Is destruction inevitable by a loving Creator?

[Twilight]

So you're saying basically that you don't know, right? So it sounds like you're open to the possibility that the view I'm presenting is correct? That is, I'm saying that Jesus Christ is the light of the glory of God who gives life to the righteous. He (or one could say God) is a consuming fire for the wicked, which destroys them. He does so not by literally setting them on fire, but because they have formed characters so out of harmony with Him and His principles that His mere presence is to them a consuming fire.

Given your answer, that you don't know what the fire is, it would seem to me this explanation should be possible, from your perspective. Is it? If not, please explain why not.

No I do not agree with your position.

Because I see no reason to move beyond the plain statements of scripture on this.

This is the point I was making above. :-)

I know this:

It will look like a fire and have the effects of fire, but to define it beyond that is more than I believe the scripture reveals.

I am not prepared to consider anything beyond this unless the Lord gives me revelation on the subject.

Mark :-)

[pnattmbtc]

To me it is simply a matter of accepting or rejecting light.

I don't agree with this, at least, as this sentence reads, and how I'm understanding it.

Dealing with a change of paradigm is very tricky! If one *sees* something in a different way, one is not necessarily rejecting light. One is rejecting something one sees as wrong. Paul (while he was Saul) did this. Amazingly, he said of his time persecuting the Lord, that he did not act contrary to his conscience. He demonstrated his sincerity in that when his paradigm changed on the Road to Damascus he obeyed the Lord implicitly. In his naivety, he excitedly told others of his friends and acquaintances that they had been wrong. Jesus Christ *was* the Messiah! But his friends, unlike him, *were* rejecting light, as their response indicated.

I'm giving this as an illustration that one can reject arguments regarding truth without necessarily rejecting light. Only the Lord knows what's in one's heart. These arguments may seem clear to you and me, but they aren't necessarily so for those who are reading them. It could well be that our explanations are not as clear as they should be, or we're not skillful enough to figure out how to communicate things in a way that someone with the paradigm they hold can understand.

I'll try to give another example of the principle I'm speaking of. I assume you're familiar with Piaget, the psychologist who explored child behavior. Before his work, the common idea was that children were basically like little adults, but Piaget had the idea that children thought in a fundamentally different way, but that as one becomes an adult, one forgets how one used to think. He designed experiments to demonstrate this.

For example, one experiment involved changing the shape of clay and weighing it to see if that changed the weight. To lumps of clay were presented to the child, and shown to weigh the same. In front of the child, the shape of one was changed, and the child was asked if the two clumps would weigh the same. Children who had learned the principle that changing the shape of an object does not affect its mass said they would weigh the same, while those who hadn't said it would. The experimenters tried to teach the principle involved to children who didn't know it. Then they repeated the experiment, but secretly removed a piece of the clay from one of the clumps, so it didn't weigh the same. The children who had just been taught the principle were confused. But to the children who knew the principle, this wasn't a mystery; they simply looked around for the missing piece of clay!

This is what happens when one's paradigm changes. What used to seem confusing (e.g. statements saying that God kills or destroys) becomes clear. The principles that God is presented as doing that this He permits, that Christ fully revealed the Father during His incarnation etc. kick in, and we recognize that the violence attributed to God has other explanations. When approached with seemingly contradictory statements, one looks for the missing clay.

This is a rather long-winded explanation to what I think is a very important principle, which gets to why we cannot judge another. We don't know another's paradigm. Things which may appear clear to us, so that we, if we responded identically to another would mean we were rejecting light may not mean the same thing to the other.

Consider the statement of Teresa's where she spoke of Ellen White's being concerned with rejecting the teaching of eternal torment because that would lead to the wicked taking solace. Her whole way of looking at this changed drastically over time, as GC 535-536, for example, demonstrates.

So, in my opinion, it's not a simple principle of accepting or rejecting light. It's a very complicated principle of dealing with different paradigms.

One of the reasons I participate in these discussions is to try to better understand these paradigms. I too used to think that God set people on fire. In my case, I think it was simply because I didn't think it through very carefully. However, my paradigm changed, and I'm simply unable to think how I used to think. But if I'm going to communicate with people who think this way, the better I understand how they think, the better chance I have of communicating in a way that will generate an "aha!" experience.

Jesus Christ was the absolute master of this. He awes me in this regard. For example, consider His ability to reach Nicodemus and Simon, the pharisees. Amazing!

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: epaminondas

The Bible says it'll be whoosh, and they're gone.

What could be done? There are only so many possibilities.

• Remake them. Change them so they're good boys and girls, whether they want it or not. This negates their freedom of choice.
• As they will be a corrupting influence, banish them to their own care. It will be a dog eat dog place with Satan the top dog. A grim scenario. Ultimately Hayflick's limit will catch up with them. Unlike the saved, telomerase will still be inactive in them - a minor genetic modification which they didn't have, so they will still die. It will be very unpleasant to their saved loved ones knowing sons, daughters, fathers and mothers are where they are till they die, which will be a merciful release from such a place.
• A quick euthanasia. They'll just be gone - no pain, no suffering, not even rest, just gone. Even though their saved friends and relatives would have wished for a different ending, this is preferable to the second option.

I cannot think of other possibilities. The last one is most likely the best. [/quote']i would like the last the best also. ive learned not to be out for vengence here and now, as in wanting any to suffer...i should say i am learning. so i cant see that i want any to suffer in that horrible day either.

we will know for sure on that day, tho, one way or the other.

Euthenesia would be okay with me too but this is not how it will happen. We may be sure that the judgements of God will fall upon all the wicked in that day and upon Satan and all of his evil angels. The language of the Bible is that fire from God out of heaven will fall upon them all to consume them but we know now what that language means. God will not interfere as the unsaved of all ages shall all agree to put the blame for their being lost eternally upon Satan and his angels and they will turn upon them with the fury of demons and in this greatest battle of the ages, fire will break out from among them but their physical pain will be nothing in comparison with their mental agony as they will feel the sense of eternal separation from God. They will get a taste of what Christ felt in His last hours of agony, so much so that He hardly felt His physical pain.

" Jesus was to be crucifed for the sins of men. What suffering then, would the sinner bear who continued in sin? All the impenitent and unbelieving would know a sorrow and misery that language would fail to express." ."

"So great was this agony that His physical pain was hardly felt." D.A.753.

sky

[pnattmbtc]

I agree with the principles sky speaks of, but it appears to me I see some particulars a bit differently. In particular, I think the wicked will suffer in proportion to their sin as a result of the judgment, where God goes through their lives with each of them, where they see where they went in the wrong direction, as the meaning of each sin becomes clear, how they rejected Christ, etc. The reason the suffering is disproportionate is entirely logical: the more sin against light, the more suffering when that is revealed.

It seems to me that if the wicked had a war at the end, and there was a nuclear bomb that went off, even now there are bombs powerful enough to destroy people instantaneously. This would enable an interpretation where the wicked suffer proportionately to their sin, and still account for the section in "The Great Controversy" which speaks of how the wicked will turn on each other and Satan.

This is just a suggestion. I'm keeping an open mind. There are certain things I'm more sure about than others. For example, I'm sure God will not set people on fire like a torch, supernaturally keeping them alive so they can suffer excruciating pain.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: sky

To me it is simply a matter of accepting or rejecting light.

I don't agree with this, at least, as this sentence reads, and how I'm understanding it.

Dealing with a change of paradigm is very tricky! If one *sees* something in a different way, one is not necessarily rejecting light. One is rejecting something one sees as wrong. Paul (while he was Saul) did this. Amazingly, he said of his time persecuting the Lord, that he did not act contrary to his conscience. He demonstrated his sincerity in that when his paradigm changed on the Road to Damascus he obeyed the Lord implicitly. In his naivety, he excitedly told others of his friends and acquaintances that they had been wrong. Jesus Christ *was* the Messiah! But his friends, unlike him, *were* rejecting light, as their response indicated.

I'm giving this as an illustration that one can reject arguments regarding truth without necessarily rejecting light. Only the Lord knows what's in one's heart. These arguments may seem clear to you and me, but they aren't necessarily so for those who are reading them. It could well be that our explanations are not as clear as they should be, or we're not skillful enough to figure out how to communicate things in a way that someone with the paradigm they hold can understand.

I'll try to give another example of the principle I'm speaking of. I assume you're familiar with Piaget, the psychologist who explored child behavior. Before his work, the common idea was that children were basically like little adults, but Piaget had the idea that children thought in a fundamentally different way, but that as one becomes an adult, one forgets how one used to think. He designed experiments to demonstrate this.

For example, one experiment involved changing the shape of clay and weighing it to see if that changed the weight. To lumps of clay were presented to the child, and shown to weigh the same. In front of the child, the shape of one was changed, and the child was asked if the two clumps would weigh the same. Children who had learned the principle that changing the shape of an object does not affect its mass said they would weigh the same, while those who hadn't said it would. The experimenters tried to teach the principle involved to children who didn't know it. Then they repeated the experiment, but secretly removed a piece of the clay from one of the clumps, so it didn't weigh the same. The children who had just been taught the principle were confused. But to the children who knew the principle, this wasn't a mystery; they simply looked around for the missing piece of clay!

This is what happens when one's paradigm changes. What used to seem confusing (e.g. statements saying that God kills or destroys) becomes clear. The principles that God is presented as doing that this He permits, that Christ fully revealed the Father during His incarnation etc. kick in, and we recognize that the violence attributed to God has other explanations. When approached with seemingly contradictory statements, one looks for the missing clay.

This is a rather long-winded explanation to what I think is a very important principle, which gets to why we cannot judge another. We don't know another's paradigm. Things which may appear clear to us, so that we, if we responded identically to another would mean we were rejecting light may not mean the same thing to the other.

Consider the statement of Teresa's where she spoke of Ellen White's being concerned with rejecting the teaching of eternal torment because that would lead to the wicked taking solace. Her whole way of looking at this changed drastically over time, as GC 535-536, for example, demonstrates.

So, in my opinion, it's not a simple principle of accepting or rejecting light. It's a very complicated principle of dealing with different paradigms.

One of the reasons I participate in these discussions is to try to better understand these paradigms. I too used to think that God set people on fire. In my case, I think it was simply because I didn't think it through very carefully. However, my paradigm changed, and I'm simply unable to think how I used to think. But if I'm going to communicate with people who think this way, the better I understand how they think, the better chance I have of communicating in a way that will generate an "aha!" experience.

Jesus Christ was the absolute master of this. He awes me in this regard. For example, consider His ability to reach Nicodemus and Simon, the pharisees. Amazing!

I will dare to disagree with you on this. The warning is clear: "When one ray of light is disregarded there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned." D.A.322

I don't know how the Lord could have made this matter more plain. It does not say that when one ray of light is disregarded that the individual is lost but that it is dangerous to resist light, to resist one ray of light. The example Teresa gave of Mrs. White shows only one thing and that is that when the light was clearly shown to her on those two particular subjects she accepted the light. These statements refer to a time in her experience when the light had not yet been clearly presented to her.

Today the Lord is causing His light to shine brightly upon us in regard to His character, in regard to the nature of His government and the principles of His dealing with sin. Are we going to argue with Him when He clearly says that He is not the executioner of the sentence against transgression? How long does it take to believe that? When He says that His judgments do not come out directly from Him upon the wicked, How long does it take to believe Him? When He explains to us how holy angels "destroy" at His command, how long should it take for us to believe Him? When He has clearly explained to us what His "wrath" is, that His restraining power is in a measure removed (until it is fully removed) from the agencies of evil so that a train of circumstances arises that will punish sin with sin, how long should it take us to believe Him?

Either we believe these simple declarations or we don't. If we disregard these simple declarations of truth, there will be a partial benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing will be less clearly discerned until it will be night in the soul. This is what happened to Pharaoh of old and to the Jewish leaders and this is what is happening today. There is nothing new under the sun.

"When one ray of light is disregarded there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned. So the darkness increases, until it is night in the soul. Thus it had been with the Jewish leaders."

"What Pharaoh has done will be done again and again by men until the close of probation. God destroys no man; but when a man stifles conviction, when he turns from evidence, he is sowing unbelief and will reap as he has sown." Review and Herald, Vol.6, p.285.

sky

* pnatt, your opinion or my opinion does not count. What counts is what inspirations has to say on the matter. Fair enough?

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

I don't agree with this' date=' at least, as this sentence reads, and how I'm understanding it.

Dealing with a change of paradigm is very tricky! If one *sees* something in a different way, one is not necessarily rejecting light. One is rejecting something one sees as wrong. Paul (while he was Saul) did this. Amazingly, he said of his time persecuting the Lord, that he did not act contrary to his conscience. He demonstrated his sincerity in that when his paradigm changed on the Road to Damascus he obeyed the Lord implicitly. In his naivety, he excitedly told others of his friends and acquaintances that they had been wrong. Jesus Christ *was* the Messiah! But his friends, unlike him, *were* rejecting light, as their response indicated.

I'm giving this as an illustration that one can reject arguments regarding truth without necessarily rejecting light. Only the Lord knows what's in one's heart. These arguments may seem clear to you and me, but they aren't necessarily so for those who are reading them. It could well be that our explanations are not as clear as they should be, or we're not skillful enough to figure out how to communicate things in a way that someone with the paradigm they hold can understand.

I'll try to give another example of the principle I'm speaking of. I assume you're familiar with Piaget, the psychologist who explored child behavior. Before his work, the common idea was that children were basically like little adults, but Piaget had the idea that children thought in a fundamentally different way, but that as one becomes an adult, one forgets how one used to think. He designed experiments to demonstrate this.

For example, one experiment involved changing the shape of clay and weighing it to see if that changed the weight. To lumps of clay were presented to the child, and shown to weigh the same. In front of the child, the shape of one was changed, and the child was asked if the two clumps would weigh the same. Children who had learned the principle that changing the shape of an object does not affect its mass said they would weigh the same, while those who hadn't said it would. The experimenters tried to teach the principle involved to children who didn't know it. Then they repeated the experiment, but secretly removed a piece of the clay from one of the clumps, so it didn't weigh the same. The children who had just been taught the principle were confused. But to the children who knew the principle, this wasn't a mystery; they simply looked around for the missing piece of clay!

This is what happens when one's paradigm changes. What used to seem confusing (e.g. statements saying that God kills or destroys) becomes clear. The principles that God is presented as doing that this He permits, that Christ fully revealed the Father during His incarnation etc. kick in, and we recognize that the violence attributed to God has other explanations. When approached with seemingly contradictory statements, one looks for the missing clay.

This is a rather long-winded explanation to what I think is a very important principle, which gets to why we cannot judge another. We don't know another's paradigm. Things which may appear clear to us, so that we, if we responded identically to another would mean we were rejecting light may not mean the same thing to the other.

Consider the statement of Teresa's where she spoke of Ellen White's being concerned with rejecting the teaching of eternal torment because that would lead to the wicked taking solace. Her whole way of looking at this changed drastically over time, as GC 535-536, for example, demonstrates.

So, in my opinion, it's not a simple principle of accepting or rejecting light. It's a very complicated principle of dealing with different paradigms.

One of the reasons I participate in these discussions is to try to better understand these paradigms. I too used to think that God set people on fire. In my case, I think it was simply because I didn't think it through very carefully. However, my paradigm changed, and I'm simply unable to think how I used to think. But if I'm going to communicate with people who think this way, the better I understand how they think, the better chance I have of communicating in a way that will generate an "aha!" experience.

Jesus Christ was the absolute master of this. He awes me in this regard. For example, consider His ability to reach Nicodemus and Simon, the pharisees. Amazing! [/quote']

I will dare to disagree with you on this. The warning is clear: "When one ray of light is disregarded there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned." D.A.322

I don't know how the Lord could have made this matter more plain. It does not say that when one ray of light is disregarded that the individual is lost but but that it is dangerous to resist light, to resist one ray of light. The example Teresa gave of Mrs. White shows only one thing and that is that when the light was clearly shown to her on those two particular subjects she accepted the light. These statements refer to a time in her experience when the light had not yet been clearly presented to her.

Today the Lord is causing His light to shine brightly upon us in regard to His character, in regard to the nature of His government and the principles of His dealing with sin. Are we going to argue with Him when He clearly says that He is not the executioner of the sentence against transgression? How long does it take to believe that? When He says that His judgments do not come out directly from Him upon the wicked, How long does it take to believe Him? When He explains to us how holy angels "destroy" at His command, how long should it take for us to believe Him? When He has clearly explained to us what His "wrath" is, that His restraining power is in a measure removed (until it is fully removed) from the agencies of evil so that a train of circumstances arises that will punish sin with sin, how long should it take us to believe Him?

Either we believe these simple declarations or we don't. If we disregard these simple declarations of truth, there will be a partial benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing will be less clearly discerned until it will be night in the soul. This is what happened to Pharaoh of old and to the Jewish leaders and this is what is happening today. There is nothing new under the sun.

"When one ray of light is disregarded there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned. So the darkness increases, until it is night in the soul. Thus it had been with the Jewish leaders."

"What Pharaoh has done will be done again and again by men until the close of probation. God destroys no man; but when a man stifles conviction, when he turns from evidence, he is sowing unbelief and will reap as he has sown." Review and Herald, Vol.6, p.285.

sky

What if it is you rejecting light, what then Sky?

[skyblue888]

I do know that I am not the one rejecting light here. I accept what the Lord says through His servant the prophet. I believe Him implicitly when He says that "the merits of a crucified and risen Saviour are sufficient to present to the Father in our behalf" in order to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit which brings all other blessings in its train. I believe this implicitly, just as I believe Him implicitly when He explains to me that His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the sinner. I believe Him implicitly when He tells me that He does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression. I believe Him implicitly when He tells me that when one ray of light is disregarded there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned. I believe everything He says implicilty and that is why I have no problem understanding what the language of the Bible means when it comes to describing God's actions. I believe Him implicity when He tells me that the representation made in chapter 28 of Ezekiel refers primarily to Lucifer.

I believe Him implicitly when He tells me that on the new earth the sun and the moon will be restored to their original brightness.

"Implicit belief in the Word of God is true humility, true self-surrender." D.A.535.

I am sorry to say but you have made it clear that you do not believe the Lord implicitly regarding what He has declared concerning His character, the nature of His government and the principles of His dealing with sin which are ever the same.

What I see you are doing is using human reasoning, intellectual philosophy, against a Thus Saith the Lord. This is what you are doing Mark and for that reason you are making it next to impossible for you to retrace your steps. I believe you are now on very dangerous ground.

My prayer is for you to retrace your steps and reconsider the clear declarations of the Lord. The Lord has given us so much evidence in regard to the principles of His dealing with sin that we are now under obligation to believe.

sky

[skyblue888]

"The only remedy is belief in the truth, acceptance of the light." T.M.91.

And the truth that the Holy Spirit has been impressing upon our minds and hearts again and again lately is that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown."

That "His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the sinner but in this way, they place themselves beyond His protection."

This has always been true and always will be whether before or after the 1000 years.

That the only time holy angels "destroy" is when they receive the command from God to "No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy" which simply means that the Lord will "no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing his work." This is what Holy Writ means when it is said that at the close of probation holy angels will pour out the vials of God's wrath upon the inhabitants of the earth.

For these reasons alone, we may always know that neither God nor His holy angels are directly involved in the work of destruction except that they can no longer hold back the winds of strife or the malice and enmity of Satan.

After the thousand years it will be the same principle in action. Neither God nor holy angels will interfere when the wicked of all ages turn upon Satan and his angels to tear them apart. They will die at the hand of the most terrible of the nations. Let us believe it because it is the truth, because God says so. We cannot tell God how to teach His message. Since the Lord has already told us that this is the way it is going to be, then we should believe Him implicitly, especially that through the Testimonies of His Spirit He has already confirmed that this is the correct understanding, as shown in The Great Controversy, p.672.

sky

[Guest]

Yes my friend.

This message that God does not destroy, will benumb and cloud the mind so that light cannot enter in.

It will make one incapable of studying the issue in a dispassionate manner.

It will take an emotional ideal and apply it to God no matter what the SOP and Bible states.

As this light is rejected, more and more absurd doctrines will be imbibed.

Until the very work a person is given is lost sight of, because they are busy chasing squirrels in the woods.

This message is deceipt, it is not from God.

In love,

Mark

Amen

[skyblue888]

"It is the darkness of misapprehension of God that is enshwrouding the world. Men are losing (have lost) their knowledge of His character. It has been misunderstood and misinterpreted. At this time, a message from God is to be proclaimed, illuminating in its influence and saving in its power. His character is to be made known. Into the darkness of the world (in the church first) is to be shed the light of His glory, the light of His goodness, mercy and truth." C.O.L.415.

There is a real danger to interpose between the heaven-sent light and the people. Let us take off the shoes from off our feet for we are on holy ground here.

If we persistenly resist the simple declarations of the Holy Spirit of God regarding His character, the nature of His government, and the principles of His dealing with sin, it will soon be night in the soul and it will be impossible for us to endure the trial that is before us. We can honor God only as we have a right conception of His character, government and purposes, and act in accordance with them. See G.C.492,593.

I am not saying this but the Lord is. See D.A.322, bottom of page.

sky

[Twilight]

"The only remedy is belief in the truth, acceptance of the light." T.M.91.

And the truth that the Holy Spirit has been impressing upon our minds and hearts again and again lately is that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown."

That "His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the sinner but in this way, they place themselves beyond His protection."

This has always been true and always will be whether before or after the 1000 years.

That the only time holy angels "destroy" is when they receive the command from God to "No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy" which simply means that the Lord will "no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing his work." This is what Holy Writ means when it is said that at the close of probation holy angels will pour out the vials of God's wrath upon the inhabitants of the earth.

For these reasons alone, we may always know that neither God nor His holy angels are directly involved in the work of destruction except that they can no longer hold back the winds of strife or the malice and enmity of Satan.

After the thousand years it will be the same principle in action. Neither God nor holy angels will interfere when the wicked of all ages turn upon Satan and his angels to tear them apart. They will die at the hand of the most terrible of the nations. Let us believe it because it is the truth, because God says so. We cannot tell God how to teach His message. Since the Lord has already told us that this is the way it is going to be, then we should believe Him implicitly, especially that through the Testimonies of His Spirit He has already confirmed that this is the correct understanding, as shown in The Great Controversy, p.672.

sky

And the truth that the Holy Spirit has been impressing upon our minds and hearts again and again lately is that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown."

I am sure you think it is the Holy Spirit Sky.

But we are to test the spirits.

We are to examine these things to see if they are so.

Comparing scripture with scripture.

That has been done here.

That is why this "truth" has been rejected, upon that basis.

Because it contradicts some plain truths as revealed in scripture.

That is the reason.

Mark

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

I'm asking this:

Quote:

It sounds like you do not believe that Jesus Christ in His humanity provided a full revelation of God's character. (i.e., all that man needs to know or can know of God). We need to supplement what Christ revealed in His humanity with other things, such as stories of destruction.

I'm asking if I've understood you correctly. This is a yes or no question. To help me out, please start with "yes" or "no" and then explain your answer as you wish.

Thanks! [/quote']

Ok my friend. :-)

Yes, Christ has revealed sufficiently what man needs to know of Gods Character.

But that revealing was not just done during those 3 1/2 years.

It is threaded throughout the history of humanity and recorded in the bible.

It is also prophetically laid down as to His activities now and in the future.

It is when we consider "all" of this, we have a panarama to view.

Not to claim to fully comprehend, but one to view.

I hold to the position that we have to look at all of Jesus' roles to gauge His character (as much as we are able).

Gods self sacrificing love however was revealed in its fullest on the cross.

I hope that answers your question?

as for me and my house we will follow the counsel of the messenger of the Lord.

Quote:

This means that you are to study the life of Christ. You are to study it with as much more earnestness than you study secular lines of knowledge, as eternal interests are more important than temporal, earthly pursuits. If you appreciate the value and sacredness of eternal things, you will bring your sharpest thoughts, your best energies, to the solving of the problem that involves your eternal well-being; for every other interest sinks into nothingness in comparison with that. {AG 241.2}

You have the Pattern, Christ Jesus; walk in His footsteps. {AG 241.3}

Quote:

We should embrace every opportunity to present the truth in its purity and simplicity, where there is any desire or interest to hear the reasons of our faith. Those who have dwelt mostly upon the prophecies and the theoretical points of our faith, should without delay become Bible students upon practical subjects. They should take a deeper draught at the fountain of divine truth. They should carefully study the life of Christ, and his lessons of practical godliness, given for the benefit of all, and to be the rule of right living for all who should believe on his name. They should be imbued with the spirit of their great Exemplar, and have a high sense of the sacred life of a follower of Christ. {GW92 182.2}

Quote:

Christ is soon coming in the clouds of heaven, and we must be prepared to meet Him, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing. . . . The converting power of God must be upon our hearts. We must study the life of Christ, and imitate the divine Pattern. We must dwell upon the perfection of His character, and be changed into His image. No one will enter the kingdom of God unless his will is brought into captivity to the will of Christ. {HP 285.2}

Professed Christians keep altogether too near the lowlands of earth. Their eyes are trained to see only commonplace things, and their minds dwell upon the things their eyes behold. Their religious experience is often shallow and unsatisfying, and their words are light and valueless. How can such reflect the image of Christ? How can they send forth the bright beams of the Sun of Righteousness? . . . {HP 285.3}

Quote:

All the contempt and bitterness that Christ met day by day could not rob Him of His self-possession. When He was reviled, He reviled not again. . . . He never overstepped the bounds of decorum. Who was He? The Majesty of heaven, the King of glory. The storm raised by His opponents beat about Him, but He heeded it not. He could afford to be calm; for He was the living embodiment of truth. {LHU 167.3}

And those today who bear the message of truth to the world should study the life of Christ, and practice His lessons. Never forget that you are children of the heavenly King, sons and daughters of the Lord of hosts. Maintain a calm repose in God, even when meeting with those who are moved by a power from beneath to uphold falsehood. Be sure that the best weapons they possess are not able to destroy the truth, however they may strive to blacken it by misrepresentation. "If God be for us, who can be against us?" . . . {LHU 167.4}

Quote:

But adoption into the family of God makes us children, not slaves. When the love of Christ enters the heart we strive to imitate the character of Christ. . . . The more we study the life of Christ with a heart to learn, the more Christlike we become. Into the heart of every true doer of the Word the Holy Spirit infuses clear understanding. The more we crucify selfish practices by imparting our blessings to others and by exercising our God-given ability, the more the heavenly graces will be strengthened and increased in us. We will grow in spirituality, in patience, in fortitude, in meekness, in gentleness. . . . A train of cars is not merely attached to the engine; they follow on the same track as the engine. Whom are we following? {OFC 124.1}

Quote:

It would be well for us to spend a thoughtful hour each day in contemplation of the life of Christ. We should take it point by point, and let the imagination grasp each scene, especially the closing ones. As we thus dwell upon His great sacrifice for us, our confidence in Him will be more constant, our love will be quickened, and we shall be more deeply imbued with His spirit. If we would be saved at last, we must learn the lesson of penitence and humiliation at the foot of the cross. {DA 83.4}

these few quotes are by no means comprehensive.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

"The only remedy is belief in the truth, acceptance of the light." T.M.91.

And the truth that the Holy Spirit has been impressing upon our minds and hearts again and again lately is that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown."

That "His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the sinner but in this way, they place themselves beyond His protection."

This has always been true and always will be whether before or after the 1000 years.

That the only time holy angels "destroy" is when they receive the command from God to "No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy" which simply means that the Lord will "no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing his work." This is what Holy Writ means when it is said that at the close of probation holy angels will pour out the vials of God's wrath upon the inhabitants of the earth.

For these reasons alone, we may always know that neither God nor His holy angels are directly involved in the work of destruction except that they can no longer hold back the winds of strife or the malice and enmity of Satan.

After the thousand years it will be the same principle in action. Neither God nor holy angels will interfere when the wicked of all ages turn upon Satan and his angels to tear them apart. They will die at the hand of the most terrible of the nations. Let us believe it because it is the truth, because God says so. We cannot tell God how to teach His message. Since the Lord has already told us that this is the way it is going to be, then we should believe Him implicitly, especially that through the Testimonies of His Spirit He has already confirmed that this is the correct understanding, as shown in The Great Controversy, p.672.

sky

And the truth that the Holy Spirit has been impressing upon our minds and hearts again and again lately is that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown."

I am sure you think it is the Holy Spirit Sky.

But we are to test the spirits.

We are to examine these things to see if they are so.

Comparing scripture with scripture.

That has been done here.

That is why this "truth" has been rejected, upon that basis.

Because it contradicts some plain truths as revealed in scripture.

That is the reason.

Mark

So you mean to tell us that this statement "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown," is not from the Holy Spirit?

And you mean to tell us that when Mrs. White says, "I was shown that the judgments of God would not come directly out from the Lord upon them but in this way--they place themselves beyond His protection," is not from the Holy Spirit either?

And that when we read from her pen that holy angels destroy at God's command in the sense that they receive the command from God to No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy, that this is not the Holy Spirit impressing the truth of God's character upon our minds and hearts, that this is not the Holy Spirit impressing the truth of God upon us, that indeed He does NOT stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression?

but that it is all a lie?

Are we not turning the truth into a lie if we say these things?

sky

If we think that these statements contradict Scripture it is only because we are disregarding the light given as to how the Scriptures are to be understood. This is taught from the Scriptures but even when it is shown from the Scriptures alone do we believe? The death of King Saul is a perfect example of that and the hardening of Pharaoh's heart and many other examples which have been presented here and which were confirmed by the Testimonies of God's Spirit.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Gail

I've heard that the mixture of blood and water that came out of Jesus' side when the spear was thrust there is a physical symptom of just that- a broken heart. [/quote']

When we understand the connection between the "spirit" of a man and his heart and the connection between our spirit and the Holy Spirit, we can understand that Jesus and the Holy Spirit were seperated.

That seperation would be a breaking of Jesus heart.

mark, how does this tie in with the bible and sop statements?

this sounds very much along the lines of spiritualism. correct me if i misunderstand you.

[Twilight]

I do know that I am not the one rejecting light here. I accept what the Lord says through His servant the prophet. I believe Him implicitly when He says that "the merits of a crucified and risen Saviour are sufficient to present to the Father in our behalf" in order to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit which brings all other blessings in its train. I believe this implicitly, just as I believe Him implicitly when He explains to me that His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the sinner. I believe Him implicitly when He tells me that He does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression. I believe Him implicitly when He tells me that when one ray of light is disregarded there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned. I believe everything He says implicilty and that is why I have no problem understanding what the language of the Bible means when it comes to describing God's actions. I believe Him implicity when He tells me that the representation made in chapter 28 of Ezekiel refers primarily to Lucifer.

I believe Him implicitly when He tells me that on the new earth the sun and the moon will be restored to their original brightness.

"Implicit belief in the Word of God is true humility, true self-surrender." D.A.535.

I am sorry to say but you have made it clear that you do not believe the Lord implicitly regarding what He has declared concerning His character, the nature of His government and the principles of His dealing with sin which are ever the same.

What I see you are doing is using human reasoning, intellectual philosophy, against a Thus Saith the Lord. This is what you are doing Mark and for that reason you are making it next to impossible for you to retrace your steps. I believe you are now on very dangerous ground.

My prayer is for you to retrace your steps and reconsider the clear declarations of the Lord. The Lord has given us so much evidence in regard to the principles of His dealing with sin that we are now under obligation to believe.

sky

Nothing I say or anyone else is going to change your mind on this Sky.

Only the Holy Spirit can do that now.

Mark

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

mark, how does this tie in with the bible and sop statements?

this sounds very much along the lines of spiritualism. correct me if i misunderstand you.

This has already been pointed out before.

I noticed that Mark is also resorting to human intellect, which is exactly what Mrs White predicted would happen. Opposing human intellect to a Thus saith the Lord.

"Our religion would be changed... A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced." 1 S.M.234.

sky

We cannot explain the work of the Holy Spirit upon the heart. See F.W.65.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

Why? It's not necessary to believe man will kill Satan to believe that God does not destroy the wicked by setting them on fire.

[/quote']

What of Ellen Whites statement above plainly declaring Holy Angels destroy?

Here it is again:

The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits. There are forces now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere.--GC 614 (1911). {LDE 243.4}

are you reading the words "in the same way" into this statement?

in other words do you see the unfallen angels destroying in the same way that fallen angels destroy?

[Twilight]

I am not saying this but the Lord is. See D.A.322, bottom of page.

sky

No Sky.

You are saying the Lord is saying it.

There is a difference. :-(

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

What does it mean to say He doesn't change? It must mean His character doesn't change, correct? You're saying that by not recognizing that His role changes, His character is being misrepresented. I don't see how this idea fits in with the following:

Quote:

All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son.

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him." John 1:18.

Taking humanity upon Him, Christ came to be one with humanity and at the same time to reveal our heavenly Father to sinful human beings. He was in all things made like unto His brethren. He became flesh, even as we are. (8T 216)

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him." John 1:18.

So did Jesus "only" declare the Father for those 3 1/2 years?

Did He not declare Him at any other time? [/quote']as has been pointed out we need to take into consideration context.

Quote:

Joh 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Joh 1:19 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?

Joh 1:20 And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.

Joh 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

Joh 1:22 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?

Joh 1:23 He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.

Joh 1:24 And they which were sent were of the Pharisees.

Joh 1:25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

Joh 1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;

Joh 1:27 He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

taking the verse in its context we do a disservice to the point made by trying to make it mean anything other than the life of Christ here on earth.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

I am not saying this but the Lord is. See D.A.322, bottom of page.

sky

No Sky.

You are saying the Lord is saying it.

There is a difference. :-(

So if I understand what you are saying, Mark, if the Lord says that "when one ray of light is disregarded there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned," and that sky says that it is the Lord who is saying that, then because it is sky who is saying that the Lord is saying that, that it is no longer the Lord who is saying it?

sky

[teresaq]

Yes my friend.

This message that God does not destroy, will benumb and cloud the mind so that light cannot enter in.

It will make one incapable of studying the issue in a dispassionate manner.

It will take an emotional ideal and apply it to God no matter what the SOP and Bible states.

As this light is rejected, more and more absurd doctrines will be imbibed.

Until the very work a person is given is lost sight of, because they are busy chasing squirrels in the woods.

This message is deceipt, it is not from God.

interesting accusations.

what proof do you have for these?

i mean we shouldnt go around throwing out accusations unless we have some basis for them.

so what basis, what proof, do you have that your statements are true?

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

I do know that I am not the one rejecting light here. I accept what the Lord says through His servant the prophet. I believe Him implicitly when He says that "the merits of a crucified and risen Saviour are sufficient to present to the Father in our behalf" in order to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit which brings all other blessings in its train. I believe this implicitly, just as I believe Him implicitly when He explains to me that His judgments do not come directly out from Him upon the sinner. I believe Him implicitly when He tells me that He does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression. I believe Him implicitly when He tells me that when one ray of light is disregarded there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing is less clearly discerned. I believe everything He says implicilty and that is why I have no problem understanding what the language of the Bible means when it comes to describing God's actions. I believe Him implicity when He tells me that the representation made in chapter 28 of Ezekiel refers primarily to Lucifer.

I believe Him implicitly when He tells me that on the new earth the sun and the moon will be restored to their original brightness.

"Implicit belief in the Word of God is true humility, true self-surrender." D.A.535.

I am sorry to say but you have made it clear that you do not believe the Lord implicitly regarding what He has declared concerning His character, the nature of His government and the principles of His dealing with sin which are ever the same.

What I see you are doing is using human reasoning, intellectual philosophy, against a Thus Saith the Lord. This is what you are doing Mark and for that reason you are making it next to impossible for you to retrace your steps. I believe you are now on very dangerous ground.

My prayer is for you to retrace your steps and reconsider the clear declarations of the Lord. The Lord has given us so much evidence in regard to the principles of His dealing with sin that we are now under obligation to believe.

sky

Nothing I say or anyone else is going to change your mind on this Sky.

Only the Holy Spirit can do that now.

Mark

Why should I change my mind on this Mark? I have a plain thus says the Lord and what do you have? nothing except human philosophy! Sorry but that is the plain truth. You keep asking rhetorical questions!

sky

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I'm asking this:

Quote:

It sounds like you do not believe that Jesus Christ in His humanity provided a full revelation of God's character. (i.e., all that man needs to know or can know of God). We need to supplement what Christ revealed in His humanity with other things, such as stories of destruction.

I'm asking if I've understood you correctly. This is a yes or no question. To help me out, please start with "yes" or "no" and then explain your answer as you wish.

Thanks! [/quote']

Ok my friend. :-)

Yes, Christ has revealed sufficiently what man needs to know of Gods Character.

But that revealing was not just done during those 3 1/2 years.

It is threaded throughout the history of humanity and recorded in the bible.

It is also prophetically laid down as to His activities now and in the future.

It is when we consider "all" of this, we have a panarama to view.

Not to claim to fully comprehend, but one to view.

I hold to the position that we have to look at all of Jesus' roles to gauge His character (as much as we are able).

Gods self sacrificing love however was revealed in its fullest on the cross.

I hope that answers your question?

as for me and my house we will follow the counsel of the messenger of the Lord.

Quote:

This means that you are to study the life of Christ. You are to study it with as much more earnestness than you study secular lines of knowledge, as eternal interests are more important than temporal, earthly pursuits. If you appreciate the value and sacredness of eternal things, you will bring your sharpest thoughts, your best energies, to the solving of the problem that involves your eternal well-being; for every other interest sinks into nothingness in comparison with that. {AG 241.2}

You have the Pattern, Christ Jesus; walk in His footsteps. {AG 241.3}

Quote:

We should embrace every opportunity to present the truth in its purity and simplicity, where there is any desire or interest to hear the reasons of our faith. Those who have dwelt mostly upon the prophecies and the theoretical points of our faith, should without delay become Bible students upon practical subjects. They should take a deeper draught at the fountain of divine truth. They should carefully study the life of Christ, and his lessons of practical godliness, given for the benefit of all, and to be the rule of right living for all who should believe on his name. They should be imbued with the spirit of their great Exemplar, and have a high sense of the sacred life of a follower of Christ. {GW92 182.2}

Quote:

Christ is soon coming in the clouds of heaven, and we must be prepared to meet Him, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing. . . . The converting power of God must be upon our hearts. We must study the life of Christ, and imitate the divine Pattern. We must dwell upon the perfection of His character, and be changed into His image. No one will enter the kingdom of God unless his will is brought into captivity to the will of Christ. {HP 285.2}

Professed Christians keep altogether too near the lowlands of earth. Their eyes are trained to see only commonplace things, and their minds dwell upon the things their eyes behold. Their religious experience is often shallow and unsatisfying, and their words are light and valueless. How can such reflect the image of Christ? How can they send forth the bright beams of the Sun of Righteousness? . . . {HP 285.3}

Quote:

All the contempt and bitterness that Christ met day by day could not rob Him of His self-possession. When He was reviled, He reviled not again. . . . He never overstepped the bounds of decorum. Who was He? The Majesty of heaven, the King of glory. The storm raised by His opponents beat about Him, but He heeded it not. He could afford to be calm; for He was the living embodiment of truth. {LHU 167.3}

And those today who bear the message of truth to the world should study the life of Christ, and practice His lessons. Never forget that you are children of the heavenly King, sons and daughters of the Lord of hosts. Maintain a calm repose in God, even when meeting with those who are moved by a power from beneath to uphold falsehood. Be sure that the best weapons they possess are not able to destroy the truth, however they may strive to blacken it by misrepresentation. "If God be for us, who can be against us?" . . . {LHU 167.4}

Quote:

But adoption into the family of God makes us children, not slaves. When the love of Christ enters the heart we strive to imitate the character of Christ. . . . The more we study the life of Christ with a heart to learn, the more Christlike we become. Into the heart of every true doer of the Word the Holy Spirit infuses clear understanding. The more we crucify selfish practices by imparting our blessings to others and by exercising our God-given ability, the more the heavenly graces will be strengthened and increased in us. We will grow in spirituality, in patience, in fortitude, in meekness, in gentleness. . . . A train of cars is not merely attached to the engine; they follow on the same track as the engine. Whom are we following? {OFC 124.1}

Quote:

It would be well for us to spend a thoughtful hour each day in contemplation of the life of Christ. We should take it point by point, and let the imagination grasp each scene, especially the closing ones. As we thus dwell upon His great sacrifice for us, our confidence in Him will be more constant, our love will be quickened, and we shall be more deeply imbued with His spirit. If we would be saved at last, we must learn the lesson of penitence and humiliation at the foot of the cross. {DA 83.4}

these few quotes are by no means comprehensive.

You will not find me disagreeing with any of the counsel to behold Christ, I labour to do it all my waking hours...

But your comment:

"as for me and mine..."

Would indicate that you have judged of me differently.

Why would you do that Teresa?

Honest question, not a prelude to an argument.

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

And the truth that the Holy Spirit has been impressing upon our minds and hearts again and again lately is that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown."

I am sure you think it is the Holy Spirit Sky.

But we are to test the spirits.

We are to examine these things to see if they are so.

Comparing scripture with scripture.

That has been done here.

That is why this "truth" has been rejected, upon that basis.

Because it contradicts some plain truths as revealed in scripture.

That is the reason.

Mark [/quote']

So you mean to tell us that this statement "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown," is not from the Holy Spirit?

And you mean to tell us that when Mrs. White says, "I was shown that the judgments of God would not come directly out from the Lord upon them but in this way--they place themselves beyond His protection," is not from the Holy Spirit either?

And that when we read from her pen that holy angels destroy at God's command in the sense that they receive the command from God to No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy, that this is not the Holy Spirit impressing the truth of God's character upon our minds and hearts, that this is not the Holy Spirit impressing the truth of God upon us, that indeed He does NOT stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression?

but that it is all a lie?

Are we not turning the truth into a lie if we say these things?

sky

If we think that these statements contradict Scripture it is only because we are disregarding the light given as to how the Scriptures are to be understood. This is taught from the Scriptures but even when it is shown from the Scriptures alone do we believe? The death of King Saul is a perfect example of that and the hardening of Pharaoh's heart and many other examples which have been presented here and which were confirmed by the Testimonies of God's Spirit.

I think this text talking about Gods angels destroying and Satan destroying would be a better position to start from:

The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits. There are forces now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere.--GC 614 (1911). {LDE 243.4}

Problem is, you will only accept half of this statement Sky, because you have started with the assumption that only half of this statement is true.

The difficult part where it clearly says Gods angels destroy, you have no choice other than to say that it is covered by the second part. Thus redifining a plain statement by twisting it to fit the half of the truth you have accepted.

You have taken one edge of a double edged sword and tried to slice Gods word in half with it.

I believe you are sincere in your belief of this error.

But it does not stop it being error.

Just read the statement as it stands.

Mark

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

mark, how does this tie in with the bible and sop statements?

this sounds very much along the lines of spiritualism. correct me if i misunderstand you.

Quite nicely when we study it out...

I would of course discuss that if you were interested in examining it, at some point in the future.

Right now would not be a good time, because I do not sense you could receive anything I said at the moment, from the general subdued hostility of your posts.

Mark :-)