"war in heaven" - real or metaphorical?

[Robert]

I've got a book for you John! After you read it, find MM Campbell and tell her how much you love it. Robert Wieland loves it...Jack too.

Light on the Dark Side of God

[skyblue888]

“.... wicked children God does not love. He will not take them to the beautiful City, for he only admits the good, obedient, and patient children there…. When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong. “ [AY 63, 1860]

The thoughts expressed in this letter are not consistent with the bulk of Mrs. White's writings on the crutial subject of the character of God. It is not in keeping with how she understood God to be like. We will have to wait until God can clear up the fog on that one. One thing we may be sure of is that when we look at the larger picture of God in the light of how Mrs. White interpreted some of the most difficult language of the Bible, especially in regards to the principles of God's dealing with sin, her understanding of God is that He is exactly as you, Robert, pnatt, teresa, have been describing Him. I got the same understanding both from the Bible and the writings of Mrs. White.

John, to say that the book "Light on the Dark Side of God" is full of false teachings is totally unfair. I have read this book several times and I have only good things to say about that book. I would encourage you to read it again and again if you have not done that already.

sky

[skyblue888]

I've got a book for you John! After you read it, find MM Campbell and tell her how much you love it. Robert Wieland loves it...Jack too.

Light on the Dark Side of God

Thanks for that link, Robert.

sky

[John317]

Quote:

ROBERT: The more I listen to John's view of God the more I want to act like the God He presents....Funny, that's when my nature comes out....See how that works? Believe that God is sadistic, and you become like him....John wouldn't like it if I acted out his view of God. He would run and hide because I can be like the SOB he presents.....

Quote:

pnattmbtc: Then don't do that. Be like the view of God you believe. How did Jesus treat others? He was kind, gentle, considerate, etc. Be like that. (I'm preaching to me too. Your observation is right on. It's our nature to return "eye for eye" rather than turn the other cheek. We need the grace of Christ.)

This is what I am talking about when I say that the emotions are too involved from the viewpoint of those who teach that God never destroys. It doesn't matter to me how God destroys Satan and the wicked. If God tells me that he never destoyed a single person, ever, I will be OK with Him. It will not affect my love and worship in the least.

However, it's apparent to me that those who believe God never destroys or kills, would not be able to love God if He told them that He killed and destroyed the wicked with fire, as the Bible makes plain.

Therefore, those who feel this way about God have an emotional basis for their view of these matters, and these emotions seem to me to determine their theology, rather than the other way round. We should consider the Bible evidence totally apart from emotions. Study each verse and section of Scripture with an open mind as to its significanse and meaning.

In regard to the above quotes from Robert and pnatt, please consider the following statements from Ellen White:

"It is the glory of God to be merciful, full of forbearance, kindness, goodness, and truth. But the justice shown in punishing the sinneer is as verily the glory of the Lord as the manifestation of His mercy." LDE 240

"God's love has been expressed in His justice no less than in His mercy. Justice is the foundation of His throne, and the fruit of His love." DA 762

"Then [after the 1000 years] the extermination of sin will vindicate God's love." DA 764

This sentence is saying that whereas the extermination of sin before the 1000 years would have caused doubts and questions, the extermination of sin when it finally occurs will actually vindicate God's love, His character, and His government. (If one cannot see how the destruction of the wicked by God could vindicate God's character, one doesn't have a correct understanding of the issues involved. Ellen White says this very thing in ST, Jan. 6, 1881 and in 12 MR 207-209.)

Notice in the last paragraph of DA 764 that Ellen White speaks of "the destruction of sin and Satan." Therefore when she speaks of the extermination of sin, she is speaking of the extermination and destruction of Satan and all who follow Satan. This will vindicate God's love. She says the same thing on page 763 of GC: After the destruction of Satan and his followers, "the full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah.")

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: John317

When I speak of "the plain language" of ...the Bible ... I'm talking about statements whose meanings are self-evident and don't require interpretation.

Why does God say, in plain language, 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, in plain language, that "He [God] killed him [saul]" when clearly "Saul took a sword and fell on it"?

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

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

Why did God say, in plain language, "I will strike the Shepherd [Jesus]" when clearly God had "forsaken" Him.

Why does God say, in plain language, 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, in plain language, 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, in plain language, 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)?

I can't fathom how anyone can read and ponder over what is stated above and not get the hint.

There is a prophecy in the Old Testament that in the very last days the "anger of the Lord" would be understood perfectly. Does not the post above contain a strong hint in connection with that?

sky

[John317]

Quote:

ROBERT: I've got a book for you John! After you read it, find MM Campbell and tell her how much you love it. Robert Wieland loves it...Jack too.

Light on the Dark Side of God

Sure, I'll read it. I enjoy reading almost any well-written-- and even some badly written-- books. I'll order or get it tomorrow when I go to the ABC.

Funny, though, how you like reading that book when you talk of throwing away Ellen White's books. I think that's telling!

[Robert]

I'll order or get it tomorrow when I go to the ABC.

I gave the link....It's free....

[Robert]

I can't fathom how anyone can read and ponder over what is stated above and not get the hint.

I can't ponder why I can't get the opposition to clear up these statements....

[skyblue888]

Quote:

ROBERT: The more I listen to John's view of God the more I want to act like the God He presents....Funny, that's when my nature comes out....See how that works? Believe that God is sadistic, and you become like him....John wouldn't like it if I acted out his view of God. He would run and hide because I can be like the SOB he presents.....

Quote:

pnattmbtc: Then don't do that. Be like the view of God you believe. How did Jesus treat others? He was kind, gentle, considerate, etc. Be like that. (I'm preaching to me too. Your observation is right on. It's our nature to return "eye for eye" rather than turn the other cheek. We need the grace of Christ.)

This is what I am talking about when I say that the emotions are too involved from the viewpoint of those who teach that God never destroys. It doesn't matter to me how God destroys Satan and the wicked. If God tells me that he never destoyed a single person, ever, I will be OK with Him. It will not affect my love and worship in the least.

However, it's apparent to me that those who believe God never destroys or kills, would not be able to love God if He told them that He killed and destroyed the wicked with fire, as the Bible makes plain.

Therefore, those who feel this way about God have an emotional basis for their view of these matters, and these emotions seem to me to determine their theology, rather than the other way round. We should consider the Bible evidence totally apart from emotions. Study each verse and section of Scripture with an open mind as to its significanse and meaning.

In regard to the above quotes from Robert and pnatt, please consider the following statements from Ellen White:

"It is the glory of God to be merciful, full of forbearance, kindness, goodness, and truth. But the justice shown in punishing the sinneer is as verily the glory of the Lord as the manifestation of His mercy." LDE 240

"God's love has been expressed in His justice no less than in His mercy. Justice is the foundation of His throne, and the fruit of His love." DA 762

"Then [after the 1000 years] the extermination of sin will vindicate God's love." DA 764

This sentence is saying that whereas the extermination of sin before the 1000 years would have caused doubts and questions, the extermination of sin when it finally occurs will actually vindicate God's love, His character, and His government. (If one cannot see how the destruction of the wicked by God could vindicate God's character, one doesn't have a correct understanding of the issues involved. Ellen White says this very thing in ST, Jan. 6, 1881 and in 12 MR 207-209.)

Notice in the last paragraph of DA 764 that Ellen White speaks of "the destruction of sin and Satan." Therefore when she speaks of the extermination of sin, she is speaking of the extermination and destruction of Satan and all who follow Satan. This will vindicate God's love. She says the same thing on page 763 of GC: After the destruction of Satan and his followers, "the full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah.")

John, personally I have no "emotional" basis for my view as far as my understanding of God's character is concerned. When God tells me by the Holy Spirit speaking through His humble servant that "He does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but that He leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown," I believe that implicitly. There is nothing emotional about accepting this statement of precious truth except that when it is believed and received with the simple faith of a little child, our conception of God can never be the same again.

sky

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

I can't fathom how anyone can read and ponder over what is stated above and not get the hint.

I can't ponder why I can't get the opposition to clear up these statements....

Same here. But let us count our blessings. On this site there is freedom of expression. This I appreciate very much. I pray that it will always be that way. But we must not abuse that privilege by making personal comments. Right Robert?

sky

[Robert]

"the full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah."

Oh boy, here we go....John, the law demands the 2nd death. Death is a result of sin. Sin pays in death. To experience the 2nd death the law demands that God abandons the unbeliever to reap what he/she has sown. However, those who have accepted Christ have been delivered from the law.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: John317

Funny, though, how you like reading that book when you talk of throwing away Ellen White's books. I think that's telling!

Well kiss my grits....I think it's telling that you've made a pope of Ellen....

Robert, I don't like your tone with John. It is obvious that you hold resentment just the way you respond to him. It is time to show the kind of God we believe in. And please Robert stop talking about Mrs. White as a pope. She is no more a pope than you are. On the contrary.

"Those who feared God were to think for themselves. They were no longer to let other men do their thinking. They were no longer to be chained down to erroneous maxims, theories, and doctrines." This Day With God, p.32.

sky

[John317]

Quote:

John317When I speak of "the plain language" of ...the Bible ... I'm talking about statements whose meanings are self-evident and don't require interpretation.

Quote:

ROBERT: Why does God say, in plain language, 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, in plain language, that "He [God] killed him [saul]" when clearly "Saul took a sword and fell on it"?

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

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

Why did God say, in plain language, "I will strike the Shepherd [Jesus]" when clearly God had "forsaken" Him.

Why does God say, in plain language, 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, in plain language, 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, in plain language, 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)?

Quote:

skyblue888: I can't fathom how anyone can read and ponder over what is stated above and not get the hint.

There is a prophecy in the Old Testament that in the very last days the "anger of the Lord" would be understood perfectly. Does not the post above contain a strong hint in connection with that?

Sky, can you give the reference to the Old Testament prophecy you refer to?

What we need to do is examine and discuss each one of those verses.

Those are indeed clear and plain sentences and cannot be misunderstood. I agree. I believe you and I would be in complete agreement with those verses. The difference is that you conclude that those verses show us how to interpret every verse dealing with God's judgments and destruction, even when that conclusion is contradicted by the plainest language of the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy. (I will give some examples below.)

It has never been denied that there are times when God is portrayed as having done things that He permits Satan to do. That is something that happens in Scripture, and Ellen White herself speaks to this issue and principle. I've understood since I was a small child.

However, those verses, and that principle, does not account for everything the Bible and SOP teaches. The problem comes from thinking that since those verses show God doing that, it means that it applies in every case where God is described as destroying sinners or taking human life. It clearly does not apply. Ellen White and the Bible clearly distinguish between the judgments of God that God allows Satan to bring, and those judgments that God has brought directly and that He will again finally bring directly at the end.

For instance,

"A single angel [of God] destroyed all the first-born of the Egyptians and filled the land with mourning. When David offended against God by numbering the people, one angel caused that terrible destruction by which his sin was punished. The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits. There are forces nbow ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere." GC 614 (1911)

NOTE: the above shows that God uses both kinds of judgments, those from the angels of God and those from the fallen angels. But it's important to see that she is not denying that there are times when God Himself destroys.

And the following paragraphs show that Ellen White taught that God's angels have caused destruction and human death:

"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)

"God's judgments were awakened against Jericho. It was a stronghold. But the Captain of the Lord's host Himself came from heaven to lead the armies of heaven in an attack upon the city. Angels of God laid hold of the massive walls and brought them to the ground." LDE 243

"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)

[teresaq]

John, personally I have no "emotional" basis for my view as far as my understanding of God's character is concerned.

whether it is true or not that you are acting on an "emotional basis" is not important if someone wants to make the accusation.

Charge not upon others your defects of character. Work in Christ's lines. With loving endeavor strive to please Him. His excellence will help you to be Christlike. Shine as lights in the world, attracting others by the brightness of Christ's glory revealed through your good works. {ST, June 3, 1903 par. 8}

[skyblue888]

There is a prophecy in the Old Testament that in the very last days the "anger of the Lord" would be understood perfectly. Does not the post above contain a strong hint in connection with that?

Sky, can you give the reference to the Old Testament prophecy you refer to?

________________________________________________________

In order to know what "the anger of the Lord" is we need to compare 2 Sam.24:1 and 1 Chron.21:1. These two passages clearly reveal that "Satan" is "the anger of the Lord."

I believe this is what Jeremiah had in mind when he prophesied:

"Behold, the whirlwind of the Lord goes forth with fury, a continuing whirlwind; it will fall violently on the head of the wicked. The fierce anger of the Lord will not return until he has done it, and until he has performed the intents of his heart. In the latter days you will consider it."

Then in chapter 23, verse 20 the prophet says, "The anger of the Lord shall not return, until he has executed, and till he has performed the thoughts of his heart; in the latter days you will consider (understand) it perfectly."

We are in the "latter days" of this prophecy and we may understand perfectly what "the anger of the Lord" or "His wrath" is. As we compare these passages of Scriptures with 2 Sam.24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 we may know that "Satan" is indeed "the anger of the Lord" in the sense that he is the prosecutor against all who break the law of God, that he is the one who always wants to make sure that the sinner is punished for his sin. His claim is that he has a perfect right to afflict or destroy those who transgress the law of God. After all, was he not bannished from Heaven and will he not be annihilated on account of his having transgressed the law of God? So he wants justice to be done against all transgressors. So Satan is the great legalist, the prosecutor and the executioner of the sentence against transgression. It is in that sense that the Scriptures teach us that he is "the anger of the Lord."

One more proof that "God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression." G.C.36. It is for that very reason that "We are not to regard God as waiting to punish the sinner for his sin." 1 S.M.235.

Satan is the prosecutor and the executioner of the sentence as soon as God permits or as soon as He gives His angels the command to no longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy, as we have seen in previous quoted statements.

Remember how Jeremiah the prophet said that in the "latter days" a people would consider this and that they would understand it perfectly. In chapter 29 and 23 Jeremiah talked about "the whirlwind of the Lord," or "the fierce anger of the Lord."

When Elijah the prophet was in the cave and the Lord said unto him, "Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord. And, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and broke in pieces the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind. And after the wind an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake. And the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire, and after that a still, small voice." 1 Kings 19:11,12.

This is the very lesson that both John the Baptist and Elijah had to learn, that God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but that Satan is. Please read D.A.215,217 very carefully and prayerfully.

God bless,

sky

[John317]

Quote:

skyblue888:“.... wicked children God does not love. He will not take them to the beautiful City, for he only admits the good, obedient, and patient children there…. When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong. “ [AY 63, 1860]

This is a private letter written by Ellen White to her young boys who were having problems obeying the people who were taking care of them while their mother and father were away on long trips. Ellen White had tried everything she knew to help them change their misbehavior. She was a young mother and so she wrote this private letter. It was not something she was inspired to write, and it was not something written for the church. As Ellen White herself said, prophets and apostles were human and made mistakes just like other men when not under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Actually, however, what Ellen White states in this letter is "mostly the truth" from the biblical viewpoint, yet it is poorly expressed in the letter. But we have to consider that Ellen White was writing to young children who wouldn't have understood adult language which is more complex.

For instance, she says that God does not love wicked children. What she no doubt meant is that God will not save wicked children in His kingdom who don't repent and stop being wicked through God's grace.

It's also true that God only takes good people to heaven, but when we say that, we need to make clear what we mean by "good people." We don't mean that he will only take people who have always been "good" and who were never terrible sinners. Millions will be there who murdered other people and did all kinds of awful things. But the point is that they allowed God to change them from being bad, mean people to being loving, kind, thoughtful people.

God certainly does not stop loving us when we do wrong, but again, when we do wrong and if we go on doing wrong, God cannot save us even though He loves us. Yet the problem is never a shortage of God's love. The only real problem is when we don't fully and completely accept His love and allow it to radically change our minds and hearts.

Quote:

skyblue888:“ The thoughts expressed in this letter are not consistent with the bulk of Mrs. White's writings on the crutial subject of the character of God. It is not in keeping with how she understood God to be like.

Yes, you are right. If she had written it as messenger from God,-- that is, if she'd said this is what God had shown her to be true--- it would prove her in my view to be a false prophet. But of course it was a private letter, never intended for publication, and was motivated by a desire to help her "naughty" boys do the right thing at a time when she didn't know what else to say or do.

You make a good point that what she wrote to her boys in 1860 is not reflected in her writings to the church, and therefore, her private letter shouldn't be seen as evidence that Ellen White taught false doctrines.

Quote:

skyblue888:“ We will have to wait until God can clear up the fog on that one.

Actually, I don't think there's any reason for the letter to be a cause of "fog," because we know why she wrote it, and as you say, we know it wasn't representative of her writings to the church. Imagine if we had the diaries and thousands of private letters that Paul or Peter or John wrote. It would be interesting, but I have a feeling that God didn't want us to see them because if we had them, we'd treat them like Scripture.

Yes, it will be interesting to talk with Ellen White in heaven. I look forward to telling her how much I appreciated her writings and her influence. She suffered a lot to do what she did, but I know she wouldn't want to take credit to herself for any of it, and she'll say, "Oh I didn't suffer at all, really, now that I think of it. Heaven is cheap enough!"

Quote:

..John, to say that the book "Light on the Dark Side of God" is full of false teachings is totally unfair. I have read this book several times and I have only good things to say about that book. I would encourage you to read it again and again if you have not done that already.

OK, good point. I will read it. I do not usually judge a book before I read it, but as I said in my post, if that was an example of the books teachings, it was wrong. Perhaps it was not a good example of the writer's teachings. Nevertheless it's very true that it's generally necessary to read an entire book to get the context and see exactly what the writer's message is.

[John317]

Quote:

John317:"the full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah."

Quote:

ROBERT: .... the law demands the 2nd death. Death is a result of sin. Sin pays in death. To experience the 2nd death the law demands that God abandons the unbeliever to reap what he/she has sown. However, those who have accepted Christ have been delivered from the law.

OK, I agree with you in substance. However, there's something else to consider that you may be neglecting to consider or perhaps you reject.

If the second death is all that was necessary in order to "visit the full penalty of the law" and to "meet the demands of justice," why doesn't God simply put Satan to sleep painlessly and with a smile on the Devil's face as he goes off into oblivion?

Why the examination of the records of the wicked deeds and the decision in heaven by Christ and His people as to the "portion they must suffer"? Notice it is "must suffer," not "will suffer." It is thus making a distinction between death as natural consequences of sin and suffering and death as "punishment" for sinful works. The first death is not a punishment for sin but rather a consequences of being a descendent of Adam and of being a member of a mortal race. On the other hand, the second death will be "punishment" for particular acts and decisions that are in rebellion against God. That seems to me to a big difference, and the reason for the suffering that the wicked MUST undergo.

So, then, if dying the second death is all that's necessary to satisfy the demands of the law, why are there verses like Rev. 14: 6-11 and Luke 12: 47, 48? Why does the Bible definitely portray the wicked as suffering a long time before they finally die? Why does Ellen White say what she says on page 673 of The Great Controversy?

What's that all about?

[John317]

Quote:

Robert:

I can't ponder why I can't get the opposition to clear up these statements....

I will be responding fully to those statements, and I will do my best to answer any follow-up questions you have. But in the meantime I have to also work on answering questions that pnatt has been waiting a long time for, about the risks that God took in giving Christ to the world. Then, on top of all that, I have a family and the necessity of not staying at the computer all the time but the need of exercise. I write fast but not THAT fast. :-)

So let this be only a beginning, Rob:

Those are indeed clear and plain sentences and cannot be misunderstood. I agree. I believe you and I would be in substantial agreement on those verses. The difference is that you conclude that those verses show us how to interpret every verse dealing with God's judgments and destruction, even when that conclusion is contradicted by the plainest language of the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy. (I will give some examples below.)

It has never been denied that there are times when God is portrayed as having done things that He permits Satan to do. That is something that happens in Scripture, and Ellen White herself speaks to this issue and principle. I've understood since I was a small child.

However, those verses, and that principle, does not account for everything the Bible and SOP teaches. The problem comes from thinking that since those verses show God doing that, it means that it applies in every case where God is described as destroying sinners or taking human life. It clearly does not apply. Ellen White and the Bible clearly distinguish between the judgments of God that God allows Satan to bring, and those judgments that God has brought directly and that He will again finally bring directly at the end.

For instance,

"A single angel [of God] destroyed all the first-born of the Egyptians and filled the land with mourning. When David offended against God by numbering the people, one angel caused that terrible destruction by which his sin was punished. The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits. There are forces nbow ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere." GC 614 (1911)

NOTE: the above shows that God uses both kinds of judgments, those from the angels of God and those from the fallen angels. But it's important to see that she is not denying that there are times when God Himself destroys.

And the following paragraphs show that Ellen White taught that God's angels have caused destruction and human death:

"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)

"God's judgments were awakened against Jericho. It was a stronghold. But the Captain of the Lord's host Himself came from heaven to lead the armies of heaven in an attack upon the city. Angels of God laid hold of the massive walls and brought them to the ground." LDE 243

"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)

[teresaq]

why not be truthful and say that "you" do not believe they apply each and every time....

and that in "your" mind it is clear,...

[John317]

John, personally I have no "emotional" basis for my view as far as my understanding of God's character is concerned. When God tells me by the Holy Spirit speaking through His humble servant that "He does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression, but that He leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown," I believe that implicitly. There is nothing emotional about accepting this statement of precious truth except that when it is believed and received with the simple faith of a little child, our conception of God can never be the same again.

sky

That a good post, sky. I know we have our disagreements on some issues but I always enjoy our "discussions" and I NEVER let differences change or affect how I feel about the person or how I treat them.

My remark earlier about the "emotional" factor involved in the question of God's treatment of sinners, was in regard to posts not made by you.

But yet it is something to consider, I think:

If my feelings toward God would change for the worse if I found out that He did kill people or destroy the wicked at the end in fire-- doesn't that play a role in whether I accept or reject a doctrine dealing with that issue?

I think it is bound to.

I can honestly say it does not have anything to do with my theology because it doesn't matter to me how God chooses to rid the universe of Satan and sin-- as long as God's will is done, and the universe is once again brought back to complete harmony and peace.

I am only arguing for the position I take because I believe that is the way the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy present it. However, I am open to being convinced of the other way of looking at this if the evidence persuades me.

In the same way, I believe in the Trinity as the SDA church understands it, yet I am open to evidence and to argument from the Arian viewpoint; and if I should see that they are right, I will have no trouble changing my view. But it would have to be a change that I believe the Holy Spirit is urging me to make and a change that I have no doubt is supported by botht the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy.

The same principle applies to doctrines such as the heavenly sanctuary and righteousness by faith, and even the Sabbath and the Second coming. I am always studying and reading the Bible for truth, and that includes truth that is new. But having said that, I am not persuaded by poor logic or poor evidence. I'm sure you share these characteristics, so we have far, far more in common than otherwise.:-)

[John317]

Quote:

John317: I'll order or get it tomorrow when I go to the ABC.

Quote:

ROBERT: I gave the link....It's free....

OK, thanks.

And after I read it, we can start a thread just for a discussion of the book and its message.

[John317]

Quote:

teresaq(sda): why not be truthful and say that "you" do not believe they apply each and every time....

and that in "your" mind it is clear,...

My previous post was "truthful." If you believe it wasn't truthful, tell what was said that you believe isn't truthful or that is in error.

================================================

As moderator to all members:

On the Forum, people don't need to feel they must always say, "I think" or "I believe" or "it's my conviction..." People are free to do this if or when they choose to. I do it but not always. Take it for granted that when people write, they are writing their viewpoint and their belief. If you don't agree or if you believe you can show that someone's idea is wrong, feel free to express your own beliefs, as strongly as you want, as long as you do it civilly and without name-calling or making a personal attack.

==================================================

Please go through these quotes below, and give your understanding of them, being as specific as possible:

"A single angel [of God] destroyed all the first-born of the Egyptians and filled the land with mourning. When David offended against God by numbering the people, one angel caused that terrible destruction by which his sin was punished. The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits. There are forces nbow ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere." GC 614 (1911)

NOTE: the above shows that God uses both kinds of judgments, those from the angels of God and those from the fallen angels. But it's important to see that she is not denying that there are times when God Himself destroys.

And the following paragraphs show that Ellen White taught that God's angels have caused destruction and human death:

"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)

"God's judgments were awakened against Jericho. It was a stronghold. But the Captain of the Lord's host Himself came from heaven to lead the armies of heaven in an attack upon the city. Angels of God laid hold of the massive walls and brought them to the ground." LDE 243

"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]

....In order to know what "the anger of the Lord" is we need to compare 2 Sam.24:1 and 1 Chron.21:1. These two passages clearly reveal that "Satan" is "the anger of the Lord."

....

This looks good, sky. Thanks for posting this. I'll study it and give a response.

[John317]

Quote:

teresaq(sda):if we think God acts according to "their" picture of Him then there is little reason to turn the other cheek, etc. because we have a "good" reason for responding as we do.

but if we see that God is not like that, then, while there can be a battle, we are now motivated to resist the "natural" man because we want to be like Christ.

my 2 cents.

That fact that God destroyed the world with a flood and the fact that God will destroy the wicked after Great White Throne Judgment does give any human the right to be cruel to people.

God ordered His people Israel to kill and slaughter the wicked nations in Palestine. Ellen White said that those who are critical of God for doing this "fail to undersand the character and dealings of God" (ST January 6, 1881. Did God's order for them to kill signify that they could ever kill people without God's command or permission? Of course not. It was not murder if they killed under God's command, but it certainly was a sin any other time. David is a good example of this.

The point is that the fact that God punishes humans doesn't excuse humans from doing what they know to be right and loving. What God does is His business. It's not up to humans to tell God how He should punish the wicked. He's told us what we're to do-- love others and communicate the gospel and the Third Angels Messages. Those messages, incidently, include the message that people need to get right with God so they don't receive the seven last plagues that will fall on the world just before Christ returns. See the picure the Bible itself portrays of what will happen to those who worship the Beast and receive its mark: Rev. 14: 9-12.

Jesus said, "Fear Him who has the power to throw you into hell." He wasn't talking about the devil but about His Father. I can't believe that Jesus would say this if God would NEVER destroy anyone.

Remember that God can do many things that it would be wrong for humans to do.

"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 saftey, punish the transgressor. 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.

"Who will say God will not do what He says He will do?" 12 MR 207-209; 10 MR 265

NOTE: What infinite justice can God do that man has no right to do? Also, it says straight-forwardly that God drowned the vast world. Are you OK with that? Would you tell God to His face that He was wrong to do it?

When Ellen White says, "But God would [inflict punishment] in strict justice," she means that He did indeed inflict punishment in strict justice on Lot's sons-in-law, who died in the destruction of Sodom.

I would like very much to know your thoughts about this.

Do you agree? If not, why not?

[Robert]

Ellen White had tried everything she knew to help them change their misbehavior.