Wednesday: Crucibles of Purification
“Therefore thus says the LORD of hosts: ‘Behold, I will refine them and try them; for how shall I deal with the daughter of My people?’” (Jeremiah 9:7, NKJV).
“If the Spirit of God brings to your mind a word of the Lord that hurts you, you can be sure that there is something in you that He wants to hurt to the point of its death.” — Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest (Uhrichsville, OH: Barbour & Company, Inc., 1963), p. 271.
How do you understand the quote and Bible verse above? What has been your own experience with the pains involved in the purification process?
Read Jeremiah 9:7-16. God says that he will “refine and test” (NRSV), or “melt” (KJV), Judah and Jerusalem (Jeremiah 9:7, NIV). What two reasons does God give for this? (Jeremiah 9:13-14). How will the refining happen? (Jeremiah 9:15-16).
Image © Kevin Carden at Goodsalt.com
God’s refining and testing involved drastic action. There are perhaps three reasons why refining and testing may feel like a crucible. First, we experience pain as God allows circumstances to bring our sin to our attention. A little earlier, Jeremiah unhappily writes, “The bellows blow fiercely to burn away the lead with fire, but the refining goes on in vain; the wicked are not purged out” (Jeremiah 6:29, NIV). Thus, sometimes drastic action is needed in order to get our attention. Second, we experience anguish as we feel sorrow for the sin we now see clearly. Third, we experience frustration as we try to live differently. It can be quite uncomfortable and difficult to keep choosing to give up the things that have been so much a part of us.
| Think about the sins that you struggle with. If God were going to refine and test you today, how might He do it? What action could you take now to deal with this before God would want to take drastic steps with you, as He did with Israel? |
(30)
You may recall that yesterday's lesson stated:
Consistent with this, today's lesson hilights that "God allows circumstances to bring our sin to our attention" - even when God is taking "drastic action". This aligns with the view of God that I proposed a while back as Master Orchestrator of reality, working/weaving (Greek: synergei) all things together for ultimate good (Romans 8:28).
I would propose that the above descriptions reflects God's "higher ways" of being and doing as an authoritative rather than authoritarian sovereign who masterfully orchestrates the myriad of dynamics within an inherent rather than imposed reality for ultimate good - even though there are unfortunately unavoidably inherently painful experiences amid that for now due to being within a sin-fallen world for now.
Biblical references you can look into that comment on the above points include Galatians 6:7-8, James 1:14-15, Romans 6:23 and Romans 8:2.
What do you find?
I would propose that the above descriptions reflects God's "higher ways" of being and doing as an authoritative rather than authoritarian sovereign who masterfully orchestrates the myriad of dynamics within an inherent rather than imposed reality for ultimate good - even though there are unfortunately unavoidably inherently painful experiences amid that for now due to being within a sin-fallen world for now.
Good points ..
Thoughts:
The overall context shows both !
Since the historic context of Jeremiah's warnings to Judah (southern kingdom) about their exile and desolation of their Temple, homes and lands, shows God as authoritative, but it is ONLY AFTER his gentle hand and care, by sending many other former prophets both to the northern kingdom called Israel, and now Judah (southern) rejected.
The same occurred in 70AD !
A good Father shows loving care first, and may discipline if needed, to be consistant with his higher ways (divine nature of love, mercy and Justice)
In Christ brother
🙏
Hi Phil – thank you for all your helpful comments! You asked – “What do you find"? I am beginning to focus on ‘motivation’ and ‘intent’ as the point from where our choices are established – selfish or selfless. The actions which follow will be based on these two factors. Is my action based on the intent or motive to love others, or are they leading me to behave selfish and self-serving?
Could one say that 'sin or sinning' is actually inherent in the motivation and intent - the act only expresses or reveals the choice we have made?
As believers we are always called to be aware of the intent and motivation of our choices – Gal.6:7-8 ”Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit reap eternal life.”
God’s spirit always establishes Love and wholeness in harmony with all life; therefor we ought to always walk in His spirit of Light and Life.
Hi Brigitte
In response to your question "Could one say that 'sin or sinning' is actually inherent in the motivation and intent - the act only expresses or reveals the choice we have made?", I believe what you have said to be true.
I would suggest that the "built-in consequences" are not intentionally "built-in", but are simply the results of ignoring reality and common sense. God did not create gravity to kill anyone or anything, but to keep them safe on a whirling orb that hurls through space at high speeds, while holding its life-giving atmosphere and oceans in place. Now if I violate this law of gravity while assuming I will be safe, then bad things will happen, but not from original intent or design. I believe we must see the idea of dire results being "built-in" from this perspective.
Also, these "built-in consequences" only relate to the temporal life and first death. The second death is a different matter as all the wicked, who have already died the first death(often as the result of violating natural law), will be resurrected to face their final judgment, where the lost will receive their "wages"(2nd death) from God, if we believe scripture as it reads.
Regarding God being authoritative or authoritarian, I'm not convinced that we can label the Sovereign of all Creation as we might one another. God is much more, and in regard to these two terms, He is, and must be, both. To the righteous, He is authoritative, while to those who reject His authoritative rule, He must at the end be authoritarian, or otherwise be accused of being derelict of duty as the Just Sovereign of all creation. (a good shepherd is authoritative to the sheep, but must be authoritarian to the wolves and robbers. If not, the sheep will perish. In my garden, I am authoritative to tomatoes, peppers, beans, etc, while authoritarian to weeds. If not, the weeds will take over and ruin the garden.)
It is true, God's ways are not our ways, unless we repent of our deviant ways and submit to His "holy, just, and good" ways which then become our ways, which is the purpose of the Gospel through faith, as we become "partakers of the Divine Nature". But God is no less just than sinners against persistent wickedness and must finally bring every rebel against His righteousness and grace to "ashes upon the earth" after they have willingly acknowledged His justice and goodness, and their sin.
Thank you Robert for sharing the big picture of the LORD's character. Your examples in practical terms help me to understand how the LORD is just and merciful, authoritative and authoritarian.
I realise we need to be clear when we speak, about the difference between what is needed for life during this probationary time and life in heaven and the earth made new.
What is deficient/lacking about God being authoritative that must therefore be supplemented by God being authoritarian?
May I suggest that whether God is authoritative or authoritarian is a matter of human perception, which seems to be inherent in Robert's comment.
In reality God possesses absolute power which He exercises in absolute love even when He finally reluctantly annihilates the wicked.
Thanks Inge
I have considered your suggestion. Human perception cannot be bypassed. Though we acknowledge that we do for now see but dimmly (1 Corinthians 13:12), at the same time we try to ongoingly grow in our knowledge of God so that we progressively more accurately understand His ways (eg 2 Corinthians 10:5). The significance of this is because we will unavoidably reflect the same attributes of God we believe in (2 Corinthians 3:18). Those who put Jesus to death believed they were serving God and that they were doing the loving thing of preserving the nation by doing so (John 11:50).
Whether God ultimately annihilates the wicked, or whether God only needs to (and therefore does) allow them to reap the self-annihilation they have chosen, makes a massive difference to the God who is and what He is about. The former reflects a God who ultimately uses power to enforce and punish non-compliance. The latter reflects a God who authentically upholds the freedom of His creation upon which true love (beneficence) is based.
If reality were not based on inherent cause and effect, then yes God would need to impose consequences and would therefore need to be authoritarian. But scripture claims that reality is based upon inherent cause and effect (eg Galatians 6:7-8).
Phil, I totally agree when you write
So let us try on your proposition that God does not actively intervene to destroy the wicked - even when the Bible appears to say that He does - and see how that view would look in human imitation. (I apologize to readers who would rather not read about death and killing. ... Please skip this comment.)
If a person believes that it is wrong to actively intervene to stop evil-doers, he will not call the police if he knows that someone is planning to kill another person. He would certainly not kill a person who is actively killing others. He would just let natural consequences happen.
It just so happens that in America we had an illustration that could fit:
Perhaps the Uvalde police chief who had his 19 men stand outside a classroom door for 50 minutes or so while a man inside the classroom shot and killed 21 people also believed that God does not actively intervene to stop evil. So he let "natural consequences" happen, expecting the shooter to "self-annihilate" (commit suicide) as many such men do ...
By contrast, the vast majority of people believe that the right thing for the police to do would have been to enter the classroom and kill the gunman to prevent him from killing more children. But it seems that you might consider it wrong (unlike God) to kill the shooter.
In the case of the Uvalde shooting, reflecting two different views of God might account for the difference between several lives lost (several victims and one shooter) and 21 lives lost - a possible net difference of 15-19 lives saved, though there's no way to tell for sure.
So, yes, our view of God makes a massive difference in our lives on this planet.
I do not see that the Bible teaches that God does not actively intervene to stop evil. Gal 6:7-8 does not claim that "reality is based upon inherent cause and effect." Rather, it teaches us that there are everlasting consequences to choices made in the body. Paul does not here say how those consequences come about.
God has allowed this awful "experiment" of sin to continue for 6,000 years. He has allowed the universe to see the consequences of Satan's rule on the principle of self-exaltation, resulting in untold suffering and the destruction of millions of lives. He will not allow this to go on forever. He will put an end to evil at the Second Coming when the wicked will initially be destroyed by "the brightness of His coming." And the Bible is full of references to the final judgment, after the wicked are resurrected to "reap" what they have sown. (See Matt. 25:46 2 Peter 2:9; 2 Peter 3:7; Rev. 20:9-10,15)
God will put a stop to suffering and death by annihilating the destroyers.
(At the same time, I believe that sinning is self-destructive and that sinners choose to cut themselves off from the Source of life. But the Bible describes what the final end of sinners looks like.)
Phil, you cite Gal 6:7-8 to endorse a certain view of God's dealing with the finally impenitent, while not mentioning the scriptures that address the matter directly, which are many. The Revelation alone is very descriptive on this topic. Jesus taught in vivid terms the final judgment of the wicked, and warned His hearers to avoid this final outcome through repentance and faith.
If you wish to label God as authoritarian for being just with those who have been unjust toward His faithful people, then it must be so. Yet God sent Jesus to save them from this outcome, and sent His Spirit to convince them of "sin...righteousness...and judgment" as well. But if rejecting authoritative rule, what is left? Justice. All creation will agree with God's works and ways, including the lost.
Thanks Inge
I have said that God is not the causative agent of destruction. That is not the same as saying God does not actively intervene. In summary I find and believe that God has created reality in accordance with and Himself operates on an inherent cause and effect basis. In accordance with this, under the added complexity produced by His facilitating of a second chance for salvation due to our sin-infected (temporary) state, God does need to actively intervene. I find that God does this by variously restraining or releasing that restraint at the level that He operates at. When God releases restraint, it is the inherent impacts of 'sin'/lawlessness that are responsible for the destruction - not God.
When it comes to human situations such as you have raised, we do not have the capacity of God to release to inherent consequences. So, we do need to intervene at times in appropriate ways. What those ways look like depends on the particular situation and is therefore reflective of significant complexity. I believe Jesus statement to Peter that those who live by the sword perish by the sword (Matthew 26:52) reflects this. How humans might need to deal with situations and how God deals with situations are not entirely the same. Hence your example is a different direction than what I was talking about.
Thanks Robert.
I find Galatians 6:7-8 to be reflecting a fundamental principle that God operates upon. Therefore I interpret Revelation passages in accordance with this principle. I find complete harmony between Galatians 6:7-8 and Revelation when I do this.
I am not saying anyone else has to believe this, I am just saying what I find from my examination of whole of scripture.
A believer will imitate the Pattern given us in Jesus, who did NOT take the prerogative of God against the wicked, which we are told not to do(see Ps 37). Trusting fully in God will be the result of know Him. Yes, many who call themselves Christians have taken upon themselves the work of avenging wrongs, but they depart from God's "good, acceptable, and perfect will" in doing so, and are condemned by their actions which God has forbidden. Yet, God's law does contain instructions for dealing with sin in society and commanded all the people to stone those worthy of death according to the law. Would God charge His creatures with actions He Himself would not do?(see Joshua 7:16-26, one of many such incidents commanded by the Lord)
God alone gives and takes back Life as needed, but not without first providing and making plain the conditions for Life. The true believer will walk in the paths of righteousness, and leave to the Lord the work only He can do.
Gal 6:7,8 must be understood in the light of all scripture on the subject of God's dealing with sin and sinners in the final day. This passage speaks of cause/effect, but not the final act of judgment, to which you have chosen to apply it. No passage stands alone where truth is concerned, and all other passages on that point must be considered by any who wish to "understand what the will of the Lord is". We must also take care that we don't see only what we wish to see.
After many years, I have not found scripture to support what you have promoted for some time now on this matter. I pray for that day when all God's people will "speak the same thing"(1 Cor 1:10).
I must now exit this conversation.
Replying to Phil's response to me:
Phil, it seems to me that you didn't really address my comment, but only re-asserted your position. But perhaps that is part of the limitation of electronic communication.
However, I will address the first sentence in your response to me, because it enunciates your oft-repeated position:
I would like you to consider some questions:
When a general orders his soldiers to destroy opposition soldiers in a stronghold and they obey, are the soldiers the only "causative agents"? Who is the real "causative agent"?
The Prophet Nathan confronted David thus:
What was that again? David killed Uriah with the sword? But David was sitting at home in his palace when Uriah was killed. It seems that, at God's direction, Nathan held David responsible for the killing which happened when Uriah's mates withdrew their protection from him, and he was killed by enemy swords. But David had caused Joab to order his soldiers to withdraw their protection. (That made the action twice removed from David.)
Now, when God orders the destruction of persons disobeying the laws He gave to Israel, who is the "causative agent" of this destruction?
You often say that God just withdraws His protection and lets "inherent causes" happen, thus absolving God of being the "causative agent." Isn't that exactly what David ordered Joab to do - to withdraw protection from Uriah and let the "inherent causes" of war play out? Yet God, through Nathan, blamed David.
Wouldn't God be responsible, by His own rules, for the death of those from whom He withdraws protection to let "inherent causes" happen? (That's why I don't see the point of your repeated assertion that "God is not the causative agent" of events He specifically orders.)
It seems to me that if we would just let the Bible speak plainly where there is no reason to believe that it speaks figuratively we would save ourselves a lot of words and a lot of confusion.
I believe that
I believe the Word of the LORD.
The Holy Spirit through James tells us that only the LORD has the power and authority to establish what is right and what is wrong and to determine the consequences(positive or negative) of our thoughts and actions.
James 4:12
God alone, who gave the law, is the Judge. He alone has the power to save or to destroy.
Jas 4:12 ISV There is only one Lawgiver and Judge—the one who can save and destroy.
I believe my two simple examples answer that question Phil, but I will add: "What is deficient/lacking" is the lawless choices of free-will creatures against their Creator's authoritative government and their impenitent and persistent rebellion which endangers the righteous(e.g. Cain against Abel, souls under the altar in Rev 6:9,10, etc).
Don't we also see this suggested in Gen 2:16,17, and demonstrated by the flood and destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, to name only two of many instances recorded in scripture?
God's authoritative rule only works for those who love His Sovereignty, justice, and righteousness, which is why Rev 20:9 even exists. If "sin" took care of sinners, why does God need to raise the persistent rebels back to life to execute the just sentence upon them before the entire unfallen/redeemed universe after all the facts have been revealed in every case? Isn't this a vital question to consider on this matter of God's need to exercise authoritarian rule?
Thank you Robert for responding to my question. What seems clear to you is not as clear to me because you and I have differing views as to how God and reality operate. That is why I ask clarifying questions.
When you refer to sin's lack of capacity to take care of sinners, do you mean that sin is not able to give sufficient punishment to satisfy the requirements for justice? Or are you referring to something else, perhaps that it is insufficient that they die before being tried and charged? I ask this because if God has to resurrect them, then sin has evidently already put them to death that they themselves can't otherwise return from? I agree that these are important questions in regard to the claim that God ultimately needs to be authoritarian.
The bible tells us that "sin is the transgression of the law." But when you write that "sin is not able to give sufficient punishment" and "sin has evidently already put them to death," you again appear to be treating sin as an entity with power to think and act independently.
I can see no biblical justification for this.
That is not what I am proposing. 1 John 3:4 states that sin is "anomia". Anomia means apart from, out of harmony with, contrary to nomia (law). A parallel would be moral versus amoral. As such, 'sin'/anomia is not an entity with power to think or act independently - it is a way of being (a functional principle) that inherently precludes life and living.
To be the just and holy Sovereign, God will need to deal with those who remain persistent in their rebellion, which always leads them to oppress the righteous(Cain/Abel) until God(or death) intervenes. Sure all have died, often without any sense of judgment/guilt, just like anyone else, by natural causes in old age. Yet Solomon speaks of a day judgment which all will meet, with a standard of righteousness all must face, no exemptions. Prophets, apostles, and Jesus have all taught of a day that will "burn like an oven" which the wicked cannot escape. A "fire prepared for the devil and his angels" which the "goats"(Matt 25) will be cast into with them, which will "reduce [them] to ashes upon the earth".
Yet, not one of those victims will be there innocently, and only after acknowledging God's offer of grace which they refused of their own free will, and acknowledging the justice and righteousness of God in their sentence and execution.
Whatever this "fire" is, it comes "from God" and will "consume" the wicked, who will be "no more".
What is unjust about this if one realizes the wicked admit it is just, and that God did all He could have done "authoritatively" to save them?
God does not simply punish "non-compliance", He is returning the actions of the wicked against others back upon themselves. This was always in the law, which is "holy, just, and good". It is the "law of the harvest". Like it or not, it is the Law of God, who made all things for His joy and delight.
I'm not sure what else to say.
p.s. However differing our views of God, we have His word which will make us "to know the certainty of the words of Truth"(Prov 22:20,21).
Thanks for the reply, Phil. However, if you'll look back at your comment to which I replied, you did use "sin" as though it were an entity with power to think and act. That usage is misleading at best.
I'll grant that, if love is a principle of action, so can sin be a principle of action. In other words, humans can act from a principle of lawlessness. However, that principle does not "inherently preclude life and living." In fact right now billions of people live by the principle of sin and are very much alive.
You need to interpret quite a bit of Scripture to come to that conclusion, and not all necessarily come to the same conclusions you do.
Phil, you are on point. Sin is "anomia", that is, lawlessness. And the law in question is God's, which is founded on love. So one might just as well say that sin is "lovelessness".
Clearly the bias of the KJV translators is evident when they rendered the text as "sin is transgression of the law." Or might I say, the bias of the regent who was sponsoring the translation and who was very concerned about people obeying the laws of the king.
Richard, lawlessness = "transgression of the law". It is the same thing. What bias is there with the KJV on that point? Weymouth renders: "violation of the law". It's all the same thing.
Thanks Robert for your further explanation of how you understand things.
I agree with your position that "Whatever this "fire" is, it comes "from God" and will "consume" the wicked, who will be "no more". And I agree that God's law is the law of harvest. Where we appear to differ is whether that harvest is imposed or inherent in nature.
Thanks Inge
That is the interpretation you are putting on what I am saying. It is not what I am saying. Different presuppositions lead to the same words being interpreted differently.
The reason anomia/lawlessness doesn't necessarily appear to us to preclude life and living is that God is temporarily restraining it to varying degrees in order to create a time of probation. There will come a time when that restraint is finally and fully released and then such will become more evident.
Yes, scripture involves interpretation - as does life. We are typically unaware how much our subconscious is continuously interpreting. And yes, I am aware others interpret differently. I am not telling anyone how they should interpret, I am just sharing what I am learning for what it's worth to anyone who may be interested.
Jeremiah was the weeping prophet of doom to the whole nation of Israel, it's temple and their exile to Babylon.
Israel's sins had come to a fullness, since they ignored all the previous prophets that were sent to her.
This extreme and just desolation was considered to be a refining process that would make the nation long to return to their homeland as God promised.
It's hard to evaluate this judgement on a nation to a personal level. Suffice to say it could imply a personal temporary loss and standing in offices and gifts in the body of Christ that were neglected or abused ! Like in 1 Corinthians 5:1
Serving God is the best thing that could have happened to me.bu when the holy Spirit convict us of sin turn around and seek the face of God daily so we can have a closer walk with him.
Is it any wonder that King David wrote in his Psalm 119:67,71,and 75 that before he was afflicted he had gone astray and that therefore it was good for him to be afflicted so that he could learn God's statutes and then finishes by saying that because God's ways were righteous that made our afflictions as God's faithfulness to us?
The LORD is like a parent using "tough love" to refine and test His people. He gave them His Law, which is the transcript of His character, if they had allowed Him to transform their characters by the Holy Spirit to be perfect/blameless/holy like Him, then they would have been happy and successful.
Lev 19:2, 20:26, Matt 5:48, 1 Peter 1:16
He warned them of the consequences if they refused to live according to His Law - His Principles of Heavenly/Eternal Life and Love.
Here in Jeremiah we see the LORD carrying out the consequences - cause and effect - because they didn't live according to His Character.
How would this apply to our lives?
The LORD might allow us to suffer the consequences of our choices Rom 1:18-32. or we might avoid them - in this probationary time - but at Jesus Christ Second Coming everyone will receive the final consequences from the LORD of their choices - eternal life or cease to exist.
Rom 2:2,5-6,8-9; 2Cor 5:10; Rev 22:12.
Yup, Tough Love !
Support groups have found this very effective !
Amen 🙏
SINCE "cause and effect" has been mentioned in this study, I would like to add this comment which I'm sure is preaching to the choir ! 🙏
There is a big difference in cause and effect in the material creation, like Newton's law of gravity (power and wisdom)
and the Spirit of God in minds and hearts.(personal power and wisdom)
The former is not personal in the substance, the later is personal ! "I AM the presence of GOD/Divinity" John 8:24, Revelation 22:13
1 Kings 19:11-15
Let us listen to the soft whisper
🙏 Blessings
The bible verse for today left out the last part: ”…; for how shall I deal with the daughter of My people?”
Well, how does a faithful and loving Creator God deal with the ‘daughter of My people” - Israel, and the believer in general? What choices are left to Him who committed Himself to be faithful to His people through His Covenant?
He allows that to happen which He explained would happen if they forsake Him - going astray and following other gods; He gives them over to their own devices - withdrawing, or holding back His providential treatment. Does it bring all the people back to Him – no, not everyone, but those who have their hearts set to do right in God’s eyes, for them it will be even more important to stay committed to Him only.
So what is sinning based on; why do we sin? Is it not choosing to go after other gods? Who are the other 'gods' – they are all that which convinces us to chose to walk contrary to God’s Will and Way; selfish, self-serving choices lead to loosing God’s benevolence which is based on living His loving and peaceable Way of Light and Life; at the heart of all of sin(ing) is 'unfaithfulness'.
Sin and sinning is caused by chosing to walk ones own, self-serving way instead of God’s Way of Truth and Life. Yes, man’s choice to sin against God by following selfish gains nailed Jesus Christ onto the cross, but His never ending Love reached back to draw us out of the fire of the crucibles of our own making to show us and teach us to live the Way of His selfless Love.
Okay, so I find a lot of things in this lesson problematic and I'm hoping some of you can help me with some of them.
First of all, I wonder if it's fair to compare the way God relates to Judah, a nation and corporate body, and individuals. It's fair to say that there were faithful believers in Judah who went into exile. In fact I know there were as Ezekiel was one (and earlier Daniel and his friends). So I don't think the exile was meant to purify individuals as much as turn the nation around (drastic means were necessary). I know I've seen people use the term "tough love", but dealing with individuals this way seems more like kicking your kid out of the house because they never clean their room. Please tell me God is not like this!
Secondly, does God deal the same with the sins believers deal with from time and time as He does with outright rebellion? The question at the end of the lesson terrifies me as it suggests that if I don't deal with the sins in my life, God may take drastic action against me (allow my house to burn down, allow me to lose my job, give me cancer etc. etc.) And as much as that can scare me into dealing with my sins, it doesn't make me love God very much. And truthfully, it doesn't really help me deal with my sins. I struggled with a sin in the past that had an addiction like hold on me, and all my resolves to eliminate it failed. They would last sometimes for weeks, but ultimately I fell into sin again. It was only as I grew closer to God and encountered His great grace that the sin lost its hold on me.
It seems like Judah as described in Jeremiah 7 is a different ball of wax, so to speak. Corporately, they were doing their own thing and had little use for God, although they pretended to. God needed to take drastic measures to wake them up. I feel like those of us reading the lesson are not in that category as we already bemoan our sins and want to honor God. Am I wrong here?
Sister, you asked some good questions. I offer the following, not as definitive authoritative answers, but as suggestions--possibilities to think about.
First: God is indeed not like that, flinging people into the abyss with no concern for whether they have done good or evil.
But consider: when the unrighteous went into exile for their purification, how exactly were they to be purified? The absence of their former lives' temptations might have opened an opportunity for repentance, but something more was needed. Perhaps God sent the righteous into exile, not as their punishment or even for their purification, but because that is where they needed to be in order to help to save the others. If that meant that the righteous too had to suffer, I suspect that that as painful as their losses must have been, they were able to bear it because they still possessed something far more precious: the presence of God in their lives. The opportunity to glorify God through their service to others in exile might have been a blessing that outweighed their losses.
Second: No, God does not deal with open rebellion the same as He deals with the mistakes and missteps His children make. Do not fear that God will rain terror and abuse on you if you slip up. (1 John 2:1). Sin is poisonous, and God seeks to save us from it, not punish us for it.
If I understand it correctly, this week's lesson aims to point out a variety of sources of the troubles that come to us. Consider cancer: sometimes cancer comes because some company let its industrial waste leak into the drinking water--a crucible of Satan. Sometimes cancer comes because we have disregarded the laws of health--a crucible of sin. Sometimes cancer comes to knock some sense into us and remind of of what is really important in life--a crucible of purification. Sometimes cancer comes because it opens our eyes to truth that we otherwise would miss--a crucible of maturity. And there are many more possible reasons beyond these.
The thing is, we rarely learn the actual reason why tragedy strikes us, and our guesses tend to be either foolishly self-congratulatory or unhealthily self-denigrating. Keeping the variety of possible reasons in mind helps, I think. And after all, would knowing the reason really make the pain go away? We may not know why God allows such things to happen, but we can know that He loves us with a boundless and infinite love. In the end we either trust Him with that, or we don't. Myself, I recommend trust; that seems to work best.
Thank you, that does help. I agree that it may be unwise to try to guess why we suffer. Sometimes it is clear, but not always, and perhaps God works in multiple ways within a particular suffering.
One day our questions will be answered, but until then, trust seems best, as you say.
Hi Christina
I appreciate your honest comments and questions. From all that I have looked into, no you are not wrong and no, God is not like that.
I concur with L R Lait's summary point that the lesson also appears to support this week. Sin, by its very nature, has its own built-in consequences. God is the One who is trying to save us from that reality - as per John 3:16, 2 Peter 3:9 and Ezekiel 33:11.
Jeremiah 9:7 Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts, Behold, I will melt them, and try them; for how shall I do for the daughter of my people?
Melting can be used to separate to out a substance from a mixture. Melting therefore is a process of purification. Each substance has it’s own unique melting point. So in order to obtain a pure uncontaminated substance the chemist has to know the its exact melting point. So with us, we each uniquely have our own melting points and the heavenly chemist knows exactly what that point is when He separates from the deadly contamination and dross of sin. He knows and waits and watches carefully applying just the right amount of heat. Too little heat (no trials), we remain mixed in and contaminated with sin. Too much heat and we become consumed. Praise GOD for the loving patient Refiner.
Read Malachi 3: 1-7 along with today’s lesson!
Justice comes to those who stick with unrighteousness. But to those who chose to be led by the rod and the staff of the good shepard, there is parden, forgivness, mercy, salvation, and comfort. Isaiah 55:7. Micah 7:18-19. Hebrews 8:12. John 6:40. Revelation 21:7. Psalms 23:4.
Amid God's justice, there is hope for us in the crucible, for what ever the reason we are there. I love and find comfort in this quote:
"God's everlasting arm encircles the soul that turns to Him for aid, however feeble that soul may be. The precious things of the hills shall perish, but the soul that lives for God shall abide with Him. "The world passeth away, and the lust thereof; but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever." 1 John 2:17. The city of God will open its golden gates to receive him who learned while on earth to lean on God for guidance and wisdom, for comfort and hope, amid loss and affliction. The songs of the angels will welcome him there, and for him the tree of life shall yield its fruit. "The mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but My kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of My peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee." Isaiah 54:10." Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing 99.4.
I love the part of Romans 6:23, "...but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Eternal life is a "gift" from God via His Son Jesus. The "wages of sin" is death. And sin is "the transgression of the law." When anyone accepts "God's Gift" by faith, God sees this person as never sinning at all at that point and he and or she now has "Eternal Life." But before that, he or she, were condemned by "The Law." But again, after that, he or she, are free from the "Condemnation of The Law."
The point was made by Phil that “scripture claims that reality is based upon inherent cause and effect”, and the question came up to distinquish between God beeing authoritative vs. authoritarian.
Citing Scripture to support ‘authoritative’:
Gal.6:7-8 -”Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.”
1John3:4 -- ”Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.”
Furthermore:
James1:14-15 - ” But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own 'desire'. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.”
To understand these passages better, I have started to look at sin and sinning from a different point of view – sin and sinning starts in the heart and is therefore a spiritual aspect of human life.
If we start looking at sin and sinning from the point of view representing a spiritual choice, we can see that the spirit expressed in 'choice' is either the 'spirit of the world’ - flesh, or the 'Spirit of God' - His holy spirit:
If we sow to our own flesh, if we base our choice on the worldly spirit, are selfish and self-serving in our motivation and intent, we ‘will from the flesh reap corruption'; this effect is inherent in the 'spirit of the world'.
If we sow to the 'Spirit of God', which is the Holy Spirit based on godly intent and motivation and live accordingly, we “will from His Spirit reap eternal life.”
I see our actions are either based on God’s love - selfless, or it is based on the 'flesh' for selfish pursuits which reaps corruption. I understand Phil pointing out that both are spiritual, ‘functional principles’, but only one is within the authoritative, overarching principle of God’s creative, life-sustaining Love; the other is not - it is against and contrary to the spirit of His Law which sustains life.
God admonishes us not to judge – why? Because we do not fully understand the workings of the spirit in order to know all aspects on which a choice is based on; but I support whole-heartedly to judge our own thoughts, behavior, and actions.
There is a "huge difference" between "sin as a lifestyle" and "sin as character defect." But in each case when we claim 1 john 1:9 or 2:1,2 or Hebrews 4:16, 7:25, 10:19,20 God very quickly grants us His Saving Grace and restores our souls and we are back to walking and working for Him. But sin as "lifestyle" has to be a thing of the past and not a thing of the present for us. Sin as "character defect" however, is something of a "Lifelong work of a lifetime."
Again, "Sin as lifestyle" has to do with things that are specifically against the 10 Commandments like "Adultery, Lying, Stealing, Idolatry, Cussing, Anger, Wrath, Pornography, Murder, etc. and etc. And "Sin as Character Defects" have to do with the lacking of the "Fruit of the Spirit," like "no peace, Joy, Patience, Gentleness, Meekness, Temperance, Faith, Hope, Love, etc., and etc., these are not "Specific things against the 10 Commandments but they also are things that have no Laws that are against them either however, they are things that will take us till Jesus comes in the Clouds and gives us a Glorified Eternal Body that will help us to have these qualities 24, 7, 365 for eternity.
Pete, wouldn't an unloving spirit, intemperance, pride, lack of love, etc also be a "lifestyle" matter. And they are out of line with God's law of love. If we allow the Holy Spirit to change us, our lives will demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit, rather than a lifestyle lacking these. I don't think there'll be anyone in heaven without at least some evidence of the fruit of the Spirit.