how do we understand ellen whites statement in bold red above?
and this statement below?

May need to quote excerpts later, but it's all right above this post, this time!

Two issues appear to me on this: law and sin.

The background, which Tom hasn't touched on, and am not sure how he fits it in, as he so fully into what sin by itself is supposed to do, is divine grace.

Because of grace, sin is no longer sin... : it's full effect is never felt, even by the Devil in hell, is it. Yes, sin is sin, alienation from God, but its guilt and alienation is not in itself lethal, is it.

"It would crush us" goes alongside "it means death" to the one who bears it. Sister White always spoke softly when exhorting us and uplifting Christ: that "means death", in light of her writings taken all together, means hell fire, not scientific brain and body melt down. That's for the personal dose of guilt. Also, guilt is a dicate of law, so its sentence is deliberate, timed and carried out at the judge's discretion, according to God's holy, just and righteous law.

She's clear that death on judgement day is after personally proportionate punishment by fire on all not found in the Lamb's book of life, with the evil angels punished the most of all.

There was war in heaven...: can we fathom that...???!! No, we can't. Their personal period of grace from the Father came to an end: that Michael's angels fought against Satan's angels strongly implies that the Father declared war, not Satan. The rest is history...Since God granted them grace - both in heaven and afterwards - to try to prove their case, he equally sentences them according to the law, the law they challenged, it says in SOP: he is the judge, after all.

Jesus personally tasted the full punishment for sin for all mankind: was it sin itself or divine wrath which killed him? Since Rom 5:18 speaks of humanity's collective condemnation following transgression, and the goat's blood on the mercy seat "satisfied the law's demands" beneath the mercy seat (check EGW quotes from Dedication that I posted on Christus Victor thread), Jesus' death from bearing our sins and guilt was to meet a legal requirement of a sacrifice equal to the law.

That's the heart of redemption through Christ Jesus, whose gospel does eventually indeed instill in us his glory, too, from the heart, not just establish a legal event preventing our death. Grace intervened in our condemnation under the law - our condemnation is natural and God's law is divinely just, providing us a Substitute for our death due under the law.

A side question for Tom here, sorry, Teresa..., and some points for us all.
Had not Christ's life been sufficient a demonstration of agape? Why be put to death, if it, the Lamb's blood shed, is not necessary for our forgiveness, our pardon? Is pardon not granted only after we die to sin on receiving the gift of repentance? Had Jesus not had to die for our forgiveness - being forgiven means being redeemed!!! - he qualified to follow (historically) Enoch in translation, but he was obliged to die, on a tree - to be cursed of God, to secure our salvation from condemnation to death, under the law.

it seems to me that guilt and shame are the burden of sin. i think everyone has those moments of 'conviction' where we feel guilt and shame but too many times we push them away through whatever it might be.

but if we paid attention would we be able to see how it is crushing some soul around us?

if we didnt try to escape the feeling however we might would we understand what ellen white is trying to say?

I think that guilt and shame are the burden of sin, but in mercy, God only allows us to see just the smallest portion of our true guilt and shame. If we saw the whole thing, it would crush us. God protects us by His grace, so we may have time to develop characters in harmony with Him and the principles of His government. In the judgment, there is no more grace, and the wicked, made to see their guilt and shame, are crushed. Their suffering is in proportion to their guilt and shame, which is just what one would expect.

Regarding how Christ bore our shame and guilt, the best I've been able to understand this is by considering the following:

i only want to respond to this but the rest was so good i left it.


it seems to me based on my experience and certain sop quotes that God "opens" our eyes bit-by-bit, as much as we can take at the moment to give us a chance to repent. each time we see deeper how bad whatever particular sin is, how much it hurt whomever, or how bad it was.

perhaps that is why during the time of trouble we wont be able to recall any particular sins. they had already been thoroughly brought to mind before that.

I see it this way too.

Ty Gibson says that God's revelation of Himself necessarily involves a revelation of ourselves. We can't stand the ugliness of ourselves, except in small doses, bathed by God's grace and mercy. If we reject the grace and mercy, then the revelation of our own ugliness (aka sin and guilt) will be too much for us.

thoughts from a couple of others on this subject:

I agree that it makes sense. I was having trouble following the metaphor reference, but I see it is this: "cannot let go of the things in themselves that are converting God's glory to a burning fire, and hanging on to them they are consumed along with them."

This sounds very similar to:



The glory of God is His character.

http://www.maritime-sda-online.com/forum...amp;#Post114174

give a good example of how two people reacted to their burden of sin, guilt and shame, i think.

The different reactions were interesting. As I recall, the SOP tells us Peter would have killed himself too if not for Jesus' look of compassion and understanding.