No, sin is not a substance that can be destroyed. Sin are unrighteous thoughts and actions. They are the result of selfishness. When exposed for what it is, it's too much for the human mind to bear.

As an exercise -- lets count the details mentioned in the TWO PAGES of text on the Lake of Fire event that we find in GC 672-673 -- that are not mentioned at all in DA 764.

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

"Every battle of the warrior is with confused noise, and garments rolled in blood; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire." "The indignation of the Lord is upon all nations, and His fury upon all their armies: He hath utterly destroyed them, He hath delivered them to the slaughter." "Upon the wicked He shall rain quick burning coals, fire and brimstone and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup." Isaiah 9:5; 34:2; Psalm 11:6, margin.


Fire comes down from God out of heaven. The earth is broken up. The weapons concealed in its depths are drawn forth. Devouring flames burst from every yawning chasm. The very rocks are on fire. The day has come that shall burn as an oven. The elements melt with fervent heat, the earth also, and the works that are therein are burned up. Malachi 4:1; 2 Peter 3:10. The earth's surface seems one molten mass--a vast, seething 673

lake of fire. It is the time of the judgement and perdition of ungodly men--"the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompenses for the controversy of Zion." Isaiah 34:8. {GC 672.2}
[/color]


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}
================================================

1. "The indignation of the Lord" and "His fury" on all nations
2. "Weapons concealed in the DEPTHS of the earth" to be used in this event
3. "Burning and fuel of fire"
4. "He hath delivered them to the slaughter"
5. "Upon the wicked HE shall rain burning coals of fire and brimstone and horrible tempest"
6. "Devouring flames burst FROM every yawning chasm" - "the very ROCKS are on fire"
7. "Elements melt with fervent heat" - the Earth AND the WORKS there-in burned up
8. "Earth's SURFACE one MOLTEN mass - a vast seething Lake of FIRE"
9. "Some are destroyed in a moment" - "Others SUFFER for many days" for "ALL are PUNISHED according to their DEEDS"
10. And beyond all that Satan is to "LIVE and SUFFER ON"

Now your argument when confronted with these "details" is that DA 764 is addressing them either in more detail or in ADDED detail.

And yet - curiously - not ONE of these details was found in DA 764's discussion of Christ on the cross.

Why then when asked to speak on "these details" would one go to a text where not ONE of "those details" is mentioned?

Diggin that one out is left as an exercise for the reader I suppose.

in Christ,

Bob

By "contrast" to directing us to DA 764 for added refined detail -- to those details we see in GC 672-673... MM has asked that we look at EW 294 content

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



Truly MM has found a passage with "added detail" and it is Horrific!!

We also have a definition for "where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched" as meaning something "quite different" from "Ghenna worms that eat dead bodies"



Indeed -- added detail.

It is not just Satan that suffers on - but Satan and his angels.

The saints and the angelic host all are relieved by the end of that event. It is over and it is just.




Added detail. The same real fire that burns the wicked -- that causes the very rocks to be on fire - will burn the refuse of earth's surface until it is finally one vast smooth even plain.

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

Indeed - added details.

in Christ,

Bob

No, this isn't the argument at all. The argument is that DA 764 is describing the destruction of the wicked in terms of principles, whereas GC 672 is describing what was seen in vision. Here are the principles of DA 764:



As a list:

1.The destruction is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. (i.e. not manufactured)
2.The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown.
3.God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life.
4.They receive the results of their own choice.
5.By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire.
6.The glory of Him who is love will destroy them.
7.At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand this.
8.Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished.
9.It would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin.

I'm contending that GC 672 must incorporate these principles. I don't see how your interpretation of GC 672 does this, or even attempts to.



You sound excited about this. Do you think this is a good thing? A "Horrific!!" description of the destruction of the wicked.

What do you think God is like, Bob? Angry? Upset? Waiting for a chance to show He is right and wreak vengeance on the miserable wretches who would dare cross Him?

What do you think God's emotions are as these things are happening? What should the emotions of the redeemed be?

Perfect! Now we get to the point "at last".

Since you have no MORE detail nor even ADDED detail in DA 764 from what we find in GC 672-673, then it is little more than sidetracking to suppose that review of the content and detail of GC 672-673 should not actually INCLUDE quotes of it - but rather should be misdirected to other highlevel 1 paragraph summary "principles" level with little or no detail at all.

Sections that add nothing to the detail already given can not be used to negate the PAGES of more detailed discussion found in GC 672-673.

in Christ,

Bob

God manufactures the lake of fire event -- literally.

He alone raises the dust - to life.
He alone judges the wicked.
He alone THEN ignites the fires in the Lake of Fire
HE alone sovereignly confirms the degree to which each person must suffer "many days" or "an instant".
He ALONE can obtain the result that while there is yet a spark of life remaining (their worm does not die) they feel the full impact of the suffering.


But in so doing - God is not arbitrary - for the entire system is based on free will.


Hint - the wicked standing before God at the Great White Throne judgment are not consumed at all - they listen and respond -- no consuming going on there. As we all know.

Satan is not "destroyed by the glory of God" in Job 1 or Job 2 when he goes into God's presence to debate the subject of Job.

The rocks that burn - are not burned by glory. Sin is not a "thing" in the rocks that is burning.

The 70 elders that meet God at Sinai are not consumed. And yet when Moses asks to see the unfiltered undimmed person of God - God says that HE (Moses) would be destroyed in that case.

in Christ,

Bob

Agreed. In fact - we all agree on that point. The details are literally true -- and they are consistent with DA 764.



I have yet to "interpret it" other than literally quoting what you refuse to quote.

The quote alone results in the refutation of your argument. And that is truly instructive.

in Christ,

Bob

My point is that the issue is not one of details but principles. A working model needs to have a foundation based on principles. That's the skeleton. Details are the flesh. You're model has not background, just sagging flesh, oozing on the ground, slithering around.



But we haven't all presented a Model which accomplishes this purpose.



If insisting upon literal details conflicts with the principles of the Model, then that assumption needs to be questioned. You haven't provided any explanation as to how your idea of things fits with the principles I set out.

As a starting off point, you've provided no explanation as to how the ideas you're suggesting fit in with God's character. Ellen White spoke of how the principles of love, mercy and kindness are involved in the judgment. How would God's burning people's flesh, supernaturally keeping them alive so they could experience more pain, be an example of the principles of love, mercy and kindness?

She says also that the judgment of the wicked is for their own benefit. Wouldn't they, in your view, be much better off to simply lay resting in their tombs? How is it to their benefit to be burned by literal fire for hours or days on end?

She also says that God loves His enemies. How is burning someone for days on an a manifestation of love?

She also says the exclusion from heaven of the wicked is voluntary with themselves. How would anyone voluntarily choose to be burned by fire for days on end?

The problem is that your conclusions and summaries abased on priniciples are flatly contradicted by the disconfirming details we see in the text.

Which is why I keep asking that you address those details. And why sometimes I refer to them as "inconvenient details".




The details are what we see happening. The principles are the "reason" or the "why" depending on the case.

By carefully avoiding the details - you have come up with a story of "what and why" that does not fit the details at all.

Hence my oft repeated offer to have you reconcile details to your own oft repeated conclusions.







Actually the details seen - are testing the assumptions and conclusions you have drawn from principles alone -- and they show that your conclusions are in error.

But what is worse - is your suggestion above that we "eisegeted the details" to fit your faulty conclusions.

That does not work with the Bible - and would not work with Ellen White's writings either.



Well I start by insisting on the glaringly obvious point that GC672-673 is not "an idea I am suggesting". I am simply accepting the facts given there at face value.

And that is where your method of ignoring those details falls apart. Fully accepting what is written in GC 672-673 without any eisegesis at all on your part would have ended your speculative conclusion before it got off the ground.



As we all agree. For God is Love AND God is Just without negating either attribute.

What we do not agree on -- is that the details seen in GC 672-673 do NOT permit God to be both loving and Just IF they are really true as written.

There we differ - apparently.



You are asking the wrong question. What you should be asking is "what kind of abuse to the text of GC 672-673 would be needed to wrench the details of some burning for many days back to something that Tom would prefer". So far you have yet to even propose such a mechanism to accomplish the task except to carefully ignore quotes of it in your own comments.



No question they would be far far far better off to be "left as dust" then to suffer the pain anguish remorse and then torment of the fire where "their worm of LIFE does not go out" as long as there is even one part remaining - the FEEL the full force.

In fact Christ argues this point even MORE SO - when He says that the FIRST death does not even COUNT as death when compared to the torment and suffering of the 2nd death.

THEREFORE He could say of the torment and suffering of His friend Lazarus in dying the first death - that Lazarus had not suffered death at all - in fact Lazarus would NEVER DIE. Because as compared to the suffering the SECOND death - the first death is not even death at all!

And this my friend is why we needed Christ to die the SECOND death FOR us. WE could not pay that debt ourselves -- and survive it! We who DIE the FIRST death needed someone to save us from what we could not pay -- suffering the SECOND death!

in Christ,

Bob

Why do ignore the "inconvenient principles" discussed by the author elsewhere? If you did that, it should be evident that your interpretation of the "inconvenient details" doesn't fit.

1.Your ideas don't fit the principles laid out by the author elsewhere, such as in DA 764, and even earlier in the GC itself (e.g. GC 541-543).

2.Your ideas don't fit with the author's conception of God's character. The God she writes about (see, e.g., GC 535-536, and GC 35-36) would not do the things you're suggesting (specifically burn people alive with literal fire for many days).



But just some facts. There are other facts to consider, such as DA 764, GC 541-543, GC 35-36, DA 108, and other passages. You can't look at facts from one place and ignore the facts in other places.



The details you see don't permit that. Not everybody sees the same details you do. You're equating your perception of things with reality, but your perception might be off.



You only say this because you have no answer to it. It's a perfectly reasonable question.



Far better to supposedly "abuse the text" than to in fact "abuse God's character."

You seem not to care whatsoever about God's character. This is where one should start in considering any doctrine.



This looks to be what your view is doing (underlined portion). If not, you should be able to address how your view is consistent with God's true attributes of love, mercy and kindness, which EGW tells us God uses in judgment, rather than skirting the question.



No one who holds the view you do could question this, but your assertion can indeed be questioned, and should be. A careful reading of GC 541-543 brings this out.



But Christ was not burned alive for many days by literal fire, which is your concept of the second death. So Christ could not have paid that debt, as you are conceiving it.

However, if we conceive the Second Death in terms which do not involve being burned alive by literal fire for many days or many hours, then it is possible for your assertion here to be true.

I still would like to know why you think God is capable of doing the things you think He will do.

By the way, you keep speaking of the text; where does the text say the wicked will be burned alive by literal fire? It says they will suffer, but where does it say their suffering is caused by being burned alive?