 |
| 
Violin for God
Luke, I am your father. --Nooooooooo!!!!!
Date Joined Dec 2004
Total Posts : 690
| Posted 10/8/2005 7:28 PM (GMT -6) |   |
jefscott said...prov·i·dence ( P ) Pronunciation Key (prv-dns, -dns) n. Care or preparation in advance; foresight. Prudent management; economy. The care, guardianship, and control exercised by a deity; divine direction: “Some sought the key to history in the working of divine providence” (William Ebenstein). The above agrees with the management idea. But ALL those ideas involve intervening or creating in a way that affects the course of the created order. Non-intervention can be purposeful, as script ure claims it is, but it does not as easily fit into the above definitions.
Let's see.. "pwaaah·vi...", nope that's not right. "pawv·hid...", darn, I'll try it again. "prive·id·dance" (I'm just making a joke.. I just always think it's funny how the definitions posted on this board are always accompanied by a pronunciation guide. )
Anyway, those definitions do have to do with both intervention and non-intervention. Governing has to do with interacting sometimes and other times letting things be, depending on the system established. So the non-intervention would fit well under "prudent management". Those subscribing to some paradigm that has to do with exhaustive control would agree with the third definition, even when it seems there is a period of non-intervention. (hope the last sentence makes sense)
If you're going to be skeptical, be fair and be skeptical of skepticism. | | Back to Top | | |
 |
spenlake
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 1050
| Posted 10/8/2005 7:46 PM (GMT -6) | |
jefscott said...One more thought with respect to punishment being an act of benevolence. It would seem hard to argue that ETERNAL punishment for a substantial percentage of the human race is the "highest good of ALL."
It is only the highest good of some, otherwise God is a monster. I see script ures make a qualification regarding those for whom all things work together for good for. "We know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." I think that fo a sinner eternally experiencing the wrath of God upon him or "abiding in the wrath of God" is good for others but is not "good" for him. This is a just action but not a benevolent action. The word benevolent comes from "good will." Casting someone into eternal damnation in a lake of fire is to execute wrath, not good will, upon them.
Spen Lake | | Back to Top | | |
|
Violin for God
Luke, I am your father. --Nooooooooo!!!!!
Date Joined Dec 2004
Total Posts : 690
| Posted 10/8/2005 7:54 PM (GMT -6) | |
spenlake said...
Violin to Spen: You wrote: "Injustice and evil exist ONLY because of the mercy of a loving God." The question I have is: is it only for the display of mercy or is there a greater reason for that?
I think that the reason for everything is the glory of God and that He may be glorified in all. When the direct and pure rule of God returns He will be glorified in extending eternal life to all who have repented/believed and in throwing all into the lake of fire who have rebelled against Him both angels and men. The time of mercy and providence only is "good" for those who inherit eternal life and are not ultimately condemned to the lake of fire. For those who continue on in their rebellion, during this time of mercy they are actually increasing their judgment and it becomes worse and worse for them over time. All things work together for good ONLY for those who inherit eternal life. Ok, I think I understand a bit more. So it's not "injustice and evil" per se exist because of God's mercy, but that it's because of God's forbearance that those who might respond to the call aren't destroyed due to their evil in order that they still COULD respond to the call? And it's in His mercy that He exercises forbearance?
I may be reading this wrong, but I still get a sense that "mercy", "providence", and "forbearance" still mean the same thing in what you're writing, particularly in this sentence: "The time of mercy and providence only is "good" for those who inherit eternal life and are not ultimately condemned to the lake of fire."
Here are the definitions I have for the terms (I may be wrong though, so this is helping me refine my understanding as well):
-mercy: forgiveness of wrongdoing; removing guilt from the guilty party; canceling of a debt (I don't apply this to soteriology as I see it, I think what happened regarding the death & resurrection was a lot more than just the cancelling of a debt)
-forbearance: withholding punishment for a crime, but not the same as forgiving a crime. -providence: the governing of creation; ruling/governing of a nation, city, etc.
If you're going to be skeptical, be fair and be skeptical of skepticism. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 10/8/2005 8:41 PM (GMT -6) | | John: God's wrath is not inconsistent with His benevolence any more than a police officer, judge, jury, and executioner are necessarily unbenevolent in meting out proper justice.
Jeff: Yes, but the human authorities are duty-bound to mete out justice. They are actually obligated by God to do so. And their actions have FUTURE benefits. But the tormenting of someone in the final judgement, as opposed to their imprisonment, has no apparent future benefit for anyone. So the analogy is not quite complete.
I can see how God might actually CHOOSE to punish as opposed to just terminating consciousness. In that case, maybe He really DOES choose judgement, volitionally, to ensure a rational moral order. For certainly, without justice, there can be no RATIONAL moral order. Then, judgement is benevolent in that sense, but not in the normal way we think of other benevolent actions. That would explain, too, why 1 Cor. 13 says love suffers long (forebears). Because the cessation of forebearance would not be love in the NORMAL sense of benevolence. It's confusing!!
Post Edited (jefscott) : 10/8/2005 8:53:53 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
JEE
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
| Posted 10/8/2005 9:39 PM (GMT -6) | | jefscott said...
John: God's wrath is not inconsistent with His benevolence any more than a police officer, judge, jury, and executioner are necessarily unbenevolent in meting out proper justice.
Jeff: Yes, but the human authorities are duty-bound to mete out justice. They are actually obligated by God to do so. And their actions have FUTURE benefits. But the tormenting of someone in the final judgement, as opposed to their imprisonment, has no apparent future benefit for anyone. So the analogy is not quite complete.
Benevolence of spirit is the very essence of moral obligation (duty) for all moral agents, so the analogy seems to me to hold just fine. Jesus said the Law and Prophets was summed up in the Two Greatest Commandments, which are the summation of benevolence in every way.
And, like I said, the highest good (most benevolent thing) God can do for the unrepentant is to consign them to the prison they have chosen for themselves by rejecting Him and His ways. That's the best thing that can be done for them. How is that not benevolent by your definition of the term? I guess I don't understand what your definition would be.
Blessings,
John
May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.
JohnE
http://www.revivaltheology.netPost Edited (JEE) : 10/8/2005 9:50:04 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
JEE
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
| Posted 10/8/2005 9:48 PM (GMT -6) | | spenlake said...
When God tells someone specifically, "Depart from me, you workers of lawlessness, I never knew you," does He do this out of benevolence?
Yes. God's benevolence is not some kind of mushy, touchy-feely emotionalism. It is the universal LAW by which He governs the moral universe. To will the highest good of ALL is to will benevolence, and the highest good of all requires that those who persist in REBELLING against the highest good of all (moral law) be punished unless they repent.
If we say God ever acts out of any other motive than universal benevolence, then we are saying God does not follow the moral law He has declared as obligatory for all other moral beings. What a hypocrite he would be if that were true. Jesus' command to "be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect," and the Bible's command to "be ye therefore holy, as God, your Father, is holy," amounts to nothing more than a "do as I say, not as I do" thing, which Jesus himself roundly condemned the Pharisees for.
John
May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.
JohnE
http://www.revivaltheology.netPost Edited (JEE) : 10/8/2005 9:55:58 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 10/8/2005 9:54 PM (GMT -6) | | John: And, like I said, the highest good (most benevolent thing) God can do for the unrepentant is to consign them to the prison they have chosen for themselves by rejecting Him and His ways. That's the best thing that can be done for them. How is that not benevolent by your definition of the term? I guess I don't understand what your definition would be.
Jeff: I was distinguishing between the imprisonment of evil-doers and the torment of them. I was agreeing with you about the imprisonment part but finding the torment part to be more difficult to define as benevolent. When I think of benevolence, I think of benefit. What benefit does the tormenting of people do them, or anyone else, if they are to be imprisoned, like disobedient angels, anyway?
I say the torment, not the imprisonment, constitutes the true punishment, which is necessary to establish ethics as RATIONAL. For if there were no evil consequences for humans DOING evil, it would not be WRONG for them to do evil. For wrong and evil are not identical. An act can be evil in one sense and still not be wrong. God brings about evil, but He does no wrong in doing so. The government, too, can do evil (i.e., retaliatory evil, like taking out eyes and teeth) but they do no wrong in doing so.
Post Edited (jefscott) : 10/9/2005 7:57:07 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Violin for God
Luke, I am your father. --Nooooooooo!!!!!
Date Joined Dec 2004
Total Posts : 690
| Posted 10/9/2005 1:14 AM (GMT -6) | |
spenlake said...
What I mean by benevolence is from the perspective of the one being judged, not the onlookers. From this perspective I doubt that if you interviewed the comdemned just before they were thrown into the lake of fire they would cry out that God was benevolent. ALL will confess that Jesus is Lord. I don't see the same thing said about them confessing His benevolence.
This is a good point. Here's how I see it (just came to me  may be somewhat right.....or not):
One who denies God's grace also automatically denies His benevolence (in its complete form, at least). I don't think one can refuse/deny God's grace while affirming His benevolence. And the converse seems also true (based on the conversations I've had with people). It also seems that those who deny God's benevolence also think of themselves as "I could have done it better than God." I don't know of anyone (in the conversations I've had at least) who say, "Your God's right, but I'm still going to deny His grace." Pretty much, the denial of God's grace comes from thinking that their way is better than God's way. Kinda falls into the same way of thinking as Satan's when he rebeled against God.
If you're going to be skeptical, be fair and be skeptical of skepticism. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Violin for God
Luke, I am your father. --Nooooooooo!!!!!
Date Joined Dec 2004
Total Posts : 690
| Posted 10/9/2005 1:18 AM (GMT -6) | |
JEE said...
I do agree insofar as those who end up in Hell will be there because they have not rightly judged God and themselves. Sinners condemn God and justify themselves, which is clearly the opposite of what genuine repentance and faith is. Yup, this is just what I was thinkin'  So maybe this makes my idea even more right? 
If you're going to be skeptical, be fair and be skeptical of skepticism. | | Back to Top | | |
|
spenlake
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 1050
| Posted 10/9/2005 6:54 AM (GMT -6) | | Vi: One who denies God's grace also automatically denies His benevolence.
I agree. They rebel against their creator and experience wrath although they ultimately are forced to bend their kness and acknowledge Him as Lord and sovereign. They do not experience His benevolence but only torment. Imposing torment where it is justly deserved is not evil, just not fun for those who are the recipients of the torment. God executing judgment is His justice being expressed after His love and mercy was refused.
We see that at the end of providence God's will is done with ALL. Some will do His will out of desire to please Him. Others will have His will forced upon them. They will be forced to bow their knee and acknowledge Him as Lord and they will be forced to spend eternity in the lake of fire. Some how freewill definitly comes to an end for some.
Spen Lake
Post Edited (spenlake) : 10/9/2005 2:21:08 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Truth Aficionado
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2003
Total Posts : 1544
| Posted 10/10/2005 2:30 PM (GMT -6) | |
JEE said...
What I am saying is that for the finally unrepentant, Hell is the highest good (benevolence) that can be done for them. They would rather reign in hell than serve in heaven. They bring it upon themselves, just as a criminal brings upon himself the penalty that is due his crimes. God's wrath is not inconsistent with His benevolence any more than a police officer, judge, jury, and executioner are necessarily unbenevolent in meting out proper justice.
Hi JohnE,
I agree for the most part with you. I have a question for you, what’s your take on how Doc developed Bath’s concept (“the nothing”) of das Nichtige? Basically what he said about hell was: those who have rejected God, and therefore reality, cease to exist to everyone accept themselves.
Shalom,
Mark
Contradictions if well understood and managed can spark off the fires of invention. Orthodoxy whether of the right or of the left is the graveyard of creativity. Post Edited (sparknheart) : 10/10/2005 2:34:03 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Truth Aficionado
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2003
Total Posts : 1544
| Posted 10/12/2005 12:11 PM (GMT -6) | |
JEE said...
While I certainly can that Hell will be psychologically isolative, I just don't see that as presenting the whole picture from a biblical standpoint. I feel too constrained by scripture itself to buy into anything other than the traditional view of Hell as eternal conscious torment for the unrepentant.
I agree, but it’s ironic how pleasurable sin can seem for a season only to be consciously tormented later when realty sets in.
Shalom,
Mark
Contradictions if well understood and managed can spark off the fires of invention. Orthodoxy whether of the right or of the left is the graveyard of creativity. | | Back to Top | | |
| 70 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:11 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|