Why are we nicer than God?

[Dordrecht]

Why are Christians a lot of times trying to be nicer than God?

Are we suppose to be far more polite, patient, tolerant,
compassionate, understanding and respectful to the wicked than God is?

[ILG]

That depends what you believe about God.

[A239]

There's a difference. We are instructed to be witnesses to the world so that they may believe. God is merciful, loving, full of grace and truth. He is the prince of peace. The wrath of God is for judgement day where sin will no longer be over looked and forgiven. He has giving us a chance for salvation from hell by coming here and dying for our sins for us.

[MissBrattified]

? I think God is far more merciful than we are! The difference is, we don't know every little bad thing about every little person. If we knew their every horrible thought, every offensive action, every terrible little word they've said, we'd no doubt feel a lot less benevolent. God, on the other hand, knows all of that stuff about each of us and STILL loves us. He's definitely nicer than us. There's no way you could be nicer than God--even if you gave it your best effort.

The other reason why we shouldn't put ourselves in a place of not being "nice" to people because of their wickedness is because we aren't omniscient. God knows everything about a person, including their thoughts and motives. Only He is in a position to judge someone because He knows they are truly evil through and through or in a position to withhold judgment because He knows they intend to do better. We can't possibly have that complete information, so we can never accurately judge a person. Ergo, we have no right to be anything less than "nice" to anyone. We can only see the outside.

[shazeep]

Amen. My understanding has always been that Law was revealed OT to highlight the need for Grace, which dispensation we are under now; hence the "Pick up your cross and follow Me."

[Aquila]

Why are Christians a lot of times trying to be nicer than God?

Are we suppose to be far more polite, patient, tolerant,
compassionate, understanding and respectful to the wicked than God is?

I believe the idea that God isn't as nice or as compassionate as we are is a misconception. We're often told that God is meaner than we are and this is because His ways are not our ways. However, please check out this verse... in context...

Isaiah 55:6-9
English Standard Version (ESV)
6 “Seek the Lord while he may be found;
call upon him while he is near;
7 let the wicked forsake his way,
and the unrighteous man his thoughts;
let him return to the Lord, that he may have compassion on him,
and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.

God's ways are not our ways... because He desires to have more compassion on the wayward and the wicked than we would ourselves. Not because He is meaner or harder than we are.

[Aquila]

Also, we have to be considerate of God's elect. Just because an individual "appears" to be wicked now, it doesn't mean that they will not one day be found among God's elect. We often judge by what we think we see with relation to appearance and behavior. But God knows the thoughts and intents of the heart.

[Dordrecht]

Many times in scripture unbelievers are called fools and blind fools.
That's not such a nice thing to say, but God did.

And what about dumb dogs that cannot bark?

Others were named hypocrits, another unfriendly name.

[MissBrattified]

Many times in scripture unbelievers are called fools and blind fools.
That's not such a nice thing to say, but God did.

And what about dumb dogs that cannot bark?

Others were named hypocrits, another unfriendly name.

God did--but He knew for SURE that they were hypocrites or fools. Since we can't see what's in a person's mind and spirit, then we can't possibly know what they are or are not. We can draw conclusions from outward appearance and actions, but those things usually tell an incomplete story. That, again, leaves us completely disqualified to label other people.

[shazeep]

i have always used those verses to illuminate willful ignorance v naivete to my congregation...

[Dordrecht]

God did--but He knew for SURE that they were hypocrites or fools. Since we can't see what's in a person's mind and spirit, then we can't possibly know what they are or are not. We can draw conclusions from outward appearance and actions, but those things usually tell an incomplete story. That, again, leaves us completely disqualified to label other people.

Doesn't the bible say you shall know them by their fruits?

[Dordrecht]

i have always used those verses to illuminate willful ignorance v naivete to my congregation...

Churches are full of dumb dogs that cannot bark.

[ILG]

? I think God is far more merciful than we are! The difference is, we don't know every little bad thing about every little person. If we knew their every horrible thought, every offensive action, every terrible little word they've said, we'd no doubt feel a lot less benevolent. God, on the other hand, knows all of that stuff about each of us and STILL loves us. He's definitely nicer than us. There's no way you could be nicer than God--even if you gave it your best effort.

The other reason why we shouldn't put ourselves in a place of not being "nice" to people because of their wickedness is because we aren't omniscient. God knows everything about a person, including their thoughts and motives. Only He is in a position to judge someone because He knows they are truly evil through and through or in a position to withhold judgment because He knows they intend to do better. We can't possibly have that complete information, so we can never accurately judge a person. Ergo, we have no right to be anything less than "nice" to anyone. We can only see the outside.

If we knew all about them, we might actually feel MORE benevolent, rather than judging them by their behaviors...

[shazeep]

ha, prolly would, yup. Which brings up a good point--Dordt, this thread suddenly gets more apropos, imo, if you start discussing why the OT believers were so nice when instructed to wipe out entire populations, and did not. What gives, there? they were under Law, and not Grace, dispensationally anyway...i have never understood this.

[MissBrattified]

If we knew all about them, we might actually feel MORE benevolent, rather than judging them by their behaviors...

I agree, and it probably would make it more clear why God is so long-suffering with people who try our patience.

[votivesoul]

I have absolutely no problem calling it like it is. If God said it, so can we.

But we must be very careful to make sure what God said applies.

But when it does apply, a fool is a fool, a Jezebel a Jezebel, a dumb dog is a dumb dog, a whoremonger is a whoremonger, and etc.

I don't hold back from such appelations, even if I don't always say what I'm thinking! Wisdom!

[shazeep]

personally, i don't think people are qualified to talk like that, and in my mind even thinking it is judging. doesn't mean i don't ever do it, but i see it as a fault in myself.

[justlookin]

Why are Christians a lot of times trying to be nicer than God?

Are we suppose to be far more polite, patient, tolerant,
compassionate, understanding and respectful to the wicked than God is?

I think God has changed His expectations toward us over time. In the past, we were to stone adulterers, now we are to forgiven them. It seems God has gotten kinder and gentler as His plan unfolds.

[KeptByTheWord]

When we read the OT, especially in the book of Psalms, we see David requesting over and over that the wicked be destroyed; then in the NT we see Jesus teaching us to love our enemies. I have always seen this as a contrast between the letter of the law (OT) , and the spirit of the law in Jesus (NT). The letter killeth, but the spirit bringeth life. II Cor. 3:6

[Dordrecht]

Yes, love your enemies.

But I will love my enemy to death when he comes into my house to rape and kill my girls.

I'm not going to love him and say "here's my wife" and rape and kill some more.

[FlamingZword]

I think God has changed His expectations toward us over time. In the past, we were to stone adulterers, now we are to forgiven them. It seems God has gotten kinder and gentler as His plan unfolds.

God does not change, he is unchangeable.
It is we (humanity) that has changed.

[Dordrecht]

God does not change, he is unchangeable.
It is we (humanity) that has changed.

Correct.
He's the same yesterday, today and forever.

[justlookin]

God does not change, he is unchangeable.
It is we (humanity) that has changed.

I'm just saying that He's changed His instructions on how we are to react toward sinners, such as adulterers. At one time, we were to stone them, kill them, but He changed His instructions to us now loving and forgiving adulterers.

I suspect that if those who were stoned to death for adultery could come back and live now, they'd quickly say that God has changed toward punishment for certain sins.

[Dordrecht]

I'm just saying that He's changed His instructions on how we are to react toward sinners, such as adulterers. At one time, we were to stone them, kill them, but He changed His instructions to us now loving and forgiving adulterers.

I suspect that if those who were stoned to death for adultery could come back and live now, they'd quickly say that God has changed toward punishment for certain sins.

Nonsense. God never changes and neither does Jesus Christ.

Loving and forgiving can only be done after repentance by the wrong doers.

And only the victim of a wrong doer can forgive through the power of the Holy Spirit.

[shazeep]

um, what? So, Christ 'forgave them' because they repented, as He was hanging on the cross? You see what the doctrine does to you, Dordt?

[shazeep]

I'm just saying that He's changed His instructions on how we are to react toward sinners, such as adulterers. At one time, we were to stone them, kill them, but He changed His instructions to us now loving and forgiving adulterers.

I suspect that if those who were stoned to death for adultery could come back and live now, they'd quickly say that God has changed toward punishment for certain sins.yes, Christ plainly said, "A new thing I bring you," and it is commonly known as a different dispensation from the Law, or OT. We now live under Grace--well, except for most of our preachers...

[shazeep]

Yes, love your enemies.

But I will love my enemy to death when he comes into my house to rape and kill my girls.

I'm not going to love him and say "here's my wife" and rape and kill some more.yikes, Dordt--it's never far from the surface, is it? So, how many times you been attacked since the last time we did this?

"When i defend myself, i am attacked."

[Dordrecht]

um, what? So, Christ 'forgave them' because they repented, as He was hanging on the cross? You see what the doctrine does to you, Dordt?

The bible is clear that Jesus died on the cross for our sins.
The bible is also clear that one needs to born again, which includes
repentance from the heart, after which the sinner is accepted by Christ and forgiven.

Can't be more simple than that.

But go ahead give it another weird twist.

[votivesoul]

I think we are way too politically correct.

While we will never be more merciful, forgiving, or loving than God (which is not Dordrecht's point, by the way), we neither have to attempt to be.

God draws so many lines and says enough is enough, and yes, even in the NEW TESTAMENT, expectations and commandments are placed upon us, and we for whatever lame reasons, don't obey.

Three cases in point:

- Marking and shunning those who cause division (Romans 16:17-18)
- Ex-communicating/turning over to Satan unrepentant fornicators, drunkards, covetous idolaters, blasphemers, and etc. (1 Corinthians 5)
- Separating ourselves from backsliders (2 Corinthians 6:14-17)

Way too many local assemblies and their leadership balk at taking such verses seriously, even as poisonous members corrupt the flock from within, proving that the elders and shepherds of that assembly don't really care about the sheep God has placed into their care (See Acts 20:28).

The fact is, we do not have to mince words and it is not "judging" someone to call it like it is; is it merely acknowledging the truth of a situation.

Someone who fornicates is a fornicator. This isn't judgment, this is truth. And until they repent and are forgiven, they are damned.

Someone who lies is a liar. This isn't judgment, this is truth. And until they repent and are forgiven, they are damned.

A backslider in heart is full of his or her own ways (Proverbs 14:14) and God takes no pleasure in them at all (Hebrews 10:38). They are not struggling or having a hard time, or whatever other weak euphemism we like to use. They are apostate unbelievers who have crucified the Son of God afresh and ought to fearfully expect the worse judgment imaginable (Hebrews 6:4-6 and 10:26-31). These, too, are damned, unless they repent and are forgiven.

None of this falls under the category of "judge not" (Compare to Romans 1, where Paul tells us about a whole list of people who are worthy of death, then goes on in chapter 2 instructing us not to judge. Was Paul a hypocrite, or was something else going on?).

Paul told the Philippians that some are the enemies of the cross of Christ, and that their god is their belly. He also asserted such people will end in destruction (Philippians 3:18-19).

Was Paul judging these people, or simply telling the truth?

How about when he called some people "dogs" (Philippians 3:2)?

Or when Jesus called King Herod a "fox", which wasn't a compliment (Luke 13:32)?

If we say of ourselves that such "name calling" is judging and is wrong, do we not also indict the Lord and one of His chosen apostles as judgmental and wrong for doing it?

[shazeep]

The bible is clear that Jesus died on the cross for our sins.
The bible is also clear that one needs to born again, which includes
repentance from the heart, after which the sinner is accepted by Christ and forgiven.

Can't be more simple than that.

But go ahead give it another weird twist.I agree with all that, D, but i do not then ignore that Christ forgave them for not knowing what they were doing, and instructed us to pick up our crosses and emulate Him. There always seem to be two sides, in a sense.
I think that, being human, it is easy to run to apply the part that we are supposed to apply personally to everyone else, and possibly vice-versa.

[TGBTG]

I'm just saying that He's changed His instructions on how we are to react toward sinners, such as adulterers. At one time, we were to stone them, kill them, but He changed His instructions to us now loving and forgiving adulterers.

I suspect that if those who were stoned to death for adultery could come back and live now, they'd quickly say that God has changed toward punishment for certain sins.

Nonsense. God never changes and neither does Jesus Christ.

Loving and forgiving can only be done after repentance by the wrong doers.

And only the victim of a wrong doer can forgive through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Dude, of course, the laws have changed (ergo new covenant):

Deut 21
18 When a man hath a son apostatizing and rebellious -- he is not hearkening to the voice of his father, and to the voice of his mother, and they have chastised him, and he doth not hearken unto them --
19 then laid hold on him have his father and his mother, and they have brought him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place,
20 and have said unto the elders of his city, Our son -- this one -- is apostatizing and rebellious; he is not hearkening to our voice -- a glutton and drunkard;
21 and all the men of his city have stoned him with stones, and he hath died, and thou hast put away the evil out of thy midst, and all Israel do hear and fear.

Do you practise this today??

[Aquila]

I think we are way too politically correct.

While we will never be more merciful, forgiving, or loving than God (which is not Dordrecht's point, by the way), we neither have to attempt to be.

God draws so many lines and says enough is enough, and yes, even in the NEW TESTAMENT, expectations and commandments are placed upon us, and we for whatever lame reasons, don't obey.

Three cases in point:

- Marking and shunning those who cause division (Romans 16:17-18)
- Ex-communicating/turning over to Satan unrepentant fornicators, drunkards, covetous idolaters, blasphemers, and etc. (1 Corinthians 5)
- Separating ourselves from backsliders (2 Corinthians 6:14-17)

Way too many local assemblies and their leadership balk at taking such verses seriously, even as poisonous members corrupt the flock from within, proving that the elders and shepherds of that assembly don't really care about the sheep God has placed into their care (See Acts 20:28).

The fact is, we do not have to mince words and it is not "judging" someone to call it like it is; is it merely acknowledging the truth of a situation.

Someone who fornicates is a fornicator. This isn't judgment, this is truth. And until they repent and are forgiven, they are damned.

Someone who lies is a liar. This isn't judgment, this is truth. And until they repent and are forgiven, they are damned.

A backslider in heart is full of his or her own ways (Proverbs 14:14) and God takes no pleasure in them at all (Hebrews 10:38). They are not struggling or having a hard time, or whatever other weak euphemism we like to use. They are apostate unbelievers who have crucified the Son of God afresh and ought to fearfully expect the worse judgment imaginable (Hebrews 6:4-6 and 10:26-31). These, too, are damned, unless they repent and are forgiven.

None of this falls under the category of "judge not" (Compare to Romans 1, where Paul tells us about a whole list of people who are worthy of death, then goes on in chapter 2 instructing us not to judge. Was Paul a hypocrite, or was something else going on?).

Paul told the Philippians that some are the enemies of the cross of Christ, and that their god is their belly. He also asserted such people will end in destruction (Philippians 3:18-19).

Was Paul judging these people, or simply telling the truth?

How about when he called some people "dogs" (Philippians 3:2)?

Or when Jesus called King Herod a "fox", which wasn't a compliment (Luke 13:32)?

If we say of ourselves that such "name calling" is judging and is wrong, do we not also indict the Lord and one of His chosen apostles as judgmental and wrong for doing it?

Most who argue that it's wrong to judge reference the following text:


Matthew 7
King James Version (KJV)
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

I don't think this is an admonition against "judging" per se. But rather it's an admonition, or warning, against hypocritical judgment. If one judges, they should have their own affairs in order, else with what judgment they judge, it will be measured back to them in response. If we have something wrong in our own lives, we should first deal with that, get our own life in order, and THEN we can approach another and then seek to draw attention to, and address, something we see going on in another person's life.

For example, I know folks who believe in the Seventh Day Sabbath and will condemn those who meet on Sunday for worship... yet they don't even attend a church or gathering anywhere on any day of the week! lol Ummmm... hello? lol

[Roxanne Murphy]

Many times in scripture unbelievers are called fools and blind fools.
That's not such a nice thing to say, but God did.

And what about dumb dogs that cannot bark?

Others were named hypocrits, another unfriendly name.

The title hypocrite was given exclusively and very liberally by Jesus to those who were very religious and had developed an elaborate system of outward rules to make themselves appear righteous, but on the inside, they were full of dead men's bones.

[shazeep]

amen and ty.

[Antipas]

The title hypocrite was given exclusively and very liberally by Jesus to those who were very religious and had developed an elaborate system of outward rules to make themselves appear righteous, but on the inside, they were full of dead men's bones.

In a very real sense all religions stand to make hypocrites out of their adherents.