Printable version
 Email to a friend

arrow_left_short all forums
topic list

Bible Questions and Spiritual Discussion

Replies: (page   1   2   3   4   5   6)
Calico 05/01/2011 12:48
"To be sure, these trials and struggles can lead us closer to God."

Indeed, Glenna!

Christ is still the example for our thinking-on, decision-making, and carried-out actions, even when natural evil brings it's consequence. And though the context of the following is about "(being) subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution" or of "servants, be subject to your masters with all respect," it is not too stretched of an extrapolation to apply the expressed principle of the passage also to the natural disasters that hit us, that "...if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God. For to this you have been called, BECAUSE CHRIST ALSO SUFFERED FOR YOU, LEAVING YOU AND EXAMPLE, so that you might follow in his steps." (1 Peter 2:20b, 21; ESV with emphasis). One whose heart and mind are oriented toward God would indeed draw closer to the Lord amidst suffering, I believe.

In light of your true words of Christians "not (being) exempt from trials and struggles", I draw back to TRWord's original post where he has aptly and agreeably pointed out the (seeming) failing on the part of the pastor interviewed by Diane Sawyer: "I heard a pastor who has lost his church to the rash of tornadoes that occurred on Thursday make the statement; “God didn’t even spare his own house.” ...I couldn’t believe that anyone could perceive this to be an act of God." Perhaps the pastor's words are taken out of context; I cannot know. But on a surface level of the information presented on this thread, the pastor does seem to have missed the mark by SEEMING to view God in a way that may imply that God is directly responsible for the disaster; or worse yet, that the church building's destruction might be hinted at by the pastor as being punishment.

Praying with you all,

Tom
Bibleman 05/01/2011 17:43
I think I would simply say that perhaps God did in fact destroy the church by allowing its destruction when he has the power to save the church. However, that building is not God's house. It is (or was) a building.

And that leads us back to the "problem of evil" - that it was destroyed for a greater purpose. What that is, well, beats me.
John T 05/01/2011 18:08
Lots of good discussion - thanks all. TRWord, I do have to comment that it's odd that there seems to be a pattern that on every thread you post on you take it over with this evil of "good and evil" stuff...

Calico, as the the book let me have a look... No unfortunately there are no listings for that author.

An interesting though -- part of the sermon in church today was the story of the Israelites and Jericho and then the battle at Ai -- it seemed like a fitting message for our conversation. Were there consequences for sin? In this instance, the Bible clearly states that that was the case. Because of Achan's sin, the whole nation lost a battle. So certainly there are times when God acts.

Blessings,
John
TRWord 05/02/2011 05:42
Ted

It’s inevitable that you will interpret Jesus Christ as a sacrifice. Mainstream christianity sees repentance as feeling sorry for your sins instead of the death of the old understanding “the old covenant” and the birth of the new covenant.

With the sacrifice such a prominent part of the old covenant Jesus recognized that is death and resurrection would be misunderstood.

Using the parable of “new cloth unto an old garment” and “new wine in old bottles” He emphasized the incompatibility between His teaching and the old understanding.

Using the parable of the good shepherd (John 10:1-18) Jesus emphasizes that His death and resurrection is an act of love. He also makes it clear that it’s a demonstration of His authority over death and not a sacrifice. An authority that He received from His Father.
TRWord 05/02/2011 05:44
John

The knowledge of “good and evil” is the original sin. This was a misconception on Adam’s part and now we are all subject to it. Until we recognize this, we will continue to sow to this belief and reaps it’s consequence.
TRWord 05/02/2011 05:46
Calico

You said; "...evil is not a thing or substance. Rather it is a lack or privation of a good thing that God made. Evil is a deprivation of some particular good."

Our belief in good and evil as a consequence gave us the belief in two powers; God and satan. Notice the Bible never called the serpent evil.

The Bible described the serpent as subtle.

And Paul said that Eve was beguiled by the subtlety of the serpent.

2 Cor. 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

Through Adam’s misconception we began to believe in good and evil and we have been sowing to this belief ever since.

The idea that evil comes from God should be inconceivable.

James 3:10 Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.

James 3:11 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?

James 3:12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.
Calico 05/02/2011 12:32
Hey TRWord,

If you wish to, you may call me Tom. :-)

OK heregoes....

For this first response to the above, I will disagree, brother, with your statement of "Our belief in good and evil as a consequence gave us the belief in two powers; God and satan." This has been covered quite thoroughly in the "The Existence Of Evil" thread, throughout several weeks of interactions. You have posited this before, and I have read your reasonings for it, and I respectfully disagree.

Of this, "Notice the Bible never called the serpent evil," I can agree somewhat. Indeed the Bible might not explicitly use the word "evil". But the imagery (literal or symbolic need not be discussed herein) of the serpent as being destructive and harmful are also accounted of in Revelation 12 and 20 ("...the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world," from 12:9a, and the one whom the angel "seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years," from 20:2a; ESV). I would offer that it is not too far of an extrapolation to see that the serpent (it being an image; again, literal or symbolic need not matter) found in the garden of the Genesis account intended distraction away from God. This is an evil ("depriving of good") thing to do.

Herein, for one responding on this thread who would identify themselves as a disciple of Christ, this now becomes a matter of a philosophical nature, because we must cite that "ideas" and "images" go hand-in-hand with the conveying of "information."

Dallas Willard has offered, that because of the limited creative nature we have as image-bearers of God (see Gen.1:26 - 28), that "the ultimate freedom we have as human beings is the power to select what we will allow our mind to dwell upon." This is freedom; this is free will. And with or without God, we can use that free will to direct what we choose to have focus of (correctly, with God; and ignorantly, without Him).

You had stated "Paul said that Eve was beguiled by the subtlety of the serpent," and that seems true enough. But the image of the serpent was very much available to Eve's conceptualization (again, here I will not argue for or against literal or symbolic). And surely the idea planted by the event was indeed very subtle. Logically, now, we might then understand that ideas and images are the main way Satan presents distractions to humankind, in order to defeat God's good purposes within us. Thus, when the serpent (it being an image) undertook to draw Eve away from God, he did not hit her with a stick, but with an idea: that God could not be trusted and that she must act on her own to secure her own well-being.

By accepting from the image/idea false information as truth, Eve freely directed (willed) her mind, so that the mind would then operate apart from God. By dwelling on the idea of securing for herself "the knowledge of good and evil" she concluded (based on the given information) this as being a beneficial thing (see also Gen. 2:16, 17; wherein, at this point, only Adam - and NOT Eve - is given the command to not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil).

We must be clear here: the single most important thing for our mind to dwell upon is our idea of God, and the images associated with that idea (ie. "conformed to the image of his Son," Romans 8:29a, ESV; and "his beloved Son..., (who) is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation," Col. 1:13b, 15, ESV; with my believing that this same image is found "walking in the garden in the cool of the day" in Gen. 3:8). Ideas and images APART from God lead to taking in disastrous information. Or even "making up" our own information, which God will indeed also allow us to dwell on (see Romans 1:18 - 32).

A.W. Tozer offers for our consideration: "That our idea of God correspond as nearly as possible to the true being of God is of immense importance to us. Compared with our actual thoughts about Him, our [doctrinal] statements are of little consequence. Our real idea of God may lie buried under the rubbish of conventional religious notions and may require an intelligent and vigorous search before it is finally unearthed and exposed for what it is. Only after an ordeal of painful self-probing are we likely to discover what we actually believe about God. A right conception of God is basic not only to systematic theology but to practical Christian living as well. It is to worship what the foundation is to the temple; where it is inadequate or out of plumb the whole structure must sooner or later collapse. I believe there is scarcely an error in doctrine or a failure in applying Christian ethics that cannot be traced finally to imperfect and ignoble thoughts about God."

So while the word "evil" is not quoted of in the Bible as a descriptor of the serpent, because of the false information the serpent offered it can reasonably be described by followers of Christ as evil because of how the Spirit enables us to discern as such. Ergo, the qualitative state of the information the serpent gave was intended to deprive Eve (and Adam) of God. Evil is now stated as a deprivation of some good that ought to be there; the qualitative state is a degenerative state ("without-God) in need of restoration, rather than integrative state ("with-God") that is whole and pure.

Praying with you all,

Tom
Calico 05/02/2011 13:56
Now, secondly... :-)

Sorry, these posts are long, and dense. I pray that they can be read and worked through, and that our dialog is seasoned with speaking the truth in love.

TRWord, you had also stated "Through Adam’s misconception we began to believe in good and evil and we have been sowing to this belief ever since. The idea that evil comes from God should be inconceivable."

I will respectfully disagree, friend. If I may, there seems to be a logic disconnect in your statement. That is, there does not appear to be any sort of connection or comparison in the syllogism of "having knowledge of good and evil" being linked to the conclusion that disciples of Christ would assume "that evil comes from God."

If, by your statement, you refer to people who DO NOT have a belief in any sort of God (atheists), then the statement somewhat makes sense: atheists have long wrestled with the idea that David Hume proposes of God; "Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?" What Hume positions therein seems to be a question of "why do we suffer?"

We can now see that James' post from 05/01/2011 17:43 where he states "that leads us back to the 'problem of evil'" becomes very relevant to the thread, so that disciples of Jesus can work through the problem of evil. The great scale of suffering that the people of Alabama are currently experiencing is not unlike suffering all over the world; but it should be noted that we cannot discount smaller scale suffering as not being linked to evil, since the problem on either scale is the actually the same problem.

The TRADITIONAL framing of the problem for Christians, then, can be offered as such: If God is great, he must have the POWER to remove evil. If God is good, he must WANT to remove evil. Therefore evil must not exist. But it DOES.

So the events of suffering due to evil (suffering because of "a deprivation of something good that ought to be there") that all follow after the Genesis account have caused even those persons from the Bible to wrestle with the same thinking that we are confronted with today. In Habakkuk we read that the prophet cried out "O Lord, how long shall I cry for help, and you will not hear? Or cry to you 'Violence!' and you will not save? Why do you make me see iniquity, and why do you idly look at wrong? Destruction and violence are before me; strife and contention arise. So the law is paralyzed, and justice never goes forth. For the wicked surround the righteous; so justice goes forth perverted." (Hab. 1:2 - 4; ESV). Or the Psalmist who inquires "Why, O Lord, do you stand afar off? Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble?" (10:1; ESV).

Carrying forward from here, for those whom the Spirit guides through in understanding, apart from the traditional framing the BIBLICAL framing counters, with a very hopeful stance to take. The biblical framing would be: If God is great, then he CAN defeat evil. If God is good, then he WILL defeat evil. Therefore, ONE DAY God will defeat evil.

So the matter at hand would seem to be one of timing. It is a matter of an outcome that has not yet come about. And during such times, we might suffer. But we can also endure, as well. And now, we can frame it this way: that in order to take the time to bring about the best possible world, then God is great AND HE MUST HAVE THE POWER TO BRING ABOUT THE BEST POSSIBLE WORLD. If God is good THEN HE MUST WANT TO BRING ABOUT THE BEST WORLD IN THE BEST WAY. Therefore allowing evil now MUST BE the best way to bring about the best world.

If God is conducting things in the best possible way (our free choice guided by the Spirit and being aligned with God's will) to create the best possible world (where love is perfectly experienced), then PATIENCE during events such as the destruction in Alabama is essential for us, so that in our here-and-now timeframe we cultivate healthy faith when we suffer: "In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified." (Romans 8:26 - 30; ESV).

So the idea that "evil comes from God" is indeed excluded, TRWord; however, the statement that the belief of knowledge of good and evil is somehow a hindrance seems too obtuse. And why would God not end such suffering at the hand of evil right away in our here-and-now? Perhaps this suffices: "The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed." (2 Peter 3:9, 10; ESV).

During this time, we pray "and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil" (Matt. 6:13; ESV); and we act as "(letting) love be without hypocrisy. Abhor(ing) what is evil; cling(ing) to what is good... not (being) overcome by evil, but overcom(ing) evil with good" (Romans 12:9, 21; ESV). This would be of good help from us to our brothers and sisters in Alabama.

Praying with you, brothers,

Tom
Davidwayne Lackey 05/02/2011 23:48
Amen Tom!!! well said. Your time alone has shown very good fruit. This is probably the explanation I have ever seen. You put it together very nicely.
Davidwayne Lackey 05/02/2011 23:50
I meant to say the best explanation. In my excitement I hit the OK button a little too soon. Oops.
(page   1   2   3   4   5   6)
arrow_up_short start of topic