 |
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/12/2004 12:38 PM (GMT -6) |   | Magneton:
quote:
How about another analogy? A master carpenter builds a house in a desolate area where the only building supplies available are in a scrap pile of used lumber. It grates against him to have to work with such inferior materials, and the end result is a house with odd sawcuts and mismatched paneling and siding. While not aesthetically pleasing, it serves the function of providing shelter for the occupant, which was the carpenter’s priority, as opposed to a display of his workmanship. The carpenter may know that being associated with this project taints his reputation: people just aren’t going to understand the extenuating circumstances. But he knows it was the right thing to do.
EXCELLENT!
Very, very, very, very well done, Magneton. I really like that...if you couldn't tell.  It expresses very well my thinking on this.
Going with this analogy, the carpenter would have to make the choice of WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT to him: providing shelter for the person OR his reputation. He could easily preserve his reputation from being tainted by just refusing to make the house. But to the extent that he decides to go ahead and build the house, there are certain things that he KNOWS that he will have to deal with..one of them being the tainting of his sterling reputation. And he takes OWNERSHIP and RESPONSIBILITY of this.
What I hear people saying is that the Master Carpenter is SOOOO concerned about his sterling reputation that he would NEVER work with inferior materials to build such shoddy and potentially hazardous housing. But my logic says that if this were the case, then the house (WHICH WE ARE CURRENTLY LIVING IN) wouldn't exist! This is why the claim that God IN NO WAY is "complicit" in evil made absolutely, positively NO sense to me.
Good stuff, Magneton
********************************
Magneton:
quote:
God is in the business of reconciliation. And evidently, the only (or at least the best) way of achieving this was by entering the world and accepting the consequences. God encounters situations not of his making and uses them for his redemptive purposes.
YES!
*****************************
Magneton:
quote:
“Complicity” to me has connotations of premeditation: involvement in bringing about evil rather than using pre-existing evil as a “raw material” for redemptive purposes. (In the music analogy, this would imply participation in composing as well as orchestrating a piece of music and conducting its performance.)
I know what you mean, man. I've been TRYING to come up with some other term..but I've been tremendously unsuccessful. I don't know what word to use that illustrates ownership and responsibility for participation that ELIMINATES the "premeditation" connotation.
**********************************
Magneton:
quote:
Perhaps even more important than finding the right word to describe God’s role in working with an imperfect world to bring about his redemptive purposes is to consider what each of us need to do: what level of “taint” are we willing to accept in working for the reconciliation of people to God?
Praise GOD, man! VERY well said.
***************************
Magneton:
quote:
Mephi, I think that further development of the "in the world but not of the world" motif would be useful, both as it applies to God and to us.
I think that you are quite right. This "complicity" thing seems to be getting me nowhere. But it seems that people CAN relate to God being IN the world but not OF it. Hey, maybe that's it! To the extent that God is IN the world, God participates with fallen, evil systems to work WITHIN them redemptively. God takes OWNERSHIP of and RESPONSIBILITY for this participation...and does not shy away from it. But God is not OF the world in that God does NOT bring about evil from premeditated intention or affinity for sin.
Hmmm...I'll work on this more as I have more time. But maybe THIS will help. Thanks so much, Mag!
"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 | | |
 |
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 3/12/2004 5:16 PM (GMT -6) | | John Earpquote:
God's faith in Job as it is about Job's faith in God.
God desires relationship with us. We have faith in God and God proves he is faithful.
Jo-Annequote:
We can choose whether to be in harmony or disharmony with the Father and our choice affects the total outcome. It also affects every other person in the orchestra and the music that the conductor desired may never happen. I see a conductor as a guide, someone who directs the way without forcing it, who points the way. An orchestrator arranges things to happen a certain way.
Again, God desires a relationship with us. God does not force the relationship. I love what you had to say!
sparknheartquote:
I heard that the Conductor was looking for musicians to join His band; one requirement, your contribution must be “lovely”, anything short of love would just be a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
AMEN!
Magnetonquote:
Perhaps even more important than finding the right word to describe God’s role in working with an imperfect world to bring about his redemptive purposes is to consider what each of us need to do: what level of “taint” are we willing to accept in working for the reconciliation of people to God?
I agree with you on this. How dirty are we willing to get? Obviously the master teacher/our role model got himself quite dirty on our behalf.
Mephiquote:
What I hear people saying is that the Master Carpenter is SOOOO concerned about his sterling reputation that he would NEVER work with inferior materials to build such shoddy and potentially hazardous housing. But my logic says that if this were the case, then the house (WHICH WE ARE CURRENTLY LIVING IN) wouldn't exist! This is why the claim that God IN NO WAY is "complicit" in evil made absolutely, positively NO sense to me.
I personally think you said it wrong. The Master Carpenter is not concerned about HIS reputation he is concerned with his beloved. Mephi, I don't understand why this doesn't make sense to you. God is NOT working with evil God is working AGAINST evil. Complicit and against don't seem to fit in the same sentence.
I was doing a bible study and came up with an interesting observation. Mark 6
discusses John the Baptist having his head cut off. John was not saved by Jesus even though Jesus could have performed a miracle and rescued him from prison. Yet shortly after, in that same chapter, Jesus is healing, performing miracles for five thousand, and walking on water. What struck me from this is that Jesus did all these things to increase faith. Sometimes it was because of the person's faith while other times it was in order to increase faith. Jesus went against the natural to perform miracles yet he chose on to intervene on John's behalf. How is it that Jesus chose to feed five thousand and heal many yet did not choose to save John the Baptist his own cousin? I believe because God is working beyond this life. God is concerned with our heart. I do not see God as being complicit in evil but I do see God working within the evil of the world to increase faith and hope in his beloved. God is in relationship with the dirty world hoping the relationship will be reciprocated. When we stand firm in faith God's heart is blessed. God chose to not stop Satan in regard to Job because God chose to allow this to increase Job's faith. God is involved, in relationship with, interacting with the sin produced in this evil world but NOT complicit with the evil.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
1Heart
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 1128
| Posted 3/12/2004 7:14 PM (GMT -6) | | Meph,
The Father does get his hands "dirty" in the sense of a surgeon who does triage in a medical unit on the front lines. I don't know how much more involved He could get then to be tortured for our sins and nailed to a tree. But He has no part in bringing about the wounds that He heals. He does not use the enemy's tactics to bring about His purposes. That's what I object to. That is what complicit implies. That is where moral culpability creeps in. I think we should steer away from anything that slithers or creeps and doesn't look like the Father. Think about what the father looks like.
Funny Meph, I've actually said this before, but I believe we are closer in what we believe than we think. Words keep us apart. Words that don't fit. Complicit doesn't fit. Neither does culpable. We can keep trying, but I think that you must be closer to being convinced that they do not represent our lovely Father.
You were looking for another word. What is wrong with words like redeemer, restorer, creator, healer, conductor, shepherd. Think of the image those words create. How lovely, magnificent, beyond our wildest expectations. He is majestic and sovereign. He is holy and just. He is compassionate and tender. He is the balm of Gilead. The light of the world. He is complicit and culpable? Do you see the contrast? I hope so.
God takes broken vessels and makes them beautiful. He takes filthy rags and makes them into robes of righteousness. He takes people who are out of tune and turns them into a symphony of harmony. He takes an empty canvas and with brush strokes creates a masterpiece of light and life. He does not take old pieces of wood and make a shack. He takes old pieces of wood and transforms them into something of beauty to behold. He took an old, rough hewn cross and made it into something wonderful and beautiful with just one drop of blood.
What do you think Meph? I think He looks like this to you too.
Love (from a sister) and blessings and peace,
Jo-Anne
"Sometimes all we can do is go back to the character of God, and drop anchor there."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
johnmd
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 154
| Posted 3/12/2004 8:31 PM (GMT -6) | | REPLY TO SPARKNHEART
Sparknheart said
I feel God is “involved in evil” due to the extent that He steers evil/man towards the greater good. God/Spirit “steered” at least one of Joseph’s brothers to the “greater good” by arguing with his brothers to sell him as a slave instead of leaving him in the hole to die.
John said
Good point. I see this as God’s redemptive process unfolding. In this particular situation I believe the Spirit was ACTUALLY convicting and convincing the brother(s) that this was absolutely the wrong thing to do and that if God got His way from this point they would forgive and reconcile their differences and go from there. Had the brothers actually done the will of God at that point, redemption of the future (whatever that entailed), I suspect, would have been much easier for God to accomplish with less hardship and suffering on the part of the those involved.
Unfortunately, I do not believe God got what He wanted even here. Sure, slavery is better than death (I guess?). And with Joseph still alive He still had “material” to work with. So, at this point God again went back to the drawing board, not to orchestrate evil, but to continue the redemptive process.
Sparkenheart said
Some brothers chose the lesser evil of money/greed over murder.
John said
I believe as far as God was concerned, the Spirit was not convicting the brothers to “pick the greed.” Ultimately this would be the Spirit convicting someone to commit the sin of greed—Maybe “less” of a sin, but sin nonetheless. Here, God would be encouraging them and then holding them accountable for an action that He Himself hates.
Things might be just as simple as Ruben harkening to a lone vestige of “conscience” incumbent in being created in the image of God such that God really didn’t have to do anything at the point Joseph’s life was threatened. Rather, Ruben just yields to a rudimentary sense of justice which had been there all along and Joseph’s life was sparred. And God’s salvific plan continues through Joseph without God intervening at all in the acute situation. The narrative only indicates that Ruben perceived injustice at some level (? On behalf of his father?). His intuitive sense of justice endowed to all men by the Creator weighed in on the discussion. At least at this point the text gives no indication that God actively intervened or manipulated anything. Ruben “steered” the situation in the right direction as a result of a “spark” of the “image of God” within himself. Joseph remained alive and God’s intent to bring good remains intact not via orchestration of any sort by God (evil or otherwise). Rather, Ruben’s God given conscience does what it was created to do (i.e., intervene on behalf of justice).
Subsequently within the situation at hand, God’s salvific plan was progressing until Potiphar’s wife came along. Maybe Satan is beginning to wise up at this point and throws in some spriritual warfare, or maybe this is just another run of the mill lust and power scenario. Regardless, God again faces an obstacle in the redemptive process and with His faithful colaborer, Joseph, His will remains unthwarted because He “means to bring good “ from what the brothers meant for evil.
Sparkenheart says
I choose to use the word “involved” and NOT complicit. I agree with you that the “complicit thing” leads us down a slippery slope “the end justifies the means" in which I strongly oppose (see Romans 3:5-8). But I don’t think we can go from one extreme to the other and take God completely out of the mix unless we are talking about hell. If we take God out of the mix He would become complicit in evil by default of neglect. Similar to the way parents are responsible to be actively involved with their children, trying to bring forth the greater good, to help steer them towards what’s best. Yet parents are not complicit when their children go astray, are they? It seems to me that God has to be kept in the mix to some degree when it comes to the mystery of this world and His involvement with “evil” men.
John says
I think we are running parallel here??? Sure God is “involved.” He is not neglectful. He remains completely “in the mix.” However, He is in the mix convicting to do the absolute right thing not the lesser of two wrong things. I believe with God there is always a trap door, a way of “escape” for the one who sincerely desires to do the right thing.
Following your parent-child analogy, lets take the case of a promiscuous teenager caught in the act by the parents. And lets say the teenager remained unrepentant. The parents, even knowing that the teen would likely find a way to continue fornicating would be remiss if they threw in the towel and in essence state, “Well, as long as we know you are going to have sex anyway, let’s talk about the burden of unwed pregnancy.” Sure the parents ought to talk about the burden of unwed pregnancy but those comments are made in the context of love en route to a redeclaration in no uncertain terms of doing the right thing with incumbent consequences for rebellion. Now if the child recognizes the burden of unwed pregnancy and gets birth control as a result of what the parents said and continues sneaking around and having sex yet avoids pregnancy, well, perhaps, the lesser of two evils has occurred. However, the parent’s intent and action was to motivate to abstinence. In the context of free will, the parents are not necessarily complicit in the evil of persistent yet protected premarital sex even though the lesser of two evils resulted (continued premarital sex without pregnancy vs. continued premarital sex with pregnancy).
Complicity implies that God “gets His hands dirty” with evil choosing lesser evils for greater good. The Joseph story tells us that God is always “involved” in every situation applying and never violating His intelligence, His wisdom, and His benevolence in order to bring the good.
To God alone be the glory
John | | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 3/12/2004 10:29 PM (GMT -6) | | Mephi, I want to expand on part of my last post because I am wondering if what you mean by complicit is really the below?
In Mark 6 John the Baptist's head is cut off. John was not saved in this life by Jesus even though Jesus could have performed a miracle and rescued him from prison. However, shortly after in that same chapter, Jesus is healing, performing miracles for the five thousand, and walking on water. At first one might ask why all these events are put into the same chapter. I believe it is to demonstrate how Jesus uses circumstances to increase the faith of the people involved. In regard to John the Baptist there was already ample faith so performing the miracle of saving him from prison would not be necessary but perhaps testing his faith would be beneficial. It appears Jesus performed miracles in the New Testament in order to increase faith. Jesus chose sometimes not to intervene to test faith. I believe this is how God interacts with each of us on a personal basis.
I found it interesting that Jesus went against the natural to perform miracles (feeding many with five loaves and two fishes, walking on water) yet he chose not to intervene to rescue John. At first I wondered why it was that Jesus chose to feed five thousand and heal many yet did not choose to save John the Baptist his own cousin? Then I started to think about how God is working beyond this physical life into the spiritual. God is concerned with our heart. God is interested in our faith. Satan wants to destroy our faith. I am wondering if what is being called "God is complicit in evil" is the type of interaction we see happening in this chapter? God is at work within the evil of the world in order to increase faith and to test the faith of his beloved. God is in relationship with this dirty world hoping the relationship will be reciprocated and does this through choosing when he will intervene (feed five thousand) and when he will abstain (not rescue John from prison). God chose not to stop Satan in regard to Job because God chose to allow Satan's attacks as a means to test Job's faith. If what you mean by complicit is God using the evil in this way then I would agree that this is what is being demonstrated in Mark 6.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
quest for truth
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 479
| Posted 3/15/2004 10:40 PM (GMT -6) | | might-be-donquote:
Didn't Jesus do miracles to ease suffering? and in the presence of already existing faith?
peace, don
Jo-Annequote:
(Jo-Anne) Don, hope you don't mind me interjecting a thought here. Sometimes the faith was that of friends of family members (like the woman in Mark 7 - the greek woman, or the friends that lowered the paralytic down through the roof. Sometimes the person had no faith at all (demon possessed). I believe Jesus healed because He loves and He came to revolt against the work of the enemy.
God Bless,
Jo-Anne
Don and Jo-Anne:
I believe that God acts ALWAYS out of love for us and performs miracles even today to ease suffering but healing and miracles don't always seem to occur despite a person's faith. I agree that God is revolting against the work of the enemy. In reading through the ministry of Jesus I find times when Jesus chose NOT to ease suffering such as with John the Baptist. Bringing faith, or increasing faith, is what God's interaction with us is about. We are not saved by works but by faith which is a gift from God. Faith is what the enemy tries to steal from us because without faith and hope we will fall into a sense of hopelessness. Jesus came to bring life and truth through giving us the gift of faith.
When Jesus performed miracles in the bible he did so sometimes as a result of a person's faith and sometimes despite their faith.
Peace and blessings! | | 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 7:43 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 |
|
|