Daniel 7 Pre-advent, Investigated out of books, Judgment affirmed by Adventist

BobRyan said:

The Investigative Judgment doctrine that Adventists teach is found in places like Dan 7 and Rom 2. It declares that before the return of Christ , He engages in a work of judgment that results in "judgment passed in favor of the saints" Dan 7:22. And that as Dan 7 states - when that judgment completes all persecution of Christians ceases and the 2nd coming happens, but until then the saints are being opposed, persecuted..etc.

Daniel 7 tells us some key facts for those paying attention to the details in the chapter.

1. The judgment before the 2nd coming. (Pre-Advent) When Judgment ends we have 2nd coming/appearing according to the chapter
2. The Judgment scope that includes the saints ... and judgment passed in favor of the saints. vs 22.
3. The (little horn) persecution of the saints does not stop until after the judgment completes. So it is the key to ending that problem of the little horn.
4. The 1260 years of dark ages
5. The judgment event is connected to the end point for the dark ages persecution of the saints.

Solution: the "solution" in Daniel 7 is "the judgment" and that same "solution" in Daniel 8 is the cleansing of the sanctuary.

Romans 2:4-16 gives us the process for how names are accepted vs rejected in that judgment and tells us that the event is still future to Paul's day in vs 16 of Rom 2.

2 Cor 5:10 tells us that it is for all the saints - all -- in the future - must stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

Click to expand...

Judgment in favor of the saints refers, I think, to a particular time in history when, at the end of the age, the world has been gathered together against Christianity. It then becomes clear who is on the Lord's side, and who is not.

This is not, I think, a one time deal in history when God finds Christians right and the pagan world wrong. That is, in fact, happening all the time.

Instead, this is a particular moment in history when God is making a particular point in a particular place in history, showing the heavens God's standard for the earth. It happened during the Flood. And it has happened in the ancient history of Israel when they were found unworthy to continue to live in the Promised Land.

All of history is, in fact, designed to show who is worthy and who is not. It is not, of course, a matter of perfection. Rather, it is a matter of responsibly choosing for the Lord, who has provided us with Christ's flawless record to cover our own imperfections.

At the end of history, who is truly on the Lord's side will become more clear on a global scale. And this is designed to take place at that time in preparation for a change on earth, to display God's rule on earth on a global scale.

Sorry, but this is eisegesis. If you accept that Jesus Christ is God, and accept that God is all-knowing, then the idea of an “Investigative Judgement” makes zero sense. The idea looks like it was a pious belief of EGW with which she tried to make sense out of the spiritual crises caused by Miller inaccurately predicting the return of Christ. So when the Great Disappointment occurred, it left the Millerites shocked and confused. It shouldn’t have, because of Acts 1:7, but it did, and I believe that EGW sincerely believed in the Investigative Judgement.

But it is not theologically sound, for it fails to take into account divine omniscience, which is attested to widely throughout Scripture, or divine eternality, also attested to throughout scripture.

By the way, I am curious what my Calvinist and Lutheran friends like @bbbbbbb @hedrick @Der Alte @JM @MarkRohfrietsch and @ViaCrucis , all of whom are more learned and interesting people than I am, think of this doctrine, in that it also seems to me to clash with any idea of preordination, or even with the idea agreed upon by both Calvinists and Arminian Methodists and synergist Orthodox such as our friends @jas3 and @prodromos @HTacianas @FenderTL5 and @dzheremi , who together with @my Anglican and Catholic friends @Jipsah and @chevyontheriver represent the definitive list of members who are more intelligent than myself and more pious than myself, who I look up to for these reasons and who enjoy debate threads, and so when I mention a thread to them it feels a bit like when I signal the choir to begin singing at a church when I am serving a liturgy, or striking up a band, I love good concert band music and have tried to conduct concert snd marching bands without much success; I fear I am not destined to be the next Frederick Fennell or Kenneth Alford or or Symeon Tchernersky, who were the best American, British and Ukrainian bandmasters of the 20th century, but I digress.

At any rate, since Calvinists and Methodists and Orthodox can agree that God already knows who will be saved, for scriptural reasons in the first two cases and for reasons of tradition, such as the Fifth Ecumenical Synod, in the case of the Eastern Orthodox at least, and equivalent traditions in Oriental Orthodoxy, the whole idea of an investigative judgement seems pointless. For that matter, the idea of Christ offering His blood in a Heavenly tabernacle seems extremely divergent with scripture, since it is made clear that His sacrifice was not in a heavenly tabernacle but on the Cross, and was completed there, because St. John the Beloved Disciple and Theologian declares that He said “It is finished!” immediately before dying on the cross. His atoning sacrifice, his victorious crucifixion, His glorious passion, was complete. He was buried, he rested on the seventh day having remade mankind in His own image, and on the first day, anticipating what in my church we call the mystical eighth day of creation, that is, life everlasting, He rose from the grave, before the myrrh-bearing women arrived, which in my church we commemorated yesterday, on the second Sunday after Pascha, which this year corresponded with Pentecost on the Gregorian calendar.

Perhaps this is why historically SDA churches usually lacked prominent crosses in their architecture or in the apse or altar/pulpit area of their sanctuary.

There's a basic disconnect about the nature of the End. Most of the talk about judgements comes from a Christianity that is about individual salvation. But in both Jesus' and Paul's rare descriptions of the End, it's the final defeat of God's enemies and establishment of Christ's rule. (Like Calvin, don't expect exegesis of the Revelation from me.) Both do speak of individual accountability and salvation, but the End is not primarily everyone being brought before God for individual judgement. I don't think how individual judgement occurs is described very clearly. I think there are hints that it's at death.

The complication here is Paul's statements that at the End everyone will be resurrected. This is part of the establishment of the Kingdom, since for the NT the final Kingdom is in a restored world. Not everyone will end up in that Kingdom, but that's just a part of the main theme which is establishment of the new world.

Modern Christians have forgotten the context of the NT. For Jesus, Paul, and the authors of the NT books, the world reflects supernatural forces. You can make a good case that Jesus' main focus was on the battle between good and evil forces. His coming was the first shot in the final battle. Thus the key issue for individuals wasn't either good works or believing the right thing (though those are part of the picture), but which side they were on. Bates has a couple of books that suggest that the proper translation of /pistis/ is "allegiance." I think there's a lot to be said for that.

Paul's description of the End in 1 Cor 15 is not about individuals actions or faith being weighed, but about the enemy and his forces being destroyed.

Paul does have a description of a kind of individual judgement in 1 Cor 3:12, just as Jesus talks about the outer darkness and all that. But they don't seem to show up in 1 Cor 15 or Mark 13 and parallels. That's why I suggest that whatever individual judgement there is (maybe only for those with the right allegiance, as in 1 Cor 3:12) may happen at death.

BobRyan said:

The important detail that we see in Dan 7 regarding the judgment , how it proceeds and ends is that the entire time the judgment is in process the saints are getting slam hammered by the wicked. Only when it concludes is relief given to the saints, and the kingdom turned over to Christ.

That did not happen at the flood or during the flood.
It couldn't happen at the great white throne judgment in Rev 21
It cannot be that when Christ shows up with all His angels He will let the wicked slam-hammer the saints right in front of Him instead of saying something like "everyone sit down -- I am going to show you what I have decided"

Click to expand...

I'm not denying what the Scriptures say, that before Christ comes he will have decided in favor of the saints and against the kingdoms of this world. That is clearly true.

I'm just saying that this is only one, albeit climactic, time in history, completing a process on earth that has been taking place from the beginning. God has *always* been deciding in favor of the saints and against the corrupt world who choose on the side of paganism.

The major difference between what has been going on in history and what happens eschatologically is that the process of world evangelization results in the Empire of the Antichrist, inheriting the old Roman tradition of European imperialism. This sets back the Christianization of Europe and of the world, leading to God rendering judgment against European paganism in favor of European Christianity. By extension this involves the entire world.

On a side note, I don't believe Dan 8 has anything to do with this. That was fulfilled before Roman imperialism evolved.

BobRyan said:

The Dan 7 judgment (as we also see spelled out in Romans 2) is not a case of God not knowing that the bad guys doing all the Christian-bashing "are bad".

The issue is not "is being wicked really all that bad"?.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't at all say it is a matter of what God knows. Rather, it is a matter of allowing people to demonstrate their choice, whether for paganism or for the truths of God, ie for holiness.

BobRyan said:

It's judgment of the saints themselves "We must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ".
It is the very thing you see in Romans 2 as noted above and also in Matt 7 "by their fruits you shall know them"
IT is as Dan 7 says - a careful review of what is written in books -- where there are myriads of observes to follow the conclusion in each case.

Click to expand...

Again, I agree that a review of what people choose for God is part of the process. I'm just saying that this has been happening perennially, from time immemorial. God is always judging the choices people make, whether for Him or against Him. It will be no different at the end of the age, when societies have come to collective agreement, with the exception of those who reject that collective agreement.

It is as much a choice to reject the ripening of collective world choices as a decision to save those who have been marginalized by their saintly choices. There is no need to overly "institutionalize" this process into what you call Investigative Judgment. However, I won't deny the Scriptural aspect of this, which involves the vindication of the saints against the collapse of the world into Antichristianity.

BobRyan said:

The important detail that we see in Dan 7 regarding the judgment , how it proceeds and ends is that the entire time the judgment is in process the saints are getting slam hammered by the wicked. Only when it concludes is relief given to the saints, and the kingdom turned over to Christ.

That did not happen at the flood or during the flood.
It couldn't happen at the great white throne judgment in Rev 21
It cannot be that when Christ shows up with all His angels He will let the wicked slam-hammer the saints right in front of Him instead of saying something like "everyone sit down -- I am going to show you what I have decided"

The Dan 7 judgment (as we also see spelled out in Romans 2) is not a case of God not knowing that the bad guys doing all the Christian-bashing "are bad".

The issue is not "is being wicked really all that bad"?.

It's judgment of the saints themselves "We must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ".
It is the very thing you see in Romans 2 as noted above and also in Matt 7 "by their fruits you shall know them"
IT is as Dan 7 says - a careful review of what is written in books -- where there are myriads of observes to follow the conclusion in each case.

Click to expand...

Having read your entire thread I can say, in the words of that Greatest Of All Time Joe Biden, "Man, that's malarkey".

You can call me a low information reader all you want. I'm used to that from you now. So hit the macro key and let loose. But there is no investigative judgment in Scripture but only from the mind of Ellen White. The SDA continuing to pretend it is found in Scripture is just sad.

hedrick said:

There's a basic disconnect about the nature of the End. Most of the talk about judgements comes from a Christianity that is about individual salvation. But in both Jesus' and Paul's rare descriptions of the End, it's the final defeat of God's enemies and establishment of Christ's rule. (Like Calvin, don't expect exegesis of the Revelation from me.) Both do speak of individual accountability and salvation, but the End is not primarily (or maybe at all) everyone being brought before God for individual judgement. I don't think how individual judgement occurs is described very clearly. I think there are hints that it's at death.

Click to expand...

Hedrick, my old friend, it is good to see you! How are you feeling? I have been extremely ill and in going to church and briefly attending the Scandinavian Festival at California Lutheran University afterwards, I massively over-exerted myself; I thought I was doing better, but just doing that, which would have been no problem a year ago or two years ago was brutally exhausting and made me realize how sick I am. So please pray for me.

Regarding your post, I found it very interesting and I found myself agreeing with the trajectory and orientation of your post.

Would you agree with the emphasis Metropolitan Kallistos Ware and other Orthodox theologians put on the notion that we are saved together, in communion with Christ as members grafted onto the Church, the Body of Christ, through Baptism and Holy Communion, and thus since the Church is the Ship of Salvation, her passengers are saved collectively?

Also, many Orthodox theologians such as Archpriest Andrew S. Damick have criticized the trend, popularized by Evengelicalism in North America, of focusing on “having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ”, which is something that the early Church Fathers never talked about. Indeed one Orthodox priest recalled an incident where at the end of a lecture on the Apostles, the Apostolic Fathers and the Council of Nicaea that an evangelical in the audience replied “I don’t see what any of this has to do with building a personal reionatlship with Jesus Christ.”

This attitude has spread into the rest of Western Christianity, even mainline and liturgical Protestantism, and even to some extent into Roman Catholicism and into some diaspora communties of the Oriental Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East and some of the smaller Eastern Orthodox and some of the Middle Eastern sui juris Catholic rites, such as the Maronites, Chaldeans, and the various Indian Catholics, both among the Mar Thoma Rites and the Roman Rite (although not so much among the Jacobite Orthodox and Malankara Orthodox, who are actually more doctrinally sound than many of the Syriac Orthodox from the Middle East who identify as Suroye ethnicity, which is associated with Aramaean or Assyrian nationalism, an for example, a few years ago when several Coptic Orthodox churches fell under heavy evangelical influence, in what was actually to a large extent an attempted takeover, a conpsiracy with Coptic clergy influenced by Western evangelicals and those same evangelicals to take over the Orthodox church be exploiting the large number of dioceses which lacked a diocesan bishop due to what was something of an oversight on the part of Pope Shenouda, memory eternal, which Pope Tawadros (Theodore) II corrected by appointing diocesan bishops. Two particularly severely affected parishes were St. Mark’s in Washington, DC*, which was selling copies of A Purpose Driven Life in its bookstore, which does not reflect Orthodox Christian values, and the cathedral in Muqattam, where a fiery old monastic hegumen, HG Bishop Abanoub, who I think has been promoted to the rank of Metropolitan, @dzheremi would know ), which is a desperately poor Coptic suburb of Cairo whose people subsist as swineherds, whose pigs feed on trash in the city landfill**; who did a good job restoring things, but initially, that cathedral, which is the only church in Muqattam, or was; it was a diocese with just a giant cathedral, well, it looked like a non-denom megachurch with tacky mid 1990s architecture, and not a Coptic Orthodox cathedral; it had no icons but rather was like a theater or concert venue, with stadium seating. And this was a symbol for the low spiritual life the people there were suffering under this modern evangelical leadership which had snuck in through the back door so to speak. @dzheremi and I are familiar with that case.


*This was surprising as they have a very good choir which released albums of the different Coptic Orthodox liturgies, such as that of St. Cyril (which is a variant of the ancient Alexandrian divine liturgy, which is known to the Eastern Orthodox as the Divine Liturgy of St. Mark, and which survives in the fourth century Euchologion of St. Serapion of Thmuis, the oldest complete bishop’s service book (this corresponds to a Pontifical in the Roman Catholic Church), and in the ancient Strasbourg Papyrus.

** During the swine flu outbreak shortly before the Arab Spring, despite no indication that their pigs were infected, President Mubarak had all of their swine destroyed, which caused a famine (this doubtless did not aid his unpopularity among Christians and Muslims that led to his ouster in the Arab Spring, and then there was the short-lived President Morsi, who was democratically elected, but his Islamist policies were so unpopular both with the highly secular majority of Egyptian Muslims, who are not strict in their observance of Shari’ah and are more ideologically pan-Arabic and nationalist than islamist, and the Coptic Orthodox Christians, who account for ten million of the eighty million or so people who live in Egypt, that he was deposed, and via a peculiar form of what one might call “democracy through protests appealing to the military” he was deposed, but this act, although irregular, did reflect popular sentiment, and the new ruler of Egypt, an army general like Mubarak, President Sisi, was essentially elected by the military leadership, but his election was democratically ceritified as it were by a lack of successful protests to depose him.

hedrick said:

Modern Christians have forgotten the context of the NT. For Jesus, Paul, and the authors of the NT books, the world reflects supernatural forces. You can make a good case that Jesus' main focus was on the battle between good and evil forces. His coming was the first shot in the final battle. Thus the key issue for individuals wasn't either good works or believing the right thing (though those are part of the picture), but which side they were on. Bates has a couple of books that suggest that the proper translation of /pistis/ is "allegiance." I think there's a lot to be said for that.

Paul's description of the End in 1 Cor 15 is not about individuals actions or faith being weighed, but about the enemy and his forces being destroyed.

Paul does have a description of a kind of individual judgement in 1 Cor 3:12, just as Jesus talks about the outer darkness and all that. But they don't seem to show up in 1 Cor 15 or Mark 13 and parallels. That's why I suggest that whatever individual judgement there is (maybe only for those with the right allegiance, as in 1 Cor 3:12) may happen at death.

Click to expand...

Indeed, although I would also say that Christianity was never a dualist religion like Zoroastrianism, in that the devil can only tempt us; he was defeated the moment he rebelled, and God permits him to exist only so that our faith becomes like gold tested in the fire.

But certainly faith can mean allegiance, for example, a king would be protected by his faithful soldiers and advised in good faith by his honorable and faithful counselors.

The Liturgist said:

At any rate, since Calvinists and Methodists and Orthodox can agree that God already knows who will be saved, for scriptural reasons in the first two cases and for reasons of tradition, such as the Fifth Ecumenical Synod, in the case of the Eastern Orthodox at least, and equivalent traditions in Oriental Orthodoxy, the whole idea of an investigative judgement seems pointless. For that matter, the idea of Christ offering His blood in a Heavenly tabernacle seems extremely divergent with scripture, since it is made clear that His sacrifice was not in a heavenly tabernacle but on the Cross, and was completed there, because St. John the Beloved Disciple and Theologian declares that He said “It is finished!” immediately before dying on the cross. His atoning sacrifice, his victorious crucifixion, His glorious passion, was complete. He was buried, he rested on the seventh day having remade mankind in His own image, and on the first day, anticipating what in my church we call the mystical eighth day of creation, that is, life everlasting, He rose from the grave, before the myrrh-bearing women arrived, which in my church we commemorated yesterday, on the second Sunday after Pascha, which this year corresponded with Pentecost on the Gregorian calendar.

Perhaps this is why historically SDA churches usually lacked prominent crosses in their architecture or in the apse or altar/pulpit area of their sanctuary.

Click to expand...

QFT

More reasons to love you, bruv! I wish I was half as knowldgeable as you are. Thank you!

The Liturgist said:

Sorry, but this is eisegesis. If you accept that Jesus Christ is God, and accept that God is all-knowing, then the idea of an “Investigative Judgement” makes zero sense. The idea looks like it was a pious belief of EGW with which she tried to make sense out of the spiritual crises caused by Miller inaccurately predicting the return of Christ. So when the Great Disappointment occurred, it left the Millerites shocked and confused. It shouldn’t have, because of Acts 1:7, but it did, and I believe that EGW sincerely believed in the Investigative Judgement.

But it is not theologically sound, for it fails to take into account divine omniscience, which is attested to widely throughout Scripture, or divine eternality, also attested to throughout scripture.

By the way, I am curious what my Calvinist and Lutheran friends like @bbbbbbb @hedrick @Der Alte @JM @MarkRohfrietsch and @ViaCrucis , all of whom are more learned and interesting people than I am, think of this doctrine, in that it also seems to me to clash with any idea of preordination, or even with the idea agreed upon by both Calvinists and Arminian Methodists and synergist Orthodox such as our friends @jas3 and @prodromos @HTacianas @FenderTL5 and @dzheremi , who together with @my Anglican and Catholic friends @Jipsah and @chevyontheriver represent the definitive list of members who are more intelligent than myself and more pious than myself, who I look up to for these reasons and who enjoy debate threads, and so when I mention a thread to them it feels a bit like when I signal the choir to begin singing at a church when I am serving a liturgy, or striking up a band, I love good concert band music and have tried to conduct concert snd marching bands without much success; I fear I am not destined to be the next Frederick Fennell or Kenneth Alford or or Symeon Tchernersky, who were the best American, British and Ukrainian bandmasters of the 20th century, but I digress.

At any rate, since Calvinists and Methodists and Orthodox can agree that God already knows who will be saved, for scriptural reasons in the first two cases and for reasons of tradition, such as the Fifth Ecumenical Synod, in the case of the Eastern Orthodox at least, and equivalent traditions in Oriental Orthodoxy, the whole idea of an investigative judgement seems pointless. For that matter, the idea of Christ offering His blood in a Heavenly tabernacle seems extremely divergent with scripture, since it is made clear that His sacrifice was not in a heavenly tabernacle but on the Cross, and was completed there, because St. John the Beloved Disciple and Theologian declares that He said “It is finished!” immediately before dying on the cross. His atoning sacrifice, his victorious crucifixion, His glorious passion, was complete. He was buried, he rested on the seventh day having remade mankind in His own image, and on the first day, anticipating what in my church we call the mystical eighth day of creation, that is, life everlasting, He rose from the grave, before the myrrh-bearing women arrived, which in my church we commemorated yesterday, on the second Sunday after Pascha, which this year corresponded with Pentecost on the Gregorian calendar.

Perhaps this is why historically SDA churches usually lacked prominent crosses in their architecture or in the apse or altar/pulpit area of their sanctuary.

Click to expand...

I am not a Calvinist.,

Jipsah said:

QFT

More reasons to love you, bruv! I wish I was half as knowldgeable as you are. Thank you!

Click to expand...

And I wish I was half as funny and as pious and as intelligent as you are!

Please pray for my health, as I have been very sick lately. I don’t know what’s wrong, but I have no energy.

Der Alte said:

I am not a Calvinist.,

Click to expand...

Oh forgive me, I wasn’t sure if you were a Calvinist Baptist or not, do forgive me. I always appreciate your scriptural commentary which is excellent and reflects your knowledge of Biblical Greek and Hebrew. I do wish you would join us in Traditional Theology.

Did you know I am descended from one of the original Baptist settlers in the US, who was of Dutch-Irish descent?

The Liturgist said:

Hedrick, my old friend, it is good to see you! How are you feeling? I have been extremely ill and in going to church and briefly attending the Scandinavian Festival at California Lutheran University afterwards, I massively over-exerted myself; I thought I was doing better, but just doing that, which would have been no problem a year ago or two years ago was brutally exhausting and made me realize how sick I am. So please pray for me.

Regarding your post, I found it very interesting and I found myself agreeing with the trajectory and orientation of your post.

Would you agree with the emphasis Metropolitan Kallistos Ware and other Orthodox theologians put on the notion that we are saved together, in communion with Christ as members grafted onto the Church, the Body of Christ, through Baptism and Holy Communion, and thus since the Church is the Ship of Salvation, her passengers are saved collectively?

Click to expand...

I don't want to have to judge what you mean by "collective salvation!" Certainly people are saved, in the spiritual sense, on an individual basis. But is "salvation" something biblically that applied to the collective?

I would have to say yes. God wanted to save not just the individual but also the society, because that's where we, as individuals, have to live. If God is concerned with social conditions, and angry at social injustice, and I know He is, then He is as interested in the collective as He is in the individual.

So I would agree with you that the Bible seems to focus on the collective more than with the individual. But I don't think this is out of disregard for the importance of the individual. Rather, individual relationship with God has been a given from the beginning, and it is everywhere implicit in every individual mentioned in the Bible.

But the collective, the nation, or nations--plural, need to be addressed because that is where human relations and social evils become a problem on earth that God wants to remedy. He wants us restored in a relationship to Himself, but some of this is so that we can relate properly to our neighbor, to one another.

So God set up and institutionalized a legal form of worship in the OT era such that an entire nation can practice the same religion and all collectively relate to God and to one another in a peaceful, spiritual way. But it is always understood that not all individuals will cooperate. And even those who observe the common religious rituals could do so deceptively, hiding their corrupt ways beneath a religious veneer.

Hopefully, I got your point?

The Liturgist said:

Also, many Orthodox theologians such as Archpriest Andrew S. Damick have criticized the trend, popularized by Evengelicalism in North America, of focusing on “having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ”, which is something that the early Church Fathers never talked about. Indeed one Orthodox priest recalled an incident where at the end of a lecture on the Apostles, the Apostolic Fathers and the Council of Nicaea that an evangelical in the audience replied “I don’t see what any of this has to do with building a personal reionatlship with Jesus Christ.”

Click to expand...

Would anybody think that the 12 Disciples of Jesus were unconcerned that they had an individual, personal relationship with Jesus during their collective ministry? But I don't think it was just a pragmatic relationship. Jesus left the Holy Spirit behind when he went to heaven so that all could, as promised to the Woman at the Well, worship God anywhere, individually and collectively.

Some think that having a "relationship with God" is extraordinary, "mystical," and controversial. But those who think this way are either skeptical that God can be touched at all, or they are believers who limit their experience of God to Sunday rituals.

At any rate, prayer to God should extend far beyond the church walls, and express concern not just for our fellow congregationalist, but also for everybody in the world. And we should embrace any particular set of spiritual gifts God wants us to have. If we've made Him Lord, then we should accept His gifts and be responsible with them. And we shouldn't be afraid of criticism from others who have no such experiences.

If our "gifts" are thought to be purely secular gifts, then where is the evangelical value in anything we do? Where is our testimony to others if we don't have light to reveal our works as being from God?