Tuesday: The Bible and Culture
Read Acts 17:16-32. In Acts chapter 17, Paul tried to deliver the gospel message in a new context: the philosophy of Greek culture. How do different cultural backgrounds impact how we evaluate the importance of various ideas?
A background knowledge of Near Eastern culture is helpful for understanding some biblical passages. “For example, Hebrew culture attributed responsibility to an individual for acts he did not commit but that he allowed to happen.
Image © Robert McKain at Goodsalt.com
Therefore, the inspired writers of the Scriptures commonly credit God with doing actively that which in Western thought we would say He permits or does not prevent from happening, for example, the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart”. — “Methods of Bible Study”, section 4.p.
Culture also raises some important hermeneutical questions. Is the Bible culturally conditioned, and thus only relative to that culture in what it asserts? Or does the divine message given in a particular culture transcend this particular culture and speak to all human beings? What happens if one’s own cultural experience becomes the basis and litmus test for our interpretation of Scripture?
In Acts 17:26, the apostle Paul gives an interesting perspective on reality that is often overlooked when people read this text. He states that God made us all from one blood. While we are culturally very diverse, biblically speaking there is a common bond that unites all people, despite their cultural differences, and that’s because God is the Creator of all humanity. Our sinfulness and our need of salvation is not limited to one culture. We all need the salvation offered to us by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Though God spoke to specific generations, He saw to it that future generations reading the Word of God would understand that those truths go beyond the local and limited circumstances during which the Bible texts were written.
As a parallel, think about algebra, which was first invented in the 9th century AD in Baghdad. Does this mean, then, that the truths and principles of this branch of mathematics are limited only to that time and place? Of course not.
The same principle applies to the truths of God’s Word. Though the Bible was written a long time ago in cultures very different from ours today, the truths it contains are as relevant to us now as they were to whom they were first addressed.
(35)
Just a short illustration of how understanding culture adds meaning to the Bible. I have mentioned this one before but it's appropriate for this discussion. We are all familiar with the text:
It was not until I was accidentally pointed to the practice in eastern countries of lining the floor of their baking ovens with slabs of rock salt that I realized what Jesus was referring to. In ancient times you did not buy your salt as white stuff in plastic containers. Rather you obtained slabs of rock salt - generally sandstone infused with salt. These were used to line the floor of the oven and during the heating process, the salt infused into the bread as it cooked. Obviously, after some time, the salt was used up and the remaining rock no longer flavoured the bread as it cooked. These slabs were then taken out, broken up, and thrown out on the road. Some eastern countries still use this sort of oven today.
It is not a big deal, but understanding the background to the comment made it more meaningful and served as a reminder that the Bible uses metaphors and illustrations that were very familiar to the listeners at the time.
God puts His principles" or laws in man's heart. Micah 6:8 clearly states what the basic principles are regardless of our culture, language or time in this earth. To be just, to love and have mercy and to walk humbly with God. In other Words depend on God to work in you and with you. This pretty much summarizes what Jesus expressed when He said that the 2 most important commandments were to LOVE God with all your mind, heart and soul and to Love others as yourself.
The Spirit of God is what helps us understand these most important but basic principles stated in ALL the Bible. When humans add their own rules and principles and processes to the Word, that's when we get lost in the translations.
The Bible is culturally conditioned, as one of the question pose in this section for the week. That doesn't mean the Bible is only applicable to that culture and time. Since the main story is about God and His relation to man and we with Him, the Bible's theme transcends all cultures and times. There is no culture that has exclusive rights to "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son."
Today's lesson hilights a vital point regarding Bible interpretation that "...Hebrew culture attributed responsibility to an individual for acts he did not commit but that he allowed to happen..." Consequently, to 'translate' the same meaning into "...Western thought we would say he (an individual) permits or does not prevent (the thing) from happening".
Many comments are rightly raised regarding why does it say in the Old Testament (and in New Testament quotes from the Old Testament) that God destroys or 'punishes' if that isn't what is actually happening? The above point regarding the widespread use of the Hebrew idiom of permission rather than causation addresses this dilemma (along with other relevant cultural considerations such as the 'developmental context' of that culture).
Take a moment to consider the biggest possible picture - how life actually operates and therefore what is necessary in order for a person to be truly alive and for creation to be in its necessary ordered (c/w chaotic) state. Keep in mind that God created the only kind of life that is viable - "abundant life" (as Jesus, the Creator, reiterated in John 10:10: Greek "zoe").
We can see from creation that there appear to be essentially two 'aspects' needed for life. One aspect is a 'life-energy' that courses through all aspects of creation that are alive - and that God is the Source of that life energy (ie "the breath of life", Genesis 2:7). The dispensing of life energy is an ongoing phenomenon rather than a once-off and therefore it is something that God necessarily ongoingly sustains across creation (Nehemiah 9:6; Acts 17:28). This is further reflected in God's nature as the I AM.
And in addition to and conjunction with a source of life energy, there is also a 'mechanism' through which that energy is manifest - the immutable Law (and associated laws) of life. I have previously written considerably regarding the fundamental nature of Law as the constants/principles upon which life is founded and maintained - with the most foundational principle being the Law of Agape/beneficent/self-giving love. Law (constant principles) is the 'mechanism' enables the necessary order that is a pre-requisite for life - the opposite of which is lawlessness (also known as 'sin': 1 John 3:4) which fosters chaos and resultant destruction. When seen in this light, it is easy to appreciate why Law (constant principles) is the foundation of 'God's government' (ie abundant life) and that it is "immutable" (cannot be changed because it is what enables life to be viable).
Because these two dimensions/aspects are absolutely necessary for life, living in harmony (ie 'obedience' with) with those two dimensions/aspects is essentially a non-negotiable because life is not possible any other way. This is why Jesus could validly say that He (and therefore 'God's way') is the only Way, Truth and Life (John 14:6).
One other vital point to also have in mind is the essential necessity of freedom of each created being. Consequently, we are not forced to live in harmony with what is essential for viable life - we are free to choose the path of non-life/"perish" if we want to (Joshua 24:15; Proverbs 14:12; 1 John 2:16,17, etc).
So what happens if someone chooses to attempt to live out of harmony with these two essential dimensions? This is precisely what God instructed/cautioned Adam and Eve in regard to in Genesis 2:16,17.
Unfortunately, because God graciously intervened on the day they ate of the fruit of the tree (because they transferred their allegiance to The Serpent/Satan instead and in doing so disconnected themselves from the Source of Life and also acted out of harmony with the Law/s of life), we easily miss the point that they should have died on that very day (and that this planet should have imploded too) and that this would have been due to the inherent consequences of the reality of what is necessary for life. And because God intervened to restrain (see Revelation 7:1; 2 Thessalonians 2:6,7) this inherent consequence, we mistakenly have developed the presupposition that life is the default state for anyone and everything. The reason I say everything is that because Adam and Eve also were created inseparably linked to the natural world (Genesis 1:28), when they 'fell' and disconnected from order to chaos, so did all of nature. This is why the 'curses' God describes in Genesis 3 (and elsewhere throughout scripture) are not imposed or inflicted 'punishments' - they are in fact inherent consequences.
Ephesians 4:18 underscores what I have attempted to describe as best I can above when it succinctly describes that choosing to attempt to live out of harmony with the two essential dimensions of life that results in "alienation" or "self-banishment" from life. That is the actual 'mechanism' of how 'punishment' and 'destruction' occurs. It is an inherent outcome of how reality operates (Note: I am NOT implying that reality is something separate from God).
Because we have mistakenly developed the presupposition that life is the default state of fallen humanity (guess where that notion came from: Genesis 3:4), we miss what God is actually doing by mistakenly thinking that God is taking something away from us that we have a 'right' to. Rather, because "steal, kill and destroy" is in fact the default reality of this world under the inherent consequences of 'the fall', God has of necessity needed to constantly and continuously restrain the inherent consequences from manifesting to their full extent. Because of the principle expressed in 2 Peter 3:9, God is doing this to create a temporary 'space and time' where people can have opportunity for a second-chance at salvation. However, in addition to God's need to restrain our (and the natural kingdom's) inherent consequences, there is also unfortunately a need to release this restrain to varying degrees at various times and in various ways for at least two reasons. One, to preserve the opportunity for salvation (including having kept open the avenue for Messiah). And two, to allow revelation of the actual reality under the Kingdom of Darkness (because the restraint that God is providing mistakenly leads people to think that there is a viable life apart from God).
What was the point of what I have outlined in as brief detail as possible? This is the backdrop to appreciation of the significance and therefore necessity of interpreting scripture through the eyes of the Hebrew idiom mentioned in today's lesson (permission as opposed to causation) and of other wider aspects of cultural relevance in order that our presuppositions more closely align with those that enable a more accurate picture of God to be seen in and from scripture. This is what Jesus came to do - to repair the mistaken presuppositions that had accumulated since Genesis 3. This is why Jesus life, ministry and teachings are the 'recalibration' that our mistaken presuppositions need (John 17:3,6).
I do not claim to be the originator of the view I have attempted to outline above. There are many that have gone before me that have also discovered this 'big picture' and there are many others who are re-discovering it currently. I am not merely adopting someone else's view - it is what my bible study has opened my eyes (gradually) to see. At many times along the way I am concerned that perhaps I am in error because it is so different to what I have previously seen all my life. Each time I am deeply concerned, I ask God to show me. And He always does by not only confirming what I have found so far, but by also showing me one step further. What is emerging is a harmonious view of God and scripture that is in accordance with its core theme - John 3:16 - and Jesus black and white summary statement in John 10:10: that all life is exclusively attributable to God and all sources and forms of destruction (the opposite of life) are exclusively attributable to another entity - the thief that first manifest as a usurped/stolen/hijacked 'The Serpent' in Eden and who was not a part of God's creation (Genesis 3:1). It was this 'The Serpent' that first deceptively insinuated that God was in fact the source of destruction and 'punishment' (Genesis 3:4,5) and has been doing so ever since.
God saves - it is sin that destroys and 'punishes'. This is the 'message' of hope that we have to live (and share) within our currently falling-apart world (2 Peter 3:15) where the winds of strife are in the process of being progressively released from restraint (Revelation 7:1).
I am not telling anyone what they must think. I am merely offering a reasoned and Biblically-supported and Scripturally consistent/unified presentation for consideration by anyone who may be interested...
God guide and bless you as you prayerfully consider and investigate this for yourself...
Phil, you stated:
"However, in addition to God's need to restrain our (and the natural kingdom's) inherent consequences, there is also unfortunately a need to release this restraint to varying degrees at various times and in various ways for at least two reasons."
Phil, Like Agrippa said to Paul - Act 26:28 KJV "Almost thou persuadest me" so please help me understand a passage like the Passover in terms of releasing inherent consequences.
Exo 12:29 KJV And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.
Shirley, please permit me to answer your question as well. I am a bit long-winded but hope that you will indulge me.
It is quite possible that a scholar of hermeneutics, familiar with the original text, could add an interesting explanation of why the bible text reads 'God smote the firstborn'.
Let me assure you, though - God allowed the destroying angel to harm the firstborn of the Egyptians. God's essence remains pure. His directive also included saving those that put the lamb's blood on their lintels. He did not perform the destructive act himself. His involvement was to save the obedient by His Grace.
Before continuing to read, please Google 'destroying angel' and read Wikipedia's definition. It will shed light on the destructive force active in Egypt and elsewhere in the Scriptures.
2. Kings 19:35 speaks also to this angel of the LORD.
God provided a way out before calamity fell on the children of disobedience. He provided his protective Grace to all who believed - Egyptians and the Israelite alike.
God is full of Grace! Trust in God's mercy and promise to protect them from harm, the Israelite acted on this trust (faith) by applying the blood of the lamb which saved them even then.
The account of Job and his relationship with the LORD is also a good example to help us understand which power is doing the work of destruction.
As you can read in the second chapter of the book of Job, beings called sons of God to appear to have various responsibilities and came 'to present themselves before the Lord' - Satan was among them.
Now, he is no longer in heaven, but was cast to earth and wanders the earth until the end 'to seek whom he may devour'.
Satan was the accuser and enemy of man from early on. After the Fall, he looked for ways to accuse man before God to cause him to be separated from the family of God in order to make him a citizen of his world of darkness.
A good example to describe God's relationship with Satan, His adversary, is found in the book of Job. Job 2:1-7.
God gave His PERMISSION to Satan and allowed him to tempt Job, but the acts of malice where inflicted by Satan, not God. Verse 5 and 6 - ...' And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in THINE hand, but save his life'. Satan uses his power to only one end - to destroy. God temporarily removed His protection when He placed Job into Satan's hand.
It was the removal of HIS PROTECTION that enabled Satan's malice to hurt Job. And this was done only to prove to Satan that Job was God's child, no matter what. No matter how severe the infliction Job suffered, he did not lose faith in the Lord's goodness and righteousness.
I am certain that God watched with a heavy heart the suffering of His servant Job during the trial of his faith.
I am sure that God was very joyful when, in the end, He could restore Job's health and material possessions, including giving him more children, beyond what Job had enjoyed before this tremendous trial of his faith.
God will do the same for those who come through the Great Tribulation. He will restore to us the joy of living among the riches of his creation without the fear of loss.
Pharaoh was given the choice to submit to God's authority and let God's chosen people go, or be confronted with the consequences coming because of refusal. The Israelite people were given the same choice.
Both were offered protection. Had Pharaoh allowed the departure of God's people, no one would have suffered the loss. But he chose to defy God and therefore removed himself from God's protection.
The full impact of the destructive force unleashed by the destroying angel of the LORD descended on Pharaoh and on those of God's people that did not apply the blood to their lintels.
You can see that malice does not reside in God, but rather in Satan. He is the evildoer from the beginning. Yes, the LORD sent this angel, in Him reside all the authority in heaven, but He Himself remains pure. After all, it is He that holds the power of life and death.
Even though God permits acts of chastening to refine mankind to seek shelter under His wing, He will not allow it to be utterly destroyed. This would be the final result should Satan be allowed to reign unrestrained by Grace.
Matt.10:28 - And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
His essence of Agape and Grace do not permit that.
Hi Shirley
If there is any persuading happening, let it be by the Holy Spirit - not me...
The bottom line awareness that needs to be kept in mind is that God/Jesus is all about abundant life - as per Jesus summary declaration in John 10:10. It is all God can do. Death and destruction is what happens when anyone disconnects from God and His principles for Love and Life (or as Ellen White says "separate themselves from God, cut themselves off from the channel of blessing" (ie avenue of Life). Thus, because Adam and Eve did this, the default state of humanity and nature is destruction unless God restrains this. God does not need to remove life for us to die - humanity under the first Adam has already done this. This is our human inheritance. Consequently, why we need to be adopted into the inheritance of Life of the Second Adam via rebirth (John 3:3-6).
Because of this reality, anyone is only alive on this earth (until mortality is exchanged for immortality at the second coming - which is essentially a restoration back to the pre Genesis 3 state) because of God's 'temporary' restraint of the inherent results of sin that are embedded in our fallen/sin-infected planet. And the only reason God undertakes this restraint is for the purpose of advancing salvation and for revealing to all created beings the true nature of lawlessness.
This is in opposition to our assumed/presupposed view of reality and life where we mistakenly subconsciously consider that life is our default state - and therefore that God needs to remove that life for those that don't 'deserve' it.
I note that prior to the flood, God does not appear to have released the restraint he had to initiate when Adam and Eve fell (keeping mind that God had previously initiated the same restraint at the fall of Lucifer: as per Desire of Ages 764). I propose that God released restraint on a large scale in response to Genesis 6:5 state of affairs as not doing so would soon have resulted in the extinction of the earth's population under the maleficence of people's evil desires and associated behaviours. But after the flood God committed to not again (until the second coming) releasing restraint on a global scale. Thus we see instead the releasing of restraint on smaller scales - such as in the showdown between God and Egypt's gods and it's Pharaoh. This was a key situation where the avenue of salvation was again at risk under the oppression of Egypt against the line of Messiah.
Keeping all this in mind, we note Exodus 12:12 which contains key elements:
1) God will pass through the land and "strike down/smite" all the firstborn of the land of Egypt, and
2) that this was an 'action' against all the gods of Egypt, and
3) that this was God executing judgments.
These terms and concepts cannot be interpreted aside from presuppositions that underpin them. These are the presuppositions that I now hold and the evidence for these presuppositions.
1) The Hebrew idiom of causation as allowance/permission. God is passing through the land to allow/permit the striking down/smiting of the firstborn of Egypt via releasing the restraint that He had heretofore been exercising against the default death state of humanity.
The Hebrew word that has been translated as strike down/smite is derived from the root word nakah which is a word that can be literal or figurative. In its figurative usage, it means to do something that will result in someone else being worse off. We still use this concept today when we say someone has been 'struck down' by an illness. The thing that God will do is release restraint of the inherent outcomes of sin that He was previously restraining and as a consequence, death will be unleashed upon those who are out of harmony with what is necessary for Life (as the Egyptians were under their allegiance to their 'gods').
It is interesting to note 1 Chronicles 21:15 which is very similar. We similarly see God sending (Hebrew idiom for releasing/permitting/allowing) a destroying angel through Jerusalem. But after a certain amount of destruction had been unleashed, God 'relented' (a word I am interested in doing more investigation into) and notably instructs the angel to restrain his hand. The implication is that the angel had been doing the opposite of restraining - that is releasing - and was being asked to cease from releasing and once again return to an orientation of restraint.
This accords with what we find in Revelation 7:1 where the angels are 'holding back' - restraining - the four winds of the earth. Note they are holding back the winds of the earth - the earth is the source of the winds and the angels are not generating the winds. But the angels will subsequently be releasing their restraint (as per Revelation 7:3) upon those who do not have the seal of God (notably equivalent to the Egyptians being under allegiance to their gods).
I believe this is a reflection of letting scripture interpret scripture.
2) God was trying to give people a 'wake-up' opportunity to see that life is only possible under Him and His principles of Love and Life - not under any other religious belief system/world-view of 'reality'. God was doing this via releasing restraint of the default state of inherent consequences under lawlessness/sin to give people an opportunity to 'give their gods a go' at addressing these consequences (as per, for example, Isaiah 46:5-7).
I suspect the limiting to first born in this instance was in response to a particular significance of first born to the Egyptian religion under their gods. I will need to do more research on this suggestion...
3) God's 'judgment' is His revealing/unveiling the truth of what is. We see this reflected in Ecclesiastes 12:14 which parallels 1 Corinthians 4:5. This conception of judgment is also reflected in passages such as John 3:18-21 where it also says (v 19) that the judgment is that people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil (reminiscent of Genesis 6:5). This 'judgment' is an unveiling of what is going on. Consequently, God's 'executing judgments' against the Egyptian gods was the unmasking/revealing that they were infact impotent to do anything about the unrestrained consequences that are the inherent default state under a sin-infected condition.
Thus, the Hebrew idiom of causation as permission/allowance/release of that which was previously restrained is in accordance with:
a) the essential preconditions that are necessary for life (ie how reality operates) and
b) God's role as restrainer of those inherent consequences in order to provide an opportunity for salvation.
I am reminded that this was also reflected in the Red Sea event. God restrained the waters for the Israelites and then released them back to their default state for the Egyptian army. He restrained the waters to 'open up' the avenue for salvation/Messiah/abundant life restoration and subsequently released them to their default state for those who were abusing this restraint to instead seek to destroy life.
One final point: Satan's insinuated allegation/deception in Genesis 3:4,5 is telling. Satan is insinuating that Eve won't die if she puts herself out of harmony with God and 'His revealed ways' because life is the default state no matter what. This is where this subtle yet powerful presupposition originated. If this was in fact the case, then God would need to remove life from people - like most people/Christians think. But because the truth is that life only is viably possible under God and 'His ways (principles of Love and Life), when anyone elects to be out of harmony with God and 'His ways' (which they are free to do), they will correspondingly forfeit life - God does not need to remove it. Life dissolves/disappears/ceases to exist just like darkness in the presence of life. No wonder Jesus/God is described as both Light and the Life. So how is it that ungodly people are 'alive'. As Inge once described, their true state is not Life, but rather "the walking dead".
May God guide your consideration and further reflection/investigation as you imitate the Bereans (Acts 17:11)...
Phil, is it possible that God, in His great mercy, did a striking-down of the first-born to prevent a traumatic first-death? He’s not punishing them for their sin, they will be resurrected in either the first or second resurrection.
Hi Gary
Thanks for your input.
The God I now see in Scripture is - above all - compassionate (Hebrew translation of the first and overarching/underpinning character and nature attribute self-revealed by God in Exodus 34:6,7). Consequently, I find and believe God to be motivated by and to carry out everything He does for compassionate purposes and in a compassionate manner. When God dwelt among us, we only see Him reducing suffering, never inflicting suffering. It is lawlessness/sin that inflicts suffering.
Therefore I believe your suggestion is both plausible and supported by whole-of-scripture evidence.
(Only clarification I would say is that God allowed/released the first born to be ‘struck down’ - He did not strike them down as God is not and cannot be the author of death (as per John 10:10). It is antithesis of Him as the Source of Life - the I Am.)
Why would God even resurrect the lost if there were no need for judgment? And it is God Who resurrects the wicked, it's not somehow a consequence of their wickedness or the "releasing" of deadness**.
The implication that love is incompatible with justice is nowhere to be found in any version of the Bible I've read.
**We appear to be going down a rabbit hole with no end and it appears to be further and further removed from "it is written."
Hi Sieg
Thank you for your expression of concern.
To clarify, I have not said and am not at any time saying there is no such thing as ‘judgment’ or that God is not involved with ‘justice’ per se. Rather, what you will find I am putting forward is that there is strong biblical support that the form/type of ‘judgment’ and ‘justice’ that God exercises is radically different to the one that has been and is typically ascribed to God. As such, God’s expression/s of these and many other concepts reflect higher ways (Isaiah 55:8,9) than our typical human expression/s.
Thank you for sharing this truth. We as a people become complacent and need to have our reality rechecked all the time.
Please post this as an article in ssnet so it can stand out from daily posting comments.
It takes time to digest what you have written. We inspire each other in this journey.
Thanks Newbegin. I didn’t want to ignore your suggestion. However it would appear that what I have outlined is a cause for concern for some, so I won’t submit for a separate post at this point. But thanks again for the thought - it is appreciated.
Phil
The interpretive paradigm of "permit but did not do" does not apply to every situation. God is actively involved with His creation and even though some sins have their natural consequences (God doesn't have to do any punishing) other sins will be actively punished by God.
God did send the flood to punish the antedeluvians and He will send fire some day to punish those who rebel against His kingdom. "I will punish the world for its evil, the wicked for their sins. I will put an end to the arrogance of the haughty and will humble the pride of the ruthless." (Isaiah 13:11)
Hello Ray.
God did or did not personally do. Regardless, the flood happened...but as punishment? Will not the antediluvian races all be resurrected?...Some to everlasting life and some to everlasting destruction...?
Perhaps as Phil suggested, God was preserving the path of the Messiah?
I can only take what the Bible says:
1 Peter 3:6,7 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Except you are adverse to the word "punish"? Does "wages" of sin sound better? I know that God is ACTIVELY involved in judgment of the sinner and its is not just a matter of "natural consequences" of the laws broken.
Just to clarify a misconception that keeps cropping up.
Saying that God is not the causative source of the destructive forces that He releases restraint of is not the same as saying that God is merely being passive.
God is active in restraining or releasing of restraint (these are not passive processes). However, that is not the same as saying that God is the causative source/agent of destruction and/or that God is responsible for the destruction. Human free will is responsible for the destruction that is unleashed by humanity/people engaging lawlessness/sin (1 John 3:4). God is only releasing His heretofore exercised restraint against that which has been unleashed in respect for the freedom that each member of His creation has to engage lawlessness and in doing so unleash destruction. Paul refers to this process as "giving up" or "giving over" in Romans 1:24,26,28 - God's higher way/form of the phenomenon humans term 'wrath' (Romans 1:18).
God, by His inherent nature, cannot (and of His own free will does not) engage lawlessness/sin. Because sin/lawlessness fosters destruction (it can't not), if God were to engage lawlessness, God would enter a sinful state and He too would come to an end in doing so (as lawlessness/sin is incompatible with life).
This is not mere human reasoning - it is an explanation of what we observe in the fall of Lucifer and of Adam and Eve.
"God has given in His word decisive evidence that He will punish the transgressors of His law. Those who flatter themselves that He is too merciful to execute justice upon the sinner, have only to look to the cross of Calvary. The death of the spotless Son of God testifies that “the wages of sin is death,” that every violation of God's law must receive its just retribution. Christ the sinless became sin for man. He bore the guilt of transgression, and the hiding of His Father's face, until His heart was broken and His life crushed out. All this sacrifice was made that sinners might be redeemed. In no other way could man be freed from the penalty of sin. And every soul that refuses to become a partaker of the atonement provided at such a cost must bear in his own person the guilt and punishment of transgression." GC p. 539
Phil, when Achan was stoned with his family and was buried with all they possessed under a pile of rock, was this a lawless act?
Are you setting limits on the love of the Infinite God? Do you understand all things well enough to pass such judgment?
To Ray's contribution:
The same author also wrote:
"We are not to regard God as waiting to punish the sinner for his sin. The sinner brings the punishment upon himself. His own actions start a train of circumstances that bring the sure result. Every act of transgression reacts upon the sinner, works in him a change of character, and makes it more easy for him to transgress again. By choosing to sin, men separate themselves from God, cut themselves off from the channel of blessing, and the sure result is ruin and death." (1SM 235.2)
How do we reconcile these two quotes by the same author?
To Robert's contribution:
Achan was stoned to death (Joshua 7:25). Where do I find God directing that Achan be stoned?
I stand by the proposition that God is the author of life via lawfulness and that Satan is the author of death/destruction via lawlessness. God, in love, reluctantly but nevertheless decisively will release all to the way of death whose hardened hearts have chosen the way of the perishing.
Am I sitting in judgment on God and setting limits on His love? Each person who reads what I share will need to make that judgment/assessment for themselves via their own study to see what conclusions they come to.
@Phil
The sinner bringing punishment on himself is not the same as punishing himself. So I don't see any conflict in those two statements of Ellen White.
That is why the wicked will be resurrected by God so that they can be judged and receive the rewards for all their deeds. God does the resurrecting and the punishing that they bought on themselves by their choices.
Phil, your quote and Ray's quote dovetail perfectly. Both are supported by Ex 34:6,7 aren't they? God IS the Author/Creator of all life, and rightfully, the only one worthy to take away the life of any who would oppose all that is good, robbing His kingdom of peace. Only He can exercise perfect justice.
As for your reply concerning Achan, would Joshua go against the will of God in stoning Achan, especially under those present circumstances?! What do we read in Joshua 7:25,26? Isn't this rather clear?
Also, I would be interested to know your response to Ellen's thoughts on the flood as found on PP, 92, 96.(your use of Ellen tells me you see the evidence of God's working in her messages to His people) I find these ideas in agreement with the sense given in the Bible account. Notice on page 96 how the people had come to believe "that it was contrary to the character of God to punish transgression", and what had led them to this conclusion.
I didn't need to read PP to understand this, and have arrived at this same conclusion from "sola scriptura".
While your thoughts are not misleading me, like you, I am addressing a challenge of God's Word.
Phil, just to add some support to your discussion, Dennis Praeger in his recent Book, Genesis, discusses this exact topic of God permitting rather than causing events. In addition to being a radio talk show host, Dennis is quite the scholar of historic Judaism and the Torah.
Phil! 👍 is not enough!
Growing up in an SDA environment, “obedience” to the law (10 commandments and all accompanying traditions) was necessary in order to remain part of the SDA culture. But!, understanding the “backstory” has made the Bible Story the story of story’s, and so much easier to see God’s character and His supernatural-heroic efforts (OT & NT) to save humanity...and restore creation.
I’m convinced..God is good through all time...even though I see through a dark glass.
Phil, I would like to share my current understanding of your ideas about God being too nice to do what His word appears to claim He did.
I believe that the Love of God is beyond what we can ever understand, especially in this life, and that His actions are not unjust, or the Adversary would be sure to call everyone's attention to it. However, what do we find instead? Satan has convinced most of the world to think the flood is a myth, God is a false hope, and the Bible is a book of naive tales for those who need something more than themselves to face the uncertainty of the present and future. And for those who claim to believe the word of God he leads some to believe contrary to the account as given due to human reasoning over what some feel a loving God could never do and still be loving.
God's actions are not evil or unjust, and His sovereignty is beyond our understanding and thus our judgement. He has proven His goodness and in time, we will understand what today may seem a conflicting mystery to some. What is clear to us we may believe, and what is not must not be allowed to shake our faith(Deut 29:29).
I recommend all to pray for God's leading on these and all questions of faith, and to remove every known obstacle from our lives that God may give His Spirit freely. I would also urge all to take Ellen's counsel; "Until you can see the reason for it yourself and a ''thus saith the Lord'' in the Scriptures, don't trust any living man to interpret the Bible for you". ("Faith and Works", pg 77)
The Psalmist writes; "and the Truth of the Lord endures forever", and Jesus said "Thy Word is Truth"(Ps 117:2; John 17:17). Therefore the Word endures forever, and we have the same truth as the Bereans.
Do we trust God and His Word, even if we can't understand all His actions? Is not Jesus, the Lamb of(from) God who died in our place, that we sinners might become new creatures and have eternal Life, evidence enough to trust even if we don't understand fully?
(Many of your points I must challenge, but not here. I cannot see what you claim to see and many of the passages cited appear misapplied to me.)
"I recommend all to pray for God's leading on these and all questions of faith, and to remove every known obstacle from our lives that God may give His Spirit freely. I would also urge all to take Ellen's counsel; "Until you can see the reason for it yourself and a ''thus saith the Lord'' in the Scriptures, don't trust any living man to interpret the Bible for you". ("Faith and Works", pg 77)"
I whole-heartedly endorse what you have said in this quote Robert.
So, what am I to do if I am praying for God's leading as I study to know Him and His Ways more and to remove every known obstacle from my life that I may be freely given His Spirit - and that what I am sharing is the ongoing outcome of this ongoing prayer?
However, absolutely should no-one believe what I say because I say it. I have said this before and I will continue to say it. I can only share what I am learning and invite others to study it out for themselves.
I know you and I see things differently - and if what I am saying is misleading to you, I would suggest you don't read my posts.
Regards, Phil
Phil - Thank you for staying the course. Yes, there are fellow travelers!
Physics has always intrigued me. A while back, I coined the phrase: 'Life takes place between the molecules'. It seemed to me that the real live force is not seen by men. Right now, physicist are starting to look into dark matter and what else goes on 'between the molecules'.
As I understand it, the universe is filled with electrically charged particles. They manifest in visible and invisible form - light and matter. The lower the frequency, the more compacted particles become and eventually manifest as matter.
Often, I pondered what and why it happened that Lucifer turned against the Creator. God grieved over his fallen angel, Lucifer.
It appears to me that the order of physical matter challenged the creative power of God's Spirit as the dominant, authoritative power. Lucifer was given the responsible to govern the physical domain. He was invested in the maintenance and order of physical matter and all that relates to that. That was his domain.
But God, the Creator, is Spirit - the creative power - He does what pleases Himself. Yes, after the Fall, God extended His Grace; the only power that is still holding this present world together and made it possible for us to be rescued.
Like you said, 'the winds of strife are in the process of being progressively released from God's restraining Grace.' Rev.7:1
The value of the whole world is regarded as nothing in comparison with the value of a rescued soul being reunited with his/her creator. Matt.16:23-28 -
Such is the power of God's Light - Agape, versus the power of darkness.
In Hinduism to call a man a sinner is sin because we are all gods. The body is riddled with sin but aatma (soul) is pure cannot be defiled by sin. However, the soul can only return to God when the body is purified of all sin and made perfect.
Christians preach we have all sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God. Can you see the cultural dichotomy of presenting the gospel to a culture that believes you are a god?
Karma (what goes around comes around) even Christians we cannot deny the fact there are effects of sinful behavior so there is a blurred line between karma and not all life events are effects of sinful behavior.
Let me give an example when a smoker comes up with the lung cancer we can easily attribute that to smoking but when someone lived a health conscious life have followed all the health principles and comes up with lung cancer the closest answer I can give is we are in a sinful world not all life events can be explained. For a person who believes in karma the cancer for the second person is very simple it is the karma from his pervious life actions. It helps them to accept the evil of the world as actions initiated by humanity. They believe there is no escape from the karma.
As Christians we have a great message not all life events are based on karma. Suffering is the result of sin. God has provided a way of escape from this sinful life. We don’t have to be reborn infinity to rid our body of sin. There is a savior who has paid the price therefore in the life to come we can be united with Him but even now when we accept Him, we can experience of the newness of life. Can you imagine the burden being lifted from a person who felt there is no escape?
We have a great message let the Spirit of God make this message crystal clear so that the world may be enlightened with His glory.
God is love.
For the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Magazine: Scientific America- In science we trust.
“I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe.... will be everlastingly punished. And this is a damnable doctrine.”- Charles Darwin
Who wants to serve such a God like that? Isn’t God a God of love. Many church and non-church people held that view. Two sides, Christ and Satan. Agree with Phil, God does not punish. What happens as God withdrawals the Holy Spirit and his protecting angels, Satan, and his angels takes over. People get to see the results of sin.
Rev 15: John saw the mercy, the tenderness, and the love of God blending with His holiness, justice, and power. He saw sinners finding a Father in Him of whom their sins had made them afraid. And looking beyond the culmination of the great conflict, he beheld upon Zion “them that had gotten the victory . . . stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God,” and singing “the song of Moses” and the Lamb (Revelation 15:2, 3). AA 589
I mentioned before about my past arthritis pain, I went to God, he told me it’s the excess sugar I was using. If I continue with the sugar I can’t blame God for inflicting pain on me.
Different cultures emerged naturally because of sin. Because of him, over the years, the population was divided into different languages in the episode of the Tower of Babel, countries, peoples and ideologies, etc. And so, different cultures emerged. GOD did not create mankind to be divided into different cultures, nations and languages, but to be a single, united people, all loving one another. It was sin that brought divisions between us, and that resulted in wars and rumors of wars. Today we have competition, specialized trade in each country, sectorized production, food production with high technology. Everything seems normal, but everything is abnormal. It seems normal because we are inserted in it like fish in water. But we must pay attention, and based on the Bible, do not get used to it and think that as it is happening it is correct. In the case of today's study, here on Earth there is no culture approved by GOD. Although GOD made us into a couple, which indicates that humanity should be a harmony, unity, not countless different and antagonistic groups.
We Adventists should develop our own culture, close to what the Bible teaches, that prepares us for heavenly culture. For example, when it comes to food, today we should be exponents, examples to the world. Only the small group of Loma Linda is setting a good example of healthy living. We should be vaccinated, by the Bible, against the influences of the cultures of this world. We are not of this world, we are of another kingdom, just as the kingdom of JESUS was not of this world.
We should be modest in dress, be the best professionals in any profession, be the best students, have music different from the world that is beautiful as EGW guides, be honest in everything, have a good relationship in the church, in the family and in society, be respected in society as exemplary, reliable and competent people. Jews are an example, even today, of technological competence and capacity. We should have a culture of healthy and obedient people to GOD in everything.
We already studied in the April 21 lesson, how culture influences the interpretation of the Bible. One thing is the reality that is happening. We, the people of GOD, are being influenced more by culture than by the Bible.
I would hesitate to say that the differences in culture are the result of sin. The problem arises when people exploit cultural differences in a way to control or oppress others. Part of the enjoyment of life is experiencing different cultures. I have not travelled all that widely but I did spend some time in teaching Thailand. It is based largely on Buddhist culture and the one thing I did learn from them was the importance of serenity. You could drive up a one-way street the wrong way and you would be treated with kindness. Try that in Australia and you would probably be lynched!
I am not suggesting that everything in every culture is good. In particular, those aspects of a culture that assert superiority are based on pride and selfishness - the oldest sin in the book.
I'm just wondering!
Who will destroy the destroyer?
God?
Satan himself?
Just wondering why we think that God cannot be life-giver and also life-taker.
Or is He too loving to hurt and destroy??
Just wondering!
Satan isn't going to commit suicide.
Someone has to destroy him.
Who will it be?
Just wondering!
"Who will destroy the destroyer?"
How would Jesus answer this question?
"What do the scriptures say? What do you read there?", or something like that.
So let's take a look at what God tells us through His servants the prophets, since He does nothing without revealing His secrets to them first, as with Abraham concerning Sodom and Gomorrah(Gen 18:16-33).
In Ezekiel 28:17,18 the word of the Lord gives us insights on this matter which seem to agree with what God told the serpent about the Seed of the woman bruising the serpent's head in Gen 3:15. Rev 20:9,10 is another prophetic view of this event which supports these other passages.
Jesus told us not to fear him who can kill the body, but to fear Him who can destroy both body and soul. There is only one Being in all of scripture we are called to fear.
Can we know the certainty of the "words of truth"(Prov 22:20,21)?
Monday and Tuesday "very good lessons."
For me, the biblical issue of culture comes up mostly with foot washing and polygamy.
1: Was foot-washing meant to continue for the world, or was it just for that culture?
I can see where this act of humility is needed in that time and culture, but no one travels with dusty feet anymore.
2: No one was ever condemned by God for polygamy. In-fact God said that he gave to David several wives, and if David wanted more God would have given him more. (2 Samuel 12.8 And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.) Was this only relevant for that culture at that time, or does the bible truly transcend all cultures?
From 27 fundamental doctrines: marriage:
"Although Scripture describes plural marriages as a cultural reality in the time of the patriarchs, its description clearly shows that those marriages did not attain the divine ideal..."
A "cultural reality" in which God takes part.
While on the topic of "culture" let us through in Female pastors and bishops. Was the fact that no female ever held the office of priest or bishop in the bible just a cultural issue?
"Moderator Note" The last paragraph of this comment is a legitimate and relevant question. However, since this topic has generated such heated debate in the church, Sabbath School Net administrators have chosen not to allow this platform to be used for such debate. Instead, we suggest you prayerfully take this question to the Lord and ask the Holy Spirit to enlighten your understanding.
In regard to some of the discussion here about "culture"(?):
Jesus told a parable in Matt 22, and as the story unfolds, He tells how the King would "send His armies" to destroy those who had abused the King's servants who were only obeying their King.
Is the King then responsible for the destruction of the city or does His army take the blame? (How would YOUR culture regard you if you sent someone to kill another for you?)
So what was Jesus saying in the parable of the wedding feast in regard to the King sending "his armies"?
Keep in mind the words of the Roman General himself when he acknowledged that Divine power had given him the victory that he realized he could not have gained by human power, and though having given an order to not harm the temple, the words of Jesus concerning it were fulfilled in its utter destruction. (remind you of the Battle Creek fires?)
We must tread cautiously when we try to explain God's word to say something other than how it reads. How do you suppose God will regard any effort to change the meaning of His Word? If it goes beyond the meaning of the language and requires a LOT of explanation, are we taking a great risk?
Do we go by "thus saith the Lord" or "thus implieth the Lord"?