Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ God's role in sickness - Permissive or Causative

[Ironman]

“The Salvation of Angels” by Pastor Michael A. Wiley.

This idea that Jesus became a man so that He could die to save fallen angels is purely a figment of Michael A Wiley's imagination. I wouldn't waste one moment of my time reading any of it. Fiction is all it will be. It amazes me how some pastors come up with more than God Himself has revealed in His Word?

The Bible is very clear as to what will happen to sinners including fallen angels.

"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;" (2 Peter 2:4).

"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" (Matt. 25:41).

[Bible Basics]

According to Dake:

• b God is responsible for disease only in the sense of making the law of sowing and reaping (Gal. 6:7-8); making penalties for sin (Ex. 15:26; 23:22-25; Lev. 26; Dt. 28); and permitting agencies with the power to execute the curse on man to have their way (Job 1:6-22; 2:1-13; 42:10; Ps. 91; Lk. 13:16; Jn. 10:10; Acts 10:38; Heb. 2:14-15; Rev. 9:1-12). If there had been no sin there would be no curse. When Christ reigns on earth there will be no sickness (Isa. 33:24; 35:5-6). When God's will is done on earth as in heaven, there will be no curse (Rev. 21:1 -- Rev. 22:6).
  Dake's Annotated Reference Bible.

Kenneth Hagin (and many other faith teachers) often point to Robert Young's "Hints and helps to Bible Interpretation" to affirm that the Old Testament Hebrew supports this. I have found a Young's Concordance online that contains this section:
http://www.archive.org/stream/analytica ... 1/mode/2up

I fully agree with Dake (and Hagin). What are the thoughts on this forum? Do you guys believe that God takes an active role in sickness or is it passive (permissive).

Pastor Edwards,

Does it have to be a choice between the two? Isn't God free to play an active or a passive role in sickness?

[branham1965]

its all THE WORD with Reverend Dake.thats why Dad Hagin was on his team.

According to Dake:

• b God is responsible for disease only in the sense of making the law of sowing and reaping (Gal. 6:7-8); making penalties for sin (Ex. 15:26; 23:22-25; Lev. 26; Dt. 28); and permitting agencies with the power to execute the curse on man to have their way (Job 1:6-22; 2:1-13; 42:10; Ps. 91; Lk. 13:16; Jn. 10:10; Acts 10:38; Heb. 2:14-15; Rev. 9:1-12). If there had been no sin there would be no curse. When Christ reigns on earth there will be no sickness (Isa. 33:24; 35:5-6). When God's will is done on earth as in heaven, there will be no curse (Rev. 21:1 -- Rev. 22:6).
  Dake's Annotated Reference Bible.

Kenneth Hagin (and many other faith teachers) often point to Robert Young's "Hints and helps to Bible Interpretation" to affirm that the Old Testament Hebrew supports this. I have found a Young's Concordance online that contains this section:
http://www.archive.org/stream/analytica ... 1/mode/2up

I fully agree with Dake (and Hagin). What are the thoughts on this forum? Do you guys believe that God takes an active role in sickness or is it passive (permissive).

Pastor Edwards,

Does it have to be a choice between the two? Isn't God free to play an active or a passive role in sickness?

[macca]

1 Corinthians 5:3-5:
For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that has done this deed,
In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, and my spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ.
To deliver such a one over to Satan FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF THE FLESH, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Satan has to get passed us before he can afflect us with destruction of the flesh,

God has given us the power and authority over Satan to bind him from us and ours.

God does not put sickness and disease on anyone, Satan does.

Its sin that opens the door to Satan, and our protecting the sinner that stops Satan from destroying their flesh.

Ok lets have at it
macca

[victoryword]

“The Salvation of Angels” by Pastor Michael A. Wiley.

This idea that Jesus became a man so that He could die to save fallen angels is purely a figment of Michael A Wiley's imagination. I wouldn't waste one moment of my time reading any of it. Fiction is all it will be. It amazes me how some pastors come up with more than God Himself has revealed in His Word?

The Bible is very clear as to what will happen to sinners including fallen angels.

"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;" (2 Peter 2:4).

"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" (Matt. 25:41).

HI Ironman

The book is not about saving the fallen angels. It is also not about keeping the faithful angels from going to hell. Jesus' redemptive work was fully for mankind and Pastor Wiley teaches that in his book. However, Pastor Wiley, as well as a number of other men and women of God, believes that Satan has launched a number of nasty accusations against God that influenced a third of the angels to follow him. Some of these accusations have been to the fact that God is selfish and unloving. That is how he deceived Eve.

Pastor Wiley takes a position that I have taken for a few years myself. My influence for this position came from another excellent book I recommend, God's Strategy Throughout Human History by Marston and Forster in which they refute Calvinism. Gordon Lindsay, founder of "Christ for the Nations" also held a similar position to Pastor Wiley and myself. See his little book, Satan's Rebellion and Fall.

Pastor Wiley's point is that because God is so loving, He wanted to erase all traces of doubt and questions that Satan would have left in the mind of other angels. This would not have happened had God just immediately punished Satan. Let me quote one statement from his book that I hope clears this up:

• God did not immediately destroy Satan because, in His wisdom, He understood that the question Satan raised about the character of God would remain even if Satan himself was destroyed. The fundamental question which Satan posed regarded the character of God. Is God really completely good, righteous, just, and holy, or is He essentially self-serving? That was, and is, the ultimate question which God recognized must be answered. p. 41

I have also offered an outline of my own teaching on this subject which I believed long before I ever read Wiley's book. If you want a copy of the outline e-mail me at victoriousword@gmail.com. At least look it over thoroughly and look at the Scriptures I use before coming to a firm conclusion. If you still feel the way you do after looking at the outline then we will agree to disagree. No need for brethren to divide over this. For me it is just a better answer than believing that God has not yet dealt with Satan because he still wants to use him as some attack dog.

[victoryword]

My own common sense tells me that the angels that never rebelled with Satan, and are still in Heaven and with God, doing His will dont need saving!!!!!!!! What a load of rubbish, the angels who never rebelled need salvation????? ROFLMGO!

They are still in heaven with God. However, due to Satan's accusations, there is the possibility that some questions needed answering. GOd sets out to do that because He is loving and wants angels and humans to serve Him and worship Him based on TRUTH and not FEAR (being afraid of Him).

Perhaps you believe as Dolph does that God indirectly uses Satan as some policeman. This would mean that God is NOT at war with Satan and his evil forces but that they secretly work for Him. Is that the position you take for why God has not yet thrown Satan in the lake of fire to burn forever?

[victoryword]

VW, the Devil comes to kill, steal and destroy and has done immeasurable damage since he rebelled, so, I don't think God would allow all this damage to the human race to occur simply to make the point or prove that Satan really is a bad guy.

The way Andrew Wommack explains it is that God has been getting blamed erroneously for most of man's problems because man has (1) not resisted the Devil but has believed the devil's lies and become sick, poor and generally unsuccessful, and (2) because man's sin has allowed Satan to attack him.

Wouldn't you agree the only weapon Satan really has is to lie to folks, starting with Eve. Some might say he also can or tries to put symptoms of sickness on folks but we must demand he take his hands off God's property!!

I agree with Womack wholeheartedly.

But Job did NOT sin. God acknowledged that Job was an upright and blameless man. Even Satan had to acknowledge that, but then he attributed Job's righteousness to bribery from God. He stated that the only reason anyone would want to serve God is because of what they can get from Him. Satan accused God of bribery in front of the rest of the angels in order to make God look bad. So God could have beat Satan to a pulp right there and Satan would have won or he could let Satan prove his case, which he eventually lost. Marston and Forster explain this better:

• “We must be clear exactly what we mean if we say that God ‘could have stopped’ Job’s suffering. We may indeed accept that he had the sheer power to stop or even destroy Satan. The problem is that in this case, even as Satan sank under God’s wrath and destruction, he would have gone down with a sneer on his lips as though to say, ‘I told you so.’ Such a ‘solution’ would have left forever unanswered Satan’s accusation that God’s kingdom was based (like his own) on force and expediency. It was not lack of power that prevented God from crushing Satan – it was a matter of principle…. Satan’s accusations must be answered, and they cannot be truly answered by a force that simply crushes the accuser.”1

Notes:
1. Marston, Paul and Forster, Roger God’s Strategy in Human History (Eugen, Oregon, Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2000), p. 7

[victoryword]

Pastor Edwards,

Does it have to be a choice between the two? Isn't God free to play an active or a passive role in sickness?

Hi BB

God acnnot do anything that violates His essential character and nature. Hence, the serious issues I take with much of the "God is sovereign" and "God is in control" teachings. The way God is portrayed as being the cause of accidents, sickness, and all of the ills of life simply because "He can do whatever He wants" violates the essential truth that God is love and in Him there is no darkness.

When Jesus came to earth as a man He never put sickness on anyone nor did He blame His Father for any of it. Jesus came here and went to war against sickness. He casted out demons and healed the sick. He then said that He only did what He saw His Father doing and that if you see Him you see the Father. Jesus put the blame for sickness on Satan (Luke 13:16) and said that healing was the sign of His Father's kingdom (His Father's sovereign reign). Luke tells us that Jesus healed all that were oppressed of the devil because God was with Him (Acts 10:38).

Sickness is not GOd's doing. God is in the healing business. So yes, there MUST be a choice. How can I fight against the works of the devil when the devil has deceived me into thinking that his works are from God?

[titus213]

Isn't God free to play an active or a passive role in sickness?

I don't think the distinction is between acitve or passive; I think it's between causative or permissive.

God certainly took an active role in what happened with Job. He had put a hedge around him, which had to be removed in order for Satan to be able to get at him. God was also active in limiting the extent to which Satan could bring calamity into Job's life. He was active in using the working of Satan as a means of testing Job. So in that sense, God was in control of the situation without being the cause of what was happening.

I think we see the same active role of God later in the testing of Peter (Luke 22.31-34), and in the provision of a "way of escape" from the tests and tempations that come to us all (1 Cor 10.13).

[branham1965]

“The Salvation of Angels” by Pastor Michael A. Wiley.

CHARISMATICS are the most naive gullible lackeys on earth.they will fall for anything.ANYTHING.i am one so i can say it.everything i say here had relevance to my existence.and is if possible to help a soul here or there.even Balaam's * spoke truth.
let some flake say God took them here there and everywhere or some other homosexual doctrine and they latch on like hungry wolves.ANGELS needing salvation nothing but what Professor Paul S.L.Johnson taught in his Epiphany Studies in the Scriptures volumes 1-17 until his death in 1950!!!!!!!!!!and you can bet that Wiley Coyote could not begin to touch the immense intellect Johnson had.no way.and both were-are

i posted the Word on here we see thru a glass darkly now then in Heaven... and it was ignored by everyone.this side of Eden we see through a glass darkly.Paul said this.the Apostle Paul said so!!!!TOTALLY IGNORED.pathetic it is.
and when God vindicates His servants and prophets and He confirms them 100%%% the same rebels will reject them!!!!! see they trace back to old CAIN.
thats why people oppose the Word.its the spirit of CAIN.CAIN!!!!!
I HAVE CDS ABOUT IT TO ANYONE INTERESTED BY GODS SERVANT ....ERNEST ANGLEY.

This idea that Jesus became a man so that He could die to save fallen angels is purely a figment of Michael A Wiley's imagination. I wouldn't waste one moment of my time reading any of it. Fiction is all it will be. It amazes me how some pastors come up with more than God Himself has revealed in His Word?

The Bible is very clear as to what will happen to sinners including fallen angels.

"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;" (2 Peter 2:4).

"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" (Matt. 25:41).