Murders depicted in the Bible

January 23, 2017

Green - Do you know where the quote comes from? "Earthly kingdoms rule by the ascendancy of physical power; but from Christ's kingdom every carnal weapon, every instrument of coercion, is banished. Answer: Ellen White. That is a direct quote. Your issue with this quote is not with me. And your single verse proof text does not fit the whole. You should read the 32nd chapter of the book The Great Controversy titled "Snares of Satan/"

January 23, 2017

7 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

APL,

You incorrectly apply that statement beyond the contextual boundaries in which Mrs. White included it. She addresses probationary time, not such post-probationary events as the plagues, nor hell fire. Furthermore, she refers to character when she says that God will destroy no one. How do we know? Because there are Bible verses that tell us both that God did destroy and that He will destroy, and Mrs. White asks the poignant question "Who will say that He will not do what He says He will do?" Jesus applied it to the "body" when speaking of hell in Matthew 18:8-9. For those who perished in Sodom and Gomorrha, and for the antediluvians, their probation had closed, and as Jude tells us, they were made examples for us of what will happen with all the wicked in the end.

What is the context of the quote in Great Controversy page 35-37? If you want to limit this to probationary times, then you need to include the Flood and Sodom and Gomorrah. Yes, they are examples. The best example what God is like is the life and death of Christ. Have you considered the fact that your thought on Matthew 10:28 that it is God that we need to fear is wrong? EGW tells who it is we need to fear in this text, and it is not God.

January 23, 2017

5 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

Can you suggest a verse or two that would show us this my friend?

Zechariah 4:6

January 23, 2017

3 hours ago, Samie said:

I believe that Scriptures tell us the LORD corrects whom He loves, just as a father the son he loves

^NKJPsalm 89:26, 30-32

²⁶ He shall cry to Me, 'You are my Father, My God, and the rock of my salvation.'

³⁰ "If his sons forsake My law And do not walk in My judgments,

³¹ If they break My statutes And do not keep My commandments,

³² Then I will punish their transgression with the rod, And their iniquity with stripes.

^NKJProverbs 3:11-12

¹¹ My son, do not despise the chastening of the LORD, Nor detest His correction;

¹² For whom the LORD loves He corrects, Just as a father the son in whom he delights.

^NKJProverbs 13:24 He who spares his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him promptly.

       NKJ Proverbs 22:15 Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child; The rod of correction will drive it far from him.

       NKJ Proverbs 29:15 The rod and rebuke give wisdom, But a child left to himself brings shame to his mother.

It appears to me that Solomon, in his God-given wisdom, approves of a proactive correction of a child. And the wisest man seemed to equate this with the correction God does to His people.

1.     1. What is your take on the above verses?

2.     2. Do you believe that God actively chastens or corrects us, as these verses seem to show?

3.     3. Is it a use of force if indeed God chastens / corrects people, or is it a display of His love?

Thank you.

Is a shepherd's rod meant to beat sheep into submission? Or is the rod a tool to guide his sheep, nudging them in the direction to go? Spare the rod, the guiding direction to a child, is true abuse. This is not talking about corporal punishment. A shepherd is to protect the flock, and keep it together. If a sheep wonders, the True Shepherd does everything he/she can to find the sheep and bring it back. In the end when God's children, His sheep, refuse to be lead by Him, will God then beat them into submission, or ultimately, heart broken, let them God.

January 24, 2017

1 hour ago, APL said:

Is a shepherd's rod meant to beat sheep into submission? Or is the rod a tool to guide his sheep, nudging them in the direction to go?

Neither. The rod is to smite the enemy jackal. It is the shepherd's defense. David was said to be "armed" with only sling and staff. Surely the sling was not merely a teaching tool--it smote the giant as well as the lion and bear! David wrote "thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me." The sheep is comforted knowing that his master is armed and ready to defend him. In fact, this phrase immediately follows the "Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for Thou art with me;" part. The sheep need not fear the perils of the enemy, for the Shepherd is armed.

January 24, 2017

1 hour ago, APL said:

Is a shepherd's rod meant to beat sheep into submission? Or is the rod a tool to guide his sheep, nudging them in the direction to go? Spare the rod, the guiding direction to a child, is true abuse. This is not talking about corporal punishment. A shepherd is to protect the flock, and keep it together. If a sheep wonders, the True Shepherd does everything he/she can to find the sheep and bring it back. In the end when God's children, His sheep, refuse to be lead by Him, will God then beat them into submission, or ultimately, heart broken, let them God.

How many people do you know that have been corrected by getting beat on? This thinking is so stupid I am amazed that people who call themselves Christian can even write such things as to think that using lashes builds a good attitude. It builds rebellion! Need we really point this out?

January 24, 2017

1 hour ago, The Wanderer said:

"The LORD is a man of war!!!" Exodus 15:3

"Jawbone of an ass; Ive slain a thousand men!!!" (Judges 15:15-16)

YEAH! Awesome God! Thunder in His footsteps, lightning in His fists. So you BETTER BE BELIEVIN'

MIGHT IS RIGHT, huh?

January 24, 2017

1 hour ago, APL said:

Is a shepherd's rod meant to beat sheep into submission? Or is the rod a tool to guide his sheep, nudging them in the direction to go? Spare the rod, the guiding direction to a child, is true abuse. This is not talking about corporal punishment. A shepherd is to protect the flock, and keep it together. If a sheep wonders, the True Shepherd does everything he/she can to find the sheep and bring it back. In the end when God's children, His sheep, refuse to be lead by Him, will God then beat them into submission, or ultimately, heart broken, let them God.

The issue is not the shepherd's rod. That's not what I am asking because I have no problem with it. Of course, the Lord is our Shepherd. But is He NOT our Father likewise? Hence, God is both our Shepherd and our Father. He directs us like a shepherd does to His sheep, and disciplines us like a father does to his son.

It was the wisest man who, with his God-given wisdom, compared the father's disciplining his son to God's disciplining his people. It was that comparison Solomon used, NOT the shepherd's rod.

David's comparison is the Shepherd with His rod to guide His sheep. Solomon's comparison used the Father's rod to discipline His son. Why accept David's and reject Solomon's?

January 24, 2017

14 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

Well, what do those verses tell you Kevin?

Not what they tell you. Need I repeat to you how it is that I understand the Bible?

January 24, 2017

1 minute ago, Kevin Straub said:

Not what they tell you. Need I repeat to you how it is that I understand the Bible?

Yes, we know you understand the Bible. So can you please respond to my question to APL as he responded to the question I asked you?

23 minutes ago, Samie said:

The issue is not the shepherd's rod. That's not what I am asking because I have no problem with it. Of course, the Lord is our Shepherd. But is He NOT our Father likewise? Hence, God is both our Shepherd and our Father. He directs us like a shepherd does to His sheep, and disciplines us like a father does to his son.

It was the wisest man who, with his God-given wisdom, compared the father's disciplining his son to God's disciplining his people. It was that comparison Solomon used, NOT the shepherd's rod.

David's comparison is the Shepherd with His rod to guide His sheep. Solomon's comparison used the Father's rod to discipline His son. Why accept David's and reject Solomon's?

Thank you.

January 24, 2017

Alas...the mission is doomed before it is started! We can't prove what God does or doesn't do. We have very little of direct words from God, he spoke through humans who interpreted those words into a language that was understood by the listener. We have to look at the message of the total sum of all things, not bits and pieces without their context. To my way of thinking, to associate God in any way with punishment of any kind is simply humans trying to make God into their image/understanding of life. We can throw texts around till the cows come home, both sides of the issue, but what does it prove? It proves we don't really understand this God or the plan of salvation. Even Christs followers, who spent three years with Him failed to understand the person of Christ and what He stood for.

Is our message to the world, God loves you but........or God loves you and want you to love others, period? It is our choice, each individual for their self, wether they choose life or death. They are on opposite ends of the spectrum with a path for both. They are natural opposites, a very simple choice. Lets not try to make God into our idea of a what earthly justice would be, He will not destroy us, we destroy ourselves. This side of heaven, it's still much of a mystery.

January 24, 2017

2 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

"The LORD is a man of war!!!I

"Jawbone of an ass; Ive slain a thousand men!!!" (Judges 15:15-16)

Do we see God's true character in Samson? Is the LORD a man of war? John 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? he that has seen me has seen the Father; and how say you then, Show us the Father?

Hebrews 1:1-3 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 Has in these last days spoken to us by his Son, whom he has appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

Gregory holds Israel up as if that is what we should look to when it comes to war. Did Israel fight? YES. Why? So terribly blinded had they become by transgression. The Lord had never commanded them to "go up and fight." It was not His purpose that they should gain the land by warfare, but by strict obedience to His commands. {PP 392.3} Israel never needed to take up arms. When they followed God's commands implicitly, they never lost a man in any conflict. Consider Jehoshaphat in 2 Chronicles 20.

The history of Israel should really be a warning to us. Jeremiah 7:22-24 For I spoke not to your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: 23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people: and walk you in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well to you. 24 But they listened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward.

Hm - Israel went backward, not forward. Is all the wars of Israel, did they ever achieve the promise? No.

January 24, 2017

1 hour ago, Samie said:

The issue is not the shepherd's rod. That's not what I am asking because I have no problem with it. Of course, the Lord is our Shepherd. But is He NOT our Father likewise? Hence, God is both our Shepherd and our Father. He directs us like a shepherd does to His sheep, and disciplines us like a father does to his son.

It was the wisest man who, with his God-given wisdom, compared the father's disciplining his son to God's disciplining his people. It was that comparison Solomon used, NOT the shepherd's rod.

David's comparison is the Shepherd with His rod to guide His sheep. Solomon's comparison used the Father's rod to discipline His son. Why accept David's and reject Solomon's?

I accept Solomon. I reject your interpretation of Solomon.

Proverbs 13:24 He that spares his rod hates his son: but he that loves him chastens him betimes.

Proverbs 22:15 Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

Proverbs 29:15 The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself brings his mother to shame.

Your interpretation of these proverbs is that one must beat on the wayward child. That is not how I read these verses. Are you like Green and do not understand herding sheep? I'd bet a simple Google search would turn up interesting facts about what the shepherd's rod was used for. Let me look. Hm - first hit: " A shepherd's rod may also be used to prevent sheep from straying. Skilled shepherds can manipulate the rod to nudge a straying sheep, triggering it to come back to the herd. This allows the shepherd to control sheep from a short distance. A shepherd's rod may also be used in correlation with a staff to guide the sheep." NOTE - your Google search may vary as google knows more about you than you imagine!

Do you regularly beat your children Samie? If so, I bet they are the most obedient and loving children, am I right? No, you do not foster love by being a tyrant. Oh, they may toe the line for a time, but once out from under your "loving care" and see what they do!

January 24, 2017

I really can't fathom why God allowed Solomon to write about God disciplining His children as would a father who loves his son would do, when all He wants is that He must only be likened to a Shepherd. Didn't Christ Himself instruct us to pray "our Father Who art in heaven" instead of "our Shepherd Who art in heaven"?

When Scriptures come our way, God speaks so clearly that even he who runs can "read" it. When they go opposite the direction our doctrine points to, it is mystery. Is this rightly dividing the word of truth?

January 24, 2017

41 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

You wont find a single place anywhere on this forum where you addressed these two texts to me or with me. I asked a fair question, and I have not yet said what I thought these two texts mean, so you cannot say they dont mean to you what they mean to me. I have not mentioned these texts to anyone until now. If this is your way of "teaching" us the truth; I sure do not understand such a method.

Oh! I didn't know you were asking a serious question. My apologies. I thought this was just more text-slinging. Also, I believe that I have spoken enough here and left enough links to my writing that those who really want to know what we believe and why we believe it would have the "code" in hand, that they could for themselves unravel these types of Bible sayings. But I have to remember that it took me a couple years to really settle into speaking the new language.

Ok, basically, then, the statement that the Lord is a man of war is rooted in the ancient near east concept of deity, which, as most of us realize, was that God is the one Source of all, both good and evil. This was not limited to the pagan mindset; it was ingrained also in the Hebrew mind. Now, today we can take that language and agree that God is a God of war, but in righteousness.

Rev. 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

His war is waged with the truth of the Word of God, who is actually Christ. In Christ we have our primary hermeneutic to the entire Scriptures. We need to study Jesus. Then we will know if He picks up stones to smash the sinner to a bloody and brutal death.

And Samson, well, now isn't there an interesting role model? Really, do you figure this man had a good understanding of God, above that of His contemporaries? He too was enmeshed in the paradigm of the God of war, in the sense of physical battle.

January 24, 2017

25 minutes ago, APL said:

Do we see God's true character in Samson? Is the LORD a man of war? John 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? he that has seen me has seen the Father; and how say you then, Show us the Father?

Hebrews 1:1-3 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 Has in these last days spoken to us by his Son, whom he has appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

Gregory holds Israel up as if that is what we should look to when it comes to war. Did Israel fight? YES. Why? So terribly blinded had they become by transgression. The Lord had never commanded them to "go up and fight." It was not His purpose that they should gain the land by warfare, but by strict obedience to His commands. {PP 392.3} Israel never needed to take up arms. When they followed God's commands implicitly, they never lost a man in any conflict. Consider Jehoshaphat in 2 Chronicles 20.

The history of Israel should really be a warning to us. Jeremiah 7:22-24 For I spoke not to your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: 23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people: and walk you in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well to you. 24 But they listened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward.

Hm - Israel went backward, not forward. Is all the wars of Israel, did they ever achieve the promise? No.

Agreed. This making of ancient Israel a standard for our interpretation of God is an amazing concept that I've yet to wrap my mind around.

It is high time for God's professed people to come out of this stupor, this fog of ignorance and lift up the true character of our God as He really is. Those who fight so hard for a punishing, destroying God cannot hear what they sound like. It is terrible.

Mal. 3:16-18 turns us away from the dark picture of God framed by Satan.

"Malachi turns away from the dark picture that Satan presents to these professed followers of Jesus Christ, for it is a libel on the paternal character of God. Satan has framed this picture for the contemplation of poor, unbelieving, mourning souls, and they have hung it up in memory’s hall where they can gaze upon it. But the Lord has presented another picture for the contemplation of every believer. “Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another: and the Lord hearkened.” . . . (RH, September 10, 1895 par. 5)

"We are to seek for precious jewels of truth as for hidden treasure. We are to have light, that we may diffuse light to others. Those who do this, will be among the company who think upon the name of the Lord, and who speak often to one another. They will study the character of God, and will become acquainted with their Redeemer. 'And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.' Let the character of God be the theme of your thought; for the Lord Jesus calls the attention of his church to himself, and would have his people think upon His name, and impart the knowledge they receive of him to those who are around them.

"The Majesty of heaven identifies his interests with those of the believers. However humble may be their circumstances, and wherever they are privileged to meet together, it is appropriate that they speak often one to another, giving utterance to the gratitude and love that result from thinking upon the name of the Lord. Thus shall God be glorified as he hearkens and hears, and the testimony meeting will be regarded the most precious of all meetings; for the words spoken are recorded in the book of remembrance” (RH, September 10, 1895 pars. 8, 9).

January 24, 2017

There is a way of quoting Scripture--the words that Christ considered of so much consequence that death was the penalty of transgression--so as to pervert it. Should we not handle the words of Christ with sacredness? -- EGW.

January 24, 2017

1 hour ago, CoAspen said:

Alas...the mission is doomed before it is started! We can't prove what God does or doesn't do. We have very little of direct words from God, he spoke through humans who interpreted those words into a language that was understood by the listener. We have to look at the message of the total sum of all things, not bits and pieces without their context. To my way of thinking, to associate God in any way with punishment of any kind is simply humans trying to make God into their image/understanding of life. We can throw texts around till the cows come home, both sides of the issue, but what does it prove? It proves we don't really understand this God or the plan of salvation. Even Christs followers, who spent three years with Him failed to understand the person of Christ and what He stood for.

Is our message to the world, God loves you but........or God loves you and want you to love others, period? It is our choice, each individual for their self, wether they choose life or death. They are on opposite ends of the spectrum with a path for both. They are natural opposites, a very simple choice. Lets not try to make God into our idea of a what earthly justice would be, He will not destroy us, we destroy ourselves. This side of heaven, it's still much of a mystery.

whoa! Easy there! We have the proof of what God does. Jesus is it. He said,

John 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

"what things soever" -- destroying is part of this. The way that we see Christ destroy is the way that the Father destroys. Jesus destroys with truth, the rod of his mouth:

Isa. 11:4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.

This is how they are destroyed by the brightness of His coming. The Jews were destroyed by the brightness of His coming. Ellen White draws the parallel:

“But in that day, as in the time of Jerusalem's destruction, God's people will be delivered, everyone that shall be found written among the living. Isaiah 4:3. Christ has declared that He will come the second time to gather His faithful ones to Himself: ‘Then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.’ Matthew 24:30, 31. Then shall they that obey not the gospel be consumed with the spirit of His mouth and be destroyed with the brightness of His coming. 2 Thessalonians 2:8. Like Israel of old the wicked destroy themselves; they fall by their iniquity. By a life of sin, they have placed themselves so out of harmony with God, their natures have become so debased with evil, that the manifestation of His glory is to them a consuming fire” (GC 37.1).

And we have here also the same truth:

“Let ministers and people remember that gospel truth ruins if it does not save. The soul that refuses to listen to the invitations of mercy from day to day can soon listen to the most urgent appeals without an emotion stirring his soul” (5T 134.1).

"likewise" -- likewise means the same way. God destroys. Jesus destroys. They do it the same way. Bringing the light, bringing Jesus. Showing the way. The choice is ours. Reject the way, reject life. Reject life and die.

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

1 John 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

John 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

1:9 [That] was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

January 24, 2017

Can you show us Kevin where in your writings did you discuss Solomon's comparing God with a father disciplining a son he loves? I would like to study it.

January 24, 2017

28 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

so why is it ok to use one or two scripture verses to make null and void one or two scripture verses. I quoted two texts that denote some aspects of Gods character. Whenever we find a paradox in the Bible, Jesus offers the following guidelines: "the scriptures cannot be broken." For this topic, I will not respond to any writings outside of the Bible. Its not fair to sound exegesis to twist one sentence out of a non-Biblical source and make it to denote Bible truth that spans an entire doctrine

One Scripture must not be used to destroy another. If we have apparently opposing Scriptures we have to harmonize them. So, if we have the statement "therefore he slew him," (1 Chron. 10:14) referring to God killing Saul, but we full well know that Saul killed Himself, because we have the story ("aetiological solution" is in vv. 3-4) we say that "He slew him" means He gave him over to the archers and to his own sword. But if we don't have an aetiological solution and if we don't have any indication of DR (in the phrases, "gave over," "hid His face," "gave up," etc.) such as in 2 Samuel 6:7, saying "God smote him," with reference to Uzzah. What warrant do we have to say these mean anything different? They don't. They are both DR. The principle of first mention gives us the key to hiding of face, which is the anger, or wrath of God, here:

Deut. 31:16 And the LORD said unto Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers; and this people will rise up, and go a whoring after the gods of the strangers of the land, whither they go [to be] among them, and will forsake me, and break my covenant which I have made with them.
31:17 Then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God [is] not among us?
31:18 And I will surely hide my face in that day for all the evils which they shall have wrought, in that they are turned unto other gods.

I can preach to you an entire discourse on Deut. 31 and the song which was to be sung to keep this principle ever in remembrance, (ch. 32) yet it is a principle that we have forgotten and worse than this, that we have denied, though Christ came to explicitly teach it and clear away the brain fog induced by Satan's suggestions from behind the language.

"Through nature, through types and symbols, through patriarchs and prophets, God had spoken to the world. Lessons must be given to humanity in the language of humanity. The Messenger of the covenant must speak. His voice must be heard in His own temple. Christ must come to utter words which should be clearly and definitely understood. He, the author of truth, must separate truth from the chaff of man's utterance, which had made it of no effect. The principles of God's government and the plan of redemption must be clearly defined. The lessons of the Old Testament must be fully set before men." {DA 34.1}

The way to read the language of God smiting is to harmonize it with the Bible definition of it. Then, we need not require any DR phraseology nor explicit narrative revealing causation in order for us to deem it "safe" to label any particular instance of Divine destruction as DR, or "passive wrath." We will no longer need the phrase "passive wrath," (God withdrawing His power to sustain and protect) because it will be understood there is no such thing as "active wrath"--God employing physical power to destroy.

Note the chiastic structure in Isa. 57:17; it is instructive:

A. For the iniquity of his covetousness

B. was I wroth,

C. and smote him:

C'. I hid me,

B'. and was wroth,

A'. and he went on frowardly in the way of his heart.

January 24, 2017

6 minutes ago, Kevin Straub said:

One Scripture must not be used to destroy another.

Can you explain how you are not using Ps 23 to destroy Prov 3 & 13, by accepting God with a shepherd's guiding rod and not accepting Him with a father's disciplining rod?

January 24, 2017

7 minutes ago, jackson said:

I am having trouble posting replies to individuals. So let me just post in general in oposition to the doctrines being espoused by both Kevin and APL

Let us just look at a few comments from the SOP that will clearly show that God executes punishment for sin, sometimes directly at His command and other times by permitting Satan and his angels to destroy.

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. GC 614.2

God is not limited to DR as claimed by both Kevin and APL. Both the Bible and SOP taken as they read are clear on this point. In addition, it is not sin that causes the second death, but rather the execution by God of the penalty for unrepenting sinners. In fact , it is Jesus in concert with the saints who judge both the wicked dead and Satan and his angels They set the penalty to be received by each of wicked.

It is at this time that, as foretold by Paul, "the saints shall judge the world." 1 Corinthians 6:2. In union with Christ they judge the wicked, comparing their acts with the statute book, the Bible, and deciding every case according to the deeds done in the body. Then the portion which the wicked must suffer is meted out, according to their works; and it is recorded against their names in the book of death. {GC 660.4} . {GC 660.4}

Then the wicked saw what they had lost; and fire was breathed from God upon them, and consumed them. This was the Execution of the Judgment. The wicked then received according as the saints in unison with Jesus had meted out to them during the 1000 years. The same fire from God that consumed the wicked, purified the whole earth. EW 54.1

Some are destroyed as in a moment, while others suffer many days. All are punished “according to their deeds.” The sins of the righteous having been transferred to Satan, he is made to suffer not only for his own rebellion, but for all the sins which he has caused God’s people to commit. His punishment is to be far greater than that of those whom he has deceived. After all have perished who fell by his deceptions, he is still to live and suffer on. In the cleansing flames the wicked are at last destroyed, root and branch–Satan the root, his followers the branches. The full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah. {GC 673.1}

has all been dealt with...

on this 'single angel' quotation, one of the most taken out of context and misunderstood passages in all of the SoP, we offer the study for those interested:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/107170239/The Same Destructive Power_GC 614.2.docx

January 24, 2017

7 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

Well; its ok You are allowed to believe as you prefer. Myself, I am choosing to not respond to any quotes that are not from the Bible

I like that.

January 24, 2017

Kevin may have run out of Scriptures, he just ignores my posts. Thanks for your half-truths, brother.

January 24, 2017

1 hour ago, The Wanderer said:

Well; its ok You are allowed to believe as you prefer. Myself, I am choosing to not respond to any quotes that are not from the Bible

1 hour ago, Kevin Straub said:

I like that.

Kevin does not respond to posts from the Bible that are against his peddled doctrine. I speak from experience with my recent posts addressed to him.

Sign In

Murders depicted in the Bible

Recommended Posts

APL

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

phkrause

Gail

BigMark

Posted Images

APL

APL

APL

Green Cochoa

Kevin Straub

Kevin Straub

Samie

Kevin Straub

Samie

CoAspen

APL

APL

Samie

Kevin Straub

Kevin Straub

Green Cochoa

Kevin Straub

Samie

Kevin Straub

Samie

Kevin Straub

Kevin Straub

Samie

Samie

Join the conversation

Browse

Activity