The IJ

[reddogs]

Once more you ignore my whole point. How does it change us as Christians.. other then lend support to the point of Heresy that Sophia points out. How does it affect our lives at all... what is the point in believing in it.

My beleifs are simple, and I dislike having extra beleifs (ones which I can't get to by reason) from my initial beleifs. Most of the SDA positions I get to from my initial beleifs (In a perfect God, that the Bible is the word of God, that Jesus Christ came and died for my sins and was ressurected).

I don't beleive in extra things, they weaken the faith and make it easier to doubt God. This might relate to me being a scientist, I prefer the smallest number of assumptions (which are like beleifs). All my other beleifs, especially those about religion, make a difference in my life, in how I live. If IJ doesn't, I don't see why I should take the time to think about it.

I really don't see how IJ is important to me or my salvation. Unless the Bible is wrong, and we do need to become perfect (like some of the IJ proponents argue). Nothing that you or anyone else has said has provided a single argument in favor of it being important.

As I stated, sure, IJ might be correct. But it doesn't seem to make a difference wether you are pro-IJ or against (other then the aforementioned heresies), so might as well be IJ agnostic.

JM

The belief of the heavenly tabernacle is on solid scriptural ground as I went over, now the doctrine of IJ is from the Spirit of Prophecy which is the testimony of Jesus, and if you dont want to accept the message it gives, then you are free to do so. I dont think I ever said you had to believe in what is given to us, that is a individual choice.

 

[reddogs]

The implications of this statement are a major reason that many Adventists today have a problem with the IJ. Yes, God is the judge of whether we have accepted His gift of righteousness, but He knows when we do it, and so do we. He doesn't need an IJ to determine that. Unfortunately, the view that we can never have assurance of salvation because we don't know when our name will come up in the IJ, and if we are not perfect enough at that moment, we will be lost (without knowing it until the end), is still alive and well in the Adventist Church.


However, the Bible tells us that we do have assurance of salvation now, when we accept Christ as our Savior. We don't have to wait for an IJ to find out if we are really saved or not:

EPH 1:13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--to the praise of his glory.​

_____________________________________________________​

1 JN 5:11 And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.​

1JN 5:13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.​

​

As for the onlooking universe, how would God be displaying His fairness if He kept all of us (all of His human guinea pigs in the great controversy) here on earth in limbo our whole lives, trying to trust and obey God but always wondering if we will become perfect enough to be saved in the end, always wondering when we sin if we have missed our chance and failed the test of the IJ? Generations of Adventists have lived with this fear, and even today I often hear them express it in Sabbath School discussions. A God like that wouldn't deserve to be vindicated.

Excellent verses, (but we must remember we are saved by 'faith', not mans works or his judgement of himself), and they are basically what I said that we who truly accept Christ's sacrifice for us have a "deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--"

So God looks at our individual case that Christ brings before Him and we already have a guarantee from Christs righteousness. But God is still the judge of that not man as all the scripture makes quiet clear......

 

[JonMiller]

The belief of the heavenly tabernacle is on solid scriptural ground as I went over, now the doctrine of IJ is from the Spirit of Prophecy which is the testimony of Jesus, and if you dont want to accept the message it gives, then you are free to do so. I dont think I ever said you had to believe in what is given to us, that is a individual choice.

Once more... how does it affect my life as a Christian? I have asked you over and over again.. and but for telling me that I had better beleive because it is important Truth.. you have said nothing. You haven't said why it is important, or anything. You continue to skip my posts, and just repeat the same thing.

As I said, I am fine with IJ, it could be correct. The issue, which you have failed to respond to (I am not saying that I disagree with your response, it is that you haven't even made a response (to the question), is what does it mean for us as Christians.

All you have said is that it is scriptually sound (fine, we can have that point), and that it should be beleived in because it comes from the spirit of prophecy.

In the Bible, I don't particularly care how many men were in some army, or when Job lived (or even if). And currently, no one has explained why I should care about IJ. Other than that adventists have traditionally beleived in it, and now some argue against it.

I will ask you once more, clearly and distinctly, why should I beleive in it? What does it mean for me? How does it affect my life?

Jon Miller

 

[woobadooba]

OK

According to the Bible there is an IJ. Peter makes this very clear in 1Pt. 4:17

But it's more for us than it is for God. In other words, the doctrine exists to teach us that our lives are under examination, in that if we are to make a claim to follow God, we must live as though we really believe in Him. This is to serve as a means to refute those who assume that by merely believing that Christ died for them, they can be saved indefinitely, even while living in sin. Such a teaching is not of God, but is contrary to the gospel, which is "the power of God unto salvation" for all who believe. Rom. 1:16

Thus the doctrine doesn't exist to inform God of what He doesn't already know. He knows who belongs to Him, and has known this from eternity. Rather, it is to teach us something about God. It is to teach us that He doesn't tolerate sin indefinitely, but seeks to save us from its guilt, power and nature.

Those who refuse to acknowledge that the IJ is very real, are not very realistic in their way of thinking.

I could always argue that it wouldn't make any sense at all for God to judge us by our works if He already knew who belonged to Him. Yet, the Bible does teach us that every person will be judged according to the things he has done during his life. See Rev. 20:12-13

So how then could it make sense that an all knowing God would have to judge anyone by what is written in a book?

When looking at things within the context of omniscience, this would appear to be an absurdity to us. However, when we look at things within the context of what constitutes the capacity of human understanding, it makes perfect sense.

You see, it is a matter of understanding why a doctrine exists. It's not for God, but for us. And when people begin to understand this, doctrines such as the IJ will all of a sudden start to make more sense (when correctly understood).

 

[Loveaboveall]

Jon,

If you take a little time and study up on the earthly day of atonement you will find all you need to know about how it affects your relationship with you and God.

The Day of Atonement was a solemn day on which the whole of Israel gathered together. They were to have confessed all their sins or be put out of the camp.

Lev 23:27 Also on the tenth [day] of this seventh month [there shall be] a day of atonement: it shall be an holy convocation unto you; and ye shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD.

Note that it was a day to afflict your souls and fully consecrate yourself to God. You were to offer an offering by fire.

A good book for your reading would be "The Sanctuary Service" by Andreasan. I am reading it now and it is very good. In it he describes the burnt offering and how it must first be washed before offering it up to God. Which wouldn't make much sense because it was to be burned. But the offering must be clean and pure. Today, we are to offer our heart to God. It must be washed and cleaned by Jesus righteousness. The day of atonement reminds us that only God can cleanse us from our unrighteousness and we are to offer our WHOLE self to God. It also reminds us that the feast of tabernacles is very soon when we shall be with Jesus.

Today we are living in the timeline of the "Day of Atonement" when we are to be preparing with all earnestness, seeking "gold tried in the fire",

Think about this, if you knew Jesus was coming next week what would you do differently? That is how the IJ relates b/w you and God. It is a constant reminder that we are to be wholely consecrated to God, not what we WANT to give up but ALL of what we are. If there is one thing we should learn from the "disappointment" it is that WE can afflict our souls as the jews did at the day of atonement; as if Jesus was coming tomorrow and that we should not delay in doing this, b/c tomorrow could be our last day( the day we die).

 

[JonMiller]

Weren't they offering their heart to God 1000+ years ago?

I really don't understand this. You seem to be making some point about parts of the Bible not being relevant for people 1000 years ago, but only relevant today? It doesn't seem to say this. In fact, the Bible says that they were relevant at the time of the apostles.

I am not asking about how Christianity affects the life of something. I am asking how does IJ affect the life of the Christian.

What I have gotten so far is an example for other worlds (but that doesn't affect us and God, just something that God is arranging), or repeat of what Christians already do (so not any different from Christianity).

I have gotten nothing that the doctrine of IJ adds to mine or anyone elses Christian walk.

And yes, I have read some about IJ. It is perhaps reasonable, but doesn't have any point there either.

JM

 

[JonMiller]

No it doesn't. It doesn't make sense at all.

Even as something that we need.. cause if (most) Christians don't know it is going on (because it isn't clearly presented in the scriptures), most aren't gaining from it.

It seems like it was used by early adventists to try to explain why they had 1844 wrong, and to provide a call for Christians to be Christian. But we don't need IJ to call Christians to act like it, we have the Bible. IJ isn't needed. And there is no need to explain why 1844 is wrong either, the movement could have the spirit of God working within it, and be wrong about some things.

JM

 

[TrustAndObey]

In the Bible, I don't particularly care how many men were in some army, or when Job lived (or even if). And currently, no one has explained why I should care about IJ. Other than that adventists have traditionally beleived in it, and now some argue against it.

Hi Jon, I'm just skimming posts so I don't have a lot to add, except to ask....are you unsure that Job was a true person that existed?

 

[Loveaboveall]

Jon,

I am not understanding your reasoning here. You say that people 1000+ years ago were giving their hearts to God so how is it different? is that correct? The children of Israel were to give their hearts to God everyday and were to offer offerings throughout the year also. The point of the day of atonement is that it is a time set aside by God to afflict your soul! This means complete consecration to God. We are to do this today, not for ourselves, but for the unbelievers so that they may glorify God in the day of His visitation. See 1 Peter 2. 1844 signified the beginning of the time of the end when every christian should be afflicting their souls so that the command to spread the gospel will be finished and we can all go to heaven. May that day come quickly!

Think about this also. With your reasoning there is no real reason for any form of judgement. How would knowing there is a judgement affect your relationship with God. If you know that you have accepted Christ and His righteousness as your own then why does it matter when or if their is a judgement? See my point?

The bible is clear, their will be a judgement or our works before Jesus returns with His reward to all those who have accepted His robe of righteousness. This knowledge should increase our faith in Christ because it gives us the knowledge of His mediation on behalf of us in heaven for our sins and so that we may have eternal life with Him.

 

[woobadooba]

No it doesn't. It doesn't make sense at all.

Even as something that we need.. cause if (most) Christians don't know it is going on (because it isn't clearly presented in the scriptures), most aren't gaining from it.

It seems like it was used by early adventists to try to explain why they had 1844 wrong, and to provide a call for Christians to be Christian. But we don't need IJ to call Christians to act like it, we have the Bible. IJ isn't needed. And there is no need to explain why 1844 is wrong either, the movement could have the spirit of God working within it, and be wrong about some things.

JM

So it makes more sense that an omniscient God would need to refer to a book of deeds to determine who to save? Rev. 20:12-13

Again, doctrine isn't for God. It is for us. And it is given to us in terms that we can relate to.

Not everything is to be taken as literal; but much of what is written in the Bible is metaphorical.

It is the underlying theme that we must attempt to discover to fully understand what God is trying to tell us in passages that don't seem to make sense to what we understand about God.

As I had said before, the underlying idea of an IJ is that we will be held accountable for what we do in this life, whether we claim to believe in what Jesus did for us or not. It is to open our eyes to the fact that sin will come to an end, and if we truly love Jesus Christ we will allow Him to separate it from our lives through the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit.

As to what had happened in 1844, that is not what I am addressing here. For, I believe the IJ began long before that time. 1Pt. 4:17

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

OK

According to the Bible there is an IJ. Peter makes this very clear in 1Pt. 4:17

First of all this contextually has nothing to do with the idea of an Investigative Judgment. We have to let the Bible speak for itself rather than read into it out pet beliefs.

1 Peter 4:12 Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you.
13 But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed.
14 If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you.
15 If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler.
16 However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name.
17 For it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
18 And, "If it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?"
19 So then, those who suffer according to God's will should commit themselves to their faithful Creator and continue to do good.

The judgment spoken of here is that of suffering as the Expositor's Bible Commentary says:

17-18 Paul said, "We must go through many hardships to enter the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22). Before the full unfolding of the messianic kingdom, there are to be judgments. In the Prophets, mention is made of judgment coming first upon the people of God (Ezek 9:6; Zech 13:7-9; Mal 3:1-5) before coming upon the nations. Here in 1 Peter the idea seems to be that the coming of the Lord in his eschatological judgment has, as a harbinger, a beginning of "birth pains" that will purify believers (cf. 1:7). (This judgment is not, of course, a punishment for the believers' sins, which were laid on Jesus.) Now if the preliminary judgment (Christian suffering) is already taking place, the final doom on the disobedient is certain to follow shortly. Peter cites Proverbs 11:31 (LXX) to reinforce this thought. The righteous are just saved. The rest come far short, and only a great disaster awaits them.

You will notice if you insert into these verses the concept of Adventist understanding of the IJ it would make no sense with what comes before and what comes after.

But it's more for us than it is for God. In other words, the doctrine exists to teach us that our lives are under examination, in that if we are to make a claim to follow God, we must live as though we really believe in Him. This is to serve as a means to refute those who assume that by merely believing that Christ died for them, they can be saved indefinitely, even while living in sin. Such a teaching is not of God, but is contrary to the gospel, which is "the power of God unto salvation" for all who believe. Rom. 1:16

Thus the doctrine doesn't exist to inform God of what He doesn't already know. He knows who belongs to Him, and has known this from eternity. Rather, it is to teach us something about God. It is to teach us that He doesn't tolerate sin indefinitely, but seeks to save us from its guilt, power and nature.

Those who refuse to acknowledge that the IJ is very real, are not very realistic in their way of thinking.

I could always argue that it wouldn't make any sense at all for God to judge us by our works if He already knew who belonged to Him. Yet, the Bible does teach us that every person will be judged according to the things he has done during his life. See Rev. 20:12-13

So how then could it make sense that an all knowing God would have to judge anyone by what is written in a book?

When looking at things within the context of omniscience, this would appear to be an absurdity to us. However, when we look at things within the context of what constitutes the capacity of human understanding, it makes perfect sense.

You see, it is a matter of understanding why a doctrine exists. It's not for God, but for us. And when people begin to understand this, doctrines such as the IJ will all of a sudden start to make more sense (when correctly understood).

If the IJ was to teach us that God
1."The doctrine exists to teach us that our lives are under examination, in that if we are to make a claim to follow God, we must live as though we really believe in Him. "

That can certainly be arrived at without the IJ Besides many passages of Paul there is this from 2 Peter (2 Pet 3:11 NIV) Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives.

2. This is to serve as a means to refute those who assume that by merely believing that Christ died for them, they can be saved indefinitely, even while living in sin.

Again no need for the IJ for this as you could get the idea from such verses as (Mat 7:21 NIV) "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
(Mat 7:22 NIV) Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'
(Mat 7:23 NIV) Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

Here as in the verse in 2 Peter the ultimate endtime judgment serves the purpose which Adventist like Woob pretend the IJ serves.

3. "Rather, it is to teach us something about God. It is to teach us that He doesn't tolerate sin indefinitely, but seeks to save us from its guilt, power and nature."

There of course the ultimate final Judgment once again will teach the concept that sin will not go on indefinitely. And even by traditional Adventist interpretation the IJ does not teach that God seeks to save us from sins guilt power and nature. As that has been part of the gospel message for nearly 2000 years. It is not something that was only seen 150 years ago with the IJ doctrine.

The history of the IJ has never served a gospel purpose it was developed as a face saving tool to explain why a prophecy failed. It has never been gospel oriented and especially in its first form it was against the gospel message and encouraged the idea of righteousness by works, with salvation only gained if one passed through the IJ and had his/her sins finally blotted out. That is the record of their sins blotted out as if the forgiveness of sins did not take effect when they were forgiven. Instead it was taught that they were forgiven but a record was stored in heaven which had to be blotted out at the IJ. This view based upon EGW's wrong interpretation of the KJV translation of Acts 3:19.

It is interesting to see here those arguing for the IJ yet arguing in a way that reflects a different view of the IJ then Adventists actually held in the later 1800's through about 1930's.

 

[JonMiller]

Hi Jon, I'm just skimming posts so I don't have a lot to add, except to ask....are you unsure that Job was a true person that existed?

I think he was. Others think he wasn't. I dont' think it matters.

JM

 

[woobadooba]

First of all this contextually has nothing to do with the idea of an Investigative Judgment. We have to let the Bible speak for itself rather than read into it out pet beliefs.

The judgment spoken of here is that of suffering as the Expositor's Bible Commentary says:

I am open to the possibility of being wrong here. So far, the explanation that you have given, which is according to the Expositor's Bible Commentary, is better than anything else anyone has given me on the passage.

It does appear to make sense that the judgment beginning with the household of God as pertaining to suffering has to do with the vain judgment of ungodly people, which results in the persecution of the followers of Jesus Christ.

In other words, it could be that Peter is contrasting the difference between ungodly judgment, which results in persecution, as opposed to God's judgment, which results in eternal condemnation of the wicked.

If this is the case, then I am happy to see something else that makes more sense out of the passage.

However, I still need to spend some more time in thought before making a definite conclusion.

 

[reddogs]

Once more... how does it affect my life as a Christian? I have asked you over and over again.. and but for telling me that I had better beleive because it is important Truth.. you have said nothing. You haven't said why it is important, or anything. You continue to skip my posts, and just repeat the same thing.

As I said, I am fine with IJ, it could be correct. The issue, which you have failed to respond to (I am not saying that I disagree with your response, it is that you haven't even made a response (to the question), is what does it mean for us as Christians.

All you have said is that it is scriptually sound (fine, we can have that point), and that it should be beleived in because it comes from the spirit of prophecy.

In the Bible, I don't particularly care how many men were in some army, or when Job lived (or even if). And currently, no one has explained why I should care about IJ. Other than that adventists have traditionally beleived in it, and now some argue against it.

I will ask you once more, clearly and distinctly, why should I beleive in it? What does it mean for me? How does it affect my life?

Jon Miller

There are some that try to tell you that man is the judge of their own sin, or that Once Saved Always Saved, and various other false doctrines, and if it isnt laid out some will take these paths. The IJ shows that God is the one who will judge, and anyone that tries to say different is leading you or going down a dangerous path as scripture clearly says God is the final judge.

 

[JonMiller]

But the Bible is already against Once Saved Always Saved. IJ isn't needed for that. You even point this out in the last sentence.

JM

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

There are some that try to tell you that man is the judge of their own sin, or that Once Saved Always Saved, and various other false doctrines, and if it isnt laid out some will take these paths. The IJ shows that God is the one who will judge, and anyone that tries to say different is leading you or going down a dangerous path as scripture clearly says God is the final judge.

Again the final judgment would show the same thing and without all the need for assumptions which fill the IJ concept.

For Woob:

One thing we always have to keep in mind is that the New Testament writers would often connect a concept they were talking about with a quote from the Old Testament, many times it was out of context with the original quote. They were not trying to be tricky doing this it was a long established method found in other Mishnah writings. They would take a text and apply it to their current condition regardless of how the text was originally used. I can't think of the word for that now, I will have to check out my blog because I am sure I mentioned it earlier this year.

 

[woobadooba]

But the Bible is already against Once Saved Always Saved. IJ isn't needed for that. You even point this out in the last sentence.

JM

Let's not look at this within the context of omniscience, but from the perspective of humanity. When was there ever a time when judgment took place without there first being an investigation and a trial?

Even in the example of Sodom and Gomorrah we see an example of an investigation taking place before God executed judgment on the people. Didn't God already know what was going on there? Didn't He already know who was doing what? Of course He did. So why then would He even entertain the thought of adhering to Abraham's request, when He already knew the fate of the people?

"And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know. And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD. And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked? Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein? That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes: Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five? And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it. And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do it for forty's sake. And he said unto him, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there. And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty's sake. And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake. And the LORD went his way, as soon as he had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned unto his place." (Gen 18:20-33)

Could it be that He said, "I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it",
because Abraham really didn't have the capacity to understand the idea of what it means to know the end from the beginning? Could it be possible that He merely sent the angels to investigate for the purpose of demonstrating to Lot that He is fair in rendering judgment?

So an IJ is possible. Not because God needs it, but because we need it in order to see that God's judgment is just. It also shows us that God's judgment isn't the result of a dictatorship; rather, it is the result of love.

So I believe in light of these aspects, that the doctrine of an IJ is necessary.

Really, what would have happened if God just destroyed the people without even giving a reason why? What would Abraham's thoughts about God have been if this was the case? God doesn't have to explain anything to us; but He does so because He loves us enough to meet us where we're at. He could just toss us out whenever He wants to; but instead He gives us a chance to set our lives straight with Him, thus disclosing to us that He does not execute judgment on the wicked without good reason.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

woob wrote:

Let's not look at this within the context of omniscience, but from the perspective of humanity. When was there ever a time when judgment took place without there first being an investigation and a trial?

Well yes, in fact in most cases there was no trial, God had already decided. The flood story has no trial, sodom has no trial in fact those who visited Abraham never went to Sodom according to the story to find out if it was sinful, they went to bring out Lot's family. Nations driven out or destroyed have no record of trial or investigation. The Psalms and the Prophet writings describe God's judgment as just and fair and in no need of going through an investigative stage.

In most of the cases where people pretend there was an investigation, the actions were meant to reveal in the story that God knew what was going on but wanted to involve the others in the story with the process of what was to happen. Thus in the Adam and Eve story, God asks where are you? Or the conversation between angels and Abraham about Sodom and how many people in the city would save it from destruction.

 

[woobadooba]

woob wrote:


Well yes, in fact in most cases there was no trial, God had already decided. The flood story has no trial, sodom has no trial in fact those who visited Abraham never went to Sodom according to the story to find out if it was sinful, they went to bring out Lot's family. Nations driven out or destroyed have no record of trial or investigation. The Psalms and the Prophet writings describe God's judgment as just and fair and in no need of going through an investigative stage.

In most of the cases where people pretend there was an investigation, the actions were meant to reveal in the story that God knew what was going on but wanted to involve the others in the story with the process of what was to happen. Thus in the Adam and Eve story, God asks where are you? Or the conversation between angels and Abraham about Sodom and how many people in the city would save it from destruction.

It appears that you posted this before reading the edited version of my post.

See the words that are underlined in the passage I quoted, and my explanation for this.

In the case of the flood, it is true that God knew the hearts of the people, and didn't need to investigate their lives in order to discover where they stood in their relationship to Him. However, it is highly probable that Noah didn't just build an ark for he, his family, and the animals, but actually sought to bring other people to repentance prior to the flood. Thus making it clear to the people that their lives have been under investigation by God, and are about to come to an end as a result of His judgment.

"The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. " (Gen 6:11-13)

The idea of looking upon the earth, and thus seeing that it was corrupt, gives us a hint to the idea of an IJ.

But again, it isn't recorded in this way to show that God needs to investigate, but to disclose that He doesn't execute judgment without good reason.

 

[JonMiller]

But He already said that He will provide a reason why. Why does there need to be a reason why provided now, when none of us can appreciate it? I thought that a good part of the 1000 years was to show that His judgement was just.

IJ still seems unneeded. It doesn't do anything for us (now). And it doesn't do anything for God. Why shuold we beleive in it? And people 1000+ years ago definitely didn't, and (we beleive, and I agree) the right beleifs now were the right beleifs then.

The problem with IJ is that it isn't neccesary, when one is internally consistant.

JM