Roberts Liardon

[God_Owned]

Look, I'm sorry if this upsets you, but it doesn't matter whether you are WoF or Baptist or Catholic or whatever else, you cannot bury your head in the sand to what the Bible clearly says without undermining your faith.

Certainly, God is the epitome of love. He is full of compassion and grace.

Be that as it may, you cannot--or at least you should not--adopt a tradition that completely ingores what a particular Bible passage says.

In Revelation 15, we are told the following:

.

Admittedly, this passage has little, if anything, to do with our present age. But the message is clear: At some point in the future, God is going to pour out his wrath on mankind. This isn't me talking... The words I quoted came straight from the Bible.

Now, here is my point....

If you want to say that God's general plan and purpose for persons alive today is that each person walk in his mercy and grace, then that is fine.

But if you want to say that God will never, ever, ever cause people to get sick, then that flatly contradicts Revelation 15. Because in the last days, he is going to pour out his wrath on mankind.

Look, I'm sorry if this upsets you, but it doesn't matter whether you are WoF or Baptist or Catholic or whatever else, you cannot bury your head in the sand to what the Bible clearly says without undermining your faith.

Another one of you wrong assumptions. I'm not upset, nor do I have my head in buried, but this is a WOF Forum for WOFers to fellowship with WOFers. This forum is not for people who feign being WOF, promote non-WOF teachings, like God makes people sick and kills people with sickness to get them to Heaven early. There is an honorary system in place here and I ask you to ask honorably. If you want to accuse God of making people sick, please do it elsewhere.

Certainly, God is the epitome of love. He is full of compassion and grace.

God is love!

Be that as it may, you cannot--or at least you should not--adopt a tradition that completely ingores what a particular Bible passage says.

In Revelation 15, we are told the following:
1 I saw in heaven another great and marvelous sign: seven angels with the seven last plagues--last, because with them God's wrath is completed.


Admittedly, this passage has little, if anything, to do with our present age. But the message is clear:

It is clear that you don't know how many types of heavens are identified in the Bible. You need to get some books by Hilton Sutton and Charles Capps.

You have trouble enough with understanding healing in the Bible. Do yourself and others a favor and leave teaching Revelations alone until you understand all of the contexts.

You really need to quit tying to impress people with your carnal insights and get an understanding of the true nature of God.

Now will you please go play with someone else.

 

[TheMatmanReturns]

Another one of you wrong assumptions. I'm not upset, nor do I have my head in buried, but this is a WOF Forum for WOFers to fellowship with WOFers. This forum is not for people who feign being WOF, promote non-WOF teachings, like God makes people sick and kills people with sickness to get them to Heaven early. There is an honorary system in place here and I ask you to ask honorably. If you want to accuse God of making people sick, please do it elsewhere.



God is love!



It is clear that you don't know how many types of heavens are identified in the Bible. You need to get some books by Hilton Sutton and Charles Capps.

You have trouble enough with understanding healing in the Bible. Do yourself and others a favor and leave teaching Revelations alone until you understand all of the contexts.

You really need to quit tying to impress people with your carnal insights and get an understanding of the true nature of God.

Now will you please go play with someone else.

Since you understand WOF and the Book of Revelations better than I do -- and I mean this in all sincerity -- then please respond to each comment below.

Assuming, arguendo, that Revelation 15 talks about a different heaven than the one referenced throughout the rest of the book.... I think you are missing the point of what I am trying to communicate.

Even if there are multiple heavens, there is only one God. And in this passage, this singular God is employing seven angels to pour seven plagues on humanity.

You will notice that the angels received their golden bowls from the four living creatures.

Question, are the four living creatures agents of God or agents of the Devil?

The four living creatures surround his throne and sing his praises. Sounds to me that they are agents of God.

Well, if they are agents of God and if they are in his midst singing his praises, I could hardly imagine that they would ever do anything without God telling them to to do it, or in the alternative, without God approving of their actions.

Hence, the reason the bowls are filled with "the wrath of God" and not "the wrath of the four living creatures."

 

[God_Owned]

Since you understand WOF and the Book of Revelations better than I do -- and I mean this in all sincerity -- then please respond to each comment below.

Assuming, arguendo, that Revelation 15 talks about a different heaven than the one referenced throughout the rest of the book.... I think you are missing the point of what I am trying to communicate.

Even if there are multiple heavens, there is only one God. And in this passage, this singular God is employing seven angels to pour seven plagues on humanity.

You will notice that the angels received their golden bowls from the four living creatures.

Question, are the four living creatures agents of God or agents of the Devil?

The four living creatures surround his throne and sing his praises. Sounds to me that they are agents of God.

Well, if they are agents of God and if they are in his midst singing his praises, I could hardly imagine that they would ever do anything without God telling them to to do it, or in the alternative, without God approving of their actions.

Hence, the reason the bowls are filled with "the wrath of God" and not "the wrath of the four living creatures."

I've told you I'm not playing your game anymore. You'll have to find someone else to play with you and your twisted view of God.

 

[TheMatmanReturns]

I've told you I'm not playing your game anymore. You'll have to find someone else to play with you and your twisted view of God.

It's not a twisted view of God. I am simply taking an entire passage of scripture and telling you what it says.

Do you have a better explaination for Revelation 15? I am eager to hear it.

 

[God_Owned]

It's not a twisted view of God. I am simply taking an entire passage of scripture and telling you what it says.

Do you have a better explaination for Revelation 15? I am eager to hear it.

Like failing to hear what God says in the Bible, I guess you didn't hear me either when I told you to find someone else to play with and explore your twisted view of God. You might try one of the Forums that believes that God is the author of sickness and disease.

 

[TheMatmanReturns]

Like failing to hear what God says in the Bible, I guess you didn't hear me either when I told you to find someone else to play with and explore your twisted view of God. You might try one of the Forums that believes that God is the author of sickness and disease.

You are the one who keeps coming back.

Look, is Revelation 15 a part of the Word, yes or no? Of course it is!

Then whatever Revelation 15 says can hardly be a "twisted view of God" because such a view was given to us by God himself. That's why it is called "a revelation." God revealed it us himself.

It seems to me that you are trying to deny the message of Revelation 15. Because you have yet to address the substantive merits of what I am saying vis-a-vis this passage.

If God never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever will cause anyone --- saved or unsaved, good or bad, holy or unholy --- to become sick, then why does He pour plagues of wrath upon the entire human race in Revelation 15?

(BTW, I am not saying or implying that this is what he did vis-a-vis a certain little girl, because his wrath is reserved for the ungodly. I am simply wanting to understand how you can say he would never, ever, ever make anyone sick given what the Book of Revelations says.)

 

[God_Owned]

TheMatmanReturns;28014750]You are the one who keeps coming back.

I'm not interested in exploring your rabbit trails with you.

I've just recently posted enough teaching by real WOFers for you to either understand the WOF view on healing and prayer or reject it. The choice is yours.

You've also been given a number of authors who are accepted by WOFers as having an in depth understanding of the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Again, you can either avail yourself of these teaching and accept them or reject them.

I'm here to fellowship with WOFers not to try in vane to change the thinking of those who are determined to view God as the author of sickness of sickness and disease.

 

[TheMatmanReturns]

I'm not interested in exploring your rabbit trails with you.

I've just recently posted enough teaching by real WOFers for you to either understand the WOF view on healing and prayer or reject it. The choice is yours.

You've also been given a number of authors who are accepted by WOFers as having an in depth understanding of the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Again, you can either avail yourself of these teaching and accept them or reject them.

I'm here to fellowship with WOFers not to try in vane to change the thinking of those who are determined to view God as the author of sickness of sickness and disease.

I am not saying that he is the "author" of sickness and disease. I am simply saying that you are in denial about one certain aspect of God's character.

The Apostle John, the beloved apostle, the man who said in I John 4 that "God is love"---he is the same man who wrote the Book of Revelation.

Clearly, John the Apostle saw no problem reconcilling the love of God with the wrath of God.

John the Apostle walked with Jesus and saw how he loved the sick and wanted to see them well and whole. But John also saw how Jesus would one day use sickness and disease to punish the entire world.

John didn't have a problem with this... I don't know why you do.

 

[pdudgeon]

Clearly, John the Apostle saw no problem reconcilling the love of God with the wrath of God.

John the Apostle walked with Jesus and saw how he loved the sick and wanted to see them well and whole. But John also saw how Jesus would one day use sickness and disease to punish the entire world.

John didn't have a problem with this... I don't know why you do.

and from the WOF point of view we are having difficulty seeing why you are having problems distinguishing judgement from punnishment.

 

[TheMatmanReturns]

and from the WOF point of view we are having difficulty seeing why you are having problems distinguishing judgement from punnishment.

Never thought there was a difference.

What is the difference between judgment and punishment?

 

[pdudgeon]

Never thought there was a difference.

What is the difference between judgment and punishment?

i won't pretend to have a legal background as you do, but punnishment always follows and does not preceed judgement and the two are separate. there may be judgement without punnishment, but there is never punnishment without judgement.

you refered to Jesus using sickness and disease to 'punnish' the world, but are you aware that this not actually the reason that the bowls will be emptied out?

 

[Optimax]

I am not saying that he is the "author" of sickness and disease. I am simply saying that you are in denial about one certain aspect of God's character.

The Apostle John, the beloved apostle, the man who said in I John 4 that "God is love"---he is the same man who wrote the Book of Revelation.

Clearly, John the Apostle saw no problem reconcilling the love of God with the wrath of God.

John the Apostle walked with Jesus and saw how he loved the sick and wanted to see them well and whole. But John also saw how Jesus would one day use sickness and disease to punish the entire world.

John didn't have a problem with this... I don't know why you do.

I agree with you that there is a time coming that the wrath of God will be poured out upon the earth. Just as in OT times he got miffed with Pharaoh.

That time is called "Great Tribulation", and last seven years. The word says that we are saved from that wrath. That is done by "rapture".

 

[pdudgeon]

yes i agree that we are saved from that time.

 

[TheMatmanReturns]

i won't pretend to have a legal background as you do, but punnishment always follows and does not preceed judgement and the two are separate. there may be judgement without punnishment, but there is never punnishment without judgement.

you refered to Jesus using sickness and disease to 'punnish' the world, but are you aware that this not actually the reason that the bowls will be emptied out?

That is correct.

However, regardless of the reason for pouring out the vials of wrath, they were still poured out by God. And the pouring of this wrath will be the proximate cause for the plagues happening; but for the pouring of this wrath, there will be no plagues.

Now, if it is absolutely positively counter to God's nature to cause sickness or disease under any circumstance, then why is God--who never changes--going to change in Revelation 15?

 

[pdudgeon]

That is correct.

However, regardless of the reason for pouring out the vials of wrath, they were still poured out by God. And the pouring of this wrath will be the proximate cause for the plagues happening; but for the pouring of this wrath, there will be no plagues.

no....but for the sin of man there would be no need for the judgement. your reasoning against God is like a man who jumps out of a building blaming the effects of gravity for his injuries. He couldn't fly and neither will your arguement.

Now, if it is absolutely positively counter to God's nature to cause sickness or disease under any circumstance, then why is God--who never changes--going to change in Revelation 15?

He does not change. In Genesis He allowed the effects of sin to take place but he also provided the remedy for that sin. So it is only because man refused the remedy that he reaps the consequences.

 

[TheMatmanReturns]

no....but for the sin of man there would be no need for the judgement. your reasoning against God is like a man who jumps out of a building blaming the effects of gravity for his injuries. He couldn't fly and neither will your arguement.



He does not change. In Genesis He allowed the effects of sin to take place but he also provided the remedy for that sin. So it is only because man refused the remedy that he reaps the consequences.

Love the gravity argument. However, there is one problem with your thesis.

In the same way that gravity has no choice but to push a man to the ground, your argument implies that God has no choice but to pour his wrath on mankind in this particular manner.

It was God who wrote the Bible. He could have written it a different way. He could have come up with a different way to punish the wicked. Instead, he chose to set up a system whereby he would pour his wrath on mankind as a final punishment for sin.

Thus, while the sin of the world does indeed prompt God to judge, it was God who decided what manner of punishment would be appropriate.

 

[Optimax]

What would happen to this conversation if the age of grace was factored in. The OT things that happened were not under grace but under law.

When the age of grace ends (at rapture) and the Great Tribulation begins the wrath of God is poured out on the earth. The book of Revelation informs us what that will be like.

Thank God that the word says the we (the born again according to Rom 10:9-10) will be saved from that wrath.

The age of Grace comes to an end soon and then God deals with the unbelieving in an attempt to get them to repent.

God never changes but perhaps the way he deals with man does.

 

[TheMatmanReturns]

What would happen to this conversation if the age of grace was factored in. The OT things that happened were not under grace but under law.

When the age of grace ends (at rapture) and the Great Tribulation begins the wrath of God is poured out on the earth. The book of Revelation informs us what that will be like.

Thank God that the word says the we (the born again according to Rom 10:9-10) will be saved from that wrath.

The age of Grace comes to an end soon and then God deals with the unbelieving in an attempt to get them to repent.

God never changes but perhaps the way he deals with man does.

Indeed, that is a rational argument.

But do you realize something? When it comes to "dispensational theology," we charismatics can be pretty screwed up.

On the one hand, we use dispensational theology to explain how God treats people differently in different ages.

Yet, when the Baptists try to use dispensational theology to say that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was for a different time, we criticize them.

On the one hand, we use Disp. Theo. to support our eschatology, but then we condemn Disp. Theo. when Baptists use it to disparage the validity of the Bapt. in the H.S.

Just an observation.

 

[Optimax]

Indeed, that is a rational argument.

But do you realize something? When it comes to "dispensational theology," we charismatics can be pretty screwed up.

On the one hand, we use dispensational theology to explain how God treats people differently in different ages.

Yet, when the Baptists try to use dispensational theology to say that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was for a different time, we criticize them.

On the one hand, we use Disp. Theo. to support our eschatology, but then we condemn Disp. Theo. when Baptists use it to disparage the validity of the Bapt. in the H.S.

Just an observation.

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit occurred at the beginning of the age of grace which we are still in.

 

[TheMatmanReturns]

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit occurred at the beginning of the age of grace which we are still in.

You know that and I know that, but the Baptists use a different dispensational framework, to wit: They believe that when the Bible was completed, the canon was finalized, that the need for the BoHS was fulfilled.

My point is simply that when we use arbitrary periods of time to explain God's behaviour--for lack of a better word--we run the risk of making the same mistake that the Baptists make by doing the same thing.