"war in heaven" - real or metaphorical?

[pnattmbtc]

pnattmbtc: Surely you can see there's no direct or organic relation between sin and being set on fire to burn for some set period of time.

J:Let's first define "organic":

"Organic" means "1. of or having to do with the bodily organ 2. inherent; inborn 3. systematically arranged 4. designating or of any chemical compound containing carbon 5 of, like, or derived from living organisms." Also, "Constituting an integral part of a whole; fundamental."

This is how I understand you position.

[John317]

Quote:

JOHN3:17: Just to take one example: 2 Kings 1: 12. The prophet who wrote 2 Kings says in plain Hebrew that "the fire of God came down from heaven and consumed" fifty-one men.

Quote:

ROBERT: I think he wrote what he perceived. If lighting kills someone you always hear, "it was an act of God". Why? Folks are afraid of God. We are brought up that way. Ellen White did the same with her sons...putting the fear of God in them to make them behave outwardly. It's very human....

The difference between Ellen White and the narrative we read in 2 Kings is that Ellen White was writing a private letter to her sons and never claimed it was something God showed her, nor did it ever become a part of Scripture, nor did anyone ever believe that it was inspired, and therefore it's plain that she wasn't speaking as a prophet of God; whereas Second Kings is Scripture and was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

But you're saying the writer of Scripture-- possibly Jeremiah-- wrote his opinion, which you don't believe. You say he is wrong.

That's the problem when we start rejecting what the Bible says. What this shows is that if the Bible contains messages that some people disagree with, they don't have any problem rejecting it in order to keep their ideas. They're willing to divide up the Bible in parts that are true and other parts that are unreliable. I think that's a dangerous road to go down.

The Bible plainly says that God sent fire, but you say God didn't do any such thing, right? Elijah said, "If I am a man of God, then let fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty." And then it says the fire came down from heaven and consumed the men.

I'm not sure but I assume you mean that the fire did not really come from God like the Bible says but the Devil was given the power to bring down lightning. Is that your position? If so, that would mean the devil caused lightning to kill 51 men at one time.

If the writer was wrong about this incident, and if God had nothing to do with what occurred but it was merely a coincidental lightning strike, it would be good evidence that Elihah was not a man of God.

Also, why should we believe the writer when he says that God sent down fire from heaven and consumed the sacrifices on Mt. Carmel? Did Elijah really go up to heaven in a whirl wind? How reliable is this writer and the book he wrote, anyway?

Do you believe the writings of Paul are also human perception and perhaps in error in some places? Why should we believe Paul but not 2 Kings 1: 10?

I'm wondering if the others who believe God does not destroy the wicked, believe as you do, that 2 Kings 1: 10 merely gives a mistaken, human perception.

[John317]

WELL I also do not believe GOD does NOT KILL

Your sentence here means that you believe God kills.

Double negative in English grammar EQUALS a positive.

You can say, "I also do not believe God kills"

Or: "I also believe God does NOT kill."

How, then,--assuming you do not believe God has ever destroyed or killed humans,-- do you understand the following:

"Under God the angels are all-powerful. On one occasion, in obedience to the command of Christ, they [the all-powerful angels under God] slew of the Assyrian army in one night one hundred and eighty-five thousand men." DA 700. (Written in 1898)

"How easily could the angels, beholding the shameful scene of the trial of Christ, have testified their indignation by consuming the adversaries of God! But they were not commanded to do this." Ibid.

Here is a clear statement from Ellen White proving beyond all question that she taught the angels of God have actually killed humans:

"The same angel who had come from the royal courts to rescue Peter had been the messenger of wrath and judgment to Herod. The angel smote Peter to arouse him from slumber. It was with a different stroke that he [the angel of God] smote the wicked king, laying low his pride and bringing upon him the punishment of the Almighty. Herod died in great agony of mind and body, under the RETRIBUTIVE JUDGMENT OF GOD." AA 152. (Written in 1911)

[John317]

I believe that the sinner destoys them selves

dgrimm60

Yes, the sinner does destroy himself.

"All are by their own choice deciding their destiny." Education 178

God is not out to destroy us but to save us. But if people persist in rejecting Him, the time will come when God will have to destroy them along with all the other wicked, including Satan and the other wicked angels. "God will finally destroy the rejecters of His grace." See GC 539-540, 541, 543.

Both the Bible and the SOP make this clear:

"The Lord rained upon Sodom... fire from the Lord out of heaven." Gen. 19: 24

"In mercy He destroyed the corrupt dwellers in Sodom." GC 543

"In mercy to the world, God blotted out the inhabitants in Noah's time." GC 543

[teresaq]

Quote:

pnattmbtc, quoting Ty Gibson: Christianity is intended to be an ever-deepening journey into the heart of God, by which the beholding of His glory gradually transforms the believer into the same character likeness (2 Cor. 3:18). For those who persist in sin to the ruin of their inner capacity to discern and reflect Gods love, that fire of divine love which would have cleansed them will, on the day of final reckoning, ignite in their souls a destructive measure of shame and guilt. The glory of Him who is love will be more than the conscience can bear.

On the day of unveiled encounter, they will experience psychological and emotional meltdown in Gods immediate presence. For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, and all the proud, yes, all who do wickedly will be stubble. And the day which is coming shall burn them up. Says the Lord of hosts, That will leave them neither root nor branch. But to you who fear My name [love My character] the Sun of Righteousness shall arise with healing in His wings [in the rays of light that emanate from Him](Malachi 4:1, 2, NKJC). Everyone will eventually meet God in all the radiance of His glorious love. Some will be consumed, while others are healed by the very same encounter.(Shades of Grace, by Ty Gibson)

J:I fully agree with the message about Christ being the revelation of the character of God. I don't believe the lines that I've set in red are supported by either Scripture or SOP. If you believe it's supported by clear statements in either authoritative source, please quote or give references.

Here are a couple from the SOP that come to mind:

Quote:

We should not try to lessen our guilt by excusing sin. We must accept God's estimate of sin, and that is heavy indeed. Calvary alone can reveal the terrible enormity of sin. If we had to bear our own guilt, it would crush us.(MB 116)

In the final judgment, the lost have to bear their guilt, which crushes them.

The following speaks to the idea that some are healed by the encounter of God's glorious love while others are destroyed by it.

Quote:

The light of the glory of God, which imparts life to the righteous, will slay the wicked. {DA 107.4}

The life of God in the soul is man's only hope. {CCh 216.5}

The love which Christ diffuses through the whole being is a vitalizing power. Every vital part—the brain, the heart, the nerves—it touches with healing. By it the highest energies of the being are roused to activity. It frees the soul from the guilt and sorrow, the anxiety and care, that crush the life forces. With it come serenity and composure. It implants in the soul, joy that nothing earthly can destroy—joy in the Holy Spirit—health-giving, life-giving joy. {CCh 216.6}

In these words Christ is speaking to every human being. Whether they know it or not, all are weary and heavy-laden. All are weighed down with burdens that only Christ can remove. The heaviest burden that we bear is the burden of sin. If we were left to bear this burden, it would crush us. But the Sinless One has taken our place. "The Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all." Isaiah 53:6. He has borne the burden of our guilt. He will take the load from our weary shoulders. He will give us rest. The burden of care and sorrow also He will bear. He invites us to cast all our care upon Him; for He carries us upon His heart. {DA 328.5}

[pnattmbtc]

But you're saying the writer of Scripture-- possibly Jeremiah-- wrote his opinion, which you don't believe. You say he is wrong.

That's the problem when we start rejecting what the Bible says.

[pnattmbtc]

Look how Jesus dealt with how his own people treated Him. He loved them anyway...He forgave them...and more importantly His death, from His perspective, was eternal. Yet He was willing to give up His life forever so that His murders could have heaven in His place. No anger there.

Indeed. Jesus demonstrated how God treats His enemies.

[teresaq]

actually, this is a clear demonstration of how "john" understands what is written. what these statements say to "john".

"Under God the angels are all-powerful. On one occasion, in obedience to the command of Christ, they [the all-powerful angels under God] slew of the Assyrian army in one night one hundred and eighty-five thousand men." DA 700. (Written in 1898)

"How easily could the angels, beholding the shameful scene of the trial of Christ, have testified their indignation by consuming the adversaries of God! But they were not commanded to do this." Ibid.

Here is a clear statement from Ellen White proving beyond all question that she taught the angels of God have actually killed humans:

"The same angel who had come from the royal courts to rescue Peter had been the messenger of wrath and judgment to Herod. The angel smote Peter to arouse him from slumber. It was with a different stroke that he [the angel of God] smote the wicked king, laying low his pride and bringing upon him the punishment of the Almighty. Herod died in great agony of mind and body, under the RETRIBUTIVE JUDGMENT OF GOD." AA 152.

[Guest]

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}

[teresaq]

so richard, do you believe God inflicts disease on people? :)

[John317]

Quote:

John317: But you're saying the writer of Scripture-- possibly Jeremiah-- wrote his opinion, which you don't believe. You say he is wrong.

That's the problem when we start rejecting what the Bible says.

He said the writer was giving his perception, just as Ellen White gave her wrong perceptions to her sons.

Those events in Second Kings happened over 200 years before Jeremiah lived.

It's likely that the writer-- whoever it was-- didn't see the event but was writing under the guidance of the Holy Spirit as he studied and read in the same way that Ellen White did.

The Scripture in 2 Kings 1: 10 says plainly that the fire of God came down from heaven and consumed the captain and his 50 men.

Do you believe that?

[John317]

do you believe God inflicts disease on people?

God has certainly inflicted a disease on people in the past.

Ellen White clearly states that it was an angel of God that destroyed all the first-born of the Egyptians. Of course the Bible says the same thing over and over again.

It was also an angel of God who caused the destruction after David numbered the people.

On page 243 of the Last Day Events, Ellen White also writes that it was an angel of God who smote Herod so that he died in great agony of mind and body, "under the retributive judgment of God."

Ellen White makes a clear distinction between God's allowing Satan to do evil and God's angels carrying out God's judgments. See top of page 244 of LDE.

It was certtainly God who made the dust of Egypt become gnats, since Satan is incapable of creating insects from dust. Only God is able to do that.

[John317]

Quote:

teresaq(sda): actually, this is a clear demonstration of how "john" understands what is written. what these statements say to "john".

Quote:

JOHN3:17, quoting Ellen G. White: "Under God the angels are all-powerful. On one occasion, in obedience to the command of Christ, they [the all-powerful angels under God] slew of the Assyrian army in one night one hundred and eighty-five thousand men." DA 700. (Written in 1898)

"How easily could the angels, beholding the shameful scene of the trial of Christ, have testified their indignation by consuming the adversaries of God! But they were not commanded to do this." Ibid.

Here is a clear statement from Ellen White proving beyond all question that she taught the angels of God have actually killed humans:

"The same angel who had come from the royal courts to rescue Peter had been the messenger of wrath and judgment to Herod. The angel smote Peter to arouse him from slumber. It was with a different stroke that he [the angel of God] smote the wicked king, laying low his pride and bringing upon him the punishment of the Almighty. Herod died in great agony of mind and body, under the RETRIBUTIVE JUDGMENT OF GOD." AA 152.

First, what do these quotes say?

And second, what do they mean to you?

[Robert]

Jesus wasn't here for that reason. He did not come that time for vengeance,

[Robert]

The difference between Ellen White and the narrative we read in 2 Kings is that Ellen White was writing a private letter to her sons and never claimed it was something God showed her, nor did it ever become a part of Scripture, nor did anyone ever believe that it was inspired, and therefore it's plain that she wasn't speaking as a prophet of God;

[John317]

Quote:

pnattmbtc; Jesus demonstrated how God treats His enemies.

Yes, God is Love and He has great patience. Jesus demonstrated that no one will be able honestly to blame God for anything. The wicked will have destroyed themselves, by making decisions that lead to that eventuality. Saul destroyed himself by his refusal to do God will, and then after Saul was permenantly devoted to rebellion against God, God had no choice but to take Saul's life.

What is Ellen White referring to when she says that God will perform a "strange work"?

She's talking about Is. 28: 21, 22. How do you understand "God's strange work"?

I believe it's a reference to the fact that the destruction of the wicked will appear to some to be contrary to his character but it will actually be in complete harmony with his characeter if people really understood how much He hates sin and how God views it.

"Although loath to punish, nevertheless He will punish, and that speedily." RH, Jan. 11, 1887.

[John317]

What do these quotes say? Please analyze them and explain what they say and then what they mean to you.

"Under God the angels are all-powerful. On one occasion, in obedience to the command of Christ, they [the all-powerful angels under God] slew of the Assyrian army in one night one hundred and eighty-five thousand men." DA 700. (Written in 1898)

"How easily could the angels, beholding the shameful scene of the trial of Christ, have testified their indignation by consuming the adversaries of God! But they were not commanded to do this." Ibid.

Here is a clear statement from Ellen White proving beyond all question that she taught the angels of God have actually killed humans:

"The same angel who had come from the royal courts to rescue Peter had been the messenger of wrath and judgment to Herod. The angel smote Peter to arouse him from slumber. It was with a different stroke that he [the angel of God] smote the wicked king, laying low his pride and bringing upon him the punishment of the Almighty. Herod died in great agony of mind and body, under the RETRIBUTIVE JUDGMENT OF GOD." AA 152.

[Robert]

Quote:

pnattmbtc; Jesus demonstrated how God treats His enemies.

Yes, God is Love and He has great patience.

But then, according to your theology, He eventually gets tired of loving with agape and then He throws a fit of rage and destroys His enemies?

[Robert]

AA 152.

You can't love a God who is always standing over you threateningly. It's like having a parent who tells you that he/she has got your back...that he/she loves your more than himself/herself, but in the same breath he/she warns you that if you get out of line that he/she will destroy you by dousing you with gasoline and lighting you on fire.

[Robert]

The following is from Light on the Dark Side of God:

How can a God who punishes so cruelly also say: "I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn, turn from your evil ways! For why should you die?" "How can I give you up, Ephraim? How can I hand you over, Israel? . . . My heart churns within Me; My sympathy is stirred." "My heart sobs like a flute for Moab, sobs like a flute for the men of Kirheres; that accumulated treasure all lost" (Ezekiel 33:11; Hosea 11:8; Jeremiah 48:36, JB). Would not humans manifesting this personality split be considered psychotic?

How can God exercise such "cruel and unusual" punishment as drowning the world, burning cities and the humans in them, and still be considered loving and just, as He and His adherents claim? He extended Himself to the lengths of Calvary to preserve our freedom of choice. But is choice really free, with God standing over us to destroy us if we choose wrong? After enduring the cross to redeem humanity, thus showing His loving character before the universe, why does He, in the end, reverse it all by executing those whose choices He does not like?

How can a God who kills command His people not to kill and yet to be like Him? How does the mild and gentle Jesus reflect the character of the "fire-breathing" Old Testament God He came to reveal? Perhaps nothing has contributed more to the advancement of atheism than these perplexing unanswered questions of Christianity.

Note: John, you need to be careful in YOUR presentation of God.....After all you don't want to create any atheist, do you?

[Robert]

But then, according to your theology, He eventually gets tired of loving with agape and then He throws a fit of rage and destroys His enemies?

Since Christ is my example I can plead and love you John, but when you go to far I can throw all that love out the window and bleed you out....That's the God you are presenting to me.....The history books are filled with such cruelty in the name of God.

[John317]

Quote:

John317: The difference between Ellen White and the narrative we read in 2 Kings is that Ellen White was writing a private letter to her sons and never claimed it was something God showed her, nor did it ever become a part of Scripture, nor did anyone ever believe that it was inspired, and therefore it's plain that she wasn't speaking as a prophet of God;

Quote:

ROBERT: Doesn't matter, this was her theology...

Of course it matters. What she wrote to her sons in her private letter doesn't reflect her theology at that time or any other time. If you believe it was, then produce the evidence from her published writings from the period 1855-1865.

Quote:

ROBERT: she went against her own counsel. Thus it had to taint her writings.....

So far it is only your opinion, and you haven't a shred of evidence that your opinion about this is correct. If you, show it.

Quote:

JOHN3:17: whereas Second Kings is Scripture and was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Quote:

ROBERT: Yes, but that doesn't negate what I said.....

It totally negates everything you said about it. Anyone should be able to see the difference between a private letter written to her young boys under those trying circumstances and a message written by a prophet for God, which is intended for publication for the benefit of the entire remnant church.

Quote:

But you're saying the writer of Scripture-- possibly Jeremiah-- wrote his opinion, which you don't believe. You say he is wrong.

Quote:

ROBERT: No, his perception

OK, are you saying that an inspired prophet's perceptions and writing is wrong but your perceptions are correct?

Are the perceptions of the writer of 2 Kings wrong in any other instance, or was it only wrong in that single instance?

I don't understand how the writer can be right in what he wrote, yet be wrong in his perception.

How do you distinguish these? In what way is 2 Kings 1: 10 correct? And how is he wrong in his perceptions?

Quote:

JOHN3:17: That's the problem when we start rejecting what the Bible says.

Quote:

ROBERT: What I'm rejecting is your interpretation. You aren't Mr. Bible.....

OK, give your "intepretation" of 1 Kings 1: 10.

It's a perfectly straight forward statement which hardly seems to require much interpretation, but tell us exactly how you "interpret" it.

Quote:

JOHN3:17: I'm not sure but I assume you mean that the fire did not really come from God like the Bible says but the Devil was given the power to bring down lightning. Is that your position? If so, that would mean the devil caused lightning to kill 51 men at one time.

Quote:

ROBERT: The OT is riddled with inconsistencies when it comes to God's character.....Some can be explained, others cannot.

I see no inconsistencies in the character of God as the Bible reveals Him. There are things that we don't understand, but that is not the same as saying the Bible contains inconsistencies in regard to the character of God.

I do know, however, that many people see great inconsistencies between the God of the OT and the God fo the New. That has been the case in the beginning of the Christian church. There are former SDAs who are teaching that Jehovah is another name of the devil. That is how far off they are from understanding God. They look at all the times in the Bible that it says God did things they don't like, and it makes them reject the whole OT. Some others in the SDA church are rejecing the majority of the New Testament.

What are the inconsistencies you see?

Perhaps they are inconsistencies because you refuse to acknowledge that God does certain things you don't want to believe. I believe you should face those things and not try to hide from them, as it seems to me you do. By hiding from them I mean manipulating language so as to change the meaning to be more in harmony with your ideas. What you are doing with 2 Kings 1: 10 is a good example. So are the things that occurred at the Red Sea in Ex. 14. There are many more.

Quote:

ROBERT: Jesus gave a "clear" view of what God the Father is like. Look at the life of Christ as told in the NT.....That's how God is....Not a God of fire....

Thomas Jefferson made the same argument. He liked Jesus but couldn't stand the God of the Old Testament. He greatly misunderstood the Bible and the God of the Bible.

Frederick Neitzsche was just the opposite. He despised Christ and the NT but loved the people in the Old Testament as well as the God of the Old Testament.

But yes, it's quite true that Jesus gave a clear view of the Father. That was one of the primary reasons for His coming here. But some people only dwell on the love of God and don't pay any attention to the justice of God. Some day-- and I believe it will be soon-- Christ will cease to be our intercessor and become King and Judge. He will still be the same loving Lord and Savior, but He will be coming to make war against Satan, sin, and all the ungodly. Read Jude 14, 15; Rev. 19: 11-21.

Quote:

JOHN3:17: If God did not send down fire from heaven, it would be good evidence that Elihah was not a man of God. See 2 Kings 1: 10.

Quote:

ROBERT: That's your conclusion....

And what's yours?

Quote:

JOHN3:17: I'm wondering if the others who believe God does not destroy the wicked, believe as you do, that 2 Kings 1: 10 merely gives a mistaken, human perception.

Quote:

ROBERT: You need to watch your tone.....You are coming off as a bully.

How's that?

What have I said that causes you think that I need to watch my tone or that I am a bully?

How am I or anyone else in the wrong to find out or inquire if sky and pnatt or anyone else believes the same as you do as regards 2 Kings 1: 10-12?

I think it's a relevant question because it will show whether you and they think alike on this topic.

Quote:

ROBERT: Go to Is 53:4 Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted.

Which includes the prophet....From his perception God beat and afflicted Christ.....but we know this isn't true.

Can you show evidence that any of the prophets wrote that Christ was beat up or afflicted by God? What prophet thought that Christ was beat up by God? Certainly not Isaiah.

Isaiah is writing a prophecy concerning Christ, and he is saying that many people will believe that God was against Christ.

Isaiah is using "we" the same way that Daniel does in Daniel 9: 10, 11ff. He completely identifies himself with Israel. This is what Isaiah does, also, in the fifty-third chapter. But Isaiah is not writing something that's false. That is quite different from denying the clear language of 2 Kings 1: 10-12 which says that "the fire of God came down from heaven and consumed" the 51 men.

[John317]

Quote:

Robert:

But then, according to your theology, He eventually gets tired of loving with agape and then He throws a fit of rage and destroys His enemies?

Not true, but God won't let sin and sinners go on forever. The Bible portrays God as angry at sin and even at those who persist in sin. We shouldn't ignore those passage of the Bible. He will have a clean and sinless universe one day soon, and that means that the time when He forgives sin will come to an abrupt halt, to the suprise of millions who will be unprepared. That's what the Seventh-day Adventist message about the heavenly sanctuary is all about: Christ is coming and we need to be prepared for Him.

He says, "You be holy, for I am holy." And, "If any man open the door [of his heart], I will come in to him and will eat with him, and he will eat with me. He who overcomes [the world of sin], I will grant him to sit beside Me on My throne, as I myself overcame and sat down beside my Father on His throne."

It's a message for the world that says God's laundry is going to close pretty soon. Christ will not remain forever our High Priest but He is coming as King and Judge to take all who love Him home with Him, but He will slay with the brightness of His coming all who are practicing sin and are in rebellion against Him.

[John317]

You can't love a God who is always standing over you threateningly. It's like having a parent who tells you that he/she has got your back...that he/she loves your more than himself/herself, but in the same breath he/she warns you that if you get out of line that he/she will destroy you by dousing you with gasoline and lighting you on fire.

After all these years of studying, you apparently still don't get it. You are repeating here the same accusations and viewpoint that Satan has about God's punishment of sin and sinners. You seem to me to be in rebellion against God and His word.

God gives warning to the world of what He knows will happen if we don't let Him change us. The picture you portray here is nothing like the way God is dealing with sinners. But it is a fact that the time is coming when God will judge and destroy Satan and all who follow him. That's a fact. It's all through the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy. For instance: "God will finally destroy the rejectors of His grace." GC 583 Also, "That Wicked... whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming." 2 Thess. 2: 8.

[John317]

The following is from Light on the Dark Side of God:...

The book is full of false doctrines if that is an example of what it contains. It teaches that God did not do the very things the Bible says He did, such as destroy the world with a flood and destroy Sodom. He teaches that God won't send fire down from heaven to consume the wicked at the end.

Quote:

John, you need to be careful in YOUR presentation of God.....After all you don't want to create any atheist, do you?

If I teach the Bible straight and people become atheistic because of the Bible's teachings that God will destroy the wicked, then so be it. The teaching that God destroys no man is only a rebellion against the God of the Bible, and Satan is preparing people to believe that God will never punish sinners in the gehenna of fire that Jesus Himself spoke of. It is all seen by many people as nothing more than a fairy tale.

If God doesn't destroy the wicked, why does all the Bible say He will? Anyone who reads English and has his head screwed on straight knows what this sentence means: "The storm of God's wrath is gathering... He shall come forth to punish the inhabitants of the world for their iniquity." TM 182

Or: "God executes justice upon the wicked, for the good of the universe, and even for the good of those upon whom His judgments are visited..." GC 541.