"war in heaven" - real or metaphorical?

[skyblue888]

[quote name='John317Was it also cruel for God to send His angels to remove the wheels of the Egyptians' chariots and to drown them when they were trying to go back to shore? See The Truth About Angels' date=' p. 96.

[pnattmbtc]

p:Yet you don't accept these statements as they read, rather "turn them upside down."

J:The problem is not the statements but the use to which you are putting them.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: John317

p:Yet you don't accept these statements as they read, rather "turn them upside down."

J:The problem is not the statements but the use to which you are putting them.

Not me, Richard (and you too). I'm rubber and you're glue.

Quote:

You are taking this statement as if she mean that God never has used force.

I'm taking the statement that the exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government to mean that the exercise of force is contrary to the principles of His government. He wouldn't do something contrary to the principles of His government, would He?

Quote:

Her point is that God will not win the great controversy by force or by destroying Satan.

But it's not that the exercise of force in contrary the principles of His government. So we can't take her statement as it reads. She didn't say what she meant. She actually meant that God would not win the Great Controversy by force or by destroying Satan by force at this specific moment (because you believe God will destroy him by force later, at a better time). The whole problem had to do with timing. Not with what God was doing, but when He was doing it. This is your thinking. And somehow this is what "the exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government" means. She made a wide reaching comment, with great scope, which you think should be limited to teeny weeny scope, so that it means something very different than what it says.

Quote:

The great controversy is won at the cross, not by killing Satan.

Yes. Not by killing Satan.

Quote:

But when he does destroy Satan, it will be after Satan has already proven who he is and will also have proven that God is right to destroy Him.

So the exercise of force is contrary the principles of God's government during the point in time when it's not clear who Satan is (i.e., that compelling power is found only under his government). But once it becomes clear that the exercise of force is not a part of God's government, and compelling power is only found under Satan's government, *then* God will exercise force and compelling power to destroy Satan.

This really makes sense? You don't see the inherent contradiction here?

Quote:

If you do not believe God has ever used force, explain the following quotes from the Spirit of prophecy:

Adam was compelled to leave the Garden. "Holy angels were sent to drive out the disobedient pair from the garden, while other angels guarded the way of the tree of life from the approach of Satan and the guilty pair." The Truth About Angels, p. 62. Obviously the guard was there to force Adam and Eve, as well as Satan, away from the tree. Satan wanted access to the Tree of Life, but God wisely did not permit him.

On page 61, she says Adam and Eve were "expelled," the same word she uses in regard to the thrusting out of Satan from heaven. She also says God told Adam he would "have to" leave. p. 61.

Angels of God removed the chariot wheels of the Egyptian soldiers as they went into the Red Sea. The Egyptians were trying to get out of the Red Sea and return to the shore, but before they could do so, God made the water rush in and "swallow the Egyptian army." p. 96.

It was Christ Himself who said He was giving Jericho into Joshua's hand, along with the king and all the mighty men of valor. p. 110. The angels and Christ "led in the attack on Jericho." p. 111. Elsewhere (3 T 264) Mrs. White says that the angels of God took hold of the walls and brought them to the ground. The whole city was slaughtered, except for Rahab and those in her house. This is exactly what the Bible teaches as well. Compare Joshua 6: 2, 16-25.

5) Angels of God were sent to do work of destruction. pp. 119, 127, 128, 241.

"Angels of God fought by the side of Jonathan, and the Philistines fell all around him."

She refers to the angel of God as "the destroying angel." p. 128.

Speaking of the temple at Jerusalem in 70 AD, Ellen White states, "Angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction, so that one stone [of the temple] was not left upon another that was not thrown down." p. 241.

Satan was compelled-- forced, if you will-- to stay on earth, to be in the midst of the warring elements, all during the Flood. p. 70

Ellen White says that God "thrust Satan out of heaven." p. 37.

How can this be stated in that way without meaning exactly what it says, that Satan was forced to leave? Have you ever seen anyone "thrust out," "cast out," "expelled," "turned out," and "driven out" if they went off voluntarily? That does not make sense, does not?

The Truth About Angels also contains good evidence that there is some sort of actual fighting that goes on between good and evil angels. If you have the book, please read pp. 69, 105, 208. She speaks of the power of certain of God's angels which makes the evil angels fall back or retreat.

Also, there's proof in the Bible and SOP that God directly caused the third Plague on Egypt--dust becoming real "gnats'-- yet we know that Satan cannot possibly create life. Therefore the third plague was most definitly from God; and if that plague was from God, the other plagues were also from God. Otherwise, we are saying Satan was cooperating with God and Moses to free the slaves, and that makes no sense whatsoever, because Satan was working to defeat God's plan. Are we to believe that every time Moses put out his rod, Satan would perform a miracle to help Moses accomplish his objective? Not likely, wouldn't you agree?

I think these have all been discussed. Teresa has, or had, a whole thread on the flaming swords quote. I think we've discussed the others.

I think you're whole methodology is wrong. It is clear that inspiration often presents God as doing that which He permits. Many examples of this have been cited, including sending strong delusion, Job, Saul, lying spirits, fiery serpents, destruction of Jerusalem, making people blind and deaf so that they won't believe, etc. So the real question is how do we know when God is directly doing something as opposed to permitting it to happen.

I don't think you have an answer to this. Do you?

I have one, however, and that is that God always acts in harmony with the principles of His government. God always acts like Jesus Christ did when here in the flesh. Jesus Christ wasn't a snap shot of what God is sometimes like when He's showing His good side, but a full revelation of the entirety of God's character. *All* that man can know of God was revealed in the life and character of His Son. All. This points to a full and complete revelation.

Amen!!! I pray and hope that many eyes will be opened that they may receive the light of precious truth.

sky

[teresaq]

If God hadn't created the earth, we wouldn't be here. What's your point?

Are you trying to prove your case by what if?

Ellen White's statements on the matter are plain and straight forward. And to anyone who believes her writings, they are irrefutable.

If she said we should take the Bible as it reads, then I know she didn't mean for us to turn her statements upside down and make them say the opposite.

this does sound pious and holy, richard, but again and unfortunately has little to do with what came before it.

we should probably study more into what was done to those who disagreed with the church of the middle ages and see if our tactics match those.

Rev 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

irrefutable to those who believe in "hell". if you try to show them otherwise they reply as you do.

[teresaq]

Just back from the hospital where I've been all day. I found some very important material relevant to the subject of this thread.

Have you read the compilation of Ellen White's writings, entitled, The Truth About Angels?

I believe anyone who reads it thoughtfully will see proof that Ellen White did NOT teach that God WON'T destroy the wicked by fire.

I will post quite a few of these quotes.

I think the only conclusion that people will come to is that either she was inspired and God did in fact use force at times and that God will really destroy the wicked in fire-- or else they will conclude that Ellen White was just wrong about these things. But no one who reads these sentences and understands English can reasonably conclude that she is saying God never used force and that He won't destroy the wicked in fire.

Let me give you here just a few examples out of many that occur in this wonderful book:

1) God told Enoch of His plan to destroy the world with a flood. p. 66.

2) Adam was compelled to leave the Garden. "Holy angels were sent to drive out the disobedient pair from the garden, while other angels guarded the way of the tree of life from the approach of Satan and the guilty pair." p. 62. On page 61, she says they were "expelled," the same word she uses in regard to the thrusting out of Satan from heaven.

3)Angels of God removed the chariot wheels of the Egyptian soldiers as they went into the Red Sea. The Egyptians were trying to get out of the Red Sea and return to the shore, but before they could do so, God made the water rush in and "swallow the Egyptian army." p. 96.

4) It was Christ Himself who said He was giving Jericho into Joshua's hand, along with the king and all the mighty men of valor. p. 110. The angels and Christ "led in the attack on Jericho." p. 111. Elsewhere (3 T 264) Mrs. White says that the angels of God took hold of the walls and brought them to the ground. The whole city was slaughtered, except for Rahab and those in her house. This is exactly what the Bible teaches as well. Compare Joshua 6: 2, 16-25.

5) Angels of God were sent to do work of destruction. pp. 119, 127, 128, 241.

"Angels of God fought by the side of Jonathan, and the Philistines fell all around him."

She refers to the angel of God as "the destroying angel." p. 128.

Speaking of the temple at Jerusalem in 70 AD, Ellen White states, "Angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction, so that one stone [of the temple] was not left upon another that was not thrown down." p. 241.

I could go on and on with such statements. There are many more.

[teresaq]

Teresa has, or had, a whole thread on the flaming swords quote.

"they" didnt seem to like that. there was resistance to the fact that the swords might be something other than what one has previously believed.

anyway, ive seen no desire to honestly search the scriptures/sop to find the truth, just the dogmatic arguing against anything that goes against their conclusions, even to lowering oneself to ridiculing if searching deeper might prove that one wrong.

i see little real desire to study as our pioneers did and as we are urged to, on these boards, and that greatly disturbs me.

if someone didnt write a book or article on it that one can read and adopt the thinking as their own, then there appears little interest in searching for oneself.

[John317]

Quote:

skyblue888: So this discussion is about Job being a self righeous man now? Why did you bring the subject up John? shoulnd't this be a separate thread?

Here's how the subject was brought up on the thread. It was suggested that the teaching that God does not destroy and that God has never used force is the result of "deeper study." As the quote from that post shows, I brought up the book of Job as an example of how some use the claim of "deeper study" when it is not "deeper study" at all but a denial even of God's own testimony and the testimony as well of the writer of the book. I think the example makes the point.

Quote:

It's very important for us to dig deeper, but "deeper" will not make the language mean just the opposite of what it plainly says. Some people believe that the deeper they study, the more they see that the SDA doctrine on the heavenly sanctuary is in error, or that SDAs are wrong about the Sabbath, or any other number of doctrines.

Some there are who say that Job was actually a self-righteous sinner who needed to learn a lesson about his self-centeredness, and that this is the reason for Job's suffering. But that doesn't make sense. Both the narrator and God Himself describe Job as being "perfect and upright, and one that feared God and eschewed evil."

Yet instead of accepting those verses as describing the truth about Job, there are some whose "deeper reading" results in changing the words of God to signify the exact opposite of what God said. For these people, God did not tell the truth about Job but instead God is merely reflecing Job's self-righteous, sinful thoughts and feelings regarding himself. Ellen White says this is precisely what Satan did in heaven; he would twist everything God said, and make it appear mysterious and quite different from God's word.

On the threads, it's OK to discuss a question like this for a short time as long as the discussion gets back soon to the main subject. If it's something that people want to discuss at greater length, then it should be made a separate discussion devoted to that topic.

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

If God hadn't created the earth, we wouldn't be here. What's your point?

Are you trying to prove your case by what if?

Ellen White's statements on the matter are plain and straight forward. And to anyone who believes her writings, they are irrefutable.

If she said we should take the Bible as it reads, then I know she didn't mean for us to turn her statements upside down and make them say the opposite.

this does sound pious and holy, richard, but again and unfortunately has little to do with what came before it.

we should probably study more into what was done to those who disagreed with the church of the middle ages and see if our tactics match those.

Rev 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

irrefutable to those who believe in "hell". if you try to show them otherwise they reply as you do.

I must say Amen to this. Wow, well said sister.

God be praised.

sky

[teresaq]

if anything comes out of my "mouth" that is right then we know it didnt come from me, so we.... ?

(i do take full credit for what comes out of my mouth that is not of God, tho, lol)

[John317]

One more comment I would like to make about the statement in which Mrs. White wrote that God hates disobedient little boys. I mentioned Romans 9 where God says He hated Esau and loved Jacob. I was thinking about that this morning and the thought came to me that this is God's way of saying that Jacob He could bless because of His faith but Esau He could not bless as He wished to bless him because of his unbelief. And this is in perfect keeping with the principles of interpretation found in the Bible itself and in her writings.

sky

God hates sin but He loves the sinner.

His love for the sinner is stronger than death. E.G.W.

I agree with you, sky. The words, God "hated Esau," really just means that God loved Esau less. God couldn't bless Esau because of Esau's lack of love, faith and obedience.

But it's important to see the significance of Romans 9: 11, which is that God's choice depends on His will alone, and not on whether people do something good or bad. It says that God's choice between Jacob and Esau is an illustration of the fact that God does not choose people on account of their goodness but strictly on account of His will, even long before people are born.

Paul then asks the question (v. 14) whether God's choice is unjust because He chooses people according to His own will and not according to man's works. His answer is that God is certainly not unjust.

God's choice does not depend on the will of people or on their good works but on God's mercy.

Verses 20 to 23 are very interesting and apropos of this discussion:

"What right have you, a human being, to cross-examine God? The pot has no right to say to the potter: Why did you make me this shape? Surely a potter can do what he likes with the clay. Is he not free to make out of the same lump two vessels, one to be treasured, the other for common use? What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the people who make him angry, however much they deserve to be destroyed? He puts up with them for the sake of those other people, to whom he wants to be merciful, to whom He wants to reveal the richness of His glory, people He had prepared for this glory long ago."

Ellen White: "God's goodness and long forbearancce, His patience and mercy exercised to His subjects, will not hinder Him from punishing the sinner who refused to be obedient to His requirements. IT IS NOT FOR A MAN-- A CRIMINAL AGAINST GOD'S HOLY LAW, PARDONED ONLY THROUGH THE GREAT SACRIFICE HE MADE IN GIVING HIS SON TO DIE FOR THE GUILTY BECAUSE HIS LAW WAS CHANGELESS-- TO DICTATE TO GOD. After all this effort on the part of God to preserve the sacred and exalted character of His law, if men, through the sophistry of the devil, turn the mercy and condescension of God into a curse, they MUST suffer the penalty. Because Christ died they consider they have liberty to transgress God's holy law that condemns the transgressor, and would complain of its strictness and its penalty as severe and unlike God. They are uttering the words Satan utters to millions, to quiet their conscience in rebellion against God.

"In no kingdom or govenrment is it left to the lawbreakers to say what punishment is to be executed against those who have broken the law... God is a moral governor as well as a Father. He is the lawgiver. He makes and executes His laws..." 12 MR 208

[teresaq]

no one is doing this, john, and accusing them of doing so after it has been explained to you time and again will not make it so.

perhaps you want others to believe this is what is being done so you continue?

Ellen White: "God's goodness and long forbearancce, His patience and mercy exercised to His subjects, will not hinder Him from punishing the sinner who refused to be obedient to His requirements. IT IS NOT FOR A MAN-- A CRIMINAL AGAINST GOD'S HOLY LAW, PARDONED ONLY THROUGH THE GREAT SACRIFICE HE MADE IN GIVING HIS SON TO DIE FOR THE GUILTY BECAUSE HIS LAW WAS CHANGELESS-- TO DICTATE TO GOD. After all this effort on the part of God to preserve the sacred and exalted character of His law, if men, through the sophistry of the devil, turn the mercy and condescension of God into a curse, they MUST suffer the penalty. Because Christ died they consider they have liberty to transgress God's holy law that condemns the transgressor, and would complain of its strictness and its penalty as severe and unlike God. They are uttering the words Satan utters to millions, to quiet their conscience in rebellion against God.

"In no kingdom or govenrment is it left to the lawbreakers to say what punishment is to be executed against those who have broken the law... God is a moral governor as well as a Father. He is the lawgiver. He makes and executes His laws..." 12 MR 208

[teresaq]

Quote:

"What right have you, a human being, to cross-examine God? The pot has no right to say to the potter: Why did you make me this shape? Surely a potter can do what he likes with the clay. Is he not free to make out of the same lump two vessels, one to be treasured, the other for common use? What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the people who make him angry, however much they deserve to be destroyed? He puts up with them for the sake of those other people, to whom he wants to be merciful, to whom He wants to reveal the richness of His glory, people He had prepared for this glory long ago."

Ellen White: "God's goodness and long forbearancce, His patience and mercy exercised to His subjects, will not hinder Him from punishing the sinner who refused to be obedient to His requirements. IT IS NOT FOR A MAN-- A CRIMINAL AGAINST GOD'S HOLY LAW, PARDONED ONLY THROUGH THE GREAT SACRIFICE HE MADE IN GIVING HIS SON TO DIE FOR THE GUILTY BECAUSE HIS LAW WAS CHANGELESS-- TO DICTATE TO GOD. After all this effort on the part of God to preserve the sacred and exalted character of His law, if men, through the sophistry of the devil, turn the mercy and condescension of God into a curse, they MUST suffer the penalty. Because Christ died they consider they have liberty to transgress God's holy law that condemns the transgressor, and would complain of its strictness and its penalty as severe and unlike God. They are uttering the words Satan utters to millions, to quiet their conscience in rebellion against God.

"In no kingdom or govenrment is it left to the lawbreakers to say what punishment is to be executed against those who have broken the law... God is a moral governor as well as a Father. He is the lawgiver. He makes and executes His laws..." 12 MR 208

aside from the evident misapplication of the above, lets read what that punishment is:

The horrible cruelties enacted in the destruction of Jerusalem are a demonstration of Satan's vindictive power over those who yield to his control.

God does not stand toward the sinner as an executor of the sentence against transgression; but he leaves the rejecters of his mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown.

The destruction of Jerusalem is a solemn warning to all who are trifling with the offers of divine grace, and resisting the pleadings of divine mercy.--Mrs. E. G. White. {YI, November 13, 1906 par. 9}

Never was there given a more decisive testimony to God's hatred of sin and to the certain punishment that will fall upon the guilty. {GC 36.1}

[John317]

Quote:

John317: Speaking of the temple at Jerusalem in 70 AD, Ellen White states, "Angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction, so that one stone [of the temple] was not left upon another that was not thrown down." p. 241....

Thoughts anyone?

Quote:

pnattmbtc: Most, if not all, of these statements have been addressed.

It's not enough to deal with the quotes in a general sense, simply to say they are all explained by a statement found in The Great Controversy. It's important to deal with the actual words of Ellen White and not pass over them with the generalized claim that they don't mean exactly what they say.

Angels were not sent in order to make Satan throw down the stones, were they? What do you believe the angels of God did? Why were they required to "do the work of destruction"?

Compare this with Ellen White's other statement that "angels of God 'laid hold' of the massive walls [of Jericho] and brought them to the ground". (3 T 264)

It is very clear that Ellen White is not saying the angels allowed Satan to bring the walls to the ground. She says teh angels of God "laid hold of the massive walls." That hardly describes the work of standing by as an observer while an evil power makes the walls fall. For another thing, it would be like saying that Satan was helping God and Israel do the very work of God.

Look carefully at this sentence: "The Captain of the Lord's host [army] Himself came from heaven to lead the armies of heaven in an attack upon the city." The Truth About Angels, p. 243.

What did that attack result in?

On the same page, Ellen White writes, "Under God the angels are all-powerful. On one occasion, in obedience to the command of Christ, they [angels of God] slew of the Assyrian army in one night one hundred and eighty-five thousand men."

Whose command? Under Christ's command.

Who slew the Assyrians? Angels of God.

Does Ellen White ever say or even intimate that the Assyrians were slain by evil angels?

Quote:

pnattmbtc: They all are applications of the same theme,

We have first of all to see whether your claim is valid, that they are all applications of the same theme. I believe the evidence will clearly show otherwise.

This single sentence shows that it is big mistake to put all the statements under a single heading or theme, for destruction comes from both the angels of God and the angels of Satan:

"The same destructive poweer exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits." GC 614.

This also is a principle, which, however, you are apparently forgetting or neglecting to apply. TWO KINDS OF JUDGMENT OR DESTRUCTION TAKE PLACE-- DESTRUCTION DIRECTLY FROM GOD AND DESTRUCTION DIRECTLY FROM THE EVIL ANGELS.

Quote:

pnattmbtc: which is discussed in the following principle:

When men pass the limits of divine forbearance, that restraint is removed. God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression; but He leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown. Every ray of light rejected, every warning despised or unheeded, every passion indulged, every transgression of the law of God, is a seed sown which yields its unfailing harvest. The Spirit of God, persistently resisted, is at last withdrawn from the sinner...(GC 36)

No one is denying that God leaves people to reap the results of their choices, and often this has led to their punishment such as in the case of the people of Jerusalem. But, again, God has punished in both ways. You are failing to distinguish between those passive judgments when God withdraws His protection and the active judgements where God has been directly involved in the punishment. Both kinds of judgments occur.

For example, do you know of a single passage of the Bible or SOP in which it is stated that Satan is the one who brought destruction to Jericho?

Or does Ellen White ever indicate that Satan's angels were the ones who made sure the stones of the temple were all thrown down?

Or that evil angels destroyed the Assyrians?

She says clearly that it was God's angels who did these things, at the command of the pre-incarnate Christ.

Do you think Christ and the armies of heaven were required to come here from heaven and supervise the destruction of these things by Satan?

What role do you see Christ and His armies taking during these events?

Quote:

pnattmbtc: It's interesting that you would cite the destruction of Jerusalem as one of the passages where angels were involved in destruction, as this is the case that EGW most specifically describes the principle described above.

....

Both kinds of destruction occurred at Jerusalem. This principle applies:

"The same destructive poweer exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits." GC 614.

Again, TWO KINDS OF JUDGMENT OR DESTRUCTION TAKE PLACE-- DESTRUCTION DIRECTLY FROM GOD AND DESTRUCTION DIRECTLY FROM THE EVIL ANGELS.

Ellen White does not say that the angels of God took the life of anyone at Jerusalem at that time. But she is saying that the angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction in order that not even one stone of the temple was left upon another.

Or do you think that it was the evil angels who performed the work of God in seeing that all the stones of the temple were thrown down as Christ predicted would happen?

It seems to me that would be the same as believing that Satan performed a miracle every time Moses put out his rod, for the purpose of freeing God's people from slavery.

[John317]

Quote:

pnattmbtc, quoting Ellen White:

Says the prophet: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;" "for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity." Hosea 13:9; 14:1. Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work. By stubborn rejection of divine love and mercy, the Jews had caused the protection of God to be withdrawn from them, and Satan was permitted to rule them according to his will. (ibid. 35)

Quote:

pnattmbtc: She couldn't have more clearly described the situation. Satan caused the destruction which happened. These are often present as a a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God (such as you just did),

No, I'm not at all denying that Satan caused great destruction at Jerusalem. But Ellen White's own statement shows that there were two kinds of destruction: from the evil angels in the mass slaughter of the people, and from the angels of God in making sure that all the stones of the Temple were "thrown down."

What I am saying is based on this principle:

"The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits." GC 614.

That setence leaves no doubt that holy angels of God exercise destructive power, and she distinguishes it from the destruction that occurs as a result of God's permissive will.

Quote:

pnattmbtc: but "It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work."

The Bible and Ellen White do not assist Satan in concealing his work, and they speak plainly. Ellen White didn't describe these things in symbols but directly and clearly in modern English. She wanted to be clearly understood and therefore did not write in riddles. Nowhere does she say that God did something when it was really Satan who did it.

Special revelation reveals Satan's character.

Ellen White says why God did not at once destroy Satan: "Even the loyal angels did not fully discernt Satan's character. THIS WAS WHY GOD DID NOT AT ONCE DESTROY SATAN. Had he done so, the holy angels would not have perceived the justice and love of God....Therefore the author of evil was spared, fully to develop his character." COL 72

Passages in both DA and GC show that by the time Satan is destroyed, all doubt will have been removed and it will be clear that God is right and Satan deserves to be destroyed.

Quote:

pnattmbtc: EGW references the destruction of Jerusalem when discussing many other incidents. For example, the walls of Jericho. The angels brought down the walls of Jericho, just like they destroyed the temple in Jerusalem. But what did they actually do in Jerusalem?

They made sure that all the stones of the temple were thrown down. No human would do that, and neither would Satan. That is why Ellen wrote:

"Angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction, so that one stone [of the temple] was not left upon another that was not thrown down." The Truth About Angels, p. 241....

[skyblue888]

"Angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction, so that one stone [of the temple] was not left upon another that was not thrown down." The Truth About Angels, p. 241....

John, I quoted this statement a few pages ago followed by a commentary but now it is used as though this statment has just been cited by you. You must not have taken the time to read the post. I know it is a big long but it must be read carefully and prayerfully to see what really happened.

I hope you will read it this time.

thanks

sky

John, let us take the example of Jericho first, if you don't mind. Please be patient and take the time to read the following. Thank you.

"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

There are a number of statements in respect to the overthrow of the walls of Jericho, which, if understood in the way man naturally understands such words, would mean that God and His angels personally exercised the power of force to bring down those mighty battlements.

"How easily the armies of heaven brought down the walls that had seemed so formidable to the spies who brought the false report! The word of God was the only weapon used. The Mighty One of Israel had said: 'I have given into thine hand Jericho.' If a single warrior had brought his strength to bear against the walls, the glory of God would have been lessened and His will frustrated. But the work was left to the Almighty; and had the foundation of the battlements been laid in the centre of the earth, and their summits reached the arch of heaven, the result would have been the same when the Captain of the Lord's host led His legions of angels to the attack." Testimonies for the Church, 4:161, 162.

"The city of Jericho was devoted to the most extravagant idolatry. The inhabitants were very wealthy, but all the riches that God had given them they counted as the gift of their gods. They had gold and silver in abundance, but, like the people before the Flood, they were corrupt and blasphemous, and insulted and provoked the God of heaven by their wicked works. 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." Testimonies for the Church, 3:264.

"The Lord marshalled His armies about the doomed city; no human hand was raised against it; the hosts of heaven overthrew its walls, that God's name alone might have the glory." The Review and Herald, March 15, 1887.

The most significant sentence in these statements is the one which says: "Angels of God laid hold of the massive walls and brought them to the ground."

It would seem that these words allow only one interpretation which is that the angels of God with Christ at their head, took hold of those walls with their hands and literally threw them to the ground. In doing so they did more than tear down buttresses of stone. There were people on those high walls. See Patriarchs and Prophets, 491.

It would have been impossible for there not to have been watchers, following every move the Israelites made. Such a singular performance as was being carried out by them could not help but command the attention and excite the curiosity of the people inside. No doubt the walls were crowded with people. Furthermore, there were people who actually lived in the wall as did Rahab who delivered the spies from her countrymen. See Joshua 2:15.

It follows that if the angels did in fact throw down those walls as we tend to understand those words as saying, then they took the lives of a great number of people.

If this is so, then we have finally found the long looked for evidence to prove that God did change because of sin and did become a destroyer of life.

God had gone on record to say that He does not deal with the sin problem by the use of physical force. He does not stand toward the sinner as the executioner of the sentence against transgression, but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves to reap that which they have sown. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. God does not destroy. He destroys no man. From His kingdom, every weapon of coercion is banished.

If the Lord were to violate those principles in just one situation, it would be all that was necessary to give Satan the victory in the great controversy. Therefore, our understanding of the principles which govern God's character compels us to look more deeply into the problem in an endeavour to see in what sense the angels laid hold of the walls and brought them to the ground.

However, if such a search for the moment at least, fails to bring to light exactly what the angels did do, then we do not lose faith in the great principles. We simply understand that this is but one of the hooks left to hang our doubts on if we want to do such. God always leaves some points unexplained to see if we will trust Him in the unknown for what we know of Him already.

The explanation for any difficult Scripture must be found in some other part of the same Scriptures. In a problem like this the most likely place to find such an explanation, is in a similar incident.

Such is to be found in the fall of Jerusalem, which, like Jericho, had filled up the cup of iniquity. From it, the Spirit of God had also departed. Its walls were likewise torn to the ground with not one stone being left upon another. It is to be expected that the Lord would describe its destruction in the same language as in Jericho's fall. Research quickly shows that He does.

"Men will continue to erect expensive buildings, costing millions of money; special attention will be called to their architectural beauty, and the firmness and solidity with which they are constructed; but the Lord has instructed me that despite the unusual firmness and expensive display, these buildings will share the fate of the temple in Jerusalem. That magnificent structure fell. Angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction, so that one stone was not left one upon another that was not thrown down." The SDA Bible Commentary, 5:1098,1099.

Consider how explicitly it declares that "angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction so that not one stone was left upon another that was not thrown down." Before He was crucified, Jesus solemnly declared that not one stone would be left upon another in the temple. Now it is declared that the angels were sent to do this work of destruction so that the fulfilment of Christ's words was assured. Just as the language used in the fall of Jericho tends to give the picture of angels personally laying

hold of the stones and throwing them down, so this statement tends to give the same impression as far as the fall of Jerusalem is concerned.

The Romans, once they had captured the temple, razed it and much of the city to the ground making certain that not one stone was left upon another. Perhaps the greatest authority on Jewish history is Josephus who was actually present at the fall of Jerusalem. See The Great Controversy, 33. His record of the event is as follows:

"Now, as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury, (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other such work to be done,) Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminence; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne, and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison; as were the towers also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valour had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind." Wars of the Jews, Book VII, Chapter one, paragraph one, by Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston.

This notable historian's report is confirmed in The Great Controversy, 35. "Both the city and the temple were razed to their foundations, and the ground upon which the holy house had stood was 'plowed like a field.'"

Here we have two records of what took place back there. One declares that the angels did the work of destruction, while the other clearly shows that it was at Caesar's orders and by the strength and activity of his soldiers that the city was razed.

This would be a hopeless contradiction if we had not studied the way in which the Bible is its own dictionary and the way in which God is said to destroy. Firstly, it is clear that the angels did not do the work of destruction as man does it. That is, they did not themselves take those stones and throw them to the ground. Yet, at the same time, it must be recognized that they did a work which resulted in those walls being thrown to the ground till not one single stone was left upon another. But, they certainly did not use the soldiers as direct servants at their personal direction and command, to tear down those mighty bastions.

So what did the angels do? How did they go about a mission of destruction?

The angels'role is to hold back the four winds of strife so that they might not blow on the earth. Let those winds be released and there is the terrible outbreaking of human anger and natural power. Those angels hold on to their work whilever God's protection is called for because of the presence of some who trust in Him. But when the time comes when that is no longer necessary or possible, then angels are sent from Heaven to instruct the holding angels to let go. In this way the angels come from Heaven on a mission of destruction. Let it be emphasized once more that while this involves a judgment on God's part, it is not His arbitrary act. He assesses the situation to be such that to remain any longer must be to force His presence where it is totally unwanted, and this He cannot do. The restraining angels feel this pressure on them to leave but they await God's command before they do so. These instructions are conveyed to them by messenger angels, who, because of this responsibility, are called messengers of destruction, which in fact they are.

It is the picture of a body of angels holding and releasing upon receipt of a clearance to do so by other angels.

The chronicle of Jerusalem's destruction bears out the facts recited above. The tearing down of that city into individual stones was the end result of a series of causes. The Romans did it as the expression of their white-hot anger and hatred for the Jews. That in turn, was the result of the behaviour of the Jews who had given the Romans so much trouble, had shown such a spirit of rebellion, and had been so ungrateful for the favours the Romans desired to show them. That spirit, consequently, was the result of the Jews' persistent determination to institute their ways in the place of God's, and of their continual rejection of the appeals of mercy to them.

For the apostasy of the Jew and the fury of the Roman to race away uncontrolled, the angels of God had to fully and totally withdraw their restraining power over the evil passions of men. This they did. That accomplished, the infuriated Roman soldiery were so totally uncontrolled that not even their officers, generals, or Titus himself, could control or restrain them. Titus had determined to preserve the temple and had given specific orders that it should not be burned, but his orders were flouted. Even though he rushed in among them, and demanded obedience, it was as if he were not even there. Here is part of Josephus' account of the burning of the temple.

"And now a certain person came running to Titus, and told him of this fire, as he was resting himself in his tent after the last battle; whereupon he rose up in great haste, and as he

was, ran to the holy house, in order to have a stop put to the fire; after him followed all his commanders, and after them followed the several legions, in great astonishment; so there was a great clamour and tumult raised, as was natural upon the disorderly motion of so great an army. Then did Caesar, both by calling to the soldiers that were fighting, with a loud voice, and by giving a signal to them with his right hand, order them to quench the fire; but they did not hear what he said, though he spake so loud, having their ears already dinned by a greater noise another way; nor did they attend to the signal he made with his right hand neither, as still some of them were distracted with fighting, and others with passion; but as for the legions that came running thither, neither any persuasions nor any threatenings could restrain their violence, but each one's own passion was his commander at this time; and as they were crowding into the temple together, many of them were trampled on by one another, while a great number fell among the ruins of the cloisters, which were still hot and smoking, and were destroyed in the same miserable way with those whom they had conquered: and when they were come near the holy house, they made as if they did not so much as hear Caesar's orders to the contrary; but they encouraged those that were before them to set it on fire. As for the seditious they were in too great distress already to afford their assistance, [toward quenching the fire;] they were everywhere slain, and everywhere beaten; and as for a great part of the people, they were weak and without arms, and had their throats cut wherever they were caught. Now, round about the altar lay dead bodies heaped one upon another; as at the steps going up to it ran a great quantity of their blood, whither also the dead bodies that were slain above [on the altar] fell down." Wars on the Jews, Book VI, Chapter four, paragraph six.

"The blind obstinacy of the Jewish leaders, and the detestable crimes perpetrated within the besieged city, excited the horror and indignation of the Romans, and Titus at last decided to take the temple by storm. He determined, however, that if possible it should be saved from destruction. But his commands were disregarded. After he had retired to his tent at night, the Jews, sallying from the temple, attacked the soldiers without. In the struggle, a firebrand was flung by a soldier through an opening in the porch, and immediately the cedar-lined chambers about the holy house were in a blaze. Titus rushed to the place, followed by his generals and legionaries, and commanded the soldiers to quench the flames. His words were unheeded. In their fury the soldiers hurled blazing brands into the chambers adjoining the temple, and then with their swords they slaughtered in great numbers those who had found shelter there. Blood flowed down the temple steps like water. Thousands upon thousands of Jews perished. Above the sound of battle, voices were heard shouting, 'Ichabod!'—the glory is departed.

"Titus found it impossible to check the rage of the soldiery; he entered with his officers, and surveyed the interior of the sacred edifice. The splendor filled them with wonder; and as the flames had not yet penetrated to the holy place, he made a last effort to save it, and springing forth, again exhorted the soldiers to stay the progress of the conflagration. The centurion Liberalis endeavored to force obedience with his staff of office; but even respect for the emperor gave way to the furious animosity against the Jews, to the fierce excitement of battle, and to the insatiable hope of plunder." The Great Controversy, 33, 34.

When soldiers who have had instilled into them the strongest discipline of respect and obedience to the Emperor, are so totally maddened with rage that they completely ignore orders he has personally given, it is manifested that human passion is rioting in its most unrestrained form. Such outrage was possible only if the angels had vacated their positions as withholders of the winds of strife. They had no further influence over those men.

They never step down of their own volition, but only on the receipt of orders from on high. These are brought to them by messenger angels commissioned to fly swiftly with the advice that the time has come when men have chosen to reject God so utterly that He can no longer provide them with protection. The advent of these messengers at the outposts, heralds the unleashing of destructive forces, thus making them, in a certain sense, angels on a mission of destruction. The result was the full release of the Romans' infuriated hostility toward the Jews, which would not be appeased even when, with their own hands, they had torn the city apart.

This casts great light on the fall of Jericho, teaching how the same descriptions are to be understood in the destruction of the Canaanite city. The only difference between the overthrow of Jericho as compared to Jerusalem is that, while in the latter it was the unleashing of the furies in men which did the work, at Jericho it was the release of the pent-up forces of nature. The role of the angels in both instances was the same. They acted only and entirely in harmony with the principles of God's kingdom. Christ, Himself, led the messengers to the walls of Jericho to give the sad message that that people had forfeited all divine protection, leaving God with no option but to call away the restraining angels. Then the furies of nature, hitherto held under control, burst forth to flatten the proud metropolis. The walls were hurled to the ground. Yet, the word of God says that the angels did it. Surely, from the way in which Bible interprets itself, the time has come when it is understood in what sense the angels did this. They had a part to play, the result of which was that destruction. That part was to carry the message of doom to the restraining

angels. Then the terror followed.

If careful comparison is made between the language used to describe the destructions of both Jericho and Jerusalem, all difficulties will disappear. Just what the angels did will be quite clear. Once more it will be confirmed that they did not act any differently from the revelation of God's character as given by Christ when He came to the earth.

Back to you John.

sky

[Robert]

I agree with you, sky. The words, God "hated Esau," really just means that God loved Esau less.

John, I have absolutely no faith in you as a Bible teacher. Agape is a love that doesn't differentiate. God loves all, good and bad, equally.

James 2:8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF," you are doing well. 9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors.

[pnattmbtc]

It's not enough to deal with the quotes in a general sense, simply to say they are all explained by a statement found in The Great Controversy.

[Robert]

In fact, the book of Job reads better when you leave out Elihu's speeches altogether

[Robert]

Job repented of his self-righteousness, as did Saul when he became Paul.

-BC- GC11

-TI- The Great Controversy

-CN- 27

-CT- Modern Revivals

-PR- 02

-PG- 471

When Job heard the voice of the Lord out of the whirlwind, he exclaimed: “I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.” Job 42:6. .... Paul, after he was caught up into the third heaven and heard things which it was not possible for a man to utter, speaks of himself as “less than the least of all saints.” ...There can be no self-exaltation, no boastful claim to freedom from sin, on the part of those who walk in the shadow of Calvary’s cross. ...Those who live nearest to Jesus discern most clearly the frailty and sinfulness of humanity, and their only hope is in the merit of a crucified and risen Saviour.

Note how EGW links Job to a self-righteous attitude before he repented.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: John317

Speaking of the temple at Jerusalem in 70 AD, Ellen White states, "Angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction, so that one stone [of the temple] was not left upon another that was not thrown down." p. 241....

Thoughts anyone?

Most, if not all, of these statements have been addressed.

Titus would willingly have put an end to the fearful scene, and thus have spared Jerusalem the full measure of her doom. He was filled with horror as he saw the bodies of the dead lying in heaps in the valleys. Like one entranced, he looked from the crest of Olivet upon the magnificent temple and gave command that not one stone of it be touched. Before attempting to gain possession of this stronghold he made an earnest appeal to the Jewish leaders not to force him to defile the sacred place with blood. If they would come forth and fight in any other place, no Roman should violate the sanctity of the temple. Josephus himself, in a most eloquent appeal, entreated them to surrender, to save themselves, their city, and their place of worship. But his words were answered with bitter curses. Darts were hurled at him, their last human mediator, as he stood pleading with them. The Jews had rejected the entreaties of the Son of God, and now expostulation and entreaty only made them more determined to resist to the last. In vain were the efforts of Titus to save the temple; One greater than he had declared that not one stone was to be left upon another. {GC 32.3}

The blind obstinacy of the Jewish leaders, and the detestable crimes perpetrated within the besieged city, excited the horror and indignation of the Romans, and Titus at last decided to take the temple by storm. He determined, however, that if possible it should be saved from destruction. But his commands were disregarded. After he had retired to his tent at night, the Jews, sallying from the temple, attacked the soldiers without. In the struggle, a firebrand was flung by a soldier through an opening in the porch, and immediately the cedar-lined chambers about the holy house were in a blaze. Titus rushed to the place, followed by his generals and legionaries, and commanded the soldiers to quench the flames. His words were unheeded. In their fury the soldiers hurled blazing brands into the chambers adjoining the temple, and then with their swords they slaughtered in great numbers those who had found shelter there. Blood flowed down the temple steps like water. Thousands upon thousands of Jews perished. Above the sound of battle, voices were heard shouting: "Ichabod!"--the glory is departed. {GC 33.1}

"Titus found it impossible to check the rage of the soldiery; he entered with his officers, and surveyed the interior of the sacred edifice. The splendor filled them with wonder; and as the flames had not yet penetrated to the holy place, he made a last effort to save it, and springing forth, again exhorted the soldiers to stay the progress of the conflagration. The centurion Liberalis endeavored to force obedience with his staff of office; but even respect for the emperor gave way to the furious animosity against the Jews, to the fierce excitement of battle, and to the insatiable hope of plunder. The soldiers saw everything around them radiant with gold, which shone dazzlingly in the wild light of the flames; they supposed that incalculable treasures were laid up in the sanctuary. A soldier, unperceived, thrust a lighted torch between the hinges of the door: the whole building was in flames in an instant. The blinding smoke and fire forced the officers to retreat, and the noble edifice was left to its fate. {GC 33.2}

"It was an appalling spectacle to the Roman--what was it to the Jew? The whole summit of the hill which commanded the city, blazed like a volcano. One after another the buildings fell in, with a tremendous crash, and were swallowed up in the fiery abyss. The roofs of cedar were like sheets of flame; the gilded pinnacles shone like spikes of red light; the gate towers sent up tall columns of flame and smoke. The neighboring hills were lighted up; and dark groups of people were seen watching in horrible anxiety the progress of the destruction: the walls and heights of the upper city were crowded with faces, some pale with the agony of despair, others scowling unavailing vengeance. The shouts of the Roman soldiery as they ran to and fro, and the howlings of the insurgents who were perishing in the flames, mingled with the roaring of the conflagration and the thundering sound of falling timbers. The echoes of the mountains replied or brought back the shrieks of the people on the heights; all along the walls resounded screams and wailings; men who were expiring with famine rallied their remaining strength to utter a cry of anguish and desolation. {GC 34.1}

"The slaughter within was even more dreadful than the spectacle from without. Men and women, old and young, insurgents and priests, those who fought and those who entreated mercy, were hewn down in indiscriminate carnage. The number of the slain exceeded that of the slayers. The legionaries had to clamber over heaps of dead to carry on the work of extermination."--Milman, The History of the Jews, book 16. {GC 35.1}

After the destruction of the temple, the whole city soon fell into the hands of the Romans. The leaders of the Jews forsook their impregnable towers, and Titus found them solitary. He gazed upon them with amazement, and declared that God had given them into his hands; for no engines, however powerful, could have prevailed against those stupendous battlements. Both the city and the temple were razed to their foundations, and the ground upon which the holy house had stood was "plowed like a field." Jeremiah 26:18. In the siege and the slaughter that followed, more than a million of the people perished; the survivors were carried away as captives, sold as slaves, dragged to Rome to grace the conqueror's triumph, thrown to wild beasts in the amphitheaters, or scattered as homeless wanderers throughout the earth. {GC 35.2}

"And as He went out of the temple, one of His disciples saith unto Him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here! {21MR 66.4}

"And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down" [Mark 13:1, 2]. {21MR 66.5}

Men will continue to erect expensive buildings, costing millions of money; special attention will be called to their architectural beauty and the firmness and solidity with which they are constructed; but the Lord has instructed me that despite the unusual firmness and expensive display, these buildings will share the fate of the temple in Jerusalem. That magnificent structure fell. Angels of God were sent to do the work of destruction, so that one stone was not left upon another that was not thrown down. {21MR 66.6}

"And as He sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked Him privately, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?" [Mark 13:3-37, quoted]. {21MR 66.7}

I am bidden to declare the message that cities full of transgression, and sinful in the extreme, will be destroyed by earthquakes, by fire, by flood. All the world will be warned that there is a God who will display His authority as God. His unseen agencies will cause destruction, devastation, and death. All the accumulated riches will be as nothingness. Notwithstanding the scientific care with which men safeguard buildings from destruction, one touch of the great and rightful Ruler will bring to nothingness the idolatrous possessions that have been laid up in a sightly and magnificent display. The devices of men will come to naught. {21MR 66.8}

it is quite possible that angels were darting in and out assisting in making the walls fall.

[Robert]

Elihu is an improvement over Job's three friends.

Elihu didn't need to repent, but Job and his 3 friends did. Why not Elihu? Elihu was used of God to prepare Job for his confrontation with God.

Job 42:6 Therefore I [Job] despise myself and repent in dust and ashes."

7 After the LORD had said these things to Job, he said to Eliphaz the Temanite, "I am angry with you and your two friends, because you have not spoken of me what is right [in other words they attacked God's character] , as my servant Job has [Job didn't attack God's character, his problem was his self-righteous attitude]. 8 So now take seven bulls and seven rams and go to my servant Job and sacrifice a burnt offering for yourselves. My servant Job will pray for you, and I will accept his prayer and not deal with you according to your folly. You have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has." 9 So Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite did what the LORD told them; and the LORD accepted Job's prayer.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

J:No, I'm not at all denying that Satan caused great destruction at Jerusalem. But Ellen White's own statement shows that there were two kinds of destruction: from the evil angels in the mass slaughter of the people, and from the angels of God in making sure that all the stones of the Temple were "thrown down."

This is really missing what happened. sky's post explains it well. What happened is that the Romans causes all the stones of the Temple to be "thrown down." There is only one type of destruction happening here, but there is an attempt by the great deceiver to conceal his own work, which you are apparently falling for. If you say that the holy angels caused the destruction, then it wasn't Satan, and Satan has succeeded in concealing his own work.

Quote:

What I am saying is based on this principle:

"The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits." GC 614.

This also is taken out of context. I've already explained this, but since you repeated yourself, I'll repeat myself as well.

Quote:

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.

Is it not clear what the angels are doing from this description? Notice what she compared this event to? The destruction of Jerusalem! What happened there?

Quote:

That setence leaves no doubt that holy angels of God exercise destructive power, and she distinguishes it from the destruction that occurs as a result of God's permissive will.

This paragraph leaves no doubt that the angels were doing a work of restraint, and ceased that work as the Holy Spirit was resisted.

Quote:

pnattmbtc: but "It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work."

The Bible and Ellen White do not assist Satan in concealing his work, and they speak plainly. Ellen White didn't describe these things in symbols but directly and clearly in modern English. She wanted to be clearly understood and therefore did not write in riddles. Nowhere does she say that God did something when it was really Satan who did it.

This makes no sense. Inspiration often presents God as doing that which God permits. Do you deny this? Do you deny that Scripture presents God as doing that which Satan has done? What about the destruction of Jerusalem?

Quote:

7But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.(Matt. 22:7)

Is this God, or Satan? If you say it's God, then you run into this:

Quote:

It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work.

If you say it's Satan, then you run into this:

Quote:

The Bible and Ellen White do not assist Satan in concealing his work, and they speak plainly. Ellen White didn't describe these things in symbols but directly and clearly in modern English. She wanted to be clearly understood and therefore did not write in riddles. Nowhere does she say that God did something when it was really Satan who did it.

So is Matt. 22:7 God, or Satan?

Quote:

Special revelation reveals Satan's character.

Ellen White says why God did not at once destroy Satan: "Even the loyal angels did not fully discernt Satan's character. THIS WAS WHY GOD DID NOT AT ONCE DESTROY SATAN. Had he done so, the holy angels would not have perceived the justice and love of God....Therefore the author of evil was spared, fully to develop his character." COL 72

John, you're just repeating yourself. I've already addressed this several times.

You're repeating yourself, and not answering the questions I put to you repeatedly. Such as, how was heaven imperiled for our redemption (17th time I'm asking this, I think).

I'd also like to know, given that inspiration often presents God as doing that which He permits, how do you know when God's action is direct or not?

Regarding your point, you're forgetting about DA 764, which describes this same scenario, but adds the insight that had God *left* Satan to reap the full result of his sin, he would have perished, but this would have been misunderstood, because the angels did not understand that death is the inevitable result of sin. As I've repeatedly pointed out, this can't possibly mean that God didn't actively destroy Satan at the beginning because it wasn't understood that death is the inevitable result of sin, for the simple reason that in this case, it wouldn't have been true that death was the inevitable result of sin.

Quote:

Passages in both DA and GC show that by the time Satan is destroyed, all doubt will have been removed and it will be clear that God is right and Satan deserves to be destroyed.

Taken as worded, there's no problem with this, as Satan does deserve to be destroyed, and he will be destroyed by truth and love, which are the prevailing power of God's government.

Taking the position that "Satan will be destroyed" to mean "God will use compelling power (or force) to destroy Satan, thus overcoming rebellion" would be missing the point I brought out earlier. We're told that "The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government." and "Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order." You're suggesting that God abides by these principles until it's seen that these are Satan's principles, and not God's, and that once this is clear, then God overcomes rebellion by force, and uses the principles which are only found in Satan's government, and which are contrary to the principles of His own. That can't be right.

John, it seems to me that you're sort of posting in a hit and run fashion. I realize that you're extremely busy, active in many threads, and answering many posts, so I appreciate this. However, what's been happening, it seems to me, is you write a post, I answer the post, making points and answering questions, and you leave this, and start another post, often simply repeating the same things you just said previously. The discussion works better if you respond to the points I make, and answer my questions, and then make any additional points you wish to make and ask additional questions. I feel like I'm simply responding to the same points over and over again, while my points and questions are not being addressed.

For example, I've been asking for some time now what it means that all heaven was imperiled for our redemption. Have you answered this? I've been watching for this, and may somehow have missed it, but I think this is the 18th time I'm asking this.

I've also been asking how you determine when God is acting directly verses when He's not.

I've also asked why you think God is capable of torturing people for days. I don't think He is.

[teresaq]

john, why dont you and yours ever put up any good thing the Lord does? why is it always death and destruction?

Originally Posted By: John317

It's not enough to deal with the quotes in a general sense, simply to say they are all explained by a statement found in The Great Controversy.

pnattmbtc: They all are applications of the same theme,

J:We have first of all to see whether your claim is valid, that they are all applications of the same theme. I believe the evidence will clearly otherwise.

This single sentence shows that it is big mistake to put all the statements under a single heading or theme, for destruction comes from both the angels of God and the angels of Satan:

"The same destructive poweer exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits." GC 614.

This also is a principle, which, however, you are apparently forgetting or neglecting to apply. TWO KINDS OF JUDGMENT OR DESTRUCTION TAKE PLACE-- DESTRUCTION DIRECTLY FROM GOD AND DESTRUCTION DIRECTLY FROM THE EVIL ANGELS.

hmmmm, and what saith the Lord?

A single angel 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 now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere. {GC88 614.2}

2Sa 24:12 Go and say unto David, Thus saith the LORD, I offer thee three things; choose thee one of them, that I may do it unto thee.

2Sa 24:13 So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him,

Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land?

or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee?

or that there be three days' pestilence in thy land?

now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.

2Sa 24:14 And David said unto Gad, I am in a great strait: let us fall now into the hand of the LORD; for his mercies are great: and let me not fall into the hand of man.

2Sa 24:15 So the LORD sent a pestilence upon Israel from the morning even to the time appointed: and there died of the people from Dan even to Beersheba seventy thousand men.

2Sa 24:16 And when the angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed the people, It is enough: stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD was by the threshingplace of Araunah the Jebusite.

2Sa 24:17 And David spake unto the LORD when he saw the angel that smote the people, and said, Lo, I have sinned, and I have done wickedly: but these sheep, what have they done? let thine hand, I pray thee, be against me, and against my father's house.

… 2Sa 24:25 And David built there an altar unto the LORD, and offered burnt offerings and peace offerings. So the LORD was intreated for the land, and the plague was stayed from Israel.

1Ch 21:27 And the LORD commanded the angel; and he put up his sword again into the sheath thereof.

In accidents and calamities by sea and by land, in great conflagrations, in fierce tornadoes and terrific hailstorms, in tempests, floods, cyclones, tidal waves, and earthquakes, in every place and in a thousand forms, Satan is exercising his power. He sweeps away the ripening harvest, and famine and distress follow. He imparts to the air a deadly taint, and thousands perish by the pestilence. These visitations are to become more and more frequent and disastrous. {FLB 328.5}

The Lord would have us understand that these mighty ones who visit our world have borne an active part in the work which we have called our own. These heavenly beings are ministering angels, and they frequently disguise themselves in the form of human beings, and as strangers converse with those who are engaged in the work of God. In the lonely places they have been the companions of the traveler in peril. In tempest-tossed ships they have spoken words to allay fear and inspire hope in the hour of danger. Many, under different circumstances, have listened to the voices of the inhabitants of other worlds. Time and again have they been the leaders of armies. They have been sent forth to cleanse away pestilence. They have eaten at the humble board of families, and often have they appeared as weary travelers in need of shelter for the night. {RH, November 22, 1898 par. 6}

When the ten lepers came to Jesus for healing, He bade them go and show themselves to the priest. On the way they were cleansed, but only one of them returned to give Him glory. The others went their way, forgetting Him who had made them whole. How many are still doing the same thing! The Lord works continually to benefit mankind. He is ever imparting His bounties. He raises up the sick from beds of languishing, He delivers men from peril which they do not see, He commissions heavenly angels to save them from calamity, to guard them from "the pestilence that walketh in darkness" and "the destruction that wasteth at noonday" (Psalm 91:6); but their hearts are unimpressed. He has given all the riches of heaven to redeem them, and yet they are unmindful of His great love. By their ingratitude they close their hearts against the grace of God. Like the heath in the desert they know not when good cometh, and their souls inhabit the parched places of the wilderness. {DA 348.1}

These persecutions, beginning under Nero about the time of the martyrdom of Paul, continued with greater or less fury for centuries. Christians were falsely accused of the most dreadful crimes and declared to be the cause of great calamities--famine, pestilence, and earthquake. As they became the objects of popular hatred and suspicion, informers stood ready, for the sake of gain, to betray the innocent. They were condemned as rebels against the empire, as foes of religion, and pests to society. Great numbers were thrown to wild beasts or burned alive in the amphitheaters. Some were crucified; others were covered with the skins of wild animals and thrust into the arena to be torn by dogs. Their punishment was often made the chief entertainment at public fetes. Vast multitudes assembled to enjoy the sight and greeted their dying agonies with laughter and applause. {GC 40.1}

[Robert]

None, I mean zip, zero...of the opposition has answered the following....Why?

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)?

[Robert]

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)?

Notice how mankind & Satan blame God for all evil...even God "assumes" the blame, as He did in the above quote.

Let's look into this since I've been discussing Job.

BTW, John's theology concerning Job has been utterly defeated. Sorry John....

Job 1:10 Have You [God] not made a hedge around him [i.e., protected Job], around his household, and around all that he has on every side? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions have increased in the land. 11 But now, stretch out Your hand and touch all that he has, and he will surely curse You to Your face!" 12 And the Lord said to Satan, "Behold, all that he has is in your power; only do not lay a hand on his person." So Satan went out from the presence of the Lord....16 While he was still speaking, another also came and said, "The fire of God fell from heaven and burned up the sheep and the servants, and consumed them; and I alone have escaped to tell you!"

Who did it? Mankind says God did it....Satan says the same. So, when we blame God for doing evil we are siding with Satan. Hmmm? Something to think on...huh?