The man of Romans 7

[pnattmbtc]

Robert: Yes, but that belief comes from Ellen White.  Ellen states if you are going to use her prove it from the Bible.  Yes?  Prove to me that the slave who was treated like a beast will be excluded from heaven.

I very much doubt the idea is original with her.  I didn't quote her.  If one thinks in terms of what's going on, the idea seems logical to me, which is why I mentioned it parenthetically.

What I mean by what's going, when one dies, the character doesn't change; one's paradigm, perspective, view of God, view of morality, ethics, all of these things, continue as before death.  Indeed, our minds cannot instantly change without violating the principle of free will, because our minds are the essence of who we are.  So God cannot change the mentally deficient in some miraculous way without in essence simply creating a new being; God could take a body that looked like a given person, and had the same DNA, but as soon as miraculous mind-changing surgery is performed, it's no longer the same person, because the mind is no longer the same.

[pnattmbtc]

Robert: You could apply this to abortion too.  Let me paraphrase:

GOD cannot take the aborted infant to heaven, who has been kept in ignorance because he hasn't had the opportunity to get to know God and His law. But he does the best thing for him that a compassionate GOD can do. He lets this aborted infant be as though he had not been.” 

I mean this is ridiculous.  Salvation is in Christ alone.  Is His hand to short to save the ignorant? Is anything impossible for God?

Please consider the post I wrote in regards to the mind being the essence of who a person is.  The way I would phrase things, in terms of what God does or does not do, is that He won't do things which are contrary to His character, and violating free will is one of those things.  As to what God will do in regards to aborted fetuses, etc., we aren't given specifics, so we need to tread lightly to not be speculating.  What I see being consistent with God's character is that God will take anyone to heaven who will be happy there.  Any other idea than this doesn't make sense to me.

Also, you must remember we have sin because God allowed Lucifer to come into existence.  God, therefore, is responsible for sin's existence.  

I wouldn't say this.  I would say that Lucifer is responsible for sin's existence.  I would say God took a risk when He created Lucifer, the same risk He took in creating the other angels, a risk inherent in creating beings with free will, but the responsbility doesn't lie with God.  That the responsibility doesn't lie with God is a key feature of the Great Controversy.  I think you're taking the wrong side here, the side of the enemy.

That doesn't imply that He is sin's author, but merely that He allowed it.  

This isn't what responsibility entails.  God created beings with free will.  These beings use this free will to do certain things, sometimes good, sometimes bad.  God isn't responsible for the things which these beings do, whether good or bad; they are.  This is what "free will" means.  God would be responsible if a being *didn't* have free will, but were constrained to act in some certain way which God was controling.

Therefore if someone who is ignorant or kept ignorant is lost it's His fault.

Why would you blame God for this?  What did God do wrong?

[pnattmbtc]

Robert: Does this hurt Ellen White's credibility? Yes, if you think she has the last word being God's messenger. No, because she stated the following:

"There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our  (Ellen White includes herself) expositions of Scripture are without error.  The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people is not a proof that our ideas are infallible.  Age will not make an error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair.  No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation.  Review and Herald, December 20,1892   

I'm trying to following your train of thought here.  You wrote that what Ellen White wrote was "ridiculous", so clearly you think your ability to judge is superior to hers.  Now if God gave her a message regarding the slave which is "ridiculous", what does that say about God?

What you appear to do is to use her when she says something you can take to support a position you hold, and give her statements no weight when you disagree, using the quote that there is more light to come as justification to do so.  I don't see why you would think this is a justifiable course of action.  She also wrote this:

“I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision—the precious rays of light shining from the throne.”

I think a more nuanced approach in regards to revelation and inspiration is needed here.

[Robert]

 I would say that Lucifer is responsible for sin's existence.  I would say God took a risk when He created Lucifer, the same risk He took in creating the other angels, a risk inherent in creating beings with free will, but the responsbility doesn't lie with God.  That the responsibility doesn't lie with God is a key feature of the Great Controversy.  I think you're taking the wrong side here, the side of the enemy.

Sin would not exist if God hadn't carried through in the creation of Lucifer.  God is omniscient; He knew Lucifer would be the author of iniquity,  yet He created Him anyway.  God therefore is responsible for allowing sin to develop.  That's why you see statements like,

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." Is 45:7  

 

Edited August 5, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

So Saul died for his unfaithfulness which he had committed against the Lord, because he did not keep the word of the Lord, and also because he consulted a medium for guidance, but he did not inquire of the Lord; therefore, He [God] killed him, and turned the kingdom over to David, the son of Jesse (1 Chron. 10:13, 14).

Did God kill Saul?  Clearly no.  Saul committed suicide.  Then why did God take the blame upon Himself as if He actually killed Saul?

Answer:  Because He, and He alone, allowed the entrance of sin.  He assumes the responsibility for all that's wrong in this world until the day of atonement, but that's another subject. 

 

Edited August 5, 2015 by Robert

[pnattmbtc]

Robert: Sin would not exist if God hadn't carried through in the creation of Lucifer.  God is omniscient; He knew Lucifer would be the author of iniquity,  yet He created Him anyway.  God therefore is responsible for allowing sin to develop.  That's why you see statements like,

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." Is 45:7

I don't think your view of God's character in any way jibes with that of what Jesus portrayed.  That is, you are presenting the
idea that God knew Lucifer would sin, and chose to create him anyway, knowing that sin would result.  If your premise here were true,
then I would agree with you that God would be responsible for sin, but that would say very terrible things about God, things which
we know are not true, for many Scriptural reasons, but primarily because of the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Let us suppose for a moment that God did know that Lucifer would sin, not that he could sin, but, without a doubt, that he would.
Then sin would be inevitable because of an action on God's part which was avoidable.  This would make God the author of sin, not
Lucifer, right?  In this case it would be God who started a course of action the inevitable result of which would be sin.  God would
be the creater of evil.

Now why would God do this?  Why wouldn't God create a different archangel that He knew wouldn't sin?  He could have had Gabriel
start out right away as archangel and not create Lucifer.  Why would God prefer a univers in which sin was certain to exist over one
in which sin was certain not to exist?

Regarding your quotation of Isa. 45, your application is completely out of context.

[pnattmbtc]

So Saul died for his unfaithfulness which he had committed against the Lord, because he did not keep the word of the Lord, and also because he consulted a medium for guidance, but he did not inquire of the Lord; therefore, He [God] killed him, and turned the kingdom over to David, the son of Jesse (1 Chron. 10:13, 14).

Did God kill Saul?  Clearly no.  Saul committed suicide.  Then why did God take the blame upon Himself as if He actually killed Saul?

Answer:  Because He, and He alone, allowed the entrance of sin.  He assumes the responsibility for all that's wrong in this world until the day of atonement, but that's another subject. 

Here you speak of God's allowing the entrance of sin.  I agree with this, which is a far cry from saying that God caused sin to occur.  Regarding God's assuming responsibility for what He allows to occur, I agree with this too, but not for the reason you give.  God assumes responsibility because it is His nature to do so, it is in accordance with His character.  We see this revealed in Christ, especially at the cross.  He did not do so because He was obligated to do so, but because this is what agape does.

[Robert]

Let us suppose for a moment that God did know that Lucifer would sin, not that he could sin, but, without a doubt, that he would.
Then sin would be inevitable because of an action on God's part which was avoidable.  This would make God the author of sin, not
Lucifer, right?

So sin snuck upon God, i.e., He had no idea what was coming when He created Lucifer?  Please....! 

Edited August 5, 2015 by Robert

[pnattmbtc]

So sin snuck upon God, i.e., He had no idea what was coming when He created Lucifer?  Please....! 

What would you choose such a horrible icon?  This hardly a subject to be joking about.

[pnattmbtc]

Robert, you didn't address my questions.  Specifically, it is your assertion that God created Lucifer with the certainty that Lucifer would sin; not that he could, but that he would.  I'm asking you, what would God do that?  Why wouldn't He just not create Lucifer, and have Gabriel be the archangel instead?  Why would God prefer a universe in which sin is certain to exist over one in which sin is not certain to exist?

Edited August 5, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[Robert]

What would you choose such a horrible icon?  This hardly a subject to be joking about.

The icon is meant for your ridiculousness. God is all knowing....It's one of His attributes.

[Robert]

.... it is your assertion that God created Lucifer with the certainty that Lucifer would sin; not that he could, but that he would.  I'm asking you, what would God do that?  

I guess you better ask God, huh?  I have an idea, but that's not to be shared with you because you are too far out in left field for me....

Edited August 5, 2015 by Robert

[8thdaypriest]

I very much doubt the idea is original with her.  I didn't quote her.  If one thinks in terms of what's going on, the idea seems logical to me, which is why I mentioned it parenthetically.

What I mean by what's going, when one dies, the character doesn't change; one's paradigm, perspective, view of God, view of morality, ethics, all of these things, continue as before death.  Indeed, our minds cannot instantly change without violating the principle of free will, because our minds are the essence of who we are.  So God cannot change the mentally deficient in some miraculous way without in essence simply creating a new being; God could take a body that looked like a given person, and had the same DNA, but as soon as miraculous mind-changing surgery is performed, it's no longer the same person, because the mind is no longer the same.

I don't see that adding a few neural connections, or brain cells which enable the person formerly "mentally defective" to now think and choose, is "creating a new being".  He would be the SAME human being, just healed.  Aren't we all "changed in a moment" - at the last trump. 

[Robert]

  Aren't we all "changed in a moment" - at the last trump. 

 

Good point...

Edited August 5, 2015 by Robert

[8thdaypriest]

Good point...

I posted just to let you know that I do follow this thread, even if I don't comment very often. 

[Robert]

" God knew Lucifer would sin when He created him. If at that point God had refused to create him, He would have been repudiating that prime principle of free choice." [Amazing Facts]

[Robert]

The thing is this: who is responsible for sin? One of the clear teachings of the Bible is the sovereignty of God. That means that nothing happens in the universe without the permission of God. That’s what it means. God is sovereign. Did God know that Lucifer would sin? Yes. Then why did He create him? That’s one of the big questions.

If God is sovereign, then He has allowed Satan to come in. He has allowed Satan to tempt Adam and Eve. This has created a problem and this was not solved on the cross. Let me give you an illustration. When Adam sinned and God came to visit him, what did he say to God when God asked why did you sin? He said, “This woman, whom You gave....” So upon whom was he putting the blame? On God. Today you will hear it all the time: “If God is love why is He allowing all the sicknesses and problems? If God is love, why is He allowing a drought in America?” These are the kind of questions that have to be solved if the great controversy is to come to an end.

So what does God do? God actually assumes the blame! He assumes the blame until the Day of Atonement. There is a text which I want you to look for, it’s in the Old Testament, where God is speaking. He says, “I have created evil.” You will find many texts in the Bible where God assumes the blame for many things. For instance God said, “I have hardened Pharaoh’s heart.” These texts cause a lot of problems to many Christians. You wonder why those texts are there. Well, it’s because God assumes the blame until the Day of Atonement. Because He’s sovereign and He allows things to happen, He has to assume the blame. Does He assume the blame for a good reason? Yes. But we will not know it until the judgment. [Jack Sequeira]

Edited August 5, 2015 by Robert

[8thdaypriest]

Robert,

You're answer, for HOW our God can "save" infants, children, mental defectives, and ignorant pagans, is for them to begin life in a saved condition - only loosing that salvation if they fail to believe when presented with the evidence. 

My answer, is to resurrect them at the 8th millennium, as "the rest of the dead" - educate them, and then let them CHOOSE. 

Personally, I think my answer makes more sense. 

The SDA answer, is to simply leave them dead (as if they never were).  THAT doesn't seem very just - certainly not fair to those who might have lived forever in God's kingdom of peace. 

And then there is the SDA teaching that young children of believers, will be given a free pass into the kingdom, without having to choose, and without any "works" at all (except what God knows they "would have done".    That makes it seem doubly unfair, to give eternal life to some, while leaving others "as if they never were". 

[LifeHiscost]

Robert,

And then there is the SDA teaching that young children of believers, will be given a free pass into the kingdom, without having to choose, and without any "works" at all (except what God knows they "would have done".    That makes it seem doubly unfair, to give eternal life to some, while leaving others "as if they never were". 

Did you ever stop to think, 8thdaypriest, that our future lives are based on God's sense of fairness, not on ours. Was it fair that we should be born in a fallen world controlled by a master of deceit? Was it fair that all those aborted babies get out of this world without having to go through the trials and temptations that all those allowed to live, have to endure? I'm not telling you what is fair as much as I'm suggesting that Able being killed by Cain, when Able was doing all that God asked him to do, doesn't portray a picture of fairness, and that gives great reason for us to have a thousand years to ask all the questions we need to have answered, in order for us to see God's character (after all, He is Love) vindicated. It will make this text make sense in a world that has gone totally out of it's mind.

Whatever you devise against the Lord,
He will make a complete end of it.
Distress will not rise up twice....Nahum 1:9

God is Love!  Jesus saves! 

[Robert]

The thing is this: who is responsible for sin? One of the clear teachings of the Bible is the sovereignty of God. That means that nothing happens in the universe without the permission of God. That’s what it means. God is sovereign. Did God know that Lucifer would sin? Yes. Then why did He create him? That’s one of the big questions. [Jack Sequeira]

"God knew Lucifer would sin when He created him. If at that point God had refused to create him, He would have been repudiating that prime principle of free choice." [Amazing Facts]

 pnattmbtc:  ....you are presenting the idea that God knew Lucifer would sin, and chose to create him anyway, knowing that sin would result.  If your premise here were true, then I would agree with you that God would be responsible for sin....

....the responsibility doesn't lie with God is a key feature of the Great Controversy.  I think you're taking the wrong side here, the side of the enemy.

Then all of Amazing Facts, Jack Sequeira, myself and a host of other folks are on "the wrong side"!  

That's why if an infant, slave, etc is lost God will be at fault for He allowed the problem. 

Rejection of this truth is the reason your theology leads you to subtle legalism. 

The problem is God's.  That's why He saved "all men" in the doing and dying of Christ.  No men will be lost because he was ignorant.  If he is he can blame God in the end.  The only way to be lost is to knowingly reject God's gift in Jesus Christ.

Edited August 6, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

Who is responsible for sin? One of the clear teachings of the Bible is the sovereignty of God. That means that nothing happens in the universe without the permission of God. That’s what it means. God is sovereign. Did God know that Lucifer would sin? Yes. Then why did He create him? That’s one of the big questions.

If God is sovereign, then He has allowed Satan to come in. He has allowed Satan to tempt Adam and Eve. This has created a problem and this was not solved on the cross. Let me give you an illustration. When Adam sinned and God came to visit him, what did he say to God when God asked why did you sin? He said, “This woman, whom You gave....” So upon whom was he putting the blame? On God. Today you will hear it all the time: “If God is love why is He allowing all the sicknesses and problems? If God is love, why is He allowing a drought in America?” These are the kind of questions that have to be solved if the great controversy is to come to an end.

So what does God do? God actually assumes the blame! He assumes the blame until the Day of Atonement. There is a text which I want you to look for, it’s in the Old Testament, where God is speaking. He says, “I have created evil.” You will find many texts in the Bible where God assumes the blame for many things. For instance God said, “I have hardened Pharaoh’s heart.” These texts cause a lot of problems to many Christians. You wonder why those texts are there. Well, it’s because God assumes the blame until the Day of Atonement. Because He’s sovereign and He allows things to happen, He has to assume the blame. Does He assume the blame for a good reason? Yes. But we will not know it until the judgment.

There is another text and I want you to look for this one too. I’ll give you a little more help, this in the Psalms. David says:

I will praise your name with uprightness of heart when I know of your righteous judgment.

Even in the minds of Christians, there are questions. Now we see through a glass darkly but then, face to face. When the Day of Atonement is over every knee will bow down, including Satan, and admit, “God you are right.” Every knee will confess. The purpose of the Day of Atonement is to put the blame where it belongs. And that is on Satan. Turn to Ezek. 28:15:

Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created [That’s Azazel. He was blameless. He was perfect.], till iniquity was found in thee.

How can sin come out of something that is perfect? That’s a mystery. It is called the mystery of iniquity. The word “mystery“ means something that can be seen and can be known but cannot be explained. How can a sinless being produce sin? I can’t explain that. We cannot explain the fall. But it is a fact. Neither can we explain how God can produce righteousness out of sinful flesh. That’s also a mystery. Can God do it? Yes.

Lets go back to Leviticus sixteen. The next question I want to bring before you is, “Why did God instruct Moses and the Jews that they had to use goats instead of sheep?” If you look at your Bibles you will discover that goats represent or symbolize sin. Look at Matt.25:33:

And He shall set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left.

He divides the human race. The sheep are on one side and the goats on the other. Who are the sheep? The righteous or the sinners? The righteous. Please notice the goats represent sin. Look also at verse forty-one:

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

Notice that is referring to the goats. Goats always symbolize sin in the Bible .

Back to Leviticus sixteen. Who created this world? Who actually did the speaking? Christ. We have Christ the Creator and Lucifer the originator of sin. The issue is, “Which of these two are to blame for sin?” That’s the issue in the Day of Atonement. Who is to blame for sin?

What does the priest do with the goat upon whom the lot fell for the Lord? Look at verse nine:

And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the Lord’s lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering.

The Lord’s goat is Christ who takes the guilt and the punishment of our sin. Did the cross deal with the issue of blame? The answer is No. The cross did not deal with the blame. Who was to blame for sin? The cross only took our guilt and our punishment. As far as we are concerned, there is an atonement between us and God through the blood of Christ. But the issue now is, “Who is to blame for sin?” Let me give you another text, Rom.7:19,20. Who is Paul talking about? Is he talking about believers or unbelievers? That is not the issue here. But listen to what He says in Romans 7 in two places, Romans 7:19,20:

For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

What is he saying here? “I want to do good but instead I’m doing evil.” As far as the choice is concerned, what choice is Paul making in verse nineteen? Good or evil? I’m not dealing with performance now but with choice. He chooses to do good. But in performance he does evil. Look at verse twenty:

Now if I do that I would not [if I’m doing what I did not choose to do], it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Who is Paul putting the blame on? Sin that dwells in me. We call that indwelling sin. Look at the next verse:

I find then a law [principle] when I would do good, evil is present with me. [I want to keep the law, but instead I’m not keeping it, I’m breaking it. And you will find this in the next verses.] For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

Who put that law of sin in you? When God came to Adam whom did Adam blame? He blamed Eve and then God. Then God went to Eve. Who did Eve blame? The serpent. Please notice that God did not go to the serpent in the Garden of Eden. Why? Because the Day of Atonement is going to settle this. In the Day of Atonement, God will say to Satan, “You are to blame.” And he will admit it because all the evidence is there.

So what is happening on the day of atonement is that the priest will go into the sanctuary and cleanse the sanctuary. He will cleanse the people, the congregation from the guilt and punishment. Then He will take the blame for sin and He will lay it on Satan.

Here is a question: When you accepted Christ did you make a decision not to sin? Did you promise God to be good? I’m not asking about your performance. Supposing you could carry out your choices, would you sin tomorrow? So as far as your choice is concerned, would you chose to sin? No. But we are sinning. I’m doing it. Why are we sinning? Because we have what we call the law of sin in our members.

Who put that law of sin there? Do you blame God or do you blame Lucifer? Who is the one that originated it? Lucifer took that sin and injected that sin into mankind through Adam and Eve. The result is this that the world today is blaming God for the mess that we are in on this earth.

No one is talking about deliberate sin. That’s why I said that we cannot explain the fall. Why did Adam sin? Why did he think he sinned? What did Adam say? He said, “This woman that You gave me.... Don’t put the blame on me, I had no intention of eating that forbidden fruit, but this woman....” He actually put the blame on God. Eve put the blame on the serpent. But who is to blame? God or the serpent? That is what the Day of Atonement will settle. The great controversy cannot come to an end unless the heavenly sanctuary is cleansed from the blame of sin. That’s why the word “Azazel” means, “The angel that takes the blame.”

So what happens is that the Lord’s goat takes the guilt and punishment; Azazel takes the blame. Please notice that the Azazel goat is not killed. What do you do with it? He is taken into the wilderness. Why? For one thousand years, Satan will have the opportunity to investigate his own case. For that thousand years, he has no one to tempt because no one is there. He has a thousand years when he will be able to contemplate what he has done to this world.

The Lord’s goat shed blood but the scapegoat shed no blood because he has to contemplate what a mess he’s made. Let us approach this from another angle. When Lucifer sinned, did he think he was doing a good thing? Or did he think he was doing a bad thing?

He said that he was trying to improve the lot of the angels. There’s something here that is very important and we need to understand it. The love of God, which is the basis of His government, has no self in it. “Love seeketh not her own.” When you look at it philosophically, the love of self sounds very convincing. “You cannot be happy unless you love self.” So the idea of self-love sounds right. There is that text is Proverbs that says, “There’s a way that seems right.”

So Lucifer felt that his way of self-love was better than God’s way where there is no self. So God said, “Go ahead, I will allow you to develop sin,” because that’s what the meaning of sin is. Sin is turning toward self. God said, “I will allow you to develop this world on the principle of self.” This world has been developed on the principle of self for the last six thousand years. Has the world improved? No. If you look at the history of this world, the moment you lift up the principle of self, what happens to society? Does it become better or does it become worse? It becomes worse. After two thousand years, the world had become so terrible that the knowledge of God was almost wiped out. God said, “I will destroy the world and give it a new start.”

And you have the same trend for the next two thousand years when God gave the gospel to the Jews. Did the Jews improve the situation even though He gave them the oracles of God? The Jews had the explicit knowledge of God. Did it help them? What happened to them? It became worse and worse and worse.

Then Christ came and redeemed us and established the Christian Church. Has the church been getting better and better? What’s the history of the Christian Church? Take the nineteenth and twentieth centuries when God allowed the world to increase in knowledge — scientific knowledge, technology. Has science solved our problem? It has solved our problem in terms of amenities of life. Now I can press a button and my dishes are all washed. In that sense, it has improved. But as far as the situation of the world is concerned, is it a better place in which to live? Has crime decreased? No. So has science solved the problem? No. Everything that has been tried has failed because self, sin doesn’t improve things. It makes it worse.

But the thing is this, that the Day of Atonement will put the blame of sin where it belongs. Christ accepted the guilt and punishment and paid for it on the cross but the responsibility, the blame for sin will be placed upon Satan. He will not be killed. He will be sent into the wilderness for one thousand years. Does Lucifer repent after the one thousand years? He acknowledges that God has been right in the controversy but he still operates on the self-sin principle when he leads his army of angels and men against the city of God.

Satan and his angels are a solidarity so they operate as one and reap the same results of rebellion. No human being is present during the thousand years. And he has no permission to go beyond this earth during that time. He can only remain here on this earth. He cannot go beyond it. In that sense, he is bound. Remember that he will have a thousand years to contemplate what he has done to this world, but does he repent? No, he does not repent. Therefore, he himself admits that sin must be destroyed. At the end of the thousand years, Satan and his angels will be destroyed. [JS]

Edited August 6, 2015 by Robert

[pnattmbtc]

The icon is meant for your ridiculousness. God is all knowing....It's one of His attributes.

Everyone agrees that God is all-knowing, but what this means has been debated through the centuries.  There are those who believe in predestination, simple foreknowledge, different forms of timelessness, different Molinist views, just to name a few things.  A lot of what we believe has been influenced by Greek philosophy, and is not based on Scripture at all.  There are many different points of view here, and just because holds a different view than you hold, or asks a question you don't understand, is no reason for ridicule. 

[pnattmbtc]

 it is your assertion that God created Lucifer with the certainty that Lucifer would sin; not that he could, but that he would.  I'm asking you, what would God do that?  

Robert:I guess you better ask God, huh?  I have an idea, but that's not to be shared with you because you are too far out in left field for me..

This seems like an odd accusation.  I've been holding to the Spirit of Prophecy and pioneers like Jones and Waggoner.  Why would I be the one too far in left field?

What our positions say about God is the most important question to my mind that we should be considering and discussing.  Our view of God's character impacts everything we do.

[pnattmbtc]

I don't see that adding a few neural connections, or brain cells which enable the person formerly "mentally defective" to now think and choose, is "creating a new being".  He would be the SAME human being, just healed.  Aren't we all "changed in a moment" - at the last trump. 

Clearly the matter of degree would matter here.  I think we have something like 38 billion neurons of over 1,000 different types, so I doubt in any case that it would be "a few neural connections".  However, knowing God's character, we can be assured that anyone who could be taken to heaven will be.  Hopefully it will be many more than we think. 

[pnattmbtc]

" God knew Lucifer would sin when He created him. If at that point God had refused to create him, He would have been repudiating that prime principle of free choice." [Amazing Facts]

This doesn't make any sense.  For one thing, a being who doesn't exist has no free will, so there is no principle of free choice involved here.  For another, there are an uncountable number of beings God could have created but didn't.  By this argument the principle of free choice is violated by all these beings God didn't create.