The man of Romans 7

[Robert]

I'm quoting Sequeira here:

In this study we’ll be talking about whether Paul in Romans 7 was referring to the pre-converted Christian or the post-converted.  In other words, is he talking about the believer or the unbeliever?  Then, in our next study, we’ll deal with Romans 8:1-3, one of the key passages in the New Testament that deals with the human nature of Christ, and that’s a big issue.

I’m convinced that the reason there is so much controversy over this passage (Romans 7) is because the devil knows that these passages are crucial to an understanding of the gospel, and especially the doctrine of righteousness by faith.  And when a pastor refuses to touch these passages, the devil is rejoicing.  But I am not going to leave these passages alone because I know what it meant to my ministry and to my Christian life and I want the same thing to happen to you.

I, Robert, concur.   

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

Romans 7:1  Now, dear brothers and sisters -- you who are familiar with the law -- don't you know that the law applies only to a person who is still living? (NLT)

NIV reads: "Do you not know, brothers--for I am speaking to men who know the law--that the law has authority over a man only as long as he lives?"

God's law, the moral law, has authority over a person only if he is living, but if he is dead, the law has no authority.  That's why Paul, in Romans 4:15, states that "the law brings wrath.  And where there is no law there is no transgression."

Now many Christians will tell you that in order for Jesus to save the human race He did away with the moral law (the 10 Commandments).  Is this how God saved us "in Christ"?  No!  Why?

1] Christ came to fulfill the law, both in terms of obedience and in terms of justice. If Christ simply did away with the law then He need not have died.  In fact Christ's death proves the immutability of His law.

2] Let me quote Christ: 

Matt 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

Rom 7:2 For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage. 

3 So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man.

Keep in mind Paul, in Romans 7:1, stated that the law has jurisdiction over someone unless that person dies!

Marriage is suppose to be for life, i.e., "till death do us part". Therefore the wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives according to the law of marriage and if she cheats on him she will be an adulteress. but if he dies, she is released from the marriage law.

In verses 2-3 Paul uses the law of marriage in the place of the moral law (of verse 1) to make a point. A careful reading of Romans 7:2,3 will render the following:

1] The woman represents us.

2] The law of God is represented by "the law of marriage".

3] The other man is Christ.

In the illustration the marriage law is terminated because the husband dies and therefore the woman can legally marry another.  The idea here is that the marriage law has been satisfied (fulfilled) before another relationship can start. That is to say once the marriage law is fulfilled the woman is free to marry again.

Now, let's look at the application:

 

 

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

In verses 2-3 Paul uses the law of marriage in the place of the moral law (of verse 1) to make a point. A careful reading of Romans 7:2,3 will render the following:

1] The woman represents us.

2] The law of God is represented by "the law of marriage".

3] The other man is Christ.

In the illustration the marriage law is terminated because the husband dies and therefore the woman can legally marry another.  The idea here is that the marriage law has been satisfied (fulfilled) before another relationship can start. That is to say once the marriage law is fulfilled the woman is free to marry again.

Now, let's look at the application:

 

Romans 7:4 "So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God."

In the example "the marriage law" could only be satisfied or fulfilled if the husband died. Then his wife could remarry another.

In the application God's law could only be satisfied or fulfilled, legally, if we died in the body of Christ.

If we are married to the law and Christ we are committing spiritual adultery.

Why?  Because we are either saved under grace or we are saved by grace plus our works of the law.  The latter is spiritually adultery (to use Paul's example).

In order to get out of your marriage contract with God's law, legally, you must die.  And your corporate life from Adam did in the humanity of Christ.

 

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

In order to get out of your marriage contract with God's law, legally, you must die.  And your corporate life from Adam did in the humanity of Christ.

I know to some this sounds like heresy, but if we read the whole of Romans 7:4 we will get a clearer view:

Rom 7:4 So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another (i.e., be married to Christ instead of the law),...., in order that we might bear fruit to God.  

Note that the gospel doesn't justify living for the flesh as a lifestyle.  While the believer has been legally delivered from under law and while the law can't touch him when he sins, the believer has been saved so he can grow and bear fruit.  That simply means that the gospel isn't license to enjoy, condone and practice known sin.

[Robert]

Rom 7:5 For when we were controlled by the sinful nature, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death.

This verse is a tough one.  Paul is speaking of preconversion here.  It looks very much like what he wrote in Eph 2:1-3

Now what did Paul mean by the words “when we were controlled by the sinful nature” or, as some translations read, “when we were in the flesh”?  It means “before we died,” in our pre-converted state, while we were still under the law, married to the law, depending on ourselves because the law will not help us.  The only kind of fruit you bear under the law is sin, which ends up in death. 

Romans 7:6: But now [now that you have accepted Christ and have become His bride], by dying to what once bound us (the law), we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.

 Verse 6 is dealing with conversion.  "But now" instead of "when we were controlled" (see verse 5).  

When did we die to what the moral law that once bound us?  In the body of Christ (see verse 4)

Notice the last half of verse 6:  "released from the law (why?) so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit"

Will God's Spirit lead you to live for the flesh (the sin nature)?  No!  However, God's Spirit (unlike the law) will not condemn you every time you sin.  We will see more about that in Romans 8.

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be!

Why does Paul ask this question? Because our fallen humanity had to be delivered from under law, i.e., from under the moral law. Therefore it seems that something is wrong with the law.  Later on (see verse 12) Paul will call the law "holy, just and good".  The law isn't sin.  Then why be delivered, legally, from under it?

Well, I'm skipping ahead, but here's why: "For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of flesh (Greek: Sarx); a slave of sin (self-love)." (Rom 7:14)

So the problem of being under law is that the law demands perfect, unblemished performance.  It demands only "agape" love.  Self-love is iniquity; agape is the fulfillment of the law. 

What law is Paul writing about?  The moral law!  How do I know this?  What law says, "you shall not covet"?  Right, the moral law!  So this is why we had to be delivered from under law.  

The law, of itself, isn't bad, but to be under law and a sinner means death.  "The wages of sin is death"  The law condemns "all sin" and the law has dominion over sinners as long as they are living.  The justice of the law demands the death of all sinners, hence "the soul who sins it must die".

But if I die then all is lost.  Then comes the gospel:  At the incarnation God put our corporate life  (the one we all share from Adam) into Christ and in so doing God rewrote our history.  Hence Christ is the "last Adam". He is the head of a new humanity, free from self-love and death.

 

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

From Romans 7:8-13 Paul continues to prove why we had to be delivered from under law. I've already touched on this, but now we will go deeper.  

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

From Romans 7:8-13 Paul continues to prove why we had to be delivered from under law. I've already touched on this, but now we will go deeper.  

 

As Paul previously stated, "Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, 'Do not covet.'"

 

 "Coveting" is a cherished thought, not an outward action. So the the 10th commandment of the moral law exposed to Paul what "sin" (singular) really was: "the love of self".  You see as Pharisee, Paul bragged on his righteousness. (BTW, bragging comes from our love of self).  It is found in Phil 3:6  "as touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless!" Outwardly Paul the Pharisee kept the law, but inwardly it was based on iniquity, his love of self.

8 But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead

 

Sin, i.e., the essence of sin, self-love, took advantage of Paul the Pharisee's ignorance of the moral law. To him the law were rules to be kept outwardly, but here he was ignorant. In fact Paul states this:

 

1 Tim 1:12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord who has enabled me, because He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry, 

13 although I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. 

14 And the grace of our Lord was exceedingly abundant, with faith and love which are in Christ Jesus.

15 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief. 

 

Please notice the continuous present tense, "of whom I am chief"!  Paul never viewed himself as righteous before the law again.  Yes, he grew, he became more like Christ, but he knew that the law of God requires only "agape", not self-love. Hence his statement, "All have sinned (past tense) and fall short (present continuous tense) of the glory of God (His agape)" (Rom 3:23)

 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

8 But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead

Let's summarize the above:

Paul's love of self blinded him to what God's law really requires.  That is, his sinful nature took advantage of Paul's ignorance of the 1oth commandment and therefore his sinful nature produced even more coveting of every kind.  So in this Pharisee's eyes he had no sin....

9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died

In other words Paul the Pharisee viewed himself as perfect before the law.  As a Pharisee he was taught that eternal life came from his obedience, not only to the moral law, but the book of the law.  But when sin (self-love) was revealed to him, his sin was exposed and he came under condemnation.  The law placed him in prison awaiting execution, the 2nd death.

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

At this time I need to prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that only "agape love" fulfills the law.  

In Gal 5:14 Paul makes this statement:

 "The whole law if fulfilled in one word, in the statement, 'you shall love your neighbor as you love yourself'"....

How many commands are there above?

Most ignorant* Christians will tell you two:

1] Love your neighbor and 2] Love yourself

Actually there is only one:

1] Love your neighbor as you love yourself

That is, love your neighbor as you naturally love yourself.  Self-love is a given.  You already love yourself.  It's natural to love self.  If you don't love yourself they'll have you sent off to a shrink. Besides most folks think that the opposite of self-love is self-hate, but there's another love, "a love that is not self-seeking" (see 1 Cor 13:5).

Now, if you still wish to define "self-love" as a good thing, e.g., building wealth for you and yours, then Paul will correct your thinking.  Turn to 

1 Cor 10:24 "Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth."

Notice that agape has no self-seeking, no competition. In this world everything is based on self-love.  I go to College and compete for a good job so I can make lots of money.  What's the motive?  Self-seeking or sin - the love of self.  

The law of God requires only agape love.  Self-love is the essence, the cornerstone, the root of every sin.  It is our love of self that makes us sinners.  We do good things outwardly to get something  back. That's self-love.  That's our problem and to be under law and be a sinner means death, the 2nd death, goodbye to life forever.

Note: * I'm using this term as Paul did in Romans 7

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

1 Cor 10:24 "Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth."

Notice that agape has no self-seeking, no competition. In this world everything is based on self-love.  I go to College and compete for a good job so I can make lots of money.  What's the motive?  Self-seeking or sin - the love of self.  

Ellen White:

At such a time as this, what is the trend of the education given? To what motive is appeal most often made? To self-seeking. Much of the education given is a perversion of the name. In true education the selfish ambition, the greed for power, the disregard for the rights and needs of humanity, that are the curse of our world, find a counterinfluence.

God's plan of life has a place for every human being. Each is to improve his talents to the utmost; and faithfulness in doing this, be the gifts few or many, entitles one to honor. In God's plan there is no place for selfish rivalry. Those who measure themselves by themselves, and compare themselves among themselves, are not wise. 2 Corinthians 10:12. Whatever we do is to be done "as of the ability which God giveth." 1 Peter 4:11. It is to be done "heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ." Colossians 3:23, 24. Precious the service done and the education gained in carrying out these principles. But how widely different is much of the education now given! From the child's earliest years it is an appeal to emulation and rivalry; it fosters selfishness, the root of all evil. [Education and Character, chapter 25]

Edited June 21, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

10 I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. 

11 For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death. 

What does Paul mean by this?

As a Pharisee Paul believed that eternal life came by his obedience to the law.  This is equivalent to "obey and live".  But when he understood the law is spiritually, through the 10th commandment, he saw himself a sinner under law.  So the very commandment that he thought he was keeping he was breaking and that resulted in condemnation. This is equivalent to "disobey and die".

Again Paul's own nature deceived him into what sin really was because he had a limited view of sin.  Notice that Paul states that "sin....deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death".  Sin put Paul on death row through the commandment.  Why?  Because "the wages of sin is death", but sin get its authority to take you 6' under through the law:  "The sting of death is sin; and sin draws its power from the law" 1 Cor 15:56;

[Robert]

12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.

There's nothing wrong with the law, but for a sinner to be under law the law then must demand justice. 

 

[pnattmbtc]

Hi Robert.  Thank you for posting this.

[pnattmbtc]

The law of marriage is that the two parties to it “shall be one flesh.” How is it in this case? The first husband is the flesh, the body of sin. Well, we were truly one flesh with that. We were by nature perfectly united to sin. It was our life. It controlled us. Whatever sin devised, that we did. We might have done it unwillingly at times, but we did it nevertheless. Sin reigned in our mortal bodies, so that we obeyed it in the lusts thereof.  Whatever sin wished, was law to us. We were one flesh. 

Seeking a Divorce: There comes a time in our experience when we wish to be free from sin. It is when we see something of the beauty of holiness. With some people the desire is only occasional; with others it is more constant. Whether they recognize the fact or not, it is Christ appealing to them to forsake sin, and to be joined to him, to live with him. And so they endeavor to effect a separation. But sin will not consent. In spite of all that we can do, it still clings to us. We are “one flesh,” and it is a union for life since it is a union of our life to sin. There is no divorce in that marriage. 

Freedom in Death: There is no hope of effecting a separation from sin by any ordinary means. No matter how much we may desire to be united to Christ, it can not be done while we are joined to sin; for the law will not sanction such a union, and Christ will not enter into any union that is not lawful. If we could only get sin to die, we should be free, but it will not die. There is only one way for us to be freed from the hateful union, and that is for us to die. If we wish freedom so much that we are willing to be crucified, then it may be done. In death the separation is effected; for it is by the body of Christ that “we” become dead. We are crucified with him. The body of sin is also crucified. But while the body of sin is destroyed, we have a resurrection in Christ. The same thing that frees us from the first husband, unites us to the second.

A New Creature: Now we see how it is that we are dead to the law. We died in Christ, and were raised in him. But “if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature; old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.  And all things are of God.” 2 Corinthians 5:17, 18. Now we may be united to Christ, and the law will witness to the union, and sanction it. For not only is the first husband dead, but we also died, so that, although alive, we are not the same creature that we were before. “I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” Galatians 2:20. We are one. The same law that formerly declared us to be sinners now binds us to Christ. 

A Different Service: Now that the union with Christ has been effected, we serve in newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. In marriage, the woman is to be subject to the husband. So when we were united to sin, we were in all things subject to sin. For a time it was willing service; but when we saw the Lord, and were drawn to him, the service became irksome. We tried to keep God's law, but were bound, and could not. But now we are set free. Sin no longer restrains us, and our service is freedom. We gladly render to Christ all the service that the law requires of us. We render this service because of the perfect union between us. His life is ours, since we were raised only by the power of his life. Therefore our obedience is simply his loyalty and faithfulness in us. (Waggoner on Romans)

Edited June 22, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[pnattmbtc]

Self-love is the essence, the cornerstone, the root of every sin.  It is our love of self that makes us sinners.  We do good things outwardly to get something  back. That's self-love.  That's our problem and to be under law and be a sinner means death, the 2nd death, goodbye to life forever.

Regarding this part, why does self-love cause death, the second death?  The answer is in the description of what self-love is, which is to put self in first place.  As long as self is in first place, God cannot be, which means were separate ourselves from God, which is to separate ourselves from life, because God alone is the source of life.

So self-love = death.

And this isn't (primarily) a legal problem. 

Edited June 22, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[LifeHiscost]

 

So self-love = death.

And this isn't (primarily) a legal problem. 

God has never asked us to stop loving ourselves. In fact the greatest favor we can do for ourselves is to yield our self over to Him Who is love.

7Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you....James 4

God is Love!  Jesus saves! 

[pnattmbtc]

"Self-love" is an area of confusion, because the term is often not clear.  If you look at the Spirit of Prophecy, you'll see the term there is never used in a positive way.  For example:

It is the love of self that destroys our peace. While self is all alive, we stand ready continually to guard it from mortification and insult; but when we are dead, and our life is hid with Christ in God, we shall not take neglects or slights to heart. We shall be deaf to reproach and blind to scorn and 2MCP 607.3 

another one:

it fosters selfishness, the root of all evil. (Ed 226)

 The term "self-love" is used synonymously with "selfishness", which is what Sequeira had in mind, and I did too.

Edited June 22, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[pnattmbtc]

Romans 7 is an interesting passage, especially that last part.  It seems to me this is a type of passage that people are going to read according to ideas they already have, so all can find support for their positions.  Regarding the "I" in Romans 7, one view is that it is converted Paul, another that it is unconverted Paul,and a third view is that Paul isn't referring to himself at all, but is speaking similar to how we would use the word "one" (such as "one shouldn't burp at the table.").  If one takes the latter view, that still leaves the question as to whether the "one" is converted or not; IOW is what Paul writes at the end of Romans 7 to be considered normative for Christian experience, or is it a transitional step on the way to what is promised in Romans 8.

I suspect that if one views that victory of sin is impossible, thinking of it as "legalism" or "perfectionism", then that will color how Romans 7 is interpreted.  Similarly if one believes victory of sin is possible, that will also color the interpretation.

[Robert]

Rom 7:13 Has then what is good (the law) become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good (the law), so that sin through the commandment (the 10th commandment of the law) might become exceedingly sinful.

We have already covered that the law is good, just and holy.  Paul is not dealing with the 2nd death here.  He is dealing with the law in his conversion. 

 

[Robert]

Romans 7 is an interesting passage, especially that last part.  It seems to me this is a type of passage that people are going to read according to ideas they already have, so all can find support for their positions.  

So let's ignore it?

Sequeira:

 "I’m convinced that the reason there is so much controversy over this passage (Romans 7) is because the devil knows that these passages are crucial to an understanding of the gospel, and especially the doctrine of righteousness by faith.  And when a pastor refuses to touch these passages, the devil is rejoicing."

Edited June 23, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

Regarding this part, why does self-love cause death, the second death?  The answer is in the description of what self-love is, which is to put self in first place.  As long as self is in first place, God cannot be, which means were separate ourselves from God, which is to separate ourselves from life, because God alone is the source of life.

So self-love = death.

And this isn't (primarily) a legal problem. 

Yes, iniquity brings destruction...it brings lawlessness...it brings disaster.  Sin kills, but in all this we are speaking of the 1st death, the results of sin. Christ didn't come to save us from this 1st death.  He came to save us from "the cruse of the law".

Rev 20:"11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. 12And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. 13And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.15And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

 

[pnattmbtc]

 "I’m convinced that the reason there is so much controversy over this passage (Romans 7) is because the devil knows that these passages are crucial to an understanding of the gospel, and especially the doctrine of righteousness by faith.  And when a pastor refuses to touch these passages, the devil is rejoicing."

I don't agree with this.  I think John 3 is crucial to an understanding of the gospel, a passage anyone can understand.

How, then, are we to be saved? "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness," so the Son of man has been lifted up, and everyone who has been deceived and bitten by the serpent may look and live. "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." John 1:29. The light shining from the cross reveals the love of God. His love is drawing us to Himself. If we do not resist this drawing, we shall be led to the foot of the cross in repentance for the sins that have crucified the Saviour. Then the Spirit of God through faith produces a new life in the soul. The thoughts and desires are brought into obedience to the will of Christ. The heart, the mind, are created anew in the image of Him who works in us to subdue all things to Himself. Then the law of God is written in the mind and heart, and we can say with Christ, "I delight to do Thy will, O my God." Ps. 40:8. (DA 176, 177)

Anyone can understand this.

If you have a theory of the Gospel which involves:

1.Throwing out everything Jesus said or did as not the Gospel

2.Depending upon a disputed passage to have the secret

that's problematic.  I'm not saying this is Sequeira's position, but you have said that Jesus didn't preach the Gospel.

Regarding Romans 7, I appreciate your posting what you did.  I posted what Waggoner said.  I've been aware of Sequeira's ideas for over 25 years, and he is an original thinking, with many good ideas.  I like and respect him, but when it comes to the Gospel and Romans, I believe Waggoner had a better understanding than Sequeira did.  As I explained previously:

1.Waggoner (and Jones) presented their ideas around the 1888 era.

2.Wieland appreciated what they wrote, and added some ideas (many of which I think are tremendous; e.g. the "agape" ideas are his; also defining faith as a heart appreciation of agape).  The legal part of Weiland's theory was developed as an answer to Desmond Ford.

3.Sequeira ran with Wieland's work, and developed it further.  The legal aspect, which was just a footnote in Wieland (he referred to it as "dry theology" looks to have become very important to Sequeira, and it is this aspect which I disagree with (not the corporate aspect).

I don't believe the issues of the Gospel are primarily legal, and I think this is where we diverge.  If all you have is a hammer, then all the world looks like a nail.  I see the primary issue is the character of God, and that Jesus' ministry was completely relevant, from beginning to end.  Consider the phrase the "doing and dying" of Christ.  What about the resurrection?  If we view the issue as a legal matter, the resurrection, which was the cornerstone of the Gospel, slips away in importance, and, indeed, it's not even present in this phrase which is much repeated. 

[pnattmbtc]

Yes, iniquity brings destruction...it brings lawlessness...it brings disaster.  Sin kills, but in all this we are speaking of the 1st death, the results of sin

No, this is the second death.  The death which sin causes is the second death.  When it says, "the wages of sin is death," that's referring to the second death.  When it says "the sting of death is sin" that's the second death.  The first death is not a problem; it's referred to as sleep, emphasizing its temporary nature.  The second death is the problem.  When it says, "O Death, where is thy victory?" 

The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown. God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life. He is "alienated from the life of God." Christ says, "All they that hate Me love death." Eph. 4:18; Prov. 8:36. God gives them existence for a time that they may develop their character and reveal their principles. This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice. By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them.

At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand this. Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin. A doubt of God's goodness would have remained in their minds as evil seed, to produce its deadly fruit of sin and woe. (DA 764)

 Sin causes us to separate ourselves from God, which leads to death, as God alone is the source of life.