Is destruction inevitable by a loving Creator?

[Twilight]

And this is exactly what happened to Jerusalem in A.D.70.

The language of the Bible in Matt.22 is that of the King (God) was wrought "angry" with the Jews and He sent "His armies" (the Romans) to "burn up" their city (Jerusalem) and to kill those murderers.

This is the language of Heaven. Now, from the book The Great Controversy let us read this most enlightening commentary:

"The long-suffering of God toward Jerusalem only confirmed the Jews in their stubborn impenitence. In their hatred and cruelty toward the disciples of Jesus they rejected the last offer of mercy. Then God withdrew His protection from them and removed His restraining power from Satan and his angels, and the nation was left to the control of the leader she had chosen." p.28.

"The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown. Says the prophet: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;" "for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity." Hosea 13:9; 14:1. Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work. By stubborn rejection of divine love and mercy, the Jews had caused the protection of God to be withdrawn from them, and Satan was permitted to rule them according to his will. The horrible cruelties enacted in the destruction of Jerusalem are a demonstration of Satan's vindictive power over those who yield to his control.

Notice how the Holy Spirit, in that statement, says that the destruction of Jerusalem was the work of Satan but that Satan seeks to conceal his own work by stating that the destruction of Jerusalem was the result of the direct decree of God!

"We cannot know how much we owe to Christ for the peace and protection which we enjoy. It is the restraining power of God that prevents mankind from passing fully under the control of Satan. The disobedient and unthankful have great reason for gratitude for God's mercy and long-suffering in holding in check the cruel, malignant power of the evil one. But when men pass the limits of divine forbearance, that restraint is removed. God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression; but He leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown. Every ray of light rejected, every warning despised or unheeded, every passion indulged, every transgression of the law of God, is a seed sown which yields its unfailing harvest. The Spirit of God, persistently resisted, is at last withdrawn from the sinner, and then there is left no power to control the evil passions of the soul, and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan. The destruction of Jerusalem is a fearful and solemn warning to all who are trifling with the offers of divine grace and resisting the pleadings of divine mercy. Never was there given a more decisive testimony to God's hatred of sin and to the certain punishment that will fall upon the guilty." pp.35,36.

If there are statements in the SoP which explain the language of God we could not find a better place than in these two pages of The Great Controversy. These words establish for ever the principle that the judgments of God do not come out directly out from the Lord upon the wicked but that He leaves them to the malice and enmity of Satan, the leader they have chosen.

sky

In all of this Sky, you will not find much disagreement.

This is not the issue.

The issue is Gods final act, not the acts that have gone before.

The Bible and SOP clearly state that God will destroy sin and sinners with His Glory.

That this "strange act" is a strange act because it "appears" to be out of character.

So out of character that some cannot accept it...

Rather they try to deny this will happen.

But the only statement I can find on how Satan will be destroyed (aside from a murky aside to the Prince of Tyrus), the only statement that is explicit and clear in the Bible and SOP is the same one, the same principle.

That God destroys with His revealed Glory.

Do you realise you are presenting something contradictory to this?

You are stating that this is not true?

What if it is?

What if you are stating dogmatically that Gods character is one way, when in fact it is not?

Should we not be cautious when such clear statements as the above are challenging our view?

Should we not be cautious that we are misrepresenting God.

For me, the only clear path that makes it all fit together is the destruction by the revealing of His Glory.

Now if that misrepresents Him in any way, if that differs from the counsel of inspiration in any way, then Lord forgive my ignorance.

But I really cannot see how your position is correct, it seems a square peg in a round hole.

Not matter how hard you bash the peg to make it fit, it is always going to be a square peg in a round hole.

In love,

Mark

[Lutz13]

Sky? Do you realize that we are going in a circle?

Also, something to keep in mind. It isn't our job to make them see it how we see it. We have presented it, and it is up to God to work their hearts if this be true.

[Twilight]

Sky? Do you realize that we are going in a circle?

Also, something to keep in mind. It isn't our job to make them see it how we see it. We have presented it, and it is up to God to work their hearts if this be true.

Exactly. :-)

But I would like to see one clear statement in Bible or SOP that states man kill Satan.

I think Ezekiel 28 and references to the Prince of Tyrus are a little murky at best.

[Lutz13]

That God destroys with His revealed Glory.

That statement would be much easier to understand if it actually said something like. "Gods glory blew them up, and they didn't do it to themselves."

You seem to be a bit bias to one view. Like I mentioned earlier. The English language allows to see that as "Gods glory causes them to freak out and kill themselves." It also allows me to see it the way you are seeing it too. I wish it were a bit more specific.

When it says that God is to them a consuming fire. Actually let me try and give an example: Keish to me is a consuming fire, it is disgusting and I would avoid it like I would avoid a consuming fire.

[Lutz13]

Originally Posted By: Lutz13

Sky? Do you realize that we are going in a circle?

Also, something to keep in mind. It isn't our job to make them see it how we see it. We have presented it, and it is up to God to work their hearts if this be true.

Exactly. :-)

But I would like to see one clear statement in Bible or SOP that states man kill Satan.

I think Ezekiel 28 and references to the Prince of Tyrus are a little murky at best.

Yeah, there are things that might just be murky until we see Him face to face.

[skyblue888]

It isn't our job to make anyone see things as we see it but as God sees it.

There is a vast difference. The Holy Spirit is using human instrumentalities to do this work. But the problem sometimes is that pride gets in the way. We refuse to be taught by humble instruments. The Holy Spirit sent Saul of Tarsus to be taught of the Holy Spirit through the disciples of Christ, did He not?

And as to things that God has already revealed to us as being "murky" it is all in the manner we receive the light that is sent to us. We need not see as in a glass darkly anymore when the Holy Spirit is our teacher. No more will we say, I cannot comprehend. No more will we see as in a glass darkly. The Holy Spirit teaches us all things. See D.A.670 and 1 John 2:20,27.

sky

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

That God destroys with His revealed Glory.

That statement would be much easier to understand if it actually said something like. "Gods glory blew them up, and they didn't do it to themselves."

You seem to be a bit bias to one view. Like I mentioned earlier. The English language allows to see that as "Gods glory causes them to freak out and kill themselves." It also allows me to see it the way you are seeing it too. I wish it were a bit more specific.

When it says that God is to them a consuming fire. Actually let me try and give an example: Keish to me is a consuming fire, it is disgusting and I would avoid it like I would avoid a consuming fire.

It is not so much I am biased Lutz.

If it was clearly evident that man destroys Satan, from scripture, I would accept that.

But the only explanation that fits all the puzzle is the one that is plain.

Think about this:

The Father shrouds Himself.

If man looks upon God He would die, if in His sinful state, Gods Glory would consume Him (how that happens I would not dare to guess).

The prophets would all fall down at the site of the Lamb being revealed to them (Isaiah, John etc).

The destruction of the wicked is a physical event.

The fire that destroys Satan is a physical event.

Gods Glory destroys Satan.

Gods Glory is revealed as a physical event.

Gods Glory destroys sin and sinnners.

Now I do not for one moment even begin to pretend to understand all that.

But I accept it by faith.

Mark

[Twilight]

Further:

I can accept the idea that Gods glory destroys, because it is based on Scripture.

The idea that man kills Satan is based at best on a murky interpretation on Ezekiel 28 and the idea that God would not do anything that caused Satan to be destroyed.

You see, this is where the error can creap in, (if indeed it is error).

Removing Gods active participation from the destruction of the wicked, means that God can "never" act against sin.

I would not be so quick to paint God as evil if He does indeed act against sin.

This is why we have to humble ourselves in the dirt on this one.

Because if it is total error to say man kills Satan, we have just smeared Gods Character.

We are saying God would not destroy the wicked.

We are therefore saying that it is in fact a sin for God to destroy sin and the sinners attached to that sin.

If this teaching is not true, those that present it as "the only truth" about the destruction of the wicked, have labelled God a sinner if God does destroy sin and sinners with His presence (which I accept as truth unless further light comes to show this is not true or misunderstood).

This is why I urge caution in presenting these views in such a dogmatic manner, when they are not the only possibility.

We must be careful not to label God a sinner.

God bless,

Mark

[pnattmbtc]

He's been angry before. But his anger has always been mixed with mercy in the past.

You're understanding the judgment in terms of God's being angry? The overriding emotion in the judgment is not anger, but sadness.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Exactly. :-)

But I would like to see one clear statement in Bible or SOP that states man kill Satan.

I think Ezekiel 28 and references to the Prince of Tyrus are a little murky at best. [/quote']

Yeah, there are things that might just be murky until we see Him face to face.

I am sure my friend. :-)

Mark

[skyblue888]

Mark, in all due respect, how is it that you can accept by faith that God's physical glory will destroy the sinners without letting God explain what that language means while at the same time you cannot accept by faith the simple statement of God who has put Himself on record saying that He does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression?

If His judgments come directly out from Him upon sinners after the thousand years then at that moment He will have become the executioner of the sentence against transgression. But God does not lie and He can never be the executioner. His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the wicked but they place themselves beyond His protection.

The wicked will be destroyed by the revealing of God's glory after the 1000 years just as the Jews were in A.D.70 and yet there was no manifestation of God's physical glory seen at that time. The wicked will be destroyed by the revealing of God's glory at the time of the sixth plague prior to the appearing of Christ in the clouds of Heaven in His physical glory.

This simply means that having rejected the message that would have caused the light of His glory in the form of grace to shine into their hearts, they were left to the deceptions which they loved and they had no more power to control the evil passions of the soul and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan.

sky

[skyblue888]

Mark,would u please address the following:

It isn't our job to make anyone see things as we see it but as God sees it.

There is a vast difference. The Holy Spirit is using human instrumentalities to do this work. But the problem sometimes is that pride gets in the way. We refuse to be taught by humble instruments. The Holy Spirit sent Saul of Tarsus to be taught of the Holy Spirit through the disciples of Christ, did He not?

And as to things that God has already revealed to us as being "murky" it is all in the manner we receive the light that is sent to us. We need not see as in a glass darkly anymore when the Holy Spirit is our teacher. No more will we say, I cannot comprehend. No more will we see as in a glass darkly. The Holy Spirit teaches us all things. See D.A.670 and 1 John 2:20,27.

sky

[pnattmbtc]

The prophets of God use such language as "God destroyed," "the Lord slew," "Fire came down from God," "I (God) will destroy," etc.

Why not stay with the language of the Bible?

The language of the Bible says that "God killed Saul." "God sent fiery serpents upon the Israelites" "God sent a lying spirit to Ahab" etc. What's of interest is what's actually happening. The prophets described what they saw in vision, but God often presents Himself as doing that which He permits. Using the language of Scripture is fine, as long as we correctly understand what the language means.

[Twilight]

Mark, in all due respect, how is it that you can accept by faith that God's physical glory will destroy the sinners without letting God explain what that language means while at the same time you cannot accept by faith the simple statement of God who has put Himself on record saying that He does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression?

If His judgments come directly out from Him upon sinners after the thousand years then at that moment He will have become the executioner of the sentence against transgression. But God does not lie and He can never be the executioner. His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the wicked but they place themselves beyond His protection.

The wicked will be destroyed by the revealing of God's glory after the 1000 years just as the Jews were in A.D.70 and yet there was no manifestation of God's physical glory seen at that time. The wicked will be destroyed by the revealing of God's glory at the time of the sixth plague prior to the appearing of Christ in the clouds of Heaven in His physical glory.

This simply means that having rejected the message that would have caused the light of His glory in the form of grace to shine into their hearts, they were left to the deceptions which they loved and they had no more power to control the evil passions of the soul and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan.

sky

My friend, although you may think you have explained it sufficiently and you may be fully convinced in your own mind this is the truth, I cannot accept it.

It has too many holes in it.

It is based on three assumptions:

1. God does not destroy in any shape or form whatsoever at any time.

2. Man destroys Satan.

3. Being destroyed by the Glory of the Lord is not a physical reality, but a metaphor.

Mark

[pnattmbtc]

Me:We're also told that the judgment is for the benefit of the wicked themselves, which I think is a rather extraordinary statement that is seldom commented upon. It's usually thought of as being something done to them against their will, hardly something that could be described as for their own benefit.

J:What "judgment"-- investigative judgment or executive judgment?

The "investigative judgment" only examines the lives of the those whose names have been written in the book of life. That judgment is going on now and will continue until just before the Second Coming.

Those who have never put their faith in God or in Christ aren't judged until after the Second Coming of Christ.

I believe that both the investigative, or pre-advent, judgment, and the executive judgment, are for the benefit of everyone in the entire universe, including the wicked. But how do you understand "the judgment" benefits the wicked?

This is speaking of the final judgment, after the wicked are resurrected. It's from GC 541-543.

It's an interesting question how the judgment will benefit the wicked. I think we can rule out from this, as well as from the accompanying statements that the principles of kindness, mercy and love are employed in the judgment, that the wicked will be set on fire, like a torch, for many hours or many days. That would hardly be for their benefit (nor be kind).

I've thought quite a lot about this, and what makes sense to me at present is that during life there are a lot of questions that go answered. People are to busy doing whatever, trying to make a living, care for their families, problems with relationships, whatever, busy living. They don't necessarily make time for God or give priority to things of eternal value. But unrighteous humans are a part of the Great Controversy. Their voice counts as well. And they themselves benefit by gaining an understanding of what happened in their lives, from God's perspective. So it's an opportunity for them to gain understanding.

Also in this same section, it's written that God would make them happy if He could. From this we can infer that the same love for the unrighteous, and the same desire that they be well and happy, exists in the heart of God. Their being lost is not because of an act or desire on God's part, but because they themselves have unfitted themselves for heaven, to the point that being in heaven would be torture for them. God's mere presence is a consuming fire to them (this consuming fire is agape; the "glory of Him who is love will destroy them.").

Most of what I've written here is in the GC 541-543 section. Only the why the benefited by the judgment is my own idea (we're not told explicitly how they wicked are benefited, so that's something we have to think out for ourselves).

[Twilight]

Mark,would u please address the following:

It isn't our job to make anyone see things as we see it but as God sees it.

There is a vast difference. The Holy Spirit is using human instrumentalities to do this work. But the problem sometimes is that pride gets in the way. We refuse to be taught by humble instruments. The Holy Spirit sent Saul of Tarsus to be taught of the Holy Spirit through the disciples of Christ, did He not?

And as to things that God has already revealed to us as being "murky" it is all in the manner we receive the light that is sent to us. We need not see as in a glass darkly anymore when the Holy Spirit is our teacher. No more will we say, I cannot comprehend. No more will we see as in a glass darkly. The Holy Spirit teaches us all things. See D.A.670 and 1 John 2:20,27.

sky

Indeed.

But teaching works both ways...

Do you think that John would instruct Paul, or Paul instruct John.

Or do you think they would share the role of teacher and student, that they would learn from each other.

It is not right for one to sit above another as the "teacher", as all of us receive different revelations from God.

------------------------

It could be that in this instance you need some guidance and help with your doctrinal position, is that a possibility you will consider?

Mark :-)

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

Mark, in all due respect, how is it that you can accept by faith that God's physical glory will destroy the sinners without letting God explain what that language means while at the same time you cannot accept by faith the simple statement of God who has put Himself on record saying that He does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression?

If His judgments come directly out from Him upon sinners after the thousand years then at that moment He will have become the executioner of the sentence against transgression. But God does not lie and He can never be the executioner. His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the wicked but they place themselves beyond His protection.

The wicked will be destroyed by the revealing of God's glory after the 1000 years just as the Jews were in A.D.70 and yet there was no manifestation of God's physical glory seen at that time. The wicked will be destroyed by the revealing of God's glory at the time of the sixth plague prior to the appearing of Christ in the clouds of Heaven in His physical glory.

This simply means that having rejected the message that would have caused the light of His glory in the form of grace to shine into their hearts, they were left to the deceptions which they loved and they had no more power to control the evil passions of the soul and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan.

sky

My friend, although you may think you have explained it sufficiently and you may be fully convinced in your own mind this is the truth, I cannot accept it.

It has too many holes in it.

It is based on three assumptions:

1. God does not destroy in any shape or form whatsoever at any time.

2. Man destroys Satan.

3. Being destroyed by the Glory of the Lord is not a physical reality, but a metaphor.

Mark

Mark, I am sorry, but we must let inspiration interpret itself. We cannot afford to present our own private interpretation. I challenge you to show the holes in what I have posted. I have not put any personal construction upon any passage of Scripture or statement from the SoP. Every single time the Lord has brought new light to His professed people, prejudices and opinions have prevailed and light from Heaven is thus kept away from the people.

Mark, I believe rather that it is your bag which is full of holes (no offense intended because you have not presented anything from the pen of inspiration or from the Scriptures that would support your personal view of what the revealing of God's glory really means. Some of us have brought forward here and there from the Bible and the SoP powerful evidence as to how the language of the Bible regarding God's dealings with sin is to be understood but from what I can see you personally choose to ignore all this evidence by saying that God in the end will be the executioner of the sentence upon the guilty just because you cannot see how one can explain it any other way when the Lord has already told us in no uncertain terms that He is not an executioner of the sentence against transgression. And that has always been true and always will be.

If we do not accept this simple statement of truth, we cannot receive any further light on this topic and this is what I see happening here. You cannot see your way through simply because you have refused to accept this simple foundational statement regarding God and His dealings with men.

sky

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

My friend, although you may think you have explained it sufficiently and you may be fully convinced in your own mind this is the truth, I cannot accept it.

It has too many holes in it.

It is based on three assumptions:

1. God does not destroy in any shape or form whatsoever at any time.

2. Man destroys Satan.

3. Being destroyed by the Glory of the Lord is not a physical reality, but a metaphor.

Mark

[/quote']

Mark, I am sorry, but we must let inspiration interpret itself. We cannot afford to present our own private interpretation. I challenge you to show the holes in what I have posted. I have not put any personal construction upon any passage of Scripture or statement from the SoP. Every single time the Lord has brought new light to His professed people, prejudices and opinions have prevailed and light from Heaven is thus kept away from the people.

Mark, I believe rather that it is your bag which is full of holes because you have not presented anything from the pen of inspiration or from the Scriptures that would support your personal view of what the revealing of God's glory really means. Some of us have brought forward here and there from the Bible and the SoP powerful evidence as to how the language of the Bible regarding God's dealings with sin is to be understood but from what I can see you personally choose to ignore all this evidence by saying that God in the end will be the executioner of the sentence upon the guilty just because you cannot see how one can explain it any other way when the Lord has already told us in no uncertain terms that He is not an executioner of the sentence against transgression. And that has always been true and always will be.

If we do not accept this simple statement of truth, we cannot receive any further light on this topic and this is what I see happening here. You cannot see your way through simply because you have refused to accept this simple foundational statement regarding God and His dealings with men.

sky

We will have to agree to disagree Sky.

Both of us can point to the other and say:

"You are not accepting light!"

But there is a danger of self rising in that.

Let us both give the Holy Spirit room to work on both our hearts and minds on this.

I have been deeply blessed by the study and many of the principles you adhere to I agree with.

I just do not accept that man destroys Satan, but that it is a physical revealing of Gods glory.

Can you give me the liberty to hold that view?

Whilst I give you the liberty to hold yours. :-)

Your friend,

Mark

[skyblue888]

Mark, let us reason together.

Lately you became familiar with this statement: "The merits of a crucified and risen Saviour are the foundation of the Christian's faith." G.C.73

I know that you believe this simple statement of truth firmly, no wavering here.

Now, you believe that what this statement says is true and always will be. Right Mark? There never will come a time when this statement will not be true no matter what. There is absolutely no possibility that this statement could cease to be true for in the day of reckoning the merits of Christ will still be the foundation of the Christian's faith, not any work he may have done.

Let me give you another example. We read, "The Scripture which above all others had been the foundation and the central pillar of the advent faith was the declaration: 'Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.'" Daniel 8:14. See G.C.409.

Is this always true? I am sure you believe it is true and always will be. Just a simple statement of truth. Will it always be true that this passage of Scripture is to remain the foundation of the Advent faith? I am sure we can all say a resounding "Amen".

But why is it that when the same Holy Spirit says that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression," we hesitate to say "yes" as though that statement will not always be true, that God some day will become the executioner of the sentence against guilty men?

sky

[Twilight]

Mark, let us reason together.

Lately you became familiar with this statement: "The merits of a crucified and risen Saviour are the foundation of the Christian's faith." G.C.73

I know that you believe this simple statement of truth firmly, no wavering here.

Now, you believe that what this statement says is true and always will be. Right Mark? There never will come a time when this statement will not be true no matter what. There is absolutely no possibility that this statement could cease to be true for in the day of reckoning the merits of Christ will still be the foundation of the Christian's faith, not any work he may have done.

Let me give you another example. We read, "The Scripture which above all others had been the foundation and the central pillar of the advent faith was the declaration: 'Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.'" Daniel 8:14. See G.C.409.

Is this always true? I am sure you believe it is true and always will be. Just a simple statement of truth. Will it always be true that this passage of Scripture is to remain the foundation of the Advent faith? I am sure we can all say a resounding "Amen".

But why is it that when the same Holy Spirit says that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression," we hesitate to say "yes" as though that statement will not always be true, that God some day will become the executioner of the sentence against guilty men?

sky

I am going to withdraw from the conversation Sky.

This point has already been discussed using different language. :-)

Mark

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

We will have to agree to disagree Sky.

Both of us can point to the other and say:

"You are not accepting light!"

But there is a danger of self rising in that.

Let us both give the Holy Spirit room to work on both our hearts and minds on this.

I have been deeply blessed by the study and many of the principles you adhere to I agree with.

I just do not accept that man destroys Satan, but that it is a physical revealing of Gods glory.

Can you give me the liberty to hold that view?

Whilst I give you the liberty to hold yours. :-)

Your friend,

Mark

Mark, we are not talking about personal views but about what inspiration says. There is a vast difference. If I attempt to push my own personal views on you, yes, by all means, I would deserve to be rebuked but this is not the case. We are dealing with things that have been revealed to us. When the Lord sends light to us we cannnot afford to wait until everybody else sees it before we receive it and believe it and act upon it. If we do the Lord says that we will go on in darkness. See F.W.77, bottom of page.

You say, I just do not accept that man destroys Satan, but that it is a physical revealing of God's glory. And yet it is clearly written in Ezekiel 28 that he will die at the hand of aliens, at the hand of the most terrible of the nations. What makes u say that this is a "murky" statement of Holy Writ when it could not be more plain and simple???!!

It is like saying, I do not accept that Pharaoh hardened his own heart, it was God who hardened his heart because the Bible says that "God hardened Pharaoh's heart." But we know from inspiration that "It is not God that blinds the eyes of men or who hardens their hearts." See D.A.322,

It is like saying, I do not accept that that Saul killed himself because the Bible says that "God slew him." And yet we know that Saul killed himself by falling on his sword. 1 Chro.10:4,14.

Mark, what if the Holy Spirit was to say to you and me that if God was to be the executioner of the sentence against transgression after the 1000 years, the whole universe would think that the accusations of Lucifer were right after all! Why would God jeopardize Himself like this when He had always been true to His word, that He does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression!

Do you remember that statement, in regard to the destruction of Jerusalem, in which it is said that Satan was seeking to conceal his own work? (G.C.36) that Satan is seeking to make the people of this earth believe that it was by the direct decree of God that the city of Jerusalem was destroyed when in fact it was the work of the devil. It was him who drove these people to reject Christ and then he claimed that he had a right to destroy them and destroy them he did! The Lord was forced to leave them to the control of the leader they had chosen. (G.C.28)

Why should it be any different after the 1000 years? All the host of Satan will be there with all the unsaved of all ages and among them the most violent of the nations. It is like we would be saying that when the multitudes of the wicked shall turn upon Satan and his angels with the fury of demons, at some point God will say, All right, stop! It's My turn now. Let Me administer the final blow! I will finish you up by causing fire to come down upon you that I may annihilate you all in My fierce anger! It's My turn to inflict a fatal wound upon you all. Let me personally destroy you by pouring fire upon your hapless heads!

There will be no need for the Lord to intervene because in that day, "Evil shall slay the wicked." Psalm 34:21.

sky

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

Mark, let us reason together.

Lately you became familiar with this statement: "The merits of a crucified and risen Saviour are the foundation of the Christian's faith." G.C.73

I know that you believe this simple statement of truth firmly, no wavering here.

Now, you believe that what this statement says is true and always will be. Right Mark? There never will come a time when this statement will not be true no matter what. There is absolutely no possibility that this statement could cease to be true for in the day of reckoning the merits of Christ will still be the foundation of the Christian's faith, not any work he may have done.

Let me give you another example. We read, "The Scripture which above all others had been the foundation and the central pillar of the advent faith was the declaration: 'Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.'" Daniel 8:14. See G.C.409.

Is this always true? I am sure you believe it is true and always will be. Just a simple statement of truth. Will it always be true that this passage of Scripture is to remain the foundation of the Advent faith? I am sure we can all say a resounding "Amen".

But why is it that when the same Holy Spirit says that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression," we hesitate to say "yes" as though that statement will not always be true, that God some day will become the executioner of the sentence against guilty men?

sky

I am going to withdraw from the conversation Sky.

This point has already been discussed using different language. :-)

Mark

Mark, this discussion is not just for you and me but for all who read and I dont quite get it that you should say, "This point has already been discussed using different language."

Mark, the language used is always the same.

sky

[Guest]

"God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression,"

Sky, you have taken this one statement and declared that this is to be the foundation of how we view all other quotes and texts to the contrary on this topic.

Ellen White did not say "this is the foundation we are to use when studying the destruction of the wicked" Sky did.

In fact if you read just a little further on from where this quote is found you will see this:

Christ has declared that he will come the second time, to gather his faithful ones to himself: “Then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” [Matthew 24:30, 31.] Then shall they that obey not the gospel be consumed with the spirit of his mouth, and be destroyed with the brightness of his coming. [2 Thessalonians 2:8.]

Can you not see what you are doing here? This isolated quote is not the foundation of this topic just because you say it is. It does not trump all the many other Ellen White quotes on this topic, and all the scripture given on this just because you think it should.

Are we not supposed to go with the weight of evidence?

[pnattmbtc]

It is not so much I am biased Lutz.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: John317

The prophets of God use such language as "God destroyed," "the Lord slew," "Fire came down from God," "I (God) will destroy," etc.

Why not stay with the language of the Bible?

The language of the Bible says that "God killed Saul." "God sent fiery serpents upon the Israelites" "God sent a lying spirit to Ahab" etc. What's of interest is what's actually happening. The prophets described what they saw in vision, but God often presents Himself as doing that which He permits. Using the language of Scripture is fine, as long as we correctly understand what the language means.

Thats right Lutz. This is the language of the Bible and we know that Mrs. White has already explained this language and yet many refuse the light. And if i may add, it is not only when God permits but also when He commands. He gives the command to the angels, "No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy." No longer prevent Satan from possessing the souls of men, from inflicting sickness and diseases, physically, mentally, and spiritually upon them, ect etc.

"The power and malice of Satan and his host might justly alarm us were it not that we may find shelter and deliverance in the superior power of our Redeemer. We carefully secure our houses with bolts and locks to protect our property and our lives from evil men; but we seldom think of the evil angels who are constantly seeking access to us, and against whose attacks we have, in our own strength, no method of defense. If permitted, they can distract our minds, disorder and torment our bodies, destroy our possessions and our lives. Their only delight is in misery and destruction. Fearful is the condition of those who resist the divine claims and yield to Satan's temptations, until God gives them up to the control of evil spirits. But those who follow Christ are ever safe under His watchcare. Angels that excel in strength are sent from heaven to protect them. The wicked one cannot break through the guard which God has stationed about His people." G.C.517.

sky