"war in heaven" - real or metaphorical?

[Lutz13]

Originally Posted By: Tammy

There are always "reasons" why people believe and teach false doctrine... For instance people like to believe one dies and goes right to Heaven, because it "sounds so nice"...even though it isn't true. I think the same holds here...they want to think that God will not destroy them...inspite of the clear Bible and Spirit of Prophecy statements to the contrary.

This bunch here wants to believe it so badly that they have made up their own little rule. And use it where ever it's needed to uphold their preferred view. They call it a "universal principle". The problem with that is, that in order for it to be what they say it is, they would need to show consistency with it. (which of course they cannot do) Otherwise they're just using it selectively, where THEY see fit.

They point to a few cases where God seems to take the blame for something He didn't do, and instead of trying to figure out why He did that, they just say: "Look! This must be a "universal principle". We can apply this to whatever we like. The entire Bible if need be". And they don't stop there either. They then apply it to the plain statements of Ellen White!

Of course this is a joke to anyone who bothers to take the time to think it through.

You may disagree with me on this, and I know others from the other camp probably will as well. We can be certain that the wrath of God is clearly God stepping away. This is seen through all the Old Testament, and even in the new. Gods wrath will forever remain the same. Even the seven last plagues will be man made. It is caused by Gods wrath after all. There is no excuse to not understand what it is.

As for the flood. There was one man who spoke with God. God had to use an emergency. Had it not happened we wouldn't be where we are today. In fact I'm sure mankind would have been gone a few thousand years ago. God let man kind go and go and He provided an abundance of mercy! He had the world warned and it was rejected and mocked. So He put them to sleep. What one must understand is that no one in the history of earth has died. So it is clear that God has never killed anyone.

He will one day wake those people up, and let them live out their lives. Which because they are separated from Him, the source of all life. It will end in death. They reap what they sow.

I would encourage you people to actually understand what Gods fire is. It isn't literal... Heap hot coals of fire on your enemy...I find it sad that Adventist go to great lengths to say that everlasting and unquenchable are words that don't really mean what they say...Well excuse me, but God said He loves me with an everlasting love, and please do not mess with that word!!

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

They point to a few cases where God seems to take the blame for something He didn't do,

Seems? He is assuming the blame. Open your eyes and get out of your traditional understanding of God, for if you remain you will become more like your version of God. Not good!

Show me one text that tells me to use such a principle in studying the Bible, and I will.

One that takes plain scripture and literally turns it upside down, so that it means the exact opposite of what it says. PLEASE!

[skyblue888]

"When France publicly rejected God and set aside the Bible, wicked men and spirits of darkness exulted in their attainment of the object so long desired--a kingdom free from the restraints of the law of God. Because sentence against an evil work was not speedily executed, therefore the heart of the sons of men was "fully set in them to do evil." Ecclesiastes 8:11. But the transgression of a just and righteous law must inevitably result in misery and ruin. Though not visited at once with judgments, the wickedness of men was nevertheless surely working out their doom. Centuries of apostasy and crime had been treasuring up wrath against the day of retribution; and when their iniquity was full, the despisers of God learned too late that it is a fearful thing to have worn out the divine patience. The restraining Spirit of God, which imposes a check upon the cruel power of Satan, was in a great measure removed, and he whose only delight is the wretchedness of men was permitted to work his will. Those who had chosen the service of rebellion were left to reap its fruits until the land was filled with crimes too horrible for pen to trace. From devastated provinces and ruined cities a terrible cry was heard--a cry of bitterest anguish. France was shaken as if by an earthquake. Religion, law, social order, the family, the state, and the church--all were smitten down by the impious hand that had been lifted against the law of God. Truly spoke the wise man: 'The wicked shall fall by his own wickedness.' 'Though a sinner do evil a hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before Him: but it shall not be well with the wicked.' Proverbs 11:5; Ecclesiastes 8:12, 13. 'They hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord;' 'therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.'" Proverbs 1:29, 31. The Great Controversy, 286.

And we are told that what took place at the time of the French Revolution and the destruction of Jerusalem, are types of what will take place after the close of probation except that then God's restraining power will be fully removed from the agencies of evil and Satan will have entire control of the finally impenitent.

All who are willing to see and understand will have no difficulty seeing and understanding that God's principles of dealing with sin are ever the same.

At first God's restraining power is in a measure removed from the agencies of evil so that a train of circumstances arises that will punish sin with sin; then, if rebellion persists, His restraining power is in a great measure removed from the agencies of evil, and when the cup of iniquity is full, it is fully removed.

When His restraining power is fully removed from the agencies of evil, it is said that "His wrath is complete." Rev.15:1.

From this it is clearly seen that God's judgments do not come directly out from the Lord upon the unrepentant but in this way--they place themselves beyond His protection. See MR 14,3.

sky

[BobRyan]

You may disagree with me on this, and I know others from the other camp probably will as well. We can be certain that the wrath of God is clearly God stepping away. This is seen through all the Old Testament, and even in the new. Gods wrath will forever remain the same. Even the seven last plagues will be man made.

Not one text of scripture says the plagues are "man made".

And as for the wrath of God -- it was addressed here recently -

http://clubadventist.com/forum/ubbthread...html#Post334299

in Christ,

Bob

[The Searcher]

Dear Friends,

Romans 1 states God gives men up to receive the consequences of their choices, but there are times, such as the flood, when He directly steps in and brings a halt to man's adventure into sin. But at such times, He gives a warning. "Surely the Lord God will do nothing except He reveal it to His servants the prophets." When God directly intervenes, He gives warnings. Then He acts.

God will bring down fire upon the rebellious at the last day of judgment. He put to sleep Ananias and Sapphira before the Church in Jerusalem. He opened up the earth beneath Korah, Dathan, and Abiram and their families in the desert. He commanded Israel to destroy the people of Jericho. He had Achan and his family killed; he had a man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath also killed. He killed the elder two sons of Aaron when they approached God with strange fire. And by the way, this was the I Am who did this, which means it was Christ who did this work.

Let us be careful here. There are times when God must remove His protection and leave the sinner to the consequences of their choices. But there are also times when He will directly carry out His discipline.

Sincerely,

The Seeker

[skyblue888]

The greatest destruction yet to eventuate before the second coming of Christ will result from the outpouring of the seven last plagues. This will be the drinking by the finally impenitent "of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation." Revelation 14:10.

Up till this time the judgments of God have always been mixed with mercy so that the wicked were shielded from the full penalty of their guilt.

"All the judgments upon men, prior to the close of probation, have been mingled with mercy. The pleading blood of Christ has shielded the sinner from receiving the full measure of his guilt; but in the final judgment, wrath is poured out unmixed with mercy." The Great Controversy, 629.

The same language used in scripture to describe the destructions on men in the past, is employed to portray this terrible future desolation. It is depicted as being "the wrath of God," administered by destroying angels. The incineration of Sodom and Gomorrah, the flooding of Noah's world, the plaguing of the Egyptians, the serpents'invasion into Israel's encampment, Jericho's, Nineveh's, and Jerusalem's overthrow, and many more such catastrophes are consistently detailed in the same terms employed to prophesy the coming seven last plagues.

Harmony of interpretation insists that the scriptural portrayal of events yet future must be understood in the same way as the Word of God reveals that the description of events in the past be understood. The Bible abounds in explanations of how we are to interpret the declarations describing the punishment to befall the wicked. By this means we have no excuse for failing to understand that when God is said to destroy, the result of His efforts to save the impenitent have resulted in Him being forced to remove His restraining power from the agencies of evil to the place where no protection from destruction remains to them. This is the way it has always been in the past. So it must yet be in the seven last plagues.

"When He leaves the sanctuary, darkness covers the inhabitants of the earth. In that fearful time the righteous must live in the sight of a holy God without an intercessor. The restraint which has been upon the wicked is removed, and Satan has entire control of the finally impenitent. God's long-suffering has ended. The world has rejected His mercy, despised His love, and trampled upon His law. The wicked have passed the boundary of their probation; the Spirit of God, persistently resisted, has been at last withdrawn. Unsheltered by divine grace, they have no protection from the wicked one. Satan will then plunge the inhabitants of the earth into one great, final trouble. As the angels of God cease to hold in check the fierce winds of human passion, all the elements of strife will be let loose. The whole world will be involved in ruin more terrible than that which came upon Jerusalem of old." The Great Controversy, 614.

"As Jesus moved out of the most holy place, I heard the tinkling of the bells upon His garment; and as He left, a cloud of darkness covered the inhabitants of the earth. There was then no mediator between guilty man and an offended God. While Jesus had been standing between God and guilty man, a restraint was upon the people; but when He stepped out from between man and the Father, the restraint was removed, and Satan had entire control of the finally impenitent. It was impossible for the plagues to be poured out while Jesus officiated in the sanctuary; but as His work there is finished, and His intercession closes, there is nothing to stay the wrath of God, and it breaks with fury upon the shelterless head of the guilty sinner, who has slighted salvation and hated reproof." Early Writings, 280.

These statements verify the truth that it is the removal of God's restraining power which releases the powers of men and nature into Satan's hands. They then burst with destructive fury upon the shelterless heads of the wicked.

Let the expression, "there is nothing to stay the wrath of God," be guarded from misunderstanding. Before the principles in regard to God's character are understood, this would be taken to mean that God was personally angered and therefore anxious to smite the offenders, but is restrained by the intercession of His Son until Jesus finishes His work in the sanctuary.

If this interpretation is correct, then Christ and His Father are working against each other. God is longing to destroy man, while Christ is resisting Him. However, it is impossible to believe this and at the same time hold to the great and precious truth that Christ and the Father are one; that, far from working against each other, they are fully united in the task of saving man.

"God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself..." 2 Corinthians 5:19.

sky

[Guest]

What one must understand is that no one in the history of earth has died.

That sounds a lot like the lie that Satan told Eve. "You shall not surely die".

People have gone through some very horible and excruciating things, on their way to being put to sleep. I know, I've seen it.

You can say they are not dead if that makes you feel better, but the Bible and Ellen White don't agree with you. It says not only are they dead, but some of them will have to die again.

Num 19:13 Whosoever touches the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifies not himself, defiles the tabernacle of the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the water of purification was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him.

1Th 4:16 and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

Yes the Bible does compare death with sleep, after a man is dead. But it doesn't say that death does not exist yet. Which is what you are doing.

All who are caught up in this "God does not destroy" lie. Have put themselves on very shaky ground. Indeed very dangerous ground. You have placed yourselves in a position to except all kinds of false doctrines, and theories. And all for the sake of feeling warm and fuzzy inside.

Show me one text or quote that tells me to use such a principle across the board, in studying the Bible and SOP, and I will.

[John317]

Quote:

JOHN3:17: a lot of people think of God as a someone who won't ever destroy sinners in what Jesus called "the gehenna of fire." They think that if God were to do that, it would mean He changed. But not so. His destruction of the wicked will be the result of His mercy and His agape-love.

Quote:

ROBERT: Oh, but that you could see the blaring contradiction!

Sure, I can see why you and many others think it's a "glaring contradition." I used to think the same thing. I know people who think there's a glaring contradiction between the Yahweh of the Old Testament and the Jesus of the New. Some of these think Yahweh is another name for the Devil. But they're wrong. They misunderstand both Yahweh and Jesus. And I've found that you often misunderstand what I'm saying, just as I'm sure I often misunderstand what you're saying. It's incorrect to say that God keeps people alive for the purpose of torturing them. That's the same as people saying God's message is that they better accept Him or He will kill them.

[Lutz13]

Originally Posted By: Lutz13

You may disagree with me on this, and I know others from the other camp probably will as well. We can be certain that the wrath of God is clearly God stepping away. This is seen through all the Old Testament, and even in the new. Gods wrath will forever remain the same. Even the seven last plagues will be man made.

Not one text of scripture says the plagues are "man made".

And as for the wrath of God -- it was addressed here recently -

http://clubadventist.com/forum/ubbthread...html#Post334299

in Christ,

Bob

I would say you do not have a clear understanding of what the Wrath of God is.

It would be a waste of time to try and tell you since it is in scripture over and over and over and over again. I'll leave you to your own reasoning.

[Lutz13]

Originally Posted By: Lutz

What one must understand is that no one in the history of earth has died.

That sounds a lot like the lie that Satan told Eve. "You shall not surely die".

People have gone through some very horible and excruciating things, on their way to being put to sleep. I know, I've seen it.

You can say they are not dead if that makes you feel better, but the Bible and Ellen White don't agree with you. It says not only are they dead, but some of them will have to die again.

Num 19:13 Whosoever touches the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifies not himself, defiles the tabernacle of the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the water of purification was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him.

1Th 4:16 and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

Yes the Bible does compare death with sleep, after a man is dead. But it doesn't say that death does not exist yet. Which is what you are doing.

All who are caught up in this "God does not destroy" lie. Have put themselves on very shaky ground. Indeed very dangerous ground. You have placed yourselves in a position to except all kinds of false doctrines, and theories. And all for the sake of feeling warm and fuzzy inside.

Show me one text or quote that tells me to use such a principle across the board, in studying the Bible and SOP, and I will.

Really Richard? I can show you how the bible agrees with such.

Jesus said Lazarus was asleep. His disciples were not able to understand this so Jesus had to say. "Lazarus is dead."

You can also look at Luke 20:37-38. "But now as to whether the dead will be raised. Even Moses proved this when he wrote about the burning bush. Long after Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had died, he referred to the Lord as 'the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. So He is the God of the living, not the dead, for they are all alive to Him."

No one is dead yet. They are asleep.

[Robert]

Show me one text that tells me to use such a principle in studying the Bible, and I will.

Luke 25:1 When Jesus saith He doeth bad things, He is assuming the blame.

[Lutz13]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

Show me one text that tells me to use such a principle in studying the Bible, and I will.

Luke 25:1 When Jesus saith He doeth bad things, He is assuming the blame.

lol...They can't put scripture together. What makes you think they will understand the point you are making here...

I got it though.

[Guest]

You guys go ahead and laugh it up. You don't even realize that you're taking the LORD'S name in vain, and laughing about blashphemy. I bet the recording angel is smart enough to pick up on it though.

[Robert]

You guys go ahead and laugh it up.

[Robert]

Show me one text that tells me to use such a principle in studying the Bible, and I will.

Show me one verse that states that Sunday will be the mark of the beast. Just one....

[Robert]

Why does God say that He "was aroused against Israel and He [God] moved David . . . to . . . number Israel" when it was "Satan [who] stood up against Israel and moved David to number Israel"? Yes?

Why did God say that "He [God] killed him [saul]" when clearly "Saul took a sword and fell on it"?

Why did God say that "I will harden his heart" when again clearly "Pharoah hardened his [own] heart"?

Why did God say, "I...will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt" when clearly it was "the destroyer"?

Why did God say "I will strike the Shepherd [Jesus]" when clearly God had "forsaken" Him, i.e., He was not present.

Why does God say that He "sends... a powerful delusion" to those who reject the truth when clearly it is "lying wonders...and every kind of deception" from Satan through the man of sin?

Why does God state that He "maketh the dumb", "deaf" and " blind" when clearly His creation of mankind was "fearfully and wonderfully made" so that even David said, "Wonderful are your works"?

Why did God tell Satan that "you (Satan) incited Me [God] against him [Job] to destroy him without cause" when it was clearly Satan who caused all of Job's problems (see Job 1:12)?

Yes, yes???

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

All who are caught up in this "God does not destroy" lie. Have put themselves on very shaky ground. Indeed very dangerous ground. You have placed yourselves in a position to except all kinds of false doctrines, and theories. And all for the sake of feeling warm and fuzzy inside.

Really Richard? I can show you how the bible agrees with such.

Jesus said Lazarus was asleep. His disciples were not able to understand this so Jesus had to say. "Lazarus is dead."

You can also look at Luke 20:37-38. "But now as to whether the dead will be raised. Even Moses proved this when he wrote about the burning bush. Long after Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had died, he referred to the Lord as 'the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. So He is the God of the living, not the dead, for they are all alive to Him."

No one is dead yet. They are asleep.

The disciples new what death was, they just hadn't heard it referred to as sleep before. So when Jesus said "Lazarus is dead" he wasn't lying, if that's what you're trying to say. Lazarus really was dead. JESUS RAISED THE DEAD!!

You have proven my point here more than I ever wanted you too, as far as where this false doctrine can take you. Are you really trying to make the case that the dead are not really dead? Yes the Bible compares death to sleep, because they are going to be resurrected. If the first death isn't really a death, then why is the second death called THE SECOND DEATH?

Rev 2:11 ...He that overcomes shall not be hurt of the second death.

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

[pnattmbtc]

p:No Richard, this isn't the point. The point is that inspiration often presents God as doing that which he permits.

R:Often? Or every single time?

You see in order to make it an absolute universal principle like you are going so far out of your way to do. It would have to be every single time. Because if it's not every single time then you don't know when the "principle" applies and when it doesn't. And there's no way it could be universal.

That means God would have had to say He killed Abel instead of "Cain killed Abel" Did He do this? No, of course not. He had nothing to do with the killing of Abel. Why would He say something that wasn't true? In the case of Saul and the one or two other cases you point to, He actually did have something to do with it. He was not just taking the blame because he allowed it, as you say.

In order for this to be a universal principle as you say. That God takes the blame for everything he allows, you would have to show complete consistency. Otherwise it is just you deciding when to use the principle and when not to use the principle.

Did God kill Agag? NO! Did he claim to have killed Agag? Did he take credit for it in any way? No. Samuel killed Agag:

Did God take credit for it when David had Uriah the Hittite killed? NO.

Did God take credit for it when Moses killed the egyptian? Not at all!

Your universal principle isn't holding up too well. We could show this principle not working, over and over and over. We could go through the entire Bible doing this.

And it would show that it is in NO WAY the DEFAULT position, for God to take credit for everything He allows. In fact the two or three cases you can point to, are an anomaly. Far far from being a universal principle.

To call this a universal principle is absurd and ludicrous at best. It's actually worse than that, because you are misrepresenting God, and calling him a liar.

[pnattmbtc]

Bob, they think their universal principle makes all that straight talk from the prophet null and void. Why did God bother to have her waste her time?

[pnattmbtc]

The fact is God knew Lucifer would sin, yet He created Lucifer anyway. Why? There are no answers.

This is half right. God knew Lucifer *could* sin. You're right that if God knew Lucifer would sin (as in sin would be 100% certain if God created Lucifer), there would be no answer to that. If God set in motion a course which was 100% certain to lead to sin, then God would be responsible for the existence of sin. It's quite a different thing if God set in motion a course of events which made sin merely possible, as opposed to certain.

[Lutz13]

The disciples new what death was, they just hadn't heard it referred to as sleep before. So when Jesus said "Lazarus is dead" he wasn't lying, if that's what you're trying to say. Lazarus really was dead. JESUS RAISED THE DEAD!!

You have proven my point here more than I ever wanted you too, as far as where this false doctrine can take you. Are you really trying to make the case that the dead are not really dead? Yes the Bible compares death to sleep, because they are going to be resurrected. If the first death isn't really a death, then why is the second death called THE SECOND DEATH?

Rev 2:11 ...He that overcomes shall not be hurt of the second death.

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Nooooo! You're still not getting it! To God who sees far down the road, no one is dead because they all get woken up! Because the disciples were so hard headed and couldn't understand, God had to speak our simple language. The truth of the matter is, they are asleep and not dead! But there is a final death, and that is true. That is what us simple minded humans call the second death. But from Gods perspective which I am trying to explain here, no one is dead!

[pnattmbtc]

And we are told that what took place at the time of the French Revolution and the destruction of Jerusalem, are types of what will take place after the close of probation except that then God's restraining power will be fully removed from the agencies of evil and Satan will have entire control of the finally impenitent.

Where are we told this? I know about Jerusalem, but I'm curious about the French Revolution.

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

The disciples new what death was, they just hadn't heard it referred to as sleep before. So when Jesus said "Lazarus is dead" he wasn't lying, if that's what you're trying to say. Lazarus really was dead. JESUS RAISED THE DEAD!!

You have proven my point here more than I ever wanted you too, as far as where this false doctrine can take you. Are you really trying to make the case that the dead are not really dead? Yes the Bible compares death to sleep, because they are going to be resurrected. If the first death isn't really a death, then why is the second death called THE SECOND DEATH?

Rev 2:11 ...He that overcomes shall not be hurt of the second death.

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Nooooo! You're still not getting it! To God who sees far down the road, no one is dead because they all get woken up! Because the disciples were so hard headed and couldn't understand, God had to speak our simple language. The truth of the matter is, they are asleep and not dead! But there is a final death, and that is true. That is what us simple minded humans call the second death. But from Gods perspective which I am trying to explain here, no one is dead!

So you're saying that when the Bible says that Jesus raised the dead, it's not true? It's just saying that for all us poor dumb humans that aren't smart enough to figure it out like you are?

If you think about it Lutz, that actually is what you are saying. That you are thinking on God's level now, and you can see why the Bible had to be dumbed way down for the rest of us poor schlubbs who can't possibly think that high.

So you are now able, since you know God's view of things, to discern what the Bible is REALLY saying. Especially in those places where it's obviously not really saying certain things. I guess God should have made two Bibles. One for dummies, and another one for you.

You're out there buddy, that's all I can say. And ordinarilly I wouldn't care. In the case of pnat, Robert, or sky, I couldn't care less what they believe. And I know I probably shouldn't say that. But for me to argue with them is nothing but a waste of precious time. And I've come to terms with that.

But it really bothers me to see you on this path. As you can see it leads to pride and grandiose thinking. To where you actually believe you are seeing things from God's perspective. If you look at the quote above, you will see yourself saying that you are trying to explain things to me from GOD"S perspective.

[Lutz13]

So you're saying that when the Bible says that Jesus raised the dead, it's not true? It's just saying that for all us poor dumb humans that aren't smart enough to figure it out like you are?

If you think about it Lutz, that actually is what you are saying. That you are thinking on God's level now, and you can see why the Bible had to be dumbed way down for the rest of us poor schlubbs who can't possibly think that high.

So you are now able, since you know God's view of things, to discern what the Bible is REALLY saying. Especially in those places where it's obviously not really saying certain things. I guess God should have made two Bibles. One for dummies, and another one for you.

You're out there buddy, that's all I can say. And ordinarilly I wouldn't care. In the case of pnat, Robert, or sky, I couldn't care less what they believe. And I know I probably shouldn't say that. But for me to argue with them is nothing but a waste of precious time. And I've come to terms with that.

But it really bothers me to see you on this path. As you can see it leads to pride and grandiose thinking. To where you actually believe you are seeing things from God's perspective. If you look at the quote above, you will see yourself saying that you are trying to explain things to me from GOD"S perspective.

Richard, I do not know whether I should laugh at this or take it serious?

You are clearly taking it the wrong way. We humans see through a glass darkly. We do not see the whole picture. When a close one goes to sleep we immediately think death. When Jesus said that they were going to go wake up Lazarus, the disciples couldn't understand what He was getting at. Why would Jesus want to go wake up Lazarus?! What is the big deal right?

These concepts are important to understand. If it wasn't important they wouldn't have made it into scripture. Just as Jesus said that God is the God of the living, and to Him they are sleeping and are alive. Because the true death is what we would call the second death...

You are taking what I said way out of context. I wasn't saying you're stupid. I was saying we're very simple in comparison to God. So He often speaks in language that we can understand.

I can assure you there is no pride in what I have said.

[Guest]

Quote:

We humans see through a glass darkly.

Obviously you don't. lol

Quote:

If it wasn't important they wouldn't have made it into scripture.

The reason that made it into scripture, was to help us Adventists(God's people) prove what the truth is about the state of the dead. Not to say it doesn't exist!