Making War on Everything

Making War on Everything

I’ve done a little less blogging and a little more reading lately.  Right now, I’m reading Sacajawea by Ann Lee Waldo.  Here’s an excerpt, which I found to be comical, but true.  The context is that Sacajawea and Otter Woman, the wives of Charboneau, a sniveling, cowardly Frenchman, have come to live among the white Americans in St. Louis:

That night, Otter Woman tossed on her pallet of pine branches thinking of other things she had noticed.  White women could not make peace inside their lodges.  Day after day they fought dust and dirt.  They made war on everything – clothes, pots, floors; fighting with lye soap, scouring ashes, straw brooms, and feather dusters.  Otter Woman felt sorry for these white squaws who did not realize that dust and dirt were just a part of life to be endured like a bad cold, hunger, or mosquitoes.

This passage caused me to look at housekeeping a little differently.  Is that what we do?  Make war?

It’s good to wave the dirty white flag of surrender every now and then, to let the dog hair collect, like little tumbleweeds in the desert with purple mountains on the distant horizon – mountains of laundry.  Read a book.  Be at peace.  (For a while, anyway.)

Comments
  • Mary Vanderplas July 9, 2013 at 6:39 am

    What an interesting – and, I agree, funny – observation and judgment of what we “white women” do to keep our living environment clean and sanitary – a battle that, indeed, never ends. I can see how viewing dust and dirt as “just a part of life to be endured” rather than as some terrible evil to be conquered might make for a less anxious life, though for some of us at least the habit is so ingrained (and the felt need for order and cleanliness so intense) that it would be hard to change or even to relax a bit, even if such change were deemed to be a good thing.

    At any rate, I think your advice is good, and I love the imagery you use (“like little tumbleweeds…,” “mountains of laundry”). There’s just one glaring omission: or the cat hair, as the case may be…..

    • admin July 9, 2013 at 10:04 pm

      Sweat Pea fluff

      • Mary Vanderplas July 10, 2013 at 5:57 am

        🙂 She also goes by “baby doll” – this feline with identity issues.

  • Stephen Helbig July 9, 2013 at 11:46 am

    Be at peace. ~ For a goodly while, ~ Godly anyway.

  • Lanny A. Eichert July 9, 2013 at 1:43 pm

    Heretics also cease to make war with moral issues, too, like homosexuality as you have done under the cover of what God is, Love, right in the face of what God does, which is destroy them eternally, totally contradicting yourself. That whole community has gone, is going, and will go to hell and the Lake of Fire forever. They are to be utterly hated with compassion to be converted to Christ and changed straight before they physically die under the wrath of God.

    Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. {Jude 7}

    From there you even deny the very words of Jesus:

    Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and MANY there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and FEW there be that find it. {Matthew 7: 13 & 14}

  • Lanny A. Eichert July 9, 2013 at 2:11 pm

    Alice, this Scripture was written late in the first century after Christ died on the cross, bodily rose from the dead, bodily ascended into heaven, and began building His church. This Scripture is the message of love:
    Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. {Jude 7}
    This Scripture is not Old Covenant. This Scripture is New Covenant.

    This Scripture is a loving warning:
    Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. {Jude 7}

    What do you think “set forth for an example” means? What does it mean? Why did God include it in His Holy Bible? How can the Bible be HOLY with this text included?

    • admin July 9, 2013 at 10:03 pm

      Have you been to Sodom lately? Is it still burning? I think “set forth as an example” means that everyone, even the “quote” – worst sinners – will be reconciled to God.

      http://www.tentmaker.org/books/SpiritOfTheWord/021Sodom.htm

      • Lanny A. Eichert July 10, 2013 at 12:00 am

        Wow, Alice, didn’t you read
        Lanny A. Eichert says:
        July 9, 2013 at 3:05 am
        Patrick, Jude 7, PEOPLE suffering the vengeance of eternal fire, NOT geography.
        when you posted it?
        I’d like to see the geography giving itself over to fornication and going after strange flesh.
        PEOPLE, Alice, since you don’t seem to understand, are burning now and forever. That’s what’s still burning. They are.

        • admin July 10, 2013 at 12:57 am

          People are amazing, unique creations – God doesn’t eternally burn PEOPLE. Your over-reliance on mistranslation and orthodoxy creates this fascination with mythology-based doctrines of fear and hopelessness so that you post comments that have absolutely nothing to do with the blog.

        • Lanny A. Eichert July 10, 2013 at 4:26 am

          Alice, you really are unable to read plain English, aren’t you?

          Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. {Jude 7}

          Why in the world would you think to ask, “Have you been to Sodom lately? Is it still burning?” You attempt to ridicule their eternal destruction with a silly inappropriate question thinking just because God actually did rain down fire and brimstone from the sky, that it should somehow be the eternal fire the populace are now suffering. BTW, the verb suffering is indeed present tense. You missed God’s double wammy: fire from Heaven, which comsumed their cities and their physical bodies, ALSO symbolizing the eternal fire of hell, where they now are, cast into the Lake of Fire.

          Your logic stinks: just because people are amazing and unique creations doesn’t disqualify them from being eternally burned by their Creator. How did you ever invent such an idea?

          Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction {Romans 9: 21 & 22}

          Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth. And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha. {Romans 9: 27 & 29}

          What’s a remnant in this context mean, dear Alice? God saves only a FEW?
          What did Esaias {Isaiah} mean been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha? Destined for eternal fire?

          Please, put it TOGETHER, Alice, please. {Jude 7 & Romans 9}

          • Lanny A. Eichert July 12, 2013 at 2:14 pm

            Alice, how is it only a remnant shall be saved and all Israel shall be saved? Are you unable to comprehend that the all Israel is the entire ethnic remnant that is mortally alive on the earth at the beginning of the promised millennium?

            Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved {Romans 9: 27}

            And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob {Romans 11: 26}

            Can’t you see that “all” doesn’t mean everybody, but is limited in scope by the entire Holy Bible, and especially in this Epistle? In this Epistle first the Remnant is establish as the definition of the all Israel. In both cases ethnicity is established as well.

          • admin July 13, 2013 at 11:36 pm

            This and many other scriptures make a lot more sense when you examine the translation of “eternal.”

            • Lanny A. Eichert July 14, 2013 at 1:38 am

              Alice, eternal does not even once occur in these two verses {Romans 9: 27 & 11: 26}. About what are you talking? Don’t you see by your response that your exclusive concept of eternal has colored every thought you possess? You can’t seem to accept the meaning of words are limited by their contexts, though you use that to prove your point, yet want to force your single idea upon every context. That’s dishonesty. These two verses clearly demonstrate all is not everybody, likewise eternal is sometimes everlasting.

              What’s a remnant in this context mean, dear Alice? God saves only a FEW?
              What did Esaias {Isaiah} mean “been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha?” Destined for eternal fire?

              • admin July 14, 2013 at 12:28 pm

                Jude 7

                New International Version: “In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.”

                Young’s Literal Version: “as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them, in like manner to these, having given themselves to whoredom, and gone after other flesh, have been set before – an example, of fire age-during, justice suffering.”

                • Lanny A. Eichert July 14, 2013 at 3:39 pm

                  What’s a remnant in this context mean, dear Alice? God saves only a FEW?
                  What did Esaias {Isaiah} mean “been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha?” Destined for eternal fire?

              • Lanny A. Eichert July 14, 2013 at 7:26 pm

                Alice, both your versions contain “fire”, meaning God does burn people “during” the “age” that never ends with never-ending “just” “suffering” as their punitive “punishment”.

                Your objection is that ages do end, but you then say God is not able to make an age that doesn’t end, which disputes your God can do whatever He wants.

                Quoting two versions without explanation doesn’t answer What did Esaias {Isaiah} mean “been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha?”
                {Romans 9: 27 & 11: 26}.
                What’s a remnant in this context mean, dear Alice? God saves only a FEW?

                Do you want to conclude, with Edy and Patrick, that physical death ends the unbelievers’ punishment for sins? Hell only on earth? The Lake of Fire on earth? No wonder you refuse to make a chronology and then say, with Mary, only God knows how it works. YOU DON’T KNOW. You don’t want to know what God’s Holy Bible tells you by which you shall be judged for refusing the very Book you have in your hands and before your face. You are WITHOUT EXCUSE. You will without doubt burn in hell, dear Alice, if you don’t get this right.

                • admin July 14, 2013 at 9:43 pm

                  “God is not able to make an age that doesn’t end” – when did I say that?

                  • Lanny A. Eichert July 18, 2013 at 8:58 pm

                    Alice, the only one which is correct is which one?
                    A} God is not able to make an age that doesn’t end.
                    B} God is able to make an age that doesn’t end.

                • Lanny A. Eichert July 14, 2013 at 11:36 pm

                  Then, Alice, by your question July 14, 2013 at 9:43 pm Young’s Literal Version “fire age-during, justice suffering” is a just suffering in fire that doesn’t end and you agree with eternal torment after all.

                  • admin July 16, 2013 at 10:14 pm

                    age during fire is fire that endures for the “age” – and biblically, there’s plenty of evidence to prove that an age can be very short, very long, or somewhere in between

                • Lanny A. Eichert July 17, 2013 at 3:20 am

                  Alice, since God makes an age that never ends, the fire never ends. Very simple logic, don’t you think? You do not oppose that God makes an age that never ends, correct according to your question July 14, 2013 at 9:43 pm? Therefore “fire age-during, justice suffering” is punitive eternal torment where eternal is never ending, since the age never ends.

                  You say very short, very long, or somewhere in between, so you DON”T KNOW. Why are you making a point about something you don’t KNOW. Isn’t that foolishness? Very short is the opposite of very long. Prove it is either short or long and make some sort of sense. How many months, Alice? The Holy Bible uses months as a regular measure of prophetic eschatological time. Our subject is only about ONE age, Alice; we’re not considering other ages, so tell me about this one age.

                  Look, Alice, unlike the NIV, the YLV doesn’t call it punishment, but rather suffering, removing any thought of it being remedial, which is supported by the fact that God makes an age that never ends; and since it never ends there is no chance of betterment caused by unending suffering.

                  Why is it you deny that God is not able to make an age that doesn’t end, and then say ages may be very short, very long, or somewhere in between, without including never ending? Are you really still telling me God can’t make an age that never ends? Don’t you see by saying very short, very long, or somewhere in between, giving only three options, all three have endings? Your view of an age is that it has a beginning and an ending, so you disallow any age that doesn’t end. You make your god incapable of making an age that doesn’t end. Once you say God is capable of making an age that doesn’t end, you agree that the fire of Hell and the Lake of Fire never quits and is not capable of being remedial. You then destroy your universal salvation and admit proving permanent damnation.

                  Alice, which is correct, A or B?
                  A} God is not able to make an age that doesn’t end.
                  B} God is able to make an age that doesn’t end.

                  • admin July 18, 2013 at 9:04 pm

                    You claimed that I said/wrote, “God is not able to make an age that doesn’t end” I asked you, “When did I say that?” This is not the same as me saying God DOES or DOES NOT make an age that never ends. I believe that God can do anything He sets His mind to do. As the Creator of Ages, it is His prerogative to do whatever the hell He wants with an age or ages. We started off talking about a particular age, but your approach to the conversation made it impossible for me to continue with you. Your conversational tactics are as follows:

                    Make a false claim about what I believe.
                    Use my refutation of that false claim as the basis for a new false claim about what I believe.
                    Use the new false claim to redefine what I said to begin with, so as to create a false claim of your own.

                    If you want to know the nature of the ages, then do a word study on the Hebrew word “olam” and its Greek equivalent, “aion.”

                    And next time you want me to engage in discussion with you, don’t make assumptions about what I believe and then try to use those assumptions against me. For me to engage in conversation with you when you do this (repeatedly) is futility. I’m not wasting any more time on this absolutely fruitless discussion.

                    • Lanny A. Eichert July 19, 2013 at 1:34 am

                      Alice, when you posted July 14, 2013 at 9:43 pm “God is not able to make an age that doesn’t end” – when did I say that? Isn’t it legitimate for me to suppose that if the statement were truly what you believed, it would not matter whether or not I was quoting you or drawing a conclusion from your insistence upon ages having endings. However, you have made it a matter of contention, so therefore I ask again, isn’t it legitimate that you contend the statement to be the opposite of what you believe? Since “God is not able to make an age that doesn’t end” is the opposite of what you believe, then “God is able to make an age that doesn’t end” is actually what you do believe.

                      Since “God is able to make an age that doesn’t end” is what you believe, then age during fire is fire that endures for the “age” that doesn’t end. That simply means eternal torment, and that’s what you believe is a proper conclusion. You just don’t know you actually believe in eternal torment. That’s why you’re so frustrated with me.

                      Now please face the natural conclusion by answering:
                      which is correct, A or B?
                      A} God is not able to make an age that doesn’t end.
                      B} God is able to make an age that doesn’t end.

                      Remember you wrote: As the Creator of Ages, it is His prerogative to do whatever … He wants with an age or ages. You should not be afraid to to answer.

                    • Stephen Helbig July 19, 2013 at 11:02 am

                      Dear “AUNT SALLY” What will become of these futile conversational tactics? There is a scripture that comes to mind found in 1 Corinthians 3
                      1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
                      2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
                      3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
                      4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
                      5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
                      6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
                      7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
                      8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
                      9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God’s husbandry, ye are God’s building.
                      10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
                      11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
                      12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
                      13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.
                      14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
                      15 If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

                      NOW let me speak of the Straw Man , “Aunt Sally” ~
                      Or as scripture states (verse 12) ~ Hay Wood and Stuble…
                      ~ A staw man argument. consists of the following tactical strategies’ and I too have noticed these and yes these arguments are FUTILE, ~ useless, fruitless, unsuccessful, vain, ineffectual, and a waste of precious time.
                      So let us look at these conversational tactics in a light of a few examples ~ The following is found @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

                      “The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:
                      1. Person 1 has position X.
                      2. Person 2 disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y. The position Y is a distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including:
                      1. Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent’s position.
                      2. Quoting an opponent’s words out of context—i.e., choosing quotations that misrepresent the opponent’s actual intentions (see fallacy of quoting out of context).[4]
                      3. Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then refuting that person’s arguments—thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.[3]
                      4. Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
                      5. Oversimplifying an opponent’s argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.
                      3. Person 2 attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.
                      This reasoning is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position does not address the actual position. The ostensible argument that Person 2 makes has the form:
                      “Don’t support X, because X has an unacceptable (or absurd or contradictory or terrible) consequence.”
                      However, the actual form of the argument is:
                      “Don’t support X, because Y has an unacceptable (or absurd or contradictory or terrible) consequence.”
                      This argument doesn’t make sense; it is a non sequitur. Person 2 relies on the audience not noticing this.

                      Examples

                      A: We should liberalize the laws on beer.
                      B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.
                      The proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has exaggerated this to a position harder to defend, i.e., “unrestricted access to intoxicants”. It is a logical fallacy because Person A never made that claim.

                      A: Sunny days are good.
                      B: If all days were sunny, we’d never have rain, and without rain, we’d have famine and death.
                      In this case, B falsely frames A’s claim to imply that A believes only sunny days are good, and B argues against that assertion. A actually asserts that sunny days are good and, in fact, says nothing about rainy days.

                      C: We should give children ice cream after every school day.
                      D: That would be rather bad for their health.
                      C: Do you want our children to starve?
                      Person C says that children should be given ice cream after every school day. D replies to that statement assuming that children would be getting this in addition to their regular meals, and states that this would be unhealthy. Person C replies with the unreasonable suggestion that if children were not given ice cream, they would starve. Person C does this because it is harder for Person D to argue that children should starve than to argue that children should not be unhealthy.”

                      p.s. ~ Please Aunt Sally let me also state here that to ignore such arguments may indeed be good and truly right for a season, ~ but for those who do not recognize these fallacious tactics ~ a response of grace in His/Her defense is also needed. So let us make this attempt of His grace with the following quote from Something Beyond
                      by C. S. Lewis

                      Christianity seems at first to be all about morality, all about duties and rules and guilt and virtue, yet it leads you on, out of all that, into something beyond. One has a glimpse of a country where they do not talk of those things, except perhaps as a joke. Every one there is filled full with what we should call goodness as a mirror is filled with light. But they do not call it goodness. They do not call it anything. They are not thinking of it. They are too busy looking at the source from which it comes.

                      Mere Christianity

                    • Lanny A. Eichert July 20, 2013 at 10:41 pm

                      Stephen, your whole universal salvation idea falls apart when God is capable of making an age that has no ending. That He has done and you have eternal torment as a result and no salvation.

                      It doesn’t matter if you want to rally to Alice’s side, because the fact is God can make an age that doesn’t end. Therefore all your agruments about ages ending do not apply in the slightest. Hell fire never ends.

                      Your god who can do whatever he wants, will you now claim he can’t make an age that doesn’t end?

                    • Patrick Strickland July 22, 2013 at 5:17 pm

                      I would agree with your assessment of Lanny’s posts being filled with logical fallacies, especially the strawman argument that you have expounded upon.

                      Great post by the way Stephen

                      Grace and peace Patrick

                    • Stephen Helbig July 23, 2013 at 2:12 pm

                      Lanny A. Eichert says:July 20, 2013 at 10:41 pm
                      “Stephen, your whole universal salvation idea falls apart when God is capable of making an age that has no ending. That He has done and you have eternal torment as a result and no salvation. It doesn’t matter if you want to rally to Alice’s side, because the fact is God can make an age that doesn’t end. Therefore all your agruments about ages ending do not apply in the slightest. Hell fire never ends. Your god who can do whatever he wants, will you now claim he can’t make an age that doesn’t end?”
                      Lanny the very substance of your above response once again shows that your argument shifts to something I have never statednor do I believe. God can indeed make an age that doesn’t end. I have been translated into this kingdom of His dear son. This kingdom is righteousness peace and joy and is by His grace that we enter. I have been made a partaker of His great and precious promises. This gift is of grace, and is for all mankind, and “ALL” will readily bow to His Kingdom of “Life forevermore”.
                      So as you’ve stated ~ “the fact is God can make an age that doesn’t end.” I readily agree with ~ But for you to now shift to the premise that this age is eternal torment or as you’ve stated above ~ “God is capable of making an age that has no ending. That He has done and you have eternal torment as a result and no salvation. …Therefore all your agruments about ages ending do not apply in the slightest. Hell fire never ends.” ~ Is fallacious.
                      Lanny we’ve had this discourse in the past and yes my views about your quote ~ “ Hellfire never ends” ~ is not the depiction I have received from God’s Word. Yes indeed everyman will be salted with fire and this fire is unto purity and clarity in His righteousness, peace and joy. And the ending is swallowed up in victory ~ FOREVERMORE.
                      ~ These are aspects of two becoming one in the restoration and reconciliation God has given in His plan of the ages where He COMMANDED THE BLESSING ~ “EVEN LIFE FOREVERMORE” ~ Psalm 133~ “Behold how good and pleasant it is”.

      • Lanny A. Eichert July 11, 2013 at 5:19 pm

        Alice, What does this mean? Sodom shall be restored to her former estate.

        What was her former estate? Her current estate is total destruction. What was it before total destruction?

        And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous {Genesis 18: 20}
        For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it. {genesis 19: 13}

        Her former estate was gross immorality and impending destruction. You and your friends think God would really restore them in their same immorality back to their city like it was immediately before God rained fire and brimstone from heaven to destroy them?

        Alice, that’s their former estate: immoral mortality on the verge of destruction.
        Your god undoes what he did? You god is unstable.

        SODOM’S FORMER ESTATE WAS GROSS IMMORALITY AND IMPENDING DOOM.

        Don’t you get it? You’ve been fed a corrupt interpretation of Ezekiel 16 and have believed the perversion because it satisfies your rejection of eternal torment. Wake up !!!

        • Lanny A. Eichert July 11, 2013 at 6:14 pm

          Alice, as Mary is known to say, you missed the point of the passage. Since in the nine hundred years that has passed between the destruction of Sodom and Ezekiel’s prophecy, Sodom has not been restored, neither will Jerusalem escape the shame of their captivity into Babylon unto the ends of the earth. Fat chance Sodom be restore, therefore fat chance Jerusalem escapes captivity.

          To make a case for probation after physical death is totally beyond the scope and intent of this prophecy {Ezekiel 16}. Just look at how it is evasively done. Very deceptive; and it caught you.

          • Lanny A. Eichert July 12, 2013 at 4:30 am

            Alice, Matthew Henry in his commentary also says fat chance.

            “But Sodom and Samaria were never brought back, nor ever returned to their former estate, and therefore let not Jerusalem expect it”

        • Patrick Strickland July 22, 2013 at 6:35 pm

          Have you ever considered what Jesus said concerning Sodom?

          Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.
          (Mat 11:21-23)

          When Jesus restores…not if he restores, but when God restores Sodom to its former estate it really does not matter if he restores them to their condition just before they were destroyed, because when he does he intends to send some men who will do the works that were done in Capernuam so that they may repent. and remain. God’s view is always restorative. God’s view is to bring about all men being summed up in christ as scripture clearly declares in Eph 1:10. So when he restores them to their former estate it is to bring them into salvation, by doing the works in them that he did in Capernaum.

          Jesus did not speculate and say if the works were done in them that were done in Capernaum they might have remained, no he clearly said that they would have remained. The only reason they did not remain is because God did not do the works he did in Capernaum. Since God wants all men to be saved and commands all men to look and be saved then he must give them the opportunity to experience the same works that were done in capernaum.

          What were the works done in capernaum? Many Healing and deliverance from demons even forgiveness of sins.

          (Mat 8:5-17)

          (Mar 1:21-35)

          (Mar 2:1-22)

          (Luk 4:31-41)

          (Luk 7:1-10)

          (Joh 4:46-53)

          Jesus and peter’s tribute money paid

          (Mat 17:24-27)

          Jesus even walked on the water when going to capernaum and then he taught in the synagogues at capernaum

          (Joh 6:17-71)

          Remember what I told you about Jesus establishing judgment and His judgment was healing and making whole men…Well then when Sodom is restored to its former estate then the only reason is to establish judgment in Sodom that brings healing delverance and causes all to become whole in Christ Jesus.

          The expositors Bible commentary contradicts Mathew Henry when it says:

          Ezekiel’s judgment is like an anticipation of the more solemn sentence uttered by One who knew what was in man when He said, “If the mighty works which have been done in you had been done in Sodom and Gomorrha, they would, have remained until this day.”
          It is remarkable to observe how some of the profoundest ideas in this chapter attach themselves to the strange conception of these two vanished cities as still capable of being restored to their place in the world. In the ideal future of the prophet’s vision Sodom and Samaria shall rise from their ruins through the same power which restores Jerusalem to her ancient glory. The promise of a renewed existence to Sodom and Samaria is perhaps connected with the fact that they lay within the sacred territory of which Jerusalem is the centre. Hence Sodom and Samaria are no longer sisters, but daughters of Jerusalem, receiving through her the blessings of the true religion. And it is her relation to these her sisters that opens the eyes of Jerusalem to, the true nature of her own relation to Jehovah. Formerly she had been proud and self-sufficient, and counted her exceptional prerogatives the natural reward of some excellence to which she could lay claim. The name of Sodom, the disgraced sister of the family, was not heard in her mouth in the days of her pride, when her wickedness had not been disclosed as it is now (Eze_16:57). But when she realises that her conduct has justified and comforted her sister, anti when she has to take guilty Sodom to her heart as a daughter, she will understand that she owes all her greatness to the same sovereign grace of Jehovah which is manifested in the restoration of the most abandoned community known to history. And out of this new consciousness of grace will spring the chastened and penitent temper of mind which makes possible the continuance of the bond which unites her to Jehovah.
          4. Eze_16:59-63 -The way is thus prepared for the final promise of forgiveness with which the chapter closes. The reconciliation between Jehovah and Jerusalem will be effected by an act of recollection on both sides: “I will remember My covenant with thee Thou shalt remember thy ways” (Eze_16:60-61). The mind of Jehovah and the mind of Jerusalem both go back on the past; but while Jehovah thinks only of the purpose of love which he had entertained towards Jerusalem in the days of her youth and the indissoluble bond between them, Jerusalem retains the memory of her own sinful history; and finds in the remembrance the source of abiding contrition and shame. It does not fall within the scope of the prophet’s purpose to set forth in this place the blessed consequences which flow from this renewal of loving intercourse between Israel and her God. He has accomplished his object when he has shown how the electing love of Jehovah reaches its end in spite of human sin and rebellion, and how through the crushing power of divine grace the failures and transgressions of the past are made to issue in a relation of perfect harmony between Jehovah and His people. The permanence of that relation is expressed by an idea borrowed from Jeremiah-the idea of an everlasting covenant, which cannot be broken because based on the forgiveness of sin and a renewal of heart. The prophet knows that when once the power of evil has been broken by a full disclosure of redeeming love it cannot resume its old ascendency in human life. So he leaves us on the threshold of the new dispensation with the picture of Jerusalem humbled and bearing her shame, yet in the abjectness of her self-accusation realising the end towards which the love of Jehovah had guided her from the beginning: “I will establish My covenant with thee; and thou shalt know that I am Jehovah: that thou mayest remember, and be ashamed, and not open thy mouth any more for very shame, when I expiate for thee all that thou hast done, saith the Lord Jehovah” (Eze_16:62-63).

          The Biblical Illistrator says:

          Ezekiel looks at the nations around, kindred in blood and language and custom, partners also in sin, and he sees that either all must perish together or all must come in together. And as he knows that God cannot cast off His people, his instincts of justice assure him that in bringing Israel back God must bring Sodom back, the most sunken and the most execrable of the race, and yet not so sunken as Israel. Sodom and Samaria, and such as they, must be pardoned for the sake of a city worse than themselves. It is substitution upside down. If there is room found in God’s mercy for Jerusalem, there must be for Sodom, and Sodom may come covered by the blackness of Jerusalem’s guilt.

          The one thing we must remember is that commentaries are only men’s opinion of what they think that scripture means and you can say it is nothing but sarcasm and find many men to agree with your point of view and I can continue to believe it is actually a promise and continue to bring up men who agree with what I say but going that way will not prove anything in the long run. The question will always remain Lord what do you mean by what you had written, and till He will answer that question then you will continue to believe what you do.

          There is far more of the grace of God available to all men then you suppose.

    • Lanny A. Eichert July 12, 2013 at 11:33 pm

      Alice says: you post comments that have absolutely nothing to do with the blog.
      She makes war against orthodoxy and the institutional church as fruitlessly as the white women make war against dust and dirt. The literal perfect Holy Bible disputes her every time and she looses all her battles all the time.

      wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat {Matthew 7: 21} Jesus said so.

      Alice doesn’t think so. Alice has better thoughts on the subject than Jesus had. Isn’t that just wonderful; that is, to know where Alice will spend eternity? Making war uselessly.

      • admin July 13, 2013 at 11:31 pm

        Lanny loves to use third person in blog comments. Alice wonders why.

    • Lanny A. Eichert July 13, 2013 at 5:30 pm

      Alice says: July 10, 2013 at 12:57 am “fear and hopelessness” without realizing that is what ultimately draws peoples’ attentions to Christ lifted up. Without those two they’d have no need of Christ. Listen to the true stories on http://www.unshackled.org and learn that reality.

      It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. {Hebrews 10: 31}

      Innate fear and hopelessness proves eternal torment.

      For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. {Romans 1: 18 & 19}

  • […] the previous blog, Making War on Everything, I mentioned I’m reading Sacajawea by Ann Lee Waldo.  Charboneau, Sacajawea’s husband, […]

  • […] the previous blog, Making War on Everything, I mentioned I’m reading Sacajawea by Ann Lee Waldo.  Charboneau, Sacajawea’s husband, […]

  • Post a comment

    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.