Is destruction inevitable by a loving Creator?

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

I don't agree with this' date=' 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. [/quote']

Thank you.

Yes, we don't know the heart of another, and it's not our place to judge.

I just came across the following:

Quote:

There are scarcely two whose experiences are alike in every particular. The trials of one may not be the trials of another; and our hearts should ever be open to kindly sympathy, and aglow with the divine love that Jesus manifested for all his brethren. Christ sometimes reproved with severity, and in some cases it may be necessary for us to do so; but we should consider that while Christ knew the exact condition of the ones he rebuked,--just the amount of reproof they could bear, and what was necessary to correct their course of wrong,--he also knew just how to pity the erring, comfort the unfortunate and encourage the weak. He knew just how to inspire hope and courage; for he was acquainted with the exact motives and the peculiar trials of every mind. He reproved with pity, and loved those he rebuked with a divine love. (ST 3/3/87)

Isn't this nice?

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: sky

I will dare to disagree with you on this.

What are you disagreeing with?

Quote:

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

How would you know if someone else is rejecting light?

Quote:

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.

Again, how do you know anyone is rejecting light?

Quote:

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?

It depends on the person. In my case, it took probably about 25 years.

Quote:

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?

In my case, again, about 25 years. If it took me that long, I should be patient with others, shouldn't I?

Quote:

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.

In order to be disregarding a "simple declaration of truth," one must be convinced that it is truth.

Quote:

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

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here. If you talking about the principles that inspiration discusses, then our opinions do matter. If we understand truth, and reject it, that's one thing. If we don't understand it, in which case our opinion is that it is not truth, that's another:

Quote:

Said the angel: "If light come, and that light is set aside or rejected, then comes condemnation and the frown of God; but before the light comes, there is no sin, for there is no light for them to reject." (1TM 116)

This last quote is much stronger than the one I quoted previously. It took me 20 years before the statement which says that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner against transgression" was introduced to me. But as soon as it was presented to me from The Great Controversy, pp.35,36, I believed it right away. There was no way around that statement. It is as clear as noonday, especially that the example of the destruction of Jerusalem is taken as a perfect example of that principle even though the language of the Bible is that God was angry with the Jews and that He sent His armies, the Romans, to kill those murderers and to burn up their city. (Matt.22)

This light has come to the users of this forum.

Either we disregard it or we accept it. If we disregard it there will be a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing of light will be less clearly discerned. (D.A.322)

That's what I have been saying and nothing more.

So whoever you are, please stop accusing me or insinuating that I am condemning others. May be we can't read other people's mind but we can certainly read their words and know what they are teaching.

* And what exactly do you mean by, "If you talking about the principles that inspiration discusses, then our opinions do matter."

How do our opinions matter? Our opinions must be left at the door of investigation. The Word of the Lord and the Testimonies of His Spirit alone matter and we must compare Scripture with Scripture and statement with statement.

"The testimonies themselves will be the key that will explain the messages given, as Scripture is explained by Scripture." 1 S.M.42.

sky

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: sky

I will dare to disagree with you on this.

What are you disagreeing with?

Quote:

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

How would you know if someone else is rejecting light?

Quote:

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.

Again, how do you know anyone is rejecting light?

Quote:

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?

It depends on the person. In my case, it took probably about 25 years.

Quote:

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?

In my case, again, about 25 years. If it took me that long, I should be patient with others, shouldn't I?

Quote:

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.

In order to be disregarding a "simple declaration of truth," one must be convinced that it is truth.

Quote:

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

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here. If you talking about the principles that inspiration discusses, then our opinions do matter. If we understand truth, and reject it, that's one thing. If we don't understand it, in which case our opinion is that it is not truth, that's another:

Quote:

Said the angel: "If light come, and that light is set aside or rejected, then comes condemnation and the frown of God; but before the light comes, there is no sin, for there is no light for them to reject." (1TM 116)

We are in agreement here pnattmbtc. How do you pronounce that anyway? Everytime I try to say it, I spit on myself.

[skyblue888]

Richard, pnatt quoted this statement: "If light come, and that light is set aside or rejected, then comes condemnation and the frown of God; but before the light comes, there is no sin, for there is no light for them to reject." (1TM 116)

And you are in agreement with that?!!!

pnatt's statement says that if light come and it is set aside or rejected, then comes condemnation and the frown of God!!!

Come to think of it, I have only quoted the statement that says that "when one ray of light is disregarded there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and the second revealing of light is less clearly discerned."

I have never quoted the statement that pnatt just quoted which says that if light come, and that light is set aside or rejected, then come condemnation and the frown of God. And you are in agreement?!!!!

I am dumbfounded here.

I have not even said that and you have accused me of condemning others but pnatt comes along and quotes a statement that says that if light comes and it is set aside or rejected then come condemnation and the frown of God and you are in full agreement with that statement and pnatt is looked upon as more loving than I have been when I have only quoted the statement that says that if you disregard one ray of light there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions.

I rest my case with the Lord.

sky

Oh yes, I have also quoted a statement to the effect that every ray of light rejected is a seed sown which yields its unfailing harvest from G.C.36 but that is not as strong as saying that if light come and that light is set aside or rejected, then come condemnation and the frown of God!!!

And oh yes, I quoted another one which said this: "The only remedy is belief in the truth, acceptance of the light." T.M.91. Nothing condemnatory about that statement either. Very soft.

[pnattmbtc]

Light is only light if it is understood. Perhaps the light has not been presented with enough tact or graciousness or skill to be accepted. Perhaps it is we who have the light that are more lacking than those we consider to be rejecting it.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

We are in agreement here pnattmbtc. How do you pronounce that anyway? Everytime I try to say it, I spit on myself.

I've been here for awhile now, and nobody's asked me what this (pnattmbtc) means.

[pnattmbtc]

I have not even said that and you have accused me of condemning others but pnatt comes along and quotes a statement that says that if light comes and it is set aside or rejected then condemnation comes and you are in full agreement with that statement and pnatt is looked upon as more loving than I have been when I have only stated that if you disregard one ray of light there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions.

If I've misunderstood you, I deeply apologize. Some of the things you write give me the impression that you are saying that others are rejecting light. If you mean this in a purely objective sense -- that is, that light has been presented, which has been rejected -- that's a possible thing to say, although I wouldn't say that myself because who knows if my own lack of tact or skill or graciousness hasn't been the reason the light has been rejected.

But this isn't what I meant by saying that you have been saying that others are rejecting light. I've gotten the impression that you feel that others have knowingly rejected light. Now if my impression here is wrong, and all you meant to say is what the EGW statement I quoted says, which is that *if* light is rejected, only then comes the frown of God, then I apologize for having misunderstood you. However, in this case, I don't believe I'm the only one who has misunderstood you, and would invite you to clarify that this is indeed what you meant: i.e. you have not been intending to say that anyone here is knowingly rejecting light, but that *if* they are, then that's a dangerous thing.

[Guest]

Ok, What does it mean?

[Guest]

And you are in agreement?!!!

I am dumbfounded here.

Pnatt said this:

In order to be disregarding a "simple declaration of truth," one must be convinced that it is truth.

[pnattmbtc]

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." (Google is your friend)

[Guest]

That's a good one.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue

And you are in agreement?!!!

I am dumbfounded here.

Pnatt said this:

In order to be disregarding a "simple declaration of truth," one must be convinced that it is truth.

But what if the Holy Spirit is trying to convince you and I of the simple declaration of truth that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression" and we resist it, we disregard it, we set it aside or reject it?

sky

[skyblue888]

That's a good one.

What's so good about it? Please enlighten me, will you?

sky

[skyblue888]

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." (Google is your friend)

What kind of a game are you playing here pnatt? what is the man behind the curtain? Could it be Satan who is playing the game for our souls. What do you think?

sky

[Guest]

It's a line from a movie.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: sky

I have not even said that and you have accused me of condemning others but pnatt comes along and quotes a statement that says that if light comes and it is set aside or rejected then condemnation comes and you are in full agreement with that statement and pnatt is looked upon as more loving than I have been when I have only stated that if you disregard one ray of light there is a benumbing of the spiritual perceptions.

If I've misunderstood you, I deeply apologize. Some of the things you write give me the impression that you are saying that others are rejecting light. If you mean this in a purely objective sense -- that is, that light has been presented, which has been rejected -- that's a possible thing to say, although I wouldn't say that myself because who knows if my own lack of tact or skill or graciousness hasn't been the reason the light has been rejected.

But this isn't what I meant by saying that you have been saying that others are rejecting light. I've gotten the impression that you feel that others have knowingly rejected light. Now if my impression here is wrong, and all you meant to say is what the EGW statement I quoted says, which is that *if* light is rejected, only then comes the frown of God, then I apologize for having misunderstood you. However, in this case, I don't believe I'm the only one who has misunderstood you, and would invite you to clarify that this is indeed what you meant: i.e. you have not been intending to say that anyone here is knowingly rejecting light, but that *if* they are, then that's a dangerous thing.

pnatt, you wrote, "Now if my impression here is wrong, and all you meant to say is what the EGW statement I quoted says, which is that *if* light is rejected, only then comes the frown of God, then I apologize for having misunderstood you."

pnatt, I have never quoted this, you did!

All I quoted were the other statements I already mentioned and they are far from being as strong as this statement you have quoted.

Yes I do believe that you have misunderstood me and you are not the only one. There have been times when, yes, it became clear that some simple declarations of truth have been disregarded, and may be set aside and rejected in the minds of some, God knows, and yet I have never stated that people were condemned for doing so but only that there would be a partial benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and that the second revealing of light would be less clearly discerned. Now you leave me with the impression that you have not read all my posts. I always take the time to read all yours and others and that is how I know I have been misunderstood and misinterpreted.

sky

Your apology is accepted though.

[LifeHiscost]

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

What I see in these paragraphs is a plea, not for a man to see the clear light of the Lord, but for God to intrude into a man's life, in order that he be made to believe as "I" have been led to believe.

The only remedy for that method of transferring the light of life, by the sheer will of the one certain they have the correct knowledge, is to accept two principles of Divine counsel.

"One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." Romans 14:5

21st Century KJV

"So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it."Isaiah 55:11 NKJV

Blessings!

[Twilight]

The Lord has convicted me this morning that at times I have not treated Sky correctly.

That there has been a lack of love, kindness and gentleness towards him, that at times my flesh has risen up and found expression in the spirit of my posts.

I apologise for this and for any other harshness that might have slipped through.

I apologise to Sky and anyone else who might have been offended.

The Lord has to often remind me I am a babe in Christ.

If by my harshness any of you were offended, forgive me.

Please be patient as the Lord works on me.

Mark :-)

[Guest]

The Lord has convicted me this morning that at times I have not treated Sky correctly.

That there has been a lack of love, kindness and gentleness towards him, that at times my flesh has risen up and found expression in the spirit of my posts.

I apologise for this and for any other harshness that might have slipped through.

I apologise to Sky and anyone else who might have been offended.

The Lord has to often remind me I am a babe in Christ.

If by my harshness any of you were offended, forgive me.

Please be patient as the Lord works on me.

Mark :-)

You could not have been any kinder to sky.

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

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

What I see in these paragraphs is a plea, not for a man to see the clear light of the Lord, but for God to intrude into a man's life, in order that he be made to believe as "I" have been led to believe.

The only remedy for that method of transferring the light of life, by the sheer will of the one certain they have the correct knowledge, is to accept two principles of Divine counsel.

"One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." Romans 14:5

21st Century KJV

"So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it."Isaiah 55:11 NKJV

Blessings!

Words of wisdom

[LifeHiscost]

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

[LifeHiscost]

And yet you cannot hide the fact that your god uses force. The view that you hold, shows a god that uses force. SOP says that only one government uses such.

The point is that God does not use force to require anyone to serve Him. War to eliminate those who chose not to serve God and actions taken against those hostile to the servants of the Lord here on this earth, are a result of a mindset by the adversary and his adherents that would not choose to serve God were they given the ages of eternity to change their mind.

Life is lost when we severe ourselves from the source of life, and God does not force any to continue in misery who have chosen their own method of government.

" Behold, the LORD’s hand is not shortened,

That it cannot save;

Nor His ear heavy,

That it cannot hear.

But your iniquities have separated you from your God;

And your sins have hidden His face from you,

So that He will not hear.

For your hands are defiled with blood,

And your fingers with iniquity;

Your lips have spoken lies,

Your tongue has muttered perversity.

" Isaiah 59:1-3 NKJV

Regards!

[LifeHiscost]

Now you leave me with the impression that you have not read all my posts. I always take the time to read all yours and others and that is how I know I have been misunderstood and misinterpreted.

sky

If one is to read in entirety each post, one has to read much that is quoted over and over and over again, almost ad-infinitum.

If that which is to be answered were the only part one had to read in the post, even that would amount to a large measure of one's time.

Is it worth it? That is probably determined by what ever else one has to do of importance. It is a struggle to keep up with extremely lengthy posts and I'm wondering if the same amount of time spent with the Word wouldn't be more conducive to get and give the answers most are probably looking forward to getting when they join Club Adventist.

No criticisms. Just mho.

"For a dream comes through much activity, And a fool’s voice is known by his many words."Eccl 5:3 NKJV

Regards!

P.S. Just in case any are convicted by that Word of wisdom and they wish to throttle the messenger, I've been known to speak plentifully myself.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

The Lord has convicted me this morning that at times I have not treated Sky correctly.

That there has been a lack of love, kindness and gentleness towards him, that at times my flesh has risen up and found expression in the spirit of my posts.

I apologise for this and for any other harshness that might have slipped through.

I apologise to Sky and anyone else who might have been offended.

The Lord has to often remind me I am a babe in Christ.

If by my harshness any of you were offended, forgive me.

Please be patient as the Lord works on me.

Mark :-)

You could not have been any kinder to sky.

The Lord is showing me some old wine in the wineskin Richard. :-)

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

If I've misunderstood you' date=' I deeply apologize. Some of the things you write give me the impression that you are saying that others are rejecting light. If you mean this in a purely objective sense -- that is, that light has been presented, which has been rejected -- that's a possible thing to say, although I wouldn't say that myself because who knows if my own lack of tact or skill or graciousness hasn't been the reason the light has been rejected.

But this isn't what I meant by saying that you have been saying that others are rejecting light. I've gotten the impression that you feel that others have knowingly rejected light. Now if my impression here is wrong, and all you meant to say is what the EGW statement I quoted says, which is that *if* light is rejected, only then comes the frown of God, then I apologize for having misunderstood you. However, in this case, I don't believe I'm the only one who has misunderstood you, and would invite you to clarify that this is indeed what you meant: i.e. you have not been intending to say that anyone here is knowingly rejecting light, but that *if* they are, then that's a dangerous thing. [/quote']

pnatt, you wrote, "Now if my impression here is wrong, and all you meant to say is what the EGW statement I quoted says, which is that *if* light is rejected, only then comes the frown of God, then I apologize for having misunderstood you."

pnatt, I have never quoted this, you did!

All I quoted were the other statements I already mentioned and they are far from being as strong as this statement you have quoted.

Yes I do believe that you have misunderstood me and you are not the only one. There have been times when, yes, it became clear that some simple declarations of truth have been disregarded, and may be set aside and rejected in the minds of some, God knows, and yet I have never stated that people were condemned for doing so but only that there would be a partial benumbing of the spiritual perceptions and that the second revealing of light would be less clearly discerned. Now you leave me with the impression that you have not read all my posts. I always take the time to read all yours and others and that is how I know I have been misunderstood and misinterpreted.

sky

Your apology is accepted though.

In general, if I'm reading a post differently than everyone else, I would think that I've misread it. However, if many people have the same impression I have, that leads me to think the post was unclear.

I don't see why there would be a partial benumbing of the spiritual perceptions unless truth was rejected, so that may have led to my misunderstanding your intent. I'm glad you're not condemning anyone for rejecting truth.