Is destruction inevitable by a loving Creator?

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

No, Mark, this isn't clear to me. Sorry. You answered the question "yes", but then everything after that "yes" seems to mean "no."

By the way, Christ wasn't human for only 3 1/2 years. "In His humanity" covers the 33 years of His incarnation.

I don't know if you're saying "yes" or "no." You said "yes," but then your explanation says "no" to me, so I don't know whether to hear the "yes" or the rest which says to me "no."

Let me try, and see if you agree with what I'm saying. I would say "yes," all that man can know of God was revealed by Christ during His incarnation, *but* He also revealed these things (at least some of them) at other times (before His incarnation and after it). Is this what you mean to say?

Or are you saying, "No, Christ did not reveal all man can know of God in His incarnation. He revealed all man can know of God in the combination of His incarnation and times preceding and following."?

I am saying that Christ reveals God eternally.

That the years as the Lamb of God is not a full revealing of Gods Character, in the sense that certain aspects of Gods Character, shadowed through the different roles of Christ were not shown.

Christ however revealed enough of Gods character at the cross for a man to be saved.

If the man receives it.

I would not dare to suggest that a man can look at Jesus' life during those 3 1/2 years and be able to "measure" God.

That is my understanding.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

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.

Not at all my friend.

Just using the bible to interpret itself.

If you want to explain your charge of "Mark is also resorting to human intellect", I would be interested.

I am sensing fire being called down from heaven again?

Mark :-)

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

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

May be we are trying to be smarter than the Lord is. May be may be not. But I do know that the Lord explains Himself. Why do we keep ignoring this statement:

"Soon God will show that He is indeed the living God. He will say to the angels, No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy."

This is how holy angels destroy at God's command. Is it not?

This is not my opinion vs ur opinion, but God's own interpretation of His word.

sky

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

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?

I am reading it as it states.

Not adding or taking away.

It is not needed, the statement is so plain.

The same destructive power exercised by holy angels.... will be exercised by evil angels.

So I do not need the addition you suggest I need.

Mark :-)

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

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. [/quote']

Not at all my friend.

Just using the bible to interpret itself.

If you want to explain your charge of "Mark is also resorting to human intellect", I would be interested.

I am sensing fire being called down from heaven again?

Mark :-)

Mark, how ironic that you should say that you are letting the Scriptures interpret themselves implying that I am not doing this when I have been doing nothing but this from the very start and yet you keep opposing the plainest statements from the Lord by contunually asking rhetorical questions, opposting human reasoning and philosphy to a thus thus says the Lord!

sky

[teresaq]

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.

that was a beautiful post pnattmbtc.

i agree. there can be no judging and condemning of another.

just because something is so clear to us does not mean it is clear to another.

i do agree that some appear to reject anything that goes against their previous understanding and appear to dig their heels in against any possibility of being wrong in that understanding, but we do not know hearts.

it would be a shame to come up to that "day" finding that we ourselves had been cast away while those we judged as rejecting light were there in full glory.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

No Sky.

You are saying the Lord is saying it.

There is a difference. :-( [/quote']

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

I am rejecting your applying the SOP term to myself when I do not agree with your position based on biblical grounds Sky.

That is the grounds of rejection.

Mark

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

I don't agree with this' date=' at least, as this sentence reads, and how I'm understanding it.[/quote']that was a beautiful post pnattmbtc.

i agree. there can be no judging and condemning of another.

just because something is so clear to us does not mean it is clear to another.

i do agree that some appear to reject anything that goes against their previous understanding and appear to dig their heels in against any possibility of being wrong in that understanding, but we do not know hearts.

it would be a shame to come up to that "day" finding that we ourselves had been cast away while those we judged as rejecting light were there in full glory.

teresa, this is not about condemning!!!!!!!!!

i know these posts are directed at me personally but where did I condemn anyone? i have not condemned anyone except warn about disregarding one ray of light. There is a vast difference, don't u think?

sky

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

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?

The whole discussion on these threads should be proof enough Teresa.

One absurd teaching after another has risen out of this idea that God does not destroy.

We are right to examine it and study it out, but when it clearly contradicts scripture it is to be discarded.

If not, it will lead into all sorts of error.

Mark :-)

PS.

If you are looking for an argument Teresa, I am not your man. :-)

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

I am rejecting your applying the SOP term to myself when I do not agree with your position based on biblical grounds Sky.

That is the grounds of rejection.

Mark

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

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

Only the Holy Spirit can do that now.

Mark [/quote']

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

For these reasons:

This statement:

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}

This "truth":

Saul was ordered to kill on Gods behalf.

These two alone should give you cause for concern.

Now you can accuse me of intellectualism and rejecting light as much as you want my friend.

But the accusation rests against these two (of very many others have posted), reasons not to accept this teaching you are presenting.

Not myself.

You can of course try to nullify these simple statements by saying "they do not mean what they say", but that is a choice I will not indulge in.

God bless,

Mark

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

May be we are trying to be smarter than the Lord is. May be may be not. But I do know that the Lord explains Himself. Why do we keep ignoring this statement:

"Soon God will show that He is indeed the living God. He will say to the angels, No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy."

This is how holy angels destroy at God's command. Is it not?

This is not my opinion vs ur opinion, but God's own interpretation of His word.

sky

I am not disagreeing with that at all.

God does indeed permit evil angels to destroy.

But that is not the only method of destruction He uses.

He also orders His Holy Angels and servants to destroy.

Like I said, you have taken a double edged sword of Gods and tried to make it a single edged sword.

As this statement plainly reveals:

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}

In love,

Mark

[teresaq]

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.... [/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

...

my brother i dont think you are understanding the point being made.

i do wish you would give some thought and prayer as to how some of your posts come across.

i know for myself many times the "natural man" would say something but that "still, small voice" pulls me back and suggests another way.

other times i feel i have gone too far and not manifested respect and consideration for the one i am addressing.

i have much, so much to "kill" in myself and to learn of Christs love.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

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? [/quote']

The whole discussion on these threads should be proof enough Teresa.

One absurd teaching after another has risen out of this idea that God does not destroy.

We are right to examine it and study it out, but when it clearly contradicts scripture it is to be discarded.

If not, it will lead into all sorts of error.

Mark :-)

PS.

If you are looking for an argument Teresa, I am not your man. :-)

Mark, like I said before, you never cease to amaze me lately. Is it not you Mark instead who is disregarding the clearest declarations of truth (both from the Bible and from the pen of inspiration) which shed precious light on the subject we have been discussing?

You say you are not looking for an argument but from the very beginning you have done nothing but to argue against a Thus says the Lord. You keep arguing and arguing until you believe yourself and the truth is set aside in your mind and heart. You argue by raising rhetorical questions until the truth is turned into a lie.

Mark, just accept it, it is the Lord speaking, "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression." It is just as simple as that Mark. When we accept this statement from the Holy Spirit as the truth of God, we will have no difficutly interpreting the language of the Bible anymore.

sky

[skyblue888]

May be we are trying to be smarter than the Lord is. May be may be not. But I do know that the Lord explains Himself. Why do we keep ignoring this statement:

"Soon God will show that He is indeed the living God. He will say to the angels, No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy."

This is how holy angels destroy at God's command. Is it not?

This is not my opinion vs ur opinion, but God's own interpretation of His word.

sky

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Mark, how ironic that you should say that you are letting the Scriptures interpret themselves implying that I am not doing this when I have been doing nothing but this from the very start and yet you keep opposing the plainest statements from the Lord by contunually asking rhetorical questions, opposting human reasoning and philosphy to a thus thus says the Lord!

sky

The difference is that one interpretation has started from an open position and the other from a closed.

How can you say you have let the scripture interpret themselves?

You have taken one statement from SOP and applied it to the whole of scripture, you have stated yourself you have used this as "the" fundamental starting position.

That is not letting the scripture interpret itself.

That is bringing a pre-conceived idea of what a statement means and then finding proof texts to support it.

Then stating that every plain statement that shines additional light on the subject by "adding" more information is wrong and needs to be re-read.

Your whole argument has been from the start that this one statement must have all others bow down to it.

And from the beginning I have said this is poor exegesis.

But rather than listen with an open mind, you would rather claim I am "spiritually blind".

And this is the mess we have ended up in.

Mark

[skyblue888]

As to when the Lord gave direct command to Moses to kill we have already discussed that and the answer is clear. These commands to kill were given under the Theocracy and they were civil statutes in harmony with the fact that the Israelites had not enough faith to let God deliver them in righteousness. So the Lord in His mercy gave them instructions in harmony with the fact that they had chosen to elect the sword as their means of defending themselves against their enemies and to solve problems within the camp. God went the second mile with them. And that is how the Lord gave also instructions like "eye for eye and tooth for tooth" and "life for life." But the same Jesus who had given these instructions to them, when He walked this earth, He said, You have heard that it was said, "Eye for eye" but I say unto you... you know the rest of the story.

So this shows that these instructions given in the Old Testament were not in harmony with God's ways of destroying but in harmony with man's ways.

sky

[Twilight]

Mark, just accept it, it is the Lord speaking, "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression." It is just as simple as that Mark. When we accept this statement from the Holy Spirit as the truth of God, we will have no difficutly interpreting the language of the Bible anymore.

sky

I have no problem accepting that this is indeed a spiritual principle in a context.

But it also has to be balanced by every other statement on the subject.

Like:

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}

Now what I am not willing to do, is to accept that this statement and this statement alone is the expression of Gods Character and actions...

That would not be correct according to the biblical method of interpretation.

Why can you not see that Sky?

Mark

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

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} [/quote']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.

did i truly judge you or did i make the point that i will take the clear statements of the messenger of the Lord, as i understand them to mean, over your statements?

[skyblue888]

The statement that says that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression," describes the character of God perfectly when He is allowed to have His way.

But when the Israelites in the Old Testament did not let Him have His own way but still wanted to have Him as their protector, the Lord in His goodness went the second mile with them and gave them instructions according to the choice they had made--to defend themselves with the sword--but these instructions were not according to God's perfect righteousness.

sky

[teresaq]

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. :-(

the Lord is saying it. lets be clear on that.

the problem is is that sky is applying the statement to specific persons, which i dont believe should be done, no matter how much we believe it or that it seems to apply.

[Twilight]

Mark, please, are you sure you read that statement correctly? When the Lord gives His angels command to no longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy, He is talking to holy angels not to evil angels. Evil angels destroy when they are permitted to but holy angels only destroy at God's command and the command is that they are bidden to no longer combat the evil angels in their efforts to destroy.

Is not the difference clear enough?

sky

You are reading something into the statement that is not there.

This is how it reads:

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}

You are saying it reads like this:

When God orders the angels to let go the evil angels destroy, the holy angels never destroy in person, only as they let go does it appear they destroy, but in fact the destruction 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}

That is not what it says at all.

It says the same destructive power angels exercise. Gods angels.

I am quite sure I am reading exactly what it says.

Mark

[Twilight]

As to when the Lord gave direct command to Moses to kill we have already discussed that and the answer is clear. These commands to kill were given under the Theocracy and they were civil statutes in harmony with the fact that the Israelites had not enough faith to let God deliver them in righteousness. So the Lord in His mercy gave them instructions in harmony with the fact that they had chosen to elect the sword as their means of defending themselves against their enemies and to solve problems within the camp. God went the second mile with them. And that is how the Lord gave also instructions like "eye for eye and tooth for tooth" and "life for life." But the same Jesus who had given these instructions to them, when He walked this earth, He said, You have heard that it was said, "Eye for eye" but I say unto you... you know the rest of the story.

So this shows that these instructions given in the Old Testament were not in harmony with God's ways of destroying but in harmony with man's ways.

sky

If it is a sin for God to kill.

It is a sin for God to hire an "assassin" to kill.

You cannot have your cake and eat it my friend.

God commanded Saul to kill.

If your position is correct.

God ordered Saul to sin.

God sinned.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

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.

did i truly judge you or did i make the point that i will take the clear statements of the messenger of the Lord, as i understand them to mean, over your statements?

I am asking you that question Teresa. :-)

I will of course accept you answer.

[skyblue888]