But what about the scripture that says God placed an angel to prevent people from accessing the tree of life because otherwise sinners would be able to “eat, and live forever”? To me, that sounds like the first death is the result of not being able to eat from the tree of life. In other words, sin has nothing to do with what causes the first death. The reason why we die the first death is due to the fact God will not let us eat the fruit of life.

Therefore, we die on account of something God is doing, which is a basic point you seem to be overlooking. I understand why God will not let us eat the fruit of life and, of course, I agree with it, but it doesn’t change the fact we die because of something God is doing, namely, forbidding access to something that would prevent death. As such, death is not the direct result of sinning, which is based on the fact that sinners would live forever if they had regular access to the tree of life. It is not sin that kills them, but rather they die because God will not let them eat the fruit in their sinful state.

The same thing can be said of the glory of God. As you say, unsaved sinners will die the second death the moment they are exposed to the unshielded glory of God. However, according to your view, God can regulate His glory in such a way that sinners are not immediately destroyed in His presence. Given the fact it is possible for sinners to stand in the presence of God’s glory, without being instantly consumed, it is clear to me, then, that people will die the second death because of something God does. As such, death is not result of sin. Yes, the reason why God allows His glory to kill sinners is due to their sinfulness, but it isn't their sins that kill them.

Thus, whether we are talking about the first or second death - people die because of something God chooses to do. Death is the direct result of a choice God makes and, of course, the reason why God chooses to behave in such a way that people die is because of their sinfulness, because they rejected the salvation provided through the shed blood of Jesus, because heaven would be to them a place of torture.

MM: But what about the scripture that says God placed an angel to prevent people from accessing the tree of life because otherwise sinners would be able to “eat, and live forever”? To me, that sounds like the first death is the result of not being able to eat from the tree of life.

Tom: Had man never sinned, he would never had died. There's hardly a teaching in Scripture that is more clear than that death is the result of sin. The fact that God did not wish for man to receive the special healing which the tree of life would have given has no bearing on this question.

Because of sin, man's vital force began to be depleted. Eating from the tree of life would have prompted the vital force to be revitalized. In mercy, God did not wish for that to happen, as man's miserable existence in this sin-cursed earth would have been prolonged.

MM: In other words, sin has nothing to do with what causes the first death. The reason why we die the first death is due to the fact God will not let us eat the fruit of life.

Tom: "As in Adam all die, in Christ shall all be made alive." "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

These Scriptures are dealing with the first death. Sin causes death.

MM: Therefore, we die on account of something God is doing, which is a basic point you seem to be overlooking.

Tom: Men die because of sin. That's not something God did.

MM: I understand why God will not let us eat the fruit of life and, of course, I agree with it, but it doesn’t change the fact we die because of something God is doing, namely, forbidding access to something that would prevent death.

Tom: How can you blame our death on God? God is innocent. Satan is the author of sin and death.

MM: As such, death is not the direct result of sinning, which is based on the fact that sinners would live forever if they had regular access to the tree of life. It is not sin that kills them, but rather they die because God will not let them eat the fruit in their sinful state.

Tom: This is not correct. Sin changed man in all sorts of ways, including making him subject to death. Because of sin, man ages, becomes sick, and dies. The tree of life would have helped heal man's loss of vital force and his diseases, but it's reading way too much into things to think that man would never have died had he not been deprived of eating from the tree of life. It still would have been true that this corruptible could not have put on incorruptible.

You seem to be latching on the same arguments that many non-Adventists use regarding hell being eternal. "Forever" in Scripture means for as long as the thing in question takes place. The point isn't that man would have lived forever had he eaten of the tree of life as we commonly understand the term, as meaning as long as God shall live, but that his existence would have been prolonged. It's obvious that sin causes disease and death. Do you think if man had not sinned, and God prevented him from eating of the tree of life that he would have become diseased?

MM; The same thing can be said of the glory of God. As you say, unsaved sinners will die the second death the moment they are exposed to the unshielded glory of God. However, according to your view, God can regulate His glory in such a way that sinners are not immediately destroyed in His presence.

Tom: This is clear. God is present everywhere, yet men live. So God is evidently able to do this.

MM: Given the fact it is possible for sinners to stand in the presence of God’s glory, without being instantly consumed, it is clear to me, then, that people will die the second death because of something God does. As such, death is not result of sin.

Tom: Death is the inevitable result of sin:

quote:

---

This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown. 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. He is "alienated from the life of God." Christ says, "All they that hate Me love death." Eph. 4:18; Prov. 8:36. God gives them existence for a time that they may develop their character and reveal their principles. This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice. 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. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them. {DA 764.1}

At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand this. Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin. A doubt of God's goodness would have remained in their minds as evil seed, to produce its deadly fruit of sin and woe. {DA 764.2}

---

One of the reasons God gave His Son to die was to show that it was *not* He, but sin, which causes death.

quote:

---

13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. (James 1:13-15)

---

It is sin, not God, which causes death. The death of Christ on the cross proves this.

MM: Yes, the reason why God allows His glory to kill sinners is due to their sinfulness, but it isn't their sins that kill them.

Tom: Sure it is, because the same thing which God does to the righteous kills the wicked. Look:

quote:

---

The light of the glory of God, which imparts life to the righteous, will slay the wicked. {DA 107.4}

---

See? The glory of God imparts life to the righteous. God is doing the same thing (revealing His goodness, His character) to both. To the righteous this imparts life, but to the wicked it causes death.

What's the difference? Is it God? No. It's with the wicked, who because of sin have formed characters which cannot abide in God's presence. God doesn't change His presence. He's just Himself, the same kind, gracious, good, wonderful God He revealed Himself to be while living among us here on earth.

MM: Thus, whether we are talking about the first or second death - people die because of something God chooses to do. Death is the direct result of a choice God makes and, of course, the reason why God chooses to behave in such a way that people die is because of their sinfulness, because they rejected the salvation provided through the shed blood of Jesus, because heaven would be to them a place of torture.

Tom: God chooses to act good, because that's His nature. His goodness imparts life to the righteous but results in the death of the wicked.

quote:

---

To sin, wherever found, "our God is a consuming fire." Heb. 12:29. In all who submit to His power the Spirit of God will consume sin. But if men cling to sin, they become identified with it. Then the glory of God, which destroys sin, must destroy them. (DA 107)

---

The glory of God destroys sin. It's hardly God's doing that men cling to sin. He has done everything possible to persuade man to give it up.

Sorry, MM but your "Tree of Life Theory" makes our Life-giver and Saviour a tree.

Hey! A new offshoot! Tree Adventists!

I wooden like to be one

Tom, death is the indirect result of sin. The direct cause is not being able to eat the fruit of life. Even in the New Earth, if we do not regularly eat the fruit of life, we would gradually die in the same way Adam did. Sin has nothing to do with why we die. We die because God will not let us eat of the tree of life. You can reword Genesis 3:22-24 if you want to, but it says what it says. true, people probably would have killed each other off, but that would have been an indirect cause of sin.

Yes, it is because we are sinful that God will not let us eat the fruit of life, which is why we die the first death. In fact, even people like Peter, Paul, and John, who had ceased sinning, eventually died. Why? Because they were unable to eat from the tree of life. No, the tree of life isn’t our Saviour, not any more than it was for Adam before he sinned. Sorry, Phil, no new cult to join. Ha! All the dreadful diseases that kill people are the result of Satan tampering with the forces of nature - not the direct result of sin. Sin isn't some kind of agent or substance that causes virus and plague.

Genesis
3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

3SM 391
Already sprinklings from the vials of God's wrath have been let fall upon land and sea, affecting the elements of the air. The causes of these unusual conditions are being searched for, but in vain. {3SM 391.2}

God has not restrained the powers of darkness from carrying forward their deadly work of vitiating the air, one of the sources of life and nutrition, with a deadly miasma. Not only is vegetable life affected, but man suffers from pestilence. . . . {3SM 391.3}

Physical and Religious World to Be Shaken.-- These things are the result of drops from the vials of God's wrath being sprinkled on the earth, and are but faint representations of what will be in the near future. {3SM 391.4}

We don't die because we don't eat of a tree. We die because of sin. Even if the tree didn't exist, we would still die. Our death is not dependent on the tree.

Here's an analogy. Let's say you get bit by a venemous snake. An antidote exists, but you don't have access to it, so you die. Why did you die? Because you didn't have access to the antidote, or because you got bit? Even if the antidote did not exist, you would still die, and the cause of your death in any case would have been the same.

Similarly the existence or non-existence of the tree of life does not impact the cause of our death.

Your analogy assumes sin is a poisonous substance. But it isn't. Sin is the transgression of God's law - not a person, place, or thing. If death is the result of sin why, then, did God place an angel to prevent sinners from accessing the tree? Why was He concerned that sinners would live forever if they had regular access to the tree?

Because God didn't wish to prolong their existence, similarly to how He allowed men to eat of meat after the fall to cut man's lifespan. But this has nothing to do with the fact that sin causes death.

The point of the analogy is that man dies because of sin, not because of not eating of the tree of life. Even if there was no tree, man would still die. The tree does not cause man's death, sin does.

Tom, you seem convinced that eating the fruit of life has nothing do with living forever. Do you also believe that in the New Earth it will not be necessary to eat the fruit of life in order to avoid dying gradually?

Also, would you please comment on the following observation:

quote:

---

All the dreadful diseases that kill people are the result of Satan tampering with the forces of nature - not the direct result of sin. Sin isn't some kind of agent or substance that causes virus and plague.

---

MM: Tom, you seem convinced that eating the fruit of life has nothing do with living forever. Do you also believe that in the New Earth it will not be necessary to eat the fruit of life in order to avoid dying gradually?

Tom: Living forever has to do with knowing God, because knowing God is eternal life, as Jesus states in John 17:3. God uses the tree of life as a means to an end, but it is God who gives us life, not a tree.

How could one die without sin? We know that sin causes death, and there will be no sin in the hereafter, hence no death. Now sin is in its essence disobedience to God, so if it is God's will that we eat of the tree of life, then we will do so happily.

MM: Also, would you please comment on the following observation:

"All the dreadful diseases that kill people are the result of Satan tampering with the forces of nature - not the direct result of sin. Sin isn't some kind of agent or substance that causes virus and plague."

I agree with this to a large extent. I think it's a good observation. However, I would add that sin involves styfling ones convictions, acting against one's conscience, and rebelling against the goodness of God which leads to repentance. I think these actions also contribute to disease.

So then, do you believe eating the fruit of life in the New Earth is optional? that it isn't necessary in order to maintain the life God gives us? that it doesn't contain elements we need regularly to live eternally?

Yes, sin is anything we think, say, or do that violates the law of God, the word of God, or the example of the Son of God. It is not one of the elements on the Periodic Table.