"war in heaven" - real or metaphorical?

[pnattmbtc]

I've never said that the wicked literally take their own lives at the end of time.

[pnattmbtc]

To add on a bit to the previous post, what I've been arguing against primarily, in regards to the destruction of the wicked, is that God sets people on fire to suffer for many days or hours, and causes their death by an arbitrary act of power ("arbitrary" as per Webster's primary definition, and as used in DA 764, dealing with "by individual discretion, as a judge").

EGW speaks of God's leaving Satan to perish. I don't have a problem with this idea. My point has been that death is the inevitable result of sin, as opposed to something caused by a direct action on the part of God, like setting one on fire.

[Guest]

Yes, I agree. I enjoy your careful consideration of things. That's why I can't understand your insistence that the wicked literally take their own lives at the end of time.

If God wants you alive at any point in time, there's nothing you can do about it.

If God wants you dead at any point in time, there's nothing you can do about it.

He is in charge of life and death. This is not complicated, the way all these pages of argument seem to make it. It is very simple - God gives life, or He takes it away. Blessed be His name. The human choice is whether to cooperate with God and have God give him life, or not cooperate with God and have God pull the plug.

The life each of us enjoy is not a permanent gift. It is given moment by moment.

Another great plain and simple common sense argument from karl. No text, quote, or opinion can refute this simple reality. What karl has said here is a fact, plain and simple. And should put a stop to this argument.

[pnattmbtc]

What do you think the argument is?

[teresaq]

Quote:

Read it again. I included both. I agree with Ty that it will be more than the conscience can bear, but it will also be more than the physiology can bear and thus result in death. This death will not be self-destruction except in the sense that the sinner has chosen his fate. The sinner's conscience doesn't kindle a fire upon himself.

Yes, I misread it, as exclusive as opposed to inclusive. Given the truth is more than the person can bear, I would describe their behavior as self-destructive.

Quote:

God gives them existence for a time that they may develop their character and reveal their principles. This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice. 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.(DA 764)

By a life rebellion, they have placed themselves so out of harmony with God that they cannot bear His presence of love. This is self-destructive behavior. Perhaps you had this in mind when you said they choose their fate.

God shields them from His love for a time, so that they can develop a character, but He can't/won't hide His love forever. Their destruction at the end is entirely of their own doing.

if God were to come close to us, to put His arms around us and assure us of His love we would instantly cease to exist. so Jesus had to be given a human body...

[teresaq]

If God wants you alive at any point in time, there's nothing you can do about it.

If God wants you dead at any point in time, there's nothing you can do about it.

He is in charge of life and death. This is not complicated, the way all these pages of argument seem to make it. It is very simple - God gives life, or He takes it away. Blessed be His name. The human choice is whether to cooperate with God and have God give him life, or not cooperate with God and have God pull the plug.

The life each of us enjoy is not a permanent gift. It is given moment by moment.

this is the universal connecting factor of every religion on this planet. it will be what ultimately connects everyone in making the sunday law.

this is exactly how the vast majority of people on this planet view God, hence all the "appeasement" efforts be they pagan or christian.

[Gerr]

I don't like long trips, so I try to take the shortest route possible. That means less hoops.

[pnattmbtc]

I don't like long trips, so I try to take the shortest route possible. That means less hoops.

I don't know what this is in reference to, although I see it's responding to teresaq. But it brings up an interesting point, which is what one should expect in reading Scripture by way of hoops.

The Bible is a spiritual book. It's also an Eastern book. So there is a great deal of Scripture which, if we read it directly as a Westerner would read some other book, we just won't get at all. So it seems from these two factors alone, there is a "hoop factor" built in.

[Guest]

I don't think Ellen White ever had that problem. She never warned us about any hoops we should know about. I think if anyone is wise enough to know how the Bible ought to be studied, he would do well to ask for guidence and enlightenment from the Holy Spirit, instead of looking through the tinted glasses of his own wisdom.

In fact this is what Ellen White had to say about Bible study...

If all would take the Scripture just as it reads, and open their hearts to understand the word of the Lord, they would not say....{CS 92}

He is seeking to teach them that the Lord's way is always to be closely followed, that His word is to be taken as it reads, and that men are not to devise and plan according to their own judgment, irrespective of His counsel. {CT 353}

A great work can be done by presenting to the people the Bible just as it reads. {ChS 144}

Amid the confusion of delusive doctrines, the Spirit of God will be a guide and a shield to those who have not resisted the evidences of truth. . . {CTr 306}

Joh 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

[Robert]

His word is to be taken as it reads

The problem with taking it just as it reads is you get what seems to be contradictions. You and others fight me on works....I have my verses and you have yours....So we have tension. If you take it just as it reads and set aside the full context, you run into trouble.

Face it, the Bible is super complicated. Somethings are easily understood, some are not. The current subject ("war in heaven") looks into the character of God. There are those verses that seem to say God kills and there are those verses that say opposite. The same with faith vs works.

Rob

[pnattmbtc]

I'm sure Ellen White pointed out somewhere that the Bible is a spiritual book, and that spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Here's an example of the principle from Scripture:

Quote:

And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have no bread.(Mark 8:15,16)

Also that the Bible is an Eastern book is self-evident.

[John317]

Face it, the Bible is super complicated. Somethings are easily understood, some are not. The current subject ("war in heaven") looks into the character of God. There are those verses that seem to say God kills and there are those verses that say opposite. The same with faith vs works.

As Ellen White herself says, the problem with the Bible is not that its messages are unclear or contradictory. The problem is with the way many people read it.

The Bible is easily understood if (1) the student is guided by the Holy Spirit since one can really understand it without the same Spirit that inspired it; (2) the student allows the Bible to interpret itself and does not force his personal views on it; and (3) the student must be willing to lay aside favorite views if the Bible shows that his view is wrong.

[John317]

HOW THE FINAL PUNISHMENT/SUFFERING OF THE WICKED IS DECIDED:

"Then I saw the thrones, and Jesus and the redeemed saints sat upon them; and the saints reigned as kings and priests unto God. Christ, in union with His people, judged the wicked dead, comparing their acts with the statute book, the Word of God, and deciding every case according to the deeds done in the body. Then they meted out to the wicked the portion which they must suffer, according to their works, and it was written against their names in the book of death. Satan also and his angels were judged by Jesus and the saints. Satan's punishment was to be far greater than that of those whom he had deceived. His suffering would so far exceed theirs as to bear no comparison with it. After all those whom he had deceived had perished, Satan was still to live and suffer on much longer." EW 290, 291.

Look closely at the above paragraph and notice the following points:

1) Christ and the saints decide every case according to the deeds done in the body. They are not deciding whether someone is lost but what their punishment is to be.

2) Christ and the saints "mete out to the wicked the portion which they MUST suffer, according to their works."

3) The amount of suffering is decided by Christ and the saints during the 1000 years. It is based on a close examination of the lives of the wicked.

4) Some will suffer much longer than others, and this is the result of the decision of Jesus and His people. It is not the result of natural processes. It is due to supernational decisions made by immortal beings in heaven.

Therefore it is utterly impossible for their destruction to be the work of other wicked people. God is obviously in charge of their deaths.

If it was a matter of people suffering "naturally" because of their consciences, there would be no need to study their lives and decide how much they MUST suffer. Ellen White says clearly that the "portion they must suffer" is decided by Jesus and the saints after carefully comparing their acts with the Word of God.

Thoughts?

[John317]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

no one said God was "trying to get Satan to stay in heaven at the time of the war or afterwards".

pnattmbtc was saying earlier that God was not trying to force Satan out of heaven but rather that God was trying to get him to stay.

But the fact is that although God did for a very long time give Satan an opportunity to repent' date=' the opporunity for him to repent was past by the time the war in heaven began. This is proved clearly by reading EW 146, where it says, "It was there [at a council'] determined that Satan should be expelled from heaven, with all the angels who had joined him in the rebellion. THEN there was war in heaven. Angels were engaged in battle; Satan wished to conquer the Son of God... Satan, with his followers, was DRIVEN from heaven."

This leaves no doubt that before the war began, God had ceased to try to get Satan to stay in heaven but had already decided that Satan must be driven from heaven.

What are your thoughts?

[John317]

Face it, the Bible is super complicated. Somethings are easily understood, some are not.

For the most part the Bible is only super complicated if people are trying to avoid what it is saying.

The Bible is simple enough for a child to understand, yet it is also profound enough for the most educated and brilliant person to continue to find new and wonderful truths throughout a whole lifetime of intense study.

[John317]

if God were to come close to us, to put His arms around us and assure us of His love we would instantly cease to exist. so Jesus had to be given a human body...

Yet some people have been so close to God as to see Him without ceasing to exist. For instance, Moses, in Exodus 33: 20-23 & 34: 5-10.

Why will the righteous living be able to view the full glory of Christ at the second coming without ceasing to exist? Why won't the lost be able to?

[Robert]

The problem is with the way many people read it.

And does "many people" include yourself?

[Robert]

1) Christ and the saints decide every case according to the deeds done in the body. They are not deciding whether someone is lost but what their punishment is to be.

[John317]

Quote:

JOHN3:17: I believe it makes biblical sense that it was God's will for Satan and the evil angels to come to this earth at the time of the creation for the purpose of testing the new race.

Quote:

pnattmbtc: God cannot be tempted, and God does not tempt. If God sent an agent to tempt in His behalf, He would be tempting us, but He doesn't tempt. God permitted the wicked angels to come to tempt the race, but this wasn't His will or plan.

It's true it was not God's will for Adam and Eve to know what evil or sin is. PP 59: par. 3.

But wasn't it God's will for them to be tested?

Further, wasn't it God's will that Jesus be tempted?

If God did not intend for Adam to be tested, why did He place the Tree of Knowledge in the middle of the Garden and command him not to eat of it?

Ellen White specifically says, "Before [Adam and Eve] could be rendered eternally secure, their loyalty must be tested"? She says the tree of knowledge "was to be a test of the obedience, faith, and love of our first parents... They were to be exposed to the temptations of Satan..." PP 48, 49.

The word's "was to be a test" and "were to be exposed to the temptations" proves that it was God's will. Those words can only be understood to mean it was God's intention.

Genesis 3: 22-24 show that it was God's plan that the humans only be given the gift of immortality if they passed the test of obedience and loyalty to Him.

I don't see how those words can be understood in any other way than that God's will was for Adam and Eve to be tempted or tested.

Could you please explain how this can be logically denied in the face of the above evidence?

It was certainly God's will that Jesus be tempted. The Bible specifically says that the Holy Spirit drove Christ out into the wilderness "in order to be tempted." See Matt. 4: 1.

If it was God's will for Jesus to be tempted by the Devil-- yet it is incorrect to speak of God tempting Christ-- why cannot God's will have been for Adam to be tempted without God's being the One to tempt him?

Please explain.

Quote:

JOHN3:17: It's very likely that at this time, Satan and his followers were trying to gain followers among the inhabits of other worlds. If this is true, it would be correct to say that God "threw them to the earth" at the time of His choosing.

Quote:

pnattmbtc: This doesn't appear to make any sense to me. That is, why would it follow from the fact that Satan and his followers were trying to gain converts from other worlds that God threw them to the earth at the time of His choosing? I don't see anything at all connecting these two ideas, and it's certainly not clear to me what your thought process was for coming to this conclusion.

The only connection is that we know that Satan was able to tempt the beings on other planets between the time of his being banished from heaven and the time that God created Adam and Eve. If we put these facts together with the fact that the Bible teaches that God "threw" Satan to the earth, it makes sense that at some point soon after the creation of the earth, God chose to "throw" him down here.

Ellen White makes it perfectly clear that it was God's plan for the human pair to undergo a test of loyalty.

She says, "they were to be exposed to the temptations of Satan." PP 49.

"they were to be" = God's plan

Could this be any clearer?

Your thoughts?

[Robert]

For the most part the Bible is only super complicated if people are trying to avoid what it is saying.

Why are there volumes of SDA Commentaries?...Why did EGW write mounds of articles and books...? If it's so easy the Bible should be enough. No, it's easy to make it say what you want....It's easy to make God look like He has the same characteristics as Satan.

John, the god you present is cruel....Fear is the key motivator for the god you create. No wonder atheism advances....

[John317]

Quote:

JOHN3:17: 1) Christ and the saints decide every case according to the deeds done in the body. They are not deciding whether someone is lost but what their punishment is to be.

Quote:

ROBERT: That statement comes from hell...

I'm wondering if you are denying my understanding of Ellen White's statement in EW 290, 291 or whether you are ssying her statement itself is false.

Do the righteous and Christ judge the wicked angels?

Is there any punishment after the Great White Throne Judgment? If so, how do you believe the punishment is determined?

In what sense does Christ come to reward everyone according to what he has done?

[teresaq]

Quote:

Gerry Cabalo:I was exposed to Maxwell's theology of a non-destroying God at LLU for 4 years. I did not/could not buy it then, and I still can't. Too many hoops to jump through. It's more simple to accept the plain sense of Scripture for me.

BobRyan: Makes me wonder if Maxwell ever took the time to read Rev 20 or Matt 10 or the statements from Ellen White (and posted here) about the lake of fire.

Or if he ever read what was shown here -

teresaq(sda): we, as sdas, certainly do have to jump through hoops to explain many "plain" senses of scripture, such as,

Jdg 9:23 Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech:

1Sa 16:14 But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him.

Psa 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

Luk 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

Luk 16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

Luk 16:25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

Luk 16:26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

and so many more.

the predestinationist, for example, has an easy time because he takes the plain meaning of the scriptures.

the arminian has a much harder job because he has to search the scriptures to find the true meaning which often contradicts the plain meaning.

and if that isnt enough, look at how people look at us when we try to explain the investigative judgment part of our sanctuary doctrine, unique only to us. we really have to take all the scriptures into account on that one!

Originally Posted By: Gerry

I don't like long trips, so I try to take the shortest route possible. That means less hoops.

I don't know what this is in reference to, although I see it's responding to teresaq. But it brings up an interesting point, which is what one should expect in reading Scripture by way of hoops.

The Bible is a spiritual book. It's also an Eastern book. So there is a great deal of Scripture which, if we read it directly as a Westerner would read some other book, we just won't get at all. So it seems from these two factors alone, there is a "hoop factor" built in.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

His word is to be taken as it reads

The problem with taking it just as it reads is you get what seems to be contradictions. You and others fight me on works....I have my verses and you have yours....So we have tension. If you take it just as it reads and set aside the full context, you run into trouble.

Face it, the Bible is super complicated. Somethings are easily understood, some are not. The current subject ("war in heaven") looks into the character of God. There are those verses that seem to say God kills and there are those verses that say opposite. The same with faith vs works.

Rob

if the bible were not "super complicated" God would be altogether such an one as ourselves, nothing more.

[John317]

Quote:

JOHN3:17:

2) Christ and the saints "mete out to the wicked the portion which they MUST suffer, according to their works."

Quote:

ROBERT: Sadistic....

Do the wicked suffer after the Great White Throne Judgment?

If so, is there any relationship between their evil works and the amount of suffering they experience?

If there is no suffering, why then does Jesus talk about "the fire of gehenna" and about the gnashing of teeth, etc.? Is Jesus any more sadistic than Ellen White in her statements about the suffering that the wicked MUST experience?

Also, what are we to make of Jesus' parable in Luke 12: 45-48, where Jesus speaks of those who will receive more lashes than others, according to their knowledge of truth? It seems clear to me that this statement is related to Jesus' words in Rev. 22: 12, about the rewards He's bringing with Him to give to everyone according to what he has done.

How do you see it?

[teresaq]

the god you present is cruel....Fear is the key motivator for the god you create.

it is the same god every religion has in common. a god that needs appeasement, a god out to get you if you mess up.