Thursday, March 5, 2009

Judges of Evil Thoughts;

Worldly people, homosexuals among them, are not satisfied to be merely separated from Christ by separation from his children. They wish the thoughts of all to bless their choices, and infer these from our actions. Pr 20:
[11] Even a child is known by his doings, whether his work be pure, and whether it be right.

I am not sure where they obtain their audience, but they typically subject the child of God to continual review according to this verse. 1 Pet 4:
[17] For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?

As such, they also set about to expose a certain hypocrisy, that of hating the sin, but still attempting to love the sinner. This at least has precedence in Rev 2:
[6] But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.



That hypocrisy is undesirable is not at issue. It is universally pejorative, but it is never specified as to whether this offense is actually any worse than having a double standard or hamming it up for an audience, like a skilled thespian.

To listen to the World tell the story, the first indictment of our earthly infallibility is sufficient cause to stop the game, and send us on to God for final analysis post haste. The lesson from earthly courts is this. Prosecutors level indictments. When responsibly brought, these are ordered according to law. This is a first step, and a Grand Jury (there's one in session at almost all times,) actually looks at the evidence and tells the District Attorney whether or not this is even worth the Court's time. If a Prosecutor proceeds on an indictment, this is understood to be a commitment that he personally thinks it has merit. He expects to win, and if he loses three in a row I estimate he has irreparable credibility problems with the people who count. How much should I actually worry about the World's indictments?

Contrast that with this view for a different perspective. 2 Tim 3:
[12] Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

This sounds like a proof that _If_ we are not persecuted, _then_ we are not true believers. For humor re-read it and add, "not just the really evil people who try to hurt them."

Meanwhile these worldly individuals are reviewing our responses to their various indictments and if our un-false or sincere responses consistently review THEM badly, THEY conclude that we have hated them completely. If they can't convict us in hypocrisy, they convict us on false charges of "hating our enemy" after the Old Testament example. If Jesus was the Christ, he was certainly correct when he said Mt 5:
[43] Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

...and contradictions are certainly not recorded here - it was a Sermon.

The righteous judge regards... Ecc 8:
[8] If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not at the matter: for he that is higher than the highest regardeth; and there be higher than they.
(Pr 29:[7] The righteous considereth the cause of the poor: but the wicked regardeth not to know it.) is also related.

...and is not deceived about either his preferences or our hearts.
Heb 13:
[8] Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
1 Jno 3:
[20] For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.

Job had his difficulties, and an examination of context for the following should inform our faith with knowledge.

Job 24:[1] Why, seeing times are not hidden from the Almighty, do they that know him not see his days?
Job 34:
[10] Therefore hearken unto me, ye men of understanding: far be it from God, that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that he should commit iniquity.
[11] For the work of a man shall he render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways.
Job 35:[13] Surely God will not hear vanity, neither will the Almighty regard it.

Was the speaker in Job 34:[12] Yea, surely God will not do wickedly, neither will the Almighty pervert judgment.

..inspired to speak truth or contrasting material?

We remember Ezekiel's discussion of God reaping where he did not sow with regard to the bloodshed of the guilty in Ez 3:
[16] And it came to pass at the end of seven days, that the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
[17] Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me.
[18] When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
[19] Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.
[20] Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
[21] Nevertheless if thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; also thou hast delivered thy soul.

As such, we can paint a brilliant image in the mind with the following suggestion to the erring:

There is Latin for "While there is life there is hope."

"While there is life, your soul has not been separated from your breathing body. While body and soul unite, you _CANNOT_ be so _comprehensively_ separated from God's love as you will be (of a certainty,) the very first day of eternal unending hell!"

Rev 20:
[14] And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Tempted and Tried;

A favorite song, known and loved by many, reads “Tempted and tried, we're oft made to wonder why it should be thus all the day long; while there are others living around us never molested, though in the wrong.” The rest of the song goes on to woo our hearts to heaven with patient continuance in well doing, per Ro 2:7, 2 Thes 3:13 and Ga 6:9. This scriptural exhortation lifts up the fallen hands, and strengthens feeble knees, giving every lawful reason to adjure us not to falter. The point of interest for today's contemplation is the perceptive nature of the opening bar's wording. As a song, we many times set aside content because of needs of rhyme and meter; God's command to sing has made use of our inability to forget lyrics, as well as our normal inability to stray from order and rhythm of presentation; there is a reason that the Negro spiritual is so moving, and that POW's are forbidden to sing in certain camps. Despite the fact that the teaching observed here comes from song, it is true that Temptation and Trial are distinct and different, and I recently heard this remarked upon from the pulpit of a youthful mission field candidate. I offered to share this blog URL\link with him (by way of encouragement,) and have mixed feelings about making his effort of that day available as “my own,” having made the determination to believe the content, without his watchful eye to stipulate the correctness of the representation.

What do we mean by “tempted” and what do we mean by “tried?” In the wilderness where Jesus retreated to fast, possibly fulfilling the prophecy in Isa 42:
[2] He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.

...he was tempted by the Devil. This occasion followed Jesus immersion baptism by his cousin John (Mt 3,) at Aenon, near Salim, in the Jordan river, and immediately precedes the famous sermon on the Mount that begins with the Beatitudes (Mt 5-7.) In the 1st verse of Mt 4, the purpose of the meeting is specified, and there is no reason to suppose that this purpose was not accomplished. Jesus was tempted.

I'll take a moment, here, to pontificate upon what exactly that should mean. Jesus could easily have been certain of his own identity, and Satan (the accuser,) also knew – witness Jas 2:19. What other cause entered in to entice the not yet crowned Christ to definitively demonstrate his identity (and associated power,) to this somewhat suspect audience? Many lessons have been taught that the Prosecution addressed 1 Jno 2:
[16] For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
[17] And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

...differently with each specific temptation. This blog itself has investigated the storyline before, as a blueprint for the operation of the shield of faith. Neither of these satisfies my intellect as to what exactly might have given these temptations teeth, but the fact that Jesus was tempted is useful to know in other ways as well.
Heb 2:
[18] For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

...serving to underscore the promises of Heb 4:
[15] For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

..and 1 Cor 10:
[13] There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

…bearing the weight, like a weight lifters barbell is a promise, not the number of repetitions. Nor do the strong among us experience different difficulties; they are simply hardened like the soldier of 2 Tim 2:3 in the Lord’s army.

That Jesus was hungry is not difficult to believe; after 40 days, any fat a man of that era had available was assuredly exhausted, and eating was a matter of survival whether hunger pangs were in evidence or not. He could have made stones bread and “killed two birds with one stone,” ensuring his survival and silencing Satan in the process.

For the second attempt to have any telling seduction, Jesus must have been interested both to prove Satan wrong, AND test the truth of God's promise. I make this out to be a lesser temptation because Satan would have been right, not wrong about the promise, giving God (and not Satan) the pride of place in related discourse. The truth that men are not to tempt the Almighty reigned sovereign over the discussion.

In the third effort, the Devil must necessarily have had the capacity to offer these Kingdoms and the Glory of them; as I understand it, Christ would not only have become ruler, but also had the attached acclaim of being known to do so, which is different from a king maker of other discussions. If ever he had opportunity to turn from drinking the bitter cup, this was an illustrative example. Forgiveness might not have come, and the Plan of Salvation might have been aborted, but the desire to shut Satan up, shut him down, and silence his gainsaying must have been so overpowering as to assail the judgment of even the divine. His paraphrase of “Thou Shalt have no other Gods before me,” is from the Ten Commandments of Exodus 20 fame.

Having looked at all three efforts, we can say that Jesus was tempted as promised. These temptations were new to my mind when I read them as a child, and I'll only take two seconds to observe that a similar offer made to my person is not the same; even if it is legitimately from the same source, I have Jesus' example; the correct answer is a “no-brainer.”

Without appeal to a dictionary, we have built from context some idea that temptations are passing desires, like the fiery darts of Eph 6:
[16] Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.

To use another illustration, I can be TEMPTED to run a red light every time one turns orange in my presence, but to be TRIED in the same regard, I have to be induced to systematically contemplate how to thwart red light systems, and become a scofflaw.

God TRIED Abraham. Heb 11:
[17] By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

1 Pet 1:
[7] That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:

Our FAITH is what is tried. It is TRIAL that compounds our spiritual virtues Jas 1:3, Ro 5:3. A shadow of the relationship of trial to temptation is seen in Jas 1:
[12] Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.
[13] Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
[14] But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
[15] Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

Verse 12, temptation endured results in successful trial – I supposed that in a court proceeding illustration, the temptations might be questions from the prosecution and defense, and the trial would still be the total construct, from accusation to verdict, (maybe even including penalty phase.) Apparently temptation can be so distressing that we are made to fault our maker for it... else verse 13 would not be necessary.

Pausing only to notice that lust itself is defined as temptation, not specifically sin, we recall the reductio ad absurdum that to make deliberate lust a practice invites sin nonetheless. However we finalize that rabbit trail, we specify as follows: sin is sin, but temptation isn't sin. I can be tempted 20 times a day, and be “yet without sin,” as noted in Heb 4:15 above.

Without the benefit of being brief, we can now say that God tries hearts, and Satan tempts men to sin. (See more at Pr 20:27.)

How are we (men) supposed to review God regarding the same topic? We have seen “Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.” Reasonable minds must allow that, IF God CANNOT be tempted with evil (neither tempteth he any man,) there should be some small query as to how this can even be possible. At the outset, the occurrence appears to be preposterous.

True, this is not a matter of choice to the creator. God CANNOT lie, and he CANNOT be tempted with evil. The remaining thing I can imagine to tempt him with would be some form of “good.” How would tempting God with good of my own devising be any different from the behavior commanded in Mal 3:
[10] Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

Here the Lord reached out to the Children of his friend’s grandson and made his promise subject to experimentation. We can even suppose that this is the reason for the success of Televangelists. They certainly quote the preceding verse enough. It is simply the case that their own misappropriation of funds convicts them unintentionally like Haman in Esther 6:6,7.

The reason that this does not amount to tempting God when legitimately employed is that it is by his own agreement. If I sign a contract, absent ending clause, I expect (and am expected) to honor it whenever specified conditions are met. God may not actually contract with US as he did with Malachi and his audience of that time, but he may repeat his blessings on a discretionary basis nonetheless.

Whatever the case this is different from two identifiable cases that may be observed in society perennially.

First, the case where a person, usually an Atheist devises some plan of his own that he envisions to be “good,” by definition of that word, and put’s it to God as Satan did to Christ. “If thou art --- ---- -- God, do this good that I have devised, and I will serve you, I and all my household.” Since this is not a contract God has agreed ahead of time to honor in any way, this defines ONE aspect I conceive of tempting God.

Second, the case where a person, usually a public figure, makes a Faustian bargain with the powers that be: I will make this concession or compromise if you will accord the Lord and/or his servants [x] benefit. Since Satan is the Prince of the power of the air, he is available for bargains such as this, without being bound to honor them at the end. God puts in power the principalities we honor, we suppose that he is aware of the ‘game,’ or we too would say: How doth God know? In this case the temptation to God is to make his anger felt as broadly as he has been defamed.

If that is how it is done (this tempting of our creator,) it is good advice to aver it.

Reviewing,

God can try us and this is how our dross is refined.
Satan can tempt us and this is how we show loyalty and dexterity with our spiritual sword.

We can try God, and this is according to his law. Ro 12:2
And we can tempt God – God forbid!