God and the Problem on Evil 2

I have heard some say that they don't like the idea of God "playing both sides of the chess board." I have some verses from Exodus very clearly showing how God was "playing both sides of the chess board " when he hardened Pharaoh's heart and kept asking him to "Let my people go." Notice that every time "as the Lord had said" is used, it is following a similar pattern of words as Exodus 5:21, which makes me conclude that this is what the Lord had said.

Exodus 5:21
And the Lord said to Moses, "When you go back to Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the miracles that I have put in your power. But I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go.

Exodus 7:3-4a
But I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, Pharaoh will not listen to you...

Exodus 7:13-14
Still Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he would not listen to them, as the Lord has said. Then the Lord said to Moses, "Pharaoh's heart is hardened; he refuses to let the people go.

Exodus 7:16
And you shall say to him, "The Lord, the god of the Hebrews, sent me to you, saying, 'Let my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness. But so far, you have not obeyed.'"

Exodus 7:22b
So Pharaoh's heart remained hardened, and he would not listen to them, as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:15
But when Pharaoh saw that there was a respite, he hardened his heart and would not listen to them, as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:19b
But Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he would not listen to them, as the Lord had said.

Exodus 8:32
But Pharaoh hardened his heart this time also, and did not let the people go.

Exodus 9:1
Then the Lord said to Moses, "Go in to Pharaoh and say to him, 'Thus says the Lord, the God of the Hebrews, "Let my people go, that they may serve me."'"

Exodus 9:7b
But the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people go.

Exodus 9:12
But the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh, and he did not listen to them, as the Lord had spoken to Moses.

Exodus 9:35
So the heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did not let the people of Israel go, just as the Lord had spoken through Moses.

Levin on the Declaration of Independence

Mark Levin in his book Men in Black says,

"By the standard activist judges use today, I wouldn't be surprised if at some point displaying the Declaration of Independence on public property is challenged. After all, the Declaration speaks of 'Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: and that 'all men...are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.' It declares that the founders are 'appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world' and relying 'on the protection of divine Providence.' Rabbis, ministers, and priests at public high school graduation ceremonies can be legally barred from saying as much."

God as therapy

I heard a critique of Christianity from a non-Christian on the radio the other day. He finds religion interesting, but he pointed out how common it is for God to become a therapy. Although God is the comforter, God is love, and God is our friend, God does not always make us comfortable, God does not always approve, and God is also our Father (or Daddy).

My Dad has a similar critique of the Church in America. It seems to him that psychological teaching has more influence than what the Bible teaches. Or rather, the Bible is taught in light of Psychology instead of viewing Psychology in light of the Bible.

An example of this would be from the four spiritual laws. Law 1: God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life. This would be alright, except that it neglects to point our God's wrath against and hatred of sin is so great that sinners must be punished. That isn't a comforting thought.

I have not thought of all the implications of this, nor do I understand all that encompasses therapy, but I will take this as a reminder to renew my mind with Scripture.

Relativism and The Death Penalty

It recently occurred to me that the Relativist view of "intolerance" is similar to the Judeo-Christian view of the death penalty.

The Christian view is this: murder is so evil, the only just punishment is to take the life of the murderer.

The Relativist view is this: intolerance is so evil, the only just punishment is to be intolerant of the intolerant.

The difference: murder must be judged and sentenced by the courts whereas intolerance is judged and sentenced by the individual. Even if the intolerance is brought to court the mere accusation of intolerance is an act of judgment and a sentence.

God and the Problem of Evil 1

I was recently discussing providence and God's will. Someone was asking, "Since evil exists, how much control is God really in?" Either God is in control of evil or God allows evil to fulfill other purposes.

There are several places in Scripture with a blanket statement saying God is in control of all things, but in case that is in dispute, there is at least one thing that is not in dispute: the Cross of Christ. The torture and death sentence of a knowingly innocent man is an evil act. God predestined it, planned it, ordained it, and used it for his purposes. There are other places in Scripture where we see God using the evil acts of humans to further his purposes, like the story of Joseph or the marriage of Sampson. These are the areas where the purposes of God are revealed. Are we to assume that God doesn't have a purpose for all evil?

Even if God were just allowing sin (God by no means just allowed the crucifixion of Christ) he is still using it or ordaining it for his own purposes. Someone with an extreme view of free-will might say God is ordaining sin so that we aren't robots, so we can freely and truly love. Of course "ordain" sounds too intentional. But if God did not intentionally create us will the ability and will to sin, then what? Was it an accident?

Alice and Boolean Logic

"I quite agree with you," said the Duchess; "and the moral of that is-- 'Be what you would seem to be'-- or if you'd like it put more simply-- 'Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise."'
-Alice in Wonderland

This would appear to be some form of negation. It reminds me of Boolean Logic only including not only logical negation, but also linguistic tense negation. I have not actually checked the statements to see if they actually say the same thing, but I sure found it funny.