When a child who is not doing what the parent wants him or her to do, and asks: "Why?" - the response of the parent can be as simple, non-complicated, concise, direct, and plainly obligatory as:
"Because I SAID so!" And THAT is IT.
The "why" to the parent just might be irrelevant for the kid to then know, especially if the explanation is complex and/or there clearly is not enough time to give a prolonged dissertation or essay in response to that "why" query.
If there is time, the parent has the option of replying to the child: "If you do not do what I tell you this very minute, I will DISCIPLINE you." [usually with the effect of immediate compliance by the kid, if in fact whatever one or two times of whatever first kind of discipline is promptly applied, but if that first kind of discipline is not heeded or is disregarded by the child, a more severe type of discipline is then administered...and can go all the way up to the following:]
Deuteronomy 21:18 If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son [or daughter], who will not obey the voice of [his] father or the voice of [his] mother, and, though they chastise [him], will not properly respond to them,
19 then [his] father and [his] mother shall take hold of [him] and bring [him] out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where [he] lives,
20 and they shall say to the elders of his city: "This our [son] is stubborn and rebellious, [he] will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard."
21 Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones; so you shall purge the evil from your midst; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. [minus one trouble-causing son in the neighborhood, and good riddance!]
22 And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree,
23 his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man [as Jesus was on that Roman cross] is accursed by God [as was the penitent thief on his cross who entered into Paradise with Jesus the very day he also was crucified]; you shall not defile your land which the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance.
The child knows that there is immutable and non-conquerable authority and power behind that "Because I SAID so" parental statement:
Leviticus 26:18 And if in spite of this you will not positively respond to me, then I will chastise you again sevenfold for your sins...
Deuteronomy 4:36 Out of heaven He let you hear His voice, that He might discipline you; and on Earth He let you see His great fire, and you heard His words out of the midst of the fire.
Deuteronomy 11:2 And consider this day (being that I am not speaking to your children who have not known or seen it), consider the discipline of the LORD your God, His greatness, His mighty hand and His outstretched arm...
Proverbs 3:11 My son, do not despise the LORD's discipline or be weary of His reproof,
Proverbs 3:12 because the LORD reproves him whom He loves, as a father the son in whom he delights.
Proverbs 6:23 The commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life...
Proverbs 12:1 Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.
Proverbs 13:24 He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him.
Proverbs 15:10 There is severe discipline for him who rejects the way; he who hates reproof will die.
Proverbs 19:18 Discipline your son while there is hope; do not set your heart on his destruction [either by giving up on him as hopeless trash or garbage, or by abusively over-disciplining him].
Proverbs 22:15 Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him/her.
Proverbs 23:13 Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you beat him/her with a rod [or willow switch, or ruler, in the right spot(s) - without causing unnatural bruises or bleeding], he/she will not die.
Proverbs 29:15 The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left to himself brings shame to [his] mother.
Proverbs 29:17 Discipline your son/daughter, and he/she will give you rest; he [or she] will give delight to your heart.
Isaiah 3:12 My people: children [like those who chalk up and obstruct sidewalk or driveway entrances] are their oppressors, and [scared-to-spank-kids] women rule over them. Oh my people, your leaders mislead you, and confuse the course of your paths.
Hosea 7:12 As they go, I will spread over them my net; I will bring them down like birds of the air; I will chastise them for their wicked works.
Hosea 10:10 I will come against the wayward people to chastise them; and nations shall be gathered against them when they are chastised for their double iniquity.
Ephesians 6:4 Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger [by harassive teasing or injust abuse], but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.
Hebrews 12:5 And have you forgotten the exhortation which addresses you as sons? "My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, nor lose courage when you are punished by Him,
12:6 because the Lord disciplines him whom He loves, and chastises every son whom He receives."
12:7 It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline?
12:8 If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons.
12:9 Besides this, we have had earthly fathers to discipline us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live?
12:10 being that they disciplined us for a short time at their pleasure, but He disciplines us for our good, that we may share His holiness.
12:11 For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.
Such discipline makes it easier for everyone, including cops with guns who are quite ready to actually and lethally use them on anyone who unduly disturbs or tries to harm others, so it is best to courageously and consistently "nip rebellion in the bud" before it gets out of hand.
There are some apostate heretics comprising the leadership of certain so-called "evangelical" and "liturgical" churches.
They essentially espouse somewhat re-worded variations of the following premise:
"The Mosaic Law now is, and for a long time has been, non-applicable to us in this present Dispensation of The Church Age in which we are saved by Grace not by works of the Law which we cannot or should not arrogantly boast about.
Christ fulfilled the Law perfectly, because we cannot and could never do it ourselves in our own strength, even though it needed to be done for all who believe.
In our inmost self, we delight in the Gospel (not the Law) of God.
Being born again, it really does not matter if we now occasionally and reluctantly sin under non-solicited temptational duress, because all our past and present and future sins have been washed away in the blood of the Lamb.
We have already asked forgiveness for all our past, present, and future sins when we were born again, and thus obviously do not have to repent again in bitter and nearly-suicidal remorse, because if we did, it would bring into question whether or not we really were born again at all and actually did accept Christ as our Savior. The joy of the Lord is our strength, not wallowing in rehashed recollections of former things we need not bring up again to make us feel ashamed and alienated from the fellowship of believers.
Any commandments in the New Testament referenced by Jesus in the Gospels and in the Epistles of the Apostles emanate from those persons alone through the Spirit in The New Covenant and nevermore related to anything in the Mosaic Law, even though the Law and Prophets testify to it.
We regard the Law as antiquated legalistic rules and ceremonial regulations which were formerly considered mandatory commands and orders, but now are merely advice, recommendations, or suggestions we now regard as our grateful response to God and our relationship with Him in Christ, not bound by nor falling back to works righteousness instead of the righteousness of Christ who fulfilled all the moral and ceremonial Law for us.
The important thing now is to love God with our whole being and love our neighbors as ourselves not because we have to but because of our appreciation for what God has done which we could not do, without us being judgmentally intolerant and unforgiving, harming the self-esteem of weak brothers and sisters in Christ, and trying to save ourselves by self-righteous failures of futile-to-perfectly-obey faithless carnality.
Besides, if we preached the Mosaic Law to people, they would then invariably want to disobey it, simply because of typical and common human nature reaction and response to at least initially rebel before giving it much forethought. So it is preferable to simply talk about the cross of Christ without ever defining exactly what "sin" is according to the Mosaic Law.
All of us (me included) have given "reasons" or "causes" (or, concerning not regarding the negative) "excuses" of "why" we sometimes
do righteousness [i.e. what obviously is concordant with God's Biblical morality]...and sometimes do wickedness [i.e. what obviously is
not concordant but contrary against God's Biblical morality].
Take the subject of sexual aberrations, for example.
We guys see mopheaded girls and women, which gals....imposing loose long hair not tied into an up-do or into a single back-of-head ponytail....have their own excuses for so committing and not performing such non-solicited sensuously-enticing immodesty.
The consequence is as reliable as turning on a light switch powered by house current.
The sexual arousal is irreparably and irrevocably incited, and remains there....seemingly dormant perhaps for the time being and for a while, but silently and relentlessly demanding logical sexual response often times sooner than we are ready for it circumstantially. Inordinate "love" [actually: lust] does not go away. It honestly and realistically cannot be sublimated by any degree or type of self-control of any attempted erasure or means of eradication or futile intention of at-least-prolonged abstinence.
The inevitable action is either expedited going-all-the-way sex in marriage with the wife, or fervent and non-quenchable (although frequently covert and non-admitted) search and discovery of internet porn quickly culminating in virtual cyber-prostitution self-sodomizing [i.e. masturbational] erotic release of quasi-fulfillment....or worse, exploiting consensual real-live-person masseuses or escorts.
So the "why" of it is plain. Or IS it?
The excuse of "temptation" is, in one sense, a viable and valid one. We all encounter suggestiveness to sin which most persons welcome, but which a few persons despise and shun [being that many are on the broad and easy road to destruction; few are on the difficult and narrow road to life]. The latter type are those who, using the words of the Lord's Prayer, sincerely and earnestly declare: "Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." [that is, prevent temptations coming at us which we could not successfully resist, if we tried, not simply in our own strength but even in the strength of Christ - with a presumptive "tempting the Lord our God" and "putting God to the test" beyond our measure of faith to escape.
Lead us not into the often probable-cause realistically-likely accidental observation of morality-destructive indecently-hairstyled human females, but deliver us from accidentally viewing those fake-glamor, pseudo-innocent, mindless mopheaded morons - sadistically tantalizing random boys and men for no good cause or reason whatsoever (being that all male victims visually assaulted by such pictorial or live-person mopheaded indecency cannot have prompt and complete coital copulation with each and every frequently-anonymous and transitionally-on-the-move mophead who terroristically imposes her flowing locks into the defiled eyesight of every Tom, Dick, and Harry.
Why do some gals go so far as to submit themselves to couch-casting for "adult" pornography, and fornicate barefoot and completely naked on the spot with porn producers in the interview room? Greed for quick and easy substantial-amounts-promised money? Status? Craving erotic affection? Desire to reproduce?
How come most persons sin, and do NOT mind it? How come some persons sin, and DO mind it?
They ALL sin "because they can."
And why do they do what they "can?"
Because they WANT to do what they can.
"Why" cannot be answered, because there is no answer to "why?"
What is instead proper to state is simply THAT they do both what they can and want.
Consider Lucifer in Heaven before he rebelled against God.
What tempted him to rebel? Was there some tempter in some garden above who deceitfully spoke to him fraudulently misrepresenting God's commands and predictions?
Scripture does not say.
There was no "why" as to why he suddenly choose to rebel against God, but simply THAT he did so when and how he himself chose to.
What tempted Eve to sin in The Garden of Eden? The Tempting Serpent? Yes. But what caused her to, and why did she, decide to take the Devil up on his suggestion for her to disobey God's command?
Did the Tempter go to her in the Garden, instead of she going to him...and did he handcuff her and demand that she eat the Forbidden Fruit or else he would not take the handcuffs off her?
Did the Forbidden Tree walk over to Eve...or instead did Eve herself walk to the Forbidden Tree to do what it took to disobey the command of the Lord she previously was well aware of? Did the Tree handcuff her when she got there, and threaten to not remove the handcuffs unless she ate of its Forbidden Fruit?
Do bullets in guns demand that genocidal maniacs use them to mass-murder people? Does alcohol demand that people get drunk with it? Does rope demand that people hang themselves with it? Does water demand that people drown with it? Does electricity demand that people electrocute themselves with it? Do steep cliffs demand people to suicidally jump off them? Does fire demand that people burn themselves with it? Do poisonous creatures demand that people die because of contact with them?
So, why did Lucifer choose to sin in Heaven, thus become Satan and forever cursed for certain damnation? Why did Eve choose to sin in the Garden, thus consigning herself and her offspring to certainly begin to die on the spot and completely die soon thereafter?
"Why" is not important. It is irrelevant, because there is no "why" and "why" cannot be answered. It instead is simply THAT Lucifer himself deliberately chose disobedience, and Eve herself deliberately chose disobedience.
God foreknew that Lucifer was going to rebel in Heaven against Him and never humbly seek forgiveness and restitution concerning that, and God foreknew that Eve was going to rebel in the Garden against Him but thereafter humbly seek forgiveness and restitution concerning that.
Though He foreknew the actions and decisions both Lucifer and Eve would do, when they decided to do what they did, God did not interfere with their choices, nor did He force them to choose to either comply or not comply with Him and His authority.
He did predestine the paths for both Lucifer and Eve to do what they themselves were going to choose to do, but the LORD did not force either one to follow the predestined path of opportunity and resources He pre-planned for them. They themselves chose to follow pre-ordained Divine provisions for and allowances of using their own freewilled choice for both deliberate thought and follow-through action.
Why did God allow that to happen, knowing the disasterous consequences against both Lucifer and Eve?
Romans 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means!
15 He says to Moses: "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
16 So it depends not upon human will nor exertion, but upon God's mercy.
17 The Scripture says about Pharaoh: "I have raised you up for the very purpose of showing my power in you, so that my name may be proclaimed in all the Earth."
18 So then He has mercy upon whomever He will, and He hardens the heart of whomever He will. [though those who have hardened hearts have previously hardened such themselves, so they themselves are to blame for the hardening and further allowed hardening]
19 You will say to me then: "Why does He still find fault? Who can resist His will?"
20 But who are you, a human, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder: "Why have you made me thus?"
21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for ugliness?
22 What if God, desiring to show His wrath and to make known His power, has endured with much patience the vessels of wrath "made for" destruction,
23 to make known the riches of His glory for the vessels of mercy, which He has prepared beforehand for glory...
So "why" did God allow both Lucifer and Eve so lethally sin?
Because He COULD.
And WHY did He do what He could?
Because He simply WANTED to do what He could.
WHY did He want to do what He could?
There is no "why" because there is no answer to any "why." It instead is simply THAT God Himself chose to do what He did, and did it.
Why did God give Satan the capacity and opportunity for him to regret not obeying God, but followed by Satan's own deliberate ABSENCE OF desire for restitution by repentance?
Why did God give Eve the capacity and opportunity for her to regret not obeying God, and followed by Eve's own deliberate desire FOR restitution by repentance?
Oh oh. Detect the crucial difference of Satan compared to Eve?
It isn't that both Satan and Eve did not have the freewilled capacity and opportunity to regret disobeying God...but it is that Satan did NOT desire restitution by repentance - whereas Eve DID desire restitution by repentance.
Both Satan and Eve were destined for eternal damnation for rebelling against God's command and disobeying Him. But in Eve's case, she was [unfairly] tempted by a Tempter in the Garden, whereas Lucifer was tempted by no known nor recorded Tempter in Heaven.
Not only that, but in Satan's case, the Devil never did, never does, and (as prophesied in Scripture) never will desire restitution by repentance, so His inevitable destiny of damnation remains on and on forever.
Conversely, in Eve's case, she DID desire restitution by repentance, and God accommodated her by giving her the male forerunner of the Atoning Redeemer and Savior Jesus Christ who would more-than-adequately compensate for "unfairly" imposing the Tempter-and-Tree stumbling blocks in the otherwise-perfect Garden of Eden.
Why did God so accommodate Eve?
Because He COULD.
And WHY did He do what He could?
Because He WANTED to do what He could.
WHY did He want to do what He could?
There is no "why" about it. Asking "why" is both irrelevant and ridiculous. Suffice it to say THAT He did what He could do, wanted to do, and did.
The author, expert in linguistic semantics, was asked some political questions pertaining to the 2016 Election:
REPORTER: Who do you plan to vote for?
DR: I intend to NOT vote for the current euphemistic equivalent of the historically-inconsistent pompously-accusatory posterior orifice of a slanderously-dishonest lifeform of the type Balaam is said to have ridden upon. Such a depository of accusatory vulgarity has rudely interrupted GOP candidates during debates, been two-sided concerning shenanigans of the Gang of 8, maliciously and illegally slandered Ted Cruz for other-person gaffes and presumptive misrepresentations Cruz had no knowledge of and certainly did not verifiably instigate himself, has contributed substantial amounts of money to demoncrats Pelosi, Clinton, Reid, along with others of their ilk, plus to Planned Parenthood and thus, for years and by default supported choice not "rights" for abortion, bankrupted casinos built on acquisitions by eminent domain and laid off cheated immigrant workers thereof, claims to be "a strong Christian" and have support of naive and so-called "evangelicals" when he cannot even name New-Testament Bible books correctly, intends to make deals with anti-Zionist "palestinians" intent on annihilating Israel, lies about Mexico funding a proposed southern-border wall presumably being able to stop flow of narcotics over and under it, will probably endanger both Medicare and SS against deprived elderly to heartlessly and ruthlessly "save money and cut expenses" without providing COLA increases for them, says nothing about overturning the recent High Court majority decision to impose same-gender homosodomy-unions licensings nationwide, and has said nothing about investigation into the Kenyan not Hawaiian birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama available to view at http://layleftlayrite.tripod.com -- and much more.
REPORTER: How about Rubio?
DR: I consider him a sassy nervously-robotic similitude thereof.
REPORTER: And Kasich or Carson?
DR: It behooves me to not relegate my selection to pathetically-compromising homosexuals-tolerant obscurity.
Look at it this way:
IF superior-gender Bernie Sanders (as intriguing as he is - concordant with Ecclesiastes 7:26-28, Isaiah 3:12, Nahum 3:13, First Corinthians 11:1-16 & 14:33-38, First Timothy 2:11-15 and First Peter 3:7) becomes the Democrat nominee for President in 2016, WHICH of the progressive or conservative-establishment Republicans (even those who have already publicly endorsed Rubio, Kasich, or Trump) will NOT vote for Ted Cruz, if Cruz becomes the GOP Presidential nominee (IF Ted, in line with the above-mentioned Scripture references, selects a male and not female VP running mate)?