Replies

There was a fishing village where men and their sons took to the sea to net fish for a month then return to market the catch. The caught fish were kept alive in a 'wet well' of the boat, Because they were in the wet well for a lengthy time, much of the catch would degrade and be of little ,arket value.

But one fisherman always had excellent healthy fish to market. Years rolled by and the fisherman died and his son took over the boat. The other fishermen of the village came aboard to ask how the father had always had such healthy fish to market.

The son said not a word, but opened the cover of the wet well. In the dim interior water a very large sea catfish was seen cruising the wet well.

The other fishermen were astonished at the sight and asked 'why a fisherman would keep such a monster in the wet well, didn't it eat some of the catch each trip?'

The new captain smiled and replied that it did eat many of the catch, but the ones not eaten kept swimming to keep from being eaten and thus the exertion kept them healthier than non-active fish. Evil works sort of like that. The Devil gets many, but the ones he doesn't get keep mindful of the Salvation God arranges by His Grace and they revert to it often and with humble hearts ... they keep movin'.

Thanks for the PING

Great story

Thank you so much for this story. Evil is something I have been studying and praying over. It is part of God’s creation that I don’t “get.”

This is a direct answer to the questions I have been pondering.

I am very blessed to have you as a FRiend! I am very blessed by FreeRepublic!

The new captain smiled and replied that it did eat many of the catch, but the ones not eaten kept swimming to keep from being eaten and thus the exertion kept them healthier than non-active fish. Evil works sort of like that. The Devil gets many, but the ones he doesn't get keep mindful of the Salvation God arranges by His Grace and they revert to it often and with humble hearts ... they keep movin'.

To use the same parable, suppose that instead of using a catfish, the fisherman could have introduced a mild electric shock to the wet well to keep the fish moving. The shock would be strong enough to motivate all the caught fish, but not so powerful that any of the fish would die or would otherwise be less marketable.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the fisherman to use the electric shock, and thus save all the fish, instead of using the catfish, and losing some of his product?

Furthermore, if the fisherman could easily afford the electric shocker, wouldn't we question his judgment if he still chose to use the catfish? And wouldn't we be even more confused if the fisherman could have chosen a painless method of motivation, but nevertheless allowed a catfish to swallow up some of his hard-earned catch?