PDA

View Full Version : So what's with God and Satan, concerning Job?



Örion
May 28th 2006, 02:40 AM
A few questions as to the whole thing with Job.

Why is it that God and Satan would have such wager? Since Satan would know that a). God can't lie. b). God knows the future. What is the purpose of their conversation? If God can look into the future and see that Job would still retain his faith regardless of how many pitfalls he encounters, and Satan knows this, . . . what's the point of Satan making this wager in the first place? Is there some reason that Satan would not take God at his word and still wager with God? Seems rather unlikely. The story (God and Satan wager part) seems rather unlikely and an afterthought of what people back in Job's day must have assumed happened between God and Satan as they tried to wrap their heads around all the bad things that happened to Job. Or, the whole story is an old parable that turned into eventual "truth" as the passage of time proceeded.

Just my thoughts on that. Sorry if I make anyone mad by saying it.

Frances
May 28th 2006, 06:50 AM
I have just started reading The Remarkable Record of Job by Henry M. Morris which starts by saying "Job has intrigued readers for many generations although it's insights are remarkably modern" and contains modern scientific insights. It is suggested that the main part was written by Job, that record being available to (probably) Moses who added the first 2 and last chapters by Divine inspiration .

Quote from p.53 - "What is not obvious is why Satan wanted to carry out this particular test, and why God was willing to allow Satan such an opportunity."

xIRoyal KnightIx
May 28th 2006, 02:44 PM
Let's take a look at the similar passages in Job ch 1 and 2 which contain the conversations between God and satan...

Job 1:6-12 KJV...
6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. 7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? 9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. 11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. 12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

Job 2:1-7a KJV...
1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. 2 And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 3 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause. 4 And Satan answered the LORD, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life. 5 But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. 6 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life. 7a So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD...

1:12 and 2:6 lets us know that satan has limits and can do nothing without God's approval. Also, God will not allow satan to do anything if it's not going to bring God the glory.

1:6 and 2:1 lets us know that satan also is a created being.

1:7 and 2:2 mentions what satan was doing and the reason he came into the presence of God.

1:8 and 2:3 doesn't contain a rebuke from God in any way concerning what he was doing. However, it mentions a question from God to satan concerning a "servant, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil". This means he was doing his God-given tasks.

Satan means accuser and adversary

Eze 28:12-19, Isa 14:12, Luk 10:18 all mention something about Satan either directly or indirectly.

So this "wager" you speak of, is it because you are trying to justify for yourself the ungodliness satan brings upon us?

MeInKC
May 28th 2006, 02:53 PM
If God can look into the future and see that Job would still retain his faith regardless of how many pitfalls he encounters, and Satan knows this, . . . what's the point of Satan making this wager in the first place? Is there some reason that Satan would not take God at his word and still wager with God? Seems rather unlikely.Satan is an egomaniacal fool who used to be an archangel on the order of Michael and Gabriel before becoming so deceived and conceited that he believed himself to be more beautiful, more righteous, more able to rule the universe than his own Creator was. That attitude pretty much answers your question. Though he has been confronted with his future defeat from the beginning, and knows at some emotional and intellectual level that it is true, his ego won't let him admit to it.

Sounds like us, doesn't it? :rolleyes:

Örion
May 28th 2006, 09:29 PM
Let's take a look at the similar passages in Job ch 1 and 2 which contain the conversations between God and satan...

Job 1:6-12 KJV...
6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. 7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? 9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. 11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. 12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

Job 2:1-7a KJV...
1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. 2 And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 3 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause. 4 And Satan answered the LORD, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life. 5 But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. 6 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life. 7a So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD...

1:12 and 2:6 lets us know that satan has limits and can do nothing without God's approval. Also, God will not allow satan to do anything if it's not going to bring God the glory.

1:6 and 2:1 lets us know that satan also is a created being.

1:7 and 2:2 mentions what satan was doing and the reason he came into the presence of God.

1:8 and 2:3 doesn't contain a rebuke from God in any way concerning what he was doing. However, it mentions a question from God to satan concerning a "servant, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil". This means he was doing his God-given tasks.

Satan means accuser and adversary

Eze 28:12-19, Isa 14:12, Luk 10:18 all mention something about Satan either directly or indirectly.

So this "wager" you speak of, is it because you are trying to justify for yourself the ungodliness satan brings upon us?

I'm trying to justify something? Where did I say that? And for what it's worth, I think people bring about more of this 'ungodliness' than Satan does. Satan is given too much credit in the Bible, and within our own humanity.

Örion
May 28th 2006, 09:35 PM
Satan is an egomaniacal fool who used to be an archangel on the order of Michael and Gabriel before becoming so deceived and conceited that he believed himself to be more beautiful, more righteous, more able to rule the universe than his own Creator was. That attitude pretty much answers your question. Though he has been confronted with his future defeat from the beginning, and knows at some emotional and intellectual level that it is true, his ego won't let him admit to it.

Sounds like us, doesn't it? :rolleyes:


From where do we see this exhaulted ego of Satan that he would make such a wager? And regardless of if it were true, does it make Satan stupid if he was an egomaniac?

I'm not sure of this "us" you're refering to in that last sentence. I don't know of anyone who has that big of an ego.

I just don't see this exchange as anything other than some sort of afterthought by a later writer. You know the old "writer's perogative". If God hates evil that much, then surely the epitome of evil would never be given an audience before God.

psalm150
May 28th 2006, 11:09 PM
From where do we see this exhaulted ego of Satan that he would make such a wager? And regardless of if it were true, does it make Satan stupid if he was an egomaniac?

I'm not sure of this "us" you're refering to in that last sentence. I don't know of anyone who has that big of an ego.

I just don't see this exchange as anything other than some sort of afterthought by a later writer. You know the old "writer's perogative". If God hates evil that much, then surely the epitome of evil would never be given an audience before God.

Ezekiel 28:17 describes the pride of satan.

Rud Hound
May 29th 2006, 11:45 AM
The story of Job is consistent with the rest of the Bible. As you pointed out, no one was around to witness the discussion between God and Satan, so there's a fair chance it was written as a story to prove a point (which makes it no less true). It's clear from the story that Satan is in opposition to God and challenges God. He does this despite the fact that he must know that God is infallible. As MeInKC said, this is not dissimilar to what we (everyone) do.

Cheers,

RH.

Örion
May 29th 2006, 02:22 PM
Ezekiel 28:17 describes the pride of satan.

So, Satan is the king of Tyrus? :confused

EarlyCall
May 29th 2006, 02:39 PM
A few questions as to the whole thing with Job.

Why is it that God and Satan would have such wager? Since Satan would know that a). God can't lie. b). God knows the future. What is the purpose of their conversation? If God can look into the future and see that Job would still retain his faith regardless of how many pitfalls he encounters, and Satan knows this, . . . what's the point of Satan making this wager in the first place? Is there some reason that Satan would not take God at his word and still wager with God? Seems rather unlikely. The story (God and Satan wager part) seems rather unlikely and an afterthought of what people back in Job's day must have assumed happened between God and Satan as they tried to wrap their heads around all the bad things that happened to Job. Or, the whole story is an old parable that turned into eventual "truth" as the passage of time proceeded.

Just my thoughts on that. Sorry if I make anyone mad by saying it.

You know, as for the truth of God and His word, if it is up to us to decide which is truth and which is not, then I'd suggest throwing away the Bible and God with it. If that isn't understood by anyone, then you need to rethink Who and what it is you believe and why.

As for this part of the story of Job you mention, I too have given that some thought as it strikes me rather peculiar as well; it did until I realized that sat*n is not the least bit out of character in this story.

You'll recall, I trust, that sat*n also did everything He could to tempt Christ, knowing that if Christ gave into temptation that the whole jig was up so to speak. Now think about that for a minute and ask the same questions about that situation that you have about this situation in the story of Job. One would think that sat*n wou;d not have bothered tempting Christ to begin with.

Further, sat*n also did everything he could to have Christ killed on the cross. Didn't sat*n know how that would turn out? Hasn't he read the predictions in the OT concerning Christ's death on the cross? Hmm. Seems sat*n should not have bothered here as well.

You need to look at this from another perspective, and that is of sat*n himself. He is so evil and cannot help himself - simple as that. He also has nothing better to do anyway to be quite frank.

Örion
May 29th 2006, 02:51 PM
You know, as for the truth of God and His word, if it is up to us to decide which is truth and which is not, then I'd suggest throwing away the Bible and God with it. If that isn't understood by anyone, then you need to rethink Who and what it is you believe and why.

As for this part of the story of Job you mention, I too have given that some thought as it strikes me rather peculiar as well; it did until I realized that sat*n is not the least bit out of character in this story.

You'll recall, I trust, that sat*n also did everything He could to tempt Christ, knowing that if Christ gave into temptation that the whole jig was up so to speak. Now think about that for a minute and ask the same questions about that situation that you have about this situation in the story of Job. One would think that sat*n wou;d not have bothered tempting Christ to begin with.

Further, sat*n also did everything he could to have Christ killed on the cross. Didn't sat*n know how that would turn out? Hasn't he read the predictions in the OT concerning Christ's death on the cross? Hmm. Seems sat*n should not have bothered here as well.

You need to look at this from another perspective, and that is of sat*n himself. He is so evil and cannot help himself - simple as that. He also has nothing better to do anyway to be quite frank.

An interesting post. Yes, Satan would have had to be pretty ignorant to have Jesus killed since that would mean that people would believe and be ripped from his (Satan's) grasp. A rather crazy decision, I would think. It's amazing that an angelic being could be that delusional.

Frances
May 29th 2006, 08:09 PM
Another quote from the book I quoted above;-

"Job's sufferings were not to teach him what was wrong in his life, but to teach Satan what God's Grace can accomplish in a human life dedicated to serving the Lord" (p85)

kyrathaba
May 29th 2006, 08:22 PM
quoted from post #12:


Yes, Satan would have had to be pretty ignorant to have Jesus killed since that would mean that people would believe and be ripped from his (Satan's) grasp. A rather crazy decision, I would think. It's amazing that an angelic being could be that delusional.

Actually Satan was not ignorant or delusional. Satan is constrained by his nature, just as God is constrained by His own nature. Where God can be and do nothing but good and righteous, Satan is evil through and through, and because he is the antithesis of good, he does everything in his power against it, even if he sometimes trips himself up. BTW, that also is the nature of evil (that is sometimes trips itself up in its eagerness to thwart good).

Most of us would agree that Satan is arguably more intelligent than we humans. If this is so, then why wouldn't he simply cease striving against God? In his immense intelligence, surely he knows beyond doubt that he and his demons are doomed to hell? Of course he does. Then why keep fighting? Because he wants to doom as many of us as possible along with himself. Here we have demonstrated another aspect of Evil -- hatred, the desire for others' destruction.

xIRoyal KnightIx
May 29th 2006, 08:30 PM
I'm trying to justify something? Where did I say that? And for what it's worth, I think people bring about more of this 'ungodliness' than Satan does. Satan is given too much credit in the Bible, and within our own humanity.

Justifying something was an honest question, I didn't mean it to be accusing you of anything. If it did offend anyone I'm sorry, I didn't ask it to accuse.

Yes, I agree that people make mountains out of the devils mole hills. Satan is not given too much credit in the bible, and if he was can you show us where?

And what exactly are you referring to when you say he is given too much credit within our own humanity? I have my own thoughts on it but I want to make sure I'm on the same wavelength.

Örion
May 29th 2006, 09:30 PM
Justifying something was an honest question, I didn't mean it to be accusing you of anything. If it did offend anyone I'm sorry, I didn't ask it to accuse.

Yes, I agree that people make mountains out of the devils mole hills. Satan is not given too much credit in the bible, and if he was can you show us where?

And what exactly are you referring to when you say he is given too much credit within our own humanity? I have my own thoughts on it but I want to make sure I'm on the same wavelength.

Well, I think people get too much into the "the Devil made me do it" thing when it is actually their own selves that cause the trouble. It's a cop-out to blame some other entity as the cause of a person's own behaviors.

xIRoyal KnightIx
May 29th 2006, 09:36 PM
Well, I think people get too much into the "the Devil made me do it" thing when it is actually their own selves that cause the trouble. It's a cop-out to blame some other entity as the cause of a person's own behaviors.

I agree with you there, but not forgetting that we do have spiritual enemies as pointed out in Eph 6

Örion
May 29th 2006, 09:38 PM
quoted from post #12:



Actually Satan was not ignorant or delusional. Satan is constrained by his nature, just as God is constrained by His own nature. Where God can be and do nothing but good and righteous, Satan is evil through and through, and because he is the antithesis of good, he does everything in his power against it, even if he sometimes trips himself up. BTW, that also is the nature of evil (that is sometimes trips itself up in its eagerness to thwart good).

Most of us would agree that Satan is arguably more intelligent than we humans. If this is so, then why wouldn't he simply cease striving against God? In his immense intelligence, surely he knows beyond doubt that he and his demons are doomed to hell? Of course he does. Then why keep fighting? Because he wants to doom as many of us as possible along with himself. Here we have demonstrated another aspect of Evil -- hatred, the desire for others' destruction.

Quite frankly, I don't see how any of us can say that we have a total, or even a partial understanding of God or Satan, since we are in the natural. All we have to go on is the bias of the original writers. I'm not saying that in a derogatory fashion, but simply state a truth. I believe that people created possible characteristics of Satan, or whoever than maybe that entity actually had. For instance, stating that Satan "is evil through and through". I'm not sure we can really state that strong of a generalization. "Evil through and through", yet able to stand before God and wager, when God desires no evil to be in his presence, apparently. Something seems a little off in that particular situation, given what we believe we know about both God and Satan.

The_Forgotten_One
May 29th 2006, 11:00 PM
Quite frankly, I don't see how any of us can say that we have a total, or even a partial understanding of God or Satan, since we are in the natural. All we have to go on is the bias of the original writers. I'm not saying that in a derogatory fashion, but simply state a truth. I believe that people created possible characteristics of Satan, or whoever than maybe that entity actually had. For instance, stating that Satan "is evil through and through". I'm not sure we can really state that strong of a generalization. "Evil through and through", yet able to stand before God and wager, when God desires no evil to be in his presence, apparently. Something seems a little off in that particular situation, given what we believe we know about both God and Satan.


That makes total sense... :cool:

Sincerely
The Forgotten One

EarlyCall
May 30th 2006, 01:57 AM
Quite frankly, I don't see how any of us can say that we have a total, or even a partial understanding of God or Satan, since we are in the natural. All we have to go on is the bias of the original writers. I'm not saying that in a derogatory fashion, but simply state a truth. I believe that people created possible characteristics of Satan, or whoever than maybe that entity actually had. For instance, stating that Satan "is evil through and through". I'm not sure we can really state that strong of a generalization. "Evil through and through", yet able to stand before God and wager, when God desires no evil to be in his presence, apparently. Something seems a little off in that particular situation, given what we believe we know about both God and Satan.

I think we can say with certainty that sat*n is in fact evil as can possibly be, through and through and without any goodness or redeeming qualifications at all.

How can we say that? By the Bible. First, sat*n being in God's presence does not in any manner indicate that sat*n has any good qualities or anything to suggest he is not completely evil. If we are to say this possibility exists based soley on the fact that sat*n was in God's presence and God does not tolerate evil, then we would have to say that sat*n was devoid of evil; which we know is far from being the case.

Therefore, this does not indicate sat*n is not totally evil. So then, how can we figure sat*n to be totally evil? Again, unless you can find anything in the Bible to suggest otherwise, I think we can conclude that sat*n's desire to see absolutely every last human being in hell would be enough evidence to convince most people that he qualifies as totally evil. It certainly does it for me anyway.

ProjectPeter
May 30th 2006, 02:23 AM
That makes total sense... :cool:

Sincerely
The Forgotten One
Yeah... I mean what would those Bible writers know about that sort of thing! ;)

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

psalm150
May 30th 2006, 04:37 AM
Well, I think people get too much into the "the Devil made me do it" thing when it is actually their own selves that cause the trouble. It's a cop-out to blame some other entity as the cause of a person's own behaviors.

[I agree] and satan may tempt us in every manner but ultimately we are the one who does or does not sin.

Örion
May 31st 2006, 01:53 AM
I think we can say with certainty that sat*n is in fact evil as can possibly be, through and through and without any goodness or redeeming qualifications at all.

How can we say that? By the Bible. First, sat*n being in God's presence does not in any manner indicate that sat*n has any good qualities or anything to suggest he is not completely evil. If we are to say this possibility exists based soley on the fact that sat*n was in God's presence and God does not tolerate evil, then we would have to say that sat*n was devoid of evil; which we know is far from being the case.

Therefore, this does not indicate sat*n is not totally evil. So then, how can we figure sat*n to be totally evil? Again, unless you can find anything in the Bible to suggest otherwise, I think we can conclude that sat*n's desire to see absolutely every last human being in hell would be enough evidence to convince most people that he qualifies as totally evil. It certainly does it for me anyway.

Welp, seein' as how that was what I was talkin' about, you know the bias part, of course the Bible is going to say that.

EarlyCall
May 31st 2006, 05:18 AM
Welp, seein' as how that was what I was talkin' about, you know the bias part, of course the Bible is going to say that.

Well, unless you know a better source concerning sat*n.

remmus2k
Jul 23rd 2007, 05:53 AM
Im not sure but maybe when God said he doesn't want evil in his presence he probably meant that he doesn't want us doing evil things. Like when a parent yells at a kid for pulling his siblings hair the parent says " I don't want to see that agian" That doesn't meant that its ok for the kid to do the same wrong even though its not in the parents sight. Correct me if im wrong please.

How else could he command fallen angels to do his will (he has in fact used demons to do his will, remember the plague of death against the egyptions)

Brother Mark
Jul 23rd 2007, 07:42 AM
Why would Satan know these things?

slynx
Jul 23rd 2007, 08:12 AM
A few questions as to the whole thing with Job.

Why is it that God and Satan would have such wager? Since Satan would know that a). God can't lie. b). God knows the future. What is the purpose of their conversation? If God can look into the future and see that Job would still retain his faith regardless of how many pitfalls he encounters, and Satan knows this, . . . what's the point of Satan making this wager in the first place? Is there some reason that Satan would not take God at his word and still wager with God? Seems rather unlikely.

You are assuming that Satan knows that God cannot lie, that God is omniscient, that God is omnipotent, and especially that God is all of these things necessarily, because He is eternally existent and therefore, unchanging.

However, consider this:
There is a book called "The Long War Against God" (by Henry Morris, I think). I can't remember all of the logic and scripture he uses, but basically he says:

When Satan was created, he found God and Jesus already existent before him. They said he was created. After an unknown length of time, he became puffed up with his own beauty and importance and began to think:
What if I am NOT created?
What if I evolved out of the formless energy and matter?
And what if all the other angels also evolved the same way?
And what if God and Jesus did too?
That would mean they are no better than I am!
It would only mean they evolved FIRST -- and they could be lying to me and the rest of the angels -- trying to keep us under their rule!
So, if we ALL are evolved from the formless energy and matter, then I could make myself like God -- I could be greater than God -- 'I will raise my throne above the stars of God' (Isaiah 14:13)!


If such is the true scenario of what has been going on with Satan, then his actions make some sense -- even if it is wrong-headed.

I think one of the purposes of the book of Job is to point out to us that what is going on concerning human beings is not the ONLY thing going on in the spiritual realm. We humans are not the be-all and end-all of creation. God's purposes encompass a lot more than just what concerns US; in some way (of which we are given only hints), we are an object lesson for the angels (fallen and unfallen).

IMHO, part of God's plan for the unfallen angels is to show them that the fallen angels COULD have repented and COULD have begged God's mercy -- after all -- human beings, who don't have anywhere near the power or knowledge that the fallen angels have, manage to repent and call on God for mercy, and God GRANTS that mercy to humans - and has granted that mercy since Adam!


The story (God and Satan wager part) seems rather unlikely and an afterthought of what people back in Job's day must have assumed happened between God and Satan as they tried to wrap their heads around all the bad things that happened to Job. Or, the whole story is an old parable that turned into eventual "truth" as the passage of time proceeded.
This brings up another of the purposes for the book of Job. It seems a natural inclination for Man to assume that IF he is being (in his thoughts and heart) and doing (in his actions) what God expects of him, THEN he will never have any trouble or calamity in his life. All of their reasoning makes the assumption that God's dealings with Man are a direct result of and are about Man alone. Even Christians do this - something "bad" happens and they immediately start searching to find out if they have any "hidden" sin in their lives -- as if that must be the "reason" for the calamity.

A goodly portion of Job is devoted to such reasoning from 3 of Job's friends. The 4th doesn't agree with them. And Job, throughout the book, maintains that he has been righteous, so they must be wrong.
At the end of the book, God says flat out that the reasoning of Job's 3 friends was indeed WRONG:


My anger glows against you and your two friends. For You have not spoken the right about Me, as My servant Job. and then has Job pray for his friends.

I think we need to keep in mind that WE are NOT the center of the universe, and we may not even be at the center of God's purposes!

Teke
Jul 24th 2007, 04:27 PM
A few questions as to the whole thing with Job.

Why is it that God and Satan would have such wager? Since Satan would know that a). God can't lie. b). God knows the future. What is the purpose of their conversation? If God can look into the future and see that Job would still retain his faith regardless of how many pitfalls he encounters, and Satan knows this, . . . what's the point of Satan making this wager in the first place? Is there some reason that Satan would not take God at his word and still wager with God? Seems rather unlikely. The story (God and Satan wager part) seems rather unlikely and an afterthought of what people back in Job's day must have assumed happened between God and Satan as they tried to wrap their heads around all the bad things that happened to Job. Or, the whole story is an old parable that turned into eventual "truth" as the passage of time proceeded.

Just my thoughts on that. Sorry if I make anyone mad by saying it.

It has been reasoned that Job could be a parable from Esau's tribe. Because that is where Job is from, he is not an Israelite (there was no ill will between Esau's tribes and Israel's tribes).
The meaning is the same as Genesis (blameworthiness of man ordained by God to make man righteous), tho the book of Job is older (historical text) than the written Genesis account.

markedward
Jul 24th 2007, 04:50 PM
Since Satan would know that a). God can't lie. b). God knows the future. What is the purpose of their conversation?If that's the case... why would Satan even bother rebelling in the first place? Satan doesn't "know" anything. He's corrupted himself, he thought he could be higher than God, and as such, he thinks he can outdo God. Satan deludes himself into thinking God is just as fallible as any created being.

Tanya~
Jul 24th 2007, 05:44 PM
Why is it that God and Satan would have such wager? Since Satan would know that a). God can't lie. b). God knows the future. What is the purpose of their conversation? If God can look into the future and see that Job would still retain his faith regardless of how many pitfalls he encounters, and Satan knows this, . . . what's the point of Satan making this wager in the first place? Is there some reason that Satan would not take God at his word and still wager with God?

Well, let's just look at the conversation:
Job 1:1-12

There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was blameless and upright, and one who feared God and shunned evil. 2 And seven sons and three daughters were born to him. 3 Also, his possessions were seven thousand sheep, three thousand camels, five hundred yoke of oxen, five hundred female donkeys, and a very large household, so that this man was the greatest of all the people of the East.

4 And his sons would go and feast in their houses, each on his appointed day, and would send and invite their three sisters to eat and drink with them. 5 So it was, when the days of feasting had run their course, that Job would send and sanctify them, and he would rise early in the morning and offer burnt offerings according to the number of them all. For Job said, "It may be that my sons have sinned and cursed God in their hearts." Thus Job did regularly.

6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. 7 And the LORD said to Satan, "From where do you come?"

So Satan answered the LORD and said, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it."

8 Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil?"

9 So Satan answered the LORD and said, "Does Job fear God for nothing? 10 Have You not made a hedge around him, around his household, and around all that he has on every side? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions have increased in the land. 11 But now, stretch out Your hand and touch all that he has, and he will surely curse You to Your face!"

12 And the LORD said to Satan, "Behold, all that he has is in your power; only do not lay a hand on his person."

So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD.
The LORD pointed out Job to Satan, and in response, Satan accused Job of fearing God only because of the blessings God had given him. Satan is the one who told God what Job would do if he lost his blessings. God told Satan nothing about what the outcome would be. The same thing happens in the second chapter, where Satan appears again and pushes even further, saying that if Job lost his health, THEN he would curse God.

So it really wasn't a wager between God and Satan. It was Satan's challenge to God, containing a suggestion even that God was a fool to praise Job, because in Satan's thinking, Job only feared God because his life was good and going well. Satan thought he would prove God wrong by inducing Job to curse Him.

OldChurchGuy
Jul 24th 2007, 10:50 PM
Ezekiel 28:17 describes the pride of satan.

It is my understanding this passage is a command from God to Ezekiel to write a letter to the king of Tyre. How does one interpret a command from God to the prophet Ezekiel regarding the king of Tyre is really a description of Satan?

Curious as always,

OldChurchGuy

OldChurchGuy
Jul 24th 2007, 10:54 PM
Let's take a look at the similar passages in Job ch 1 and 2 which contain the conversations between God and satan...

Job 1:6-12 KJV...
6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. 7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? 9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? 10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. 11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. 12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

Job 2:1-7a KJV...
1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. 2 And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. 3 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause. 4 And Satan answered the LORD, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life. 5 But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. 6 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life. 7a So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD...

1:12 and 2:6 lets us know that satan has limits and can do nothing without God's approval. Also, God will not allow satan to do anything if it's not going to bring God the glory.

1:6 and 2:1 lets us know that satan also is a created being.

1:7 and 2:2 mentions what satan was doing and the reason he came into the presence of God.

1:8 and 2:3 doesn't contain a rebuke from God in any way concerning what he was doing. However, it mentions a question from God to satan concerning a "servant, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil". This means he was doing his God-given tasks.

Satan means accuser and adversary

Eze 28:12-19, Isa 14:12, Luk 10:18 all mention something about Satan either directly or indirectly.

So this "wager" you speak of, is it because you are trying to justify for yourself the ungodliness satan brings upon us?

Both of the Job passages talk about the "sons of God presenting themselves to the Lord". Any explanation who these "sons of God" were?

OldChurchGuy

justsurfing
Jul 25th 2007, 05:06 AM
A few questions as to the whole thing with Job.

Why is it that God and Satan would have such wager? Since Satan would know that a). God can't lie. b). God knows the future. What is the purpose of their conversation? If God can look into the future and see that Job would still retain his faith regardless of how many pitfalls he encounters, and Satan knows this, . . . what's the point of Satan making this wager in the first place? Is there some reason that Satan would not take God at his word and still wager with God? Seems rather unlikely. The story (God and Satan wager part) seems rather unlikely and an afterthought of what people back in Job's day must have assumed happened between God and Satan as they tried to wrap their heads around all the bad things that happened to Job. Or, the whole story is an old parable that turned into eventual "truth" as the passage of time proceeded.

Just my thoughts on that. Sorry if I make anyone mad by saying it.

Hi,

I'm posting some comments below from another thread where Job was discussed.

Something I'll add. Each of us is responsible for our own thoughts, words, deeds, actions. Yet, consider this. Satan has audience with God. Satan gains God's permission to unleash the trial on Job.

And what happens? There are natural phenomenon (Satan controlled/actuated). But that's not all. People become murderous and Job's servants were murdered.

Job 1:13 One day when Job's sons and daughters were feasting and drinking wine at the oldest brother's house, 14 a messenger came to Job and said, "The oxen were plowing and the donkeys were grazing nearby, 15 and the Sabeans attacked and carried them off. They put the servants to the sword, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"

16 While he was still speaking, another messenger came and said, "The fire of God fell from the sky and burned up the sheep and the servants, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"
17 While he was still speaking, another messenger came and said, "The Chaldeans formed three raiding parties and swept down on your camels and carried them off. They put the servants to the sword, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"
18 While he was still speaking, yet another messenger came and said, "Your sons and daughters were feasting and drinking wine at the oldest brother's house, 19 when suddenly a mighty wind swept in from the desert and struck the four corners of the house. It collapsed on them and they are dead, and I am the only one who has escaped to tell you!"

So, a sub-point is that Satan received permission from God to destroy. Satan controlled/actuated fire falling from the sky and an incredible wind storm as natural phenomenon to carry out what God gave Satan permission to do.

But, the murders of the servants was also done under the control/actuation of Satan. Satan used human beings who were then under his control/actuation to do Satan's will.

Everyone is responsible for what they think, say, and do... but Satan was also in control actuating these deeds.

(Below I clipped and pasted some of my reply ref Job to someone else's post in another thread)


Quote:And the reason for the affliction was to perfect Job's faith. We come to God as little children, but we are not intended to stay as children. God wants us to grow up and become useful to one another.

I agree that the affliction may have been to perfect Job's faith, in a way. (The concept of perfection in practice... and perfection by grace through faith is profound, and just trying to "keep it simple" for myself... :) )

Anyway, God told Satan that Job was perfect. God doesn't lie. In God's sight, Job was a perfect man (must be by justification by faith... actuated in Job's sanctification - Job continually sacrificed to God and prayed and feared God, etc.)

Bottom-line, I think it was about displaying God's right to afflict even those most perfect among us... to display God's righteousness and power... to show us and reveal what happens spiritually "behind the scenes"... and that God is in ultimate control.

I think these things are part of what Job is about too.

I think the Book of Job is more about God than it is about Job... especially at the end where God talks and challenges all those who will ever complain against Him and what they suffer and how He works... and even how God uses Satan to accomplish what God wills.

And God silences Job... and declares Job's friends wrong.

And Job repents in complete confession of Job's error in ever questioning or coming against what God has said or done.

I think the whole Book of Job is about God proving He will do what He wills... how He does what He wills to certain extent using Satan... and how we have absolutely no room to say one word...

God answers from the whirlwind.

And Job, having seen God... "gets it"... enough to realize Job is totally to blame for any bad thoughts or feelings against Almighty God.

And God doubly blesses Job.

Satan is under God's control.

(end of comments)
Just some thoughts on the scripture.
God bless you!
Love in Christ,
js

slynx
Jul 25th 2007, 06:16 AM
The meaning is the same as Genesis (blameworthiness of man ordained by God to make man righteous),
I don't think this is right.
1- It was the argument of Job's 3 friends (Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite, and Zophar the Naamathite) that Job must be worthy of some blame for something and that God was punishing him to get him to repent so God could make him righteous. But God says in the last chapter: "My wrath is kindled against you and against your two friends, because you have not spoken of Me what is right ...".

2- It was Elihu's argument that God must have some purpose in what happened to Job, and it must be a redemptive purpose because of who God is, but Man might not know what that purpose is. In the last chapter, God says nothing whatever about Elihu's argument. He doesn't pronounce it right OR wrong. So, any speculation from the book of Job on suffering having a redemptive purpose is just that: speculation.

3- Job, throughout the book, maintains his innocence of all wrong-doing and insists that he is righteous. He calls upon God to vindicate him and throughout the book insists on God's ultimate justice and insists that he will maintain his trust in God no matter what happens to him, even though he complains and laments about his suffering.

The closest he comes to sinning is asking God to tell him WHY all this has happened to him -- which God answers by posing a series of questions which show Job that he is not capable of understanding all of what God does or why He does it. That gives Job a much clearer understanding of who God is, so he says: "Therefore I have declared that which I did not understand, Things too wonderful for me, which I did not know."

4- Although Job says he repents, there is no indication from God's monologue that He sees any actual sin in Job -- just that he is ignorant of a lot of stuff and has been getting counsel from "words without knowledge". In fact, he says to the three friends that what JOB said was RIGHT!


My wrath is kindled against you and against your two friends, because you have not spoken of Me what is right as My servant Job has.

Job is not condemned -- so we know he was NOT blameworthy, but Job also was not given either a logical or legal answer by God for why he suffered. WE only know why because we have the prologue to the story - the conversations between God and Satan.

Teke
Jul 25th 2007, 01:23 PM
Slynx I addressed this in the garden thread. God can't judge a person who isn't blameworthy.

It would not make sense to have an Advocate with the Father if there was no accuser (devil laying blame on man for sin).
Job is a wisdom book, and shows Job's wisdom of God in knowing that only God can make him righteous (IOW justify him before any accuser, be that the devil or man).
One doesn't need to be condemned to be blameworthy, they need to be free to make a choice which they are responsible for.

Teke
Jul 28th 2007, 12:56 PM
Blameworthy MEANS WORTHY of BLAME.

It's relative of judgment, finding fault, censure, criticism etc. It's what man does with everything. God knows this and even has man judge Him and His work.

Isa 5:3 ¶ And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard.

The Son of God literally faces this judgment of man in the flesh.

slynx
Aug 1st 2007, 07:25 AM
Slynx I addressed this in the garden thread. God can't judge a person who isn't blameworthy.

It would not make sense to have an Advocate with the Father if there was no accuser (devil laying blame on man for sin).
Job is a wisdom book, and shows Job's wisdom of God in knowing that only God can make him righteous (IOW justify him before any accuser, be that the devil or man).
One doesn't need to be condemned to be blameworthy, they need to be free to make a choice which they are responsible for.

Yes, one DOES have to be condemned if they are blameworthy. That is the DEFINITION of blameworthy! And, OF COURSE, God can JUDGE a person if he is not blameworthy -- He JUDGES him to be blameLESS.

I really think you have confused the definitions of some words.

"Accusation" does NOT mean the same thing as "blameworthy".
"Judge" does NOT mean the same thing as "condemn".


ACCUSATION = The act of charging with a crime or offense (the accused COULD BE INNOCENT - iow BLAMELESS)
BLAMEWORTHINESS = The quality of deserving censure
CENSURE = To find fault with AND condemn as wrong
JUDGE = To hear and determine a case; to examine and decide.
CONDEMN = To determine or judge to be wrong, or guilty.
ACQUIT = To set free; to release or discharge from an accusation, guilt, censure, or suspicion.



Satan makes accusations and asserts that we are BLAMEWORTHY: deserving of censure & condemnation.
Jesus is our Advocate who disputes those accusations and asserts that we are BLAMELESS.
God judges the case and DETERMINES which is TRUE; then He either acquits us as blameless, or condemns us as blameworthy.

Thus, when you say Jesus is "blameworthy", you are saying that He is deserving of being condemned by God -- which is absolutely false.

In the case of Job, God Himself determined (judged) that Job was BLAMELESS; that Satan's ACCUSATIONS were FALSE.

Teke
Aug 1st 2007, 06:24 PM
Yes, one DOES have to be condemned if they are blameworthy. That is the DEFINITION of blameworthy! And, OF COURSE, God can JUDGE a person if he is not blameworthy -- He JUDGES him to be blameLESS.

I really think you have confused the definitions of some words.

"Accusation" does NOT mean the same thing as "blameworthy".
"Judge" does NOT mean the same thing as "condemn".


ACCUSATION = The act of charging with a crime or offense (the accused COULD BE INNOCENT - iow BLAMELESS)
BLAMEWORTHINESS = The quality of deserving censure
CENSURE = To find fault with AND condemn as wrong
JUDGE = To hear and determine a case; to examine and decide.
CONDEMN = To determine or judge to be wrong, or guilty.
ACQUIT = To set free; to release or discharge from an accusation, guilt, censure, or suspicion.



Satan makes accusations and asserts that we are BLAMEWORTHY: deserving of censure & condemnation.
Jesus is our Advocate who disputes those accusations and asserts that we are BLAMELESS.
God judges the case and DETERMINES which is TRUE; then He either acquits us as blameless, or condemns us as blameworthy.

Thus, when you say Jesus is "blameworthy", you are saying that He is deserving of being condemned by God -- which is absolutely false.

In the case of Job, God Himself determined (judged) that Job was BLAMELESS; that Satan's ACCUSATIONS were FALSE.

Why would God need to judge Job blameless if he wasn't blameworthy in the first place. The devil threw out the blame, in his being a man that he would eventually curse God. The whole story of Job puts forth criticism (criticize- to consider the merits and demerits of and judge accordingly ), by his friends, the devil and God.

Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

Like this verse says, accusing or excusing in the sense of blameworthiness. While our conscience is at work in us toward pointing this out, it is God who has the final say on who is blameless.
We already know we are blameworthy in our ignorance of the Almighty. Which is why we are called sinners while in the flesh, until God says or proves us otherwise.

slynx
Aug 1st 2007, 09:07 PM
Why would God need to judge Job blameless if he wasn't blameworthy in the first place.

Satan's ACCUSATION that Job is blameworthy does NOT automatically MAKE Job blameworthy!

One HAS to pay attention to definitions of words!

One more time --

ACCUSATION = The act of charging with a crime or offense (the accused COULD BE INNOCENT - iow BLAMELESS)
BLAMEWORTHINESS = The quality of deserving censure
CENSURE = To find fault with AND condemn as wrong


What if I accuse YOU of being a thief and a liar? Does that automatically MAKE you a thief and a liar? Does my accusation automatically mean that you are DESERVING of CONDEMNATION just BECAUSE I accused you? I ACCUSE you, so you are automatically GUILTY and should be carted off to jail?

That would be absurd!


JUDGE = To hear and determine a case; to examine and decide.
CONDEMN = To determine or judge to be wrong, or guilty.
ACQUIT = To set free; to release or discharge from an accusation, guilt, censure, or suspicion.

No - we would have to go before a Judge, who would DETERMINE whether or not the ACCUSATION is TRUE!
If the accusation is true, then you would be condemned as GUILTY (blameworthy, NOT blameless).
BUT, if the accusation is FALSE, you would be acquitted as INNOCENT (blameless; NOT blameworthy).

Whether a person is blameworthy or blameless has NOTHING whatever to do with the accusation ITSELF. Whether a person is blameworthy or blameless is ONLY dependent on whether or not the accusation is TRUE or FALSE!

God determined that Satan's accusation against Job was FALSE; therefore, He said Job was blameless, which means NOT blameworthy!

In the quote of your sentence, substitute GUILTY for blameworthy - in essence they mean almost the same thing; likewise INNOCENT for blameless:

Why would God need to judge Job INNOCENT if he wasn't GUILTY in the first place.
Don't you see the absurdity in such a statement?

Bringing in extraneous arguments about OUR guilt or innocence also has nothing whatever to do with Job and God's determination that he was innocent of Satan's accusations!

Teke
Aug 1st 2007, 09:42 PM
I guess we are just talking past one another. How about some scripture to make my point. ;)

Gen 6:5 ¶ And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually.

Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

It appears God has made man worthy to be blamed. So only He can change that for them to be blameless. The point is that it is His righteousness which does so, not ours. We are sinners (blameworthy).

It may seem strange, but it is just like one wouldn't know good if they didn't know evil. God is apophatic and catophatic experientially that is.

slynx
Aug 2nd 2007, 03:34 AM
I guess we are just talking past one another. How about some scripture to make my point. ;)

Gen 6:5 ¶ And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually.


The Genesis 6 quote certainly does not reflect the entire context of the passage. Read verse 12.

God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.
Does it say they were born corrupt? No, it does not; they became corrupted. Does it say God MADE them corrupt? No, it does not. Who does God's word say corrupted these men? Satan? No. They corrupted their OWN way. They corrupted THEMSELVES.

What is corruption? Webster's dictionary says it is "the destruction of the natural form of bodies, by the separation of the component parts, or by disorganization, in the process of putrefaction" and "perversion or deterioration of moral principles; loss of purity or integrity".

It defines the verb, "to corrupt" as "to change from a sound to a putrid or putrescent state" and "to vitiate or deprave; to change from good to bad".

Destruction, putrefaction, deterioration, loss of purity or integrity, change from sound to putrid, change from good to bad.

Only one conclusion is possible from both the wording of the text and from the words used in the text: God is angry with these men because they were born pure, they were born with integrity, they were born sound, they were born good - God MADE THEM blameless and uncorrupted, but they have corrupted themselves!

But, Noah remained righteous and blameless and walked with God; Noah had not corrupted himself.


Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Not because they were MADE that way or BORN that way!

It appears God has made man worthy to be blamed. So only He can change that for them to be blameless. The point is that it is His righteousness which does so, not ours. We are sinners (blameworthy).

It may seem strange, but it is just like one wouldn't know good if they didn't know evil. God is apophatic and catophatic experientially that is.

No, God had NOT made man worthy to be blamed. God creates all men upright; then men devise their OWN destruction by sinning. They certainly are not born corrupt or worthy of blame.

As a matter of fact, there is a man in the Bible - Enoch - who did not die. Since the wages of sin is death, and all sinners die, the LOGICAL deduction is that God took Enoch because Enoch never earned the wages of sin by committing sin!


Psa 11:7 For the LORD is righteous, He loves righteousness; The upright will behold His face.
According to this verse, "upright is the equal to "righteousness".

Deu 32:4 "The Rock! His work is perfect, For all His ways are just; A God of faithfulness and without injustice, Righteous and upright is He.
Here's a verse saying God is upright.

Ecc 7:29 "Behold, I have found only this, that God made men upright, but they have sought out many devices."
There it is in plain language: God made men upright, which we saw from Psalms 11:7 means God made me righteous. BUT --- THEY -- who? MEN -- did what? sought out many devices -- ie found LOTS of ways to commit sin and corrupt themselves.

God doesn't MAKE man worthy of blame; God does not MAKE anything or anyone evil or sinful -- He CANNOT for He IS goodness and righteousness! Men make THEMSELVES worthy of blame by corrupting themsleves with sin, AFTER God made them pure, righteous, upright. Scripture PLAINLY says so. Therefore, I am not going to debate it with you anymore. If you want to continue arguing it, argue with God, because *I* did NOT write Ecclesiates (nor Psalms, nor Deuteronomy which both define what the "upright" of Ecclesiastes means).

Bick
Aug 2nd 2007, 06:18 AM
A few questions as to the whole thing with Job.

Why is it that God and Satan would have such wager? Since Satan would know that a). God can't lie. b). God knows the future. What is the purpose of their conversation? If God can look into the future and see that Job would still retain his faith regardless of how many pitfalls he encounters, and Satan knows this, . . . what's the point of Satan making this wager in the first place? Is there some reason that Satan would not take God at his word and still wager with God? Seems rather unlikely. The story (God and Satan wager part) seems rather unlikely and an afterthought of what people back in Job's day must have assumed happened between God and Satan as they tried to wrap their heads around all the bad things that happened to Job. Or, the whole story is an old parable that turned into eventual "truth" as the passage of time proceeded.

Just my thoughts on that. Sorry if I make anyone mad by saying it.

MY COMMENTS: I believe God created Satan what he is and what his name means: 'adversary, accuser'

Nothing says he was an arc-angel, which "fell" because of his pride.

"Angel" simply means "messenger", and while Satan is a spirit being, he is not an angel. He disguises himself as a messenger of light.

Speaking of the devil:
"He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own, for he is a liar, and the father of it." John 8:44, AV.

"He that commith sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil." 1 John 3:8, AV.

To me, the dialogue between God and Satan was revealed by the Spirit to the writer of Job. Interesting that it was the Lord that posed the question of Job's righteousness to Satan. And of course, Satan knew all about Job. It seems obvious to me, that Satan believed that if troubles and trials came upon Job, that he, Job would curse God to his face.

I see nothing that Satan knows not future events, or had any idea of the outcome of all the evils put upon Job; except Satan believed Job would curse God.

Teke
Aug 2nd 2007, 01:36 PM
The Genesis 6 quote certainly does not reflect the entire context of the passage. Read verse 12.

Does it say they were born corrupt? No, it does not; they became corrupted. Does it say God MADE them corrupt? No, it does not. Who does God's word say corrupted these men? Satan? No. They corrupted their OWN way. They corrupted THEMSELVES.

What is corruption? Webster's dictionary says it is "the destruction of the natural form of bodies, by the separation of the component parts, or by disorganization, in the process of putrefaction" and "perversion or deterioration of moral principles; loss of purity or integrity".

It defines the verb, "to corrupt" as "to change from a sound to a putrid or putrescent state" and "to vitiate or deprave; to change from good to bad".

Destruction, putrefaction, deterioration, loss of purity or integrity, change from sound to putrid, change from good to bad.

Only one conclusion is possible from both the wording of the text and from the words used in the text: God is angry with these men because they were born pure, they were born with integrity, they were born sound, they were born good - God MADE THEM blameless and uncorrupted, but they have corrupted themselves!

But, Noah remained righteous and blameless and walked with God; Noah had not corrupted himself.


Not because they were MADE that way or BORN that way!


No, God had NOT made man worthy to be blamed. God creates all men upright; then men devise their OWN destruction by sinning. They certainly are not born corrupt or worthy of blame.

As a matter of fact, there is a man in the Bible - Enoch - who did not die. Since the wages of sin is death, and all sinners die, the LOGICAL deduction is that God took Enoch because Enoch never earned the wages of sin by committing sin!


According to this verse, "upright is the equal to "righteousness".

Here's a verse saying God is upright.

There it is in plain language: God made men upright, which we saw from Psalms 11:7 means God made me righteous. BUT --- THEY -- who? MEN -- did what? sought out many devices -- ie found LOTS of ways to commit sin and corrupt themselves.

God doesn't MAKE man worthy of blame; God does not MAKE anything or anyone evil or sinful -- He CANNOT for He IS goodness and righteousness! Men make THEMSELVES worthy of blame by corrupting themsleves with sin, AFTER God made them pure, righteous, upright. Scripture PLAINLY says so. Therefore, I am not going to debate it with you anymore. If you want to continue arguing it, argue with God, because *I* did NOT write Ecclesiates (nor Psalms, nor Deuteronomy which both define what the "upright" of Ecclesiastes means).

Hey, I am not promoting any "depraved state of man" doctrine or teachings. Eastern Christians hold no such beliefs. I'm only pointing out the fact that humanity is blameworthy before God. Seems plain in scripture to me.:dunno:

slynx
Aug 2nd 2007, 04:13 PM
Hey, I am not promoting any "depraved state of man" doctrine or teachings. Eastern Christians hold no such beliefs. I'm only pointing out the fact that humanity is blameworthy before God. Seems plain in scripture to me.:dunno:

This whole debate began because you claimed that both Job AND Jesus were blameworthy.

Any man is ONLY blameworthy IF they sin! It is being GUILTY of sin that makes a person blameworthy before God. If they are NOT GUILTY, then they are NOT blameworthy either.

Jesus never sinned; He is not and was never blameworthy.
God Himself announced that Job was blameless (the opposite of blameworthy).

StevenC
Aug 5th 2007, 01:14 AM
It is my understanding this passage is a command from God to Ezekiel to write a letter to the king of Tyre. How does one interpret a command from God to the prophet Ezekiel regarding the king of Tyre is really a description of Satan?

Curious as always,

OldChurchGuy

It appears that 28:3-10 is a message for the "prince of Tyrus" (maybe king of Tyre in yours.) The vs 12-19 are talking about Satan which also exhalted himself above God. God calls him "the anointed cherub that covereth." And says that he was in the garden of eden. These things can't really apply to the man who was king of Tyre.

Perhaps it could be said that the punishment that awaited satan also awaited the king of Tyre because they had both exalted themselves above God.

-Steven

OldChurchGuy
Aug 5th 2007, 12:44 PM
It appears that 28:3-10 is a message for the "prince of Tyrus" (maybe king of Tyre in yours.) The vs 12-19 are talking about Satan which also exhalted himself above God. God calls him "the anointed cherub that covereth." And says that he was in the garden of eden. These things can't really apply to the man who was king of Tyre.

Perhaps it could be said that the punishment that awaited satan also awaited the king of Tyre because they had both exalted themselves above God.

-Steven

Perhaps. But why so much concern over this passage being about the Satan? Are there not enough other verses about the Satan?

OldChurchGuy

Teke
Aug 6th 2007, 03:17 PM
This whole debate began because you claimed that both Job AND Jesus were blameworthy.

Any man is ONLY blameworthy IF they sin! It is being GUILTY of sin that makes a person blameworthy before God. If they are NOT GUILTY, then they are NOT blameworthy either.

Jesus never sinned; He is not and was never blameworthy.
God Himself announced that Job was blameless (the opposite of blameworthy).

Your western theology considers it to be associated with guilt. I believe I found the answer for myself of why this is understood in that manner in the west, by their translation of the Greek word for 'justification'. Which I did a thread on (justification in Romans (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=94216)), here in bible chat, and you commented in that thread that you understood.

The juridical approach to scripture doesn't work well IMHO. For instance when scripture says that God concluded all in disbelief (or sinners), it doesn't mean that He is condemning them all. It means He sees their condition or state in the flesh. IOW that which He will attend to. :)