Second Resurrection = Second Death?

[Nicodema]

(Yes, here I go again.)

It is argued that God does not force His will upon any. This is the argument raised for the destruction of the wicked at the second resurrection, that it would be wrong for God to force His will so as to forcibly change them to serve Him. What I don't understand is how the obvious alternative is so lost on us. How is it any less wrong for Him to force His will so as to forcibly destroy them for all eternity?

The Bible clearly states that fire comes down from God out of Heaven and devours them. This is active agency on God's part, not passive. Yet even if someone wishes to argue it as passive, is it more just and loving to permit someone to be completely destroyed for all eternity than to "forcibly" re-create them as they were intended to be in sinless perfection? (Particularly when we pause to consider just before this, every knee has bowed and every tongue confessed not only that Jesus Christ is Lord, but that all God's ways are just and true, and their own sentence of death is just and deserved.) And if they are going to be destroyed in their present sinful form anyway, what exactly stops God from making the creatures He intended them to be originally before sin entered the world? How do we know He will not then choose to do so?

Please don't come along and accuse me of "charging God with sin." I charge God with nothing. What I am doing, is questioning and challenging theology and the typical teaching of this topic in the church. I am challenging its assumptions and implications. I do not "charge" God with anything here. Rather I question whether this theology is sound, and properly represents the Judge of all the earth, Whom shall do right.

One or two of you here, I have heard PLENTY from in regard to this question. Don't take this personally but if you know who you are, please understand I would like to hear from others this time, and give me room to do so here. Thanks for understanding and respecting my request.

[Robert]

Let me introduce you to some paradoxes (actually, the Bible is fully of them):

"The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved."

Okay...this passage definitely states that it is Satan who deceives by the use of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders! Then Paul tell why the unbeliever is deceived: "They do not love the truth"....BTW Jesus said, "I am the truth, the way and the life." So they are not refusing to obey the law (as some would have it read) - they are refusing to believe in Jesus Christ and accept His righteousness....

If it ended here there wouldn't be any problems, but it doesn't:

"For this reason [because the unbeliever wouldn't believe] God sends them strong delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth [Jesus] but have delighted in unrighteousness (which, BTW, Paul equates to unbelief)."

Okay, who done it - Satan or God????

This passage says that Satan did it....It also says that God did it!!! Are Satan and God on the same side - are they working together to destroy men's lives? NO WAY! Then how do you deal with this passage? It might answer you concerns.....

Rob

[Nicodema]

Satan has no authority to operate on his own. Everything he is able to do is because it is within the boundaries of the limits of what God permits. As mentioned in my first post, whether God's agency is passive or active is not the issue.

I would like to hear from someone who can really address what I'm saying here. No offense, Rob, but I don't think you get what I'm "on about." Agency isn't the issue; God is sovereign still.

[there buster]

Nico, it seems to me that you're overlooking human agency. God has given us what C.S. Lewis called "the dignity of causality." Our choices matter, and there are those for whom life in heaven would be torture.

Could God 'remake' their will? Well, sure, but why wait for the end? Why not remake Eve's choice to eat the apple? Or why not remake Lucifer?

But then, all sentient creatures would serve out of fear, rather than love. We would become a "Stepford Universe," where we all smiled vacantly and obeyed -- or else be remade into ones who would.

True love can only come out of true freedom. And freedom must include the ability to rebel. The last charge to take the New Jerusalem makes it clear that they would rather die than serve God. They get their wish.

As C.S. Lewis says, in the end there are only two classes of people: Those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whome God says, "Thy will be done."

Or, in more contemporary terms, "Be careful what you wish for."

[Nicodema]

Then one question, Ed (since you put it so well in your post) -- is it possible to end up there outside the NJ in the 2d R NOT by your own actual choice but by something DEEMED BY ANOTHER by proxy to be your choice based on your failure to make a series of smaller choices "correctly"? Because our theology teaches that is indeed the case, and further, our theology leaves the impression that those people will have no control but will be compelled to rush the city. I mean theoretically what if someone is stuck coming up in the 2d R who didn't want to be there and refuses to rush the city -- will they be struck down in eternal death or will they be spared?

Do you even see what I'm getting at??? We claim human agency yet we game the system to read that it's not the choice to be there or not be there, but it's whether you did anything wrong when you knew better or not, or whether you went out with some unconfessed sin or not, or whether you believed the right theology or not. Whatever. Point being, it's not your actual choice but something "deemed" to have been your choice by proxy. It's as if I were to say to you, "Would you like a cookie, Ed?" and then tell you if you don't stop being Ed, you are thereby proving to me your choice is to have no cookie, no matter how fiercely you protest that you want one. And once it's me judging what your decision is on the basis of what I choose to observe, it is no longer truly YOUR decision; i have removed it from your hands.

Do you even get what I'm saying?

[cardw]

Quote:

---

The Bible clearly states that fire comes down from God out of Heaven and devours them. This is active agency on God's part, not passive. Yet even if someone wishes to argue it as passive, is it more just and loving to permit someone to be completely destroyed for all eternity than to "forcibly" re-create them as they were intended to be in sinless perfection?

---

This is really where the free will arguement breaks down. If God were to offer infinite choices then I think the freewill idea might work. Its interesting that one of the grail myths is based on the idea that the grail was brought to earth by the neutral angels so man would have a third choice.

I happen to believe we do have infinite choice. I believe that we may live many lifetimes so that we can make true choices. True choice is based on having enough knowledge to actually be able to make a choice.

For example: Let's say I go to a 5 year old and ask them to make a choice between driving a car on the freeway (bad) and riding their tricycle (good). On what basis are they going to know which is the right choice? It certainly is not going to be on the basis of experience. Now say I have a 20 year old that has learned that driving on the freeway is bad and I ask them the same question. Now they are going to look pretty immature riding around on a tricycle. But they might decide to walk. Now walking is not part of God's plan and walking is part of a slippery slope that might eventually lead to driving on the freeway. Anyone who walks is now labelled as liberal.

In this scenerio everyone is missing the point. Its not how you get there (freeway, walking, or tricycle), its how one gets there safely based on your ability and knowledge.

If there are "evil" people, I believe its based on fear and ignorance. Jesus really emphasized love and trust. He also seemed to believe in the God of unlimited chances. Why should we care if someone gets another chance? I think Jesus has a number of parables that would address this concept.

We can barely negociate our way though this life, how could we ever possibly know what we would be getting with eternal life? How would we know that our will to live would last for eternity? How would we know that we could find meaning for eternity?

I would say that its important to learn how to live now, so that we might have some understanding of eternal life. And some understanding that no matter what life experience we may be in, there are still meaningful moments, things to be savored, and life lessons that bring us into whole new kingdoms.

This God that says my way or the fires of hell, no matter how nicely he says it, is really a tyrant, immature, and not taking responsiblity for His creation.

Anyway, that's my take on it.

Richard

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

This God that says my way or the fires of hell, no matter how nicely he says it, is really a tyrant, immature, and not taking responsiblity for His creation.

Anyway, that's my take on it.

Richard

---

Mine too, which is part of why I keep raising these questions and challenges to the conventional theology. I don't believe in the "god" you mention above. The God I believe in is "bigger" than that, too holy, pure and loving to be an immature tyrant, and I don't think we should be representing Him as anything less with our theology. I want to provoke people to think past the theology to the reality of Who He Is, but I also want to see the theology refined and reformed to better represent who He is, and the current accreted explanations to take the "sting" out of the temper-tantrumming tyrant picture just don't cut the mustard, in my humble opinion.

Thanks for your input, Richard!

Nico

[there buster]

Quote:

---

We claim human agency yet we game the system to read that it's not the choice to be there or not be there, but it's whether you did anything wrong when you knew better or not, or whether you went out with some unconfessed sin or not, or whether you believed the right theology or not.

---

There are those who claim that, but none of those things is the real issue. To paraphrase Lewis, we are not people with "mistaken theology, or mistaken behavior," we are rebels who must lay down our arms. That's what the scene outside the NJ is about--rebels who will never lay down their arms.

[Nicodema]

But that's not the issue I'm seeing, and I need some answers from the angle I'm looking. Something that will speak to me where I'm coming at this from, instead of asking me to first come at it differently. Something that will address MY concerns instead of telling me to have different ones. I can't have different ones. I can only have the ones I have.

[Nicodema]

The point is, agency doesn't matter here because God is sovereign. That is the angle from which I am viewing this. Whether another thinks that angle "right" or "wrong" is immaterial; I still need something that will speak to me here inside it.

Perhaps the fault is mine for not being clear enough about my question or concern, I'm willing to own that. But don't try to shame me out of my questions or concerns by labelling me negatively just because they are not yours or you don't get them. Your lack of having them does not make you any less a "rebel in danger of hellfire" than I am, and my having them does not make me any more that than you are. We are all of equal standing before God -- equally in danger by sin, equally in hope of salvation.

[there buster]

Quote:

---

But don't try to shame me out of my questions or concerns by labelling me negatively just because they are not yours or you don't get them.

---

Now you have me completely baffled. I certianly had no intention of shaming you, and am not certain what I wrote that made you think so.

Quote:

---

agency doesn't matter here because God is sovereign.

---

But what if it matters to God? What if He is so secure in His sovereignty that He can give it away, that he insists on giving it away so that His creatures can be free?

[there buster]

Quote:

---

Point being, it's not your actual choice but something "deemed" to have been your choice by proxy.

---

Let me try again. In the quote above, who is doing the "deeming?"

[DaveM1936]

Nico, I also am confused by your comments. I do not know what you are asking us to respond to. If the following comments answer your question, let me know. If not, then tell me what you still want to know. We are not trying to get you to change you mind. We only want to understand what you want.

What is Jesus looking for as He examines each record in heaven? Why are some names blotted out (erased)?

l. Can this person be trusted in heaven? Can he\she be trusted to roam free throughout the universe without misusing and mistreating other beings?

God has a large family. He desires peace, friendship, love between all His children.

2. This is not a legal proceeding. Our records are not being examined legally to see if every sin has been legally forgiven.

Rev 22:11-12 - He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. (KJV)

Rev 22:11-12 - Let him who does wrong continue to do wrong; let him who is vile continue to be vile; let him who does right continue to do right; and let him who is holy continue to be holy."

"Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. (NIV)

Jesus is not issuing His verdict on the basis of the records. Rather, He is stating the realilty of the condition of each person whose record He reads. He is not saying that this person will no longer be able to change because "I so decree it." Each person has reach the point that he will never change. The righteous have come to the point of never returning to sin. The sinner has reached the point that he will never want to be righteous. Each one has decided his own destiny.

3. Does this person know Me?

John 17:3 - 'And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. " (KJV)

John 14:6 - 'Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. " (KJV)

Christ affirmed that His word was in itself a key which would unlock the mystery to those who were prepared to receive it. It had a self-commending power, and this was the secret of the spread of His kingdom of truth. He desired Pilate to understand that only by receiving and appropriating truth could his ruined nature be reconstructed. {DA 727}

A. What does reconstructed mean?

- rebuild, make over, exact reproduction, recast. Like a die.

The character is Christ, as exhibited in the 4 gospels, is what is to be reproduced in us. This is as much an act of creation as was the creation of Adam. The character of God was originally built into Adam by God Himself. Just as, God Himself must rebuild, recreate, again in us this nature.

Judas now cast himself at the feet of Jesus, acknowledging Him to be the Son of God, and entreating Him to deliver Himself. The Saviour did not reproach His betrayer. He knew that Judas did not repent; his confession was forced from his guilty soul by an awful sense of condemnation and a looking for of judgment, but he felt no deep, heartbreaking grief that he had betrayed the spotless Son of God, and denied the Holy One of Israel. Yet Jesus spoke no word of condemnation. He looked pityingly upon Judas, and said, For this hour came I into the world. {DA 722}

A murmur of surprise ran through the assembly. With amazement they beheld the forbearance of Christ toward His betrayer. Again there swept over them the conviction that this Man was more than mortal. But if He was the Son of God, they questioned, why did He not free Himself from His bonds and triumph over His accusers? {DA 722}

Pilate looked at the men who had Jesus in charge, and then his gaze rested searchingly on Jesus. He had had to deal with all kinds of criminals; but never before had a man bearing marks of such goodness and nobility been brought before him. On His face he saw no sign of guilt, no expression of fear, no boldness or defiance. He saw a man of calm and dignified bearing, whose countenance bore not the marks of a criminal, but the signature of heaven. {DA 724.1}

When God is through with us, people will be able to see "the signature of heaven" in our face.

Rev 7:1-3 - And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea, Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. (KJV)

We do not become righteous permanently because of the seal, the signature of God. Rather, as a result of studying the records, Jesus presents to the Father a list of names who have, by experiencing Jesus as Saviour and Friend, have already been reconstructed. "Father, the reconstruction is complete in all these people," Jesus says.

"Then put my signature on each of them as a sign of my approval and acceptance as My children," the Father says.

Your friend,

Dave M

[Robert]

Let's back up....

God knew BEFORE He created Lucifer that Lucifer would invent the principle of self -- yet He created Him anyway!!! WHY?

Answer: LOVE!

What? Right, love....God does not force or coerce (that's one of those things I repeat obsessively!) God IN HIS SOVERIGNTY values our free wills (our decisions) so much that He went ahead and created Lucifer!

This "free-will" issue can be seen in my original quote....Let's review it:

"The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan [the father of lies/deceit] displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing."

Clearly it is Satan that deceives! Then why does God take the credit? I mean just read what the following states:

"For this reason [i.e., because they, through use of their right to choose, rejected truth] God sends them strong delusion so that they will believe the lie....

Why do we need a devil if on one point God allows free-will, but then turns around and FORCES delusion upon the unbeliever????? Why does He take the blame when clearly the blame is Satan's????

God sees and describes Himself doing evil because in His sovereignty He cannot force or coerce....He assumes the blame from all the fall-out of our free-will decisions.

Our omniscient God did more than just allow Lucifer to be created. Because of His love He could do no other....So "allow" isn't really apart of the equation.

Let's look at Saul: Saul rejected God (the Bible says it). What happens when someone persistently rejects God - does God force Himself on the one making that "free will" decision or does He simply retreat?

Answer: "Now the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul....

Okay, but keep reading:

"and [i.e., after God departed] an evil spirit from the Lord terrorized him!

Wait just a blooming minute - did God sent an evil spirit into Saul? No!!! However since God's sovereign love does not "force or coerce" (here I go again) then when He departed the evil spirit came in....If God wouldn't have departed the evil spirit would never have come in....God assumed the blame for Saul's BAD choice. Likewise when Saul killed himself during battle we see God once again stating that He killed Saul! (I challenge anyone to find those two statements)

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

Now you have me completely baffled. I certianly had no intention of shaming you, and am not certain what I wrote that made you think so.

---

I apologize. I sure sounded "on the defensive" when I wrote that. Sometimes my brain doesn't work too good. I have intermittent problems at times with paranoia and overpersonalization.

Quote:

---

But what if it matters to God? What if He is so secure in His sovereignty that He can give it away, that he insists on giving it away so that His creatures can be free?

---

This goes to the crux of the matter and the heart of my question, doesn't it? Is it really the greatest, highest, best Love and Good of all to allow sentient creatures born into spiritual blindness, darkness, ignorance and sin by their very natures -- this "rebel"-ness of which you spoke -- to destroy themselves for eternity just because they didn't "get" your divine riddle, couldn't solve it, believed in the wrong notion of God ... "BZZZT! wrong answer, thank you for playing!" -- and down the chute to eternal death? "You are the weakest link -- goodbye (to life forever)" --??

Is it even parsimonious or conservative (in the noble sense of the word) to do so? My contention being simply this: setting aside all question of the perfection of God's justice (which is beyond compare) and rightness in what He does with His sovereignty, would He be wasteful? What would it matter if, since they were going to be thrown away forever ANYWAY, the lost were simply replaced with their own sinless equivalents? More to the point, what if, in fact, that were what the all-consuming fire were really all about, and what Jesus has saved US from is having to pass through it to get to that state? After all, we look forward to being changed into sinless perfection with joy and longing, do we not? We don't consider that some form of "joining a Stepford universe". We want it to happen. I know I do. I want to be placed beyond the reach of sin and temptation; I want the virus OUT of me -- permanently!

So now hear me out -- TRUTH, if at the end there are those saying NO GOD, I don't WANT the virus taken out, I want to remain hating, hateful, lying, murderous, covetous, etc. then CERTAINLY they shall see their free will choice honored. But now, what of those who "bow down and confess the justice of their sentence" -- "God You are just and true in all Your ways. You did everything You could to save me; it is I who have rejected You. Do to me as I deserve." What is to stop the Judge of All the Earth, Who Must Do Right, from looking upon them EVEN AS HE LOOKED UPON THE THIEF ON THE CROSS WHO, AT THE HOUR OF HIS JUST DESSERTS OF A DEATH, HAD NO REPENTANCE OR RESTITUTION TO OFFER, BUT ONLY A CONFESSION OF THE RIGHTNESS OF GOD AND WRONGNESS OF SELF???

THAT is the crux of the matter and the heart of my question.

Is it any clearer now? **hopeful look**

[Nicodema]

FYI, I'm not ignoring the other comments here, it's just a lot to digest at once. I didn't want the others to feel ignored if I didn't respond right away.

[DaveM1936]

Quote:

---

This goes to the crux of the matter and the heart of my question, doesn't it? Is it really the greatest, highest, best Love and Good of all to allow sentient creatures born into spiritual blindness, darkness, ignorance and sin by their very natures -- this "rebel"-ness of which you spoke -- to destroy themselves for eternity just because they didn't "get" your divine riddle, couldn't solve it, believed in the wrong notion of God ... "BZZZT! wrong answer, thank you for playing!" -- and down the chute to eternal death? "You are the weakest link -- goodbye (to life forever)" --??

---

It seems to me that you are making several wrong assumptions.

1. That God allows us to be sinful without immediately evening the playing field for us.

2. God is in the riddle business. What He wants is for us to know as much about Him as is possible for our minds to comprehend.

3. God does not care if we misunderstand His character. We all are born with wrong concepts of God. God is love. He does not choose to be love. Love is an intergral part of His nature. He does not choose to forgive. Forgiveness is an intregal part of His nature. He cannot help but love and forgive.

4. It seems you are saying that all of us are not God's children. This is incorrect.

5. The God you present is not the kind of God I would ever choose to serve.

6. God destroys sinners even if they do not comprehend what He is trying to explain. First, God does not destroy sinners. They destroy themselves. God equals fire. He IS fire. Since sin cannot exist in His presence, those who hold onto their sinful natures instead of letting the Holy Spirit create a new one in them, will naturally be consumed by His presence.

Quote:

---

if at the end there are those saying NO GOD, I don't WANT the virus taken out, I want to remain hating, hateful, lying, murderous, covetous, etc. then CERTAINLY they shall see their free will choice honored. But now, what of those who "bow down and confess the justice of their sentence" -- "God You are just and true in all Your ways. You did everything You could to save me; it is I who have rejected You. Do to me as I deserve." What is to stop the Judge of All the Earth, Who Must Do Right, from looking upon them EVEN AS HE LOOKED UPON THE THIEF ON THE CROSS WHO, AT THE HOUR OF HIS JUST DESSERTS OF A DEATH, HAD NO REPENTANCE OR RESTITUTION TO OFFER, BUT ONLY A CONFESSION OF THE RIGHTNESS OF GOD AND WRONGNESS OF SELF???

---

Again you are making incorrect assumptions.

1.That those who bow the knee confessing the correctness of their sentence are truly repenting. They love sin as much as they ever did.

2. That God can justly and fairly to the entire universe recreate these people sinless beings. What would angels and unfallen beings think of a God who would do that? The fact that they follow this confession by storming the Holy City is testimony to the fact they have not repented.

3. That the theif on the cross did not repent. In fact if you read the DA, he had listened to Jesus earlier, but had been drawn away by Barabbas. He was not a hardened sinner. As he hung on the cross, the Holy Spirit brought to his mind some of the things Jesus said and the miracles He performed. He repented and was converted. It was this conversion that prompted the words: "Remember me."

4. God does not give everyone a fair chance of receiving Christ. All heaven is invovled in the work of saving us sinners. All the angels, all three members of the Godhead are actively invovled 24\7 in helping you personally.

Instead of allowing your mind to dwell on these downer thoughts, accept the Bible for what it says and leave some of these impossible to answer question to Him. He will answer any question you have that is necessary to your salvation.

Your friend,

Dave M

[there buster]

Quote:

---

EVEN AS HE LOOKED UPON THE THIEF ON THE CROSS WHO, AT THE HOUR OF HIS JUST DESSERTS OF A DEATH, HAD NO REPENTANCE OR RESTITUTION TO OFFER, BUT ONLY A CONFESSION OF THE RIGHTNESS OF GOD AND WRONGNESS OF SELF???

---

It seems to me that you have the answer. There were two thieves. Both of them deserved death. Both of them were confronted with the reality of Jesus. One confessed his wrong, and asked for help--"remember me." The other one cursed Christ.

I believe that's what happens when we're confronted with the reality of Jesus and His perfection. One group, the Pharisees, for example, responded with, "Why does he have to be that way? Let's change him." The disciples responded with, "Why can't I be like that."

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Is it really the greatest, highest, best Love and Good of all to allow sentient creatures born into spiritual blindness

---

It's funny how we "sentient creatures born into spiritual blindness" make free-will decisions all day long! Yes, we cannot just choose to live a righteous life, but we can choose to believe in the One who is our righteousness. That is why John says, "There was the true light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man."

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Point being, it's not your actual choice but something "deemed" to have been your choice by proxy.

---

Let me try again. In the quote above, who is doing the "deeming?"

---

According to SDA eschatology -- at least as I understand it -- God is the one doing that "deeming". NO ONE is REALLY choosing to be lost and burned up into forever death. They are choosing a lot of things, but they are not choosing that. Yet it is treated as their "choice by proxy" because they chose, say, to get high, or they had anger management problems, or as much as they tried to summon compassion they found they were dead inside and it disheartened them so they stopped going there, not wanting to see their own emptiness, or WHATEVER it was that caused them to be lost. In fact the whole mythos of saved vs. lost is becoming "lost" on me, Ed. So Christ does all these wonderful things only to be just like the rest of us at the end of time, loving only those who loved Him back? It just doesn't make any sense to me.

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

It seems to me that you are making several wrong assumptions.

---

These are not MY assumptions, per se, but rather those derived from existing SDA eschatology.

Quote:

---

1. That God allows us to be sinful without immediately evening the playing field for us.

2. God is in the riddle business.

3. God does not care if we misunderstand His character.

4. ... all of us are not God's children.

5. The God you present is not the kind of God I would ever choose to serve.

6. God destroys sinners even if they do not comprehend what He is trying to explain.

---

I don't agree with these statements either, save #5. Like I said, they are what I derive from standard SDA eschatology concerning the 2nd Resurrection, and this is why I challenge it. I can understand if YOU or Ed or anyone else does NOT derive these things from an examination of standard SDA eschatology -- FINE -- just understand this is what *I* see when I analyze it and approach it from there -- but please, NOT from the conclusion that this is how *I* view God. I'm trying to argue AGAINST this view of God!!

Quote:

---

Again you are making incorrect assumptions.

1.That those who bow the knee confessing the correctness of their sentence are truly repenting. They love sin as much as they ever did.

---

Why does that matter? They are agreeing with God upon matters of Truth -- how do they differ from US? Do we not all love sin as much as we ever did? Does this not come out in our struggles with sin and self? How are these different from us save their timing???

Quote:

---

2. That God can justly and fairly to the entire universe recreate these people sinless beings. What would angels and unfallen beings think of a God who would do that?

---

What would they think of a wasteful Deity who throws them away when it NO LONGER MATTERS??? That's my point -- if they are going to be DEAD FOREVER ANYWAY THEN DOES IT MAKE MORE SENSE TO PUT THEM BACK AS THEY WERE INTENDED TO BE OR TO DESTROY THEM, SINCE IN EITHER CASE THEY WILL BE AS THOUGH THEY HAD NOT BEEN???? Whether they are destroyed forever totally or whether their sinful selves are forever destroyed because they are "put back to blueprint" in EITHER case they are completely, irrevocably destroyed!!! That's my point.

Quote:

---

The fact that they follow this confession by storming the Holy City is testimony to the fact they have not repented.

---

Again, doesn't matter. The fact that our feet rush to sin and our hands to do evil right after we confess in prayer could be said to be testimony to the same thing.

Quote:

---

3. That the theif on the cross did not repent.

---

What I meant was there was no room for his repentance to be manifest. No changed life. No restitution. No new fruits to be seen. No testimony to bear in testimony-meetings. YES we can say we believe he repented but from the outside he doesn't look any different than any other sinner confessing the justness of his punishment. Judas did likewise but it is judged he was not sincere.

Quote:

---

4. God does not give everyone a fair chance of receiving Christ.

---

This is entirely in your imagination, doesn't enter here.

Quote:

---

Instead of allowing your mind to dwell on these downer thoughts, accept the Bible for what it says and leave some of these impossible to answer question to Him. He will answer any question you have that is necessary to your salvation.

---

These questions are necessary to my salvation because they are necessary to my understanding of God. These are not "downer thoughts". They are very real concerns I have and they are important to me. Are you trying to make me believe God doesn't care what's important to me? My God cares very much whether I know Him as He is or not.

Scripture and SOP both attest to the validity of looking into these things and asking these kinds of questions; it is even said the millenium is spent precisely because of these sorts of questions, so who do you think you are to tell me what I can and cannot ponder? Not to be rude but you're way out of line doing that, Dave. God has not given the spirit of fear but of power and love and a sound mind. What are you afraid of?

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

Nico, I also am confused by your comments. I do not know what you are asking us to respond to. If the following comments answer your question, let me know. If not, then tell me what you still want to know. We are not trying to get you to change you mind. We only want to understand what you want.

---

I want my questions answered without the imputation of motives or false assumptions upon me. I see flaws in the standard SDA eschatology concerning the 2nd Resurrection and the ultimate fate of those deemed to be rejectors of God's grace and I mean to get my challenges answered to my satisfaction.

So don't say I'm making false assumptions when what I'm doing is EXTRAPOLATING from the theology that is already there. Those are not my assumptions; they are implicit within the theology itself, and that is why I am challenging it.

Quote:

---

Can this person be trusted in heaven? Can he\she be trusted to roam free throughout the universe without misusing and mistreating other beings?

---

Can WE? How exactly do we differ from them? Show me the difference. Christians sin. I sin. You sin. How are we any different? Any "safer"? Now granted, AFTER the resurrection, why, yes -- new bodies, no propensities to sin to plague and harrass us. But before? And without that ultimate final change? What separates us from the others? Only our faith. We are just like them, just as selfish, just as unloving, just as pleasure-seeking, just as cluelessly expedient and locked down in our comfort zones, are we not?

Quote:

---

God has a large family. He desires peace, friendship, love between all His children.

---

And ALL are His children .... and He died for ALL.

Quote:

---

2. This is not a legal proceeding. Our records are not being examined legally to see if every sin has been legally forgiven.

---

Understood.

Quote:

---

Each person has reach the point that he will never change.

---

Then practically speaking, I have reached that point. Perhaps I have done so prematurely, but I have reached the point where even regardless of my will to change and desire to change I find it impossible. It's like trying to will legs to walk after you got squashed by a semi and became a paraplegic.

Quote:

---

Each one has decided his own destiny.

---

Consequences are neither decisions nor destiny. They are simply consequences.

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

I believe that's what happens when we're confronted with the reality of Jesus and His perfection. One group, the Pharisees, for example, responded with, "Why does he have to be that way? Let's change him." The disciples responded with, "Why can't I be like that."

---

If only it were that easy! But then there's all the millions of ways we're not (like that), and all the zillions of things we're supposed to be doing to become like that which we just cannot do (in my case, mainly because I'm so tired all the time I just can't remember to keep my eye on anything, let alone try to catch myself out when I'm about to sin or whatever so I can pray it away... it's not just what I don't remember, it's what I can never remember I'm supposed to be remembering to remember. Maybe that's why we still need a Sabbath!)

Speaking of which, if we are really in Christ, are we supposed to have constant cognizance of sin? Or are we supposed to, in faith, lose cognizance of it because we are focused on His white robe of righteousness?

Shabbat shalom, everyone, by the way.

Nico

[Robert]

Post deleted by Gregory Matthews

[i will explain my actions in a private e-mail to Nico & Robert--GM.]

[there buster]

I think I'm beginning to see what you're concerned about. But then, it's so late, I'm having trouble seeing anything. I'll try and respond (coherently) tomorrow.

Shalom