Since the blog is silent I thought I'd throw out another topic. I think it's one we all must wrestle with from time to time. That is, how do we know God's plans in our lives vs. our own?
To explain, let me give a little background overview of how I have approached the issue. In the beginning, the first thing God commanded was to multiply, and subdue the Earth. God doesn't tell Adam what that is supposed to look like. He gives him free reign within the few commandments he's given, and of course I note in this that Man's authority descends and therefore is subordinate to God's authority. Next, God brings the animals to man "to see what he would call them." If God wanted to control man's every thought, word, and deed than it would seem logical that he would give Adam commands or inspiration as to what to call them; it would seem that is not God's intention than. Next, God who is omnipresent, all knowing, and willing to protect man by giving him commands to preserve his life...chooses to be absent in the day of temptation, in fact it seems based on how God "walked" in the cool of Garden that even though he can be everywhere at once, he isolated his presence down to a small part in the garden at anyone time. So it's not a stretch to imagine that he was frequently absent from the garden.
From this I gather that God's way is for us to submit our ways to his, rather than holding our every action awaiting the go ahead.
Further, I consider the breath of scripture and considering the long gaps in people's lives between which God does nothing obvious to people (though no doubt he was ever working in the background), which leads me again to reinforce the same idea that God wants both to play, but also to sit back and coach. Just as a Father intervenes to save and to teach, but often stands back to let the child discover and practice. Still more, I consider all the commands where God instructs us to pursue our desires, ambitions etc...
Deu 12:20 When the LORD thy God shall enlarge thy border, as he hath promised thee, and thou shalt say, I will eat flesh, because thy soul longeth to eat flesh; thou mayest eat flesh, whatsoever thy soul lusteth after.
21 If the place which the LORD thy God hath chosen to put his name there be too far from thee, then thou shalt kill of thy herd and of thy flock, which the LORD hath given thee, as I have commanded thee, and thou shalt eat in thy gates whatsoever thy soul lusteth after.
God wants us to pursue our desires...
Deu 15:9 Beware that there be not a thought in thy wicked heart, saying, The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand; and thine eye be evil against thy poor brother, and thou givest him nought; and he cry unto the LORD against thee, and it be sin unto thee.
10 Thou shalt surely give him, and thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: because that for this thing the LORD thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto.
God will bless us in our works AND in all that we put our hands unto, if we obey.
Pro 12:5 The thoughts of the righteous are right: but the counsels of the wicked are deceit.
Pro 16:3 Commit thy works unto the LORD, and thy thoughts shall be established.
Pro 21:5 The thoughts of the diligent tend only to plenteousness; but of every one that is hasty only to want.
In all three of those the word thoughts can be rendered plans, it is the same word that is rendered in Jeremiah as "I know the PLANS I have for you..." So it would seem that God is interested in establishing the plans of the righteous/commit their works unto him. I have had it presented to me that, a man should have no plans rather wait on the Lord, but if that is the case than what point is there in having a mind at all? Why am I given the capacity to think if my only function is to wait and listen? My experience, if my thoughts are necessarily useless to God, is that my thoughts only get in the way of listening to God, therefore it would seem that thinking is a distraction from God.
I reject this because what point would there be in study if my mind was not to be engaged? Sure the Spirit discerns the scriptures, but doesn't he use the mind to process? How can a man be prudent/cunning if he can't understand where he's going or make any plans for it?
Pro 13:16 Every prudent man dealeth with knowledge: but a fool layeth open his folly.
Pro 14:8 The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit.
Pro 14:15 The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.
Pro 14:18 The simple inherit folly: but the prudent are crowned with knowledge.
The cunning (meaning the one who makes bare in other words he sees through), deals with knowlegde; understands where's he's come, is and goes; looks to what's about to happen and grows in knowledge.
Pro 22:3 A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.
Pro 27:12 A prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself; but the simple pass on, and are punished.
The prudent man must forsee evil. If this was meant to be "the praying man listens to God and does seemingly random things because God sees evil coming," then why the emphasis on knowledge and understanding? Why be cunning, if all I have to be is tuned in?
Having said that, what do we then do with the times when God does intervene? We are not told of any reason that Abraham wanted to leave his father's house and strike out on his own, traveling through countries where he felt afraid for his life. Or Hagar, did she think it desirable to be kicked out of Abraham's protection? Did the apostles think the ministry was a better idea than fishing or tax collecting?
Clearly God also has his own plans...destinies if you will, a purpose higher than our own plans...left to ourselves, I think most of a our plans would end up being quite petty anyways. But, and this is where it meets the real world, it would be easy to have an arch angel or a booming audible voice come to me with a message and go...hmm...ok, whatever you say. But I've never had that happen. In my experience, my 'promptings' come in the form of doors closed in my face, biblical prohibitions, obvious wisdom, and usually lastly somekind of intangible in that general order. I suppose sometimes, I do have a very persistant urging that won't go away, but I can't think of anything more major than personal confession or a hard word that that has influenced. Not to say those are minor things, but I've never felt some really powerful inner urging to...move somewhere or marry someone or buy a house, sell a car, anything.
But I have met people who have very strong feelings about such things. And in some cases I see a lot of their choices and I can't believe that God would be so random. And I mean that, I don't believe God is so random. It seems almost cruel to constantly tear a man's work down or to never let him see any purpose behind his labour. I mean which is worse to have no goals because you believe God is just going to take them away, to have goals only to feel that God is tearing you away from each of them before you can accomplish it, or to firmly hold to a plan (that has no sin mind you) and be unable to tell when God is trying to change your course?
I'm not saying those are the only possibilities, or that I completely hashed out anything. But these are actually some questions that I am personally facing. It started the other day...well actually it started earlier, but that detail isn't important. When I had someone else, who strikes me as making more effort to be atuned to the Spirit, suggest to me that a course of action that I had thought much over and committed considerable resource to accomplish believing it was the right course was in fact going to lead to considerable evil consequences. In this particular case the reason was based on a number of dreams that I had had, and that another third party had had. I pretty much rejected the idea for whatever reason, but I am still thinking and praying about it.
In my search, I kept coming to two things that recurred. On the one hand, I am increasingly frustrated by the idea because, I'm like "how can it possibly be of God to have them 'waste' all this time, effort, and money, forsake everything that was prayerfully and carefully planned before; all on account of a couple of dreams that are vague and the interpretations do not account for the whole dream?"
But the other thing that came to mind was a question. See, these series of dreams do seem to share similar elements...and the people to whom these interpretations have occurred are people to whom a certain amount of...preconception seems to have been given. For example in the current situation there's a person who dreamed about meeting people by face and name before she actually met them. In another, case someone who wasn't involved in this incident saw a poster and then interpreted it as a warning, passed it on to another set of people, who failed to relay it to the subject of the warning and that person became deathly ill from an unusual incident.
So the question that came to me is, if it were God trying to turn the wheel...what would I take from him that I would accept as proof? How could I test him and know that it was him speaking? Especially if my understanding of the situation is opposite of the interpretation?
Fire away...
Jesse,
ReplyDeleteMan does not have “free” reign, but the ability to reign within the guidelines God’s established for his good. He has imparted him with a “will” to do as he pleases whether it is right (his good) or wrong (his bad).
Why doesn’t God tell him what “it” will look like? Adam is not given the task of creating, but arranging. Everything was supplied to him.
Statement “If God wanted to control man’s every thought,” should read “God desires for man is to control every thought he has.” This would follow after the order you’ve established: God’s authority and then man subordinate unto Him.
God does provide inspiration to Adam to name the animals. The word inspiration, of course, comes from the word inspire. Inspire in its simplest definition means “to breathe in(to).” The divine instructions would have been implanted within him at the moment God breathed into Him. Ideas are not original with man. There is nothing new under the sun. You don’t think of something on your own. You may believe this to be the case because you suddenly realized it. The source of the knowledge is either “revelation” of the divine or “understanding” of the logic. Either way you are influenced by someone.
God’s allowing of Adam to name the animals continues the plum line. God is superior to man. Man is superior to animals (creation). God’s intent is therefore to establish the authority of man.
Understanding of the word “omnipresent” voids the possibility of God’s absence. I watch my daughter every morning get on the school bus, but she doesn’t necessarily know I’m there. The better question is: Why does God choose not to reveal His presence? What was God’s desire we established earlier? It was for man to control every thought he has. He was not absent but concealed from their senses. How is this possible? Where is God when you sin?
From thought proceeds doctrine (instruction), from doctrine proceeds practice (action). Action done in ignorance against God’s will reveals one should have waited to receive instruction. Action done in agreement with God’s will is never wrong. The mere fact that we ask, “God should I do this?” reveals our uncertainty. Is it faith that propels this man forward?
But alas I see you have reached the same conclusion. “A father intervenes to save and to teach, but often stands back to let the child discover and practice.”
The Deuteronomy passage you quoted (12:20-21) states, “thou mayest eat flesh, whatsoever thy soul lusteth after.” Does this mean they can eat pork? Of course it does not. The meaning is found in the phrase “I will eat flesh.” The obvious choice would be in following the commands or instructions of your superior. The reason your borders were enlarged was because you kept His commands from the start.
God desires for us to pursue His desires. The reason is because they are for our good. I understand the dilemma. How do I know that what I want to do is God’s desire for me? How we do something will lead us to what we do. If we do something the right way, it will lead us to produce rightly.
Are you saying, Jack, that God wants me to be a garbage man? I don’t think I should have answer to answer that particular question. Are you happy with being a garbage man? Is there something else you could do that would make you happier within the guidelines God has established? Happiness (true) is found in producing or revealing the best that God has given you in your daily living, whatever that may be, as long as it doesn’t violate (willfully) God’s command.
I’ll get back to you later with more.
Jack
Your Brother in Christ
Jesse,
ReplyDeleteGod desires for man to control every thought he has. The question that stems from this fact is: What does it mean to control? In the earlier response I suggested exercising authority plays a role. In order to exercise authority correctly one must be aware of not only his condition, but the conditions or circumstances that surround him. Deuteronomy 15:9 (quoted) uses the word “Beware” to convey. Often folks think of this word as a warning. “You better not go into that house!” (Beware). Beware, however, is not only a warning, but an exhortation and means “to take care (of).”
In other words the Scripture seems to suggest that this object (or matter) should have your watchful regard or attention. The object (matter; issue) of concern would include everything in our daily lives. Why do I say everything? If it is not worth paying attention, it is not worth having.
What purpose do “things” serve? If used correctly (right) they should be used to glorify God (Prov. 12:5). But here is where we need to exercise caution because it is in this thought that idol worship originates. I use this block of wood to worship God. The key therefore to understanding is “if used correctly.” This draws attention to the subject not the object. The object has no thought or intent but to be used as the subject determines. We can conclude therefore that “God desires for man to control every thought he has with the intent to serve Him correctly.” You find this sentiment echoed in the verse you quoted from Proverbs 16:3. “Commit thy works unto the Lord, and thy thoughts shall be established.”
Your thoughts are directed in one of two ways: need or want. You would agree there is a big difference between them. A need is met by God as you continue to serve Him correctly. A want is met by and achieved by greed. The difference can be seen in Proverb 21:5. The one who “tends” is moved in a certain direction (toward God). The one who acts in “haste” is moved, and it may be in the right direction initially, but they are swept away by excitement of passion. They are not under control of thought (and emotions properly balanced), but instead our moved emotionally (or by the soul).
What is a plan? You stated that you had heard you shouldn’t have one. I’m not sure the one who speaks understands what it is they say. A plan is a method or process by which a goal is achieved. What is the goal of man? How does he achieve? The plan is not established by you, but adopted and implemented from God. God has a plan for you. What is it and how is it achieved? The first step (method; process) is to hear (hearken) with the intent to obey (incline). The second step is to walk (live accordingly) after the counsel you have received (Jer. 7:24).
Now, if a man says he has no plan, then he confesses that he has not received. This may be true! But it would not be wise then to suggest that because I haven’t heard, you haven’t heard either. So while it may be that one man must wait, it would not necessarily apply to all.
I’ll have to finish this up later, but let me close with a story I have heard. A man stood in a store desiring (out of need) a toothbrush. When he went in he found three. Upon entering he had determined to buy his favorite color, blue. Only one was blue! The other two were orange and purple. Which one should he buy? A man of haste would say, “Why not buy the one you desire?” Would it make a difference if it cost twice as much as the others?
Jack
Your Brother in Christ
Well, the point of the post was to generate discussion in which I suceeded, but I was nonetheless sloppy...or rather hasty.
ReplyDeleteI agree. When I said free reign, I assume that is within subordination to God's will. When I say free, I mean there is a first choice to submit or not to submit, but after that decision God grants freedom within his Kingdom to pursue desires that he has given us, just as he has also given the fullment of the desires through and in him. At least one point of a gift is the possession of it, possession implies governance. If God gives us choice in the excercise of authority he has given, then in subordination to the authority over us, we are intended to weild that gift (choice).
I agree man is to control every thought, in other words to excercise the authority he is given. The command was not "replenish and subdue to the earth...if you feel like it." However, if as you say our every thought is not new and it comes from somewhere else, then where did the thought to disobey come from? We could say from Satan, but then where did he get the thought? If all thoughts flow from somewhere they already existed, then logically the the thought to disobey God came from God.
It would seem this goes back again to Man's origin. Certainly his body came out of the will of God because it was he who called the Earth into being. And the spirit(s) were also breathed into man from God, but he "became" a soul, and as we've discussed earlier the soul is bed of the thoughts, intentions, emotions. Though it doesn't make sense to me, it seems the soul is somehow a secondary exist, a collatteral creation. God made trees, man made a house, the house is a collateral creation to make an analogy.
If it isn't so, then it makes sense that my every thought is really something God gave me, in fact I would be God. How could I have any identity if everything that makes me who I am, and everything I do is in fact God. Even the choice to acknowledge the knowlegde that I have would be God acknowledging the knowledge that he had, by a choice that he made. In short everything would be God. Every choice, thought, and action would then be his choice, thought, and action. What then would be the point of anything? If I sin, it would be God's, if I do right, it would be God. If an unbeliever, it is God unbelieving in himself, even though he died for himself to save himself, from hell where he will be forced to send himself and view his own torment. Without choice, then all is meaningless. How can there be any significance to anything?
If on the other hand, the soul is indeed a collateral good with mysteriously an independent identity...and I should clarify this by analogy. Clearly a 'collateral good' could not have any identity apart from it's Maker. The Maker gives context/identity/meaning to the thing made. One square foot of Earth cannot be distinguished (identified) from another unless there is a marking upon it.
So when I say independent, I mean that while a choice against it's maker would be meaningless, it has that choice to make and it is not actually the maker making the choice. A child may have no ability to resist it's father, but it can still choose to resist. If that is the case then my thought may be inspired by another, and the fact that I am realizing may not be new (if true), but the realization is my own. And if I choose to sin, it's not because I was inspired to do so, it's because I created my own thing...hmm
That just occurs to me. As you began, man was set to order, not to create. When he operates without sinning, he is in subordination ordering what God has created. When he sins, he creates on his own out of insubordination. His creation is thus an invader and will eventually be destroyed. So then, is the difference choice to wield/order and choice to create? In a sense this goes back to what we were discussing in Job. The matter of waiting on God to provide. By wielding, Yeshua waited for God to provide bread, by commanding the stone to be made bread he would be creating...choosing to provide his own.
I think this latter view agrees with the simple reading of scripture. And it is the most sensible, what was the point of creating anything if it's the same as the maker? Do we want sons that are exactly us right down to the scar on our knee? Or do we want a son that is subordinate but brings his own expression within that?
So I wholly agree, that God wants people's plans/thoughts/actions to be one hundred precent in agreement with him, but I question that is only one option. In other words that God sees every scenario as having only one right answer. I sit down to eat a meal and to be in agreement with God, I must eat the rice before the salad using my right hand and just below that little tomato. I think, if God sets the table that everything in every order is in agreement with him...though me might say specifically "try the beans they're delicious...or that's too much for you take a smaller portion." I don't believe there is one set value and it is that choice or rebellion in every situation.
It is as you say whether the heart is inclined to obey. Whether the works are committed to him. Whether a man is listening to submit. It's in short will he drop what he's doing when he knows God wants something different.
Which I think rolls right into your second post. You point out that "beware" clause as a sign to pay attention. And I think of the many times this is repeated. Yeshua said the first command was "Hear O Israel." If you think about every command, hearing is an implied requirement. As you say, not seeking is what sin is. But, just because you're listening and attentive does not mean anyone is speaking to you...though again, just because they aren't speaking to you doesn't mean they aren't thinking about you.
Over and over there is this implied "hear" command, and often times it isn't implied. It also comes in many different forms. And it makes me think of the idea of a sign. If you were giving a radio signal to trigger something, the signal not be static. To quote scripture, how shall they know to prepare for battle if the note is unclear? Nor could you have one continuous sign that said turn right then there's more than one place to turn.
To be a sign, by definition it must be surrounded by things that are not the sign. In addition, the sign must have a predetermined meaning. "I know when I see the sign for I-90, I must exit." Which means there must be a warning. In the current passage in Deu "When the LORD thy God shall enlarge thy border, as he hath promised thee" (warning order) "thou mayest eat..."
So if there is to be a sign, God has to let you know where he's taking you ("as he hath promised"). Which means in the large you must be aware of his plan...or to be specific, he has to offer you the plan (though you may not receive it). And you have to know that along the route, the changes of avenue (not destination) will be signalled by a sign recognizable in advance or at least recognizable in time to act.
But if I'm looking for a sign and I'm already heading in the direction God has planned, I am in agreement with him whether I choose to use the left lane to pass someone or the right lane. Whether I turn on my lights because it's dark or my wipers because it's raining. The point is the fact that God tells me go this way, and that in the future there will be a sign to do something else, means that there is a time between one command and the next whatever length that may be. So how, if a man is an agreement and staying on the road and looking for the sign, is he not in agreement by making choices that don't take him off of that route?
God has a plan that for our own good and his glory (his glory is our good), and we must be in submission to that, but within submission to Him every choice we make not explicitely directed (though as you said, by need or want) would have to be in agreement with God even though it is not of command. Naming the animals was in agreement with God, and therefore whatever Adam chose to name the animals was in agreement with God even though God did not give the names to give.
As for toothbrushes, it would seem there is not enough information to tell. He needs a toothbrush, it would be hard to say without knowing what the difference in cost would mean. Say man is so rich that he can't find ways to spend fast enough (I can't imagine that ever being true...I think anyone who says that simply lacks vision), but suppose it were close to true. He has made considerable effort to meet all the needs of the poor and orphans etc and God has blessed him. It's Job who wants the toothbrush. The very fact that Job has so much shows he has more than he can presently use, yet he is not faulted for holding this excess. To someone in his spot then, how could paying more for a toothbrush make a difference? I suppose it would make a difference, if he did not consider the difference.
I suppose that's a thought. What would have been God's response if Adam has simply spat babble for names? Maybe the point of a relationship is not just to engage the other, but a reason for you to engage at all? I mean what a waste if a person acted like a rock?
Very good thoughts! It almost appears as though you had them planned. I have a final thought that deals specifically with the latter half of your post. I will email this directly to you because it is rather lengthy. You can drop it in the comments if you feel it is applicable.
ReplyDeleteJesse,
ReplyDeleteMan I am long winded. Sorry about the length, but I couldn’t help myself. This is my last comment regarding the introduction piece.
As stated earlier, a mind is not used to “create” but arrange (more to come on this later). You asked, why should I have a mind at all? How else would you arrange in the proper order? But you continue, “Therefore it would seem that thinking is a distraction from God.” It would appear to me that thinking about things contrary to God would be the distraction.
I would agree with your conclusion that a mind should be engaged. It should bind itself to the word it has received from God. How else would the mind be renewed? The process thus includes you (your mind) agreeing with God and making “plans” accordingly. It is the man who interacts (deals) with God who is considered prudent [careful; judicious] (Prov. 13:16). He understands his way is paved with truth (Prov. 14:15) having received it from God. He is kept from foolishness (Prov. 14:18). A fool is destitute of reason. In other words he can’t explain what or why he thinks or believes. He does not even really know what he sees (Prov. 22:3).
The judicious man sees (recognizes) bad or evil. It does not say that he “sees” it coming in the future. It says that he recognizes its presence (as active and about the circumstance or situation). What does he do in response? He doesn’t pray about it. The text (Prov. 22:3) says he “hideth” himself. The word used here is “catham” and means “to stop up.” It is by stopping the evil from continuing that he repairs the damage that would have ensued. In other words he keeps secret or hidden what would have happened as a result.
How does he know what is evil? Is it through a dream or vision? No, it is found in the Word already established. What can we conclude? “God desires for man to control every thought by bringing it under subject to His Word with the intent to serve Him correctly.”
“Casting down imaginations (plans), and every high thing that exalteth itself against (and therefore above) the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” - 2 Corinthians 10:5
I do find it interesting that a man would say, “You need no plan, but instead should pray before acting!” Is he not enacting a plan or formula of worship or service? Did God tell him to pray? Or does he pray when he wants? Does he pray about prayer before praying? Hopefully, you understand the vicious cycle I’m establishing. Why does a man pray? I can see only 3 reasons:
1. In order to interact (commune) with God about the present
2. To thank (praise) God for providing a need in the past
3. Or to ask God to provide a need in the future
I don’t find a “want” supplied unless it acts in cooperation with a “need”!
God has already provided us with all the information we need regarding our future. Do you pray so that you can know the future? I do, but not in the way you might suppose. I have no need to know what tomorrow brings. I do, however, need wisdom to understand what He has already revealed (maybe I’m slow of learning).
I find that most people believe that prayer is like rubbing the magic genie bottle. They always seem to get things backwards. If God does this for me, then I will change my conduct. When in actuality it should be I will change my conduct and then I know God will do what is right for me.
Prayer should be governed with the intent to reach the goal. A goal is the final purpose achieved. Should a man have a goal? By all means, but in and on what should his goals be fixated? Did Abraham dream or have a goal of becoming the father of many nations? No, he simply did and lived what was right. The purpose of his labor was to give glory to God in what he did and how he lived. His course of life was changed only when he knew God intervened, and quite often when he didn’t. For instance, Abraham didn’t pray about what piece of land he should own. Instead Abraham said to Lot, “What part do you want?” How or why was he able to do? In my mind it was because he knew that where he lived was not as important as how he lived.
Concerning the practical experience you suggested, I have my own rendition. Someone calls upon me and says, “Don’t get on that bus because it is going to blow up!” I, like anyone else, would as, “How do you know?” If they tell me they saw someone put an explosive device on board, I unpack my luggage. Prayer hardly seems necessary at this point. However, if they tell me that God has told them I must ask, “why did God tell you about me instead of yourself?’ They might answer with, “I am as Ananias with Paul.” Did they forget that Paul received the same vision? My next question would be, “Are you always right about what you think you see?” I would follow up quickly with “Do you have the numbers to next weeks Lotto?”
It is “the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man” that “availeth much” (Js. 5:16). It is not prayer in general. If I have been living faithfully (living in obedience to the word I have received) I am not concerned about what someone may suggest about me. I do what is right. God takes care of the rest. They say, “But had only Pilate listened to his wife!” My friend, if Pilate had listened to his wife, you and I would still be dead in our sin.
How does one know what will happen to you? Better yet, if you do what is right, so what if they do? “You shouldn’t go because you will die,” (a worst case scenario) hardly seems that difficult to bear. Meanwhile, if one were to say, “You shouldn’t do that because it is sin,” sends chills up my spine. “Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good” (Rom. 12:9). We are able to do this because “we know that all things work together for good to them that love God” (Rom. 8:28).
The question, “what would it take” to “accept as proof?” is one only you can answer. But to stir up the water a little, let me tell you a story. Years ago I was sitting in a little blue house next to a church preparing myself for dinner. There was a knock at the door. I opened up to discover a “little man” of Indian descent. He wore rag tag clothes and was missing a couple of teeth. His breathe smelled of alcohol. His fingers were stained with nicotine. He gaped at me (I did mention he was missing teeth) and requested, “Do you have any food to eat?” Marian (my wife) had just finished making a stew. I quickly darted into the kitchen and requested a bowl for my new found friend (You never know when you might be entertaining angels). I asked him to come inside and join us, but he refused. Marian had already scooped him a heap of stew into a bowl so I brought it to him sitting upon the steps. He asked me to sit with him.
“I have a message from God,” he told me. “Really,” I said to myself with a smile that reached from ear to ear. “What is it?” He promptly replied, “You must leave this place and go preach in your own city.” I still chuckle about this event today. “When should I do this,” I asked in a somewhat skeptical way. “I don’t know,” he answered, “but let me show you this leaf.” He held the leaf in his hand and asked, “Do you see how the leaf branches off in many directions?” I shook my head in agreement. “You must branch off!” I was somewhat puzzled by the discussion. I asked him if he wanted something to drink. He smiled and shook his head yes. I went inside and gave my wife the “what did I get myself into” look. I exited to find the man departed.
Three years later I gave a sermon at a little white church in the small village in which I was raised. How did it come to pass? It was not by my effort. I didn’t live my life according to this man’s word. I simply lived. Yes, it did come true, but I didn’t make it come true. It just happened! Should I have paid more attention? I don’t know, but I do keep a fresh stew on the stove just in case! (I’m just kidding)
Jack
Your Brother in Christ
One quick clarification, my copy of esword doesn't say "catham" it says "sathar." Maybe it's just the tools I have at my disposal, sathar means to hide and it's first use is Cain saying that he'll be a fugitive and be "hid" from the LORD. So how do you get that he's not hiding himself, he is halting the evil? That makes sense, if man is in submission to God then he is acting in authority and it is his mission to put things in order not hide from the disorderly, I'm just wondering how you get that.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the cunning man may not see in the future evil as in somekind of vision, but clearly he sees/recognizes it before he "steps in it." So perhaps he doesn't see the future in the prophetic sense, just his view of the present and his dealing with knowledge is greater. In practice a parent cannot see the future, but he can certainly see what is about to happen well before the child can. In short he sees things from above...which I guess is the essence of the cunningness (he makes things bare). In other words he sees things for what they are, and by understanding what they are, he understands what they will become.
Moving on...
Mmm...stew...I'm still chewing on that...your comment that is, but there was an interesting correlation with another thought.
To quote the deep theology of Terminator 3. "I should have realized it was never our destiny to stop Judgment Day, it was merely to survive it, together."
It would make sense that doing right leads to your destiny with no real...plan changing except where God intervenes. And I suppose that God intervenes regardless of whether we accept, work to make it happen, or even recognize it...When YHVH told Abraham that he was going to have a kid by next year did he immediately say "Wife, get in the tent we're going to make a baby?" Or were they going to enjoy themselves anyways and that "happened" (from their perspective) to be the time God used to fulfil his promise?
If this is the case then God's direction is simply giving you a desire (to order your garden) or a need (to stop up evil)...but how then still, if we are cunning men and things are made bare then how would that be different than the stranger telling you the bus will explode and you choosing not to ride the bus for that reason? Wouldn't that follow the direction principle?
How do we know when we are to avoid an evil and when we are to go through it? Even Yeshua avoided people or situations before his time...hmmm...I would have said to survive, but that couldn't have been the point since no man could take his life...the swat team of 12 legions could have come down at any point to solve the problem. If two can take on all the men of Soddom, I don't think the Pharasees and Romans could have offered much resistance.
So he must have been avoiding because of the will of the Father and since death wasn't the threat, he must have needed to be somewhere else or to prevent the pharasees from "forcing" the Father to do something contrary to his will. Hmmm, this makes an interesting question. Is self-defense for the will of God because it preserves our lives or because it stops another person's evil? Which would be worse a righteous man's death or a righteous man allowing evil to have it's way? From Yeshua's example I would think allowing evil is worse, it would be to lay down your authority...which really would be to disavow God's authority.
So then, the purpose of the 'seeing' evil is not to preserve ourselves but to stop the evil. The fact that the fool walks on and is punished could either be he steps in it, or he will face judgment for allowing another to step in it. Ie "I saw the child playing in the street, but I did nothing to stop it because I wasn't in danger." A man's duty is not to consider what will happen to him if he acts, but what will happen to others if he doesn't. Really at what point can we be more in God's will and more in his image than when we give at our expense for another's good?
Still this doesn't simplify the practical. If a message (whatever the format) told me only of what would befall me on a right path, then I would know I had to continue and face this evil. But if the message talks about what will befall someone else, then...I guess I just answered my question. I should face that evil to protect the other from it. If you believe the bus is going to blow, you need to stop the bomb, not just tell everyone there is a bomb.
I suppose that's why God repeated told us to "put away evil from the congregation." It's not enough to just tell everyone who is righteous to avoid that person, the evil itself must be dealt with.
So I guess the course of action in any situation remains the same. Pray for wisdom. Pray for provision. Believe that God will provide both because you seek. Then proceed to vanquish the dragon. In fact the first part is really the key to it all. Because if you have the wisdom/cunning, the issue will be made bare to you. You will see what it is and what you can do to stop it.
The question then becomes not what to do about evil, the question becomes do I recognize the evil for what it is? If I am seeking God then I will see it for what it is. Any message will be revealed. So if I do not have that message revealed as of God, there are only two possibilities. I do see clearly and it isn't of God. Or I'm not seeking God.
In either case the solution is to seek God by inclining my ear and pray for wisdom. So there should be no consternation about what to do in any situation. If I am in constant attention then the issue will be clear just by doing right, if I am not seeking God than I am the fool and will be punished.
Act on what you know. What you don't know, cannot be of any concern. How can we worry about what we don't understand? We'd have to say God has failed to provide all we need.
Which as we know, if false.
Jesse,
ReplyDeleteI really liked your response. Concerning your first response:
A collateral creation – while not necessarily understanding the phrase (terminology) I would agree with the conclusion. “When he sins, he creates on his own out of insubordination.”
Concerning eating dinner it should be remembered where specifics are not granted leniency should be applied. Eat what you want as long as it is “kosher”, but say grace before and after.
You made an excellent analogy about the “sign.” I would agree with you. You are in agreement by making choices that don’t take you off route. In fact, I would suggest that you are judicious. A goal that God has in mind for you to reach, and found by yourself in suggesting that “not considering” the difference would make a difference with the toothbrush.
I do want to comment on the question you asked, “where did Satan get the thought to disobey?’ A “will” comes with a responsibility and the ability to choose. One can only choose if he is aware of both what to do and what not to do. In other words you can only disobey intentionally if you know the truth. The “will” of fallen man is born under subjection to sin. It can’t and it won’t, because it is unable, to be under subjection to God. I must reiterate man does not choose God, but God chooses man.
But of even more interest is the comment, I believe in support of my position, that God makes regarding man after he has partook of the forbidden fruit. “And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, let he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from when he was taken” (Gen. 3:22-23).
Concerning the second response: Excellent insight!
I would have to say that I have a Bible program that appears to be in error. You are correct in the word that was used in Proverbs 22:3. However, I believe the conclusion, though worded awkwardly, is still the same. The principle established by this verse involves a moral choice. The question proposed, paraphrased, would be “What came first the prudence (judiciousness) or the vision?” Proverbs 29:18 states that “Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.” In light of this verse, and the ongoing dialogue, I would suggest that God first gives vision or revelation, and prudence is the fruit. Vision therefore motivates and provides warning (carefulness) in conducting our affairs. In other words it enables us to exercise more control over the direction of our lives and avoid pitfalls. My conclusion and yours are therefore similar in nature.
As always I appreciate the insight. Thank you for the correction. You know what happens as a result? I have to go back to the old fashioned way of looking it up, not once, but twice to make sure my computer program is correct. Oh Boy! And they said it would make things easier . . . what was it you said about Terminator 3?
Jack
Your Brother in Christ
Sorry I have been absent. While inthe process of moving I have not had a computor with internet at my disposal and I will only have this one for a few more days.
ReplyDeleteI would like to throw my two cents in though. As you know I am usually most concerned with where the rubber meets the road. Theoretical knowledge is no good to me unless I can use it in my daily life in some way. I this subject I am afraid that I find this predicament equally frustraiting. I don't think I have a problem with hearing God and considerning him in the plans for my live. Where I run into problems is when I meet with someone who "hears" from God about every detail and then try to change my plans based on what they hear. How do we know that God told them that? And if we don't know that God told them that then what good is it to us. It comes accross to me almost as arrogant. Perhaps its because I am not so accomidating to others but, really what does it have to do with them. If God really told them to tell me why didn't he just tell me opr wouldn't he at least give me some way of knowing it was from him. It like getting one of those letters from publishers clearing house that say you won a million dollars, just because the letter says that I won doesn't mean its true and I would be a fool to go and start buying things believeing that I had that money.
I was recently on a trip to England where Nikki and I were trying to find a house. The problem we ran into is that there were several houses that we like and we couldn't figure out which one God wanted us to have or which one would be best for our family. In the end when we prayed about it the only thing that was revealed was that he is not going to tell us directly which one to get so we just picked the one that we liked the best.
Sadly my comment is in no way shape or form as long or perhaps as well thought out as all the others but I too have questioned the idea of the "God told me too....". I as you know come from a very different view on the topic but on a simple note it has always troubled me to hear people speak away there choices by simply claiming they were not their own.
ReplyDelete