Posted on 09/17/2001 11:16:12 AM PDT by ksen
Who does?
He that will one day require of you your soul! See it doesnt matter if you believe in Him..irrevelent to history,mankind or me
The only one it is revelent to is you..
And then it is irrevelent to you untill eternity..then you will believe ..but it will be too late..
One day EVERY knee will bow and every tongue profess...that Jesus Christ is Lord...yep even you
Your call..you kneel now or later..
No, I don't, and I'm not an Epicurean.
If you don't have faith that the sun will rise in the morning, then only suicide is left.
The sun rising in the morning is not based upon faith. It is based upon direct observation of objective reality.
I'm not swayed by threats or bullying.
An interesting conversation about babies and judgement and the nature of God (and who He is). But on the babies issue....
The baby issue is very interesting. I think first of all a person has to start with what the Bible says about God. Can the God of the universe be unjust? The answer is no (not from what we see in the Bible). Thus, whatever happens to babies, we cannot attribute unrighteousness to God. If someone can't put that issue away (of charging God with unrighteousness), then there is no use going any further into the issue of babies.
Secondly, God has indicated that He has chosen us from before birth. Hmmm..., now that's very interesting. But, however He has chosen us and in whatever way, God also holds us responsible. How does one correlate God choosing us in conjunction with holding us "responsible" for "our choice" (i.e., of Christ) -- at the same time. Don't know..., that's one of the great mysteries, but God tells us so. And since God knows much more than we'll ever be able to know (even in eternity), then that pretty much settles it. Even so, I still try to "think through" the issue anyway. I just don't dismiss what God has plainly said.
Then, thirdly, we're all going to die anyway, because of our sin condition, which the Bible makes clear applies to every last single person in the human race (no matter how young or how old). So, death is the norm -- under the condition of the "Fall". Since it's the "norm" -- that shouldn't disturb us.
In fact, we're told not to be concerned about that, but rather be concerned about the "second death" -- which is the eternal separation from God (those who choose not to avail themselves of the provision that God has for the payment of the penalty of sin [which is "eternal separation from God, totally unto yourself" -- keep in mind, God is all that is good and is joy, so that separation means separation from all good and all happiness, in the lake of fire]).
Now, add to that, the fact that God is outside of the dimension of time (He knows the beginning from the end -- plus -- being "all knowing", knowing all the details of every last single movement of each atom at every microsecond of the universe and any other detail that you could imagine. Thus, even though a baby has not made "obvious choices" in the "dimension of time" -- God knows in intimate detail exactly what kind of life is represented by that baby, before it ever gets "played out" in the "dimension of time." We may have to wait for "time" to "see" for ourselves, what the choices of others are, after they've grown up and have had those opportunities -- but God doesn't. He already knows. He knows the "end of eternity" -- even though for us -- eternity never arrives.
So, what is the eternal destiny of that baby, in which we've never seen that baby makes its choices "in time"..., well, we might not know -- but God sure does.
Is God unjust (unrighteous) in knowing these things and acting upon His knowledge and power? No, the Bible makes that clear. That charge can never be leveled and sustained against God.
And death in this life is not the thing to be concerned about. Death to the whole human race was not the original intention (in that we were not designed that way or for that purpose). In fact, no one will ever cease to exist for eternity. The only problem is that some will exist for eternity away from God in the lake of fire. That's the big thing to be concerned about (not a building falling down on you in New York).
It's definitely a tragedy, without a doubt -- but the worst tragedy is that a certain number of people had their account called -- at that moment -- and they were not ready. That's the biggest tragedy of all. Whether it happens to a baby or an adult doesn't make any difference.
I don't know what happens with babies (on the level of each one of them) -- but God sure does, and I trust God. That's where it stands with me. I don't charge God with unrighteousness.
----------
For those who would accuse others of contributing to their dislike or unbelief of God, I would give a warning. It won't make a bit of difference what others say here (whether they are Christians or not) -- in terms of your own responsibility. God will hold you responsible for your own choices, and not hold you responsible for what someone else said here.
You see, God makes it clear that He gives all sorts of "signs" pointing His way, so you can seek Him out. If you refuse to do so, then it's your responsibility. God has given His word. You don't even have to depend upon anyone else to get that Word of God. It's written down. You've got it at your fingertips. That's what will count.
In the end, you'll acknowlege God anyway -- no matter what your choice is. You will either accept His Son, Jesus Christ or not. If you don't, you will have sealed your fate, according to all that you've done in this life, and you will be judged according to your own actions. That will result in eternal separation (while you exist for eternity) -- from God and all that is good. It will be in the lake of fire, that place of eternal torment (that we are told about in the Bible). And if you choose to ignore or reject Christ, then God will respect your decision and remove Himself from you -- forever -- for eternity, according to your life's choices. It's your doing. God leaves you to your own doing, from then on. And that's not going to be a very pleasant result.
----------
On another matter..., was this tragedy a judgement from God? Was it simply a removing of the "protection" of God (which would be somewhat different)? Or was it a blessing in disguise to wake up people to the coming calamities and prepare themselves? Well, one might try to make a case for one or the other of those things.
What we do know is that this could not have happened -- at all -- unless God had allowed it in the first place. So, at the very minimum -- this was done by the "permissive will" of God (the Bible makes that very clear that this is the case).
Can we point to one thing or another in this society and say, "This is the cause...," or "That is the cause..." -- well... that's questionable -- working in "that direction" (from a supposed judgement to the "originating and casual act" [which brought on the judgement]).
However, it can more easily be said -- that if certain things are done in this country -- that an impending judgement will result (that's going from the "causal act" and then saying that a "judgement" is coming). That sort of thing is pretty clear -- from the Bible.
AT THE SAME TIME, we have to note -- that in Job's case, there was no causation on his part that brought on those things that Satan sent his way. Thus, we also have -- very clear evidence -- that calamity can happen for things which has "no legitimate cause" (i.e., "the bringing on of judgement") -- and are simply "at the hands of Satan" in which He accuses the brethren (those saved) and tries to "make his case" -- before the "court of the universe".
In that sense, we are all in a "long-term" and continuing "court trial" (the whole time of man's existence on this earth) -- in which the "case" is being made by Satan (as the accuser). He accuses not only the brethren, but accuses God (in an indirect way) and is also the father of lies and bring destruction.
God has allowed this "court trial" of humanity (and the human race over "history") to go on until the "final decision" is rendered and "all avenues" have been explored and "proven" one way or another.
What will be "proven"...?? Well, that there is no other way excepty by Jesus Christ -- in the end -- and that mankind (itself) is utterly depraved and sinful and deserving of death (no matter what is done or tried) -- and that it is only by Grace that God has saved anyone (out of His lovingkindness).
----------
I hope that's a good summary of a few issues here. There's not too much more to add to it -- other than just getting into the Word of God, itself and finding out for yourself (and by help of the Holy Spirit, which God will send your way to help you understand, if you ask).
[... a last word..., this wasn't directed at any particular person -- and certainly not to the one I responded to, but to whomever wants to listen.]
Agreed. However, I am not about to second guess God in matters like these; in fact, I'm not even going to first guess Him by saying this was a result of His Just Wrath. I will say, though, that we don't know what *He* regards as consistant and what, exactly, those who died were being punished for, if anything.
I do trust my God, though. I trust that He is both just and merciful, so that whatever happened, if He was the cause of it, it was proper in some manner which I may or may not be able to comprehend.
A small comfort to some, perhaps, but a great comfort to me.
Tuor
On what grounds would you trust Him to be just and merciful if we can't even discern what He considers consistent. If His definitions of consistent, just, merciful, loving, etc. are independent of the objective reality in which we live, then there would be zero grounds on which to trust Him.
Frankly, I consider it a matter of faith. In part, that faith is based on my understanding of what He is. Also, I do not expect to be able to understand why all the things that happen, happen.
Again, I doubt this is very comforting to non-believers.
Tuor
So, what's the problem? I only ask because there are several different things talked about. It's all fairly ordinary and straightforward stuff (as far as the Bible is concerned).
Even though you are not able to see long, or short, wavelengths with the naked eye, nevertheless, they are a part of objective reality. They exist.
You missed the larger point I was trying to make: We say they exist because we can theorize and hypotheize and create instruments to see what we cannot. How many centuries did it take to discover that the Sun emitted energies besides those we can see with the naked eye?
Why, then, do people not accept that there are *still* things in the Universe which we cannot directly or indirectly perceive. Further, people seem to continually mistake the limits of science: *if* there are things which we cannot in any way detect -- something completely outside Nature -- then Science cannot help us anymore than it can tell us what happened before the Big Bang.
Tuor
Objective reality? What is objective reality? Where does one stand in the universe to see it as it "really" is?
Of course there are things in our universe as yet undiscovered. However, the moment someone declares they have found a new thing, the burden is then upon that person to document his evidence and provide his proof. If in addition to merely theorizing its existence, he goes on to claim that his discovery is making demands that we order our life around, then the burden is even greater. In the case of radio waves, we have devices which enhance the range of our natural senses and bring them into a domain in which we can perceive them directly. There is no such instrument with respect to a God. He remains in the realm of faith.
By what means would I prove to you the existence of objective reality, if you reject the very foundation on which any proof must rest. There can be no communication between us if you are unable to accept the metaphysically given -- the existence of reality. I simply declare that existence exists and that man is conscious of it. If existence did not exist, there would be nothing to be conscious of. Consciousness presumes the existence of something to be conscious of and some being to have that consciousness. Existence pre-exists consciousness, but the opposite is a contradiction, which does not exist in reality.
One can study what exists and how consciousness functions; but one cannot analyze (or "prove") existence as such, or consciousness as such. These are irreducible primaries. (An attempt to "prove" them is self-contradictory: it is an attempt to "prove" existence by means of non-existence, and consciousness by means of unconsciousness.)
[Ibid.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.