Comments on: Who decides what ‘Mercy’ is?

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:55:51 +0000

Nathan,
Good post. Very thought provoking.
That sounds like a good book, I’ll check it out.

bob

By: Gordan

Gordan — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:04:20 +0000

The thing that complicates the question is that the very same instance of “blessing” can be mercy to one and a judgment on another; or merciful discipline to one and destrution to the other.

I propose that the best time to know whether or not God was merciful to Person A is upon a fairly complete examination of Person A’s whole life. If Person A finished his race in faith and trust in Christ, we can look back and thank the Lord that all of His paths have been mercy and truth. We are promised that even the things that look like curses will turn out for our salvation, by God’s grace and mercy.

On, Brooks, I second the book recommendation heartily and would have to admit that I have sometimes fallen to temptation, in part because of a presumptuous assurance that God’s mercy would be waiting for me when I had had my “fun.” This is a grave and grievous error.

By: robert

robert — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:11:23 +0000

Gordan,
Ouch! you just described too much of my thinking…

…and would have to admit that I have sometimes fallen to temptation, in part because of a presumptuous assurance that God’s mercy would be waiting for me when I had had my “fun.” This is a grave and grievous error.

By: Gordan

Gordan — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 20:13:51 +0000

Oh, good. For a moment there I thought I was unique.

By: Nathan White

Nathan White — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:33:06 +0000

Gordan–
I agree that we can see mercy in looking back over time, etc. But the particular error that I see is how we are so quick to look at favorable circumstances (mostly involving finances and comforts) and objectively say, ‘That’s mercy from God’.

True mercy can only really be seen when the end glorifies God; or in other words, the end meets up with some promise or blessing indicated in scripture. Just as David said, ‘It is good for me that I was afflicted, that I might learn your statutes’. That is, David saw that learning God’s statues was a good thing, and he knew that because of the testimony of God Himself. Thus, he was able to objectively see that his affliction was a mercy because of the end that it brought.

Thus, the lie of Satan is to present God as all of mercy and no justice, and the remedy that Brooks puts forth is that we must see that to be left in sin is the sorest of judgments. My point was to take that and demonstrate how we’re so prone to misinterpret ‘blessings’ from judgments, though I might not have been as clear as necessary to make the point.

By: Gordan

Gordan — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 03:06:11 +0000

No, Nathan, I think you were clear. I was just reiterating that concept, that the very same instance can be mercy to one and judgment to another; and my suggestion that only time can really tell objectively. I’ve thought this for a while on the topic of tragedies like Hurricane Katrina. The very same judgment poured out on a population: but, with different effects on different people, even those whose experiences were very similar. Some now count it a mercy.

By: James

James — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 22:13:09 +0000

I actually appreciate this post a good deal. I tire of hearing of this event or that event being a “clear indication” of God’s punishment or His pleasure or that because person y has been abundantly blessed with x that they must have earned God’s favor (which is really another way of describing the caste system of India in a way - the poor are the way they are because they somehow made God unhappy and have “earned” their lot).

Such statements about the will of God in the events of life must be made with reservation and great, great caution and discernment.