"war in heaven" - real or metaphorical?

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

Richard:Your biggest problem with that is, that many of the principals you are calling universal, are not universal at all. For instance, a universal principal on how to study the Bible cannot come from Ellen White. It must come from the Bible itself. Too many times I have seen you take a EGW quote and use it to re-interpret the plain language of the Bible. She plainly tells us not to do that. Perhaps you should read up on the instructions she gives on how to use her writings.

1.A universal principle on how to study the Bible can come from anyone, even you.

2.Certainly a universal principle on how to study the Bible could come from an inspired prophet.

3.The universal principle I was speaking of has absolutely nothing to do with studying the Bible, so it's a bit odd that you would bring this up.

4.I could only use clear statements of Ellen White to "re-interpret" the Bible if Ellen White were contradicting the Bible, which I don't believe is the case.

5.I'm happy to have this conversation without reference to Ellen White, but as many others quote her, I don't see why I shouldn't be allowed to do the same. It seems odd that people complain about this. It makes me think they see the force (no pun intended) of the quotes adduced, and not having an answer, fall back on the idea that we shouldn't use her writings to establish the points we wish to make. In actuality, who said something really doesn't even matter. What matters is if the thing said is true or not.

6.Regarding the use of her writings, it doesn't appear to me that I'm using them any differently than others are. I can't think of why you would suggest that, other than you simply don't agree with the points being made. I don't see that my methodology is any different.

[Guest]

1.A universal principle on how to study the Bible can come from anyone, even you.

Sure you can take one from anywhere, but that doesn't make it correct. It would not be in keeping with letting the Bible interpret itself. Nor would using Ellen White to interpret scripture be in keeping with that principal.

[Robert]

Didn't God force Adam and Eve to leave the Garden of Eden?

[Robert]

First, the statement in Ezekiel 18: 4 didn't mean that God would NEVER punish anyone through the death of a loved one. That's the problem we run into when we take one statement and apply it universally. There are almost always exceptions to every rule.

[John317]

But you don't believe that every baby will be in heaven. Further more you give no Bible evidence why David's baby will be there...

1. I don't believe that every baby will be in heaven. I do believe some will be there. But we cannot know these things for sure because the Bible is silent about babies.

If all babies will be in heaven, it would mean that it's best to die as an infant because then you'd be guaranteed of salvation. I don't believe that.

2) It's true I don't have Bible evidence that David's baby will be in heaven, but I believe Ellen White's statement that there will be babies saved and in heaven. All I can say, then, is that it's possible David's child will be among them. We can trust God that He will make the best decision because He loves everyone and therefore will save everyone that He can.

It's the same with my wife's mother. She was a Yaqi indian peasant girl in Mexico who never went to school and didn't know how to write her own name or read the newspaper. She may have gone to the Catholic church two or three times in her whole life, but she never knew the gospel. I believe she could still be saved in God's kingdom but we simply have to trust God with that decision.

[pnattmbtc]

1.A universal principle on how to study the Bible can come from anyone, even you.

Sure you can take one from anywhere, but that doesn't make it correct. It would not be in keeping with letting the Bible interpret itself. Nor would using Ellen White to interpret scripture be in keeping with that principal.

A principle can be true regardless of its source.

[pnattmbtc]

First, the statement in Ezekiel 18: 4 didn't mean that God would NEVER punish anyone through the death of a loved one. That's the problem we run into when we take one statement and apply it universally. There are almost always exceptions to every rule.

This took me by surprise. When we read something like "Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die." there may be exceptions to this rule? So it's not necessarily the case that "The soul that sinneth, it shall die"?

How do you determine when exceptions apply?

[Guest]

>>A principle can be true regardless of its source.<<

So then it's ok to use one of Satan's principals to study scripture?

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

>>A principle can be true regardless of its source.<<

So then it's ok to use one of Satan's principals to study scripture?

Not a principle of Satan, but a principle he stated, if it were true, could be used. Again, a principle can be true regardless of its source. Also, we weren't talking about Satan, but the SOP. Surely an inspired prophet can be trusted to state true principles of study.

Where did this come from anyway? I didn't say anything about universal principles of studying Scripture. I'm not understand what led you to bring this up.

[pnattmbtc]

1. I don't believe that every baby will be in heaven. I do believe some will be there. But we cannot know these things for sure because the Bible is silent about babies.

If all babies will be in heaven, it would mean that it's best to die as an infant because then you'd be guaranteed of salvation. I don't believe that.

2) It's true I don't have Bible evidence that David's baby will be in heaven, but I believe Ellen White's statement that there will be babies saved and in heaven. All I can say, then, is that it's possible David's child will be among them. We can trust God that He will make the best decision because He loves everyone and therefore will save everyone that He can.

I agree. Ellen White says that just because the parents are Christians does not mean their baby will be saved. She stresses very strongly the importance of parental care in bringing their infants according to right principles. She also implies that some infants of some non-Christians will be saved. I think this is in 3SM IIRC.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

First, the statement in Ezekiel 18: 4 didn't mean that God would NEVER punish anyone through the death of a loved one. That's the problem we run into when we take one statement and apply it universally. There are almost always exceptions to every rule.

This took me by surprise. When we read something like "Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die." there may be exceptions to this rule? So it's not necessarily the case that "The soul that sinneth, it shall die"?

How do you determine when exceptions apply?

The Jehovah's Witnesses use the same argument to prove some of their false doctrines. They believe there were never any exceptions to the rule.

Can you think of any exceptions to the rule that all souls who sin shall die?

Well, how about Enoch and Elijah? Weren't they sinners? Why, yes, they sure were. Of course. Did they ever die? NO.

So there are your exceptions to the rule.

The JWs do not believe in exceptions, and for this very reason, they believe those men are dead in their graves, and they would be, too, if the statement in Ezekiel was absolute. But it isn't, and thank God it isn't. Therefore we have fellow human beings now in heaven who never saw death, and they are representatives of all who will be taken to heaven without seeing death. So yes, if you count those two men as well as the righteous who are alive at the Second Coming, you have many exceptions to what you believed was a universal rule that applied to every single human being ever born on the face of the earth.

Can you see now how we determine when there are exceptions to the rules? It can be done by studying the Bible evidence.

But let's say you have your mind made up that Ezekiel 18: 4 gives us a hard and fast rule that applies universally to every last human on earth. What then? Well, what happens then is that you find a way to explain away the verses in Scripture which teach that Enoch and Elijah never died. Because if you believe it's a universal without exceptions, then if you find an exception, God looks like a liar!! Just like, since you have made up your mind that God has never used force and never will use force under any circumstances, you come up with the idea that Satan left heaven willingly and of his own volition and that no force was used. Because if God used force in that instance or any other instance in salvation-history, God seems to be a liar. But of course He isn't a liar. But what you do with the so-called universal rule about the use of force-- that God didn't make Satan leave heaven-- makes as much sense biblically as believing Enoch and Elijah died and are in the grave.

[Guest]

Where did this come from anyway? I didn't say anything about universal principles of studying Scripture. I'm not understand what led you to bring this up.

[Robert]

Enoch and Elijah never died.

Yes, in the traditional sense, yet they were changed. Flesh and blood cannot enter heaven. The old vanished (died) and they received a new, glorified life free from all sin.

[pnattmbtc]

Where did this come from anyway? I didn't say anything about universal principles of studying Scripture. I'm not understand what led you to bring this up.

R:Yes you did.

[pnattmbtc]

The Jehovah's Witnesses use the same argument to prove some of their false doctrines. They believe there were never any exceptions to the rule.

Can you think of any exceptions to the rule that all souls who sin shall die?

Well, how about Enoch and Elijah? Weren't they sinners? Why, yes, they sure were. Of course. Did they ever die? NO.

So there are your exceptions to the rule.

[pnattmbtc]

But let's say you have your mind made up that Ezekiel 18: 4 gives us a hard and fast rule that applies universally to every last human on earth. What then? Well, what happens then is that you find a way to explain away the verses in Scripture which teach that Enoch and Elijah never died. Because if you believe it's a universal without exceptions, then if you find an exception, God looks like a liar!! Just like, since you have made up your mind that God has never used force and never will use force under any circumstances, you come up with the idea that Satan left heaven willingly and of his own volition and that no force was used. Because if God used force in that instance or any other instance in salvation-history, God seems to be a liar. But of course He isn't a liar. But what you do with the so-called universal rule about the use of force-- that God didn't make Satan leave heaven-- makes as much sense biblically as believing Enoch and Elijah died and are in the grave.

This whole argument is specious because it's based on a false premise, which I explained in the previous post. If there were exceptions to the principle that "the soul that sinneth shall die," then it wouldn't be a universal principle. Even if the verse were dealing with the first death, your argument would still be invalid. It would be like saying that the law gravity has exceptions because one can use a parachute.

The statement "compelling power is only found under Satan's government" is either true or false. If it's also found in God's government, then it's false. This should be easy to see.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: John317

Didn't God force Adam and Eve to leave the Garden of Eden?

Gen 3:23 So the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden to be a worker on the earth from which he was taken. 24 So he sent the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden he put winged ones and a flaming sword turning every way to keep the way to the tree of life.

Flaming sword? That's not force? Or should I use your exegesis method and read a switch? But then that would still be force. How about a flaming blade of grass?

Quote:

Doesn't He force the Devil to remain on this desolate earth during the 1000 years?

He limits his access to other unfallen worlds. There's a barrier....He places limits on iniquity or else all of us would have slaughtered each other by now.

Barrier? Like titanium bars? But wouldn't that still be use of force? Or perhaps a persuasion barrier?

Quote:

Once He withdrew from Saul, God knew that Saul would die.

But that wasn't God's fault....God assumed the blame for the results of sin until the day of Atonement where He places the actual blame for sin on Satan. Until then God assumes the blame as if He did theses things Himself.

As I said before, since God made laws the violation of which has consequences, there is a sense in which God TAKES, er, ASSUMES, responsibilty although the fault is not His.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: John317

Didn't God force Adam and Eve to leave the Garden of Eden?

Gen 3:23 So the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden to be a worker on the earth from which he was taken. 24 So he sent the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden he put winged ones and a flaming sword turning every way to keep the way to the tree of life.

[teresaq]

The reason I say it's a cheap tactic is because it's simply a rhetorical devise. Lump an idea you disagree with with something or someone who is viewed negatively rather than deal with the issue itself. Hitler and Satan are common choices for this devise.

welcome to the club.

we are told he has the "right" to set the tone for his forum, and this is the tone he sets and encourages from his yes-men.

some encouragement from the messenger of the Lord:

I had labored early and late, writing out important matters to meet and correct the prejudice, the misconstruing of things, the misinterpretation of matters. . . . {11MR 244.3}

I have had to vindicate myself and my brethren, press with all my powers against the prejudice, unbelief, false statements and misrepresentations until it almost gives me a nervous chill to think of the blindness and unreasonable pharisaism that has been adjusted as a garment about men in prominent positions. . . . {11MR 245.1}

If my brethren allow me to carry this burden longer in this way I will certainly know that God does not lead them and me. One of us is not moving in God's order. I think it time to call a halt and see what powers are moving us. . . . {11MR 245.2}-Letter 115, 1890, pp. 1, 2, 7, 8. {11MR 245.3}

[Gerr]

Are we now to use the RH quote about "beams of light" to interpret the "flaming sword" of Genesis?

[teresaq]

By the way, if you haven't already, please deal with the fact that Ellen White said Satan was "expelled" from heaven after God "decreed" that the Devil was "banished from Heaven." "Expelled" never refers to a free act on the part of the one who's expelled.

Also deal with the fact that the Bible uses the word, bello ["thrown out," "hurled down"], which, in the passive voice, is NEVER used to refer to something someone does voluntarily.

Satan, and those whom he had deceived, and who fought with him, were cast out of heaven, but the warfare has been continued on the earth. {UL 77.4}

They need not imagine a battle going on in some distant field with celestial pomp, in all the terribleness of superhuman strength, but bring the imagination down to the reality of the war and conflict in the domain of the human heart, and give this battle the character of a moral conflict, a struggle between principles supported by opposite parties which appear as combatants. They must consider they are either to become champions of falsehood or of truths. {RH, July 19, 1887 par. 9}

[teresaq]

Are we now to use the RH quote about "beams of light" to interpret the "flaming sword" of Genesis?

[pnattmbtc]

Yes, there can be no doubt that God's ideal was for Saul to repent and have eternal life. In the same way, God's ideaL was for Lucifer to never become the Devil and be thrown out of heaven. But we're not dealing with the ideal. We must come to grips with what actually happened, and what actually happened was that God expelled, or threw out, Satan and the other wicked spirits from heaven.

[pnattmbtc]

p:The reason I say it's a cheap tactic is because it's simply a rhetorical devise. Lump an idea you disagree with with something or someone who is viewed negatively rather than deal with the issue itself. Hitler and Satan are common choices for this devise.

t:welcome to the club.

I didn't wish my statement to be an indictment against John. If I see someone posting something I think is inappropriate, I may bring it to their attention, but I've been very pleased overall with my discussions with John. I think he's treated me respectfully, and in the past has been open to quite a number of suggestions and comments, and hope he will be here as well.

We all make mistakes.

(I've also not been in this forum long, so can't comment on any experiences you may have had previous to my coming here.)

[John317]

The principal that God cannot lie is valid because it comes from the Bible itself. Not so with principals you make up, or get from other places. That's why I say that principals you call universal are not universal at all, except in your mind.

This is true, and a very important point that some do not appear to understand or grasp.

One is a plain statement of Scripture and the other, which is used to conclude that God did not force Satan out of heaven, is arrived at by invalid deduction.