Does God put a stop to bad things?
An interesting question has been posed in one of the hillsongs threads:
“Does God put a stop to bad things?”
It is a question that was made in the context of what some believe are bad teachings of prosperity theology etal.. but it it is wider question than that.
If the Church is doing bad things, if the people of God are being led astray by bad leaders - will God put a stop to it?
Discuss.
April 15th, 2006 at 3:16 pm
Wiggy, why not try “fowl” language instead?
April 15th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
Deep breath, Wiggy. They’re still there, honey.
Yes still there - sorry about all the multiple posts people.
I was being spammed out by the server.
Apologies…
Yes Donald I will try fowl language LOL!
April 15th, 2006 at 5:14 pm
Deep breath, Wiggy. They’re still there, honey.
Yes I realise that now but they were being spammed off in a big way about 11am this morning.
Don LOL mate - I will give the ‘ol ‘Fowl’ language a go.
Site admin my apologies, I assumed incorrectly you had booted me of this forum.
April 15th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
WIggy
I like what your saying. Is this to infer the view that everything was created, including evil for the purposes of…. Gods good pleasure? relationship with his created beings?
It sounds alot closer to the Judeo/biblical truth than some of that dualist (world bad, heaven good) tripe that keeps getting trotted out by hillsongesque groups… Do you think old Brian reads platonic Philosophy?
The real shame is that this dualistic view seems to have left indellible scars on the bride of Christ… Can a scarred lover still be desirable?
BTW - I have a suggestion for a new thread topic ( hope its not to presumptuos of me) how bout the worst church sign phrases for Easter sunday services, ala John Saffran/father bob style..??
heres one I saw this afternoon. “Jesus is the HERO of Easter.”
What the…??
April 15th, 2006 at 6:45 pm
Urban Monk thank you for the reply.
Funny thing is Urban is that I didn’t exactly ’say’ any of that, I simply quoted some scripture and added the obvious comments.
You know if it was up to me I wouldn’t have done things this way but conventional christianity want us to believe this -
A. God made a perfect creation but somehow the whole thing backfired and the perfect sinless Adam dropped the ball by sinning.
B. God moves into plan B by sending us a Saviour.
C. The saviour plan really isn’t going too well. The vast majority of God’s creation will spend eternity in a burning literal lake of fire.
D. Satan was once Lucifer, also once perfect but he backfired too and is now a sinning machine who takes great delight in his self funded guerilla campaign against Christ and his kingdom.
Hello? Is there something wrong with this picture?
Of course there is.
FYI, I am a universalist Urban and I believe what the bible actually says.
“Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” Matthew 5.48
The word translated ‘perfect’ here actually means complete or mature.
When Adam took that forbidden fruit he took the very first step towards that maturing process.
Prior to this he had not a clue what the difference between good and evil was.
“And saying is Yahweh Elohim, “Behold! The human becomes AS ONE OF US, knowing good and evil” Genesis 3.22
WIGGY
April 15th, 2006 at 8:01 pm
I might be dumb, but it sounds a bit weird to me… So a Perfectly loving God, in perfect holiness, designed sin so humans could mature?
Can you expand on what a universalist is? Is that to say that you do believe everyone is saved, or the opposite? I m taking that second option from your comments on the literal lake of fire…
April 15th, 2006 at 8:10 pm
A universalist believes that eventually the grace and love of God will win everyone to salvation. And as to your fist question, it is just like we do with children, we give them struggles, and problems, (math problems) as well as occasionally hardships, discipline and so forth. Knowing that without trials our children will never become mature.
the rev
April 15th, 2006 at 8:19 pm
Hey again Urban.
Yes the ways of God are utter foolishness to the human mind -
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways, says Jehovah. For as the heavens are high from the earth, so My ways are high from your ways, and My thoughts from your thoughts”
Isaiah 55.8-9
I don’t pretend to like or know why exactly God chose it this way but he did nonetheless…
A Universalist believes in what’s termed ‘Universal reconciliation’ and this is a central theme of the scriptures.
God will save every last rank sinner Urban but not all at the same time, ‘each in his own order’ (1 Corinthians 15.23)
Here are some scriptures that reveal this wonderful truth -
“For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the WORLD might be saved through Him”
John 3.17
Not just a few here and there but the WORLD might be saved through him.
“And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, I will draw ALL (not some, or most but ALL) to Myself” John 12.32
“For as in Adam ALL die, so also in Christ ALL WILL BE MADE ALIVE.
But each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruit; afterward those of Christ at His coming. Then is the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God, even the Father, when He makes to cease all rule and all authority and power” 1 Corinthians 15.22
This is perhaps the most prominent scripture speaking of U.R
As in Adam all die, (that’s everyone) so also (in the same manner and with due regard to the same number of people) in Christ ALL WILL BE MADE ALIVE.
The Lake of Fire in revelation is symbolic Urban.
In Revelation 1.1 we read this -
“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and SIGNIFIED it by his angel unto his servant John”
The Lake of fire is no more literal than the 10 horned, 7 headed beast arising from the ocean!
For a look at some papers I have written on this Urban go to
http://squarecircles.blogspot.com/
WIGGY
April 15th, 2006 at 8:23 pm
A universalist also drinks alcoholic liquor (a finer grade than the anarchist drinks), but refrains from swearing. Universalists are urbane, sophisticated, comfortably off and solidly middle-class.
In their comprehensive library they have an armchair especially reserved for sitting in to cogitate over abstruse theological matters. Some may indulge in a cigar and brandy during this process. Some of the more technologically aware universalists will publicly pontificate on the internet.
April 15th, 2006 at 8:29 pm
That’s nice, Wiggy. I’m feeling comfortable and relaxed about the universalist flavour of Christianity. It means I can live a life of partial self-indulgence (obviously not too much - one can’t go overboard), keep on accumulating wealth and not care too much about the less fortunate. Because I know in the end I’ll be reconciled to God, anyway. Maybe a little later than some, but I think the worldly pleasures to be had are worth the delay.
April 15th, 2006 at 8:30 pm
Not all parents do that rev.
April 15th, 2006 at 8:39 pm
Not all parents have their children do things that are hard? And what is the result of this kind of parenting? Is the goal of parenting to keep children from any hardships?
the rev
April 15th, 2006 at 8:41 pm
Anonymous you speak as a fool.
Yes, you can take that tact if you do and that’s quite ok should you choose to do so but I never indicated in anything I said there will not be judgement did I?
You will ‘reap what you sow’ and be ‘judged as you judge’.
But what is judgement?
It’s quite simple - Judgement is chastening -
“But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world” 1 Corinthians 11.32
The word used for Chasten is a Greek word Paideuo.
Strong’s Concordance defines this word as meaning the following –
*To train up a child, that is, educate, or (by implication) discipline by punishment.
*Chasten, chastise, instruct, learn and teach.
Thayer’s Greek Lexicon defines Paideuo as this –
*To train children.
*To be instructed or taught or learn
*To cause one to learn.
*To chastise, to chastise or castigate with words, to correct.
*Of those who are moulding the character of others by reproof and admonition of God.
*To chasten by the affliction of evils and calamities
*To chastise with blows, to scourge
*Of a father punishing his son
*Of a judge ordering one to be scourged
There it is - Judgement is chastening.
It is not some deluded literal fire that burns you for all time - that is not love.
God’s few chosen judge themselves now so that they will not be judged later. In turn they will judge the rest of humanity at a later date -
“For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged”
1 Corinthians 11.31
You may do as you please anoymous but you should you not judge or chasten yourself now, you will be judged or chastened later.
WIGGY
April 15th, 2006 at 8:52 pm
Wigg… you strike me as a heretic… I am aware of the use of Symbolism and metaphor in the Bible, thank you… but I have read some contemplative theology that seems to lean towards what your saying, Such an intimate God could not possibly be willing that anyone would perish, but, simple as I am, and unprepared to judge or speculate on the purposes of God, i still think a lack of difference between sheep and goats cancels out the need to erradicate sin, which cancels out the need for judgment, which cancels out the need for a saviour, which cancels out the need for Jesus. I am not yet sufficiently liberal that i am prepared to abandon the need for Jesus!
then again, it could just be the pentecostal environment I was abused, I mean, brought up in, that told me that Satan was going to get me..
April 15th, 2006 at 8:58 pm
What’s a little reprimand? Just some short term embarrasment and then we’re all buddies again. We’ll all have a giggle with God over it.
April 15th, 2006 at 9:01 pm
Thanks again for the reply Urbanman.
No I am not a heretic at all.
Did I ever say ir imply that any of this would be possible without Christ?
Of course it’s not.
But to be a saviour one must save - would you agree?
To be the ’saviour of the world’ then you must in essence save every last person in the world, otherwise how you possible be a ’saviour of the world’?
Don’t mistake thinking outside the convention of the square circles of Orthodox Christianity as being Herectical Urban…
And don’t forget that the original scriptures were penned in Hebrew and Greek, if you bother to scratch a little deeper and ’study to show yourself approved’ you will see what I mean…
Here’s a question for you - what exactly does the phrase ‘As in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive’ actually mean?
WIGGY
April 15th, 2006 at 9:03 pm
Yeah, urban, what does it mean?
April 15th, 2006 at 9:09 pm
Not all, no.
Some folks give their kids problems that are entirely unintentional. And nothing to do with maths.
April 15th, 2006 at 9:16 pm
yes, they do, but that doesn’t mean that the giving of trials and struggles is an act of violence, or even non love.
the rev
April 15th, 2006 at 9:24 pm
Good call Rev man.
Urban - here’s some more meat for you to chew over:
“Though he were a Son, yet LEARNED he obedience by the things which he suffered; And BEING MADE perfect…” Hebrews 5.8-9
Christ was made perfect by the things he suffered.
What makes you think we shall get off with anything less?
Perfection (maturity, completion) is a process, not a state of being.
WIGGY
April 15th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
Yeah, urban, what does it mean?
Anonymous please try and bring something constructive to the discussion forum.
You are showing your lack of maturity with your pre-puberscent comments and mockery.
What does that scripture mean to you anonymous?
WIGGY
April 15th, 2006 at 9:30 pm
I never studied hebrew or Greek. As I said, I am a simple man. but it seems to me that Paul says that those who will be made alive with Christ, will be those that belong to him. Not every body in the world belongs to him. Commentary I read, howerver does point out that Paul expounds the passage on the significance of Christs Ressurection, by dwelling on the significance of everything. which may reenforce your point.
As I alluded to, I have an interest in contemplative prayer and theology which suggests this kind of view. I am not adverse to it. ( i was being slightly fecitious with the heretic remark) but neither do I swallow it wholesale..
April 15th, 2006 at 9:37 pm
Thanks for your thoughts Urban, I respect your opinion.
No these things cannot be ’swallowed’ - I totally agree with you.
With regards to Paul and the ‘As in Adam, All in Christ’ quote you are right that not everybody now belongs to him.
However they eventually will and hence Pauls comment ‘each in his own order’.
WIGGY
April 15th, 2006 at 9:45 pm
Rev: of course not. it is by trials that character is formed. Im alluding to my own bitterness..
Wigg..That is one of my favourite passages. But what I hear you suggesting, is that the fact that Jesus had to enter full humanity and LEARN OBEDIENCE by SUFFERING, despite being fully God, means that Humans did nothing to break their relationship with their creator that needed to be mended? does that make sense? Unlike us, Jesus was not subject to a sinful nature that bounded him to the need to learn by suffering. He chose it. ” It is in him that we move and have our being.”
I actually really gravitate to this point of view, that God showed us the way to salvation through sharing in our suffering. ( i have read some Dostoyevski) That does not mean that humans never broke the relationship that cuased the suffering in the first place.. if God designed sin to teach, what becomes of our free will? Of course this is doctrinal orthodoxy in some circles, but speculation none the less..
April 15th, 2006 at 9:51 pm
Anonnymous has gone missing…
April 15th, 2006 at 9:58 pm
Anonymous has been reading that passage from Corintheans - about the “all shall be made alive”. The context does not suggest that all will be reconciled to God. Only that all shall be made alive in a certain order. The author is not clear for what purpose everyone will be made alive.
April 15th, 2006 at 10:01 pm
Urban -
Yes man did sin but what I am saying is that the whole thing was a complete setup from the get go.
We all know the story don’t we?
Adam was NAKED and yet felt no shame.
He didn’t even know the difference between right and wrong at this stage of his life, he was complete immature baby.
Adam was simply ‘marred in the potter’s hand’ from the beginning.
Even though he sinned he did not need to be asked to sin or encouraged to do so, he was ‘drawn away by his own lusts’
“Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death” James 1.14-15
Do you really believe God had no intention of everything turning out the way it has?
Do you think we are operating in plan B?
As for you your comment on ‘Free Will’, the scriputres teach NO SUCH thing.
We have choice certainly but even those choices are caused and effected by others. And who is the effector of all this cause and effect?
Why the Grand Architect of course!
Did Pharoh have any ‘Free will’. Didn’t God choose to harden his heart?
What about King Nebuchanezzer?
Where was his ‘Free will’
Do you suppose he thought that going bush for 7 years would be a nice sea change from being an established King?
And Peter?
Didn’t his ‘Free will’ decide that he would not deny Christ on the night of his crucifixion?
We all know what became of that!
WIGGY
April 15th, 2006 at 10:16 pm
So we have the appearance of free will but are really just cleverly constructed automatons?
April 15th, 2006 at 10:18 pm
there is an obvious tension between omnipotence, omiscience, immanence, and the free will of marred pottery. Im starting to sound like Ned Flanders here, ( no offence Ned) But without the ability to choose, that Cancels out the purity of Gods love? And if the whole thing was a set up, ( I admit my position calls into question omnilpotence) then what does that say of our ability to choose? That means that most of Christian preaching and teaching through the ages has been in gross error. Not that that surprises me.
I refer you to the epistle to the Romans, chapter 1?
thoughts?
April 15th, 2006 at 10:28 pm
Anonymous you crack me up
No I never said we were automatons did I?
I just said we didn’t have what’s termed ‘Free will’
A ‘Free will’ by definition would be free from any external causes or ramifications would it not?
“The Lord hath prepared His throne in the heavens; and His kingdom ruleth over all” Psalm 103:19
In the fourth chapter of Daniel, God gives King Nebuchadnezzar a ‘troubling’ dream.
Four times in this one chapter we are told “…that the living may know that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomever He will, and setteth up over it the basest of men”
Daniel 4:17, 25, 26 & 32.
According to Daniel chapter four, God rules in the kingdoms of men and ‘wills’ to ’set up’ the “basest of men” over those kingdoms.
Even evil men are under the sovereign rule of the supreme authority according to the scriptures from Genesis to Revelation.
Though troubling to the carnal mind, even this assertion is acknowledged by most Christians.
The question naturally arises as to how far this sovereignty extends. Does God rule in the kingdoms of men, but not in the wills of men?
How could that possibly work?
If God wills to place base men over the kingdoms of men, it would seem He must first know which particular leader will not break down and repent of his low ways right in the middle of his rulership.
We are told emphatically and repeatedly that God had to “harden Pharaoh’s heart” to keep him from letting Israel go before God planned on their release from Egypt - Exodus 4:21, 7:13 & 22
Does God therefore harden the hearts only of world leaders, but not the hearts of the average individual?
What of Paul the apostle Anonymous?
Didn’t he hate the Christian world and it’s religion?
What became of his ‘Free will’ when he came face to face with his maker?
Saul as a zealous young church leader had consented to the stoning of righteous Stephen.
He was constantly “breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord” (Acts 9:1).
Let us observe how God reforms this “marred vessel”.
Observe how the goodness of God led Saul to repentance.
Saul went to the high priest “and desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way [following Christ], whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem” (Acts 9:1 & 2).
He ‘freely’ chose to slaughter the disciples of ‘this way’.
This Saul was a marred vessel in the hand of the Potter: “and the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the Potter” (Jer. 18:6) The Potter does not make mistakes.
He deliberately makes vessels to honor and vessels of dishonor.
The vessels of dishonor are endured “with much longsuffering” so God can “demonstrate His wrath and make His power known” (Rom. 9:22). These vessels of wrath are “fitted to destruction that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy which He hath AFORE prepared unto glory. Even us whom He hath called not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles.”
Saul’s experience demonstrates how God “destroys” a vessel of wrath.
“And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven. And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, who art thou Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do” (Acts 9:3-6)
At this point Saul’s highly esteemed ‘freedom of choice’ was looking very much like a pile of dung. “Kick against the pricks” is scriptural lingo for pitting our ‘free will’ against the will of the Potter.
Give it some thought Anonymous - I look forward to some serious banter with you on this topic.
I must sip my brandy now…
WIGGY