 |
| 
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 3/4/2004 12:29 PM (GMT -6) |   | Meph,
Where in Scripture do we ever find it taught that we will answer in the Judgment for anyone's sins but our own?
Also I think it is important to point out that in the free-will paradigm that Icon, Laika, and myself hold to, one is in fact guilty for NOT doing what they know they should (To him that KNOWETH to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin), just as much as one is morally culpable for doing what they know they shouldn't.
In the scenario you depict it is not clear what one's moral obligation would be. If the company is obeying the law (even if barely), and one still thinks the company should do more, it is the specific LAW that is at fault, not the company. Work to change the particular law in question if you think it's unjust, or plead the case to the company and use your influence to improve things for the handicapped if possible, by pointing out WHY they should do more than they are doing, why they are morally guilty of not doing all they should in this case to provide an equitable workplace for the handicapped.
The ideas that one either should do more than one can (as in Augustianism/Calvinism; e.g., antinomy) or that one can do more than one should (works of supererogation/merit) are simply unscriptural and of course are impractical.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
Electra
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 611
| Posted 3/4/2004 12:55 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Not to psychoanalyze Meph or anything but just hypothetically…I could think of a couple of scenarios that might result in and individual forming this sort of belief. An individual might have done something evil that he/she believes was God’s will, or an individual might have had an experience in which they believe they were done evil by God’s hand. Hmmmm just a thought.
Interesting theory, Springs!  I wonder how openness to the possibility that God’s hand could be involved in scenarios like these might shape a person’s view of God.
Like when Abraham followed God even when it meant leaving his family behind. Or when instead of sitting on God’s lap and getting a big hug, Jacob's most vivid encounter with God was getting tackled, wrestling all night long, and receiving a wound that lasted the rest of his life. Or when James and John wanted to take care of their elderly father before following Jesus, but Jesus wouldn't let them. Or when Jesus himself hung on the cross and asked why the Father had forsaken him. Experiences like these surely shaped these individuals’ view of God. Even though I don’t share their experiences, I value their perspectives.
Bonhoeffer is a modern-day example of someone whose view of God might be shaped by such experiences. He describes God’s goodness in light of a psalmist’s experience of suffering at God’s hand. Here is an excerpt from a sermon he preached on Psalm 63:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At some point in our psalmist’s life something quite decisive happened: God came into his life. From that moment his life was changed. I don’t mean suddenly he became good and pious—it may well be that he was that before God came. What made his life remarkable was simply that God was always there with him and he could no longer get away from God. It completely tore his life apart. We so often hear and say that religion makes people happy and harmonious and peaceful and content. Maybe that’s true of religion; but it is not true of God and dealings with humankind. It is utterly wrong. This is what the psalmist discovered.
Something had burst open inside him. He felt as if he were split in two. A struggle flared up within him, which every day became more and more heated and terrible. He experienced hour by hour how his old beliefs were being torn out of his inner being. He struggled desperately to hold on to them; but God, standing ever before him, had taken them from him and would never give them back…And so the breathless struggle goes on…he no longer knows where it will all lead to and he sees that he is lost; he does not know whether he hates or loves the one who has forced his way so violently into his life and destroyed his peace. He struggles for every inch and in despair yields to the weapons of God.
May God lead us to a true understanding of God’s goodness.…Which of us has already come to know that God’s goodness leads us into a conflict, which involves the physical side of our life, and not only that but also our work, our honor, and even our family? Who would allow themselves to be drawn into such a conflict and who would see in such a conflict God’s goodness? And above all, who sees that we have not grasped the meaning of God’s goodness until the conflict goes much deeper and seizes hold of our life and reaches out beyond even that?…the more deeply we recognize what God’s goodness is, the more…we shall be led by God’s goodness to assume our responsibility and will be brought to God again through our acknowledged guilt.
From Bonhoeffer, “God’s Loving Care and Human Suffering,” in A Testament to Freedom (San Francisco: Harper, 1995), pgs. 194–198.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace,
Electra
Love in action is a harsh and dreadful thing. ~ Dostoevsky | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/4/2004 1:16 PM (GMT -6) | | Iconoclast:
quote:
Let's say that someone just robbed a bank and is running down the street. You are walking along and this person runs right past you. You did have the ability to stop him but you had no idea that he had just robbed a bank or that a bank had even been recently robbed. Are you complicit in the robbery of the bank?
Hmmm...lessee. This would depend. If he was about 100 yards from you directly in front of you, running wildly with people chasing him, cash bags in hand, sirens going off and everything...and you just decided to NOT put the pieces together because, in truth, you didn't want to get involved...then yeah. When he runs by, you could always tell yourself that it could have been some prank or something, after all. Hey, you didn't KNOW that a bank was robbed for SURE...riiight?
Now, if you had NO genuine ability to garner any information that would lead you to comprehend what was going on at all? Nope, you wouldn't.
"I've been converted three times. The first was to traditional Christianity; the second to honesty and the third was to the Love of God and man (humanity) The third was the real conversion. The first two were preliminary."
--Nels Ferre, a theologian speaking of his spiritual journey with the Triune God
| | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 3/4/2004 4:32 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by MephEternal
John:
quote:
Also I think it is important to point out that in the free-will paradigm that Icon, Laika, and myself hold to, one is in fact guilty for NOT doing what they know they should (To him that KNOWETH to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin), just as much as one is morally culpable for doing what they know they shouldn't.
Cool. I got that. This is still based on KNOWLEDGE. What one KNOWS to do. It's when we get to IGNORANCE that's an issue, I'm betting.
How does ignorance affect this issue one way or the other, really? I think we all will agree that one is not responsible for that which one had not ability to know. (In other words, this presupposes that the ignorance is unavoidable, and not willful).
quote:
John:
quote:
Where in Scripture do we ever find it taught that we will answer in the Judgment for anyone's sins but our own?
It's not a matter of answering for the sins of others. Not at all. It's about answering for ALL of our own forms of participation in the sin of the world.
What do you see as the biblical definition of sin? When you say "participation in the sin of the world," I cannot see how that doesn't entail a willful transgression of a known law.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
1Heart
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 1128
| Posted 3/4/2004 4:44 PM (GMT -6) | | [quote]Originally posted by MephEternal
Hmmmm...I think I'm seeing something...
(MEPH) {"Moon River, I DO think that we are getting hung up on terminology."}
(Jo-Anne) Meph, I'm glad you're seeing that.
(MEPH]To the extent that one doesn't WILLFULLY, KNOWINGLY and INTENTIONALLY from the heart support the an evil structure, they are not in ANYWAY complicit.
(Jo-Anne) Meph, I think we should avoid blanket statements unless they are clear in scripture, and this one isn't. I can think of an example immediately that flies in the face of this statement.
(MEPH)And this logic gets into ABSURD lengths. I remember this one guy who was BIG in this idea of sin. And he said that he hadn't sinned in 5 years. I was like WHAT the HECK??? I thought he was crazy...until I got to the root of his theology. What he was saying in essence was this:
In five years, I have not (to my knowledge) KNOWINGLY and WILLFULLY from the heart supported anything against God. Therefore, I haven't sinned."}
(Jo-Anne) Meph this fellow either a) has cognitive delays and is not capable of understanding the abstract idea of sin (that is not true of all people with cognitive delays), b) has an ego problem, c) is in denial, d) has been taught false doctrine, e) is deceived by the evil one or d) all of the above
(MEPH) {"Check it. If someone has a thoroughly INDIVIDUALIZED idea of sin then when they here "God is complicit in fallen, sinful structures", chances are they are hearing this..."}
(Jo-Anne) Meph, sin is individual, but it has a rippling effect as well and affects eternity. (My quote below..."choice by choice...") What I was saying was that only God knows all the givens and all the variables in each and every situation and responds accordingly. Someone can be culpable (like your friend for example or the young woman having an abortion that did not realize there really was a baby) without being aware of it...that doesn't mean it is any less sin. That fellow's sin was no less because he didn't believe it existed!
(MEPH) {"I can then UNDERSTAND why people would not like what I am saying! They would be HEARING me say (as opposed to me actually saying) that God is a SINNER, that God is someone who supports sin or "greater good" from the heart. This would give God NO real separation from the devil."}
(Jo-Anne) I for one did not hear you say this anyway, but sometimes you say things that leave room for ponder, if you know what I mean? I think we would all do well to ask for clarification if we are not sure what is being said (like you do, and I appreciate that).
(MEPH) {"Complicity in sinful, fallen, systems and structures can be willful, knowing, and intentional from the heart...BUT it can ALSO be UNwilling, UNknowing, AND UNintentional support of those systems and structures!"}
(Jo-Anne) I wholeheartedly agree with this.
(MEPH) {"What this means is that it's possible that you could actively be fully working AGAINST an evil system while being IN the evil system, using the BENEFITS of that evil system against itself...but participating IN that evil system still makes you somewhat ACCOUNTABLE."}
(Jo-Anne) There are no benefits of evil.
MEPH, I don't believe God is Wesleyan or Lutheran. He responds to each and every situation with changeable faithfulness.
My thoughts Meph. God Bless. More later.
Jo-Anne 
"Sometimes all we can do is go back to the character of God, and drop anchor there."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 3/4/2004 10:45 PM (GMT -6) | | This question came to my mind so I want to throw it out here. I wonder how much the image of God we hold dearest in our mind and heart, how much does that image influence our theology? No one on this thread is "right" or "wrong" in how they relate to God hence their theology is for them and the Holy Spirit to work out. I wonder if we build our theology based upon the image that has the most pull at drawing us in. If that be the case, and if some feel closer to God by believing that God is involved in the world in such a way that God is complicit in evil, then I say peace to you.
A Simple Exercise
What comes to your mind immediately when you hear the word GOD? Here are some descriptions but what is yours?
God the righteous judge
God the good shepherd
God our friend
God our refuge and strength
God the father
God the healer
God the holy king
God the mighty one
For me I get an immediate picture of the shepherd holding the little lamb securely in his arms. I hear him saying, "Do not be afraid, little flock, for your father has been pleased to give you the kingdom." Luke 12:32 With that picture in my mind, hearing those words, and feeling the warmth and secureness of God's embrace I am unable to EVER, EVER, EVER, EVER see God as complicit in evil. I could NOT feel secure resting in his arms if I thought he was at all complicit in evil. The words "Do not be afraid" would have no meaning for me if I thought God wasn't always fighting against evil on my behalf. So I wonder, does your image of God, the one that draws you in, paint your theology?
| | Back to Top | | |
|
1Heart
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 1128
| Posted 3/5/2004 6:27 AM (GMT -6) | | [quote]Originally posted by quest for truth
A Simple Exercise
What comes to your mind immediately when you hear the word GOD? Here are some descriptions but what is yours?
God the righteous judge
God the good shepherd
God our friend
God our refuge and strength
God the father
God the healer
God the holy king
God the mighty one
Hello Quest,
I see Him as all these things. Thanks for drawing our focus back to these things. I also see my relationship with the Father as a sacred romance. He is the lover of our souls, always pursuing us with His love. It was His love that drew us to Him. I see my relationship with the Father as a dance. It takes two, one to lead and one to follow and you really have to listen to follow the spirit's movement. I see Him as creatively sovereign, all powerful, all wise, not all controlling and hence not all knowing in that He pre-determines every detail of our lives. I see my life as a tapestry that He and I are weaving together. My life with Him was once black and white and now it is technicolour. I love this journey I am on.
I think Meph and othrs see Him much the same way. I believe that sometimes we take words that don't fit and try to make them fit and therein lies the problem. And sometimes we have an idea and we try to come up with an analogy that fits (but they always break down). Some people have a picture of God and they go to scripture and find something to try and validate how they see the Father.
I appreciate the honest search here. Complicit and culpable do not apply to my picture of God. Responsible and involved, yes. Some of it really is wrapped up in these words and their meanings, implications and ramifications.
What do you think?
God Bless,
Jo-Anne 
"Sometimes all we can do is go back to the character of God, and drop anchor there."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 3/6/2004 12:00 AM (GMT -6) | | Jo-Annequote:
I love this journey I am on
Me too!  
Jo-Annequote:
I think Meph and othrs see Him much the same way.
quote:
I appreciate the honest search here. Complicit and culpable do not apply to my picture of God. Responsible and involved, yes. Some of it really is wrapped up in these words and their meanings, implications and ramifications.
What do you think?
I think we all have a basic agreement on what the bible tells us about God but I am not sure we all envision God in the same way. I think that you have a similar picture of God as myself. I think that Mephi has a different picture of God and therefore CAN apply complicit and culpable to his understanding of God. I think that we operate out of what is in our heart of hearts. In my own experience, when I was little, I once watch a movie about Moses and from that drew the conclusion that God was a God of vengence and wrath. I pictured God with gray hair and a long beard standing with a rod in his hand ready to zap a person if they did wrong. Later, when I was young, I saw a movie about the life of Jesus and saw all the love and mercy he had for people. My picture of Jesus and God the Father were in conflict so I pictured them as two different people (I never could understand three in one when I was little) I saw Jesus fighting on our behalf for God not to punish us.
To be honest it has taken a journey through understanding the bible.... to come to the point where I picture God the Father as the shepherd tenderly holding the lamb. So, although we can all agree that God is ALL those qualities, I am not sure we all have the same moving picture in our mind about who God is and I believe that is why a person like Meph can say that God is complicit in evil whereas I cannot.
When I was little I operated out of good works for fear of the wrath of God. When I was little I prayed to Jesus to watch out for me and help me but not God the Father because I thought him to be above us mere humans. I operated out of that belief until I discovered more truth. I "tried" to do good to be accepted by God. Now I operate out of a stirring from the Holy Spirit and a motivation to love as I am FREELY loved and accepted by God. I firmly believe that when people walk away from God it is not God they are walking away from but rather their understanding of God due to their heart of hearts image of who they understand God to be.
I think it really is about the words and their meanings. I think it really is about the inner image we create in understanding God. Therefore I believe this is why we cannot judge one another's theology since their theology comes from their OWN understanding and journey with God. I do think this is what has stirred the passion behind so many of the posts on this topic because our understanding of God is based on the image that motivates us in our relationship with God and each other.
What do you think?
| | Back to Top | | |
|
1Heart
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 1128
| Posted 3/6/2004 12:17 PM (GMT -6) | | I must confess. I posted this on another thread, the one where Quest is thanking Iconoclast, but I thought it fit here too (and since you asked me what my thoughts were...).
Hope that's alright. My son returns from Arctic Winter Games today (he won a silver in snowboarding on Monday!) so I'm busily preparing for his return, catching up on my reading with the board and going to worship practice today! (It's a wonderful life!)
(Quote about love from Iconoclast)
"To love someone is to be FOR them for no other reason than that you choose to be for them. In other words you are “acausally” for them. If there is a cause then you are not loving them but simply using them your own purposes – your own cause. Love is uncaused."
(Jo-Anne)
I cannot think of a more wonderfully descriptive definition of love, one that so adequately defines unconditional, self-sacrificing love. Thank you Iconoclast.
Try as we might, humanly, it is almost impossible to understand that kind of love because we are either consciously or subconsciously meeting our own needs, even in loving.
I think that Iconoclast has boiled this down to its purest form. Love is a choice. The Father chose to love us when we were unlovable, not knowing if we would choose Him. He risked because love is worth risking for.
It is incomprehensible that we would seek to attribute complicity or culpability to a Father who loves us like that. Meph himself saw where terminology was a problem. We just don't have the right words. Yes, the Father created a world where nightmarish evil is possible, but does that make Him responsible (culpable) for it? No. It was our choice and people are responsible for their own choices. And yes, He relates to us in a world where a cosmic battle is taking place. He has to use what we will understand to speak to us (just as Jesus did when He walked among us). Does that make the Father complicit? No. The words are incriminating and I, for one, object to their use. I think I understand much of what Meph has been trying to say and that I agree with some things he is saying, but not with this idea of complicity or being culpable.
I appreciate the spirit in which Meph communicates what he is trying to say and the challenge he has issued for us to consider in the "problem of evil." What is most important to me in these threads is to see the manner in which we relate to each other as believers as we search for answers and come to know the Father in a deeper way and helping each other to apply them to our lives personally and to the world as we reach out with the Father's love.
Sparknheart asked a defining question on the complicity thread. What is your picture of God? We may differ slightly, but I have no doubt that we all see Him as love. If we start with love and end with love, we can't go far wrong.
My thoughts,
God Bless,
Jo-Anne
"Sometimes all we can do is go back to the character of God, and drop anchor there."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Truth Aficionado
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2003
Total Posts : 1544
| Posted 3/8/2004 7:17 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by BBBCanada
Oh. By the way. Mark? I guess Greg Boyd is going to hell. Greg? How do you feel 'bout this?
Hello Brandon, I apologize if you thought I was condemning anyone. Allow me to rephrase: “honesty is the best policy.”
The reference to Romans 3:5-8 was intended as a note of caution. Ignoring it may lead to “repenting of religion” and ultimately to sin. Religious or self-righteous people have been found guilty of evil, throughout history. The Crusades come to mind. The irony is that much of it was thought to be justified in the name of God. We walk a fine line. When we begin to juggle lies we hamper the truth. I agree that in a circumstance demanding self defense we may have to kill, let alone lie. My point is: We need to exercise caution as the enemy works inside a circle of lies, deceit and deception.
I felt the verse should be included in the discussion because I’m beginning to feel that the question “Is God complicit in evil?” is a red flag and a sign of danger ahead. I no longer feel the answer is as important as some who persist with the question. My concern is the tone of enthusiasm while trying to implicate God with evil. Are we trying to allow for justification in an evil system or in personal sin? Are we trying to implicate God, by saying that He is complicit in evil, thereby morally culpable? Does this somehow relate to our own complicity and morally culpable behaviour?
Any way you shake it, if we are not held accountable we are following a dangerous path. We are called to be Christ like, to love as He loved - not to compete with God. The commandment Jesus gave us is to love God and love others. Clinging to the notion that it is in any way alright to model ourselves after God’s wrath is dangerous. Do you think one day some guy just woke up and said “I think I’ll go kill an abortionist” or even “I think I’ll hijack a plane and fly it into some buildings?” More often then not it was a slow process and at one point they believed God to be complicit in evil. They felt they were acting as God’s instruments of wrath and so justified their participation in evil acts. The stolen knowledge that we can judge the difference between good and evil is what contributes to this kind of mind-set. It leads to a distorted belief that we are contributing to a greater good by choosing a lesser evil. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not suggesting that anyone here is thinking that. I’m merely pointing out the danger in people who do. All true acts of the spirit add the value of love that is evidenced by the outcome. It should not come at a cost to anyone but the one who acts in love. We are not called to sacrifice others in the name of God or love, but to sacrifice our self. Sacrificial love is to serve others not self. You are right, we need to revamp the system and it should come as a personal sacrifice, not at the cost of others. We cannot leave or escape the system entirely. That would self-centered. Instead we need to measure our steps in this world with how much love we bring to the table. To align our will with God’s will is to stay rooted and grounded in love. There was no rainbow after 9/11. If this world is not a better, more loving place on earth as it is in heaven, then it is not the work of God.
Peace, Mark
| | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 3/9/2004 6:39 PM (GMT -6) | | I'm thinking something through here by contemplating on the story of Job. God ALLOWED Satan to do a lot of evil in Job's life but God did also put limitations up. I am wondering if some would say God was complicit in evil by allowing Satan to do evil in Job's life?
God's response to the sin in our world is to put restraints on it. God is involved in our lives in that we are protected from experiencing the full amount of suffering and pain that Satan would like to send our way. Would some say that in this God is complicit within the evil in that he does ALLOW some but not all the evil intentions and schemes that Satan would like to throw at us?
Thinking out loud. | | Back to Top | | |
|
1Heart
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 1128
| Posted 3/9/2004 10:28 PM (GMT -6) | | [quote]Originally posted by quest for truth
I'm thinking something through here by contemplating on the story of Job. God ALLOWED Satan to do a lot of evil in Job's life but God did also put limitations up. I am wondering if some would say God was complicit in evil by allowing Satan to do evil in Job's life?
God's response to the sin in our world is to put restraints on it. God is involved in our lives in that we are protected from experiencing the full amount of suffering and pain that Satan would like to send our way. Would some say that in this God is complicit within the evil in that he does ALLOW some but not all the evil intentions and schemes that Satan would like to throw at us?
Thinking out loud.
(Jo-Anne) Job's friends thought that Job must have done something wrong to deserve the torment that was being rained upon him. Obviously they were skewed in their theology and so was Job. I believe the whole point of Job is to teach us that there is far more that takes place in the heavenly realm than what we know of and that we are remiss in thinking that there must be a divine purpose in all suffering. It also teaches us about the complexity of creation (chapter 38 and following) and that the Father cares enough to speak to us personally. Just think, the Lord of the Cosmos cares enough about me that He chooses to interact with me on an intimate level. It makes me think of Psalm 8 as well. I love that Psalm.
the satan shows up in the heavenlies uninvited to challenge the Father. Basically he tells Him that if everything is stripped away from us, that we would not worship Him. His challenge needed an answer. God had to put a "cork" in satan's mouth, so to speak, and this needed to be a lesson to all believers, for all time. I may be reading this in to Job, but I believe that God "had no choice," that the satan was going to pick someone to prove his accusation true and that the Father, knowing this, directed his attention to Job. In directing him to Job, He may have prevented the satan from tormenting some poor soul who couldn't have withstood the torment. God chose the most righteous man that He could find. Interesting isn't it, that the most righteous man that God could find was STILL messed up in his theology. Hmmmm. What does that say about us? I believe that the Father intervened in this way. He also set limits. Satan does not have total control over this world. It is a battle. He is a formidable foe, but not all powerful. God is able to intervene and protect. Job shows us that. It also shows us that the Father steps in and speaks on a very intimate level (38 and following). He softens Job's humility ("I spoke what I did not understand.") by letting him know that his lack of understanding was due to the absolute complexity of creation.
In no way is God complicit. He is not an accomplice, or even using the enemy to accomplish His purposes. Job's suffering was not God's design for Job or God's purpose for Job's life. "This an enemy has done." I love what the Father says in Job when speaking to the enemy, "This far and no farther." The Father has always had the final say. One day He will speak these words to the enemy one last time.
The Father is all good, all loving, all powerful, He knows everything that He purposes to know. He loved us enough to reassure us through messages like Job. This is another example like Zosia, only in Job we are let in on what is happening that normally we are shielded from (the meeting in the council of the heavenlies, the satan's challenge to the Father...). He let's us in on it, so that we will remember there is a cosmic war going on. What happened to Zosia wasn't God's design or purpose either. It was evil. What the enemy was doing to Job was evil too. But was God able to bring some good out of what he intended for evil? You bet!
(My take on it) God bless, Jo-Anne
"Sometimes all we can do is go back to the character of God, and drop anchor there."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 3/10/2004 12:51 AM (GMT -6) | | Thanks for your response, Jo-Anne. I want to think a little more about this by challenging what you wrote. I am doing this in order to think this through a bit more.
Jo-Annequote:
God had to put a "cork" in satan's mouth, so to speak, and this needed to be a lesson to all believers, for all time.
Why? Jesus often ignored Satan in the gospels. Satan would try to tempt him or put doubt in him ... but instead of addressing Satan Jesus would reply with scripture. So why did God have to prove anything to the enemy? Doesn't God prove enough through the people who choose to follow him? Just wondering.
quote:
In directing him to Job, He may have prevented the satan from tormenting some poor soul who couldn't have withstood the torment
This sounds like something Mephi would use. I mean it sounds like God chose the lesser of two evils by choosing Job over someone else.
quote:
Interesting isn't it, that the most righteous man that God could find was STILL messed up in his theology.
Very interesting. I believe this is an example of how none of us have this all worked out. We need to allow each other room to differ without trying to prove our theology correct. I believe disunity comes when people believe their theology to be correct while judging anyone who differs. I think this is a great example of God showing us that even the most righteous man he could find was still missing in his theology. We only see through a glass for now but one day we will we see clearly.
quote:
In no way is God complicit. He is not an accomplice, or even using the enemy to accomplish His purposes. Job's suffering was not God's design for Job or God's purpose for Job's life. "This an enemy has done." I love what the Father says in Job when speaking to the enemy, "This far and no farther."
Again I am just thinking out loud here but isn't this what Mephi and the rest would say as being an example where God chooses the lesser of two evils? Satan is going to do something so God chooses the lesser evil.
quote:
But was God able to bring some good out of what he intended for evil? You bet!
AMEN! I think we all can agree that God is able to turn ALL things around and redeem whatever good can be salvaged from the enemies evil attacks.
Any responses? | | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 3/10/2004 7:22 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Maybe someone should write a book about “Repenting of Theology” or maybe “Idolatry of Theology”.
If it’s not love then it’s not God, Peace - Mark
Thanks, Mark. You're cool too. I agree with you!
Beloved, let us love one another. For love is of God and anyone who loveth is born of God and knoweth God. He who loveth not, knoweth not God for God is love. Beloved, let us love one another.
That's my quest -- to know God and to love as he has commanded.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
1Heart
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 1128
| Posted 3/10/2004 12:32 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by quest for truth
Quest, Thanks for the challenge. That's why I'm here, to be challenged and to learn and to know how to apply these things day by day!
Jo-Annequote:
God had to put a "cork" in satan's mouth, so to speak, and this needed to be a lesson to all believers, for all time.
(Quest)Why? Jesus often ignored Satan in the gospels. Satan would try to tempt him or put doubt in him ... but instead of addressing Satan Jesus would reply with scripture. So why did God have to prove anything to the enemy? Doesn't God prove enough through the people who choose to follow him? Just wondering.
(Jo-Anne) God doesn't have to prove anything to the enemy, but because he has free will (along with all of us), he is a "force to be reckoned with." To me, it is obvious that God does address him directly. He did not invite him into the council in Job, but when he did we see God addressing him directly. I don't believe that Jesus ignored Satan any more than God did. He spoke directly to spirits in demon possessed people. He identified the enemy wherever he was at work (even with Peter). Jesus did not give the enemy more attention than what was necessary, but he did not ignore him. What I meant when I said that God had to "put a cork" in Satan's mouth was that God was doing this for our benefit. The book of Job is our reassurance when we are suffering. Unfortunately, the enemy must be silenced by each act of love that we "committ" in Jesus name.
quote:
In directing him to Job, He may have prevented the satan from tormenting some poor soul who couldn't have withstood the torment
(Quest)This sounds like something Mephi would use. I mean it sounds like God chose the lesser of two evils by choosing Job over someone else.
(Jo-Anne) This is my own thought. Often we do not see the way that the Father intervenes in our lives and in the lives of others. Sometimes (as in the prologue of Job) we are not privy to what is taking place in the heavenlies. It was God that said, "Consider my servant Job." Not because it was God's purpose or plan for Job's life but because Job, being the most righteous man God could find, could withstand the fiery darts that the enemy was about to rain down on him. Those are my thoughts.
quote:
Interesting isn't it, that the most righteous man that God could find was STILL messed up in his theology.
(Quest)Very interesting. I believe this is an example of how none of us have this all worked out. We need to allow each other room to differ without trying to prove our theology correct. I believe disunity comes when people believe their theology to be correct while judging anyone who differs. I think this is a great example of God showing us that even the most righteous man he could find was still missing in his theology. We only see through a glass for now but one day we will we see clearly.
[Jo-Anne]In no way is God complicit. He is not an accomplice, or even using the enemy to accomplish His purposes. Job's suffering was not God's design for Job or God's purpose for Job's life. "This an enemy has done." I love what the Father says in Job when speaking to the enemy, "This far and no farther."
(Quest) Again I am just thinking out loud here but isn't this what Mephi and the rest would say as being an example where God chooses the lesser of two evils? Satan is going to do something so God chooses the lesser evil.
(Jo-Anne) There is a greater good. I think all of us see that. In directing the satan's gaze toward Job, God was not choosing a lesser evil or preventing a greater evil (I do not believe in those terms. I believe evil is evil and God has no part in it, except to rescue, to redeem, to restore...)...BUT He was directing him that way for a greater good (if you will). Greater good in the sense that we would all benefit from the lesson in Job - that suffering is about free will of humans and other agents and about the complexity of creation and NOT about the character of God. God's creating us with free will was for a greater good (than if He hadn't).
For now, all evil is not being stopped, right? BUT God combats evil on evry front and anywhere there is evil the Father is seeking to redeem, restore, heal...all of those things that love does. I love Romans 8:38,39
"If God is perfectly good, he must do everything He can properly do
to prevent evil. The only evil God cannot "properly" prevent is evil arising from the willing of a free agent, for preventing this would result in a loss of the greater good of having freedom."
- Satan and The Problem of Evil by Gregory Boyd
God Bless!
Jo-Anne
"Sometimes all we can do is go back to the character of God, and drop anchor there."
| | Back to Top | | |
| 163 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 8:07 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 |
|
|