"war in heaven" - real or metaphorical?

[pnattmbtc]

That is not talking about the final destruction of the wicked. It is saying that people destroy themselves through their choices. We all know that.

[Twilight]

Quote:

This isn't literal fire, and the context is, without question, the destruction of the wicked. Again, DA 764 is the same logic as the COL statement.

How do you know it is not literal fire?

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

Problem you have here Pnat, is that you might look at the Lamb and miss the Lion...

Or worse, look for the Lion and miss Christ altogether (common problem, both in the time of Christ and now; expecting a militant Christ).

Quote:

Question:

What causes the destruction of the wicked when Jesus comes (second coming)?

Short answer: The light of the glory of God.

[pnattmbtc]

How do you know it is not literal fire?

[Twilight]

Quote:

Problem you have here Pnat, is that you might look at the Lamb and miss the Lion...

Or worse, look for the Lion and miss Christ altogether (common problem, both in the time of Christ and now; expecting a militant Christ).

Quote:

Question:

What causes the destruction of the wicked when Jesus comes (second coming)?

Short answer: The light of the glory of God.

I agree.

Mark

[Twilight]

How do you know that Gods "glory" does not manifest itself in a "physical" manner?

Agreed, His glory is His character.

But that does not mean that His Glory does not have a "physical manifestation".

What is the visible representation of His Glory?

Light.

What is "light"?

Energy.

What is "fire"?

Energy.

To accept that the light is energy, but that energy does not have any "burning" aspect, is to deny the plain statements of scripture in my view.

How do you reconcile light and fire being different, when they are essentially the same thing?

[Robert]

If Ellen White was the problem, why is the "monster" still here for all to see?

Why is there still self-love and self-seeking in your life? Answer that and you'll answer your question to me....

Legalism always brings out the worst in folks.....No peace...fear of God...just work, work, work on trying to get perfect so you can get to heaven and hope that God doesn't strike you dead. This will make a person go mad...i.e., get eat up with the flesh...even rebel against God....I'm thinking about leaving CA because all it does lately is gets me torqued....I don't need this garbage....

[skyblue888]

I am still wondering how one quote has been made the guiding principle above another, which states that Gods angels and evil angels destroy?

This is the key issue.

Why is this a "universal principle", upon who's authority has it been granted this "status"?

This idea that "God never destroys in an active role"...

It's not just one quote.

One can approach this from the basis of Scripture alone, or consider the SOP as well. From Scripture alone, the following is an excellent presentation: http://sinbearer.com/light_on_the_dark_side_of_god.htm

The basic approach is:

1.God has been misunderstood.

2.Christ revealed God as He really is.

3.Apparent contradictions (God appears to behave differently than Christ's portrait of God) are explained by the principle that God is often presented in Scripture as doing that which He permits.

There are many passages to establish each of these points. The author does an excellent job with this, so I won't repeat anything here.

With regards to the SOP, there are statements which speak directly to the issue, sometimes whole chapters, such as the case of the destruction of Jerusalem or what happened in France. There are also statements such as the following:

[God destroys no man. Everyone who is destroyed will have destroyed himself. Christ's Object Lessons, 84.

Quote:

God destroys no one. Testimonies for the Church, 5:120.

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. Every ray of light rejected, every warning despised or unheeded, every passion indulged, every transgression of the law of God, is a seed sown, which yields its unfailing harvest. The Spirit of God, persistently resisted, is at last withdrawn from the sinner, and then there is left no power to control the evil passions of the soul, and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan. The Great Controversy, 36.

Satan is the destroyer. God cannot bless those who refuse to be faithful stewards. All He can do is to permit Satan to accomplish his destroying work. We see calamities of every kind and in every degree corning upon the earth, and why? The Lord's restraining power is not exercised. The world has disregarded the word of God. They live as though there were no God. Like the inhabitants of the Noachic world, they refuse to have any thought of God. Wickedness prevails to an alarming extent, and the earth is ripe for the harvest." Testimonies for the Church, 6:388, 389.

This earth has almost reached the place where God will permit the destroyer to work his will upon it. Testimonies for the Church, 7:141.

God keeps a reckoning with the nations. Not a sparrow falls to the ground without His notice. Those who work evil toward their fellow men, saying, How doth God know? will one day be called upon to meet long-deferred vengeance. In this age a more than common contempt is shown to God. Men have reached a point in insolence and disobedience which shows that their cup of iniquity is almost full. Many have well-nigh passed the boundary of mercy. 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. Let him work out his malignity upon the children of disobedience; for the cup of their iniquity is full. They have advanced from one degree of wickedness to another, adding daily to their lawlessness. I will no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing his work." The Review and Herald, September 17, 1901.

Quote:

When Jesus was asked to destroy the Samaritans who had rejected Him, He replied to His disciples, "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village." Luke 9:55, 56.

There can be no more conclusive evidence that we possess the spirit of Satan than the disposition to hurt and destroy those who do not appreciate our work, or who act contrary to our ideas. The Desire of Ages, 487.

Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. His authority rests upon goodness, mercy and love; and the presentation of these principles is the means to be used. God's government is moral, and truth and love are to be the prevailing power. ibid., 759.

The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority. ibid., 22.

Sickness, suffering, and death are work of an antagonistic power. Satan is the destroyer; God is the restorer. The Ministry of Healing, 113.

We are not to regard God as waiting to punish the sinner. 1 S.M.235.

When parents or rulers neglect to discipline their children God will take the case in hand. His restraining power will be in a measure removed from the agencies of evil so that a train of circumstances will arise that will punish sin with sin. P.P.739.

Tradition and misinterpretation has obscured the teaching of the Bible concerning the character of God, the nature of His government, and the principles of His dealing with sin. G.C.492.

[God bears with divine patience with the perversity of the wicked; but He declares that He will visit their transgressions with a rod. He will at last permit the destructive agencies of Satan to bear sway to destroy. MS 17, 1906.

He will say to the angels, "No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy. Let him work out his malignity upon the children of disobedience, for the cup of iniquity is full." Review and Herald, Vol.4, p.335.

So it's not just one statement.

Here's a nice statement from S. N. Haskell:

While it was in harmony with worldly government, it was not, however, according to the principle of the heavenly government. Hence it is, that again, in the person of the Babylonian king, Satan is challenging the government of God. When Lucifer and his angels refused to bow before the throne of God, the Father would not then destroy them. They should live until death should come as a result of the course they pursued. The Babylonian king, however, threatened utter destruction to all who refused to worship his golden image. The motive power in the heavenly government is love; human power when exercised becomes tyranny. All tyranny is a repetition of the Babylonian principles. We sometimes call it papal; it is likewise Babylonian. When the civil power enforces worship of any sort, be that worship true or false in itself, to obey is idolatry. The command must be backed by some form of punishment,-a fiery furnace,-and the conscience of man is no longer free. From a civil standpoint, such legislation is tyranny, and looked at from a religious point of view, it is persecution. {1901 SNH, SDP 41.1

This explains the issue well. If God threatens to set people on fire to burn for days if they do not worship Him, then "the conscience of man is no longer free."

But what about the plain quotes that do not agree with your position Pnatt?

What of those, are you going to quote those as well my friend?

Or just those that you use to support this position?

Mark :-)

_____________________________________________________

Mark, don't u get it? the quotes cited by pnatt in the above post contain the "keys" graciously given to us by the Holy Spirit who is the Teacher of God's people to unlock the meaning of the quotes you are talking about.

sky

[Guest]

What absurd folly. I like it better when you talk about Jones and Waggoner.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

Thanks sky. I've read that, but it's been awhile. It was a good thing to post, as it's bringing out the points I was thinking about. It looks like we have a bit of scrambled egg. I think my idea that God's character is the chicken is correct, but since our view of God's character is shaped by factors such as the methodology we use in interpreting Scripture, of course that's an important factor.

Something helpful to bear in mind is that Christ's goal was the revelation God's character, so if our desire is to present God's character to others, and we want to know how to go about this, we can simply look to see what Christ did.

Problem you have here Pnat, is that you might look at the Lamb and miss the Lion...

Question:

What causes the destruction of the wicked when Jesus comes (second coming)?

Mark :-)

Mark, we need to sit at the feet of Jesus in order to understand the deep things of God. We need to learn at the school of Christ what Holy Writ means by such expressions as "whom the Lord shall consumed with the spirit of His mouth, and shall be destroyed with the brightness of His coming." 2 Thess.2:8.

The superficial reader will never understand this language unless he is willing to leave all his preconceived opinions at the door of investigation and let the Holy Spirit be the Teacher.

This Scripture has been usually understood to portray the picture of Christ descending the advent skies, while before Him precede great flowing sheets of devouring flame which reach out to consume whoever of the impenitent have somehow managed to survive the seven last plagues.

Such an interpretation of this Scripture, obvious as it may appear, is out of harmony with the character of God and Christ. If fire emanating from Him kills the wicked, then there is a direct, destructive work associated with His presence and Person. Therefore, He would be an executioner after all. But He is not, nor ever will be.

sky

[skyblue888]

How do you know that Gods "glory" does not manifest itself in a "physical" manner?

Agreed, His glory is His character.

But that does not mean that His Glory does not have a "physical manifestation".

What is the visible representation of His Glory?

Light.

What is "light"?

Energy.

What is "fire"?

Energy.

To accept that the light is energy, but that energy does not have any "burning" aspect, is to deny the plain statements of scripture in my view

How do you reconcile light and fire being different, when they are essentially the same thing?

_______________________________________________

A further evidence to support the fact that it is not the pulsing forth of fire from the Person of Christ which destroys the wicked, is the final confrontation around the city of God. There the wicked come quite close to the presence of Christ Who is just as powerful then as when He returns the second time. But they are able to march against the city in which is the presence of God and of Christ. They are able to stand there right through the revelation of the mystery of Christ, and they are able to see all that God wants them to see without being consumed with physical fire from the presence of God and His Son.

sky

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

How do you know it is not literal fire?

Here's what it said (you inadvertently cut off the answer to your question, which is just above what you quoted):

Quote:

DA 764 says "By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them."

This isn't literal fire, and the context is, without question, the destruction of the wicked. Again, DA 764 is the same logic as the COL statement.

It says:

Quote:

By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them.

This isn't literal fire because God isn't a literal fire, nor is the glory of God a literal fire (the glory of God is His character).

the bolded part gives that idea unless we miss what it is saying. Gods presence is like a "consuming fire" to the lost.

During that long time spent in communion with God, the face of Moses had reflected the glory of the divine Presence; unknown to himself his face shone with a dazzling light when he descended from the mountain. Such a light illumined the countenance of Stephen when brought before his judges; "and all that sat in the council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had been the face of an angel." Acts 6:15. Aaron as well as the people shrank away from Moses, and "they were afraid to come nigh him." Seeing their confusion and terror, but ignorant of the cause, he urged them to come near. He held out to them the pledge of God's reconciliation, and assured them of His restored favor. They perceived in his voice nothing but love and entreaty, and at last one ventured to approach him. Too awed to speak, he silently pointed to the countenance of Moses, and then toward heaven. The great leader understood his meaning. In their conscious guilt, feeling themselves still under the divine displeasure, they could not endure the heavenly light, which, had they been obedient to God, would have filled them with joy. There is fear in guilt. The soul that is free from sin will not wish to hide from the light of heaven. {PP 329.5}

By this brightness God designed to impress upon Israel the sacred, exalted character of His law, and the glory of the gospel revealed through Christ. While Moses was in the mount, God presented to him, not only the tables of the law, but also the plan of salvation. He saw that the sacrifice of Christ was pre-figured by all the types and symbols of the Jewish age; and it was the heavenly light streaming from Calvary, no less than the glory of the law of God, that shed such a radiance upon the face of Moses. That divine illumination symbolized the glory of the dispensation of which Moses was the visible mediator, a representative of the one true Intercessor. {PP 330.2}

The glory reflected in the countenance of Moses illustrates the blessings to be received by God's commandment-keeping people through the mediation of Christ. It testifies that the closer our communion with God, and the clearer our knowledge of His requirements, the more fully shall we be conformed to the divine image, and the more readily do we become partakers of the divine nature. {PP 330.3}

Moses was a type of Christ. As Israel's intercessor veiled his countenance, because the people could not endure to look upon its glory, so Christ, the divine Mediator, veiled His divinity with humanity when He came to earth. Had He come clothed with the brightness of heaven, he could not have found access to men in their sinful state. They could not have endured the glory of His presence. Therefore He humbled Himself, and was made "in the likeness of sinful flesh" (Romans 8:3), that He might reach the fallen race, and lift them up. {PP 330.4}

[Twilight]

Quote:

Mark, don't u get it? the quotes cited by pnatt in the above post contain the "keys" graciously given to us by the Holy Spirit who is the Teacher of God's people to unlock the meaning of the quotes you are talking about.

sky

I do not agree Sky.

They are proof texts taken out of context to present a view that Ellen White did not believe.

Ellen White stated that God destroys personally and permissively.

The Bible states the same.

Nowhere in either will we find the principle that only permissive destruction is rendered.

Mark

[Twilight]

Quote:

Mark, we need to sit at the feet of Jesus in order to understand the deep things of God.

The superficial reader will never understand this language unless he is willing to leave all his preconceived opinions at the door of investigation and let the Holy Spirit be the Teacher.

Does this mean you do not think that I sit at the feet of Jesus and learn brother?

Does this mean I am just reading superficially?

How can you possibly know that?

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Quote:

A further evidence to support the fact that it is not the pulsing forth of fire from the Person of Christ which destroys the wicked

2Th 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

In this text, the simple plain truth is that the Lord "destroys" the wicked with the brightness of His coming.

Mark

[skyblue888]

A further evidence to support the fact that it is not the pulsing forth of fire from the Person of Christ which destroys the wicked, is the final confrontation around the city of God. There the wicked come quite close to the presence of Christ Who is just as powerful then as when He returns the second time. But they are able to march against the city in which is the presence of God and of Christ. They are able to stand there right through the revelation of the mystery of Christ, and they are able to see all that God wants them to see without being consumed with physical fire from the presence of God and His Son.

sky

______________________

]

2Th 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

In this text, the simple plain truth is that the Lord "destroys" the wicked with the brightness of His coming.

Mark

Mark, we need to sit at the feet of Jesus in order to understand the deep things of God. We need to learn at the school of Christ what Holy Writ means by such expressions as "whom the Lord shall consumed with the spirit of His mouth, and shall be destroyed with the brightness of His coming." 2 Thess.2:8.

The superficial reader will never understand this language unless he is willing to leave all his preconceived opinions at the door of investigation and let the Holy Spirit be the Teacher.

This Scripture has been usually understood to portray the picture of Christ descending the advent skies, while before Him precede great flowing sheets of devouring flame which reach out to consume whoever of the impenitent have somehow managed to survive the seven last plagues.

Such an interpretation of this Scripture, obvious as it may appear, is out of harmony with the character of God and Christ. If fire emanating from Him kills the wicked, then there is a direct, destructive work associated with His presence and Person. Therefore, He would be an executioner after all. But He is not, nor ever will be.

sky

The Scriptures clearly teach that this fire does not come directly out from the Lord upon the wicked any more than strong delusions are sent directly out from the Lord to those who do not receive the love of the truth. This is what the Bible teaches and nothing else. Never at any time is the Lord the executioner of the sentence against transgression but He leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown.

[skyblue888]

Some are prepared to believe that, during the six millenniums of the great controversy, God will have withheld His righteous hands from slaying anyone or destroying anything. But they are not prepared to go so far as to believe that He will continue this course at the final showdown. Then, they believe, He will arise to personally exterminate the wilfully unrepentant. They reason on this basis. During the six thousand years He restrains Himself to give the wicked opportunity to display before the universe their utter defiance and ingratitude. When the inhabitants of other systems see the full perversity of the human race, God will be free to cut them off without being regarded as cruel or unjust. Moreover, they will have become so incensed with this despicable behaviour that they will expect and even require God to destroy them. This is the position held by some.

This reasoning, if true, makes God a politician Whose policies are determined by public opinion. This is to belittle God; to reduce Him to the level of scheming men who study the temper of their fellow humans, and then formulate their policies and procedures accordingly.

But God is not like that. He is motivated by righteousness, not by the feelings of His creatures. Before the great controversy began, throughout all of its duration, and in its final resolution, God has and will act with unvarying consistency.

The reason for God's willingness to enter into the great controversy with the devil, was to demonstrate that the principles of His government were perfect, and that, no matter what the pressure upon Him, He would act only in accordance with them. Accordingly, no matter how wicked men have been in the past, how extensively their destructive ways have desolated the earth, or how violent their insolence against Heaven, God has not raised a finger to obliterate them. They have perished as the fruitage of their own evil seed-sowing.

To believe that God has never destroyed during the course of the great rebellion, but turns to do so in the end, is self-contradicting. It would mean that God, Who has spent seven thousand years demonstrating that He is not an executioner of the sentence against transgression, will undo all He has worked to establish by turning into an executioner for this final judgment. What a tragedy that would be!

During the long defection, Satan and his hordes have worked with relentless determination to provoke God into raising His righteous hand to destroy the rebels, but He has passed every test without defect. In the last showdown He is afforded His final opportunity to confirm that He is not an executioner, that He has given to all, the freedom to choose what they want, and that He will not interfere with that choice.

To make the least concession then, after so perfectly demonstrating the contrary over the previous millenniums, would nullify all that has been achieved. It would be as if a man spent a lifetime building a splendid edifice and then burned it to the ground. It is certain that this is not what God will do.

There is no possibility of His having faithfully resisted every pressure to provocation for so long, only to give way to it at the last. The final eradication of the wicked will happen exactly as lesser decimations occurred in human history.

As Jerusalem was overthrown by the Jews themselves, as Sodom and Gomorrah perished as a harvest of their own seed-sowing, as the flood came, not because God sent it, but because He could not prevent it without violating His righteous principles, so the final end will come. It will not be because God sent it, but because He cannot prevent it without taking away people's freedom to choose what they want.

These principles are poorly understood by earth-dwellers, most of whom have gone to their dusty beds with distorted understandings of God's character. This is not God's fault for He has provided in nature, in His Word, and in the revelation given by Christ, all that is necessary for understanding His righteous principles. Therefore, in His great love and mercy, He will especially raise up every human being so that once more, they can be shown God's workings and their own rejection of them.

This time, they will have no arguments with which to counter the witness of God. Every person from Satan down will acknowledge that God has been just and that the loss of their own souls is their own doing.

After one thousand years during which there will not be a living soul upon this earth apart from the devil and his evil angels, the wicked of every generation will be raised up for this final showdown. They come up resuming "the current of their thoughts just where it ceased. They are actuated by the same desire to conquer that ruled them when they fell." The Great Controversy, 664.

sky

God is not concerned about clearing His name for His own personal interest. He is not proud. He does not take personal offence. But He does understand that His character and the principles of righteousness are one and the same. Therefore, the justification of one assures the establishment of the other.

He further knows that the eternal happiness and security of the universe depend on the vindication of those principles. Inasmuch as His everlasting and infinite love for all His children will not permit Him to provide anything less than the perfect best for them, He is determined not to permit the ultimate desecration of righteousness. He will establish it eternally.

Because of this, every person who has ever lived must be assembled for the final showdown in the great controversy. Every principle upon which the kingdom of God is built and operates must be revealed in sharply defined contrast to the principles of Satan's government.

It follows then that if it was important for God never to violate the laws of His government during the six thousand years of active controversy, then it is of multiplied importance that He strictly adhere to them in the final showdown around the city after the thousand years have expired.

[Archie777]

This is my first post on Club Adventist. I haven't read every page on this thread. I hope you don't mind me jumping in and participating.

I believe "war in heaven" is real and not metaphorical. Whether it was a war of words or weapons or both I don't know. I suspect it was both. The evil angels were, after all, cast out of heaven. I doubt they left willingly. To this day, under certain circumstances, evil angels flee the presence of holy angels. I suppose it's because they are afraid, and I doubt they are afraid of words. Do they wield literal swords? I don't know. Do "swords" symbolize weapons? Probably. But I can't say what kind or what it looks like.

Has God ever destroyed sinners? Ellen White thought so.

Quote:

The plea may be made that a loving Father would not see His children suffering the punishment of God by fire while He had the power to relieve them. But God would, for the good of His subjects and for their safety, punish the transgressor. God does not work on the plan of man. He can do infinite justice that man has no right to do before his fellow man. Noah would have displeased God to have drowned one of the scoffers and mockers that harassed him, but God drowned the vast world. Lot would have had no right to inflict punishment on his sons-in-law, but God would do it in strict justice. {LDE 241.2}

Who will say God will not do what He says He will do?--12MR 207-209; 10MR 265 (1876). {LDE 241.3}

[John317]

This is my first post on Club Adventist. I haven't read every page on this thread. I hope you don't mind me jumping in and participating.

You are more than welcome to the Forum and to this discussion. Feel perfectly free to jump right in and comment whenever you want to. We appreciate your participation no matter what your viewpoint is. :-)

[Twilight]

Is it right to infer that another needs to sit at the feet of Jesus, just because they disagree with you Sky?

I am sitting at the feet of Jesus my friend.

I just do not agree with what you are presenting.

It is a half truth in my mind, presented as the whole truth.

Have you considered that it is because I am sitting at the feet of Jesus that I cannot accept what you are saying, because it is error?

In love,

Mark :-)

[Guest]

Is it right to infer that another needs to sit at the feet of Jesus, just because they disagree with you Sky?

I am sitting at the feet of Jesus my friend.

I just do not agree with what you are presenting.

It is a half truth in my mind, presented as the whole truth.

Have you considered that it is because I am sitting at the feet of Jesus that I cannot accept what you are saying, because it is error?

In love,

Mark :-)

I think you are being very generous to call it a half truth. And I believe your generosity comes from sitting at the feet of Jesus.

[Guest]

This is my first post on Club Adventist. I haven't read every page on this thread. I hope you don't mind me jumping in and participating.

I believe "war in heaven" is real and not metaphorical. Whether it was a war of words or weapons or both I don't know. I suspect it was both. The evil angels were, after all, cast out of heaven. I doubt they left willingly. To this day, under certain circumstances, evil angels flee the presence of holy angels. I suppose it's because they are afraid, and I doubt they are afraid of words. Do they wield literal swords? I don't know. Do "swords" symbolize weapons? Probably. But I can't say what kind or what it looks like.

Has God ever destroyed sinners? Ellen White thought so.

Quote:

The plea may be made that a loving Father would not see His children suffering the punishment of God by fire while He had the power to relieve them. But God would, for the good of His subjects and for their safety, punish the transgressor. God does not work on the plan of man. He can do infinite justice that man has no right to do before his fellow man. Noah would have displeased God to have drowned one of the scoffers and mockers that harassed him, but God drowned the vast world. Lot would have had no right to inflict punishment on his sons-in-law, but God would do it in strict justice. {LDE 241.2}

Who will say God will not do what He says He will do?--12MR 207-209; 10MR 265 (1876). {LDE 241.3}

Amen Archie, and welcome to the forum!

[John317]

Quote:

pnattmbtc: There is no possible way that Ellen White could answer the question I'm asking you, which is why you think God would be capable of the things you think He will do, most specifically setting people on fire to cause them to "suffer torture" for many days.

This is a personal question. It has to do with your values, your conception of God's character. Only you can answer this.

....I'm asking specifically about the idea that God will set people on fire to suffer excruciating pain while being burned alive, something Ellen White describes as being made to "suffer torture." I'm asking specifically about this. Not about destroying the wicked in general, nor even destroying the wicked by fire (if this were to happen in a moment, as fire normally works, that would be a different question; it would certainly be more merciful than the idea that God has people burning literally on fire for days like a torch).

....This has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm asking. I'm asking about your concept of God's character, your sense of morality, why these personal values you hold allow you to believe that God will set people on fire for days.

You seem not to understand the concept of proportional punishment for the finally impetanent, even though you said earlier (I believe) that you agree there will be proportional punishment for the wicked. That is a principle laid down in Scripture-- that the wicked will suffer according to what they have done in the body. Ellen White shows that this "portion that the wicked MUST suffer" is "decided" by Christ in union with the righteous during the 1000 years at which time they will closely examine the lives of all the wicked. This also has the support of the Scriptures. The decision is not arbitrary but according to "strict justice," i.e., the laws of God. It is not left up to someone's feelings or to desires for revenge. God is not out for "revenge." Ellen White speaks of the punishment being "meted out to the wicked according to their deeds." This does not describe anything arbitrary. We can trust God not to do anything arbitrary in the punishment of the wicked any more than He rewards the righteous arbitarily. In the final analysis, the whole universe will have no doubt that God is fair and just in His dealing with sin and Satan.

It seems to me that you are judging God by human standards, but this is a mistake that many people make. Both the Bible and Ellen White speak to this very issue, and there are quotes on this topic that I've given before on this thread, so I won't give them here again. If you don't know what those are, ask me, and I'll be glad to post them again. God is able to do infinite justice in a way that it would be wrong for people to do. He is the lawgiver, Judge of the entire universe, and He created everything that exists. He certainly has unlimited control over the works of His hands, to do as He pleases, and no man has a right to ask His maker, "Why are you doing this?" (See Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4, page 50-53.) God wants the universe to watch what He does, but God is not asking criminals to tell Him what He ought to do.

I believe that God's punishing the wicked according to their sins is perfectly right for God to do. In fact, the concept of God's justice is that He would not be "moral"-- that is, in harmony with God's own standards of justice-- if He didn't punish the wicked proportionally for their sins. Far from being immoral for God to punish the wicked by making them suffer proportionally, it is actually an essential aspect of God's "morality." It is also an essential aspect of man's morality. Who think that it would right for a court to punish a shop-lifter, for instance, the same as it would punish a murderer? I doubt very much if anyone would think that's moral. Well, Satan and his angels are mass murderers if there ever were any.

It's important to keep in mind that Ellen White says that some will be destroyed as in a moment. So, you are right that God will allow those who deserve it, to pass out of existence without any physical pain at all. He is a just and loving God who is not out to see that anyone suffers any more than their sins merit.

If you think that the second death is not "punishment," or "recompense," or "payment," and that God should simply allow Satan and the rest of the wicked to merely fall asleep in death, you do not understand the character and dealings of God. I didn't make this up--- they are the words of Ellen White. See ST, Jan. 6, 1881.

Let me know if you need any more explanation on this question. I'll be happy to try harder and, if necessary, to state things more clearly and in greater detail. :-)

[John317]

Quote:

John317: Yes, the measuring stick of doctrine is the Bible.....What she says there does not contradict the Bible.

Quote:

And it is this circular reasoning that gets many, well meaning SDA to put down their Bibles and pick up Ellen G. White. Their reasoning? If EGW doesn't contradict the Bible I might as well just read her.

Been there, done that, became a devil...a legalist

You are wrong to measure everyone by yourself, Robert. Not all read the Bible and Ellen White as you did or do. And not all respond to Ellen White's writings or to Joe Crews the way you did. I suspect that you reacted the way you did, partly because of your personality, and probably to a large degree because you were living in the flesh. I think you realize that at that time you were like the man of Romans 7. I know because I was like the man of Romans 7 myself for most of my life. This happens when we have things in our life that we know are wrong but we want to keep them and not give them up to Christ so He can cleanse of all unrighteousness. When we have sins in our life-- I mean sins that we are consciously practicing and do not want really desire to give up-- then that sin will dominate our life and prevent Christ from coming fully into our lives the way He wants to. Why? Because by holding on to conscious sins, we are saying to Jesus that we love sin more than we love Him. In that way, we are really not giving Jesus permission to rule as King and Master of our lives.

[John317]

Quote:

skyblue888: Some are prepared to believe that, during the six millenniums of the great controversy, God will have withheld His righteous hands from slaying anyone or destroying anything.

They may hold this, but it would be, as shown already, against much biblical evidence. No one can deny that God destroyed the world by a flood and Sodom or the Egyptians in the Red Sea. The only way anyone could deny it is if they re-define "destroy" in a way that makes it impossible for God to have destroyed them. You say, for instance, that God merely withdrew his protecting care from Sodom, so that a volcano destroyed the people whom God would otherwise have protected by keeping the volcano from destroying them. You also say that God could have kept the elements from destroying the world with a flood, and that God merely allowed the waters of the Red Sea to return to their original postion before He performed the miracle of separating the waters. To you, these things show that God didn't destroy anyone. But I beleive reason will show you that this is not true.

If I am taking care of a child and I allow the child to be killed by refusing to do what I could have done to save it, that is the same as destroying the child. If I have a big dog that wants to kill someone and I allow it to happen by opening the door of its pen knowing it will kill, am I not fully responsible for the victim's death?

God knew what would happen when He allowed the elements to self-destruct, just as He knew that volcano-- assuming it happened that way-- would destroy the people. He also was fully aware of the consequences of making the water return to where it had been while the Egyptians were in the sea. In fact, valid evidence has been shown that God knew ahead of time that the Egyptians would be destroyed in the water and that He planned to destroy them there. At least that is the Bible's picture. See Ex. 14: 16-18. The language of the narrative shows clear "intent" because it says Moses was commanded to put forth his staff "in order that" the waters would return over the heads of the Egytpians.

So I don't see how anyone looking at the evidence can reasonably conclude that God never destroyed anyone. It certainly was not the devil who did those things.

God forced Adam out of the Garden. The Scripture say that God drove him out. Ellen White says God sent angels to make him leave. It wasn't because of "natural" consequences that he left. Adam didn't want to go, but God told him that he had to leave. Why? Because God was too wise to allow sinners to eat of the Tree of Life and become immortal. For the same reason God had angels guard the way to the Tree of Life so that Satan and the evil angels could not partake of its fruit and immortalize sin.

This last example is proof positive that God has used force before--- unless, again, we refuse to acknowledge the normal definiton of "force" and redefine it in such a way that God could not possibly be said to have used force irrespective of what He did.

Quote:

But they are not prepared to go so far as to believe that He will continue this course at the final showdown. Then, they believe, He will arise to personally exterminate the wilfully unrepentant.

Will God personnally pronounce the death sentence against each wicked individual? See Ellen White's description in GC 665-666. It is Jesus who personally "decides the portion that the wicked MUST suffer" and it is Jesus who personally "pronounces sentence upon the rebels against His government and EXECUTES JUSTICE upon those who have transgressed His law and oppressed His people."

Why do you resist these statements and why do you believe that if we take these statements literally, they make God like the devil?

It seems to me you have not yet come to terms with these kinds of statements.

Please explain what the above statement plainly says.