lftc

@Debp Sorry to have brought a dark cloud to your topic.

I think you might be saying you are unsure whether you have a firm hold on reality? Or that maybe reality is unknowable? If that is the situation, you are not alone. The history of human endeavors to truly understand reality go back to the beginning of time. And the theme of unknowable reality is present all the way through. And always end at the same place, in my opinion: faith. The question is: What are you going to choose to have faith in? If you can't find you way out of the coma feeling, make a choice while in your coma reading what I write, to have faith in Jesus the Christ. Peace, deep and true Peace to you.

@Debp - thanks for posting. I like it and I don't like it. I like it because I think it is true. It brings a level of meaning to suffering. It is relfected in 2 Cor 1 : 6 If we are distressed, it is for your comfort and salvation; if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which produces in you patient endurance of the same sufferings we suffer. 7 And our hope for you is firm, because we know that just as you share in our sufferings, so also you share in our comfort. I don't like because I think it is true. According to the quote from whoever that was, one has to go through ten years of suffering. God have mercy.

@TraceMalin You are a man passionate about your vocation/avocation. Thanks for sharing your passion. I liked seeing how your passion makes you see parallels into the the greater passion. Peace to you.

When you think about it, it is even bigger. Jesus made Peter the leader of the first assembly in Jerusalem. And then after the resurrection, he had the encounter with Peter that was similar to when he first called Peter: He met Peter, who had gone back to fishing - what else could he do? And he gives the wonderful assurance of Love by asking Peter the same question three times, just like Peter's three denials. But it is even better, The first two times Jesus asked he used the greek word for love that has the transliteration (english readable form): agapaó , commonly called agape love in some english domains. Greek has 4 separate words that get translated into "Love". Agape is the type of Love that is most often used in association with God. It is specifically the Love in 1 COrinthians 13, which does a far better job of defining it than all the lexicons I have seen. Peter responds with the word for Love that has the transliteration: phileó. This word is intended to convey a meaning that we might term as emotional or brotherly love. This is like what a person feels when they think about their friends. Anyone who has lived for very long knows that this type of love changes in an instant as it is based on the current set of emotions a person is experiencing. "I love you forever" - 3 months later after an episode of broken trust: "I hate you. Get out of my life". In Peter's denial, he showed the effects of decision making based on his phileo love for Jesus. His has emotions of uncertainty. He and the others had just a few days before been certain that Jesus was about to do what all Jews believed the Messiah would do: expel the Romans and reestablish a Kingdom of David. They had just watched the triumphal entry. Then Jesus is arrested and clearly on his way to the ending of a criminal. Peter would certainly be uncertain. The powerful surge of phileo from the events of the prior week would vanish, leaving Peter in a state of being that I fight all the time: "but I thought you were the Christ? I thought the Christ would do these things in my life". That uncertainty would be coupled with fear: Peter, indeed anyone alive, would fear falling into the hands of the government. The odds of escaping severe punishment were virtually zero. Fear and uncertainty: phileo evaporates. That is phileo. At least that is how I understand it. So now lets look the exchange with Peter and Jesus over a fish meal: Jesus: Peter, do you agape me more than these fish? Peter: Supreme Master, You know that I phileo you. Jesus: Then take care of my people Jesus goes through it a second time: Jesus: Peter, do you agape me more than these fish? Peter: Supreme Master, You know that I phileo you. Jesus: Then take care of my people Then Jesus asks a third time but changes the question: Jesus: Peter do you phileo me? The passage says that Peter was deeply saddened because Jesus asked him the third time using Phileo. Peter: Supreme Master, you know everything. You know that I phileo you. Jesus gives the same instruction for the third time. ---------- Melinda12 pointed out that Jesus had anticipated Peter's denial and it had not changed Jesus' Love (agape) for Peter. In this restoration of Peter, Jesus demonstrates to Peter the prinicple of agape to Peter. Jesus presents the standard, the goal of Agape Love. Peter, being a freshly destroyed person, does not pretend ability to achieve the standard. Jesus again asserts the standard. Peter chooses the path of honesty and admits he cannot live up to the standard. Jesus then says OK, honest and humble man who can't live up to my standard: I still give you the responsibility to represent me to my people. Peter would never forget this. Well except that he made a mess of the whole law issue in the middle of Acts and had to be once again chastised for failing to truly believe in Grace. So Jesus excluded him from the Kingdom of Heaven after that. The Kingdom of Heaven excludes failures to live up to the standards. Last paragraph just a sarcastic test to emphasize that that is NOT how the Kingdom of Heaven works. Peter is one of the justly revered men, as he continued in his love (whichever happens to be working at the moment) of Jesus. I don't like the mortal ending of his story as he was crucified by the authorities (those that claim authority). But, in this story, I see a powerful continuation of the principle that Melinda12 started. Note: A language expert of great reputation, who is being put through his own personal Diet of Worms in another topic on this forum, wrote a highly regarded book on the subject of these 4 Loves.

Hello @Jayne I too have believed for years that Jesus knew he was going to raise Lazarus. I believe that Jesus wept because he feels the pain that we feel. In that situation, he looked and saw a crowd of people weeping over the empty hopelessness of death and he felt their pain. He knows the emotional pain I am in now (for years). He knows it will be over soon. He is always trying to get me to trust him, but it is so very hard to do when every part of life is arrayed against you. But I do have moments when I trust a little. And verses like this shortest verse help assure me that he doesn't say "You idiot! I told you to trust me! Chin Up!" Jesus wept. The shortest verse, but so deep.

I find your description of church life excellent. Very excellent.

@createdequal I often avoid controversy issues, but this one is different. I must acknowledge that I write from a location where abortion is illegal although there are countless other problems with authority. Like the Rwanda topic, the blood of the slaughtered cries out. The outrage at human brutality is consistent throughout the ages. Societies always claim they are the best, while any outside observer, especially with a heavenly view, can see the huge issues that scream of hypocrisy in the most abominable forms. In Rwanda 1 million killed. In the western world 1 million killed every year. It is tempting to call for justice for the countries and people that commit such things. But then Jesus, when showing us the problems of living by judgement (the sermon on the mount), said Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. When I consider the women that have chosen abortion as the way out of their terrible situations, I love Jesus' words as it gives me God's blessing to not hold the terrible events against them. Just like the point I was trying to make in the Rwanda topic. Mercy is beautiful when we have Love. Mercy is heinous when we have hate. Does that mean that abortion is OK because we forgive those who are engaged in the actions? No, abortion is clearly a sin, which can be demonstrated from the Law of Moses. What must be done about the society? Here is where there is not a clear directive in scripture that I can see. We see precedence in scripture in different directions. So precendence by itself is not clear enough to establish a principle about what action the individual should take against a society. Which leaves it in the hands of God to speak to the individual. During the Rwanda massacre, what action should a person take? Should a person from the USA have formed a squad to go over and violently stop the massacre? Should a person who lived in Rwanda have formed a squad to violently stop the massacre? Should a person from anywhere have organized a network of people to get people out of the massacre? Should a person have stood between the murderous mob and their victims to attempt to stop them? Should a person just take the long term view and seek to depose the government that allowed such actions? Should a person just stay home and pray for them? I believe the answer to any of these could be "yes" if God led a person to such action. The last two carry the risk of apathy, where it is easy to lose connection with the suffering of others and return to a lifestyle of looking for the Logs. The other ones carry the risk of focusing on the Logs in the eyes of the perpetrators. Now that we are After the Rwanda Massacre, should a person call for justice for the perpetrators? When I asked that in the other topic some responded yes. Is it the same answer for those involved in abortion? I believe in decision making based on principles not on Utilitarianism. I believe the dominant principle in the New Covenant is Grace, made possible through His Mercy. But that does not mean that the issue of abortion does not loom as a gigantic issue that should be of great concern to every person, but especially those who support the authorities that authorize such atrocities.

I apparently completely missed understanding you in my previous post. I am sorry and I hope it did not offend you. Could you be more specific in what you have prayed for for 36 years?

Yes, blessings to all

From this and your other posts, I think you are expereincing a common issue. However, it can be hard to discuss such things in an open forum as there are some that do not comprehend grace. You stand at a point of decision. You have been at a similar point every day for many years. Since you plea the Blood of Jesus, I assume you are at a place where your "no" answered prayer requires Grace from God if there is not a "Yes" answer. What I find remarkable about Paul's similar prayer (besides all the scrambling in many doctrines to obscure it) is that he prayed it only 3 times. That is astonishing faith. Those who truly live by the rules, instead of living by a subset of the rules, quickly come to the same place of praying that prayer. The Pharisees were at that same place, but took the rules based approach to resolution. Hence the tremendous meaning in Jesus' parable of the new wineskins. One of the most startling parables. Paul, the "chief among sinners" as he described himself in one of his LAST letters, had the faith to trust God, when God said His stength is perfected in weakness. Paul, who was caught up to the third heaven (assuming it was to himself he referred). Weak. You've tried the path of waiting for God to say "yes" by removing the issue. Now maybe it is time to try the other approach. Trust that the Death of Jesus the Christ is the answer. God already said yes. Fall in love with him. Let the bridegroom clothe you in beautiful white robes that he made himself. Every bride rejoices when her bridegroom adorns her to make her beautiful. Accept the adornment as it is what he wants. If I totally misunderstood - I offer my apology: maybe it is useful for someone. It is for me.

@frienduff thaylorde When we cross the barrier of death and stand (and fall) in the presence of the King, I want to stand next to you and hear you sing.

Yes. Knowing him is the only reason for life. Knowing who he really is.

Powerful

Only a person that is truly alive would be capable of this. What a worthy goal. I humbly doubt my ability to live up to this.

He is like that! Thank you for writing such excellent comments!

As always, well said. I think these stories start us on our way to compassion. What you said, above, is so true. When I consider what Jesus bore on the cross, far beyond the physical agony, I am deeply moved. Until I finally really believed him, my guilt was a huge burden, the separation from God was unbearable. And that was just me. When I think of Jesus carrying the burden of ALL THE SINS OF ALL TIME, I cannot even begin to conceptualize it. When he quoted the Psalm of David (22) "My God! My God! why have you forsaken me?" I know that the depth of spiritual pain he felt far exceeds mine. When I consider that he did it that I, we, might be free from the guilt of sin, I am humbled and eternally grateful. When I truly believe, I put on the beautiful gown of the bride (he made it!) and look forward to dancing in his presence. Soon I hope.

not mine, please. I did not make the bed.

Already several good posts here. I understand the dilemma that is summarized in the title of this topic. How can we concieve of a God as having complete control over everything while still giving man his choices. Unfrotunately, over the centuries the writings of prior men seeking the truth becomes the starting point for understanding. Martin Luther decided that the Roman Catholic Church had gone too far away from the scripures because of the credence given to the earlier teachings of the church. And truly what a maze it becomes when we add one mans teachings to another mans teachings and then try to understand the scriptures from the combined perspective. Martin Luther broke away based on Sola Scriptura - scripture alone. And by the time he died had built up a a significant following of people claiming Sola Scriptura and quoting Luther's teaching. Not that we should not refer to other people. But my point is that it is OK to hold other people's thoughts and summaries of scripture as propositions, not as established truth. I say that to make it clear that I mean no disrespect to Spurgeon (of whom I know some) and Criswell (whom I know not at all). As Coliseum observes, this issue is similar to the Trinity doctrine in that it is based on principles that are extrapolated from the scriptures. We see that God has various characteristics from the scriptures. From those we come to understand that God has control over all that occurs. An often referred to passage is Ephesians 1 where the word "predestined" is used several times. Yet we have numerous passages that clearly state that man has a choice. "This day choose...", "Whoever believes on him..." etc A succinct (is it possible that lftc can be succinct?) statement of the problem: How can God predestine events that happen in this life while man has a choice? If life is predestined where is the choice? I see the dichotomy as false and holding its basis in erroneous assumptions. Ephesians 1 almost always says that the believers are predestined IN CHRIST. Paul is careful to add that phrase for precise reason. God's plan from before the beginning of the world was to show his mercy through his own substitionary death, the death of the Christ. So reread that passage with the understanding that he had that plan in place. Secondly, most people that look at this accidently assume that God is not a very good planner. When I make plans, especially important plans, I often will add contingency plans, alternate plans to arrive at the same goal when uncontrollable circumstances prevent the primary plan from completing. I understand that good chess players do this (I don't play games). I personally believe that God Most High is quite capable of making the required number of contingency plans to deal with the decision points in my life. To me that is more feasible than talking to everyone in the world at the same time, which no-one seems to have a problem with. Much to the readers delight, I must stop writing at this time and go off line. Hope that was understandable.

I very much appreciate your candor. I welcome it. And I appreciate you posting instead of sending a PM. You are very correct. Other people do need to hear of your situation. I meant that you can PM me when you need to express hostility towards other posters here or have the need to use "unapproved" adjectives. The moderators do have a responsibility to try to keep things civil. I don't have that responsibility so you can express such things to me in private. I, too, long for experiencing God's love. I used to experience it a lot, but for the last several years my situation has been bad, really bad. So much so that death is appealing. When I feel a pain in my chest, I get excited: maybe it's finally time to go. I have come to realize that he is the God of broken people. As you accurately quoted him, he came to heal the sick, those that know they need a doctor. I feel a slowly growing peace as I embrace that suffering is part of the way of God. I am like Peter when everyone else had rejected Jesus because he said they have to eat his flesh. Peter said "Who else has words of eternal life?" So here I wait. Each day is one day closer to the end of suffering.

I am not sure, but I believe what you are asking is why we can't just look around us and see the hand of God dispensing justice on those who dispense justice (as the James passage promises). It is an excellent question and is the source of much dismay in people's lives. As is usual for me, I wrote way too long of a post for modern readers. So allow me summarize: Since God is the author of mercy why would we expect him to bring judgement on those who deserve it (as the James passage makes clear they do). I am speaking in terms of this mortal life. After this mortal life, those who do not believe the Gospel will get what they want, the opportunity to tell God they don't need mercy - face to face. Those who believe in mercy are constantly being brought to justice by the accuser and those that work for him. Now for the longer exposition. Skip it unless you have time to read. Again the OP questions are pertinent to everyone's life. I believe it is the point of the book of Job. In Job we see God claiming that Job is "perfect" which of course prompts a response from the accuser, "allow me to show you his weakness". To our great dismay, God says have at it. Job's life is destroyed. Even more than mine. If I put the proper terms to describe how this feels, the post would need to be removed. Besides, I try to stick with more articulate adjectives. But Jeremiah describes it well in Lamentations chapter 3. And David describes it in several Psalms. And the Sons of Korah (there is a name that brings focus on Mercy) describe it well in Psalm 88. Then Job's friends show up. People like to make fun of them because of what they say, but they are honest and they sat with him for 7 days before they started the discussion. In my life there have been about the same number of friends. Most people are looking for a reason to hate and immediately disregard the destroyed person, as they take the same view as Jobs friends, but don't have any love to at least sit with the destroyed person. Just get the bad person out of the way. Then we get 30+ chapters of philosophical discussion. A debate right from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Job's friends are saying that Job has done something wrong and that is why he has been destroyed. Evil earns judgement and punishment. Job is saying that he has not and he deserves blessing. Good earns blessing. I think God gave us the courts of heaven start of the book to ensure we would know Job was correct about his innocence from God's perspective. God had removed his sins - Job does reference prior sins, yet has confidence those are not held against him. So they are all saying the same thing. Many hundreds of years after this story, God confirms that this is indeed the summary of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil: at the end of Deuteronomy he gives the Blessings and Cursings. Which no-one has ever collected on the Blessing side as the prerequisite for blessing is to KEEP THE WHOLE LAW. Most people don't even know what it says as they have been told that that blessing is referring to a different law. Job and his friends are debating the questions of the Original Post in this topic. 30+ chapters of some articulate discussion of the issue. Which is why I almost never quote from the middle of Job. In a way, God negated the whole debate. If you notice, the last statements by Job sure seem to be headed the wrong way. He basically demands that God make an accounting for the destruction in his life. Calling on God to answer for misdeeds is indeed a serious issue. My conjecture here is that Satan was joyfully watching the defendant fully incriminate himself. God steps in. He stops the debate. I used to be frustrated as God does not point out who had good things to say in the debate. I wanted so much for him to say one side or the other was correct. But then I realized that he simply insures that all listeners, Job, his friends, numerous centuries of readers, and Satan, recognize their respective position. God alone is God. Eternity is his domain. All created things are ... well ... created. Existence emanates from him. Does one call on God to answer for his actions? What should one call on God for? The first thing God does is ask: ‘Who is this that obscures my plans without knowledge?’ After God establishes the smallness of man, Job answers "You asked, ‘Who is this that obscures my plans without knowledge?’ Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know." So the Great and Terrible Divine Being destroys them all for their impertinence. End of Story. That is what Satan wanted. No, God shows his Mercy, he has Job officiate at a blood sacrifice to cover (atone) their sins. What are God's plans that they were obscuring? It's not a hard question, he told his plans. He predestined his plans to show his great mercy. From before the beginning of the world, he predestined (planned and made sure it happened in common language) to make sure people knew their need for mercy, ... no, KNEW their need for mercy ... still not strong enough ... had absolutely no doubt about their need for mercy. He made sure of this quite effectively through the law. Then he planned to show that mercy by coming and becoming the once and for all blood sacrifice to fulfill the requirements of all the law. And establish once for all that he is merciful. Real Mercy as the sins are very real and worthy of death. Eternal death. An undefeatable plan. Just needs people to believe. How were Job and friends obscuring it? By continuing to believe that they could procure blessing via their own actions. After that Job experienced fleshly blessings again. Then he died ending those fleshly blessings again. Important to note as we want all blessings now. But my guess is that Job and his friends had a better view point on life after that phenomenal experience. What view? That the Kingdom of God is far bigger than this life. Which brings us back to the original post: Why does God not bring judgement on those the live by judgement? Because that would obscure his plans. He has mercy while the world runs its course. He does step in sometimes in big ways. I believe that is to prevent people from being completely decieved by Satan. He does step in sometimes in individual lives. But not often enough from my point of view. I want so much for him to intervene and teach my oppressors a great and terrible lesson. JUSTICE! NOW! Then I remember that a call for justice requires full justice. If I call for others to face justice, then I will not be excluded. And God does not pay any attention to the custom sets of law. He is not even slightly amused by the feeble attempts to dodge his clear instructions. He rises in anger at those who make mockery of his plans. Including me. And then he has mercy. I wish he would step in more. I sometimes think I should call him to account like Job did so that he will step in and give me a lecture like he did Job. That would be great. But I realize that I shouldn't do that; I fight off the impulse. Once again I come to the place of dependency. God have mercy.

Hello DailyPrayerWarrior, If it offensive for me to ask you a question, please just ignore this. Are you saying that God's forgiveness has no force in this world? That the many thousands of guilty Hutus should be killed because they killed 1 million Tutsis. I understand the point of view where it is an offense against our sense of justice to not punish someone for their crimes. That is the core issue with Good and Evil. Good must be rewarded and Evil must be punished. I wonder what situation we would have if Moses had met with justice after mudering the eqyptian overseer. I would sure would miss the Psalms if David had been properly punished after killing Uriah. The New Testament would be largely empty if Paul had been punished for murder and other crimes that are recorded in the New Testament. I don't bring these things up as if I am trying to incite discord. These things are clear issues for the person progressing through their journey as a believer that the Bible is the Word of God. Grappling with understanding of these issues is intended as God wants us to understand the immense meaning of Mercy, the product of His Love. Mercy means little when Judgement is little. In the real world, Mercy stands as the giant killer, a powerful beautiful enormous force overshadowing the power of Sin, which is judgement and death.

Hello Coliseum. Are you looking for ideas? Or did you want to just share? It is late. I'm going offline.

All we can do is the best we can in a situation. It is important, vitally important I believe, to understand the Kingdom of God and the ramifications it has on every part of life. But realize that we have a limited role to play. But I believe God is VERY interested in my pursuit of understanding HIS principles and holding them above any other set of principles. You are a wonderful brother and I am glad we discussed this. I think it is too late. having to retype lines.

Beautiful, truly beautiful