I make peace, and create evil: NOT ANY MORE.

[Paul Hazelwood]

Hi Paul and WW, maybe part of the problem is looking at God with unlimited power.
God cannot sin, cannot fail, cannot lie; therefore, his power is limited by His nature.
I don't believe God can do anything outside of His nature. God is love and love worketh no evil.
Another problem might be our understand of God foreknowledge and predestination, I don't have all the answer, but I think if we understood Gods foreknowledge it might help us understand this stuff better.

I agree with you here.

It is common for people to say "all powerful"  "anything is possible" but it is all seen in the wrong perspective.

For instance,  "all things are possible through christ"    So it is possible that I should be able to cheat on my wife and not sin since all things are possible through christ?


The second you would assert that, it will put what is possible to the correct perspective.


On God being unlimited.   If God is unlimited, then at some point God could be evil, we have no true assurance that he would not become evil because after all, it is possible.


It is actually the "limits" that we perceive as weakness that is the true strength of assurance

[WhiteWings]

Hi Paul and WW, maybe part of the problem is looking at God with unlimited power.
God cannot sin, cannot fail, cannot lie; therefore, his power is limited by His nature.
I don't believe God can do anything outside of His nature.

Agreed.

God is love and love worketh no evil.

Good verse but unfortunaly I have some too 
Ecclesiastes 1:13  .... It is an evil task which God has given to the sons of men to be busied with.
Isaiah 45:7 Forming light, and preparing darkness, Making peace, and preparing evil, I am Jehovah, doing all these things.'

Looks like a contradiction. Surely there is an explanation. But I don't know it.
If a father gave his todler a handgrenade. Who is responsible when the kid gets killed.
The kid because it pulled the pin. (=sinning) Or the father giving the grenade (putting sin/flaws in His creation)

Another problem might be our understand of God foreknowledge and predestination, I don't have all the answer, but I think if we understood Gods foreknowledge it might help us understand this stuff better.

Do you think God's foreknowledge is limited? I think not.

[legoman]

Hi Paul and WW, maybe part of the problem is looking at God with unlimited power.
God cannot sin, cannot fail, cannot lie; therefore, his power is limited by His nature.
I don't believe God can do anything outside of His nature. God is love and love worketh no evil.
Another problem might be our understand of God foreknowledge and predestination, I don't have all the answer, but I think if we understood Gods foreknowledge it might help us understand this stuff better.

I agree with you here.

It is common for people to say "all powerful"  "anything is possible" but it is all seen in the wrong perspective.

For instance,  "all things are possible through christ"    So it is possible that I should be able to cheat on my wife and not sin since all things are possible through christ?


The second you would assert that, it will put what is possible to the correct perspective.


On God being unlimited.   If God is unlimited, then at some point God could be evil, we have no true assurance that he would not become evil because after all, it is possible.


It is actually the "limits" that we perceive as weakness that is the true strength of assurance

Good points Paul.  And I think this ties back to the whole idea of God being logical, and creating logic.  It is not logical to say you can cheat on your wife and it not be a sin.  Therefore our understanding of sin is "limited" to what it really means.  Therefore God is "limited" because He set up the universe with laws (laws of logic, laws of physics, laws of sin, laws of Christ, etc.).  Is this a real limitation?  Like you said if God is unlimited then God could also be evil.  We only have assurances because God has told us what He will do (thus limiting himself).  Essentially God limits Himself because He is good.  Guess what:  GOD HAS SELF-CONTROL!  That's part of being LOVE.

Regarding the good/evil/who created it/free will issue:

God sent Jesus, he was sinless.  He was the son of God, separate from God but still God (Don't want to start a big trinity debate)

Anyway.  Why didn't God just create humanity as a billion Jesus's to start off with?  Obviously He didn't, so He chose to make us with our human fallibility and sinful nature.  It was God's choice and purpose to do this.

[Paul Hazelwood]

Anyway.  Why didn't God just create humanity as a billion Jesus's to start off with?  Obviously He didn't, so He chose to make us with our human fallibility and sinful nature.  It was God's choice and purpose to do this.

It's obvious he didn't but does it imply anything if he did not have to?   The point I am making on the issue of limits here is that it again appears to be a limit of weakness to say that God couldn't make a billions Jesus to start with.  But he can't because it is impossible to become like Jesus without going through a certain process. 

Perhaps it's not about choice, perhaps inherantly God expands all the time and creation is an inherant aspect of God continually and we are in the only process that there is as there is no other way.  But he can work all things that are possible to help us along the way, the written word is one. 

Our carnality and unbelief will capture that and reject it because it implies weakness when as I said before, what our "ways" and our "thoughts" perceive is unimaginable strength that gives us true assurance that absolutly nothing can change our paths to perfection.


I may be saying what you are a different way, we seem to agree much over this.

[sheila]

   while reading all these posts, this thought come to me...

   I AM SEEING NOTHING BUT JACOB WRESTLING

   Genesis 32;22

    and he said, thy name shall no more be called Jacob,

    but Israel; for as a prince, has thou power with God

    and with men, and hast prevailed.


   Adam's family ,wrestling with both the Holiness of God and

  the man of sin..within himself and others.

   and Jacob called

[Paul Hazelwood]

   while reading all these posts, this thought come to me...

   I AM SEEING NOTHING BUT JACOB WRESTLING

   Genesis 32;22

    and he said, thy name shall no more be called Jacob,

    but Israel; for as a prince, has thou power with God

    and with men, and hast prevailed.


   Adam's family ,wrestling with both the Holiness of God and

  the man of sin..within himself and others.

   and Jacob called

Yes, and it also demonstrates more of Gods character.   He wrestled with God and it appears to be for a very long time.

Don't we all?

But his life was preserved.

[pneuma]

It is actually the "limits" that we perceive as weakness that is the true strength of assurance

 

[pneuma]

Good verse but unfortunaly I have some too 
Ecclesiastes 1:13  .... It is an evil task which God has given to the sons of men to be busied with.
Isaiah 45:7 Forming light, and preparing darkness, Making peace, and preparing evil, I am Jehovah, doing all these things.'
Looks like a contradiction. Surely there is an explanation. But I don't know it.

Hi WW I already gave a different translation of Is.45:7 in the OP.
For me I look at the Father through the eyes of Jesus because every eye but His (Jesus') views the Father through shadow. Therefore any view of the Father that differs from Jesus' is not a clear view.

If a father gave his todler a handgrenade. Who is responsible when the kid gets killed.
The kid because it pulled the pin. (=sinning) Or the father giving the grenade (putting sin/flaws in His creation)

That just it WW, I don't believe God put flaws/sins in His creation.
Freewill is not a flaw or sin because God has freewill.

Do you think God's foreknowledge is limited? I think not.

That's a hard question to answer brother, I want to say no but I view foreknowledge differently than others (big surprise in know)
Foreknowledge is not set in stone.
Example: I dream a true dream that I am going to get into a car accident tomorrow, I now have foreknowledge of the event, does that mean because I have foreknowledge of an event that the event has to come to pass? No, if I don't get into the car at all I don't get into an accident.
Jesus Himself show this to be true, He said He did not have to die on the cross if He did not want to, that He could pray to the Father and the Father would send twelve legions of angels, but He did it so that the scriptures would be fulfilled. Mt.26:53
Foreknowledge can be used in both a negative way and a positive way.
Foreknowledge is not predestination and I think that is where some come into error, thinking because God foreknew what would happen means that is what will happen.
Thus foreknowledge is limited because of the freewill of man.
Does this mean God was surprised that Adam sinned? NO
It just means God knew that Adam might sin, and as He is God He already had in place a provision to bring man back to Himself.
He is the master planner and He has a provision for every eventuality that might come up because of mans freewill.

[jabcat]

Hi Brother Scott.  It's been allowed to be mentioned multiple times, and it's clearly noted that you believe in the concept many have labeled as 'freewill'.  Please steer away from directly continuing to bring it up.  It's been denoted as an off-limits topic and debate on it's not allowed anymore on the forum.  Debate about it is what could imminently occur if we don't move in a little different direction.  It could be me doing the debating  , but I'm trying to abide by forum guidelines, so I'll ask you to please do the same.  Thanks, have a great night,  James. 

[peacemaker]

I seen my brother peacemaker who seems to believe along the same lines I do, and I did not want to leave a man all alone.

Evil is not the opposite of good evil is the absence of good -- Pneuma
(Re: The Potter and His clay - reply #12)

Hello, Pneuma, I am never alone as the breath of life is within my very being; after the pattern of peace, where there is no darkness.

"There would be no need for correction, if we didn't have the will of making a choice; and there would be no choice, if there weren't circumstances."

Walk into a dark room, flip the switch on and watch the darkness flee; turn it off and it will return. But it will appear to be seven times darker, until the eyes have adjusted to the darkness of the room, once again.

"I am God, there is no other, I bring forth the light and create darkness; fashion peace, and create adversity" (Isaiah 45:7)

peacemaker

[peacemaker]

"The opposite of one thing is the absence of the other."

We learn good by experiencing bad because there is no other way to be one with God.   

So, in the same vein, we learn bad by experiencing the good?

"The man who has the knowledge of doing good and does not do it, to him it is sin."

peacemaker

[pneuma]

I seen my brother peacemaker who seems to believe along the same lines I do, and I did not want to leave a man all alone.

Evil is not the opposite of good evil is the absence of good -- Pneuma
(Re: The Potter and His clay - reply #12)

Hello, Pneuma, I am never alone as the breath of life is within my very being; after the pattern of peace, where there is no darkness.

"There would be no need for correction, if we didn't have the will of making a choice; and there would be no choice, if there weren't circumstances."

Walk into a dark room, flip the switch on and watch the darkness flee; turn it off and it will return. But it will appear to be seven times darker, until the eyes have adjusted to the darkness of the room, once again.

"I am God, there is no other, I bring forth the light and create darkness; fashion peace, and create adversity" (Isaiah 45:7)

peacemaker

[pneuma]

Hi Brother Scott.  It's been allowed to be mentioned multiple times, and it's clearly noted that you believe in the concept many have labeled as 'freewill'.  Please steer away from directly continuing to bring it up.  It's been denoted as an off-limits topic and debate on it's not allowed anymore on the forum.  Debate about it is what could imminently occur if we don't move in a little different direction.  It could be me doing the debating  , but I'm trying to abide by forum guidelines, so I'll ask you to please do the same.  Thanks, have a great night,  James. 

Hi jab, I understand your concern and I try my best not to debate the freewill issue on tents as I know it is a taboo issue here.

But to not even be allowed to mention freewill basically shuts me down, for although freewill is not the main issue of what I am speaking about it does have bearing on how I see things.

So how do I explain what I see when I am asked a question, if I am limited in explaining what I see?

I don't use freewill in order to debate it Jab, but to express how I see things when asked a question.

Years ago on one of Gary's old tent boards Gary placed a taboo on the Law, I became upset with this and told him so, but without telling him why, Gary banned me from tents, I take full responsibility for the ban because I should have been more tactful in the manner I approached him, and should have explained the reason why.

But while I was banned I emailed Gary and told him how I view the law as the second death and by him making the law taboo he was basically hindering me from teaching the restitution of all things.

Once Gary realised this was the reason why I became upset, he reinstated me on tents. I was not allowed to debate the law but I was allowed to mention it as it held sway on the way I see how God is to bring about the restitution of all things.
 
So what do I do? Gary at that time allowed the mention of a taboo subject but not the debate of it, which we both thought was a good compromise.

So again brother what do I do? Do I go by what Gary allowed then, or has Gary changed the rule altogether and a taboo cannot even be made mention of.

Can you see the relevance of what happened then to what is happening now? Except I am trying to explain myself in a tactful manner so that everything is out in the open before a final decision is made on this matter.
God bless

[jabcat]

I understand the dilemma.  It's a dilemma for me as well.  A little while back it was stated that there were a couple of hot button issues that would be off-limits for discussion, and free will was one of them.    The thing is, I believe there are ways to discuss our beliefs (mostly) without using (repeatedly) certain hot-button specific words.  I won't count  but there have been several repeated uses of the specific term free will in this thread.  Just being honest, being VERY human, I for one, do get my buttons pushed with that.  Trying to be a) reasonable, b) tolerant, c) charitable, I bite my tongue, say a prayer, and try to not get too insane with it  (I haven't gone all Gary on you - just kidding Gary - don't ban me .)  So a mention (or even a few) is allowed, I personally may make a statement showing what I believe to be a more accurate "other side" view of it, then hope it settles.  But if you'll admit (and count  ) you've tossed it out there several times now pretty quickly.  Not just the idea, but the specific term - the term of which has a history of causing some major problems.  It's actually been loosened a little, with a mention or two and a little discussion allowed (which I PERSONALLY disagree with) but the mod team decided a while back (with Gary's suggestion and blessing) that we just weren't going to go there or let things even approach a level of the problems that occured in the past.

Let me give you an example from my perspective.  If I started a thread, and said, oh, 5 or 6 times in 5 or 6 posts "man doesn't have free will.  We have a will, man's will, that is basically against God's will until God shapes it, as He humbles us and teaches us to follow Him.  But it's not free.  Man doesn't have free will.  He has a limited will that only operates within paramaters an all-Soverign God allows and creates the circumstances and possibilities within which it can function.  But there's no free will."  That's not just a passing mention, it's "hammering on the point".  I would be a) breaking forum guidelines, and b) pushing people's buttons and just kicking the door open for a fight. 

So here's my suggestion.  Talk about what you believe much of which (I perceive) is built around/connected to the freewill issue.  Many will agree and see what you're getting at.  Some will disagree, know what you're getting at, but not get quite so agitated and ready to give you heck because you won't be "rubbing salt in the wound" by repeatedly pushing the hot button that sends them through the ceiling.  YES, we/I all need to work on having more self control, more charity, more tolerance....on the other hand, IMO, none of us should be (even inadvertently) "rubbing anyone else's nose in it", either.

Think about it, get back with me.  It's been public, so I left it public, but if we need to we can go to PM.

God's blessings, James.

[pneuma]

So here's my suggestion.  Talk about what you believe much of which (I perceive) is built around/connected to the freewill issue.  Many will agree and see what you're getting at.  Some will disagree, know what you're getting at, but not get quite so agitated and ready to give you heck because you won't be "rubbing salt in the wound" by repeatedly pushing the hot button that sends them through the ceiling.  YES, we/I all need to work on having more self control, more charity, more tolerance....on the other hand, IMO, none of us should be (even inadvertently) "rubbing anyone else's nose in it", either.

Think about it, get back with me.  It's been public, so I left it public, but if we need to we can go to PM.

No need to take it to PM brother, I see your point, I'll try to limit it to when someone asks me a question where I can only answer by speaking of my belief in freewill.

Is that expectable?

God bless

[jabcat]

Thanks for your understanding.  I'm not saying "pneuma, you better not ever let that word slip out of your mouth!"  .  I am saying I bet that 99% of the time I can express my POV without saying "Bob, man does not have freewill, it's a limited will - man's will rather than God's will.  Yep, that's the way I see it;  no free will".  I can make my point (even being a bit of smart-aleck  )  by saying, "if you think it's up to you, then save yourself".  Never used any terms/labels, point still probably made (even though expressing it like that, you'd probably still want to smack me  ).  Anyway, it's an example.  A bad one - but an example.

And conversely, I bet 99% of the time you can express your POV without saying "Sally, man has freewill and I sure do believe it, yes sir, we got ourselves a dose of freewill".   Not telling you what to say, you're quite capable;  and you may say it quite a bit different than this.  But just as an example to express my point, I could see you saying something like "I believe we have to make choices, God requires it, He hold us accountable, etc".  Never used the hot-button term, point made, and able to stay on point rather than veer into a "freewill!"/"not-freewill!", "freewill, Stupid!"/"not-freewill, Stupid!" food fight.   A little extra creativity, a little extra consideration, etc., still basically able to say what we all believe.

Also, as I type what I see as a possible example of you stating your beliefs, I would actually personally find common ground there.  No real need to fight.  I could say "Amen brother" to your statement, then we could move along further into the main points of the discussion.

The main thing is, a time or two in passing to answer a question or set a premise is one thing - that even though it's an off-limits topic, we'd probably blink and let it slide.  But bringing it up over and over, multiple times in a short "conversation", is likely to be waving honey around in front of bears, the bears are gon'na head for the honey jar, and somebody's gonna end up getting clawed or bit!

Give it some thought, don't feel smacked around, but do realize it's a serious issue and is regarded as such.  We can do this without posts starting to get cut and all that jazz.

We are brothers and sisters here, and God is helping me see that I need to act like it (for a change  ).  We can do it!

God's blessings, James.

[willieH]

willieH: Hi WW & Pneuma...

I agree Paul.
Why would an all powerful God that despises evil for some reason (a plan) create/allow/support evil.
Answer like "must be for His plan" or "to teach us" don't really answer that because infinite power means He could have bypassed it.
Mystery for me.

I don't see it as a mystery at all bro...

I think the answer is simple... Why did He create ANY opposing thing?  Up vs Down for instance?  What makes UP, ...UP?  -- Is not "DOWN" required in order for "UP" to indicated as an existant thing?

Each subjective "knowledge" is ONE knowledge containing BOTH sides of the sword.  "Up" is and only can be known as, "Up" ...because Down exists and vice versa... they are by necessity TIED together as ONE observance... The KNOWLEDGE of Good and Evil are NOT 2 knowledges, they are 2 aspects of ONE knowledge.

GOD has, within His wisdom, created ALL THINGS... and it does not matter whether or not a "created entity" (such as ourselves), questions that agenda, as is plainly noted in Rom 9:20

Even if it "strikes you or I" to question God's "character"... we have no RIGHT to do so... and in the end it does not matter, for HE created, controls and sustains ALL THINGS... as HE so chooses to "create, control and sustain" them...  ...and our approval or objection to those things, is irrelevant.

I guess it is just our good fortune that He is LOVE and GRACE... and we must be dependent upon those characteristics to keep that which might cause us concern as FINITE observers, in check. (such as the fact that, He created EVIL)

There is COMPLETE PURPOSE in God's agenda, which none of us can see in total... and that AGENDA is subject to, and manifests of -- HIS CHOOSING which is found within ETERNAL WISDOM.

All we need to do is do what we were created for:  PRAISING  HIM!    In THANKSGIVING... 

...willieH 

[Paul Hazelwood]

Even if it "strikes you or I" to question God's "character"... we have no RIGHT to do so

We have every right to work out what God's character is and that is what is going on here.

Believers in the idea that Gods character  fries human beings in an eternal hell use that argument all the time.   

[Raggedy Anne]

Pneuma,

Very profound.  I'm really glad you decided to share this.   One way I look at it is that in order for God to manifest his essence "Love and Light" - there must needs be resistance to that which HE IS in order to manifest His glory.  In that way, God 'creates evil' or brings about resistance from all sides.   God cannot possibly be of an evil mind or anything that is not pure (as some teach).

Anne

[Raggedy Anne]

Even if it "strikes you or I" to question God's "character"... we have no RIGHT to do so

We have every right to work out what God's character is and that is what is going on here.

Believers in the idea that Gods character  fries human beings in an eternal hell use that argument all the time.   

Paul,
I totally agree.  Our search for faith is all about questioning God's character.   WillieH. - have you never read the book of Job?

Anne

[peacemaker]

"The opposite of one thing is the absence of the other."

In other words, the opposite of air is the absence of air; try not to breathe.

Just a Dive-Master, speaking from experience!

Thus, the opposite of gravity is the absence of it, and without gravity we would
continue to fall away into utter darkness (literally and figuratively).

peacemaker

[pneuma]

Even if it "strikes you or I" to question God's "character"... we have no RIGHT to do so

We have every right to work out what God's character is and that is what is going on here.

Believers in the idea that Gods character  fries human beings in an eternal hell use that argument all the time.   

  I agree because Gods character seems to get assinated all the time

[pneuma]

Pneuma,

Very profound.  I'm really glad you decided to share this.   One way I look at it is that in order for God to manifest his essence "Love and Light" - there must needs be resistance to that which HE IS in order to manifest His glory.  In that way, God 'creates evil' or brings about resistance from all sides.   God cannot possibly be of an evil mind or anything that is not pure (as some teach).

Anne

your welcome sis

[pneuma]

"The opposite of one thing is the absence of the other."

In other words, the opposite of air is the absence of air; try not to breathe.

Just a Dive-Master, speaking from experience!

Thus, the opposite of gravity is the absence of it, and without gravity we would
continue to fall away into utter darkness (literally and figuratively).

peacemaker

 

[dboutwell]

That limitation of God makes him only liable for creation,  he grieves because he knows what we go through, but he spoke us into existance despite what we would HAVE to go through because in the end, we will be glad for the gift of life he gave us.

There are sooo many hardships in this life, and, in the U.S. where we live, we probably have not seen too many of them compared to other parts of the world. I do find some comfort in the fact that God placed Himself down here in the mess to experience it for Himself. He knows what we go through because He went through it too..more than most of us because most of us, though some have, don't have to give our lives for our faith. Being persuaded of God's unexplainable love for His creation  and His plan for a happy ending helps eliminate hard feeling toward Him for the  present human situation. We, who know that love, should be trying ever harder to make it known to eveybody we come in contact with.

Debbie