Skip to main content
added 1 character in body
Source Link
brasshat
  • 5.6k
  • 1
  • 12
  • 31

To me, the first consideration in answering your question is to identify exactly what the phrase means. It is easy enough to imagine that the phrase is used to mean that God wants us all to have "Hallmark" (R) moments--"When you care enough to send the very best". When you go to the butcher, God wants you to buy Prime grade instead of choice grade beef, Grade A eggs and dairy, and at the fish market, Grade A jumbo shrimp. Drive an Olds Delta 88 instead of a Plymouth FuryChevy Chevette. In other words, God wants us to have the best things. But there is another way to read the sentence. That is, rather than God wanting us to have something which is best on some arbitrary scale, that God wants us to have what is "best for us". Grade A eggs are not best for someone allergic to eggs; Grade A milk is not best for someone who is lactose intolerant; and Grade A shrimp is not best for someone who has a shellfish allergy. And the notion of some kind of objective best is contrary to any number of Jesus' teachings: the lesson from the Sermon on the mount about not being concerned with what to eat, or what to wear (Matthew 7:25-33); the parable of the man who anticipated a large harvest, so he pulled down all his warehouses and built bigger ones (Luke 12:13-21); and the widow who put in a small offering which Jesus held in higher regard than the large offerings of wealthy people (Mark 12:41-44). These passages, and many others like them in Scripture, seem to support the idea that phrase is meant to teach that God wants us to have what is "best for us", not some "best" based on an arbitrary measure.

What, then, is the origin of the phrase? It is not, as far as I can tell, a direct quotation from any the translations of the Scripture with which I am familiar, though I do not claim by any means to be familiar with all of the tens of English translations that have been made. I suspect that this is an example of the somewhat common phenomenon of attempting to quote the Bible without verifying that the passage says exactly what they remember it says. In other words, this is another example like that when people assert that the Bible teaches "Money is the root of all evil". However, the closest the Bible comes to this is 1 Timothy 6:10, where Paul writes "The love of money is the root of all evil." The two sentences are similar, but not identical, and the meaning is significantly different. I take the statement "God wants the best for us" as another example of the same phenomenon, where the phrase is a well-meaning mis-quotation of Romans 8:28a: "We know that in everything God works for good"..., perhaps colored by other teachings of Jesus, e.g. Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?"

I would distinguish, too, between things that are meant for our benefit, and things that are meant for the edification of God. So I would set having a really good sound system in the Church so that the Word of God is heard better, or God is worshipped better is a different matter from having the very best sound system at home, so as to better hear a sporting event, or listen to one's own music. The former is an offering to God, and is consistent with the commands to make the items associated with worship of God, that is the vestments described for the High Priest of Israel, and the fixtures for Solomon's temple. The latter, to me, is more like the fellow described in Luke 12 cited above.

To me, the first consideration in answering your question is to identify exactly what the phrase means. It is easy enough to imagine that the phrase is used to mean that God wants us all to have "Hallmark" (R) moments--"When you care enough to send the very best". When you go to the butcher, God wants you to buy Prime grade instead of choice grade beef, Grade A eggs and dairy, and at the fish market, Grade A jumbo shrimp. Drive an Olds Delta 88 instead of a Plymouth Fury. In other words, God wants us to have the best things. But there is another way to read the sentence. That is, rather than God wanting us to have something which is best on some arbitrary scale, that God wants us to have what is "best for us". Grade A eggs are not best for someone allergic to eggs; Grade A milk is not best for someone who is lactose intolerant; and Grade A shrimp is not best for someone who has a shellfish allergy. And the notion of some kind of objective best is contrary to any number of Jesus' teachings: the lesson from the Sermon on the mount about not being concerned with what to eat, or what to wear (Matthew 7:25-33); the parable of the man who anticipated a large harvest, so he pulled down all his warehouses and built bigger ones (Luke 12:13-21); and the widow who put in a small offering which Jesus held in higher regard than the large offerings of wealthy people (Mark 12:41-44). These passages, and many others like them in Scripture, seem to support the idea that phrase is meant to teach that God wants us to have what is "best for us", not some "best" based on an arbitrary measure.

What, then, is the origin of the phrase? It is not, as far as I can tell, a direct quotation from any the translations of the Scripture with which I am familiar, though I do not claim by any means to be familiar with all of the tens of English translations that have been made. I suspect that this is an example of the somewhat common phenomenon of attempting to quote the Bible without verifying that the passage says exactly what they remember it says. In other words, this is another example like that when people assert that the Bible teaches "Money is the root of all evil". However, the closest the Bible comes to this is 1 Timothy 6:10, where Paul writes "The love of money is the root of all evil." The two sentences are similar, but not identical, and the meaning is significantly different. I take the statement "God wants the best for us" as another example of the same phenomenon, where the phrase is a well-meaning mis-quotation of Romans 8:28a: "We know that in everything God works for good"..., perhaps colored by other teachings of Jesus, e.g. Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?"

I would distinguish, too, between things that are meant for our benefit, and things that are meant for the edification of God. So I would set having a really good sound system in the Church so that the Word of God is heard better, or God is worshipped better is a different matter from having the very best sound system at home, so as to better hear a sporting event, or listen to one's own music. The former is an offering to God, and is consistent with the commands to make the items associated with worship of God, that is the vestments described for the High Priest of Israel, and the fixtures for Solomon's temple. The latter, to me, is more like the fellow described in Luke 12 cited above.

To me, the first consideration in answering your question is to identify exactly what the phrase means. It is easy enough to imagine that the phrase is used to mean that God wants us all to have "Hallmark" (R) moments--"When you care enough to send the very best". When you go to the butcher, God wants you to buy Prime grade instead of choice grade beef, Grade A eggs and dairy, and at the fish market, Grade A jumbo shrimp. Drive an Olds Delta 88 instead of a Chevy Chevette. In other words, God wants us to have the best things. But there is another way to read the sentence. That is, rather than God wanting us to have something which is best on some arbitrary scale, that God wants us to have what is "best for us". Grade A eggs are not best for someone allergic to eggs; Grade A milk is not best for someone who is lactose intolerant; and Grade A shrimp is not best for someone who has a shellfish allergy. And the notion of some kind of objective best is contrary to any number of Jesus' teachings: the lesson from the Sermon on the mount about not being concerned with what to eat, or what to wear (Matthew 7:25-33); the parable of the man who anticipated a large harvest, so he pulled down all his warehouses and built bigger ones (Luke 12:13-21); and the widow who put in a small offering which Jesus held in higher regard than the large offerings of wealthy people (Mark 12:41-44). These passages, and many others like them in Scripture, seem to support the idea that phrase is meant to teach that God wants us to have what is "best for us", not some "best" based on an arbitrary measure.

What, then, is the origin of the phrase? It is not, as far as I can tell, a direct quotation from any the translations of the Scripture with which I am familiar, though I do not claim by any means to be familiar with all of the tens of English translations that have been made. I suspect that this is an example of the somewhat common phenomenon of attempting to quote the Bible without verifying that the passage says exactly what they remember it says. In other words, this is another example like that when people assert that the Bible teaches "Money is the root of all evil". However, the closest the Bible comes to this is 1 Timothy 6:10, where Paul writes "The love of money is the root of all evil." The two sentences are similar, but not identical, and the meaning is significantly different. I take the statement "God wants the best for us" as another example of the same phenomenon, where the phrase is a well-meaning mis-quotation of Romans 8:28a: "We know that in everything God works for good"..., perhaps colored by other teachings of Jesus, e.g. Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?"

I would distinguish, too, between things that are meant for our benefit, and things that are meant for the edification of God. So I would set having a really good sound system in the Church so that the Word of God is heard better, or God is worshipped better is a different matter from having the very best sound system at home, so as to better hear a sporting event, or listen to one's own music. The former is an offering to God, and is consistent with the commands to make the items associated with worship of God, that is the vestments described for the High Priest of Israel, and the fixtures for Solomon's temple. The latter, to me, is more like the fellow described in Luke 12 cited above.

added 2192 characters in body
Source Link
brasshat
  • 5.6k
  • 1
  • 12
  • 31

ITo me, the first consideration in answering your question is to identify exactly what the phrase means. It is easy enough to imagine that the phrase is used to mean that God wants us all to have observed"Hallmark" (R) moments--"When you care enough to send the very best". When you go to the butcher, God wants you to buy Prime grade instead of choice grade beef, Grade A eggs and dairy, and at the fish market, Grade A jumbo shrimp. Drive an Olds Delta 88 instead of a Plymouth Fury. In other words, God wants us to have the best things. But there is another way to read the sentence. That is, rather than God wanting us to have something which is best on some arbitrary scale, that itGod wants us to have what is somewhat common"best for peopleus". Grade A eggs are not best for someone allergic to quoteeggs; Grade A milk is not best for someone who is lactose intolerant; and Grade A shrimp is not best for someone who has a shellfish allergy. And the Bible without consultingnotion of some kind of objective best is contrary to any number of Jesus' teachings: the passage they intendlesson from the Sermon on the mount about not being concerned with what to quoteeat, or what to verifywear (Matthew 7:25-33); the exact wordingparable of the passage they intend to quote before doingman who anticipated a large harvest, so he pulled down all his warehouses and built bigger ones (Luke 12:13-21); and the widow who put in a small offering which Jesus held in higher regard than the large offerings of wealthy people (Mark 12:41-44). A consequenceThese passages, and many others like them in Scripture, seem to support the idea that phrase is meant to teach that God wants us to have what is "best for us", not some "best" based on an arbitrary measure.

What, then, is the origin of thisthe phrase? It is not, as far as I can tell, a direct quotation from any the numbertranslations of times the quote doesn't get it quite right. For exampleScripture with which I am familiar, though I do not claim by any means to be familiar with all of the tens of English translations that have heard people attemptbeen made. I suspect that this is an example of the somewhat common phenomenon of attempting to quote 1 Timothy 6:10 by sayingthe Bible without verifying that the passage says exactly what they remember it says. In other words, this is another example like that when people assert that the Bible teaches "Money is the root of all evil". However, while if they had first consulted the text, they would have found thatclosest the actual quoteBible comes to this is 1 Timothy 6:10, where Paul writes "The love of money is the root of all evil." In like mannerThe two sentences are similar, but not identical, and the meaning is significantly different. I take the phrase you're asking about,statement "God wants what isthe best for us" as another example of the same phenomenon, where the phrase is a well-meaning mis-quotation of Romans 8:28a: "We know that in everything God works for good"..., perhaps colored by other teachings from the sermon on the mountof Jesus, e.g. Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?"

As far as changing the quotation as you propose, I don't see any basic conflictwould distinguish, too, between the phrase "God wants the bestthings that are meant for us", on the one handour benefit, and "Whatthings that are meant for the edification of God gives us. So I would beset having a really good enough.", onsound system in the otherChurch so that the Word of God is heard better, sinceor God is worshipped better is a different matter from having the very best sound system at home, so as to better hear a sporting event, or listen to one's own music. The former is a statement ofan offering to God, and is consistent with the belief of some about what they believe--or perceive--to becommands to make the attitudesitems associated with worship of God, that is the vestments described for the High Priest of Israel, and the fixtures for Solomon's temple. The latter is an admonition, to us about what our attitudes should beme, is more like the fellow described in Luke 12 cited above.

I have observed that it is somewhat common for people to quote the Bible without consulting the passage they intend to quote to verify the exact wording of the passage they intend to quote before doing so. A consequence of this is the number of times the quote doesn't get it quite right. For example, I have heard people attempt to quote 1 Timothy 6:10 by saying "Money is the root of all evil", while if they had first consulted the text, they would have found that the actual quote is "The love of money is the root of all evil." In like manner, I take the phrase you're asking about, "God wants what is best for us" as a mis-quotation of Romans 8:28a: "We know that in everything God works for good"..., perhaps colored by teachings from the sermon on the mount, e.g. Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?"

As far as changing the quotation as you propose, I don't see any basic conflict between the phrase "God wants the best for us", on the one hand, and "What God gives us would be good enough.", on the other, since the former is a statement of the belief of some about what they believe--or perceive--to be the attitudes of God, and the latter is an admonition to us about what our attitudes should be.

To me, the first consideration in answering your question is to identify exactly what the phrase means. It is easy enough to imagine that the phrase is used to mean that God wants us all to have "Hallmark" (R) moments--"When you care enough to send the very best". When you go to the butcher, God wants you to buy Prime grade instead of choice grade beef, Grade A eggs and dairy, and at the fish market, Grade A jumbo shrimp. Drive an Olds Delta 88 instead of a Plymouth Fury. In other words, God wants us to have the best things. But there is another way to read the sentence. That is, rather than God wanting us to have something which is best on some arbitrary scale, that God wants us to have what is "best for us". Grade A eggs are not best for someone allergic to eggs; Grade A milk is not best for someone who is lactose intolerant; and Grade A shrimp is not best for someone who has a shellfish allergy. And the notion of some kind of objective best is contrary to any number of Jesus' teachings: the lesson from the Sermon on the mount about not being concerned with what to eat, or what to wear (Matthew 7:25-33); the parable of the man who anticipated a large harvest, so he pulled down all his warehouses and built bigger ones (Luke 12:13-21); and the widow who put in a small offering which Jesus held in higher regard than the large offerings of wealthy people (Mark 12:41-44). These passages, and many others like them in Scripture, seem to support the idea that phrase is meant to teach that God wants us to have what is "best for us", not some "best" based on an arbitrary measure.

What, then, is the origin of the phrase? It is not, as far as I can tell, a direct quotation from any the translations of the Scripture with which I am familiar, though I do not claim by any means to be familiar with all of the tens of English translations that have been made. I suspect that this is an example of the somewhat common phenomenon of attempting to quote the Bible without verifying that the passage says exactly what they remember it says. In other words, this is another example like that when people assert that the Bible teaches "Money is the root of all evil". However, the closest the Bible comes to this is 1 Timothy 6:10, where Paul writes "The love of money is the root of all evil." The two sentences are similar, but not identical, and the meaning is significantly different. I take the statement "God wants the best for us" as another example of the same phenomenon, where the phrase is a well-meaning mis-quotation of Romans 8:28a: "We know that in everything God works for good"..., perhaps colored by other teachings of Jesus, e.g. Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?"

I would distinguish, too, between things that are meant for our benefit, and things that are meant for the edification of God. So I would set having a really good sound system in the Church so that the Word of God is heard better, or God is worshipped better is a different matter from having the very best sound system at home, so as to better hear a sporting event, or listen to one's own music. The former is an offering to God, and is consistent with the commands to make the items associated with worship of God, that is the vestments described for the High Priest of Israel, and the fixtures for Solomon's temple. The latter, to me, is more like the fellow described in Luke 12 cited above.

Improved answer.
Source Link
brasshat
  • 5.6k
  • 1
  • 12
  • 31

I have observed that it is somewhat common for people to quote the Bible without consulting the passage they intend to quote to verify the exact wording of the passage they intend to quote before doing so. A consequence of this is the number of times the quote doesn't get it quite right. For example, I have heard people attempt to quote 1 Timothy 6:10 by saying "Money is the root of all evil", while if they had first consulted the text, they would have found that the actual quote is "The love of money is the root of all evil." In like manner, I take the phrase you're asking about, "God wants what is best for us" as a mis-quotation of Romans 8:28a: "We know that in everything God works for good"..., perhaps colored by teachings from the sermon on the mount, e.g. Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?"

As far as changing the quotation as you propose, I don't see any basic conflict between the phrase "God wants the best for us", on the one hand, and "What God gives us would be good enough.", on the other, since the former is a statement of the belief of some about what they believe--or perceive--to be the attitudes of God, and the latter is an admonition to us about what our attitudes should be.

I have observed that it is somewhat common for people to quote the Bible without consulting the passage they intend to quote to verify the exact wording of the passage they intend to quote before doing so. A consequence of this is the number of times the quote doesn't get it quite right. For example, I have heard people attempt to quote 1 Timothy 6:10 by saying "Money is the root of all evil", while if they had first consulted the text, they would have found that the actual quote is "The love of money is the root of all evil." In like manner, I take the phrase you're asking about, "God wants what is best for us" as a mis-quotation of Romans 8:28a: "We know that in everything God works for good"..., perhaps colored by teachings from the sermon on the mount, e.g. Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?"

As far as changing the quotation as you propose, I don't see any basic conflict between the phrase "God wants the best for us", on the one hand, and "What God gives us would be good enough.", on the other, since the former is a belief about the attitudes of God, and the latter is an admonition to us.

I have observed that it is somewhat common for people to quote the Bible without consulting the passage they intend to quote to verify the exact wording of the passage they intend to quote before doing so. A consequence of this is the number of times the quote doesn't get it quite right. For example, I have heard people attempt to quote 1 Timothy 6:10 by saying "Money is the root of all evil", while if they had first consulted the text, they would have found that the actual quote is "The love of money is the root of all evil." In like manner, I take the phrase you're asking about, "God wants what is best for us" as a mis-quotation of Romans 8:28a: "We know that in everything God works for good"..., perhaps colored by teachings from the sermon on the mount, e.g. Matthew 7:11, "If you, then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him?"

As far as changing the quotation as you propose, I don't see any basic conflict between the phrase "God wants the best for us", on the one hand, and "What God gives us would be good enough.", on the other, since the former is a statement of the belief of some about what they believe--or perceive--to be the attitudes of God, and the latter is an admonition to us about what our attitudes should be.

Source Link
brasshat
  • 5.6k
  • 1
  • 12
  • 31
Loading