ARGH!!! Open Theism makes me furious!!!

gimp

New member
So it is possible for God to experience great joy and delight in His children and yet be grieved, disappointed, hurt, 'angry' when they rebel or disobey (cf. Gen. 3). God's emotions and dispositions are seen at different times in different ways depending on the circumstances. He is infinite, so He can experience great joy and great pain in His heart as He delights in one person and grieves at the wickedness of another person. We are finite, so do not have the same capacity in an identical manner.

You aren't saying anything much different than I am. Sure a person can experience conflicting emotions when they consider a person who loves them and the next instant a person who dislike them. However, that being said if the person who is considering the two individuals is a wrathful person his reaction to both individuals will be much different than someone who is a loving person.

I'm saying that a loving God couldn't look at a person who agrees with him and say "I love you" and look at another person who doesn't and say Love me or I'll kill you. That is the response of someone who is completely self-centered, which is the antithesis of love.

I would ask you to show me where in the life of Jesus here on earth you can show me where he said" Love me or I'll kill you", or show me how he lived his life in harmony with that attitude. When he was being crucified didn't he say: Forgive them for they don't know what they do? Wouldn't his true person be the only thing revealed under that kind of stress? If he had an equal portion of anger towards those who rejected him as he did love towards those who accepted him wouldn't he have been calling down curses or telling them those who were crucifying him that they are going to burn in hell for what they are doing? I just don't see in the Bible what you guys are trying to tell me.

I see only a God who is loving, not wrathful and angry. If jesus is God, and your doctrine of the trinity is true, then he has to be like his father. The two of them have to be alike. Didn't Jesus say whoever had seen him had seen his father? Since this couldn't be referring to a physical sighting it could only mean that the two were the same kind of persons.

This is the problem I have with Christianity. I don't see the angry, wrathful, God you all say you worship. It's probably the main reason I have not accepted it.
 

gimp

New member
Edited because of double post caused by extremely slow site response

On a different note.... Is this site always this slow. It is taking minutes between when I try to post or preview a post and the site responds. I've never seen a site this slow before.
 

gimp

New member
You seem to be rejecting the Bible, not Hilston, godrulz, and I...when you read the Scriptures, ask God to open your eyes so that you may truly see Him for who He really is.

Am I rejecting the Bible or what you say is in the Bible, because I don't see there what you guys say you do. No one has offered satisfactory answers to my questions and objections, you just tell me accept what we tell you or you are rejecting our God. Well, that is partially true anyway. I do reject a God that is they way you portray him to be.

I haven't made a decision for or against God because I don't know who is right, me or you. If you are I may very well reject Christianity completely for you worship someone who demands and then kills in anger and wrath rather than someone who loves and kills only because of governmental duty or necessity. I could love the one but only fear the other.
 

STONE

New member
Originally posted by godrulz

The Gospel was preached to all men persuasively with the belief that those who heard could either procrastinate, receive Christ, or reject Christ. The Word of truth is powerful and the Spirit convicts/convinces/draws/woos/persuades. Those who respond in repentant faith (will, intellect, emotions involved), will be saved. Those who harden their hearts and refuse to submit to the Lord of love will remain condemned. God provides and initiates, but we must respond. The evidence is that many continue in their selfish rebellion. This does not mean they are more powerful than God, or that His provision is powerless. It is simply reality from a loving God who gave us the gift of free will moral agency so we can know and love Him with integrity (vs being mindless, will-less automatons). God's sovereign will is not the only factor in the universe, or He is responsible for Hitler's evil and the perishing of the masses in hell (contrary to His explicit revelation of His character and ways).
Fair enough. It is when either soveriegnty or free will are downplayed that I am concerned.
The influence of the potter's hands cannot be under estimated; nor can the importance of free will.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by STONE

Fair enough. It is when either sovereignty or free will are downplayed that I am concerned.
The influence of the potter's hands cannot be under estimated; nor can the importance of free will.

I haven't been following this conversation as closely as I should so I hope that I'm not too far off the topic at hand, but I found this comment of yours interesting and felt that I should respond.

The only reason we have free-will is because God has sovereignly decided to grant us the ability to choose on our own whom we will serve. God could snuff out our existence in a blink of an eye if He wished, so there is simply no way to suggest that our ability to freely choose what we do and believe in anyway impinges upon God's sovereignty.
While the theological meaning of the term sovereign has come to mean the meticulous control of every detail of every event that has or will ever occur, that is not the normal meaning of the word. A human king does not have to control or even be aware of every event that occurs in his country to be that countries sovereign ruler. The term sovereign simply indicates authority, God is the highest authority that exists, all authority of any sort comes from and can be recalled at any time by God, He is therefore sovereign, period.

And one last point concerning "the Potter's hands". The Potter and the clay analogy refers to God (the Potter) and the nation of Israel (the clay), it is not talking about individuals at all. This story does not speak to the issue of free-will but rather to God choosing and using a nation as a whole to accomplish some particular purpose.

Resting in Him,
Clete

P.S. I don't mean to suggest that you disagree with any of this. I'm just throwing in my two cents. ;)
 

Turbo

Caped Crusader
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by gimp

On a different note.... Is this site always this slow?
No, the site is undergoing a hardware upgrade. The slowdowns are only temporary.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by gimp

You aren't saying anything much different than I am. Sure a person can experience conflicting emotions when they consider a person who loves them and the next instant a person who dislike them. However, that being said if the person who is considering the two individuals is a wrathful person his reaction to both individuals will be much different than someone who is a loving person.

I'm saying that a loving God couldn't look at a person who agrees with him and say "I love you" and look at another person who doesn't and say Love me or I'll kill you. That is the response of someone who is completely self-centered, which is the antithesis of love.

I would ask you to show me where in the life of Jesus here on earth you can show me where he said" Love me or I'll kill you", or show me how he lived his life in harmony with that attitude. When he was being crucified didn't he say: Forgive them for they don't know what they do? Wouldn't his true person be the only thing revealed under that kind of stress? If he had an equal portion of anger towards those who rejected him as he did love towards those who accepted him wouldn't he have been calling down curses or telling them those who were crucifying him that they are going to burn in hell for what they are doing? I just don't see in the Bible what you guys are trying to tell me.

I see only a God who is loving, not wrathful and angry. If jesus is God, and your doctrine of the trinity is true, then he has to be like his father. The two of them have to be alike. Didn't Jesus say whoever had seen him had seen his father? Since this couldn't be referring to a physical sighting it could only mean that the two were the same kind of persons.

This is the problem I have with Christianity. I don't see the angry, wrathful, God you all say you worship. It's probably the main reason I have not accepted it.


The OT God is not different than the NT God/Jesus.

God in both Testaments displayed His wrath by having nations judge and kill other nations. Jesus is the center of the Book of Revelation (if you read this, you will see the same wrath as evidenced in the OT). He oversees great judgments resulting in the death of masses of evil people. This Jesus is the same one as seen in the Gospels who blessed and forgave.

Lk. 13:3 "Unless you repent, you too will perish" - Jesus

He also warned about hell and the weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Hell is not inconsistent with the love of God.

One must not reject a straw-man caricature of God. He is seen to be loving and holy, not just sentimental luv. He loves truth and righteousness. Love does not overlook heinous evil. This would be unloving for the victims.

Do not pit the love and holiness/justice of God against each other. At the cross, His mercy and justice kissed.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by gimp

Am I rejecting the Bible or what you say is in the Bible, because I don't see there what you guys say you do. No one has offered satisfactory answers to my questions and objections, you just tell me accept what we tell you or you are rejecting our God. Well, that is partially true anyway. I do reject a God that is they way you portray him to be.

I haven't made a decision for or against God because I don't know who is right, me or you. If you are I may very well reject Christianity completely for you worship someone who demands and then kills in anger and wrath rather than someone who loves and kills only because of governmental duty or necessity. I could love the one but only fear the other.

God's justice is based on governmental issues, not personal appeasement issues. God is love. His anger is not petty or uncontrolled. It would be unloving to let evil people continue to slaughter the innocent. Even police use force to save lives (snipers, etc.).
 

gimp

New member
godrulz,

Thank you for making my argument for me.

If your God's judgments upon sinners are governmental duties then they can not be said to be adminstered in wrath and anger. However, you still seem to want to cling to the idea that even though your God's judgments are basically duties he must carry out to protect the good of his subjects and execute justice you want to make them actions of anger and wrath. Why is that?

You seem to be a guy that really thinks things out so I'm wondering how you reconciile the discrepancy to yourself. When a man commits murder here on earth, is found guilty in a court of law, and that court sentences the man to death are you saying these are actions of revenge, anger, and wrath? Is that your position? If not why would you charge your God with that?
 

God_Is_Truth

New member
Originally posted by natewood3

GIT,

I just realized I had not responded to this post yet. My apologies.

Now, a few points need to be made. First, you say the Spirit "helps" us do what we should have done the whole time, namely, repent and believe, but at the same time you want to say that we were totally able to do this before the Spirit began to convict us. Do you not see the incoherence of that? If you are totally able to do so on your own, then why do we need the Spirit's conviction and the Father's drawing? If we have to have it to be saved, then we obviously are unable to truly be saved unless GOD does something first.

Just cause we are able to do it doesn’t mean we don’t need help actually going through with it.

Secondly, you say you believe that we "fully understand and see Christ in all his glory AFTER we repent and believe, not before." I suppose you did not think this statement all the way through before you said it.

Why would anyone "repent and believe" in Someone who they do not see or understand, Someone who does not look gloriously beautiful and all-satisfying? Why would anyone come to Christ if they do not see Him? Why would anyone believe in Christ if they don't see Him as the all-satisfying Treasure they have been searching for? I agree that we do not FULLY understand or see Him, but we do see Him and understand what He done for us BEFORE we are saved, otherwise, we would never have any desire to be saved. God's initial activity of letting us "taste and see that the Lord is good" is what causes our desire for Him and our desire to believe in Him.

because we ALL know we have sinned. We ALL know we are guilty before God. We ALL know we cannot save ourselves. THAT is the reason we need Christ and why we should repent. You seem to think that one chooses Christ because they feel the need for him in their life, that he will make their lives better, he will enhance their daily experiences or something along that line. That is so false I don’t know where to begin. The reason one chooses Christ is because he needs salvation and that salvation is found only in Christ. It has NOTHING to do with seeing him as a treasure, seeing him as beautiful, thinking he’s what you need or anything like that. it’s about salvation, plain and simple.

First, the word "long" in that text means "desire." You are confusing terms. Second, if we are "desiring" the Word by just trying to make ourselves do it, then it is probably fake. I can "make myself desire" a food that I hate, but that is not real desire and longing. Desire comes from tasting and savoring. The more we taste the Word and savor the Word, the more we will desire it. The point it this: If God does not open our eyes to see His Word as great and marvellous, we won't desire it, yet we are commanded to do it.

We are not commanded to do it. God is simply stating that IF we don’t repent, we will continue as we are and WILL die. We don’t die because we didn’t repent as if not repenting were a sin. Rather, it’s because of the sin that we die and a lack of repentance leaves us in our sins.

You do not understand the relationship between God's actions and our actions if you think that is what you should do. That is like saying, "God gives and sustains life, so we should just stop breathing." That is crazy. Just because it is GOD that does the work in us, it does not follow for us to be lazy or to just "let go and let God." That is actually antibiblical.

1Co 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me.

1 Thessalonians 5:23
May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Peter 1:2
who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance.

it is God who sanctifies us through his spirit. By “let go and let God” I mean that we have to surrender our abilities and rely totally on God to purify our hearts and renew us in him to live out our lives for his will. Trying to do it on our own is like spitting in the face of Christ.

Hence, you support my argument that we would never see Christ or even have the desire to look and rely on Him without God's grace and God's decisive actions before our dependent actions. Therefore, how are we not totally unable to come to Christ unless God performs an awesome miracle in our hearts first?

Because it’s COMMON grace, not irresistible grace!

If I give thanks for the loss of my wife, and I am not really feeling thankful, it is hypocritical GIT!!! True gratitude is there when it is there, and when it isn't, it just isn't there. If you just try to muster up some "gratitude" without truly being thankful and feeling thankful in your heart, it is pseudo-gratitude. It is hypocritical.

If you can’t genuinely give thanks then you should not pretend to. God is not mocked. Either be thankful, or acknowledge that you aren’t and examine why you are not so as to remedy the situation.

The problem with your example is that your cat cannot swim across because it is PHYSICALLY unable to do it. We cannot come to Christ because we are MORALLY unable to do so. It is not as if God is not allowing some people to come to Him who would have came had they been given the opportunity. No one seeks God. No one understands spiritual things. No one sees the Cross as beautiful. Why? Because they don't WANT to and they are UNABLE to do so because of their sinfulness, corruption, and rebellion. Do not make it as though it is God's fault that we are sinful. As I have always said, we make choices and we choose sin. It is OUR fault we cannot come to Christ. That does NOT in any way lessen weight of the command, "Repent and believe."

You are the one who says we are unable to swim. I say we are able, but usually unwilling.

Now, in relation to what I have said above: How would a person with a deceitful and wicked heart ever turn to Christ? If we can turn to him with a sinful heart, why do we need a new heart?

1Co 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

You say this verse only refers to God's wisdom. I said the Gospel is the wisdom of God. You said it is not.

1Co 1:22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom,
1Co 1:23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles,
1Co 1:24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

That whole context of 1 Cor. 1 and 2 is speaking of the Gospel of Christ, and how it is considered the wisdom of God and is foolishness to the world.

Oh really? Then why does Paul say this?

1 Corinthians 3:1
Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly–mere infants in Christ.

He says that his brothers (those who had accepted the gospel) could not be regarded as spiritual, even though they should’ve been. If the gospel was a spiritual thing, then there is no reason why Paul would’ve said that. the people were not understanding the spiritual things, but they had already accepted the gospel. This means the gospel is different from the spiritual things.

If one does not repent, it is because he/she hasn't seen Christ as the all-satisfying Treasure that he/she has always been searching for, because when he/she does, they sell all they have to get it.

It’s because they CHOOSE not to. Repenting has nothing to do with how we see Christ. It has to do with knowing we are sinners and choosing to no longer live that way and accept Christ as our savior for our sins.

I DO NOT DENY FREE WILL! I DO NOT DENY FREE WILL! One more time? I DO NOT DENY FREE WILL!

Oh so now you deny exhaustive foreknowledge? In case you forgot, they are mutually exclusive concepts.


You keep stressing that Christ didn't literally bore our sins, but that He bore the wrath of our sins. What you do not seem to understand is this: How can Christ bear the "wrath" for sins that were not yet know? God just gave Christ some general wrath for some general sin for some general people? Paul said that Christ gave Himself for "me." Christ cannot bear Paul's wrath unless God already knew all the sins Paul would ever commit, and therefore be able to remove all the wrath standing between Paul and God.

The wages of sin is DEATH. Whatever sin we commit, it’s wages is DEATH. Thus, Jesus can pay for them all in one death.

I love how you ignored the text.

Joh 17:2 since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him.

Christ died to give life to ALL THOSE GIVEN to Him by the Father?

Who are "all those given to Him by the Father"?

All those who repent and believe.

You imply we "become predstined," which seems, at least to me, totally contradictory. How can we become something that took place before we ever existed?

It’s a general predestination that becomes applied to you once you enter into the group per the conditions established beforehand. In other words, the actions were predestined, but to whom they apply was not. Thus, sanctification was predestined to all who believe from eternity past. However, those who are sanctified was not. When they believe, they are predestined to be sanctified.

Neither one of these texts state God works "with" us:

Rom 8:28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.

Phi 2:13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.

God does not work around your free will; He works in it to do HIS will and HIS good pleasure. Big difference than Him working "with" us.

Neither one says God takes away our free will. Remember, we are the ones who repent in the first place. We surrender our wills to God at that point and allow God to work in us.

How would you be "free" to go to class if God "causes you to stay asleep"?

Cause free means “able to act as one decides in a given circumstance”. If you are asleep, there is no act able to be done. Free will is non-existence, so to speak. Free will just means that you are conscious and able to decide given a choice. What choice is there about sleep? When you are tired, you sleep. If God puts you to sleep, then it’s not your free will that’s being overridden, just your ability to exercise that. it’s like a hurricane hitting your house. Free will isn’t affected at all, just what you can do with it and what choices you have.

If we produce that which is pleasing in His sight on our own, you know who will get glory and praise? US!!! However, if it is God who gives and produces that which is pleasing in His sight IN us and through us, then GOD gets the glory. The Giver gets the glory.

Oooooooo no we don’t. we don’t because it is BOTH God and us who does it. the ONLY way we could claim any glory is if it was ALL us. But since it’s God who works IN us to produce good fruit that we do, we must give him the glory.

Pro 16:9 The heart of man plans his way, but the LORD establishes his steps.

How does this go along with what you said above?

What’s the problem?

2Ti 1:9 who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before time began,

"Before time" began seems like a LONG "time" ago. Maybe, from all eternity (as other translators translate it)? How much did it involve? Well, look at the hundreds of prophecies and it seems as though all the details were included.

Question: How can God ordain that He would save us through the cross before time began, being He didn't even know Adam and Eve had sinned or would sin, and therefore, we did not need a Savior yet? Why would God ordain the cross before time began if He didn't know the cross would even be needed?

I agree that it was from eternity past, but in a different sense. God ordained it as the plan of salvation that would be brought to mankind not WHEN they sinned, but IF they sinned. The prophecies ALL came AFTER man sinned, not before. Why would God ordain it before man sinned? Because God plans ahead…. :chuckle:

You say God CAN stop you from thinking an evil thought, but what you seem to ignore is the fact that God must KNOW that you are going to think that evil thought if He has the ability to stop the thought. Whether or not God WILL is irrelevant in this issue. You say God CAN stop a person from thinking an evil thought. God must KNOW the evil thought will take place beforehand in order to be able to stop the evil thought.

Why? Where do evil thoughts come from? Partly the devil, partly temptations, and partly our own desires. Now if God restrains Satan, removes the temptations and has us focus on something good for a while, then he can stop us from having evil thoughts. However, since we have free will I don’t believe he will stop us from having evil thoughts at all.
In other words, you punted on Prov. 16:9...

If you think you can establish the doctrine you want to on that one verse then you have bigger issues.

So Pharaoh COULD HAVE repented and changed everything?

Sure.

Blessings,

GIT
 
Last edited:

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by gimp

godrulz,

Thank you for making my argument for me.

If your God's judgments upon sinners are governmental duties then they can not be said to be adminstered in wrath and anger. However, you still seem to want to cling to the idea that even though your God's judgments are basically duties he must carry out to protect the good of his subjects and execute justice you want to make them actions of anger and wrath. Why is that?

You seem to be a guy that really thinks things out so I'm wondering how you reconciile the discrepancy to yourself. When a man commits murder here on earth, is found guilty in a court of law, and that court sentences the man to death are you saying these are actions of revenge, anger, and wrath? Is that your position? If not why would you charge your God with that?

Righteous indignation against evil is different than emotionalism anger because someone is ticked off. His actions are not revenge, but righteousness. A human judge is not personally offended. The Holy Judge and Lawgiver of the universe is personally offended and grieved. The OT and Revelation reveals an aspect of wrath flowing out of love for truth, holiness, and justice. It is not unreasonable for God to not be meek and mild in the face of Satan's or Hitler's great evil.

If the Bible is the Word of God and His revelation, we need to do word studies and historical background studies on the references to anger, wrath, judgment, etc. We accept these revelations as truthful insights into God's characters and ways. We must always remember that His emotions, actions, etc. are perfect and not identical to fickle, finite man. Whatever His wrath and anger entail, it is not like a human's anger at being wronged and wanting revenge. Hence, the governmental issues are the foundation, but God's heart disposition is also reflected in response to evil or good.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by godrulz

Righteous indignation against evil is different than emotionalism anger because someone is ticked off. His actions are not revenge, but righteousness. A human judge is not personally offended. The Holy Judge and Lawgiver of the universe is personally offended and grieved. The OT and Revelation reveals an aspect of wrath flowing out of love for truth, holiness, and justice. It is not unreasonable for God to not be meek and mild in the face of Satan's or Hitler's great evil.

If the Bible is the Word of God and His revelation, we need to do word studies and historical background studies on the references to anger, wrath, judgment, etc. We accept these revelations as truthful insights into God's characters and ways. We must always remember that His emotions, actions, etc. are perfect and not identical to fickle, finite man. Whatever His wrath and anger entail, it is not like a human's anger at being wronged and wanting revenge. Hence, the governmental issues are the foundation, but God's heart disposition is also reflected in response to evil or good.

godrulz,

You are missing the fact that revenge is righteous. We are told by God not to take revenge because (basically) we would screw it up. But the Bible clearly depicts God as a vengful God and He does get angry when people sin. I don't see how this can be denied by anyone who can read; the Bible is pretty clear on the issue.
You are correct, however, to point out that God's anger is not like man's. God does not lose His ability to think clearly and to judge righteously when He is angry like you and I do and so anger does not falsify justice somehow. There is no need (that is, it is not logically necessary) for a judge to remain neutral as long as He remains just.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
I agree and this is why I affirmed God's self-revelation in Scripture. What gimp needs is illumination of the revelation and an accurate knowledge of God's character and ways. They are perfect and not unreasonable. He is looking at things from a human perspective and pits God's love against His wrath, anger, and holiness. His justice flows out of love for truth and righteousness. We must not create God in our own image. God is God and we are not.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by godrulz

I agree and this is why I affirmed God's self-revelation in Scripture. What gimp needs is illumination of the revelation and an accurate knowledge of God's character and ways. They are perfect and not unreasonable. He is looking at things from a human perspective and pits God's love against His wrath, anger, and holiness. His justice flows out of love for truth and righteousness. We must not create God in our own image. God is God and we are not.

:thumb:
 

gimp

New member
godrulz,

You say your God is just but you also use the human terms of anger, wrath, etc... to describe the way he adminsiters his "justice". When someone then says that this isn't a very likable or just being then you say these human terms don't really describe your God.

I for one find this rather confusing. Why do you use terms that you say don't describe what you believe your God to be like when you describe him? There were no qualifying phrases or adjectives when you said he was also full of anger and wrath and that he dispensed his "justice" with wrath and anger.

It is only when I point out that justice and judgment can't be dispensed with anger and wrath and still be justice that you attempt to begin qualifying your statements on wrath and anger. If this second explanation is the true one why didn't you explain it that way in the first place?

See, this is why I find trying to nail down who the Christians believe their God to be so frustrating and difficult. They all disagree among themselves, and then they end up disagreeing with their own initial descriptions of him. Don't you people actually know your own God?
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Originally posted by gimp

godrulz,

You say your God is just but you also use the human terms of anger, wrath, etc... to describe the way he administers his "justice". When someone then says that this isn't a very likable or just being then you say these human terms don't really describe your God.

I for one find this rather confusing. Why do you use terms that you say don't describe what you believe your God to be like when you describe him? There were no qualifying phrases or adjectives when you said he was also full of anger and wrath and that he dispensed his "justice" with wrath and anger.

It is only when I point out that justice and judgment can't be dispensed with anger and wrath and still be justice that you attempt to begin qualifying your statements on wrath and anger. If this second explanation is the true one why didn't you explain it that way in the first place?

See, this is why I find trying to nail down who the Christians believe their God to be so frustrating and difficult. They all disagree among themselves, and then they end up disagreeing with their own initial descriptions of him. Don't you people actually know your own God?

I, for one, will be quite clear. God is a vengeful God who gets extremely angry when it is appropriate to be extremely angry. He is, however, always just whether He is angry or not.

Heb. 10:26 For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. 28 Anyone who has rejected Moses' law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know Him who said, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord. And again, "The Lord will judge His people."

Prov. 1:7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge,
But fools despise wisdom and instruction.

You can choose for yourself, fear God now or fear Him after it is too late for "it is appointed unto man once to die and then the judgment". There is no escape, you will bow before God in fear one way or the other; I recommend doing it now. There is no guarantee of tomorrow or even your next breath but while there is life there is hope.

Heb. 10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

gimp

New member
Clete Pheiffer,

It's interesting that you take texts that can be read a couple of ways and make them fit your idea of your God.

While I'm not a Christian I have done some studying. Admittedly I am no theologian nor do I claim to know as much as Christians do. But, I do have a few simple tools I use in my study such as e-Sword. e-Sword has a concordance. In that concordance it says that the word Vengeance comes from a Greek word meaning vindication and/or retribution. Both of those words have meanings that have nothing to do with anger, wrath, and revenge. So, to me you are reading something into these texts. Thus to me I don't see an angry God taking out revenge on those he doesn't like and is angry with.

In the last text you quoted I can also see a meaning that is not even close to your interpretation of it. If someone has been a rebel/brigand, murderer, law-breaker, etc... it is always a fearful thing to fall into the hands of someone who delivers justice. That justice does not have to be administered in anger to be fearful. A judge or policeman just doing his duty and executing justice without emotion is just as fearful to those on the receiving end of the punishment. Is the death penalty any less fearful if it is executed dispassionately than if it is executed in white hot anger? Are not the results of both deliveries to be feared equally?

I really don't see a whole lot of strength to your statements.
 

gimp

New member
Clete Phieffer,

As to the text you quoted from Proverbs I once again went to my concordance. Once again I'm not Hebrew or Greek scholar so I'm just taking the words in the concordance and looking at them for possible meanings.

The word fear used there can also be used to mean reverence. e-Sword has something called Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrews definitions. In it they give two meanings to the Hebrew word. One is fear as in being afraid, the other is fear as in respecting.

As I read the verse as a whole, and once again I'm no expert, the usage of the word fear as meaning afraid doesn't seem to fit the rest of the verse. Doesn't Hebrew have a style of writing in which they state the same thought twice in a row but word it differently? So the verse to me says respect God for this is the beginning of wisdom, but fools don't listen to instruction or advice. I know that is probably not a very accurate translation of what is there, but it certainly makes far more sense to me than your reading of be afraid of God for this is the beginning of wisdom, but fools don't listen to instruction and advice.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
gimp,

Your observations are accurate, there is often more than one meaning to the phrases people use, and this goes for phrases that the Bible uses as well. But there can be no doubt about it God can and does get quite angry when it is appropriate.
If you'll simply plug in the word "anger" into your concordance you’ll find that it occurs 234 times in the King James and many of those are direct references to God being angry and it quickly becomes very clear what sort of things provokes the "fierce anger of the LORD".

In reference to the following statement...
A judge or policeman just doing his duty and executing justice without emotion is just as fearful to those on the receiving end of the punishment.
I would say that this sort of thinking is born out of a modern understanding of criminal justice (or actually the lack thereof). Biblical justice is completely different and altogether more effective specifically because it is far more frightening!
To demonstrate what I mean, let me ask you the following question.
Which of the following would you think was more frightening?

A. You've been convicted of raping and murdering a man's young virgin daughter and have been sentenced to be executed by lethal injection.

Or...

B. You've been convicted of the same crime as in A but the girl's father will get to both choose the method of and participate in your execution. He is allowed to be as creative as he likes as long as your death is public, and painful but not torturous.

If you're honest, which you seem to be, the choice is obvious.

Oh, and one last thing.
My last name is spelled with an “f” not an “h”. ;) Don’t worry about it though, it’s a common mistake. Please feel free to simply address me as Clete; last names are so formal. :down:

Resting in Him,
Clete
 
Top