Peter ch1:10-12
/10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:/
So Peter seems to Be speaking of the old testament prophets here, He says they prophesied of the grace that should come and than had to go back and enquired and searched diligently through there own writings to try to understand the grace that should come. They wrote of things that where deeper than there own understanding could comprehend when they wrote them.
11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
These verses are deep, They are speaking of the Spirit of Christ which was in them Having them write of things that there comprehension was unable to fully grasp, It reminds me of First John where he says we need no one to teach us because of the anointing in us knows all things,yet our minds seem to not understand all things yet our spirit that is anointed does?? Deep stuff.. very unorthodox.
//12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.//
So this seems to be saying that they never fully grasped there own writings because it was not revealed for them but for us.
It goes on to say that even the angels desire to look into these writings, indicating that they do not even have full comprehension of the depths of these writings.
God never departs the waters untill we against all hope, first step in and have full confidence that he will.
Gods version
psalms 91 v11 v12
11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, (to keep thee in all thy ways).
12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone
The Devils Version
11 He shall give his angels charge concerning thee:(???)
12 and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Hi! ProudPapa
As always, your comments are exceedingly well thought out and very much scriptural. That's what I so appreciate when reading your Posts.
Yes, it's indeed just as you stated it: "They wrote of things that were deeper than their own understanding could comprehend when they wrote them."
This is how/why, for instance, that the apparent contradiction occurred between 1Chron 21:14 and 2Sam 24:1 (which I mentioned previously in this Thread). The writer of Chronicles had more insight concerning the Kingdom of Heaven (invisible world) than the writer of Samuel and therefore correctly identified the instigator.
We can detect this anomaly throughout the Old Testament because, as the scriptures testify and which you yourself reiterated, "So this seems to be saying that they never fully grasped there own writings because it was not revealed for them but for us."
Now I will give you yet another question to ponder which is somewhat relational to this same subject:
Was it God who killed Ananias and Sapphira? (Acts 5:1-11).
==========================
by proudpapa on 2012/6/9 20:53:07
HI, Blayne thank you for the thought provoking question.
Having not meditated deeply on this thought I will throw out What first comes to mind.
RE: Blayne asked "Did the writers of the Scriptures compose their narratives in something near a trance-like state of direct divine inspiration or did the writers compose them using the insights and knowledge which they had obtained for themselves at the time?"
We can not say that the Bible is totaly writen from a means of mechanical dictation, in that we can see Each of the Writers own personalitys whithin there writings, Such as a different personality from Paul and Peter or from Paul to John. Yet It all is of the same Spirit and the exact thoughts and even words as what God Him self Inspired.
==========================
Hi Blayne, I always look forward to what you or Pilgrim777 have posted!
RE: Blayne wrote //This is how/why, for instance, that the apparent contradiction occurred between 1Chron 21:14 and 2Sam 24:1 (which I mentioned previously in this Thread). The writer of Chronicles had more insight concerning the Kingdom of Heaven (invisible world) than the writer of Samuel and therefore correctly identified the instigator.//
You make a good point here, I think it is needful also to keep in mind That these things where inspired exactly how God wants us to recieve them. There Are Many very intellectual and scholarly Men that Loose there faith over versus like this, Because they do not understand the nature of Faith nor the nature of Scriptures,they do not relize that God has delibertly willed these seeming Contridictions to throw off the faith of the high minded and wise of this world. But for those of faith it is no contridiction at all,It actuly openes more awarness to the ways in which God works, By faith it openes up another deminsion of scripture that the sceptic is locked out of. We know from the Book of Job how God is in control and what tools he so uses to accomplish his will.
Both of the writers are correct.
Are you sure that it was the writer of Chronicles that had more insight??
RE: Blayne wrote /Now I will give you yet another question to ponder which is somewhat relational to this same subject:
Was it God who killed Ananias and Sapphira? (Acts 5:1-11)./
I am still pondering, the first thought off of the top of my head was yes,but when I read it, It did not clearly say that, It seems that when Peter spoke to them, That his Words where so anointed that They cut them so deep inward that the fear or panic killed them. Umm?? It seems as though it depends on what level we are speaking??
I have to admitt I am stumped on where you are going with this,But looking foward to it
I have to ask again for you Blayne or anyone else reading this.
How did Jesus go about to prove the Resurrection of the Dead to the sadducees???
they were astonished at his doctrine!!
.
The writer of Chronicles had more insight concerning the Kingdom of Heaven (invisible world) than the writer of Samuel and therefore correctly identified the instigator.
Sorry bro, this doesn't add up. Reasoning of this sort flaws Scripture, thus making what's said a lie. Saying that says that the writer of Samuel stated something about God as fact that actually was not accurate, and in doing so undermines the integrity of the entire book. What if every other time something that was declared as God's doing in second Samuel, it was in fact the devil, and the author didn't have the right insight to discern between the two? This is a dangerous road to go down. Can you see why reasoning in this fashion whilst claiming 100% inerrancy of Scripture can't be reconciled mutually?
What was being communicated was something much deeper here. The truth is, that both Satan AND God were the perpetrators. As shown in other instances throughout Scripture, Satan is still subject to God even though he is His enemy. The Lord used Satan to accomplish His will. He's done it multiple times throughout Scripture. Both accounts are 100% accurate, and reveal something about the other towards the larger picture.
We know from the Book of Job how God is in control and what tools he so uses to accomplish his will.
Both of the writers are correct.
This is correct. It's actually kind of funny, as some of the alleged "contradictions" in the Bible show us some VERY important truths, that like you said, those who figure themselves wise will discard. God uses these things many times to really highlight something that we need to take in.
Who Killed King Saul??
Who Killed King Saul??
King Saul.
very well EverestoSama but what about 2 Sam.ch1 8-10
I am an Amalekite.
9 He said unto me again, Stand, I pray thee, upon me, and slay me: for anguish is come upon me, because my life is yet whole in me.
10 So I (the Amalekite) stood upon him, and slew him,
1 Chronicles 10
Then said Saul to his armourbearer, Draw thy sword, and thrust me through therewith; lest these uncircumcised come and abuse me. But his armourbearer would not; for he was sore afraid. So Saul took a sword, and fell upon it.
Amalekites can lie (especially if they're trying to curry favor or one up themselves with the new king). The Word of God doesn't. We only have an account of what the Amalekite SAID. 1 Chronicles tells us what actually happened. We see things like this all the time in Scripture. God says one thing, people lie about what was said. :)
Another good example would be in 1 Kings 13. We see a case of what God actually said, and a false account being said in the name of God.
RE: EverestoSama wrote
/Amalekites can lie (especially if they're trying to curry favor or one up themselves with the new king). The Word of God doesn't/
(Amen Brother!!!!)
How did Jesus go about to prove the Resurrection of the Dead to the sadducees???
they were astonished at his doctrine!!
How did Jesus go about to prove the Resurrection of the Dead to the sadducees???
By beating them at their own game.
The Sadducees were very legalistic in their understanding of the Bible, only accepting the Pentateuch (or Torah, or first five books of the Bible penned by Moses) as the authoritative Word of God, so Christ quoted from their very source so they'd have no excuse.
Instead of engaging in Rabbinical pilpul (which is how they engaged in topics of the day, and still do, look it up if you're unfamiliar with it, it's really interesting) He cut strait to the source and spoke with authority, instead of just quoting from some other rabbi. He spoke with an authority that they had never seen before, which is what happens when the Word speaks the Word (literally giving testimony of Himself).
Though of course, ultimately beyond just what was said, He proved the resurrection by in fact becoming the first fruits of it and actually doing and becoming it.
EverestoSama, I am impressed with your faith in the scripture it is beyond orthodox. and I mean this as a
complement
RE: EverestoSama wrote, /The Sadducees were very legalistic in their understanding of the Bible, only accepting the Pentateuch (or Torah, or first five books of the Bible penned by Moses) as the authoritative Word of God, so Christ quoted from their very source so they'd have no excuse./
That is very true, But What was the Scripture that He used??
is it one that you would use to prove the resurection??
That is very true, But What was the Scripture that He used??
Exodus 3:6
He said also, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." Then Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.
He quoted from the only source they would accept: Moses. Now they had no excuse, as if He had quoted from any other part of the Old Testament, they could have dismissed it on those grounds. He gave them no out.
is it one that you would use to prove the resurection??
Never been in a situation with a Sadducee before. Either way, no matter what I would have done in a similar situation, He chose that verse because it would silence them, and testify to the truth that they knew was there. It was the specific passage that left them speechless. Instead of going back and forth with the opinions of other rabbis on the subject, He went strait to the text, and let it speak for itself, to those who couldn't deny it's meaning. Good example for us.
How many years from Moses to Jesus??
Where the Original writings of Moses available in Jesus Day??
Is our Faith in the perfect Jott and Tittle of nonexistant Originals?? Orthodoxy says Yes but what does the Bible say??
Great Job, EverestoSama!!!
EverestoSama wrote Exodus 3:6
//He said also, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." Then Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.//
He based His argument not on general concepts but specific written Words. And More than that He Based his argument on the Tense of the Verb ,I am rather than I Was.
He based it on the jott and tittle
A very unorthodox approuch to Scripture both in His day and in ours
From Moses to Jesus was like 1400-1500 or so. Though I may be wrong. I can't remember at the moment.
As far as the original writings of Moses, probably not, unless you count the ones in the ark, however, if there's one thing that the Dead Sea scrolls proved to the academic world (alone) is how carefully the Jews preserved the original texts in copying them.
Now, a lot of the New Testament when quoting the Old quotes from the Septuagint which was compiled 200 years before Christ(which should also speak volumes to the "God only chooses one language, and one translation" crowd :P)
but the meaning was in tact, but it is the most perfectly preserved document from antiquity, and that can be proven (even under secular scrutiny).
Send me your email if you want, and I might be able to set you up with some valuable resources if you want to dig into it.
psalms 91 from the Bible
//11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.//
psalms 91 from a corrupt translation
//11 He shall give his angels charge concerning thee:
12 and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.//
Do you notice any differences in the translations??\\
If so, is the difference significant or not??
EverestoSama what does your Nick stand for??
The corruption of what was being said was not in the fact of what was being said itself. The corruption was in the application. Notice how Christ never said to Satan that He had corrupted the translation. You see, what Satan did was to take the verses in isolation from it's context, and co-texts, and present them solely as a pretext (much of in the same style we see people do hatchet jobs on the Word of God today).
Satan took the Word of God, and presented it as a pretext, out of context of the full counsel of God. Christ put it back into context. Notice how all of Jesus's replies were all from the book of Deuteronomy, viewing the Word through the prism of what God had specifically commanded Himself out of His own Mouth, and not allowing Satan to just take Scriptures from anywhere and try and make them stand alone.
This teaches something phenomenally HUGE which is many times overlooked, and should put a rather large responsibility on any Christian when trying to use just "this one verse" to hinge everything on. It's in the style of Satan to do this sort of exegesis. God's Word speaks as a whole.
Hi! ProudPapa
Yes, it's very true what you said, that some intellectuals/scholarly men might stumble because of some apparent scriptural anomalies.
However, what isn't so true is your saying, "They do not realize that God has deliberately willed these seeming contradictions to throw off the faith of the high minded".
ProudPapa, we have to be careful about suspecting God in such things. Even though He's God, He can't give what does not belong to Him.
You asked: "Are you sure that it was the writer of Chronicles that had more insight?"
Yes, that is most certainly true.
Clearly, the writer of Chronicles possessed a knowing what was later expressed by John, "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempts he any man".
Do you notice that both of your expressed ideas about God wrongly presume Him to sometimes behave as would an imperfect man?
God is only and completely good! He never commits evil; nor does He tempt man to do evil. We can never suspect God as somehow doing the devil's work.
It could be said that the confession that God is only good is one of the keys to the Kingdom. Jesus told His disciples, "Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom", (Luke 12:32. Without being able to confess this "key" to the Kingdom, it becomes increasingly difficult for God's people to "enter in" to greater fullness.
About who caused the death of Ananias and his wife, Sapphira:
A part of the the answer can be discovered in Rom 9:22, "To make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction".
The natural mind would assume that it is God who instigates the destruction. But this verse does not say that.
Death always remains the wage of sin in both the visible and invisible worlds, (Eph 2:1). Ananias and Sapphira had placed themselves outside the protection and influence of God which invited powers of darkness to overpower them completely. They had willingly fled from the presence of the Lord which caused them to become victims of the powers of death.
The stories of Ananias and Sapphira, Simon Magus, and Barjesus or Elymas the sorcerer prove this in horrible detail. In the endtime it will increasingly be a matter of Spirit against spirit; a direct and open confrontation between the Holy Spirit in the sons of God and the spirit of the anti-Christ in the sons of perdition. It will be the Spirit of Life against the spirits of Death.
So ProudPapa, that is basically the answer to the question about who/what killed Ananias and Sapphira.
You had this additional question: "How did Jesus go about to prove the Resurrection of the Dead to the Sadducees?"
I'm not fully understanding your question here. It appears that it's related to Matthew 22:23; but I can't be sure.
Whatever the case, the doctrine of the 'Resurrection of the Dead' is pivotal to the Gospel of Jesus. If you're asking for a better understanding of this doctrine, that's not a problem; for me at least. But it may be you who might have to relinquish some of your present thinking about it before being able to comprehend it more fully.
Anyways, jus' tell me more plainly what specifically you are needing to know about this doctrine and hopefully I can be of some help to you.
Edited to include below:
I mentioned above "wage of sin".
God does not pay the wage of sin.
Why should God pay the wages of someone who was employed by someone other than Himself?
God is only busy rewarding those who follow Him. He has nothing whatsoever to do with the Book of Death and the wage debits therein.
It is the evil one who pays the wages of sin; he has the legal right to pay his employees.
When we accept Jesus, we confess our faith in the fact that Jesus paid these wages for us in our stead.
=====================
Re: Blayne
by proudpapa on 2012/6/10 21:06:06
Hi Blayne, I always look forward to what you or Pilgrim777 have posted!
There Are Many very intellectual and scholarly Men that Loose there faith over versus like this, Because they do not understand the nature of Faith nor the nature of Scriptures,they do not relize that God has delibertly willed these seeming Contridictions to throw off the faith of the high minded and wise of this world.
=====================
=====================
Re: Blayne
by proudpapa on 2012/6/10 21:06:06
EverestoSama what does your Nick stand for??
I'm kind of tall (like 6'3 or 190cm depending on your location). I live in Japan, and in Japanese, Mt. Everest is called Everesto San. San means, mountain, but can also mean Mr. So one kid used to call me Everesto San. Another suffix added onto a name in place of San can be Sama. When I first came to Japan I would get mixed up on the two, and thought that I was being called Everesto Sama. The name stuck, so I just started using it as a handle online. I'm not sure if that made sense, as the concepts didn't really make sense to me when I first lived here, but hopefully you get kind of the gist of it. :)
We can never suspect God as somehow doing the devil's work.
Neither of us claimed that. We said the opposite however. So does the Bible.
Hi! EverestoSama
I was not claiming that anyone, least of all you or 'ProudPapa', was somehow claiming that God was "doing the devil's work".
I was merely stating that no one should ascribe to God the activities of the evil one.
Sorry, that yuh mistakenly misconstrued it.
=====================================
by EverestoSama on 2012/6/10 23:22:48
We can never suspect God as somehow doing the devil's work.
Sorry, that yuh mistakenly misconstrued it.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I just got a bit confused since your previously quoted statement was prefaced with this:
Do you notice that both of your expressed ideas about God wrongly presume Him to sometimes behave as would an imperfect man?
I assumed "both of your" referred to he and I, and not to two prior things he had said.
Hi! EverestoSama
Yeah, I've done that sortta' thing far too many times myself. I've hurriedly read something and got it completely wrong too many times that I care to count.
An' to make things worse, my writing style isn't so hot either ... difficult for readers to muddle through most times.
=====================
by EverestoSama on 2012/6/11 0:21:25
Sorry, that yuh mistakenly misconstrued it.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I just got a bit confused since your previously quoted statement was prefaced with this:
Do you notice that both of your expressed ideas about God wrongly presume Him to sometimes behave as would an imperfect man?
An' to make things worse, my writing style isn't so hot either ... difficult for readers to muddle through most times.
Join the club. :P
Hi! EverestoSama
To answer your question asking: "This is a dangerous road to go down. Can you see why reasoning in this fashion whilst claiming 100% inerrancy of Scripture can't be reconciled mutually?"
"And He said to them, Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasures what is new and what is old" (Matthew 13:52).
The gospel ABOUT Jesus is the indispensable milk, but insufficient as food for the development of God's children to spiritual maturity. This requires the preaching of the gospel 'OF' Jesus, the message which Jesus Himself preached when He was on earth.
Matthew 3:24 says: "And He went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and preaching the gospel of the Kingdom and healing every disease and every infirmity among the people". This was the gospel 'of' Jesus. Rather than preaching a gospel about Himself, our Lord revealed the mysteries of the unseen Kingdom of heaven. His own personal walk was in the Kingdom of God, and His entire life was a manifestation of this fact. Apart from preaching, He also showed what life in the Kingdom of God was all about. In word and in deed He preached the 'gospel of glory'.
His message was absolutely new. He explained the Father's nature, for no one had ever seen the Father, but Jesus revealed to us the Father who is in heaven. He was the firstborn of the new creation, that is, the first new or spiritual man who made known the thoughts of God. He showed us that the invisible hosts of angels had been created to serve and protect that part of mankind which directs its life at God. He also exposed the evil powers, because they resist God's plan with man. He publicly exposed them as enemies of God and man, as the perpetrators of all lawlessness in spirit, soul and body.
For all who understood His teachings, He opened up an entirely new world. Those who followed Him He gave the power to rule in the heavenly places. He also showed that the devil and his demons are the cause of evil, not man. He taught us His method of deliverance from the evil one, that "we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve Him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before Him all the days of our life", (Luke 1:74-75).
The Old Covenant functioned in the visible world; it was a shadow of the things to come. As such it was unable to perfect those who served God. But Jesus chose His followers to share in a heavenly call which enabled them to actually strive for spiritual maturity. That is the reason why they focus their attention on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of their faith.
For many centuries this gospel has been hidden in the churches. Most of us were raised hearing stories 'about' Jesus, but no one told us about His thoughts. We heard a lot about the forgiveness of sin and what Jesus had done for us, but we formed little insight into God's plan with man; the mystery that man is destined to sit with God on His throne in the Kingdom of Heaven, to rule with Him over all the works of His hands, in the visible as well in the invisible world.
A scribe, trained by Word and Spirit in the Kingdom of God, is compared with a family father who takes from his storeroom the produce of his fields, from this and last year's season, to distribute to the members of his household and meet all their needs. In this sense, he is like the bride in the Song of Songs, whose door was adorned with choice fruit, "new as well as old", (Song of Songs 7:13).
It's remarkable that, in the commentaries of many orthodox bible scholars, one often reads of scribes who are equipped with a wealth of old things and new. However, they always put the 'old' first, and in doing so emphasize the old truths and creeds of the ancestors which are supposed to keep taking on new life whenever they are preached and taught. But Jesus put the NEW things first which were in sharp contrast with the scribes of His days, who were content with the crop their fathers had harvested years ago.
To these leaders the Lord said: "Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town", (Matt 23:34). The scribes who enter into the Kingdom of heaven will never be accepted by the earthbound teachers. They will share in the rejection of their Master, because they follow Him in his ways of thinking. Paul said: "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ", (1Cor 11:1).
The new things are the doctrines of the Kingdom of heaven as Jesus preached them. While it remains true that by accepting the gospel 'ABOUT' Jesus, man enters into the Kingdom, it is the gospel 'OF' Jesus' which has causes life and victory to become spiritual reality for us.
The disciple of the Kingdom does not begin handing out the old things ... but the new. He preaches salvation which was "at first declared by the Lord", (Heb 2:3).
For that reason the teaching of the New Testament goes before the Old. The New Covenant is not an extension of the old; it is merely related to the Old Covenant as reality to shadow, as the eternal to the temporal.
Those who read the Old Testament without knowledge of the Kingdom of heaven have 'a veil over their mind', just as the Old Covenant Jews. The only way in which they could understand what they had read was literally or intellectually in this natural world.
Paul wrote that the events of the Old Covenant happened as examples for us: "Now these things happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction upon whom the end of the ages has come" (1Cor 10:6 and 11). We therefore should read the Old Testament in the light of the New. The histories recorded there should be perceived as visible images of invisible realities; as illustrations needing to be transposed into the spiritual world.
The apostle Peter also said that the prophets of the Old Covenant "prophesied of the grace that was to be ours", (1Peter 1:10). The apostle said: "The old has passed away, behold, the new has come". The new is: "The gospel of the glory of Christ who is the likeness of God", (2Cor 4:4). The glory means the atmosphere or the climate of the Kingdom of God which results in peace, righteousness and joy.
Those who begin on this road will soon see that in the infinite space of the eternal Kingdom of God ever new discoveries can be made. By the Holy Spirit new things are inspired in abundance. Moreover, the beauty of the gospel of the Kingdom is that the believer is enabled to make independent discoveries. In this way the veil which covers the unseen world is gradually opened before our eyes. On Mount Zion, in the heavenly places, God "will destroy the covering that is cast over all peoples, the veil that is spread over all nations" (Is 25:7).
For the sons of God the gospel of the Kingdom opens up a new perspective in life. About them John said: "We know that when He appears we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is", (John 3:2).
Thank you for your reply, however it still does not address the question raised.
You've essentially stated the the first account in 2 Samuel wasn't given enough light for a revelation to be properly dictated, and that it took a further revelation in a different account to show who was really behind the census of David, thus showing that the author of 2 Samuel spoke incorrectly concerning the events and what transpired behind the scenes, where I would say both God and the Devil were used in that instance. One author says God. One says Satan. Who's got the clear picture? I would say both, as does the Bible.
To continue along the line of "lack of insight" we would then have to then put every other account in 1 and 2 Samuel under the same rigorous scrutiny, that perhaps the accounts of what God said or did, might not have been accurate, but simply the results of faulty interpretations of the facts by the author or lack of true insight. Every time God states something in 1 and 2 Samuel, the question would have to arise, "Did God really say that?"
That question rings strangely familiar, does it not?
Unless I've again misread what you're trying to communicate.
Hi! EverestoSama
I was not implying that the writer of 2Samuel "wasn't given enough light for a revelation to be properly dicated" (as your wrote); I was stating that the writer of 2Samuel possessed less knowledge about the activities occurring in the "unseen" invisible world than the writer of Chronicles. Because of that, it was the writer of Chronicles who was able to correctly identify the one who instigated/tempted David to count the number of the people of Israel ... Satan.
It's not as if God forcibly grasped the hands of the scripture writers to "dictate" their narratives. This would be more in keeping with repulsive occult practices; Mediums and Soothsayers behave in such a manner when evil spirits powers control the spirit of a person.
God does not work in this manner with His people. God only cooperates with the human spirit; He does not over-rule nor dominate it. This is why Timothy says "all scripture is breathed out by God and profitable". Otherwise, we'd have to express the scriptures as the 'words of God' and not the "Word of God".
The impression I'm also receiving from your comments is that you mistakenly believe that God participates with evil; that He does and acts and cooperates with evil.
Your difficulty seems to be clearly one of differentiating between the image of God in the Old Covenant and that of the New Covenant. Was the God of the Old Covenant a different God? Are we to perceive Him as a God of multiple faces; as a God of opposing personalities? Yet, it was Jesus, Himself, Who said of His Heavenly Father that He was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. No, He is not a different God.
It was not in vain that the Apostle Paul warned us to the inherent dangers of certain ideas and conceptions concerning God. In his time, not unlike our present days, there were many who exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images which represented mortal man: "For that which is known about God is evident to them and made plain in their inner consciousness because God has shown it to them. For ever since the creation of the world His invisible nature and attributes, that is His eteal power and divinity, has been made intelligible and clearly disceible in and through the things that have been made --- His handiworks. So men are without excuse --- altogether without defense or justification; because when they knew and recognized Him as God, they did not honor and glorify Him as God, or give Him thanks. But instead they became futile and godless in their thinking with vain imaginings, foolish reasoning and stupid speculations --- and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise they became fools --- professing to be smart they made simpletons of themselves. And by them the glory and majesty and excellence of the immortal God were exchanged for and represented by images resembling mortal man and birds and beasts and reptiles”, (Rom 1:19-23[AV]).
This exchange, which Paul writes of here, is not only confined to tangible items such as idols, relics, sacred pictures and the like. It also addresses the things of the intangible: our thought-world. There is little difference between possessing a false image of God in our minds and that of sculpturing that same thought in stone. One such intangible thought or image sculptured in the thought-world of many Christians today is that God is the author of both good and evil.
A most grievous tragedy of our day is that the evil one is still succeeding in coercing many Christians to believe that God does evil and that He perpetrates calamity and suffering upon the earth. But James said, "Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren. Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of Lights with Whom there is no variation or shadow due to change", (James 1:16-17).
God cannot give things that are wrong; things that do not belong to Him. Even with God ... no one can take what He does not have! What reasonable intelligent person would ever say that the Creator gives sin, bondage and sickness? Make no mistake! Wars, catastrophes, suffering and anxieties have never originated from God. Evil does not come from God --- no more than darkness comes from the sun! Only health and freedom come from God while sickness and bondage come from the eviI one. God never tortures His creation, not even under the guise of 'just punishment'.
The irrefutable truth is that God thinks and does only that which is good while evil is wholly conceived and perpetrated by the Evil One and his host. God is only good and radiates only light and life --- absolutely no darkness is found in Him.
Jesus, at the beginning of His preaching, clearly taught His disciples to pray: "Our Father Who art in Heaven, Hallowed be Thy Name". Our testimony of the Living God must hallow His Name--- that is, to separate it from every fashion of lawlessness, from all evil, and from all suffering and catastrophe. We should never depict the good Creator of Heaven and Earth as the author of these dark matters.
Our God is only good. He has only constructive ideas and plans. His nature, deeds, and His qualities are perfectly good.
When we visualize God, we must determine to reckon His image to be the exactitude of what we see in the nature of the Lord Jesus Christ. For Jesus is, "the sole expression of the glory of God and He is the perfect imprint and very image of God's nature", (Heb 1:3). Therefore, when we worship Him, we first want to identify Him in order not to serve foreign gods. The more so, we wish to worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.
Are the actions of God's First Begotten Son the "perfect imprint" and "very image of God's nature"? Indeed, Jesus repeatedly stated that He performed the will of God on earth and declared that He did only that which He had first known of His Father. It is the Lord Jesus Christ Who makes the Father known to us and, with this fact, it is absolutely crucial to reckon that no reasonable Believer is able to endear ideas or conceptions of God which are in contrast to His revelation of the Father.
When Phillip pleaded, "Show us the Father, cause us to see the Father, that is all we ask; then we shall be satisfied" (John 14), Jesus replied, "Have I been with you so long a time and do you not recognize and know Me yet, Phillip? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and that the Father is in me? What I am telling you I do not say on My own authority and of my own accord, but the Father Who lives continuously in Me does the works", (8-1O).
Should evil be from the Hand of God, the good works of the Son would have been in direct opposition to the Father. All the thoughts and actions of the Lord Jesus brought only dignity, life, elevation and, ultimately, salvation to the human spirit. Wherever He could, the Lord would deliver, help, heal and raise from the dead. As a result, the populace readily attested to the validity that God had surely visited His people. Jesus, having made the Father known to us, consistently taught that God is only light and life. Indeed, this testimony was to be reaffirmed in the later writings of the disciples: "God is light and there is no darkness in Him at all, no, not in anyway"; and again, "[He is) the Father of all that gives light, in the shining of Whom there can be no variation, rising or setting, or shadow cast by His turning as in an eclipse", (1John 1:5; James 1:17).
Given the fact that this same Jesus is the "very image" of the unseen and "perfect imprint" of the Godhead, perhaps, we now have the first 'key' or axiom to the solution of the failure. All who have a sincere and earnest desire to know the 'far and unknown' God must first look to Jesus.
Only Jesus, the Faithful Witness, has shown us Who and what the Eternal God is and what He thinks and what He does. Any and all contrarieties to this Witness easily disappear in the light of the New Covenant and quickly retreat in and through the words and deeds of our Lord Jesus Christ.
When reading the Old Testament, this question must always be our discerning point:
"Would Jesus have acted in this way?".
If the answer is no, than neither has/would His heavenly Father.
==========================
by EverestoSama on 2012/6/11 1:13:35
Thank you for your reply, however it still does not address the question raised.
You've essentially stated the the first account in 2 Samuel wasn't given enough light for a revelation to be properly dictated, and that it took a further revelation in a different account to show who was really behind the census of David, thus showing that the author of 2 Samuel spoke incorrectly concerning the events and what transpired behind the scenes, where I would say both God and the Devil were used in that instance. One author says God. One says Satan. Who's got the clear picture? I would say both.
==========================
Hi Blayne, One thing I greatly apperciate from you is that what you write always makes me think.
What do you make of 2 Cor ch 12
7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.
8 For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me.
9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.
It appears,and maybe I am wrong and admittedly ,I have not medittated greatly on this subject, so I am open to correction.
It appears from these verses that God allowed Satan to put the thorn in Pauls Flesh in order To keep Paul from being exalted above measure??
Whats your thoughts??
When reading the Old Testament, this question must always be our discerning point:
"Would Jesus have acted in this way?".
If the answer is no, than neither has/would His heavenly Father.
Here's the thing, most of the time you see God acting in the Old Testament, it was in fact a Christophany. IT WAS JESUS ACTING THAT WAY. The One speaking to Moses from the bush, the same One Who's anger burned against Israel, Who judged them, and let them die out in the wilderness. The One Who said that He would destroy all of Israel save Moses?
Yeah, that was Jesus.
It's not very hard to reconcile the idea of the two together, if one reads the Bible. But it is hard for the modern day Christian who only reads select parts of the New Testament and has a funny distorted view of the character of God, and tries to shade the entirety of God's character by the few parts of the Gospel accounts of Jesus that they don't feel uncomfortable with. I mean, then we get funny ideas of God. Like He never judges, He never brings calamity, He never brings destruction. The problem is, is that He has, He does, and He will. Just read through the prophets. To say anything to the contrary is simply to be unaware or willfully ignorant of what's already been written in the Word.
We're never given the option of viewing God through the prism of how we think He should act. God has only ever presented Himself as He is. We submit to that, or we don't.
Make no mistake! Wars, catastrophes, suffering and anxieties have never originated from God.
Yet He has no problem both planning them and bringing them about.
Amos 3:6
"If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the people tremble? If a calamity occurs in a city has not the LORD done it?"
Go ahead and check every version you can find, in any language. They'll all say the same thing (some even translate the Hebrew word רע (ra`) as "evil"). To say otherwise simply and directly argues with what the Bible PLAINLY says. I mean, one can choose not to believe it, because it doesn't fit in with their "Buddy Christ" idea, but don't call it a Biblical view of God and His character.
The impression I'm also receiving from your comments is that you mistakenly believe that God participates with evil; that He does and acts and cooperates with evil.Your difficulty seems to be clearly one of differentiating between the image of God in the Old Covenant and that of the New Covenant. Was the God of the Old Covenant a different God? Are we to perceive Him as a God of multiple faces; as a God of opposing personalities? Yet, it was Jesus, Himself, Who said of His Heavenly Father that He was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. No, He is not a different God.
As I've said before, I have no problem reconciling the two pictures of God. His characteristics were just as apparent in the Old as they are in the New. The problem arises, in the way I've stated before.
One one picks the parts about Jesus that they like, and then takes that to be the entire image of God, throughout history. The ignore the parts that Jesus said about wrath and judgement, especially in Revelation, and come up with an unbalanced view of His character. They then take this idea (not wanting to be grouped in with the crowd that thinks that the New and Old Testament God were in fact two different Gods) and try to paint over all accounts God gave of Himself and His character in the Old Testament with the Jesus that they feel comfortable with, and that lines up best with their theology.
I was not implying that the writer of 2Samuel "wasn't given enough light for a revelation to be properly dicated" (as your wrote); I was stating that the writer of 2Samuel possessed less knowledge about the activities occurring in the "unseen" invisible world than the writer of Chronicles. Because of that, it was the writer of Chronicles who was able to correctly identify the one who instigated/tempted David to count the number of the people of Israel ... Satan.
This is the problem with that; You've repeatedly stated that you're not implying something that you are (unless we're saying the same thing). The writer of Samuel said that it was God who rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census. The author of Chronicles states that it was Satan. You've stated the the author of Chronicles is more in tune with the "unseen" thus being able to "correctly" (as you said) identify the instigator as Satan. However the author of Samuel (who being also aware of the unseen) stated that it was in fact the anger of the Lord burning against Israel that caused the Lord to move against them. Satan was merely a pawn in this game. The Lord allowed Satan to move against David in this fashion. Was it Satan tempting Him?
Yes.
Was God allowing this to happen according to His purpose?
Yes.
Were both authors equally aware of a piece of the puzzle that God was trying to convey to them?
Yes.
Was one off a little bit, and not fully aware of what was REALLY going on in the invisible?
Not for a second. They're both accurate in what they state. We have to bring the two together to get the full account. And in doing so, reveals something very unique about how God operates, and how He allows the devil to operate.
It's not as if God forcibly grasped the hands of the scripture writers to "dictate" their narratives. This would be more in keeping with repulsive occult practices; Mediums and Soothsayers behave in such a manner when evil spirits powers control the spirit of a person.
By dictate, I simply meant the act of writing something that one hears, similar to the way a secretary would dictate a letter. Someone says something to them, and they write it down. I wasn't implying the meaning of dictate to mean literal dictatorship, where one takes control of the other, and dictates their movements by force.
Now I'm of the view that many times those penning Scripture weren't always aware that at the exact moment they were under the full inspiration of the Holy Spirit, however there are accounts (especially in Paul's letters, though it's easier to pick up in the Greek), where Paul will literally preface something in the form of a dictation, even indicating in text that He's delivering it word for word from God, as He received it, and had to be delivered EXACTLY so.
That kind of dictation. Sorry if that didn't come across clearly. :)
(Also, sorry about the sections in a bunch of caps. For most of those situations I would have preferred using italics, but the site doesn't support it. Just didn't want to seem like I was yelling a bunch of stuff.)
Hi! EverestoSama
Thank you for your reply.
It's increasingly obvious that my image of God is very much different than your own.
Our Lord declared that the Evil One is the liar and that he is the father and originator of falsehood in man. Satan lies from his own being, (John 8:44). God, however, only knows evil from the actions of the spiritual rebels in the heavenly places and from the works of men who are inspired, used and manipulated by the lawless spirits.
Moreover, God can never be lawless, for all laws of creation are the products of His mind, and He does not change. In this sense, too, He cannot deny Himself. So God saw the development of evil and thus obtained knowledge of it.
It was Satan's words, "You shall be as God knowing good and evil", which gave rise to the idea that God knows evil in His own being in the same way that He knows good. Falsehood and sin would then seem have originated in Him just as truth and righteousness. But of Jesus Christ, Who bears the very image and stamp of the Father ---, the Bible testifies that no guile was found on His lips and that He did not know or do sin, (1Pet 2:22; 2Cor 5:21).
But the lie of the Serpent is even subtler than what is noted at first glance. Man was said to be like God and, for that reason, the reverse would also be true: that God would be as man became after the fall. Man not only knows good and evil but also does good and evil. Therefore, the picture of God degenerated to the confession that He is also like this.
This lie has greatly affected the conception of many people with regards to God. In many instances, the thought-life of Believers would have the God of light and life relegated to the same profanities as found in Greek mythology ---that God acts and behaves in the likeness of natural man.
Although God knows evil from the acts of the evil one, He never brings it about. The largest failure of many Christians is that they fail to take into account the influence of the evil one. They say that man produces evil of himself and, for that reason, bears the entire responsibility and guilt. Suffering then comes from God as punishment and as a reward for sin.
Clearly, God is not divided. He is of singular Being. It is urgent that we neutralize and flee the shameful lie; that same intolerable lie which had its beginnings through the Serpent in the Garden: "You shall be as God knowing both good and evil". This same Serpent begs us the suspicion in these days too that God is somehow pendular to multiple personalities; that He swings between good and evil like a bucket rising in a well. Falling prey to this grievous lie, many Christians have found themselves with sculptured images of God that weigh down their spirits and unwittingly cripple their motivation to faith.
===================
by EverestoSama on 2012/6/11 20:38:03
When reading the Old Testament, this question must always be our discerning point:
"Would Jesus have acted in this way?".
If the answer is no, than neither has/would His heavenly Father.
Here's the thing, most of the time you see God acting in the Old Testament, it was in fact a Christophany. IT WAS JESUS ACTING THAT WAY.
=====================
God knows evil by virtue of the fact that He knows what IS OF HIM and what IS NOT OF HIM. Thus, everything that is not of God is EVIL.
God does not know EVIL, EXPERIENTIALLY. To know EVIL experientially, one must be a partaker of Satan's nature.
"Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, AND HATH NOTHING IN ME." (John 14:30)
Pilgrim
Hi! ProudPapa
Ummm, I want to hurry an' say is that I'm jus' an ordinary Christian sortta' thing. I'm neither a theologian nor a preacher/teacher. I have no Bible College training nor anything like that. (Actually, I was expelled from a Bible College after attending only 5 weeks on a Scholarship nearly forty years ago. I was jus' far too immature a Christian at the time).
If what I write causes you to think, I am happy for that. Sometimes it takes another to give us a different view of the facets of the diamond for us to better comprehend the brilliance of the whole.
I've been very fortunate and greatly blessed by having access to some exceedingly helpful literature and books over the years. These gave me clues to pursue and caused me to think more in depth than what I was accustomed when reading the Scriptures.
For instance, the nick in these Forums 'Pilgrim777' introduced me to the teachings of James Fowler earlier this week which I found to be exceedingly good reads. They laid out additional road maps for me to investigate on my journey.
As you know, I jus' sortta' stumbled into this SermonIndex Site while doing some OnLine research. I had no intention to participate in the manner which I now have. It just happened that I read some comments and thought I could be helpful by adding some of my own.
Anyways, ProudPapa, I'll be getting back to you about Paul's 'thorn in the flesh' later in the week. I have some Christian friends from Europe visiting for the next couple of days and I got my hands full with that event.
=================
Re: Blayne
by proudpapa on 2012/6/11 19:28:00
Hi Blayne, One thing I greatly apperciate from you is that what you write always makes me think.
=================
Everest-san, that post @ 2012/6/11 20:38 had to be one of the best that I've read in many moons. Thank you, Sir.
"Here's the thing, most of the time you see God acting in the Old Testament, it was in fact a Christophany. IT WAS JESUS ACTING THAT WAY. The One speaking to Moses from the bush, the same One Who's anger burned against Israel, Who judged them, and let them die out in the wilderness. The One Who said that He would destroy all of Israel save Moses?
Yeah, that was Jesus.
It's not very hard to reconcile the idea of the two together, if one reads the Bible. But it is hard for the modern day Christian who only reads select parts of the New Testament and has a funny distorted view of the character of God, and tries to shade the entirety of God's character by the few parts of the Gospel accounts of Jesus that they don't feel uncomfortable with.
" I mean, then we get funny ideas of God. Like He never judges, He never brings calamity, he never brings destruction. The problem is, is that He has, He does, and He will." EverestoSama
Very sound and inspiring post EverestoSama [Grant]. The problem is, that in accepting this truth that the Godhead as One is to be feared and loved and obeyed, and He DOES bring wrath upon men..[ over and over and over in scripture] then I just cannot go on in my self absorbed world of my success, my ministry, my way.
..."And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him !"...Jesus [ Jahweh ]....Jesus, who holds the keys to death and Hell is saying "Fear me!"
I think that the doctrines of extreme grace come to view in those who would avert this truth that He must be obeyed and feared. Also the doctrines that Jesus taught about following Himself.
" But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.
34 And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them;
"Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
35 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it."
Whenever you see Cross in the New Testament substitute your name and the word death. Time to die; to your hopes, loves, successes and future, even to the extent of losing all, inwardly for sure and possibly outwardly. [ ask the martyrs ]
It no longer about the blessing God then; it is about the Conforming God and the Terrible, Fearful One that desires to conform us to His living image. This must involve failure and burning and self-denial, and for some, the cost of following Jesus is just another rainy day for my parade.
Ambition to BE myself is just another form of satanic AMBITION, the twin sister to pride. Jesus said we must die to that, and it was He who after creating the worlds stretched out His hand to create a human son and his wife. Jesus IS Jehovah and His ways or personality does not change nor evolve. He calls Himself "I AM" for this reason.
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven."
"And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you."
.....Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58 Jesus said unto them, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM!".
59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by."
Yet today there are those who are picking up stones rather than bow and obey. They save their lives, for now.
Thank you, Jesus-is-GOD and BrotherTom for your encouraging words. I'd been waiting for you two to show up. Welcome to the party!
2Th_2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work..." We might even go so far as to say "the mystery of evil."
Why is it a mystery? For one, how did Evil start if there was no evil in the world to "model" after? We know how Adam and Eve sinned, they were tempted by ANOTHER. Lucifer was not tempted by ANOTHER, so how did God ensure (or will) that Lucifer should turn away from Him, thus serving as a useful tool in all of His predetermined counsel to bring many sons to glory? How did Lucifer know what EVIL was? What choice was presented to him? We see a choice presented to Adam/Eve, but not Lucifer.
The thing that no one will ever understand this side of heaven is an understanding of the origination of evil.
When God created Satan (Lucifer) He created a choosing creature who was/became Satan
Lucifer was also created a derivative being. He was not independent of God. God does not create anything that is INDEPENDENT of Him. Lucifer was not autonomous or self-existent or self-generative, either. All of which are attributes of God.
As Satan, he only takes that which is of God and falsifies it. He replaces that which is of God with a lie, a counterfeit. He distorts and perverts the truth. But he can do nothing, independently of God.
The idea of Lucifer falling from heaven can be found in Isa. 14:12; Ezek. 28:16; Jude 6.
Some key questions:
1) Was Lucifer's choice to rebel an unsolicited choice?
2) Where did the self-oriented pride and arrogance originate? Where did he first see it? We know where Adam and Eve first saw it, but where did Lucifer first see or imagine the concept of evil?
Adam and Eve derived their pride and arrogance from partaking of Satan. When they received his words (lie) over God's THEY RECEIVED HIM. They gave themselves to him by choosing his commands over God's. They ate of him rather than the Bread of Life.
But again, I bring you back to Lucifer. Who did he derive his nature from? How did he know what Evil was and even if he did not know (how could he), who tempted him?
Satan is a spirit being and a personal being. He is not an impersonal force.
The Biblical evidence that he is a personal being is overwhelming. Some "Christians today", like to say that he is not real, but rather a metaphor for the flesh.
Christian theology has never definitively clarified and articulated a Christian doctrine of theodicy (an understanding of the origin, source, judgment of evil). The doctrines of satanology have been weak, ambiguous and inconsistent. One of the first doctrines to be questioned and jettisoned by those who regard the Biblical record as suspect is the teaching about Satan. Satan is often regarded as a pre-scientific myth; figment of imagination of ignorant peoples or a metaphorical or literary personification of evil. He has done a good job not only hiding himself from the world, but hiding himself from the church.
Eph_6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Most unbelievers and sadly there are many believers that portray our life down here as a constant battle between God and Man. This is how Satan has maligned and perverted the Scriptures and the character of God while hiding himself.
Satan is actively working in man to move them to disregard and diminish the Biblical record of the spiritual and personal agency of him.
Pilgrim
Psalms 91 v 11 and 12
11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Psalms 91 v 11 and 12 Satans version,
11 He shall give his angels charge concerning thee:
12 and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
A very small seemingly insignificant omission
What you should know about Inerrancy by Charles C. Ryrie moody press 1981
p77
"The second temptation also illustrates the importance of plenary inspiration. Satan tried to intice the Lord to throw Himself off the pinnacle of the Temple by assuring Him that he could claim the promise of psalms 91:11-12 that Gods angels would guard Him. But in quoting those verses Satan omitted part of verse 11: "to guard you in all your ways." The omission distorts the meaning of the promise, which is that God will keep the righteous on their journeys,not that He will preserve them when they take needless risks. A needless risk was exactly what Satan had proposed to Christ. The Lord replied that to bank on part of a verse would be to tempt God. Instead He would rely on every word that came from God,including every word of Psalms 91:11-12."
Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.
Donate