P
This is a puzzling aspect of Christianity. I ask if there may also be aspects of the following which were part of the "Reformation'?
If anyone is interested in this thread, you should read Gill's comments posted here first. Scroll down.
What more than Gill's comments can be said about this verse? I was reading wiki about Manicheans, and they likely continued with Zoroastrian doctrine and then in 18th century London at St. Mary Le Bow church there were sermons to counter Manichean influence.
The pamphlet published with the sermons referenced the same verse from Isaiah.
Is there likely, still Manichean influence in the Christian churches today? Charles Spurgeon may have been referring to Manichean doctrine in a sermon where he was talking about 'counterfeit' Christian doctrine. Unfortunately, I don't recall which sermon it was. It does seem to be a subtle variation of doctrine that is not readily discerned. Apparently, it deals with the way good and evil are understood. Very puzzling?
Very interesting in wiki article on Manicheans is the implication that Manicheanism was the likely religion which the Roman empire was initially persecuting starting in the 3rd century. Was the similarity of Manichean and Christian religions difficult to distinguish by Romans? Could this have been intentional on the part of the 'Persians'? Not certain as to the relationship of Eastern Roman Empire and 'Persia' at that time.
Isaiah 45:7 Gill's comments in part.
I make peace, and create evil; peace between God and men is made by Christ, who is God over all; spiritual peace of conscience comes from God, through Christ, by the Spirit; eternal glory and happiness is of God, which saints enter into at death; peace among the saints themselves here, and with the men of the world; peace in churches, and in the world, God is the author of, even of all prosperity of every kind, which this word includes: "evil" is also from him; not the evil of sin; this is not to be found among the creatures God made; this is of men, though suffered by the Lord, and overruled by him for good: but the evil of punishment for sin, God's sore judgments, famine, pestilence, evil beasts, and the sword, or war, which latter may more especially be intended, as it is opposed to peace; this usually is the effect of sin; may be sometimes lawfully engaged in; whether on a good or bad foundation is permitted by God; moreover, all afflictions, adversities, and calamities, come under this name, and are of God; see Job 2:10,
I the Lord do all these things; and therefore must be the true God, and the one and only one. Kimchi, from Saadiah Gaon, observes, that this is said against those that assert two gods, the one good, and the other evil; whereas the Lord is the Maker of good and evil, and therefore must be above all; and it is worthy of observation, that the Persian Magi, before Zoroastres (m), held two first causes, the one light, or the good god, the author of all good; and the other darkness, or the evil god, the author of all evil; the one they called Oromazes, the other Arimanius; and, as Dr. Prideaux
observes,
"these words are directed to Cyrus king of Persia, and must be understood as spoken in reference to the Persian sect of the Magians; who then held light and darkness, or good and evil, to be the supreme Beings, without acknowledging the great God as superior to both;''
and which these words show; for Zoroastres, who reformed them in this first principle of their religion, was after Isaiah's time.
If anyone is interested in this thread, you should read Gill's comments posted here first. Scroll down.
What more than Gill's comments can be said about this verse? I was reading wiki about Manicheans, and they likely continued with Zoroastrian doctrine and then in 18th century London at St. Mary Le Bow church there were sermons to counter Manichean influence.
The pamphlet published with the sermons referenced the same verse from Isaiah.
Is there likely, still Manichean influence in the Christian churches today? Charles Spurgeon may have been referring to Manichean doctrine in a sermon where he was talking about 'counterfeit' Christian doctrine. Unfortunately, I don't recall which sermon it was. It does seem to be a subtle variation of doctrine that is not readily discerned. Apparently, it deals with the way good and evil are understood. Very puzzling?
Very interesting in wiki article on Manicheans is the implication that Manicheanism was the likely religion which the Roman empire was initially persecuting starting in the 3rd century. Was the similarity of Manichean and Christian religions difficult to distinguish by Romans? Could this have been intentional on the part of the 'Persians'? Not certain as to the relationship of Eastern Roman Empire and 'Persia' at that time.
Isaiah 45:7 Gill's comments in part.
I make peace, and create evil; peace between God and men is made by Christ, who is God over all; spiritual peace of conscience comes from God, through Christ, by the Spirit; eternal glory and happiness is of God, which saints enter into at death; peace among the saints themselves here, and with the men of the world; peace in churches, and in the world, God is the author of, even of all prosperity of every kind, which this word includes: "evil" is also from him; not the evil of sin; this is not to be found among the creatures God made; this is of men, though suffered by the Lord, and overruled by him for good: but the evil of punishment for sin, God's sore judgments, famine, pestilence, evil beasts, and the sword, or war, which latter may more especially be intended, as it is opposed to peace; this usually is the effect of sin; may be sometimes lawfully engaged in; whether on a good or bad foundation is permitted by God; moreover, all afflictions, adversities, and calamities, come under this name, and are of God; see Job 2:10,
I the Lord do all these things; and therefore must be the true God, and the one and only one. Kimchi, from Saadiah Gaon, observes, that this is said against those that assert two gods, the one good, and the other evil; whereas the Lord is the Maker of good and evil, and therefore must be above all; and it is worthy of observation, that the Persian Magi, before Zoroastres (m), held two first causes, the one light, or the good god, the author of all good; and the other darkness, or the evil god, the author of all evil; the one they called Oromazes, the other Arimanius; and, as Dr. Prideaux
observes,"these words are directed to Cyrus king of Persia, and must be understood as spoken in reference to the Persian sect of the Magians; who then held light and darkness, or good and evil, to be the supreme Beings, without acknowledging the great God as superior to both;''
and which these words show; for Zoroastres, who reformed them in this first principle of their religion, was after Isaiah's time.
