Then the Ants Sat in Judgment of the Man, God on trial?

A couple of years ago I posted an article entitled Is God on Trial? Recently Marco Belmont on HeavenlySanctuary.com posted a nice piece of continuing Adventist mythology entitled Judging the Judge.

He begins with a story which he later tells us is a parable about God, Satan, humans and angels. The key piece to interpreting his parable is supplied when he explains:

“...I'd like to submit that the judgment never needs to be the source of anxious panic because guess what? We aren't the ones who are on trial. We human beings aren't the ones being judged. The crazy thing about the judgment is that The One who is being judged is none other than Almighty God Himself. We human beings – and doesn't this just blow the mind – we humans have been assigned jury duty. When this Great Cosmic Battle between good and evil comes to a close, the question isn't “what does God think about us?” - because that question has already been answered in the person of Jesus Christ. God loves even those who hate His guts. Rather, the real question that each of us will be asked when Jesus Christ appears at the close of time will be, “What do YOU think about God?” Is He guilty of being a harsh taskmaster who enslaves His intelligent creatures by using power and might as a way of keeping them in fearful submission? That's what the reptilian con-artist Mr. Satanic Snake has suggested. Or, is God a compassionate and kind Father who loves and forgives people even when they murder Him? That's the testimony of Christ. Right now, respectfully, we are going to judge the Judge of the Judgment.”

The idea that human beings are going to judge God is such an incredible logical fallacy that it amazes me people believe it. In fact toward the end of his rather long article he destroys his whole thesis by showing that human beings are not qualified to judge God. He writes:

“...If a jury knew a person was innocent and convicted that person as guilty despite knowing the truth, that jury just judged itself as being unfit for jury duty. Likewise, when people of God – and notice I'm not directing this towards non-Christians – who claim the name of Christ but spread any sort of theology that makes God look guilty as charged – no matter how precious the words seem to sound – there is no excuse for lack of investigation and pushing our old cherished beliefs out the window – we simply announce to the entire universe that we have become unfit to make truth – specifically the truth about God's character – our standard. Even worse, our absence from the jury box is not just a loss for God, but another vote in favor of Satan and his methods. Are we guilty of saying, “God is love” and yet warn people of Christ's 2nd coming? Why would we warn people about God? You warn people when an enemy is coming, not a friend. Do we claim there is freedom in serving Christ and yet enslave our youth with exacting rules that come from gross misinterpretation of the scriptures? Do we say God accepts everyone unconditionally but turn around and suggest that He couldn't do it unless Christ first shed His blood thus taking the true message of Christ and replacing it with hedonistic paganism? Have we substituted honesty, open mindedness, and willingness with symbolism, religious rhetoric and euphemisms? Do we keep preaching the soon return of Christ somehow subconsciously implying that Christ isn't available right this second as He stands within our midst at this very moment? Have we preached on prophecy and the signs of the times so much that we've forgotten about The God of prophecy and The God of signs and The God of time? Have we Christians become so enamored with God's law hanging up in some municipal or judicial building – worrying about politics and who will represent our cherished views in parliament or senates across the globe - all the while the law of love and freedom is strangely missing from the barren wall that now encases our hearts as God begs for a group of people to free Him from the shackles of the courtroom and announce with tongues of fire, “In the case of Christ vs. Satan, we find the defendant not guilty on all accounts.” If we have answered yes to any of these questions, we have judged ourselves unfit to judge God. Thus, we have no need to worry about The Judgment, because we won't ever experience that glorious moment when one group of people will turn to our good Good and say, “we are sorry, Father, that you were wrongly accused and that an innocent God ever had to prove His goodness in the first place.”'

To simplify this rather elaborate long section of material. If you believe God is good and just, you are capable of being on the Jury that Judges God. If you don't think God is good and just, you are not suitable for the jury and therefore you won't be seated on the totally biased jury pool and only those on that jury pool are rewarded with heaven. If you ever misrepresented God in any of the numerous ways listed as questions by Marco, then you are unfit to serve on the jury...sinners need not apply could be the title of that little section.

The fact is the judgment in the Bible is not about humans judging God after all, we can judge God now to the best of our abilities, we all have to go through life making judgments all the time who to trust and who not to trust, we apply the data and make the choices, in that respect we certainly do judge but it is restricted to our judgment about things. It is not some kind of legal all encompassing judgment of the ultimate truth or reality of a superhuman creature who dwells in the supernatural while we are restricted to the natural. Even if there was a judgment after this life of God, we would be dependent upon God for the information anyway and if you did not trust His information what are you going to do about it? So in such a vast judgment case in the sky scenario there is no point to man being the jury, no need for the finite to judge the infinite. These remnants of the old Investigative Judgment concepts must really go away as they are just as weak as the original Adventist Investigative Judgment. You cannot redefine a poor theology based upon complete misrepresented texts, that leads only to confusion the only answer is found in going back to the original presuppositions and discarding the faulty ones and rebuilding on a firmer and more logical foundation.

Good News Tour Presentations, fiction over fact

As I have been listening to the Good News Tour 2006 presentations I have noticed that their Biblical understanding is frequently questionable. Most of this is developed from their unquestioning acceptance of what they call the Great Controversy view. Which is based largely upon assumptions they draw from taking meaning away from the context given in the Bible. For example here is some material from Marco Belmont in the latest issue of the Good News Letter.

The Sin of Defining Sin
(And how it affects our youth)

Having served as a youth pastor, I’m tuned into kids, and how they reject vague, formless, and fuzzy theological answers. One of the more popular questions my youth would sometimes ask is this: "What is sin?" Is this not a question we must answer if we are to comprehend why God came down and lived in a womb for nine months, let His own created beings raise Him into adulthood and ultimately–(here’s the kicker) murder Him? …

Where did sin originate? Heaven. More specifically, in the very presence of God. I can hear one of my 16-year-olds protesting. ―Pastor Marco, I was told that sin can’t live in the presence of God. Valid question, right? What would you say to this teenager? Does it make sense to say that sin can’t live in the presence of God but it did originate there? So, whatever sin is, it obviously does something to change our perceptions about God - NOT God's perception of us. If sin can’t live in the presence of God, then how are the youth of 2007 supposed to go to God to get the solution for sin? We say, ―Go to God and in the same breath we suggest ―but don’t get too close. I recently read this statement in a popular theological periodical: ―Sin, therefore, is as much who we are as it is what we do, be-cause, in the end, we do what we do because we are what we are.

You only come up with the answer that sin originated in heaven by assuming that the verses in Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 are not writing about the king of Babylon and Tyre respectively but holding to the Lucifer myth that those verses are actually talking about Satan. However we know from history were the Lucifer myth came from and we know that it is not found in either the Jewish history or the New Testament period. For more information and an extensive list of quotes from modern Bible Commentaries see the article Who is Lucifer or Satan Misidentified.

If you can’t hold to the Lucifer myth then much of the presentations at the Good News 2005 will be pretty hard to take. The Bible actually never tells us about the origin of Satan, when where or how he became the adversary of God. It is extra Biblical sources and a whole lot of reading into texts that give us the theory of Satan’s fall. The book of Genesis begins with man’s fall because we are part of mankind and we are the ones in need of reconciliation to God. When we try to insert extra material into the story we merely create a fiction that we call fact. It may be that we want to know more then we do but in the end we are only left with what we are given.

Marco continues:

This seems more than a little confusing. However, I think the writer is summarizing an idea we've heard all our lives in one form or another – that as soon as we come out of our mamma’s womb, we’re already horrible sinners. We seem to be telling little Johnny that not ONLY is he born into a sinful world with sinful tendencies and disabilities (which is true), but that he is already BAD to the bone, and hopeless! We may even follow it up with ―Now Johnny, don’t even attempt to try and understand why you are a sinner and why you were just born that way, but it’s very important that you understand that God can forgive your sin if you beg Him to. But unfortunately, sin can’t live in His presence. So, well – um – well — uh… look, don't ask questions. Just get ready for church. We’re already late.

I’d like to suggest that when we tell a child that he is born a horrendous and hopeless sinner before he even gulps his first breath, we just might be instilling hopelessness. Satan used a lie at the tree with our first parents, saying that God didn’t make them good enough, and if they would just eat some yummy cantaloupes, they’d finally achieve perfection. Now, he whispers loudly to us—"You're already so MESSED up that you might as well GIVE up!" And many of us do.

Now that people have successfully created the Lucifer myth it is easy to extend the myth building farther. Through the book of Revelation we see Satan identified with the serpent of old so that is perfectly acceptable but does the story indicate that the serpent charges were addressed at saying the people weren’t good enough. No in fact the attack was upon God through the selfish desires of the people.

(Gen 3:1-5 NIV) Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.'" "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman ."For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

So it was not about being good enough it was a play to pride that they wanted to be like God. Trust is the key element here, can man trust God or not. The rest of the Bible is about creating that trust. The story continues with the banishment from the Garden and then on to the first murder. It is clearly not about Satan whispering “your all messed up”. Well unless you assume that the inspiration of the Bible is from Satan, otherwise you have to admit God has pretty much identified us as messed up people. In general even the atheist would agree with the idea that people are messed up it seems to be an historical fact rather then the whispering of the deceiver.

Where does the Bible say that sin can’t live in His presence? Well that appears to be another of those insertions that people put into the Bible along with a whole host of things that they draw from metaphors like God is a consuming fire. But suffice it to say God met with the sinner Moses, talked with a whole bunch of patriarchs and prophets and came down and lived among us as Jesus Christ. God can do as He desires and people have no business foisting nonsense upon youth. Which brings me back to my problems with the numerous presentations at the Good News tour with the exception of those presentations by Alden Thompson, though I still have one more to listen to of his.

Marco concludes:

In conclusion, permit me to make one final statement. If sin is lies about the Character of God that originated in the mind of a created being in the very presence of God, then the solution to sin is the truth that dispels those lies in the minds of God’s created beings, as we behold and utilize that truth, in the very presence of God. And that, my dear global family (who I love with all my heart), is why Jesus Christ is the solution to the sin problem – because on earth, He WAS God, and now we know the truth about what God is really like and realize that Satan was a liar from the beginning. With that truth available, we can allow the healing that comes with trusting the healer. I believe this to be the concept that God has been trying to communicate to His people from the beginning: that at the Cross of Calvary, we discover we have no reason to fear a God who loves His creatures so much that He allowed them to murder Him. Marco Belmonte

Aside from his conclusion of what sin is, which is based upon some of his assumptions rather then accurate Biblical interpretations, because frankly sin is far broader then lies about the character of God, he presents a reasonable conclusion. The question is why involve all the supposition and fantasy to come to the idea of trust in God which was pretty clearly in the Adam and Eve story to begin with if it had not been reinterpreted by Marco. He could have quoted Jesus saying that Satan was a liar and murderer from the beginning, no need to plead to tradition about Lucifer, no need to pretend that sin can’t exist in the presence of God.

I am glad that this article was published because it makes it so much easier for me to say what I wanted to say about those Good News Tour presentations. They have some very good parts to their message but it is filled with so much rubbish that it becomes hard to stomach. They have restricted the gospel to and Adventist traditional view and don’t seem to realize that there is a whole world out there to be reached. Their message will not even be heard by other Christians because it is so infected with an extra-biblical view that they have named the great controversy. I remember asking them at HeavenlySanctuary.com what their definition of the Great Controversy was. Their best answer seemed to be the first three chapters of the Ellen White book Patriarchs and Prophets. Not exactly a great Biblical definition.