The Wrath of God
Posted By: Daryl
The Wrath of God - 11/17/04 12:05 AM
As a result of the discussion in another topic I have created this topic on The Wrath of God where we can ask and answer such questions as:
1 - What is the wrath of God?
2 - Does God kill, or does man, etc. kill himself?
Let the discussion from that other topic begin and continue here.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/17/04 02:04 AM
quote:
Then the end will come. God will vindicate His law and deliver His people. Satan and all who have joined him in rebellion will be cut off. Sin and sinners will perish, root and branch, (Mal. 4:1),--Satan the root, and his followers the branches. The word will be fulfilled to the prince of evil, "Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God; . . . I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. . . . Thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more." Then "the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be;" "they shall be as though they had not been." Ezek. 28:6-19; Ps. 37:10; Obadiah 16.
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 763, 764)
The second paragraph points out:
1) The judgement is not an arbitrary act of power of God.
2) The wicked reap that which they have sown.
3) God is the fountain of life. The wicked die because they choose to separate themselves from God.
4) The wicked die because they are out of so harmony with God that God's presence to them is a consuming fire.
5) The glory of God destroys the wicked.
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/17/04 02:18 AM
You write "arbitary act of power of God". Why is such an act of power nessessarily arbitary in your oppinion? God knows what He is doing. His actions are just even if we cannot see how it works out with our limmited view. There is noting arbitary about Gods actions, even if they mean the purposefull death of sinners.
/Thomas
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/17/04 09:03 AM
I didn't write "arbitrary". Ellen White did. I just quoted her.
Satan would have us to believe that his invention of sin is innocuous. He argued from the beginning that he and his angels should be free from the law. He argued that he had a better way of government than God.
The Spirit of Prophesy tells us that compelling force is found only under Satan's government. God's government is moral, and the principles of His government are love and truth.
Satan's government, in addition to running under the principle of compelling force, runs under the principle of deception. Satan has ever endeavored to do evil and then blame God for it. He has always done that and will continue to. He presents all things as being God's fault.
For example, he blames God for the inception of sin. Calvanism embodies this principle. God supposedly ordained that sin should occur so that He could manifest His glory. There are even Adventists that hold to some variation of this idea.
Satan presents the cross as if it were a pagan sacrifice where the wrath of God is appeased. The idea is that God is so angry at sin, He must kill something, so He kills Christ so He doesn't have to kill us.
Similarly the final destruction of the wicked he presents as God's fault, rather than the consequence of his own doing. Satan invented sin, and sin causes ruin. God has consistently worked to bring sin to an end as quickly as possible. The cross shows that all of Satan's accusations are false. God is not a God of arbitrary love, but of self-sacrificing love. The cross shows sin in its true light.
I'm kind of rambling on here, so I'll try to bring this to an end. Here's a quote from the Great Controversy:
quote:
The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown. Says the prophet: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;" "for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity." Hosea 13:9; 14:1. Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work.
The question is, is God's wrath arbitrary? Is there anything wrong with sin other than God doesn't want us to do it? Is sin really bad, in and of itself, or is it just bad because God says so?
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/17/04 10:10 PM
Sin is what separates us from God, and the wages of sinis death, and Jesus came and redeemed us from the wages of sin.
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/18/04 12:18 PM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 08:23 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Daryl
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/18/04 04:51 PM
I think EGW also referred to God's act as God's strange act as it is the last thing God ever wanted to do.
God uses the Lake of Fire for two reasons, to kill, destroy, consume all the wicked leaving neither root nor branch; eternal death from which there is no further resurrection and to cleanse the earth from all taints of sin followed by a recreation of the earth to what it was when He created it the first time.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/18/04 11:34 PM
I haven't seen any of these points being addressed:
1) The judgement is not an arbitrary act of power of God.
2) The wicked reap that which they have sown.
3) God is the fountain of life. The wicked die because they choose to separate themselves from God.
4) The wicked die because they are out of so harmony with God that God's presence to them is a consuming fire.
5) The glory of God destroys the wicked.
Whatever theory one wants to come up with regarding the destruction of the wicked must harmonize with these statements.
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 12:16 AM
Here is God's strange act (destruction of the wicked):
quote:
Isaiah 28:20-22 KJV
20 For the bed is shorter than that a man can stretch himself on it: and the covering narrower than that he can wrap himself in it.
21 For the LORD shall rise up as in mount Perazim, he shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that he may do his work, his strange work; and bring to pass his act, his strange act.
22 Now therefore be ye not mockers, lest your bands be made strong: for I have heard from the Lord GOD of hosts a consumption, even determined upon the whole earth.
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 12:37 AM
God in mercy has prevent sin from having its rightful consequence, which is death. When God permits that to happen, all who have chosen to separate themselves from God, the fountain of life, will suffer the consequences of their choice. God will appear to them as a consuming fire, and the glory of God will destroy them.
This is God's strange act, and is, to my mind, in perfect harmony with the principles I have quoted from DA 764.
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 03:26 AM
The destruction of the wicked is all over the bible, from genesis to revelation. And on that day of judgement, everything that could be done to save everyone has already been done. There is nothing in the bible to indicate that God at that point shows secound thoughts, Jesus said that the angles will gather together that which is to be burned. It appears to be a very purposefull clensing of all that befouls the universe.
Am I wrong in any of this?
/Thomas
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 05:28 AM
I never understood the doctrine of making God to be cuddly and cute. He is the Soverign Almighty God, and he will come for His people, and destroy the wicked. He will not accidentally sort of burn them up. He is coming to judge, and to wipe out the unholy,filthy, and unrighteous.
God even says the following in His Word:
quote:
Ezekiel 18:32
32 For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 08:29 PM
These points need to be addressed:
1) The judgement is not an arbitrary act of power of God.
2) The wicked reap that which they have sown.
3) God is the fountain of life. The wicked die because they choose to separate themselves from God.
4) The wicked die because they are out of so harmony with God that God's presence to them is a consuming fire.
5) The glory of God destroys the wicked.
Yes, God will destroy the wicked, but He will do so in harmony with what He has revealed in these clear statements. I have suggested a way (see previous post) which I think is in harmony with the above. If someone has what they think is a better theory, I would be happy to see it.
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 08:40 PM
AH Ok I see now what you mean Tom. I do not mean that God will destroy the wicked because it is something He can;t wait to do. It is because The Hour of His judgment is come, and those that choose to serve a different master will find themselves either in the 2nd resurrection, or they will be destroyed at His coming. What do you think?
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 09:34 PM
Graham Maxwell pointed me to this article written in the 1940s by Lynn Harper Wood, who I believe does an excellent job in discribing this issue. I hope that you find it as big a blessing for this study as I have.
**************************************
SUFFERING THE GREAT REFINER
Who may abide the day of His coming? and who shall stand when He appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fuller's soap: and He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness. Malachi 3:2,3
While this text has primary reference to Christ's first advent, as shown in verse 1, it also refers to the time just before His second coming. At that time there will be just two kinds of material -- that which can be refined by fire and that which will be destroyed by it. As Paul says, "Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver precious stones, wood hay, stubble; every man's work shall be manifest; for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of whit sort it is." 1 Cor 3: 11-13. That this was not a new idea to Paul in shown by Isaiah's statement, "Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burning?" Isa. 33:14. Now wood, hay or stubble will be consumed in a moment, but precious stones and metals are only purified by the fire.
How can one who has built of the wrong material have that material transmuted into precious metal? No one ever transmuted wood into gold, but by the power of re-creation Christ can and will make a sinner more precious than the "golden wedge of Ophir" ! (Isa 13:12.) If a life is nothing but combustible material camouflaged, this fire will reveal it. Therefore, in mercy God has sent us trial and suffering beforehand that we might learn to hate sin. Now is the day of re-creation. There will come a day, very soon, when it will be everlastingly too late. Will you not open your heart to Him as never before?-- Lynn H. Wood, One-time Jasrow Fellow of the American School of Oriental Research, Jerusalem: Mysteries Unveiled copyright 1944 review and Herald Publishing Association, Voice of Prophecy edition, pg. 283-284.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 09:40 PM
Thanks Kevin. Very nice.
Isaiah answers his own question in the Isa. 33:14 quote about who can dwell with the everlasting burnings. He says the wicked can.
An important point for us to understand, I think, is that God does not change. He is who He always has been. What changes is that God will no longer continue the probationary period in which we now live, which is what prevents the present destruction of the wicked. That is, it is only because God is actively taking steps to preserve the wicked that they are not presently destroyed. His "strange work" is to discontinue their probation.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 10:01 PM
I'm sorry for this long post, but this is a very important topic to me, and colors my view of the cross, redemption, 1844, the Sabbath the writings of Mrs. White, etc.
First of all, yes, the Bible teaches that we have a heaven to gain and a hell to shun. And yes, despite all our tap-dancing over the text, the Bible does teach an eternal burning hell.
But in the Old Testament, it says that God is the fire. Fire symbolizes God's love that either changes our lives, or destroys us if we refuse it's power. Deuteronomy 4:24 and 9:3 says that God is a consuming fire. Isaiah 33 says that the righteous will live forever in the eternal fire while the lost are not able to live in the eternal fire. Isaiah 10 says "...under his glory a burning shall be kindled
Like the burning of fire.
The light of Israel will become a fire!
And his Holy One a flame!
And it will burn and devour
His thorns and briers in one day"
Although there are exceptions, for the most part in the Old Testament God Judgment over and over again is allowing the natural results of people's choice.
In the ancient Baal myth, Baal dies, rises after 3 days and destroys his enemy through power and force. The Bible writers copied from writings around them including the Baal myth. But what is interesting is when the Bible writers get to this part of the story, they stop copying. Yes, Yahweh, like Baal appears as a mighty warrior to lead out in war, but instead of actually having the battle as in the Baal myths, Yahweh's presence scares the enemy to death.
In his book, "James and the Children" Eli Siegel discusses the Henry James' book "The Turn of the Screw." It is an excellent book, but I have to admit I have not read it in about 20 years, so I hope I am fair to it in this reference here. Siegel argues that the death of the children at the end of the story was how they were battling an indecisiveness between being good or evil.
In John 3: 18-20 Jesus says that the lost are lost because they are afraid to come to the light for fear that they would be exposed. They are afraid that God is going to get them for their sins, so they pull back. Jesus continues by pointing out that for those who despite the fear, do come to the light, instead of finding a God who is going to expose their sins, they instead find that their lives change. Jesus' love is not some sticky sweet sentimentalism. It is a power that always encourages the best in us. It transforms us. But if someone does not want the best in them to be developed, they can feel quite uncomfortable in Jesus' presence. They see that he knows all about them. We see our sinfulness in response to his purity. The saved cast their crowns and sing "Worthy, worthy, worthy is the lamb who was slain and lives again" but the lost have a fear that God's grace is not sufficient for them and that therefore God is going to get them. The woman in John 4 roasted in hell fire as she found someone who knew all about her but offered her living water.
The Psalmist says about God's character "More to be desired are they then gold, yea then much fine gold, sweeter also then honey, and the honey comb."
Daniel, in describing Satan, says that he is not like "The one beloved of women" (an Old Testament name for Christ that we don't use too often). Another more common phrase seen as an Old Testament name for Jesus is "The Desire of All nations." The Angel announces Jesus' birth as news of great joy for "ALL PEOPLE" Notice, it did not say "The honest in heart" nor "the saved" but ALL PEOPLE!!! Ellen White titled her biography of Jesus "The Desire of Ages" (How many of us have ever meditated about this sentence? What was Mrs. White saying here?) Our deepest desire is to be like and with Jesus.
When Jesus cleaned the temple, divinity flashed through humanity and people ran in two different directions. The money changers ran away from him, and children and the poor ran TOWARDS him. What was it about Jesus' anger that would make children run to him when he was angry? How many children want to run to an angry man with a whip? Should not the children have run away from him like the money changers? But the children did not fear the whip, because it was held by Jesus!!!
In Revelation John has the wicked running to the rocks saying fall on us and hide us from the wrath of the lamb. John is being ironic in his statement. How scary is a lamb? Do you expect to pick up the New York Times tomorrow and read the headlines "Lamb escapes from Central Park Zoo: Terrorizes City" John says that the sinners have no more need to be afraid of Jesus than they need to be afraid of a lamb. Yet it becomes their worst terror.
Ellen White builds on John's message. She has us seeing Jesus in all his majesty and power and out of terror we ask "Who shall be able to stand?" and the angels stop their singing and a moment of horrible silence. Then Jesus says "My grace is sufficient for you" at these words we find two results. The saved think "Of course his grace is sufficient for us!" and sing out "This is my God, we have waited for him and he will save us" and it will be a moment of joy! But others believe that Jesus is lying, that his grace is not sufficient for them, and so they go running to the rocks to fall on them and hide them from the wrath of the lamb.
We find similar ideas in the writings of William Tyndale and C. S. Lewis, especially in "The Magician's Nephew." In one passage of this great book Uncle Albert is miserable. Aslan is asked to say something comforting to Uncle Albert, but Aslan sadly replies that he can't because no matter what he said, Uncle Albert would only hear a ferocious lion roaring. In "The Last Battle" as the characters enter into a stable some found it to be a beautiful place with wonderful food, but the dwarfs only saw a smelly stable with only straw to eat.
Mrs. White has other statements also. Some directly; such as "The glory of Him who is love will consume the wicked" and another where she describes that while the presence of God being an ark of safety to the believers, it is a consuming fire to the lost. As well as indirect statements, such as how she had both Peter and Judas seeing the look of Jesus face, and how that look lead one to repentance and the other to suicide. She has numerous statements where she focuses on one acts with two results. A master chapter in Mrs. White's theology is the chapter "It is Finished" in the Desire of Ages.
Go through the Bible concordances and indexes to the writings of Ellen White and look up the fire and consuming fire quotes.
I believe that Mrs. White had made a oneness out of Calvinism and Arminianism. She has Calvin's irresistible grace, but also freedom of choice. Grace is so irresistible that you can't exist if you don't surrender to it.
The traditional view of hell has the lost facing the judgment standing nervously and being told that they can either go into heaven, where they breath a sigh of releaf. Others are told that they have to go to hell where they are sent kicking and screaming saying "No, no, no!" and Jesus saying "You would not say that you accepted me in life, it's too late for you to say you're willing to accept me now, I don't care how much you beg forgiveness and ask me into your life now."
What the Bible and Mrs. White actually teach about what happens at the end is simply God shows up in person, in all God's beauty. We are all drawn to this beauty. For those of us who have responded to the pleadings of the Holy Spirit in life here, we will continue to yield, and find being with God to be heaven. Who cares about the golden streets, just to be with Jesus, our loved ones, and so many notables from history.
But those who have made a habit of rejecting the pleadings and drawing of the Holy Spirit, will continue to resist. They see Jesus in full beauty and want to come, but they won't. They desire Jesus, but refuse to give up their selfishness. They see how sinful they are, and are afraid that God is going to get them for their sins.
These are people who either want to be saved by their own works, or else saved in their present sins, they don't want to be saved by Jesus' love. They thus surround the city trying to conquer it by force, trying to get heaven on their own terms, but realize it is useless. They fully see the issues of the Great Controversy and the role they played. They see that they are indeed wrong and become atoned in the sense that they finally understand that God is indeed right, but they continue to refuse to allow themselves to submit to God's authority. In contrast to the beauty of Jesus and in the panoramic overview they are shown their sinfulness from God’s perspective and seeing the true ugliness of sin compared to the beauty of Jesus they loath their sinfulness and no longer want to live that way, but refuse to come for healing and forgiveness, and would rather die than allow Jesus to heal them.
And they continue to struggle with their longing to just fall on their knees and accept Christ, and their lifelong fighting against this desire. They want to, but they won’t. Jesus is their deepest desire, but they are afraid of him. They are attracted to the Desire of Ages, but they have destroyed their capacity to choose, and are slaves to their feelings of fear.
This struggle becomes intense. Finally they try to compromise, they go on their knees and confess that Jesus is right and that Jesus is Lord, but they refuse to go any farther. And this conflict between wanting to accept Christ, and their developing a character of refusing that desire finally just quite literally tears them apart.
Those who have not fought the pleadings of the Holy Spirit as hard as others are consumed quickly. Others, who have been actively fighting and closing their minds and hardening their hearts will characteristically keep trying to justify themselves, and it will be longer for them to go through this struggle. Thus some burn longer than others. Satan, who has resisted Grace the most, who had been able to stand in the presence of God before will deal with this situation the longest, but finally he too will be destroyed by being split between his desire to ask forgiveness, yet his continued refusal to.
As Mrs. White says "The Glory of Him that is Love will consume the wicked."
Hell is not a place, but a response to a person. God does one act. God shows up in person. No more veiling and only letting Moses see his back, but we see God face to face. The glory that shown from the face of Moses so that he needed to wear a vale will be so much more intense when every human sees God’s face. God is again fully visible in all beauty and awe. For some it becomes heaven and eternal life, for others it becomes hell and their destruction. When Jesus was on earth there were those incredibly attracted to him. We read in the gospels about those who were attracted but left when he did not fit their picture of what they wanted the Messiah to be like. Is Jesus the Messiah we are looking for or will we respond as others who long ago claimed to be looking for the Messiah?
Now some see this aspect of the Bible and Mrs. White and have construed it to God does not kill. They see half the truth, but are leaving out the other half of the truth. The supporters of the forensic view have the other half of the truth. The God does not kill camp has God too passive. The truth is a oneness of active and passive. It is the presence of God that is the consuming fire! The lake of fire is love, glory, character, grace and personal presence of Jesus. Now if God was not going to kill, he has 3 choices. One is simply to let the first death be it. Second, he could, as he is doing now, only reveal enough of God’s self to keep us alive and let us end up destroying ourselves. Or third, to keep us from destroying our selves he would have to put each sinner on their own planet, but kept alone to keep them from harming others. But then God would be no more than a divine warden. God's strange act is putting those who have rejected him in his presence. For thousands of years he has veiled himself from us. Even Moses was only able to only see the back of God. If it was some kind of imposed legal issue, Moses should have been able to see God's face instead of only God’s back. God still needed to work with Moses to heal him to a point where he could see God face to face.
So God just does his one act, treats everyone the same, and allow the two different results to happen, as he cries "Why or why will ye die?" "How can I give you up? How can I let you go?" "What more can I do?"
God does not treat Abraham any different from he does Judas. God does not treat Gabriel any different from he treats Satan. When theologians argue for the idea of Universalism, that everyone will be saved, it is half the truth. As far as God is concerned God treats us all the same. It is our attitude of wanting to be with God or to flee from the only source of life that makes the difference. So when God hears someone teaching Universalism, he wipes a tear from his eye saying "I wish, but there are people who won’t let me."
The people who are concerned about this view seem to worry that if that is they think that God is being soft on sin if he does not inflect pain. They do not realize the beauty of Jesus. He is our deepest desire. The horror of hell is loosing Jesus! Loosing Jesus is not God tucking the sinners into bed and kissing them "Good night" as they drift off into a sweet sleep. Hell is horrible, but it is an emotional hell. We see a little bit of the horrors of hell when we loose a loved one, or are ripped apart from loved ones by distance, or family problems, or a break up. The sinner, seeing Jesus in all his beauty, is so incredibly attracted to him, yet refuse to repent. They even try to get in by force, but they want to be saved either by their own works or in their present sins. They refuse to come to Jesus for salvation. They want to, but they won’t. Their heart is being worked on by irresistible grace, but they have developed an irreversible habit of resisting grace. It is the worst situation a person can experience.
Let's imagine a guy who hates doctors. He not only refuses to go to doctors, but publicly tells his disdain for them. Publicly humiliates the doctor. Tells how he never had gone to the doctor and never will. Then have this guy get an illness that if fatal if untreated, but he is absolutely too proud to break down and go to the doctor. He fears that the doctor would taunt him. He opposed doctors so much that it would be too humiliating for him to come, so he ends up dying. The emotional conflict someone like that could face would be incredible.
Now greatly multiply this and make it real and you have the situation of the lost. The conflict of wanting to be with Jesus yet refusing is so intense that for God to add anything to this would make as much of an impact as throwing a match on a ragging forest fire. Remember, when Jesus died on the cross the pain of being separated from his Father was so intense that he barely felt the pain of the cross. Mrs. White is making a message in that line that speaks volumes.
This also vindicates God's law, the law of self sacrificing love and that salvation is not based on works but only a righteousness by faith contact with the only source of life.
The traditional view of hell, where God does two sepperat things to you, has raised the questions about how to get God to do the good things to me? And Salvation ends up being based on how to get God to do the good thing to me and not the bad thing. This has lead to ideas such as: Maybe I can do good works and God will let me into heaven. Maybe I can pay for indulgences and let the leader of the church who holds the key to heaven to let me in. Maybe I can spend my life in the Mafia but perform the church rites where the leader of the church who holds the keys to heaven will let me in. Or a bit closer to us Protestants; I can just let Jesus' works be in place of my works and if I say the correct things about Jesus God would have to let me in. (Current critics of the Seventh-day Adventist church are critizising Sabbath keeping saying that if you keep the Sabbath you are doing some of your own works instead of trusting in Jesus' works, with the implication that you have to hide behind Jesus' works or else God's gona get you). They still end up being focused on works and finding a way for works to save them. Whether our works or looking for someone else's works, works are still works.
All these attempts at works falls when they see Jesus. The gates of heaven are open, but unless they allow the drawing power of the character of Jesus to draw them closer to him, they will pull away. And works of those who are saved are not the basis for salvation. The only basis is how we are responding to the love of Jesus. If I want to spend time with him on Sabbath, it does not my own works that God is going to see and judge as not good enough and therefore throw me out of heaven as I did not hide so well while trying to sneek into heaven behind Jesus. Jesus had an unbroken righteousness by faith relationship with the Father and the Holy Spirit, and gives us his relationship to connect us to the only source of life. This is the only way in.
All stand before God without excuse. They can not blame not having missionaries or good missionaries, as the Holy Spirit works with all. Mission work can help encourage some to start a walk with Jesus, and deepen the relationship of others, but all in all faiths and even non-faiths are making choices about what to do with the work of the Holy Spirit on the heart. People from all cultures and faiths will find themselves either running towards Jesus or running away from him.
Jesus wanted to be with the Father and the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit and the Father wanted to be with Jesus. They wanted to be together, but refused, not for the same reasons that the wicked refuse at the end of time, but they refused out of love for us. they knew that if they did not allow sin to separate them from each other, it would have eternally separated us from them and destroyed the whole universe.
Had Jesus given up bearing sin, Moses, Enoch and Elijah would not be called before a divine firing squad, but the entire universe would have given up it's righteousness by faith relationship with God and the entire universe would have been destroyed.
The cross shows us what sin would do to us if Jesus did not bear it in our place. The resurrection shows that if we want to be with God all the sins of the world cannot keep us apart!!!
As for the fire burning forever? How long will God's love last? Will God's love ever burn out? I have no problem with the eternal fire texts knowing that the Old Testament sees the fire as symbolic for God's love and beautiful character and personally being with him forever and ever! The Eternal Fire of Glory!
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 10:03 PM
Excellent posts Tom!
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/19/04 10:34 PM
Thanks for the long post Kevin. Lots of good stuff.
Here's a text you could add to your list:
With the merciful You will show Yourself merciful;
With a blameless man You will show Yourself blameless;
With the pure You will show Yourself pure;
And with the devious You will show Yourself shrewd. (Ps. 18:25, 26)
We see God through the filtering lens of our own character.
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/20/04 09:54 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 08:25 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/20/04 09:55 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 08:26 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/20/04 04:37 PM
Hi Doug: I think that you did not read my post very closely. I did not say that there was eternal life for the wicked. They are killed by the eternal fire of God's love. Eternal life are for those of us who choose to live forever in the fire of God's love, and since I believe that the Bible teaches that hell fire is God's love, God's Character, God's glory, when will that ever end?
Posted By: Stacie
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/22/04 03:41 AM
God doesn't kill--sin does.
Peace and Love,
Stacie
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/22/04 11:17 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 08:27 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/22/04 11:26 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 08:28 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/22/04 06:35 PM
Doug, God is the fire that burns eternally. That was Kevin H's point.
Posted By: D R
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/22/04 08:27 PM
From this thread the statements lead to a strange end:
God is Light:
God is Love:
God is Good:
God is Fire:
Interesting statement that "God is Fire".
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/22/04 09:13 PM
Fire not always destroys but sometimes purifies.
/Thomas
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/22/04 11:34 PM
Information on Lynn Wood, one of the proponents of a deeper understanding of what hell fire really is, this appeared in a magizine for Southern Adventist University.
KH
The establishment of the Lynn H. Wood Archaeological Museum by the School of Religion at Southern Adventist University continues the long tradition of emphasis in archaeological research by the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the Middle East. Over the last thirty years educational institutions of the church have been recognized for their excellence in archaeological research, excavation, and publication. One scholar remarks that sponsored excavations have been "a model of interdisciplinary research," while another states that they have "become one of the most sophisticated and truly interdisciplinary of all American archaeological excavations in the Middle East." There are many factors that have contributed to this interest in archaeology over the years, but perhaps one of the most significant is the legacy of several key individuals whose vision captured the potential and vital contributions archaeology would have on the understanding of the Bible. The first of these key thinkers in the church was Lynn H. Wood.
LYNN H. WOOD (1887-1976)
The service of Lynn Harper Wood to the church spanned three continents. He became president of Southern Junior College (now Southern Adventist University) from 1919-1922 and later became president of what is today Avondale College in Australia, Stanborough Park College, England and Andrews University, in Michigan. In 1934 he took a leave from his administrative responsibilities at Emmanuel Missionary College (later Andrews University) and began his graduate studies at the University of Chicago. After completing an M.A. he spent seven months as the Jastrow Fellow at the American School of Oriental Research in Jerusalem. During this time he traveled extensively throughout the Near East and excavating with Nelson Glueck at Tell el-Kheleifeh and Khirbet et-Tannur. In 1937 Wood became the first scholar in the Seventh-day Adventist Church with a Ph.D. in archaeology. Subsequent to the completion of his studies he became a professor at the SDA Theological Seminary in Potomac, Washington and established the Archaeology and History of Antiquity Department.
Over the years Wood's contribution to the historical background and chronology of Biblical events were strongly felt throughout the church. His articles regularly appeared in Signs of the Times and The Review and Herald. In April, 1949 he inaugurated a column in the The Review and Herald dedicated to "Archaeology and the Bible." Entries for this column appeared almost every month. Wood also contributed a number of articles to professional journals outside of the denomination. The contribution of this pioneer was recognized in an important article published in the prestigious Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, by Professor William F. Albright, the brilliant and dominant John Hopkins scholar, who stated that the close of the Twelfth Dynasty in Egypt was "now apparently fixed by Wood." His collaboration with Professor Siegfried Horn, his student and successor, in the book entitled The Chronology of Ezra 7, established the date of 457 B.C. as the 7th year of Artexerxes. Upon his death in 1976, Dr. Wood's personal library of archaeological volumes was donated to the McKee Library of Southern Adventist University, the institution that he so much loved and devoted his energies to during his early years.
In his honor, the Lynn H. Wood Archaeological Museum was established in 1999 with a handful of artifacts donated by various faculty members of the university and a dream that someday it would grow to facilitate the development of a new archaeological emphasis in the School of Religion. A modest, illustrated, and annotated display was placed in the McKee Library on November 1.
Posted By: Stacie
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/23/04 01:51 AM
Hey Doug,
quote:
Originally posted by Doug Meister:
Stac, if sin destroys sinnes - why are there so few dead people walking around? Why does it take til the end of the 1000 years for these sinners to be ressurrected and then destroyed by fire? And Why fire?
Fact is the sinner (Satan) is not going to destroy themselves (himself). Some intelligent source MUST do the destroying. I say that source is God and the Bible backs me up on this. I just dont wanna argue this point. 
--Ðøug 
2004.11.22.0.25.50 PT
Every where you look you will see dead people, in the spiritual sense of the word of course. Sin destroys the mind of God's people everyday, in other words, the consequences of a rebellious heart pays it wage and that wage is death.
It is my belief that on the day that the unhealable come face to face with Dr. Love, there will be no doubt in any mind-earthly or heavenly-that their destruction is not at the hand of God but by their own.
The fire? I believe it is God's goodness. That same fire that consumes the "wicked" will be life imparting to God's friends.
I enjoyed your input and no need to fear arguments which by the way are very good. It allows us the oppurtunity to learn more and decide what it is we really believe in. We cannot know what we really trust in until we are challenged by opposition.
Peace and Love,
Stacie
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/23/04 07:08 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 08:20 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/23/04 07:21 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 08:21 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/23/04 06:50 PM
So how do you present the fact that when Jesus comes the wicked will be destroyed by His coming? Alot of people are not up to speed with the fact that we are caught in a war and it is The Great Controversy between Jesus and satan.
How do you share this with others to let them know of the Hope we have burining in our hearts?
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/23/04 09:01 PM
Excellent question Will. I am afraid that much of Popular Christianity has has a focus on "Me and My Personal Salvation" as their center, as opposed to Jesus being the center. I understand this view of hell to be a point were instead of asking "How can I get God to let ME into heaven" we can point out, don't worry about that, lets look at the beauty of Jesus, the issues of the great controversy that conferm that he really is this beautiful.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/24/04 02:55 AM
quote:
Tom,
}} God is the fire that burns eternally. {{
Yikes - thats a strange one - Jesus didnt look that way to anyone when here on earth even when He went up.
We say that God is a consuming fire, but that means that His character (glory) consumes sin. Its not a real fire as we know it. Course I never saw Him (in person, that is) so I dont know for sure.
Language is tricky. I wouldn't say that God is literally a consuming fire, but fire is a description of His character and His impact on sin. Isa. 33:14, 15 says:
"Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings? He that walketh righteously."
When Kevin H. was saying that the fire would burn forever, I believe what he was saying is that God is the fire that burns eternal, having in mind the description of Isa. 33:14, 15. (I'm hesitant to speak for another. Thankfully, he's here, so can correct me if I misspeak for him.)
The Spirit of Prophesy says that the glory of God will destroy the wicked. It is in this sense that God is a consuming fire.
Regarding Christ, it's true in general that Christ didn't look that way (like fire), but I will note a couple of exceptions. First of all, when He cleansed the temple, "divinity flashed through humanity" and the money changers ran away. The second time Christ cleansed the temple, they were determined it wouldn't happen again, but it did, and they couldn't run away fast enough. Evidently there was something about Him which made them very, very uncomfortable. And yet, immediately after this event, children were sitting on His lap.
When Christ shall come a second time, the wicked will call for the mountains to fall on them. They would rather have rocks fall on their head than to look into the eyes of He who loves them and redeemed them.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/24/04 03:18 AM
Precisely Tom! Also, we do find Jesus appearing as a fire to Moses. Moses after seeing God's glory had it shine from his face so that he needed a veil. In Deuteronomy and I believe Leviticus there is one text saying that God will destroy like a consuming fire, and another where God says that He IS a consuming fire.
While God's pressence is like a consuming fire to the lost, it is an ark of safty for the saved. Please read my longer post again, as well as the passage from Lynn Wood's Mysteries Unveiled.
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/24/04 09:54 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 08:22 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/26/04 12:11 AM
Inspiration says very clearly that God kills. Some examples:
"But for those who had done despite to the king, more than exclusion from his presence and his table is decreed. 'He sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city [Mt 22:7].'"
{COL 307.3}
"The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits."
{GC 614.2}
"In mercy to the world, God blotted out its wicked inhabitants in Noah's time. In mercy He destroyed the corrupt dwellers in Sodom. . . It is in mercy to the universe that God will finally destroy the rejecters of His grace."
{GC 543.3}
Many more could be cited.
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/26/04 12:37 AM
Thank You John!
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/26/04 12:43 AM
Yes indeed, John, of course.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/27/04 11:26 PM
And [Saul] enquired not of the LORD: therefore [God] slew him, and turned the kingdom unto David the son of Jesse.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 12:31 AM
The idea that we must interpret the passages where it says God killed or destroyed human beings in light of natural law or some other means requires us to ignore the most obvious meaning of scripture. If we cannot take God at His word, then we are in big trouble. "I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." Isa 45:7.
All throughout the Bible whenever the enemies of God were defeated or destroyed, the faithful always gave God the glory. They never once praised natural law or fate or bad luck. At the end of time, the holy angels praise God for destroying the unsaved in the plagues, and then again in the lake of fire. They do not praise natural law or fate or bad luck.
Why are we so afraid of giving God the glory for defeating sin and sinners? Why can't we be like the holy angels who are anxious to destroy sin and sinners in the lake of fire? Yes, they are more willing that everyone be saved, but for those who reject so great a salvation, they deserve to be punished and destroyed.
Whether God causes or permits death and destruction He is, nonetheless, ultimately responsible. Which is actually good news. I shudder to think that anyone or anything else, other than God, is in control. If it were up to natural law or sin or death or evil doers to eliminate sin and sinners in the lake of fire, well, we cannot be totally sure they will get it right, they are, after all, unholy and imperfect.
Whoever is ultimately responsibile for the death and destruction of sin and sinners in the lake of fire is the real hero in the great controversy. If God is not the real hero, then how can we be sure affliction shall not arise a second time? But if God is the real hero, and not natural law or anything or anyone else, then we can rest assured that sin will never rear its ugly head again.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 01:22 AM
Hi Mike, yes, you are right, but you seem to present this in what appears to be a critical tone as if this truth is not being presented, and that you were trying to correct it. Therefore I would like to invite you to re-read, maybe a bit slower than the last time, what has been written. The Natural and Supernatural work together, and yes it was indeed What God does.
The issue is whether God does two sepperat acts, the one being something nice to those who are saved, and something not so nice (such as the same type of fire that we get if we light a match that produces the same type of pain as if we were to put our hand on a hot stove)to the lost: Or does God do one act to both the saved and lost, but get two different results?
Either way, God is ACTIVE, God is not sitting around twiddling his thumbs, but the critics keep wanting to picture the latter as our view. That is nonsence.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 02:12 AM
Sorry about the negative overtones. I happen to know that not everybody agrees that God is actively involved in punsihing and destroying sin and sinners in the lake of fire. You asked if the same act produces different results among the saved and the lost. That depends on the conditions set forth by God. In the Flood, the conditions were to abide and hide in the Ark. Those who didn't comply with the conditions experienced radically different results.
In the resurrection the cause and effect results are also radically different. The conditions for being a part of the first resurrection are - believe on Jesus and behave like Jesus. The same applies to those who are alive when Jesus arrives in the clouds of glory. But in the second resurrection the results of the lake of fire apply only to sin and sinners.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 02:38 AM
I was feeling I came on too harsh in my earlier post so came back to soften it, but since you all read read it I'll leave it as it is and appologise if I came on too strong.
Thank you Mike, but could I still encourage you to read where I put a post by Lynn Wood (I later put a post about Lynn Wood, not that one, although it is good to know, but the one where I copied what he wrote) and my posts, I know that some are long, but please take the time to give them a good read.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 03:17 AM
Kevin, I'm sorry, but I cannot agree with your premise that the glory of God's character is the fire that destroys sin and sinners. It would require me to reject the obvious meaning of God's word in the Bible and the SOP. But I do appreciate your attempts to vindicate the character of God. Apparently there are people who fear God for all the wrong reasons.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 03:24 AM
I understand this view to BE THE MEANING in scripture and Spirit of Prophecy.
And I am not alone in reaching this conclusion. Responcible Adventists from different times in our church history, and different parts of the world, often without contact with others who held this view have come to these conclusions.
I know that we are not to look to degrees as a final word, but look at what a careful scholar Lynn Wood was, and although I have not seen just what doctrines are being talked about, friends and relatives of Ellen White, such as W. W. Prescott and I believe Willie White (although I don't remember for sure) befriended Wood and found "many points in agreement" (One ready source is Valentine's book "The Shaping of Adventism" a biography of W. W. Prescott). When the church leadership was debating whether to give up the 2300 days, it was Lynn Wood's scholarship that showed that 457 BC was indeed the year for the decree and the start of the 2300 days. He has good creditentials.
Also, Daniel Dudah, living in the Soviet Union cut off from the rest of the church, an Adventist getting permission from the government to go to a Luthean Seminary, and while there decided to compare what they were teaching with what Mrs. White taught, and he came to this view of hell. Johathan Gallager in England who had only been exposed to what the Evangelists teach, who studying Mrs. White came to this view and thought he was the first one to discover this, only later to learn that it had a strong history in our church.
That this view of hell is what the Bible and Mrs. White really believed was taugh in our colleges and even the Seminary since at least the 1920s (and while I have not seen proof yet, there are hints that it was taught even before the 1920s) until recent years. This is the view held by many of the contributers of the SDA Bible Commentary
Our ministeral students were told that what evangelists teach was only a begining view for those ignorant of Mrs. White and ignorant as to what the Bible taugh about hell, that it was a good first step, so they needed to know how to give the evangelistic sermon, but that it was only a first step towards the truth. I've talked to some older retired ministers who said that while they were convinced from college that this is the correct view of hell, that in Evangelistic meetings and Bible Studies, they got use to and therefore more comfortable with teaching the first step, but was not sure how to explain deeper from there.
Yes, we need to continue to study, just like in issues such as the ordination of women we need to be willing to study, to present our views, to listen to others views and other's cretiques of our views. But please remember that while I admit, it is not that clear from a superficial reading, that I have become convinced that this view is indeed THE view Mrs. White and the Bible teach. I've come upon many other responsible people who have reached the same conclusion. Therefore I do not see the view of hell I'm rejceting as "obvious". I am open to listen to arguments to show where I and the others are wrong in our conclusions, but don't think that we do not see this as Mrs. White's view, because we honestly do.
[ November 27, 2004, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: Kevin H ]
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 05:20 AM
I just want to come back and say that I do not mean to give an impression that this view has been taught universally in our colleges, because that I don't know. What I do know is that it has been an acceptable understanding of Mrs. White over decades, and I was taught this from different professors when I was in college, without anyone who (at least not publicly) dissagreed.
I first learned about this view in a joke about the college Bible department. I though it was obvious heresy. But after hearing that joke, I started to notice things in the Bible and Mrs. White, even before I was in a class that taught the topic, but by the time the professors got to it, I had read myself into it from Mrs. White and the Bible.
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 06:28 AM
Who destroys the sinners?
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 09:02 AM
Kevin, how do you explain the following passages:
EW 289, 290
My attention was again directed to the earth. The wicked had been destroyed, and their dead bodies were lying upon its surface. The wrath of God in the seven last plagues had been visited upon the inhabitants of the earth, causing them to gnaw their tongues from pain and to curse God. The false shepherds had been the signal objects of Jehovah's wrath. Their eyes had consumed away in their holes, and their tongues in their mouths, while they stood upon their feet. After the saints had been delivered by the voice of God, the wicked multitude turned their rage upon one another. The earth seemed to be deluged with blood, and dead bodies were from one end of it to the other. {EW 289.3}
EW 294, 295
Satan rushes into the midst of his followers and tries to stir up the multitude to action. But fire from God out of heaven is rained upon them, and the great men, and mighty men, the noble, the poor and miserable, are all consumed together. I saw that some were quickly destroyed, while others suffered longer. They were punished according to the deeds done in the body. Some were many days consuming, and just as long as there was a portion of them unconsumed, all the sense of suffering remained. Said the angel, "The worm of life shall not die; their fire shall not be quenched as long as there is the least particle for it to prey upon." {EW 294.1}
Satan and his angels suffered long. Satan bore not only the weight and punishment of his own sins, but also of the sins of the redeemed host, which had been placed upon him; and he must also suffer for the ruin of souls which he had caused. Then I saw that Satan and all the wicked host were consumed, and the justice of God was satisfied; and all the angelic host, and all the redeemed saints, with a loud voice said, "Amen!" {EW 294.2}
GC 614
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. There are forces now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere. {GC 614.2}
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/29/04 07:47 AM
Thank you for sharing these quotes Mike, but to be honest with you, I do not see your point, where am I supposed to have a problem with any of these quotes? They all fit what I have said. Apparently you don’t think they fit together. Can you tell me what I’m missing?
Now there are points that I give a little bit more explanation to, such as why some suffer longer than others, and since I’ve already explained these, is it fair to take up more computer space to repeat what I already said? Therefore I would again like to invite you to again (?) read both the post that I copied from the writings of Lynn Harper Wood from the 1940s (posted Nov. 19 at 14:34) and my longer essay (Nov 19 at 15:01) and my answering of questions thereafter.
Anyway, first I noticed that you mostly quoted from Early Writings. I take these quotes and see how Mrs. White herself expanded upon them through the years, and harmonize them with quotes such as “The glory of Him who is love will consume the wicked” Her description as to what should have happened to Lucifer at the beginning of the Great Controversy, WHY God is keeping Lucifer alive and What would have happened had God not kept Lucifer alive, and points she brings up in places such as “It is Finished” in the Desire of Ages, and “God made Manifest in Christ” and as you see her view developing you start to see how often she brings up the principle in many places in her writings. Everytime I go through Desire of Ages I keep finding my self surprised on how she presents this view. I also take these writings and include with them Biblical passages such as Deuteronomy 4:24 and 9:3 says that God is a consuming fire. Isaiah 33 says that the righteous will live forever in the eternal fire while the lost are not able to live in the eternal fire. Isaiah 10 says "...under his glory a burning shall be kindled
Like the burning of fire.
The light of Israel will become a fire!
And his Holy One a flame!
And it will burn and devour
His thorns and briers in one day"
God's love is the fire which is currently burning sin out of our lives now and purifying us as gold for his kingdom, or will destroy us with our sins at the end if we persist in holding to our sins and refuse to let it purify us now.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/28/04 08:40 PM
I've read what you posted here and other places regarding the fire, the light, the glory of God, etc., but I guess I'm having a hard time accepting it as truth. I listened to Graham Maxwell for years, and I appreciate the way he emphasizes the love of God, but when he started saying God does not destroy, etc., and after much study, I came to the conclusion that his theory is incomplete.
BTW, where in the Bible is fire actually fire?
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/29/04 12:29 AM
While Graham Maxwell does make comments that sounds by themselves like God does not distroy, he has the ballancing statements, which are too often ignored. I will admit that he has gotten into a set way of saying what he has to say, which is why I encourage to look for some of the different shaded of presentation to help get a fuller view.
I started out as a harsh critic of Graham Maxwell. Now the view I presented I had developed over the years 1977- about 80 or 81. About 1986 or 87 I met the "God does not kill view" and at first thought that it might be similar to my view, but very quickly saw that they had taken half the truth and were using it against the other half, and thus turning the beauty of Mrs. White's full message into a lie.
Although I knew about Uncle Arthur and that he had some sons in the Ministry, I did not really know much about them until going to Andrews and knowing C. Mervin. When I first learned about Graham Maxwell I heard that he was teaching the "God does not kill view" and the Moral Influence Theory.
I wrote to one of my major professors at the Seminary for more information on Graham Maxwell's teachings. My professor said that he was not familiar with his teachings at all, but there was one professor at the seminary who had looked into it and he was telling everyone else what Graham teaches and the problems with it. My professor said that all he knew about Graham Maxwell came from what this other professor taught.
I was sort of dissapointed. I never had class with this professor, but I read one of his books and heard him give a sermon. Now after reading his book I asked my professor if this other professor was a heritic. In the sermon there was one illustration that I really liked and had been planing to use, and since it was fairly easy to research it I went to read the story and found the topic but the story was very different. So niether of these gave me a positive impression of that professor. But anyway, I wrote him. He wrote me a short note back saying "Actually I am not at all familiar with Graham Maxwell himself, I've never heard him speak, never heard a tape and never read anything he wrote, but I know that he is a good friend of Jack Provonsha. Now I'm not really famaliar with Provonsha either except that I have read just enough of his book 'You Can Come Home Again' so see that it appears to be just a new twist on the Moral Influence Theory, thus I assume that Graham Maxwell is teaching the moral influence theory as well, and if you buy the book 'The Cross' by John Stott you will be able to know what Maxwell and Provonsha are teaching and what is wrong with it."
I mentioned about my earlier contact with the God does not kill view, I was not familiar with the Moral Influence Theory, so I looked into it, and saw that it did not have the substitutionary sacrificial aspects, and it tended to, as I put it, turn the cross into a coach which is encouraging you to do good works so that God can let you into heaven, insead of us being totally dependent on Jesus and his death to get into heaven.
I use to denounce Graham Maxwell in sermons because of these two points. But I would run into people who denied that Graham Maxwell taught either of these points. That frustrated me so when I moved to California I decided to get it from the horses mouth. I'd sit in his class and spent hours asking him questions after class. While driving I'd listen to his tapes. Sometimes he would say something where I'd say "AH-HA!! Here it is!!!" but I could not use my magic quote too long because he's later say something that would ballance out those statements, and my body would hunch over in dissappointment. And too often I'd be screaming at my tape recorder saying "What are you saying that for? You don't believe that!"
I mentioned the Seminary professor who was critical of what Graham Maxwell is teaching and how when I wrote asking him for information, he flatly told me he was completely unfamiliar with Graham Maxwell himself. Dr. Maxwell told me how he once called that professor on the phone to try to clearify his views. The professor gave Graham a list of things he saw as heresy that Graham was teaching (all dealing with "God does not Kill" and "Moral Inluence") Graham said to him "But I don't teach any of those things" to which the professor replied "Oh yes you do" hung up the phone and refused any phonecalls or attempts by Graham Maxwell to talk to him.
Graham Maxwell also told me that although Jack Provonsha does not hold the Moral Influence Theory, his shading of the topic does include some points in common with the Moral Influence Theory which Maxwell is not comfortable with. Since they have similar theologies, the critics have made a mistake to believe that they are identical, and thus Graham has gotten blaimed for some of Provonsha's ideas that Graham himself is not comfortable with.
(Graham and Provonsha went to PUC together, but did not know each other too well. They graduated and went their sepperate ways. During this time they developed their theologies. When their paths crossed again they were surprised as to how similar their conclusions were, although as mentioned above they were not identical and some of Provonsha's ideas were a bit more Liberal than Graham was comfortable with.)
The last time I spoke to C. Mervin Maxwell he said to me "I keep telling my coligues at the seminary that they do not understand what my brother is saying and that they are misrepresenting his views, but they refuse to listen to me."
While Graham Maxwell was one those who developed the view on his own, there have been others before and after him all very independent from him. Mine, and the views of my professors were all developed very independent from Graham Maxwell. While I have come to love Graham Maxwell and have gone from a critic to a defender, all the different people who have studied this issue all have our own shades, and I want people to look into the different shades and not think that one size fits all. That if I hear a rumor about Graham Maxwell, then I know just what he and Kevin H and Lynn Wood and all the rest are thinking. One size fits all. We are not all one happy family with a great guru who's teachings we all reflect. Rather a loose (some closer than others, and some completely independent) association of people who here and there in different parts of the country and the world, using different methods of study, who over the years, both before and after Graham Maxwell have come to the conclusion that Mrs. White and the Bible teaches this view about hell and have seen Adventistism from this view. Graham Maxwell's version of this has become the most well known, but all of us are not as much interested in what Graham Maxwell is teaching, but what does the Bible and Mrs. White teach, and we have reached similar conclusions about the death of the wicked. Had I never heard of Graham Maxwell I'd still be teaching this.
For example, while Graham's theology accomidates the same great truths that we find in the "Forensic view" but since the Forensic view is based on the other view of hell, Graham does all he can to avoid the common language and sort of trys to slip the truths in here and there so to distance himself from the forensic view. I'm just the opposit, I have no problem using the language of truths that we hold in common with the Forensic view, and I look for other ways to express the differences.
So Mike, it is good that you are familiar with Graham Maxwell's version, but to help ballance things out please check out some of the other versions as well. Also an additional name I can add to the study is Dr. Heppenstall. He actually could not decide which view was right. Held both of them although he knew they were mutually exclusive, but he would teach both views, and thus he would also be a sorce in this study.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/29/04 07:42 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Lowe:
Kevin, I'm sorry, but I cannot agree with your premise that the glory of God's character is the fire that destroys sin and sinners. It would require me to reject the obvious meaning of God's word in the Bible and the SOP.
But's that just what you're doing! The Spirit of Prophesy says, "The glory of Him who is love will destroy them." (DA 764). This wasn't Kevin!
My second post has the fuller context from DA 764. I made the following points:
The second paragraph points out:
1) The judgement is not an arbitrary act of power of God.
2) The wicked reap that which they have sown.
3) God is the fountain of life. The wicked die because they choose to separate themselves from God.
4) The wicked die because they are out of so harmony with God that God's presence to them is a consuming fire.
5) The glory of God destroys the wicked.
Any theory of the descruction of the wicked needs to harmonize with these points.
Mike, Jesus Christ is the revelation of God. He said, "When you've seen me, you've seen the Father." The cross was not an exception, but reveals what God is actually like.
The Spirit of Prophesy spends a whole chapter explaining how the cross of Christ won the victory. She explains that compelling force is not to be found in God's government. (Pardon me for saying this, but your perspective strikes me as being exactly that -- compelling force). She explains that the death of the wicked is NOT an arbitrary act of power of God, but they destroy themselves by separating themselves from God, the fountain of life.
God is active in the destruction of the wicked. He actively turns them over to the results of the choices they have made. This is His wrath. This is His strange act.
Each of the following illustrates that God's wrath is His withdrawing Himself and His protection, His giving up those who have rejected Him to the results of their choices:
"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?
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." (Deut 31:17, 18)
"They come to fight with the Chaldeans, but it is to fill them with the dead bodies of men, whom I have slain in mine anger and in my fury, and for all whose wickedness I have hid my face from this city.
." (Jer. 33:5)
"For our fathers have trespassed, and done that which was evil in the eyes of the LORD our God, and have forsaken him, and have turned away their faces from the habitation of the LORD, and turned their backs.
Also they have shut up the doors of the porch, and put out the lamps, and have not burned incense nor offered burnt offerings in the holy place unto the God of Israel.
Wherefore the wrath of the LORD was upon Judah and Jerusalem, and he hath delivered them to trouble, to astonishment, and to hissing, as ye see with your eyes." (2 Chron 29: 6, 8)
"And they caused their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire, and used divination and enchantments, and sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger.
Therefore the LORD was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Judah only.
Also Judah kept not the commandments of the LORD their God, but walked in the statutes of Israel which they made.
And the LORD rejected all the seed of Israel, and afflicted them, and delivered them into the hand of spoilers, until he had cast them out of his sight." (2 King 17:17-20)
"Hide not thy face far from me; put not thy servant away in anger: thou hast been my help; leave me not, neither forsake me, O God of my salvation." (Ps. 27:9)
"How long, LORD? wilt thou hide thyself for ever? shall thy wrath burn like fire?" (Ps. 89:46)
"Hear me speedily, O LORD: my spirit faileth: hide not thy face from me, lest I be like unto them that go down into the pit." (Ps. 143:7)
"Though they bring up their children, yet will I bereave them, that there shall not be a man left: yea, woe also to them when I depart from them!" (Hosea 9:12)
"The LORD was as an enemy: he hath swallowed up Israel, he hath swallowed up all her palaces: he hath destroyed his strong holds, and hath increased in the daughter of Judah mourning and lamentation.
And he hath violently taken away his tabernacle, as if it were of a garden: he hath destroyed his places of the assembly: the LORD hath caused the solemn feasts and sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and hath despised in the indignation (wrath JB) of his anger the king and the priest.
The LORD hath cast off his altar, he hath abhorred his sanctuary, he hath given up into the hand of the enemy the walls of her palaces; they have made a noise in the house of the LORD, as in the day of a solemn feast." (Lam. 2:5-7)
The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown. Says the prophet: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;" "for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity." Hosea 13:9; 14:1. Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work. (GC 35)
I find it ironic that you would quote the verse which says, "I create evil." To me this is an obvious example of God using active voice in a case where we in our normal mode of speaking would use passive voice. That is, we would say that God permitted evil to come about. This proves the point I am trying to make, not yours, unless you think this verse is saying that God intended for evil to exist and actively worked towards that end.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/29/04 07:59 AM
I'm going to piggy back on what Kevin said regarding A.G. Maxwell. I started listening to his tapes only in the last year, but to my knowledge none of the views I have presented have come from him, and they are views I have held for many years. The strongest influence to my reaching the conclusions I have has been, I believe, Ellen G. White. In particular, The Desire of Ages and The Great Controversy.
The principle that Kevin shared from C. Mervyn Maxwell that none of his colleagues knew what A. Graham actually believed I have found to occur very often. While rejecting truth, people do not reject the actual truth, but a caricature of it they form in their own mind. This is why I object when I see the views I'm trying to present being misrepresented. It's OK to disagree with a different perspective, but one should understand that perspective before rejecting it, and a test that such a perspective is understood is the ability to present it in such a way that the one presenting the given perspective can say, "Yes, you are presenting my view correctly. That is what I believe."
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/29/04 08:47 AM
The idea that the punishment and destruction of sin and sinners is a passive-aggressive act of God just doesn't jive with the obvious reading of God's word in the Bible and the SOP. Does it matter if I choose to interpret the lake of fire literally? I'm not entirely sure if it does or not. It doesn't change my mind about the kingdom and character of God. Whether it is the light of His glory that kills sinners in a lake of fire, or His calling fire down from heaven that kills them - either way, unless I'm missing something really big here, God is directly responsible for eliminating sin and sinners in the lake of fire. It's just that reading the Bible and the SOP literally requires a whole lot less explaining.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/30/04 12:17 AM
Not at all Mike, you are not missing anything, except for thinking that we are...
Also, God is not Passive-Agressive.
Was God passive when Jesus was born? No I think he was very active.
Did Mary give birth to twins, one who's birth brought joy to the Magi and another who brought grief to Herod, or was it one child who's simple act of being born brought joy to some and horror to others?
Was God passive in the Resurection? Well... [I'm trying to think of a way of having God do two sepperat things here, as I mentioned the twins above, but it's not working, so I'll just stick to the facts] God was VERY active in the resurection, and that act brought joy to Mary and the disciples, but what did the resurection do to Pilate and the hight priests? Did God have to do two different acts to these two groups of people, or was it one act with two results? And again, how passive was God in the resurection? God will be just as active at the end. The actvity will be heaven and eternal life to some while that very same act will be hell and eternal death to others.
So you are on the right track. You just need to realize that we are on that same track.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/30/04 12:45 AM
Kevin, I'm pretty sure we are not on the same track. But thank you for trying to be a peace maker. I do not believe the lake of fire separates saints and sinners, or that their individual reactions determines their eternal reward. I believe God separated them in the first resurrection. Only sin and sinners are impacted in the lake of fire. Whether or not this fire is literal or merely the glory of God's countenance is probably not as important as the results itself. There is a problem, I believe, when we spiritualize the word of God when it was intended to be taken literally. But perhaps we should discuss that some other time and place.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/30/04 02:26 AM
I think an important question to consider is, what does our view of the destruction of the wicked tell us about God's character? Is sin something which God is trying to save us from because it will destroy us? Or is sin something for which God will punish us for if we don't do what He says? Or is there some third alternative?
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/30/04 04:32 AM
All of the above. The third alternative is a combination of the first two. What does this tell us about the kingdom and character of God? He is in control. He is merciful and just. He will not tolerate sin.
Job
36:11 If they obey and serve [him], they shall spend their days in prosperity, and their years in pleasures.
36:12 But if they obey not, they shall perish by the sword, and they shall die without knowledge.
Exodus
34:6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,
34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation].
listen to what the pioneers wrote:
"A Word to the Little Flock" by James and Ellen White and Joseph Bates.
Page 2
Sorry, I can't bring it over from my file...but it would be worth searching for. Too much to type.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/30/04 05:53 AM
Here are some links to articles Sister White wrote on the covenants:
The Covenants
Manuscript Releases Volume One, pages 104-122
http://www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/cgi-bin/egw2html?C=135899694&K=215426112910404548&M=PNOTE: click on "Next Paragraph" to read entire article.
The Two Covenants
RH October 17, 1907, paragraphs 1-12
http://www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/cgi-bin/egw2html?C=104946285&K=220032112910404972And here's a link to Word to the Little Flock (but it begins on page 11 goes thru page 20):
http://www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/cgi-bin/egw2html?C=69779466&K=220330112910406706
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 11/30/04 11:42 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 08:18 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Thanks Doug,
Didn't work. I originally scanned it into my Photo House then placed it in my "documents" page by page and can't get it from either source. I will have to take time to type it into the word processor, then i can use it. It is a good read on this subject. Thanks for the try. I am really one of the computer "dummies".
trying again from an online source....
The Seven Last Plagues.
"And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvelous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God." Rev. 15:1.
For more than one year, it has been my settled faith, that the seven last plagues were all in the future, and that they were all to be poured out before the first resurrection.
It may not be my duty to attempt to point out each plague separately, but only give some of my reasons for believing that they are yet to be poured out, prior to the second advent. By the light of the brightly shining lamp, (the bible) we can see the events of our past experience distinctly; while future events may not be seen in their order so clearly.
If it be true that the plagues are yet to be poured out upon the earth before the resurrection and change of the saints, has not the time fully come for us to see the light in relation to them, that we may better see, and feel the force of Christ's words? Watch ye, therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man. Luke 21:36.
From the last clause of Rev. 15:1, "for in them is filled up the wrath of God," it seems clear that all the wrath of God to be poured out on the living wicked, is contained in the plagues. The vials of wrath will certainly be poured out, in the day of the wrath of God, and of the Lamb.
Jesus is clearly represented in the bible, in his different characters, offices, and works. At the crucifixion he was the meek, slain lamb.
[2]
From the ascension, to the shutting of the door, Oct. 1844, Jesus stood with wide-spread arms of love, and mercy; ready to receive, and plead the cause of every sinner, who would come to God by him.
On the 10th day of the 7th month, 1844, he passed into the Holy of Holies, where he has since been a merciful "high priest over the house of God." But when his priestly work is finished there, he is to lay off his priestly attire, and put on his most kingly robes, to execute his judgment on the living wicked. Now where shall we look for the day of wrath, in which will be poured out the vials of wrath? Not to the crucifixion, nor while Jesus is fulfilling his Priesthood in the Heavenly Sanctuary. But, when he lays off his priestly attire, and puts on the "garments of vengeance" to "repay fury to his adversaries, recompence to his enemies;" then the day of his wrath will have fully come. As the "wrath of God" on the living wicked is "filled up" in the plagues, and as the day of wrath is future, it follows that the plagues are all future. I think the following is a prophesy which has been fulfilling since Oct. 1844.
"And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.
Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey; and the Lord saw it, and it ispleased him that there was no judgment.
"And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor." Isaiah 59:14, 15, 16.
I think that the next two verses, which speak of our Lord's putting on the "garments of vengeance for clothing," to "repay fury to his adversaries," point to the wrath of God in the seven last plagues. God has shown this day of wrath, in prophetic vision, to some of his servants by different symbols. Ezekiel saw it in the men with "slaughter-weapons," slaying "utterly, old and young." Eze. 9:5,6. John saw it in the "seven last plagues;" while Esdras saw it in the famine, pestilence, and the sword. The Bible contains many descriptions of this soon expected day of wrath.
"A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee" see Ps. 91:5-10.
"Howl ye; for the day of the Lord is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty. Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every man's heart shall melt;" see Isa. 13:6-11.
"And this shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem (the saints): Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongues shall consume away in their mouth." Zech. 14:12.
"Alas for the day! For the day of the Lord is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come."
"The seed is rotted under their clods, the garners are laid desolate, the barns are broken down, for the corn is withered." see Joel 1:15-18; Jer. 30:23,24; Dan. 12:1; Hab. 3:12,13; Zeph. 1:17,18; 2nd Esdras, 15:10-13. I am quite sure that our Savior referred to the same, when he spake of "distress of nations, with perplexity"; "Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth." Luke, 21:26,27. In the 36th verse we are exhorted to constant watchfulness and prayer, that we "may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man." at his appearing.
[3]
This makes it sure, that the trouble comes before the second advent; for the saints are to escape it, before they "stand before the Son of man." At the second appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, the living wicked, who are not swept off by the plagues, are to be destroyed by the "brightness of his coming." 2Thess. 2:8.
This is positive proof that the plagues come before, and not after the advent; for the wicked will not suffer by the plagues, after they are destroyed by the burning glory of his coming.
The plagues of Egypt, and the deliverance of ancient Israel from bondage, clearly shadow forth the seven last plagues, and the deliverance of the saints.
"I will bring them (the saints) with a mighty hand and a stretched-out arm, and smite Egypt with plagues AS BEFORE," etc. 2Esdras 15:11. "Zion shall be redeemed with judgment," etc. Isa 1:27, see Eze. 20:33-38. The plagues were poured out on Egypt just before, and at the deliverance of Israel; so we may expect the last plagues on the wicked, just before and at the deliverance of the saints.
HOORAY! IT WORKED.
Note: if questions arise from this quote,, it is covered in the apendex of this little pamphlet.....everyone should have and read this book, is my thoughts.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/01/04 08:18 AM
Considering the drastic nature and results of the seven last plagues, the wrath of God, what can be deduced concerning the far more drastic nature and results of the lake of fire? Compared to the lake of fire the plagues seem more like a spanking. And yet, even the wrath of God, in the lake of fire, is love. "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten." Rev 3:19. "All they that hate me love death." Prov 8:36. Here is a graphic description of the lake of fire:
Revelation
14:9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive [his] mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/01/04 09:42 AM
Mike, did you notice the post of November 28, 2004 02:29 PM? In it are many texts which show that the wrath of God is His withdrawl, causing those who reject God to suffer the consequences of their choice. From the Spirit of Prophesy we have this:
"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.
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
Why choose a symbolic text which makes God look bad over scores of other texts, explaing what God's wrath is, and a non-symbolic passage from the Spirit of Prophesy, which makes God look good?
Note from the DA 764 text:
1) The destruction of the wicked is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God.
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) All they that hate Christ love death.
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; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin.
I don't see how she could have written this any more clearly. If God had allowed Satan to reap the full result of sin (which is what? God destroying them by throwing a ball of fire at them from heaven?) the angels would not have understood that their destruction was due to sin. They would have thought that God was doing it.
In order to prevent this misunderstanding, God has prolonged things so that it could be seen that it was sin, and not God, that caused their destruction. This is why God did not immediately allow them to suffer the consequences of their sin.
So after all this, do we still not understand? After all these millenia, and the demonstration of Jesus Christ, who suffered the second death and showed to the world what it was (did God destroy Christ by throwing a ball of fire at Him from heaven?) do will still think that God is responsible for the death of the wicked?
Well I suppose if you think God is responsible for sin, it's not a large step to think He's responsible for death too.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/02/04 07:31 AM
Tom, I appreciate your attempts to represent God as He really is - a loving Father. I am more inclined to leave it at that, because to argue in favor of the wrath of God makes it seem as if I believe God is unloving. But the truth is I believe God is very loving, the ultimate epitome of love. So, I hesitate to defend the wrath of God, because I’m afraid of misrepresenting Him.
Yes, I am fully aware of the many places where Sister White says the glory of God’s countenance is what consumes the wicked when Jesus returns, and in the lake of fire at the end of time. I do not doubt this inspired insight. It is the truth. But unlike you, I do not believe her other insights regarding the seven last plagues and the fire that rains down upon the wicked are symbolic of God’s glory. It is obvious to me that both are true, that both play a part in the punishment and destruction of the wicked.
The law of sin and death, of life and death, of blessing and cursing, is no arbitrary law, nor is it a natural law. Whether we live or die, that is, whether we live eternally or die eternally, is not left to natural law. God is the author of eternal life and eternal death, since it is He who decides whether to resurrect us or not, whether to give us access to eat the fruit of the tree of life or not.
There is nothing natural about the second death because there is nothing natural about the second resurrection. Only God can destroy the wicked in hell. “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Mat 10:28.
Deuteronomy
30:15 See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil;
30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:
John
3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
Romans
8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
8:6 For to be carnally minded [is] death; but to be spiritually minded [is] life and peace.
2 Timothy
1:10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:
1 John
3:14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not [his] brother abideth in death.
5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/02/04 02:34 AM
I've never used the term "natural law" to refer to the second death. The law of sin and death is simply that the soul that sins shall die.
"The soul that sinneth, it shall die." (Ezek. 18:20).
God doesn't tell us, "Don't sin or I'll kill you." but "Don't sin or you'll die."
"But unlike you, I do not believe her other insights regarding the seven last plagues and the fire that rains down upon the wicked are symbolic of God’s glory. It is obvious to me that both are true, that both play a part in the punishment and destruction of the wicked."
If you take account what she wrote:
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.
I think it is clearly seen that it is not a case of "both" but one and the same process that is being described. "God's very presence is to them a consuming fire. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them." Isn't this enough? Or are they not dead enough if it's only His glory that kills them?
I've not seen anywhere where you have dealt with the issues raised by EGW in DA 764. She doesn't merely explain what happens, but why. It's all tied up with winning the Great Controversy, which cannot be accomplished by force, but by love and truth.
She explains that had God allowed them to suffer the consequenced of sin early on, those watching would not have understood. Did she mean be that that if God had killed them by burning them with fire from heaven the watching angels wouldn't have understood? Or that if He had allowed them to suffer the consequences of their sin, which is death, they wouldn't have understood.
Christ experienced the second death, but there was no fire from heaven sent to destroy Him. But there was the consuming fire of God in contact with sin: "My God, my God, Why hast thou forsaken Me?" "My heart melts like wax."
Sin cannot abide in the presence of God. There's no need for Him to do something other than simply be Himself in order to destroy sin. Sin is separation from God and apart from God noone can live.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/02/04 04:21 AM
Tom, it looks like we are gridlocked. Does anybody else watching this thread believe the lake of fire symbolizes the glory of God, the brightness of His countenance? Or, am I the only one who believes it is literal fire?
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/02/04 04:40 AM
Mike, there are indeed people on both sides, as well as people, such as Dr. Hepenstall, who could not decide and therefore taught both. The 27 Fundamendals are specifically writen to included both views, and Mark Finley's presentations are made where a pastor can go to either view with the ones studying.
Keep studying. It took me about 2 to 3 years since I first heard about the other interpetation to it changing from sounding like heresy to "maybe Mrs. White does teach this after all" to it finally making sence to me.
Just becareful not to think that we have God pictured as mearly passive in this situation.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/02/04 08:29 AM
I'd like to piggy back on a point Kevin made which is important. There are those who believe that what happens at the end is only natural law and that God is not in any way involved in the death of the wicked. They deny that it is the glory of God that destroys the wicked. They may destroy themselves with implements of mass destruction or some other way that doesn't involve God's involvement. This is not at all what we're saying.
I've also asked you quite a number of times to please explain how to reconcile your view with the principles Ellen White so clearly lays out in DA 764. To date your only answer has been that you believe the fire is literal. But you give no reasons why it should be literal based on principles, and have not considered the principles which have been laid out in DA 764.
I'd like to thank you Mike for continuing to dialog. It may seem that we are just going around in circles, but I can assure you that, at least speaking for myself, that this is not the case. I particularly like it when you try to make a well-reasoned case or ask thoughtful questions. I find these very helpful in trying to understand issues which I believe are very important for us to think about and understand. To know God is life eternal.
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/02/04 08:45 AM
I'd say it's literal fire. Both the Bible and the SOP are exceedingly plain about this.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/02/04 08:52 AM
John, what are your thoughts about DA 764? (I won't requote it since I've already quoted it many times). How do you reconcile a literal fire with what was written there?
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/02/04 05:37 PM
John, if it is so "excedingly plain", then why has so many of our giants of the faith believed the other view, why does the Seventh-day Adventist Bible commentary try to reach a consensence between the two views but leaning towards the non-litteral fire view? Why is our 27 Fundamentals written to be inclusive of both views? Why did a brilliant mind such as Heppenstall find himself unable to choose between the two? While I have not found documents specifically dealing with the subject of Hell, we do find close friends and (I don't remember for sure, but I think Willie White as well) befriended and agreeded with "many of the ideas" of Lynn Wood.
You also tend to find this view among those who believe in Mrs. White as a prophet and support the Investigative Judgment. You don't find this say in Desmond Ford's theology or what has been called by some as "New Theology"
[ December 02, 2004, 12:27 PM: Message edited by: Kevin H ]
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/03/04 07:30 AM
My Bible tells me that there is going to be a lake of fire plain and simple. Its not a metaphor, or tricky wording to describe what it is not i.e. the Glory of God.
Seriously how is someone thrown into the Glory of God?
This is watering down what the Bible teaches. There is a verse that comes to mind but I need help in finding it. It refers to the lake of fire was created for the devil, and not for people. Anyways its something along those lines (mild case of advanced decrepitude:D ) . I will see if I can find it, but if anyone does please do post it.
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/03/04 07:46 AM
Tom, the fires of Sodom and Gomorrah are an example of the flames of the lake of fire. Yes, Sister White emphasizes that our God is a consuming fire. But I do not believe she contradicts herself or the plain wording in the Bible. Both are true.
2 Peter
2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned [them] with an overthrow, making [them] an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
Mark
9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
9:44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
9:45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
9:46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
9:47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
9:48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
9:49 For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.
Matthew
3:12 Whose fan [is] in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/03/04 12:34 AM
This is the seventh time on this thread alone that I'm asking that the principles which Ellen G. White has laid out so clearly in DA 764 be considered. No one taking the literal fire view has even attempted to deal with these, which may speak to the weakness of the view.
For your convenience I'm reposting the paragraphs and the principles laid out.
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.
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)
Note from the DA 764 text:
1) The destruction of the wicked is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God.
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) All they that hate Christ love death.
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; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/03/04 12:51 AM
Hi Will and Mike:
First of all, yes there are a lot of fire texts. But there are the other texts as well. What you tend to do is take the one group of texts at the expence of the others, and you try to picture us of taking the other texts at the expence of these.
Now, I admit it is a difficult topic. Once again even the brilliant Dr. Heppenstal was unable to decide between the two views and thus taught both of them and decided that he would have to wait until he got to heaven to find out which view was correct. We also have the other very careful scholars who know the Bible and Mrs. White much more than I do, who have come down on both sides of this issue. Lynn Wood was no lightweight when it came to knowlege of the scripture and Mrs. White. We also have others here and there coming to the conclusions. My profesors at AUC happened to come to it with out knowlege of others having reached that understanding. Daniel Dudah isolated away in the soviet union just studying the Bible and Mrs. White. Jonathan Gallager in England. Richard Nies in Southern California also found it on his own study of the Bible and Mrs. White. Graham Maxwell heard Lynn Wood give an impressive week of prayer when he was a student at PUC, but does not remember Lynn Wood touching the issue (although he said that Wood might have without him really noticing) and Graham came to his views out in a countryside cabin with only the Bible and Mrs. White's books. (Now his wife had Paul Heubeach as a teacher, and he was a student of Lynn Wood's and became convinced by Wood's teaching, and would teach it in his classes)
So once again we have going for this view the fact that it has been an acceptable interpetation through out Adventist history, and some of our giants came to this conclusion, and people have come to it independently in different parts of the world and at different times (1920s, 1940s, 1960s 1970s) it did not have one great teacher with a bunch of disciples.
And also, I know these arguments that you are bringing up here. In 1977 when I first heard of this view, all these texts came into my mind, and I was sure that the theology department of AUC was teaching heresy on this topic. But as time went by I kept seeing where Mrs. White would keep quoting these many fire texts, text after text, but then she'd summerize them with phrases such as "The Glory of Him that is Love will Consume the wicked" and how the holy city is like an ark on the sea of flames and while the glory of God is an ark of safty to the saved, it is a consuming fire to the lost, and comment after comment like this. And I also began noticing where she kept bringing about the same principles in other points.
It took from about the fall of 1977 until the fall of 1979 for me to slowly change from believing that it was heresy, and supporting the literal fire hell to finally seeing this other view as a possibility, although still not yet a believer, I was no longer a critic and was open to the possibility. Then it took from the fall of 1979 to the spring of 1981 before I became a believer in this view.
Since coming to this view, the issues in Adventistm have jelled, the law, the investigative judgment, the state of the dead, the issues of the great controversy have all been unified by this understanding of hell.
What Graham Maxwell does is simply compiled as many Biblical and Ellen White statements about hell as he can find, compiles them without commentary, and these with copies of Mrs. White's Article "God Made Manifest in Christ" simply hands them out and asks people to read them and see what conclusion they come to from their own reading of her words.
May I invite you to read "Why was Sin Permitted" in Patriarchs and Prophets, "It is Finished" in Desire of Ages, "Why was Sin Permitted" in Great Controversy, the books "Confrontation" and "The Story of Redemption" and the many articles Mrs. White wrote about the issues of the Great Controversy.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/03/04 08:11 AM
Tom, I have replied to your view several times. I believe both play a part.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/04/04 02:09 AM
I've not seen anywhere where you describe how the DA 764 principles play a part. Here they are:
1) The destruction of the wicked is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God.
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) All they that hate Christ love death.
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; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin.
How do they play a part?
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/04/04 04:58 AM
I'm seeing teachings here that are kooky to say the least. Regardless of what great theoplgian said, or conclusion they came to doesn't hold any weight with me at all.
I am seeing the the twisting of the Bible in order to fit with what Sister White says, and not what Sister White says to agree with the bible.Anyone else find that to be just a wee bit strange? I definitely do.
The lake of fire is made for the devil and his angels. According to what people are seriously theoriuzing here thatr the fire is God is telling me that God is for the devil. Crazy souniding isn't it especially when taken at face value.
My Bible teaches that sinners
will be destroyed, and to skew the direct question that requires a straight response is short of deceitful. Theories? Lets see what my Bible says:
quote:
Matthew 25:41
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:
Weird that this everlasting fire is prepared for the devil and his angels.
Lets see what Sister White says here:
quote:
I saw that Jesus would not leave the most holy place until every case was decided either for salvation or destruction, and that the wrath of God could not come until Jesus had finished His work in the most holy place, laid off His priestly attire, and clothed Himself with the garments of vengeance.
So definitely the destruciton of the wicked is not for the heck of it or to flex some muscle. The cases have been decided for either salvation or for destruction. The wicked are going to be destroyed not by some falling rocks, but by the very wrath of the Lamb:
quote:
16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?
Still doubting that God is coming and will detroy the wicked?
quote:
Matthew 13:41-43
41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Lets err on the side of God and not man's own understanding.
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/04/04 10:09 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 07:39 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/04/04 08:03 PM
Okay, Tom, let's go through your quote:
quote:
The glory of Him who is love will destroy them.
Yes, if we divorce this insight from the rest of the Bible and the SOP, it would seem that the brightness of God’s countenance, His glory, is what destroys the wicked in a lake of fire. But how does this insight vindicate God? How does it make Him less responsible for the death and destruction of the wicked? How is it less “arbitrary” than the view I have been advocating?
quote:
A doubt of God's goodness would have remained in their minds as evil seed, to produce its deadly fruit of sin and woe.
Why would it cause the loyal angels to doubt? Is it because they would wonder why God’s brightness killed them? How would they make the connection? How would they put two and two together? How would they figure out that it was God’s glory that killed the rebellious angels?
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/05/04 06:31 AM
quote:
Yes, if we divorce this insight from the rest of the Bible and the SOP, it would seem that the brightness of God’s countenance, His glory, is what destroys the wicked in a lake of fire.
This isn't an isolated statement of hers. She uses the same logic many times. It's all throughout the two books she wrote which most comprehensively treat the Great Controversy theme, The Desire of Ages and The Great Controversy. For example, in Chapter One of DA she wrote:
quote:
The earth was dark through misapprehension of God. That the gloomy shadows might be lightened, that the world might be brought back to God, Satan's deceptive power was to be broken. This could not be done by force. The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority. Only by love is love awakened. To know God is to love Him; His character must be manifested in contrast to the character of Satan. This work only one Being in all the universe could do. Only He who knew the height and depth of the love of God could make it known. Upon the world's dark night the Sun of Righteousness must rise, "with healing in His wings." Mal. 4:2.
This is what the Plan of Salvation is all about. Making known God's character. She says this time and time again.
Note that the exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government. Is this really true? If the exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government, does this mean that God doesn't use force often? Most of the time He uses the principles of love and truth, but when that doesn't work, He falls back on force?
She goes on to write, in the same chapter
quote:
The fall of our first parents, with all the woe that has resulted, [Satan] charges upon the Creator, leading men to look upon God as the author of sin, and suffering, and death. Jesus was to unveil this deception.
With how many has Satan been successful with these lies?
quote:
The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown. Says the prophet: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;" "for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity." Hosea 13:9; 14:1. Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work. (GC 35)
Over and over we are told how Satan seeks to vest God with his own attributes and lead others to view his work as God's work.
quote:
He sought to gain control of heavenly beings, to draw them away from their Creator, and to win their homage to himself. Therefore he misrepresented God, attributing to Him the desire for self-exaltation. With his own evil characteristics he sought to invest the loving Creator. Thus he deceived angels. Thus he deceived men. (DA 21, 22)
Over and over we see Satan seeking to blame God for what he has done and what he is. DA 764 is by no means "isolated."
The Scriptures present the same view. I presented 10 texts from the Scriptures regarding the wrath of God, none of which have been discussed. That destruction comes when God allows those who have rejected Him suffer the results of His consequences is shown again and again in Scripture. (See e.g. Deut. 31:17,18; Jer. 33:5; 2 Chron. 29:6,8; 2 Kings 17:17-20; Isa. 57:17; Rom. 1:18-32)
The full revelation of God's character is seen in Jesus Christ. He never hurt anyone who rejected Him. He certanly never killed anyone. His response was to forgive them. When His presence was not desired, He left.
quote:
But how does this insight vindicate God? How does it make Him less responsible for the death and destruction of the wicked? How is it less “arbitrary” than the view I have been advocating?
The truth vindicates God because it shows that God is not responsible for sin or death. That's Satan's accuasation.
quote:
If you cling to self, refusing to yield your will to God, you are choosing death. To sin, wherever found, God is a consuming fire. If you choose sin, and refuse to separate from it, the presence of God, which consumes sin, must consume you. (MB 62)
God and sin cannot co-exist. This is not because God "punishes" sin or does something special to it, but simply because the nature of sin is such that it cannot co-exist with God. If someone chooses death, God will honor that choice, but He won't kill anyone.
Because God loves us and knows the destruction sin will cause for those who choose to follow Satan, He hates sin and warns us of its consequences. He warns us that "the soul that sinneth, it shall die."
"Arbitrary" means not "by individual discretion rather than fixed by law." In my view, sin causes death. In your view, God is the author of death.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/05/04 08:06 AM
quote:
In my view, sin causes death. In your view, God is the author of death.
In my view, God uses fire to punish and destroy the wicked in a lake of fire. In your view, it is the unconcealed brightness of God that causes the wicked to die. According to both views, the reason why the wicked suffer the second death is because they refused to comply with the condition of salvation.
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/05/04 08:34 AM
I was reading the Bible today and came across a verse that tells us that God will destroy the wicked, and we are not talking about His Glory either.
There isn't any wiggle room for this even though I can definitely understand the desire to study and learn about things, but this is different than proposing ideas that are contrary to Scripture:
quote:
Isaiah 11:4
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.
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/06/04 09:13 AM
quote:
In my view, God uses fire to punish and destroy the wicked in a lake of fire. In your view, it is the unconcealed brightness of God that causes the wicked to die. According to both views, the reason why the wicked suffer the second death is because they refused to comply with the condition of salvation.
If a snake bites you, and I offer you anti-venom, and you refuse to take it and die, what killed you? Was it the snake venom, or your refusal to take the anti-venom?
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/06/04 06:55 PM
Will, I'm sorry but that text can go at least as well, if not better, with the view we are presenting. We agree that God does kill, our dissagreement is whether the killing is by God doing two sepperate things, one nice to the saved and a second not-so-nice, such as roast in a fire akin to what wouls happen if we lit a match, to the lost. Or if God's love is the fire which cleanses us from sin now and causes his pressence to be heaven, or if we develope a habbit of resisting his love now and allow sin to control us, that we will hold on to sin as it is killed by his pressence, so that his pressence becomes hell and death for us.
Or in otherwords, does God do two acts, or one act with two results.
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/06/04 08:01 PM
I dont know Kevin since the questions you ask seem tricky to say the least. I'm a simpleton who reads "God will slay the wicked", and understand it to mean just that. Everyone may have a differing opinion which is really a preference vs a conviction in the truth which does not change, and is not a preference. I believe that He will slay the wicked plain and simple.
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/06/04 08:29 PM
So do I, plain and simple.
The dissagreement is NOT over whether or not God slay's the wicked, but HOW. Is hell physical pain in literal fire, or is it the mental anquish such as Jesus went through in the garden and upon the cross of the pain that my sins caused him in them sepperating him from the Father, which was so great that he hardly noticed the physical pain.
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/06/04 08:34 PM
Ok well the lake of fire is a real place. A furnace if you will which has been prepared for the devil and his angels.
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Tom Wetmore
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/06/04 10:18 PM
Will,
The figurative expression "lake of fire" is used 4 time in Revelation (19:20, 20:10, 20:14 and 20:15). Those verses describe 6 things that will be destroyed in the "lake of fire" - The Beast, The False Prophet, The Devil, Death, Hell, and all whose names that are not in the Book of Life. (Notice that it is not reserved only for the devil and his angels - same as Matt. 25:41.) Limiting the interpretation of "lake of fire" to a literal pit of fire that literally burns things up seems more difficult with the inclusion of things that are intangible (meaning not made of material), such as death and hell. (Even consider the figurative incongruity of the actual words used - "body of water" + fire, which is somewhat of an oxymoron.)
The language of Revelation is primarily figurative and symbolic and should not be read as simply being a literal description of events, creatures and people from earth's history. Such symbolic language depicts a greater Truth that mere words do not adequately convey. Part of the symbolism of Revelation is found in the numbers and sets of specific numbers of things used by John. The number "4" represents "universal", as in an event of complete world-wide application. The number "6" is symbolic of sin, rebellion, confusion, conflict, chaos, sinful mankind, a falling short of the perfect number "7". So in these 4 verses we see a double symbol of destruction - fire + lake - combined with its object, all of the atributes and agents of sin. (Large bodies of water such as the sea or a lake had a sinister destructive quality to be feared. Recall the terror of the disciples in the storm on the lake.) Repeated mention of this "lake of fire" 4 times means it will be a universally destructive force that will impact the whole world. What will meet its end is identified and reinforced by a specific set of 6 figures of sinfulness. All that is sin will be destroyed by the greatest power known to mankind. It is the power of love. God is love. Love is His glory.
Tom
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/06/04 10:22 PM
I tihnk some clarification is in order here.
1. Lake of fire will be a real place i.e. gnashing of teeth.
2. Lake of fire is made for the devil and his angels, but not limited to them. refer to the book of Matthew for these references.
3. The earth will be purified by...Fire, and melt away all the elements refer to I believe it is 2Peter.
I do not see any metaphors, or symbolism when a person is thrown into the lake of fire.
Question: Who believes that the lake of fire is not for real.. A yes or no is all that is needed, any more will be filtered.
God Bless,
Will
[ December 06, 2004, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: Will ]
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 03:36 AM
Will, I agree with you that the lake of fire is real fire. But the wicked are not tossed in the lake of fire, rather God rains fire down upon them, and this fire becomes a lake of fire. The Bible consistently compares the lake of fire to the fire and brimstone God rained down upon Sodom and Gomorrha. There is no reason to think the lake of fire is anything other than real fire.
Genesis
19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
Mark
6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
Luke
17:29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed [them] all.
2 Peter
2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned [them] with an overthrow, making [them] an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
Jude
1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Revelation
14:9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive [his] mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.
NOTE: the third angel's message is referring to the lake of fire, not the second coming.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 03:43 AM
Tom Wetmore, you raise a very good point regarding the demise of hell and death in the lake of fire. I'm not so sure, however, we should decide the lake of fire is not real fire because hell (i.e., the grave) and death do not survive it. Of course, the reason hell and death not survive the lake of fire is the fact no one will ever die again. But the potential for hell and death will continue to exist, in theory, so long as the universe is populated by beings capable of sinning and dying. What do you think?
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 03:48 AM
Tom Ewall and Kevin, I don't expect you guys to agree with the way I used the texts posted above, but what do you guys make of the word "vengeance" in the following quote (also cited above)?
Jude
1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
BTW, Tom, your analogy of the snake bite does not fit in the context of sin and death. It does make senes the way God used it, in light of the "look and live" principle. According to your theory, if the wicked look, they aren't going to live, they're going to melt and die.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 04:12 AM
Hi Mike:
Many cities in the ancient world were re-built after distruction, but not Sodom and Gamorah, their distruction was eternal and in that way an example of the eternal vengence. We are told that when Lot choose to live there, it was due to it being so lush, but it's become a very barren desert where not even the water (the dead sea) is able to support life. Quite an example of eternal death. But they only suffered the first death from the fire.
You have been bringing up excellent posts in other lines about how of all the beings God created, the odds were great indeed that someone would choose to rebel, and God kept control of the situation and was prepared for it.
The second death is after these questions have been answered. The final judgment is to help the lost get a clear understanding of all what happened, and showing the uglyness of their evil, the chances missed, but they don't ask for another chance (otherwise the promise "Whosoever commeth unto me I will in nowise cast out" could apply) but instead they only bow and confess that God is who God claims to be and that God is right, but refuse to go further. The suffering while there is even the smallest amount of sin in them is the strugle from self justification to realizing that they are indeed wrong, and the intence conflect between their deepest desire (which they have constantly fought against) and their sinful nature (which they nurtured and developed) and no longer want to live the evil lives they are living but also refuse the healing and decide that they no more want to live and choose speperation from the only source of life.
Again, the eternal desolation of Sodom and Gamorah is an EXAMPLE of the final distruction, but Jesus in the garden is someone not going through a mere example, but is litterally being distroyed but yet, at the same time, streanthened by the ACTUAL lake of fire. Jesus is the only one person to fully expirence the lake of fire as of this time, and in the garden we see the real thing. That is why we need to focus on the closing moments of the life of Jesus.
It's that same lake we see through a glass darkly as it burns away our sin, so that when we see face to face we can live forever in the eternal fire (Isaiah 33) It is also literally coals from this very lake that we heap upon our enemies when we show kindness to them.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 04:53 AM
Kevin, as I see it, Jesus endured the wrath of God in the same way the 144,000 will endure the wrath of God. So, His experience is not an example of the unsaved in the lake of fire. Instead, Satan, the scapegoat, is an example of the unsaved, who die with their sins in the lake of fire. This interpretation does not require us to ignore or twist the obvious meaning of the scriptures I posted above.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 08:53 AM
"BTW, Tom, your analogy of the snake bite does not fit in the context of sin and death. It does make senes the way God used it, in light of the "look and live" principle. According to your theory, if the wicked look, they aren't going to live, they're going to melt and die."
I was asking a question by way of clarification. How would you answer the question? (there's no right or wrong answer -- I'm interested in your point of view)
What causes your death, the snake venom, or refusing to take the anti-venom?
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 08:57 AM
How do the statements quoted fit in with the following principles?
1) The principle of compelling force is not to be found in God's government.
2) The judgement is not an arbitrary act of power of God.
3) The wicked reap that which they have sown.
4) God is the fountain of life. The wicked die because they choose to separate themselves from God.
5) The wicked die because they are out of so harmony with God that God's presence to them is a consuming fire.
6) The glory of God destroys the wicked.
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 02:50 PM
Actually, I find the serpent parallel quite apropos:
"What is sin? The transgression of God's law. God wants all connected with him to loathe sin, to hate anything that approaches to it. Transgression is a serpent with a deadly sting. Grant it no indulgence, for it will imperil the soul. Rather choose privation, suffering, hunger, reproach, imprisonment, and death, than the indulgence of sin." {RH, June 3, 1880 par. 10}
"The two thieves upon the cross represent the two great classes of mankind. All have felt the poison of sin, represented by the sting of the fiery serpent in the wilderness. Those who look upon and believe in Jesus Christ, as the thief looked upon him when lifted upon the cross, shall live forever; but those who refuse to look upon him and believe in him, as the hardened thief refused to look upon and believe in the crucified Redeemer, shall die without hope." {5Red 79.2}
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 02:59 PM
This is very plainly said:
""I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance," said John; "but He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." Matt. 3:11, R. V., margin.
The prophet Isaiah had declared that the Lord would cleanse His people from their iniquities "by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning." The word of the Lord to Israel was, "I will turn My hand upon thee, and purely purge away thy dross, and take away all thy tin." Isa. 4:4; 1:25. 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. Jacob, after his night of wrestling with the Angel, exclaimed, "I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." Gen. 32: 30.
Jacob had been guilty of a great sin in his conduct toward Esau; but he had repented. His transgression had been forgiven, and his sin purged; therefore he could endure the revelation of God's presence. But wherever men came before God while willfully cherishing evil, they were destroyed.
At the second advent of Christ the wicked shall be consumed "with the Spirit of His mouth," and destroyed "with the brightness of His coming." 2 Thess. 2:8. The light of the glory of God, which imparts life to the righteous, will slay the wicked." {DA 107.4}
Granted this is the 1st and the second advent of the Lord; any reason to think that His glory magically changes to something else on the 3rd?
Does He say, "I change not!"
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/07/04 06:58 PM
quote:
What causes your death, the snake venom, or refusing to take the anti-venom?
If God does not choose to miraculously override the natural consequences of a lethal injection, then death is most likely imminent. But God, not death, is in control of whether or not we die, even if we do take the anti-venom. He is the life giver, therefore, He is also the life taker. God decides when we live and die.
Psalm
104:29 Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled: thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust.
104:30 Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/08/04 07:04 AM
Ikan, do you agree with Tom and Kevin that the lake of fire is symbolic of the exceeding brigthness of God's glory, and not real fire and brimstone?
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/08/04 12:42 AM
God has given us the ability to decide our own destinies. We decide if we live or die. "The soul that sinneth, it shall die." If we believe in Christ, we will live.
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/08/04 02:14 AM
Mike: I find your desire to see if I am aligned with someone, before any comment is made about my posts, well...divisive and an awkward light shown on you.
Wouldn't a response before I was "assigned " a camp be more....uncolored?
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/08/04 08:08 AM
The lake of fire at the 3rd coming is no more "symbolic" than the Noachian flood was symbolic.
"'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 lake of fire. It is the time of the judgment 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}
This is more than just God's presence and His glory being manifested. This is the very bowels of the earth bringing forth its molten lava; reminiscent of how the deep was broken up in Noah's time, and water erupted up from out of the earth as the rain also poured down from the skies. {see PP 99.1}
Is anyone going to argue that the Flood wasn't a direct act on the part of God? Or that His glory consisted of water at that time?
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/08/04 08:59 AM
Ikan, what do you believe? What do you think the quotes you posted mean? Do they teach a literal fire or a symbolic fire? Is the lake of fire real fire or the glory of God? or both?
John, thanx for the quote. When she quotes the Bible like that, and describes it like that, it's hard to believe the lake of fire is anything other than real fire.
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/08/04 01:20 PM
I think Sister White's quotes mean exactly what they say.
Again, Mike, you have failed to respond to my post and only asked for my opinion. Why you do that? Haven't your read them? Can't you conclude from sacred writings what it means without my comments on it? I am not being smart, just bummed that you rarely seem to answer my posts directly.
I want to study with people, not flaunt my opinions, which frankly carry no weight with eternity anyway. I'm not Matthew Henry, thank God, and am only sharing research, not arming for debates.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/09/04 07:20 AM
Okay, Ikan, that's only right and fair. I believe the quotes you posted agree with the one John posted above, that is, hell fire is real fire, it's not symbolic of the glory of God. The idea that the lake of fire is not real fire ignores the obvious meaning of scripture and inspiration.
EW 294
Satan rushes into the midst of his followers and tries to stir up the multitude to action. But fire from God out of heaven is rained upon them, and the great men, and mighty men, the noble, the poor and miserable, are all consumed together. I saw that some were quickly destroyed, while others suffered longer. They were punished according to the deeds done in the body. Some were many days consuming, and just as long as there was a portion of them unconsumed, all the sense of suffering remained. Said the angel, "The worm of life shall not die; their fire shall not be quenched as long as there is the least particle for it to prey upon." {EW 294.1}
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/08/04 08:32 PM
Yes, it is a shame that we degrade the powerful fire at the end to something as small and insignificant and weak as the love of God.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/08/04 10:13 PM
I have two questions. First of all, we know that the wicked will suffer for different amounts of time, some for a short amount of time, and others for many days. How is that the lake of fire does not kill them immediately? Does God keep them alive, so they will feel the pain of the fire until a certain accumluation of pain has been met and God says, "That's enough. Their scalding pain has reached the point where it is exactly equivalent to the evil they did. They can now cease to exist." Maybe He doesn't let them stay in for too long at a time so they don't burn completely away, but He "dips" them. Puts them in for a little bit, measures the pain they've suffered, takes them out before they've burned to much, lets them recover a bit, and then dips them back in, and makes another pain measurement.
The second question is that there are principles regarding the judgment which God has revealed. Among them are:
1) The destruction of the wicked is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God.
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) All they that hate Christ love death.
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; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin.
My question is, how are these principles realized?
For your convenience, I'm posting the DA quote from which these priniciples are gathered here:
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.
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)
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/09/04 04:47 AM
Kevin, there is nothing small or insignificant about the love of God. He is all powerful, and so is His love. Only a loving God can punish and destroy the wicked in a lake of fire. "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten." Rev 3:19.
Tom, it is impossible to explain how the wicked will punish and perish, according to their sins, in the lake of fire. But our inability to explain it does not mean it isn't so. God created the world in six days, but can you explain how?
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/09/04 09:01 AM
Mike, is this an answer to my request to harmonize your views with DA 764? This seems like an arbitrary answer. Many of your answers seem arbitrary. Is God arbitrary? Or do the principles involved in the Great Controversy tie together?
In Jesus Christ we see the character of God revealed. The Good News is "if you've seen Me, you've seen the Father." Do our views agree with the truth as it is in Jesus?
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/09/04 02:11 PM
If our views agree with what's been revealed in the Bible and the SOP, then yes they do. Those bodies of literature reveal the truth as it is in Jesus.
But the ideas that the lake of fire is symbolic -- or that God doesn't kill -- those don't agree with Inspiration, not at all.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/09/04 06:57 PM
Tom, as you know, I have repeatedly posted an answer to the list you have compiled from the SOP regarding the death of the wicked and the glory of God. How do I harmonize her two views? Again, it is obvious, at least to me, that both play a part in the punishment and destruction of the wicked in the lake of fire.
In my opinion, there is nothing unloving or unChristlike about Jesus using fire and brimstone to punish and destroy the wicked in the lake of fire. Yes, it is a "strange act", but nevertheless, God's ways are not our ways, we may not be able to comprehend everythng that makes sense to God, at least, not here and now. But, in heaven, it will make sense. We will praise God, with the holy angels, for the punishment and destruction of the wicked.
Revelation
16:5 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt be, because thou hast judged thus.
16:6 For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.
16:7 And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous [are] thy judgments.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/10/04 07:15 AM
quote:
Originally posted by John:
If our views agree with what's been revealed in the Bible and the SOP, then yes they do. Those bodies of literature reveal the truth as it is in Jesus.
But the ideas that the lake of fire is symbolic -- or that God doesn't kill -- those don't agree with Inspiration, not at all.
John, I agree that the idea that God does not kill does not fit with inspiration, but Tom and I have brought up several texts and Mrs. White quotes (and there are more out there if you feel that you have not received enough) that indicate that the fire is symbolic, besides that much of the Sanctuary service is how can people stand in God's pressence and live. A theam in Revelation is "who shall be able to stand?" The view of the literal fire is that everyone can stand, so God has to do something else to those who are unrepentant sinners.
You avoid the texts that says that God will distroy as a consuming fire, and that say that God IS the consuming fire, and that the righteous live forever in the eternal fire. Taking your theology and mixing it with what Isaiah 33 says, it is best to be a sinner, because they die in the eternal fire, but the righteous have to live in THE FIRE forever and ever.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/10/04 02:39 AM
Mike, the reason I keep asking the same question over and over again, is because it hasn't been addressed. You have stated you have addressed it, but you haven't actually done so. To be fair, the fault may be my own in that I have not been explicit enough in what I'm asking. I'll try to rectify that here and be more clear as to what I'm asking.
1) The destruction of the wicked is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God.
The Spirit of Prophesy tells us that force is not a governing principle of God's government. Here again she states that the destruction of the wicked is not due to an act of arbitrary power of God's part. Here's another quote that brings out the same principle:
quote:
God could have destroyed Satan and all his sympathizers as easily as one can pick up a pebble and cast it to the earth. But by so doing he would have given a precedent for the exercise of force. All the compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. He would not work on this line. (RH 9/7/98)
What does it mean to say that compelling force is not a principle of God's government? Does that mean that God prefers not to use it, but sometimes (or perhaps very, very often) He makes an exception? How does your view of the destruction of the wicked harmonize with the fact that force is not a governing principle of God's government and the fact that here it is explicilty stated that it is not being used for the destruction of the wicked? (equating "power" with "force")
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) All they that hate Christ love death.
I'll group these together. I'll add the following quote, which makes the same point:
quote:
God destroys no man. Everyone who is destroyed will have destroyed himself. Everyone who stifles the admonitions of conscience is sowing the seeds of unbelief, and these will produce a sure harvest.
Here it is stated that the wicked destroy themselves by cutting themselves off from God and it is explicitly stated that God destroys no man. How does your view harmonize with these points?
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.
I'll add this one:
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)
This points out that God is a consuming fire to sin and that God's glory must destroy those who insist on clinging to sin. This points out clearly that sin is deadly, and that God's purpose is to do whatever He can to get people to release from it, so they will not be destroyed. It also points out, along with the other DA quote, that it is the glory of God that destroys the wicked.
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; but it would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin.
These last principles show that reaping the full result of sin leads to destruction. We have seen above that it is the glory of God that destroys. So this is telling us that had God not allowed Satan to continue existing, but instead had allowed him to reap the results of his sin, which would have led to his destruction, the other angels would have been confused, thinking that God was responsible for their demise rather than sin.
How does your view of the destruction of the wicked harmonize with any of these points?
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/11/04 07:38 AM
Tom, force is not how God operates. Punishing Satan without due process of law would be an abuse of His power. But when found guilty by a jury of his peers, then it is no longer considered “force” when God punishes and destroys him in the lake of fire. It is perceived as a strange, but loving, and merciful act. We reap what we sow, but it’s according to the divine order of God. God gave Satan and sinners life and probation to demonstration the consequences of sin – unrest and unhappiness. But the punishment for sinning, for refusing to abide in Jesus, is death by execution.
Yes, the wicked cut themselves off from God’s protection when they refuse to abide in Jesus. We are on probation, borrowed time, and the continuation of our life forces are promised on condition that we abide in Jesus, and live in harmony with His law. In judgment, God decides whether we deserve to live or die, but He destroys no man arbitrarily. We determine our own outcome by choosing or refusing to abide in Jesus. God simply acknowledges and accepts our choice, and then He fulfills His promise.
If our destiny is death, then God will do what He has promised to do, that is, punish and destroy us in the lake of fire. In so doing, He pulls the plug, and our life forces cease to function and we die. We cannot pull the plug ourselves because we do not have access to it. God can gives and takes life. God alone manages the consequences of our choices. We will not die, in the lake of fire, until God pulls the plug. And, He will not pull the plug until we have paid the wages of our sins. Then we die.
To be perfectly honest with you, Tom, I do not pretend to understand how the glory of God can be a consuming fire. I do not understand the science of fire and divine glory enough to comprehend this concept. So, I cannot answer questions involving this issue to your satisfaction. I know that light can be condensed and focused in such a way, like laser light, that it can be used discriminately to treat cancer or to cut steal. But just exactly how God’s glory will be used to punish and destroy the wicked, according to their sinfulness, I cannot say with certainty.
But this much I do know, and can answer with all confidence in the Holy Bible, God has, in both OT and NT times, used fire and flood and disease and famine and war to punish and destroy sinners. The Bible says that the fire God used to punish and destroy the wicked inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah is the same fire He will use to punish and destroy Satan, and all the unsaved, at the end of time. I have no reason to doubt the Word of God. It is plain and simple to understand.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/11/04 12:42 AM
Mike: Tom, force is not how God operates.
Tom: Right.
Mike: Punishing Satan without due process of law would be an abuse of His power. But when found guilty by a jury of his peers, then it is no longer considered “force” when God punishes and destroys him in the lake of fire.
Tom: Force is "an act of aggression (as one against a person who resists)." Force does not cease being force regardless of whether a trial has taken place or not. One could assert that force in one instance would not be just, and another it is just, but whether a trial has taken place or not does not convert force into non-force.
Mike: It is perceived as a strange, but loving, and merciful act. We reap what we sow, but it’s according to the divine order of God.
Tom: This is exactly right. God gives the wicked over to their choices, and they reap what they have sown. This is perceived as a strange, but loving, and merciful act.
Mike: But the punishment for sinning, for refusing to abide in Jesus, is death by execution.
Tom: The punishment for sinning is death. EGW explains exactly what "reaping what they have sown" means.
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. (DA 764)
quote:
God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression; but He leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown. (GC 36)
Mike: If our destiny is death, then God will do what He has promised to do, that is, punish and destroy us in the lake of fire. In so doing, He pulls the plug, and our life forces cease to function and we die. We cannot pull the plug ourselves because we do not have access to it. God can gives and takes life. God alone manages the consequences of our choices. We will not die, in the lake of fire, until God pulls the plug. And, He will not pull the plug until we have paid the wages of our sins. Then we die.
Tom: quote:
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.
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)
Mike, what's going on here is very simple. The wicked cling to their sin. They become identified with it. To sin, wherever it is found, God is a consuming fire. The glory of God, which destroys sin, destroys them. That's it. There's no need for a theory where God casts them in a lake of fire and stands by with a stopwatch waiting until the magic moment arrives when He can say "Enough! Their pain has paid for their misdeeds. Torture can end now."
Sin causes the destruction of the wicked because it's sinful. It's bad. It is so out of harmony with God's character that to is God is a consuming fire. That fire destroys sin. Where there's more sin, there's more destruction. Simple.
Where you and I differ, it seems to me, is that you do not think that sin causes death. You think sin is something which has no harmful consequences in and of itself. The problem with sin is that God doesn't like it, so He punishes those who do it. The wicked die because God kills them to punish them for doing something He doesn't like. God is arbitrary, just like Satan has accused Him of being. This is how your view appears to me.
My view is that sin is deadly. It kills us, because it is based on a principle which is suicidal, which is the principle of living while separated from God. This is impossible. God permits it for a time, as an exception to what should happen (death), in order that the principles of sin can be seen. If God had permitted sin to meet its deserved consequence, death, then God could have been seen as the One causing death, rather than what really does cause death, which is sin. This is exactly what DA 764 says:
quote:
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.
Because God loves us, He warns us of the consequence of sin. It is sin that kills, not God. Sin is the enemy. God is not arbitrary, and God does not use force to get His way. God destroys sin by the principles of His government, which are love and truth, not compelling force.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/11/04 04:18 AM
quote:
God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression; but He leaves the rejectors of His mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown. (GC 36)
Okay, it looks like you got me on that one. But not really. If you take what I posted in its context, the way I use the word “executioner” does not contradict the fact God punishes and destroys the wicked in the lake of fire. It looks like playing with words isn’t cutting it for us. Perhaps we should stick with entire ideas!
Yes, to sin wherever found our God is a consuming fire, and He will also punish and destroy the unsaved in the lake of fire, using real fire, just like Sodom and Gomorrah. Plain and simple, right? But not to you, I know. Coming from someone who doesn’t believe Jesus had to die in order to satisfy the legal demands of the law, I’m not surprised you find it hard to believe God will punish and destroy sinners with fire and brimstone.
No, I don’t believe sin naturally causes death, because if it did, God wouldn’t have needed to prevent us from accessing the tree of life. See Gen 3:22. Yes, I do believe, and know from experience, that sinning causes suffering, but it doesn’t kill me. Instead, I go right on living. Why? Because sin doesn’t kill. Yes, sinning, not sin, can lead to an untimely death, but everyone dies eventually. Why? Because God will not allow us to eat from the tree of life.
If sin kills, why do you keep on insisting that it is the glory of God that kills and consumes sinners? If you truly want to divorce God from the death of sinners, then shouldn’t you insist that sin kills sinners? that God merely chooses to stop whatever it is He's doing to prevent sin from killing them? But wait a minute, that implicates God too, doesn't it?
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/11/04 09:28 AM
Mike: Okay, it looks like you got me on that one. But not really. If you take what I posted in its context, the way I use the word “executioner” does not contradict the fact God punishes and destroys the wicked in the lake of fire. It looks like playing with words isn’t cutting it for us. Perhaps we should stick with entire ideas!
Tom: I'm not trying to "get you." I'm trying to point out where your thinking is fuzzy. You seem unable to admit your thinking is wrong in any way, regardless of how clearly inspiration contradicts it.
You say God is responsible for sin, even though inspiration denies it. You say God is the author of death, even though inspiration says this is what Satan is trying to get us to think. You say that sin does not cause death, even though that's what inspiration says many, many times. You say that God kills the wicked in the end by some arbitrary means, even though inspiration says the reverse. You say God is an executioner, even though inspiration says He's not.
I have appreciated dialoging with you, and have learned a lot. I plan to continue as long as you are willing. I have appreciated your tone as of late. Very much in fact.
I pray a lot for you (and for me in dialoging with you). I see that you have a vision of God's character which is to my view let's say not flattering. I am hopeful that somehow in some way the things that I write may help you view God in a better, and more accurate light.
God is infinitely good. Our conceptions of goodness are off. This is an area we need to be constantly growing in. I'm not writing this as if my views are perfect, far from it. I hope we can learn from each other, and if our views of God's character can improve, that will be a great thing.
Mike: Yes, to sin wherever found our God is a consuming fire, and He will also punish and destroy the unsaved in the lake of fire, using real fire, just like Sodom and Gomorrah. Plain and simple, right? But not to you, I know. Coming from someone who doesn’t believe Jesus had to die in order to satisfy the legal demands of the law, I’m not surprised you find it hard to believe God will punish and destroy sinners with fire and brimstone.
Tom: Oops. Maybe I spoke to quickly about tone. It's still not too bad, but it's kind of oozing in the wrong direction. I've been trying to be careful with mine. It's always a temptation to say things too sharply. What you just wrote seems a bit on the sarcastic side to me, don't you think?
You've mischaracterized what I think regarding Christ's death. I absolutely believe that Christ had to die to meet the legal demands of the law, and I have I am quite sure never written anything to the contrary. Please retract that statement, or produce some statement of mine to back up your allegation. It's possible I may have written something where you have misunderstood my meaning, but I'm quite sure I didn't write something along the lines of what you wrote because I don't believe that.
Mike: No, I don’t believe sin naturally causes death, because if it did, God wouldn’t have needed to prevent us from accessing the tree of life.
Tom: I've asked you not to use the "naturally." I don't know what you mean by that. You could leave out the word "naturally" and just say you don't believe that sin causes death, or choose some other word, but "naturally" is a poor choice of words for reasons I've already explained. See Gen 3:22.
Your reasoning is faulty regarding God's not allowing man to eat from the tree of life, which has already been explained. The death that God warned Adam and Ever regarding their eating of the forbidden tree was the second death. The reason they did not die the second death is because Christ died for them. This is clearly explained in FW 21, 22. Please read!
Mike: Yes, I do believe, and know from experience, that sinning causes suffering, but it doesn’t kill me. Instead, I go right on living. Why? Because sin doesn’t kill.
Tom: No!!!!! You go on living because Christ died for you. That's why! Give honor and glory where it's due! Read FW 21, 22.
Mike: Yes, sinning, not sin, can lead to an untimely death, but everyone dies eventually. Why? Because God will not allow us to eat from the tree of life.
Tom: This is confusing the first and second deaths.
Mike: If sin kills, why do you keep on insisting that it is the glory of God that kills and consumes sinners?
Tom: Because that's what inspiration teaches.
quote:
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)
quote:
The prophet Isaiah had declared that the Lord would cleanse His people from their iniquities "by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning." The word of the Lord to Israel was, "I will turn My hand upon thee, and purely purge away thy dross, and take away all thy tin." Isa. 4:4; 1:25. 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)
quote:
Could they endure the glory of God and the Lamb? No, no; years of probation were granted them, that they might form characters for heaven; but they have never trained the mind to love purity; they have never learned the language of heaven, and now it is too late. 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. (FILB 176)
quote:
If you cling to self, refusing to yield your will to God, you are choosing death. To sin, wherever found, God is a consuming fire. If you choose sin, and refuse to separate from it, the presence of God, which consumes sin, must consume you. (MB 62)
Mike: If you truly want to divorce God from the death of sinners, then shouldn’t you insist that sin kills sinners? that God merely chooses to stop whatever it is He's doing to prevent sin from killing them? But wait a minute, that implicates God too, doesn't it?
Tom: Why are you so interested in implicating God? That's what Satan want to do. God is innocent. Our job is to put God in a good light, which is the truth. God is good. Sin kills. God, because He loves the sinner, hates sin and wants to save us from it. We are saved from sin when we see the goodness of God, which is most clearly seen in Jesus Christ.
Jesus said, "When you've seen Me, you've seen the Father." This is the Good News! God really, really is like Jesus. To know God is life eternal.
I do insist that sin kills sinners and that God will stop doing what He does to prevent them from dying, which is providing Christ to bear their sin.
quote:
We must accept God's estimate of sin, and that is heavy indeed. Calvary alone can reveal the terrible enormity of sin. If we had to bear our own guilt, it would crush us.(MB 116)
As to implicating God, in what way does the following implicate God?
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)
I say this doesn't implicate God, it exonerates Him! God eliminates sin in a manner which is in harmony with the principles which govern His government, love and truth. God shows that sin causes death. The universe is safe for eternity.
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/11/04 12:41 PM
Amen Brother Tom! So clearly said. Glory to His unspotted Character!
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/11/04 08:16 PM
Tom, I realize that, in your mind, I am demonizing the character of God. And for that, I am sorry. As I said before, I would rather not talk about the wrath of God, the lake of fire, because to defend it makes it seem like I’m some kind of evil person. I didn’t mean for my post to sound sarcastic, but I will try harder in future to avoid sounding sarcastic.
I do not believe using the same words Sister White used in a different light contradicts the light. But I realize now that it causes confusion, and it causes you to worry about my understanding of the character of God, and my influence as a minister of the gospel. So, I will try to be more careful when choosing words to describe the wrath of God.
I have read FW 21, 22 and here’s what I got out of it: “And the reason why man was not annihilated was because God so loved him that He made the gift of His dear Son that He should suffer the penalty of his transgression.” Our first parents were not annihilated the second they sinned because Jesus immediately paid the penalty for their transgression. He is “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.”
Annihilated? Now that’s a word that hasn’t been used yet. You’re right, of course, the first death is not the penalty for sinning. We die the first death simply because we cannot eat from the tree of life. The first death is the result of natural law. That’s what I mean when I use the “n” word. We don’t die the first death because we sin, rather we die the first death because God will not allow us to eat from the tree of life.
Your view of the second death, and what causes it, sounds, to me, like the results of a divine natural law of some type. From what I hear you saying, sinners die in the presence of God because His awesome glory and exceeding brightness causes their flesh to melt off their bones. If this is true, and this is what the lake of fire is, then it sounds, to me, like sinners die a natural death. Whether one is the cause or the effect, it takes both to kill a sinner.
Dying in the presence of God implicates God. I realize you don’t see it that way, but I do. And I don’t have a problem with it. I’m glad God is in control, and not sin, self, Satan, or death. I don’t see how your view makes God any less responsible for the death of the unsaved than my view. If the lake of fire is nothing more than the glory of God, then it is the glory of God that punishes and destroys sinners according to their sinfulness, some suffering longer than others.
Again, I totally agree that, in some cases, sinners are killed and consumed by the glory of God’s brightness. The Bible and the SOP clearly teach it, and I do not doubt it for one second. My problem is the idea that the flood, fires, disease and wars Jesus has used to kill millions of sinners in the past were not real, but symbolic of His glorious brightness. Such an idea, in my opinion, totally ignores the obvious meaning of God’s word, and I cannot countenance such a fabrication.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/12/04 08:03 AM
Thank your for your post. I appreciate the comments you made.
Thank you for reading FW 21, 22. There's quite a bit more to it than what you stated. It tells us that everything we have is of infinte value because it comes to us through the death of Christ and hence has value equivalent to the life of Christ. That's very powerful truth!
It tells us that the reason we, whether saint or sinner, live physically is because of the death of Christ. This is a point I've been trying to make. You asked why we live if sin kills. The answer to that question, an excellent question, is that we live only because of Christ's death. Without the death of Christ we would could not live even physically. "To the death of Christ we owe even this earthly life." (DA 660)
Regarding the destruction of the wicked at the end, in my view they die because the wages of sin is death. God destoys sin by the principles of love and truth. God is vindicated.
According to your view (from my perspective), the wicked only die because God kills them. Sin in itself is not deadly. Their death is arbitrary. Satan was right in His accusations. God is not vindicated.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/14/04 08:13 PM
Tom, my view insists that God punishes and then destroys the wicked in the lake of fire because they refused to abide in Jesus. "For it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." Rom 12:19. To me, there is nothing arbitrary about God warning us, about promising us what He will do to us if we refuse to abide in Jesus.
Posted By: Will
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/14/04 08:18 PM
Is it safe to say that the main focal point is whether God will destroy the sinner(person), or sin?
Do I understand correctly that there is an agreement where God will destroy the wicked because of their sins?
God Bless,
Will
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/14/04 10:05 PM
Mike, here's the text from Romans 12:19-21
"Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good."
Notice that God vengeance is manifest by being kind and good. God manifests His vengeance by being the same kind, gracious, compassionate God He always is. He's not schitzophrenic. His goodness is a balm to the rightoues and a consuming fire to 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)
This makes perfect sense to me. Your view (Mike) I don't understand. How is it that the wicked are not destroyed immediately when they are cast in the lake of fire? How can some of them suffer for many days? How does burning someone pay for the wickedness they have done? Is there a physical pain threshold for sin? Such and such a sin costs so many BTU's of pain?
Will, everyone agrees that God will destroy sin and sinners. The question is how? Some of us believe this is how:
"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)"
Others believe this is not how. Rather than being the glory of God, it is an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. Rather than God's very presence being a consuming fire, there's a different consuming fire, since evidently God as a consuming fire is insufficient. Rather than God consuming sin whereever it is found, God casts the wicked into a lake of fire, because God's consuming sin and destroying the wicked isn't sufficient. That is, this "Then the glory of God, which destroys sin, must destroy them." is not sufficient.
The bottom line issue that needs to be faced is, what do we think God is like? Is He really like Jesus Christ? Or is Satan right, and God has a dark side? This is the same issue we're facing on all the issues we're dealing with. Who's resonsponsible for sin? God or Satan? Who's responsible for death? God or Satan? Is God arbitrary? Is He cruel? These are the questions involved. Whether God destroys in a literal lake of fire is just a symptom of the cause. The question of questions is, "Who is God?"
To know God is eternal life.
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/15/04 12:38 AM
quote:
How is it that the wicked are not destroyed immediately when they are cast in the lake of fire? How can some of them suffer for many days? How does burning someone pay for the wickedness they have done? Is there a physical pain threshold for sin? Such and such a sin costs so many BTU's of pain?
That's evidently the way it will be. Otherwise how are we to explain the fact that some will burn much longer than others, and Satan, the author of sin, will remain alive & burning long after all others have ceased burning, and have been reduced to ashes?
In all of God's plans there is equity and balance, and the final punishment for sin is no exception.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/15/04 01:40 AM
John, I'm sorry, but this question keeps coming up, I keep answering this question, but for some reason no one reads what I write on this topic, and keep repeating the same question.
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/15/04 04:46 AM
Kevin, I've read you say that the fire of final punishment is symbolic; that's an unacceptable conclusion, contrary to the plain teaching of Inspiration.
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/15/04 05:35 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 07:42 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/15/04 06:33 AM
Doug, I guess you mean what you posted on Nov. 18th, as follows?
quote:
I think there is a scientific explanation for that. Briefly, God must seal up the tectonic plates which were ruptured at Noah's Flood. To do this God has chosen to melt the earth all over again. But this is done whilst the New Jerusalem is sitting on the earth. So the fires miss it.
Sorry, I missed that the first time around. Instead of calling that 'ignorance in action,' how about giving someone the benefit of the doubt that they just might have missed it, y'know? It happens. There are lots of posts to keep up with here.
Anyway, that line of thought seems to square with what Inspiration says. I'm not sure about the tectonics angle, but there doesn't seem to be anything that rules it out, and it's plausible enough. What's certain is that fires within the earth will erupt up from below, similar to what happened with the Flood. Only at the 3rd Coming it'll be fire erupting instead of water. There will also be fire raining down from heaven, as there was water raining down during the Flood:"Satan and his angels try to encourage the wicked multitude to action; but fire descends from Heaven, and unites with the fire in the earth, and aids in the general conflagration.
{3SG 86.1}
"Those majestic trees which God had caused to grow upon the earth, for the benefit of the inhabitants of the old world, and which they had used to form into idols, and to corrupt themselves with, God has reserved in the earth, in the shape of coal and oil to use as agencies in their final destruction. As He called forth the waters in the earth at the time of the flood, as weapons from His arsenal to accomplish the destruction of the antediluvian race, so at the end of the one thousand years He will call forth the fires in the earth as His weapons which He has reserved for the final destruction, not only of successive generations since the flood, but the antediluvian race who perished by the flood.
{3SG 87.1}
"When the flood of waters was at its height upon the earth, it had the appearance of a boundless lake of water. When God finally purifies the earth, it will appear like a boundless lake of fire. As God preserved the ark amid the commotions of the flood, because it contained eight righteous persons, He will preserve the New Jerusalem, containing the faithful of all ages, from righteous Abel down to the last saint which lived. Although the whole earth, with the exception of that portion where the city rests, will be wrapped in a sea of liquid fire, yet the city is preserved as was the ark, by a miracle of Almighty power. It stands unharmed amid the devouring elements. 'But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also, and the works that are therein shall be burned up.'"
{3SG 87.2}
Now, for those who say the lake of fire is symbolic: this passage from Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3 shows that it will be about as un-symbolic, in other words about as literal, as anyone can possibly imagine.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/15/04 08:24 AM
quote:
Kevin, I've read you say that the fire of final punishment is symbolic; that's an unacceptable conclusion, contrary to the plain teaching of Inspiration.
John, just saying something doesn't make it true.
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)
It's hard to imagine this could be put any more plainly. How does your view harmonize with this?
Tom: How is it that the wicked are not destroyed immediately when they are cast in the lake of fire? How can some of them suffer for many days? How does burning someone pay for the wickedness they have done? Is there a physical pain threshold for sin? Such and such a sin costs so many BTU's of pain?
John: That's evidently the way it will be. Otherwise how are we to explain the fact that some will burn much longer than others, and Satan, the author of sin, will remain alive & burning long after all others have ceased burning, and have been reduced to ashes?
Tom: If we consider the option to a question, and that option is manifestly absurd, it behooves us to consider another option. If the blood of bulls and goats did not satisfy God in Old Testament times, what makes think He will be satisfied by BTU's of pain in the judgment? There's nothing in Jesus Christ that speaks of God being as you are suggesting.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/15/04 08:29 AM
Kevin, I'd be interested in any SOP references you have. You don't need to post the whole thing, just the references would be fine. Thanks.
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/15/04 09:45 AM
quote:
John, just saying something doesn't make it true.
When Inspiration says it, that makes it true. quote:
There's nothing in Jesus Christ that speaks of God being as you are suggesting.
How mistaken you are! Witness these words from the Lord Himself:Luke 12:
47 "And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes."
Matthew 22:
11 "And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Matthew 13:
41 "The Son of man shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."
Jesus' love and goodness doesn't preclude His justice and severity towards those who finally reject His grace when all is said and done. As Paul said,"Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in His goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off." Romans 11:22.
You wouldn't be saying these things, making these propositions that suggest God doesn't kill, that the fire of final punishment is symbolic, and such similar things if you'd made a very thorough study of the character of God. Your theories as they've been stated here contradict Inspiration on many fronts, Tom. Read the passage again a few posts above this one, from Spiritual Gifts vol. 3, for instance. It completely negates a lot of what you and Kevin have been saying in this thread."As He called forth the waters in the earth at the time of the flood, as weapons from His arsenal to accomplish the destruction of the antediluvian race, so at the end of the one thousand years He will call forth the fires in the earth as His weapons which He has reserved for the final destruction, not only of successive generations since the flood, but the antediluvian race who perished by the flood."
Ignoring such passages doesn't make them go away. Neither are we at liberty to pick and choose which ones we accept, and which ones we toss away. They all harmonize into one coherent whole.
To get back to one of your points, then: how do you explain the fact that Satan will be kept alive and will burn and suffer much longer than anyone else?
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/15/04 11:30 PM
John, there is nothing in Christ's life that speaks of Him being cruel or arbitrary. The quotes you provided speak of the death of the wicked, which will be awful. But the cause of their death is not God arbitrarily causing them pain.
Do you not see Christ's tenderness, compassion and graciousness with all those with whom He came in contact? This is what God is like! When you've seen Jesus, you've seen the Father. That's the Good News.
Here is revealed the character of God:
quote:
Those who think of the result of hastening or hindering the gospel think of it in relation to themselves and to the world. Few think of its relation to God. Few give thought to the suffering that sin has caused our Creator. All heaven suffered in Christ's agony; but that suffering did not begin or end with His manifestation in humanity. The cross is a revelation to our dull senses of the pain that, from its very inception, sin has brought to the heart of God. Every departure from the right, every deed of cruelty, every failure of humanity to reach His ideal, brings grief to Him. When there came upon Israel the calamities that were the sure result of separation from God,--subjugation by their enemies, cruelty, and death, --it is said that "His soul was grieved for the misery of Israel." "In all their affliction He was afflicted: . . . and He bare them, and carried them all the days of old." Judges 10:16; Isaiah 63:9.
Please note that force is not a principle of God's government:
quote:
Satan's representations against the government of God, and his defense of those who sided with him, were a constant accusation against God. His murmurings and complaints were groundless; and yet God allowed him to work out his theory. God could have destroyed Satan and all his sympathizers as easily as one can pick up a pebble and cast it to the earth. But by so doing he would have given a precedent for the exercise of force. All the compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. He would not work on this line. He would not give the slightest encouragement for any human being to set himself up as God over another human being, feeling at liberty to cause him physical or mental suffering. This principle is wholly of Satan's creation.
How do the statements you quote fit in with the following principles?
1) The principle of compelling force is not to be found in God's government.
2) The judgement is not an arbitrary act of power of God.
3) The wicked reap that which they have sown.
4) God is the fountain of life. The wicked die because they choose to separate themselves from God.
5) The wicked die because they are out of so harmony with God that God's presence to them is a consuming fire.
6) The glory of God destroys the wicked.
For the sake of completeness, here is the statement from which the principles were taken:
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.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/16/04 03:12 AM
Tom, there is nothing more that can be said or quoted. You are convinced that all the quotes John and I have posted symbolize the glory of God. We do not.
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/16/04 04:31 AM
Well, Mike, you may have no more contributions and may wish to bow out (an amazing switch from your past), but I would think it wise to let John and others decide whether they wish to continue by letting them speak for themselves.
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"
I'm surprised at the emotion displayed by many whom I have great respect for. It is almost like many want a bloodthirsty, whip wielding, enemy roasting Jesus to be promoted.
Taking parable illustrations as literal is what evangelicals do with Lazurus in "Abraham's bosum" to justify an eternal hell! Even "Rapture" theories generate from ultra-literalisms of parables. Adventism is not founded on that, or we would be without most of our solid platforms.
God kills; no one here has denied that. The question is with what in His heart and how?
Revenge? Anger? Hatred? Kingly ire?...like humans would.
OR does He kill by a full display, a revealing Himself "as He is", His Character of Love and Energy and Creativeness, His fullest possible manifestation, which cancels out (like light does darkness) those souls so indentified with Hate, and Sin and Selfishness.
Literal fire? Sure, but not like any type of flamming material we have ever seen. And like Doug mentioned it will kindle everything flammable that is flammable. I find it rather ironic that the trash heaps(coal and oil)of the pre-flood days will be destroyed along with the trash heaps of the Last Days, sitting and rotting for a thousand years.
The Character (the real person) of God was what Moses had to hide from in the cleft of the rock, it is what takes away the breath of all the prophets and what made Sinai rumble and the Ark of the Covenant dangerous to touch. These were not displays by God designed to terrify, but rather the lifting of the veil, the allowing of us mere mortals to peek at the hugely unbelievable power who actually maintains the universe, Jesus the Upholder of ALL Planets.
[ December 16, 2004, 03:03 AM: Message edited by: Ikan ]
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/16/04 05:10 AM
We are warned by the Scriptures themselves that we are to look for at least two, and better yet, three confirmations of every truth given in His word: 2 Corinthians 13:1.
"In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established."
So for every conclusion we draw we should be able to produce at least two or three Scriptures that attest to the fact. Concerning the character of God, we find that everything in the Bible must be understood in the light of the way that Jesus lived His life. He is the ultimate and perfect demonstration of what the Bible is all about— God's character.
Thus, Jesus' witness about himself tells us much about the character of God:
"Whatever the Father does, I do. . . all things." John 5:19-20.
"He that hast seen me hath seen the Father." John 14:8-9.
"I have kept my Father's commandments." John 15:10; Exodus 20:1-17.
"Thou shalt not kill." Exodus 20:13.
Therefore God's law as well as the life of Jesus is a transcript of His character. And Christ's estimation of how the law is fulfilled and what perfection consists of, also tells us His view of the character of the Father.
"Love your enemies. . . be ye therefore perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect." Matthew 4:44-48.
"The Lord is righteous in all His ways." Psalm 145:17.
"There is no unrighteousness [law breaking] with God." Romans 9:14.
But man throughout history has seen God as being like himself in character. And this can be a fatal error, for life eternal is defined as knowing the character of God as His really is.
"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." John 17:3.
"Thou thought I was altogether such as one as thyself, but I will reprove thee." Psalm 50:21.
"[They] changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like unto corruptible man." Romans 1:23.
"For my ways are higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." Isaiah 55:8-9.
The Scriptures warn us against applying man's definitions to God's actions. And there are numerous instances in the Bible that show us that God has, at times, totally different definitions for words than we do.
"No prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation." [That is, we are not to use Webster's definitions, but let the Bible define itself.] 2 Peter 1:20-21.
For example, when "God slew Saul." 1 Chronicles 10:13-14.
The Bible defines this by saying that Saul killed himself. 1 Chronicles 10:4-5.
Likewise when the disciples interpreted Scripture according to man's definitions, and thought it was God's way to call fire down on their enemies, Jesus corrected them by saying, "You know not what spirit you are of, for the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives." Luke 9:51-56.
Again, when God said that He was going to destroy Israel for disobedience, He defined His words by adding, "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself." Hosea 13:9.
Now, concerning Himself, God assures us three times that He will never change. He will always treat us exactly the same as He would have during the best days of our relationship with Him—that is, as if we had never done anything wrong.
"For I am the Lord, I change not: therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed." Malachi 3:6.
". . .with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." James 1:17.
"Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever." Hebrews 13:8.
Therefore, the word "wrath" must be defined both in the light of the way Jesus lived His life and in the light of God's declaration that He will never change. Two notable examples occur in the New Testament and two in the Old Testament:
"When he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for their hardness of heart. . ." Mark 3:5.
Man's wrath is always translated "thoo-mos" in the Greek, meaning to rush at someone passionately, fiercely, breathing hard, intent on killing them. But here in this verse, and wherever else God's wrath and Jesus's anger are referred to, it is translated from "or-gay", meaning to desire, or yearn after someone, to stretch after them longingly. So Mark 3:5 actually says: "Jesus looked around on them yearningly." Likewise, in the Old Testament, God's wrath is invariably translated from "ane-khar-ode", the glance that makes one shudder, the look that sets one trembling."
In Romans 1:17-18, 24 God's wrath is defined as His righteousness, and in verse 24 as giving them up to their own lusts.
Then in Isaiah 54:7-8 His wrath is defined as "forsaking", "hiding His face". And what causes Him to hide His face? The answer is five chapters away in Isaiah 59:1-2, that it is our iniquities that separate us from God and our sins that hide His face.
Hosea 11:1-8, 4:17. "How can I give you up? How shall I set you as Admah and Zeboim?" These are two cities which burned up with Sodom and Gomorrah. Therefore, this all happened not because God sent fire, but because they forced Him to withdraw from them, and the destruction that God had been protecting them from then fell upon them.
Let's examine some other specific instance of God's behavior, defining His meaning by His Word alone:
The Flood: "Hast thou marked the old way which wicked men have trodden? Which were cut down out of time, whose foundation was overflown with a flood; which said unto God, Depart from us: and what can the Almighty do for them?" Job 22:15-17.
The Decimation of Israel by Her Enemies: "Evil is come because our God is not among us." Deuteronomy 31:17.
The Destruction of Jerusalem: "You sold yourselves, you divorced yourselves from God by your iniquities." Isaiah 50:1-2.
The Plagues of Egypt: "He cast upon them the fierceness of His anger, wrath, and indignation and trouble, by sending evil angels among them." Psalm 78:49.
That is, when men cast God out, who floods in? Satan. So wrath is defined as evil angels coming in to fill the vacuum left by God's departure. [See Exodus 12:23 and Revelation 9:11].
God goes even further to tell us in unmistakeable language what it is that will destroy the wicked in the end. It is not Himself, but they who destroy themselves as the inevitable consequences of their choices:
"His own iniquities shall take the wicked, and he shall be holden with the cords of his sins." Proverbs 5:22.
"Shall a man take fire. . . and. . . not be burned?" Proverbs 6:27-28.
"They lay in wait for their own blood. . . and shall eat the fruit of their own way." Proverbs 1:18, 31.
"The wicked is snared in the work of his own hands." Psalm 9:15-16.
"His sword shall enter his own heart." Psalm 37:14-15.
"Evil shall slay the wicked." Psalm 34:21. Not God!
[See also Jeremiah 2:17, 19; Ezekiel 22:4, 31; Obadiah 15; Hosea 10:13].
All discussions concerning the wrath of God must ultimately end at the cross, however, for that is the final demonstration to mankind of what will actually happen to the wicked in the end. Jesus was the first in the entire universe to experience the second death, long before even Satan. But all who refuse His offer will ultimately experience for themselves what Jesus went through for them on the cross:
Did God kill His Son? No, He declared Himself forsaken: "Eloi, Eloi, Lama Sabachthani" which literally means, "Why, God, are you leaving me alone to die?" ["Lama" = why; "sabach" from the Chaldean "sebaq" = left alone; "thani" = to die].
1 Chronicles 21:1 Versus 2 Samuel 24:1 God is often blamed for what Satan has done. [See also Job 1:12, 16 Versus Job 2:7].
Revelation 6:16 Versus Isaiah 25:9. God is not two-faced; the difference is in the people.
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/16/04 10:17 AM
,
[ January 01, 2005, 07:43 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/16/04 08:10 PM
Ikan, I did not mean to speak for John, so far as bowing out. But John and I agree that God will punish sinners for refusing to abide in Jesus, and that He will then destroy them in the lake of fire, a literal fire that not only consumes sinners, but every trace of sin.
I do not believe God is evil or demonic just because He punishes sinners before He destroys them in the lake of fire. The wrath of God is holy, just and righteous. He has used fire, flood, disease and war to punish and destroy sinners in the past, and He will resurrect them in the future to punish and destroy them again with fire.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/17/04 01:19 AM
quote:
Originally posted by John:
Kevin, I've read you say that the fire of final punishment is symbolic; that's an unacceptable conclusion, contrary to the plain teaching of Inspiration.
Sorry for the late reply, I've been away for a few days.
John, please becareful that you take the above information in it's context. I would like to understand what you think I'm saying when I call it symbolic. We may be on two different trains of thought. I'm afraid you may have misunderstood my context when I say it's symbolic, and I see calling it symbolic as based upon and fitting with many other statements in both the scriptures and Mrs. White that makes fire symbolic of God's glory such as:
Deuteronomy 4:24 and 9:3, one which says that God is like a consuming fire, the other that says that God is a consuming fire. Was God lying when he claims to be the fire? My saying that the fire is symbolic of God's glory comes right from these texts. The fire is not something external and speperate from God himself, but is God himself in such power that the closest that could be understood in the ancient world was the power of fire.
Isaiah 33 says that the righteous will live forever in the eternal fire while the lost are not able to live in the eternal fire. If Isaiah did not see the fire as symbolic, then the saved are really in trouble since the wicked get to die and be put out of their misery, while we have to live forever in the fire.
We still find Isaiah making the same symbol in Isaiah 10 saying
"...under his glory a burning shall be kindled
Like the burning of fire.
The light of Israel will become a fire!
And his Holy One a flame!
And it will burn and devour
His thorns and briers in one day"
It is the glory of God that Moses had to be hid in the cleft of the rock and be allowed to only see the back, otherwise Moses would have been distroyed. It is the reflection of this glory on Moses that was too bright for the children of Israel and therefore he needed to wear a vail. It was the reflection of that glory in the angel that caused the soldiers to fall as if dead when Jesus was resurected, what is going to happen when we get to see that glory itself from it's front. Why was this glory so strong for Moses that he needed to have his exposure limited, but so weak and impotent to the sinners that God has to do something completely outside and sepperate from himself to the lost?
Getting back to why some burn longer than others (and sorry my answer was so short, but again I was out of town, the hotel computer was on a charged by each minute pay system and kept getting disconnected and things I wrote dissappeared and I'd have to start from scratch, besides that I had worked all night and traveled during the day and had a full day and it was late at night that I was at the computer and needed to get up early the next morning.)
I could give a much longer answer, starting from the begining, the role of the trinity, the role of God's law, the three lies of Satan etc. as background. What I will start with are the two attitudes in people.
Actually I think I will back up some and talk a little about God's law, which is a reflection of who God is. God's law is Self Sacrificing Love, no more and no less. But we can ask "What does self sacrificing love mean" so it is broken down into two principles, to love God supreamly and to love your neighbor as yourself. Next we can ask how this is done, so it is broken down even farther into the 10 commandaments. The best known version of the 10 commandaments is Exodus 20, which can be broken into three thirds. The first third tells us how to love God supreamly, and talks about the role of God the Father. The last third talks about the role of the Holy Spirit in making us into loving and lovable people who love our neighbor as ourselves. The middle third ties the two ideas together saying that the only way we can love God supreamly and our neighbor as our selves is through resting in a personal relationship with God. It is a reflection of the role of God the Son.
Now for the two attitudes in every person:
On the one hand we have sinful nature, or a disposition to think we are for ourselves by making less of the outside world, or in other words by esteaming ourselves more highly than our breathern. That in us which is selfish and self seeking, that wants to use people for what we can get out of them, and aquire as much as we can.
If this was all there was to us our condition would be sorry indeed. But when man fell God gave us a gift. Now this gift has caused ALL the problems in life because it fights against the sinful nature. It was given in Genesis 3 where God places within us an emenity towards the serpent, while our sinful nature finds sin attractive, this gift from God has us also finding sin ugly. While part of us loves violent sports, part is opposed. Something in us feels sad when a natural disaster hits and kills hundreds of people instead of simply saying "Cool!" Something in us that is attracted to beauty, that finds roses beautiful, or thrills at a beautiful song or enjoys a beautiful picture. And these things of beauty are only small reflections of The One who is All Together Lovely, The Fairest of Ten-thousand, The Lilly of the Valley.
God's law is a reflection of this character. We read in Psalm 19 that this character is more desirable than gold and sweeter than honey. In Haggi He is called "The Desire of ALL Nations" Mrs. White calls Him "The Desire of Ages." indicating that everyone in all ages desire to be like and with him. The Angel said at his birth that it was great joy to ALL people (not limiting it to the honest in heart, nor the pure, but to ALL people) From these and other quotes I have come to understand that the gift that God gave us in Genesis 3, the desire to be like and with Jesus is our deepest desire.
And therefore we have all our problems, the fight between the sinful nature that wants to serve self in an internal war fighting against our deepist desire. This is very complex, as even our good things are still tinged with selfishness, even the desire to go to heaven has some selfish motives in it. Yet our most evil actions are to make life apprently a little more better, comfortable and lovely for us, a little more heavenly, thus tinged (in a wrong manner and opposed to the true way of reaching the goal)with our deepest desire. If I recall correctly, I believe that C. S. Lewis in the Screwtape letters has uncle Wormwood complaining that they (the demons) were at a disatvantage since everything that eveyone likes belonged to the enemy above, and the best that the demons could do was pervert how the person would go after it.
Everything we do has a trend to go more towards either our sinful nature and streanthing it, or goes towards our deepest desire, to be like and with Jesus and streanthens it. The characters we form, or the general trend of our life is what evidences whether or not we have accepted Jesus in our life. Those whos trend is towards that which wants to be like and with Jesus, our deepest desire, will find it heaven to be with Jesus when we see him in person. His love heals us and transforms us so that unlike Moses, we don't need to hide in the cleft of the rock and only see his back, but we can be honored to see what Moses could not see that day, and it will be heaven for us. Man was not created with the sinful nature and at Glorification the sinful nature is distroyed.
Those whos trend is towards our sinful nature, find the sinful nature streanthing and their hardening the heart towards their deepest desire. But it is still their deepest desire. It does not go away. Thus the way of the sinners is hard, and they are alway kicking against the thorns. But the deeper into sin they go, the less they pay attention to the kicking against the thorns, the voice of the Holy Spirit becomes quieter, not necessarly because the Holy Spirit is quieter, but because they have trained their ears not to listen (although it is also discribed as a withdrawing of the Holy Spirit). These people may go to drown out the still small voice by throwing themselves deeper into sin and taking substances to numb their thinking. There are several levels of hardning of the hearts that we see among sinners.
For these people, we again come to the end of time. They also see their deepest desire in all His beauty. This is not the beauty of a rose or a beautiful song which are only dim reflections, but the actual desire in person. They see what Moses was blinded to in the cleft of the rock, They don't see the mear reflection as the Children of Israel did when they saw Moses, or the soldiers when they saw the angel, but see what Moses and the Angel was reflecting.
This is also a time of atonment in the universe. This is why I was tempted to give the long answer. Satan raised his three lies against each member of the trinity and God's law. The whole universe, every angel, every being on other planets, every person is evaluating these issues. The angels and the unfallen worlds examined and made their final discisions at the cross and closed their probation, but reviewing (in the investigative judgment) what God has done to save fallen mankind, helps them to understand their own salvation and relationship to God and therefore deepens their love for God and sees that he is indeed right.
As life comes to a close for most people, their general trend closes their probation, while a few, such as Enoch, Elijah, Paul, John Wesley, Nero, Pilate, Pharoah and others (in one way or another) closed their probation long before the end of their life. Those who have closed their probation in accpetance of Jesus will have the thousand years to get all sorts of answers clearified, and this clearification will justify all that God has done. Satan and the demons will also have the thousand years to think over what they have done and realze how horrible it is, and how better things would have been had God's law not been broken.
The lost go through this clearificaton of questions at the end of the thousand years. They see what their sin has done to them, and to their loved ones including Jesus, their deepest desire. Unlike the saved who are recreated without their sinful nature, the lost have refused God's healing, so they are rased with the infimaties they had when going to the grave, including the fight between their sinful nature, which rules them, and that naging deepest desire that they keep fighting against.
In the intensity of this fight, although seeing their sin as horrid, there is a tendency to want self justification. Those with harder hearts will find that it takes longer to accept the fact that God's law is indeed the true path to freedom, and that God's ways are indeed right, but they refuse to surrender to his healing. They try to enter heaven by their own works and steal it from the saved, but refuse to take heaven as a free gift by submitting to their deepest desire instead of their sinful nature. They finally come to an attempted compromise between their sinful nature and their deepest desire, when they bow down and confess that they understand and see the horror of sin. They no longer want to continue in this wretched life, but their sinfulness has become such a part of them that they don't want to live without it, thus they choose to die. But they die in full agreement that God's law is indeed just, that God's ways are just and true. They and God are at atonement in that they realize what they have done, how horrible it is, and since they have developed a personality that refuses healing and God will not force the healing, they want to die and God respects their choice and stops continuing to supply them with life.
Those who's hearts have not been so hardened will see faster the uglyness of their sin and it will take a shorter time to come to this conclusion. Those who have gone deeper into sin will continue to bring up arguments of self justification and excusal of their choices. The struggle continues longer for them. The suffering of seeing their sinfulness in contrast to their deepest desire continues longer, finally they become completely convinced of God's righteousness, the perfection of his law, and the horror of their sin and the fact that they refuse to come for healing and thus want to die and their suffering finally ends, but for them it takes longer and they suffer longer, then those who's hearts are softer and who were more willing to see the facts and admit to the sinfulness of their sins with less excuse.
Now I am going to do some speculating, and I may be completely wrong on this point, so take this paragraph for what it's worth. I would not be surprised in at the end of the thousand years Satan and the demons think "I wish I could have another chance" and the saved, thinking of their loved ones who are lost say "I was a poor witness to your beauty, I'm sure that if my loved one could see you in person that they would accpet." and at the end of the thousand years Satan and the demons get another chance, and end up doing the exact same thing. And the lost see Jesus, but continue to reject him.
The issues of the great controversy are completely settled in every reasoning being. Those who have placed their character in harmony with Jesus will continue with him through out eternity and find it to be heaven to be with him, and those who allowed their sinful nature full control will choose death over their wretched life and over allowing Jesus to heal them. From Gabirel to Lucifer, Enoch to Nero, there is no more question over God's character and law. Every lingering doubt and question are fully dealt with and it will be clear to ALL intelegent beings that Jesus has done all that was infinately possible to save, and one group on the full weight of the evidence says "Thy will be done" and the other group in the full weight of the evidence does not want to continue in life and God says to them "Thy will be done." as they are consumed by his pressence and allow the fight between their sinful nature and deepest desire quite litterally rip them appart and distroy them.
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/17/04 01:19 AM
Mike You said: "He has used fire, flood, disease and war to punish and destroy sinners in the past, and He will resurrect them in the future to punish and destroy them again with fire."
Punish sinners and then kill them again, after bringing them back to life? And that does not sound macabre to you? It's like luring a pregnant teenaged daughter home just to kill her..
Hmmmm...
Can it not be that He raises them to show them how they have put themselves on the wrong end of the great Controversy by showing them proofs beyond question, and that they choose not to repent even then? And because they are so wedded to their evil lives they perish??
Well each to their own opinion about what the Word says. The Lord established freedom of "beholding" Him long long ago. We become what we see Him as.
Care to elaborate on these points?
"For example, when "God slew Saul." 1 Chronicles 10:13-14.
The Bible defines this by saying that Saul killed himself. 1 Chronicles 10:4-5.
Likewise when the disciples interpreted Scripture according to man's definitions, and thought it was God's way to call fire down on their enemies, Jesus corrected them by saying, "You know not what spirit you are of, for the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives." Luke 9:51-56."
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/17/04 03:49 AM
A lot's been written since I was away. I didn't even know I was away! I'd like to thank everyone for their participation in this thread. I've certainly learned a lot.
It's a bit frustrating to me that I keep asking the same questions over and over again and they never get answered. It would be like having a discussion about hell not being eternal, and having the parable of Lazarus and the rich man thrown in your face. You keep asking, how does this fit in with the rest of inspiration, and the answer comes back, "It says Lazarus is in hell! That's what it says!"
quote:
God could have destroyed Satan and all his sympathizers as easily as one can pick up a pebble and cast it to the earth. But by so doing he would have given a precedent for the exercise of force. All the compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. He would not work on this line.
Just one question this time. How does God destroy the wicked without using force?
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/17/04 08:36 PM
Ikan, I do not disagree that there are situations where the glory of God consumes sinners. Nor, do I disagree that God takes credit for allowing someone to die, even when they kill themselves or someone else kills them. And, yes, Jesus rebuked John and James for wanting to call down fire on the Samaritans. But the Bible also clearly says God has and will use fire and brimstone to punish and destroy sinners. Is it macabre? It may sound that way to us, but from God’s perspective it makes perfect sense, otherwise He wouldn’t do it.
Tom, it depends on how we use the word “force”. Luke, the Jedi, used the “force” for good. Call it what you want, force or power or justice, whatever, but one thing is certain, whether it is the glory of God or fire and brimstone that kills the sinners in the lake of fire, God is in control, and God is responsible. God is no less culpable either way.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/17/04 11:34 PM
quote:
Ikan, I do not disagree that there are situations where the glory of God consumes sinners.
What are these "situations"?
quote:
The warfare against God's law, which was begun in heaven, will be continued until the end of time. Every man will be tested. Obedience or disobedience is the question to be decided by the whole world. All will be called to choose between the law of God and the laws of men. Here the dividing line will be drawn. There will be but two classes. Every character will be fully developed; and all will show whether they have chosen the side of loyalty or that of rebellion.
Then the end will come. God will vindicate His law and deliver His people. Satan and all who have joined him in rebellion will be cut off. Sin and sinners will perish, root and branch, (Mal. 4:1),--Satan the root, and his followers the branches. The word will be fulfilled to the prince of evil, "Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God; . . . I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. . . . Thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more." Then "the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be;" "they shall be as though they had not been." Ezek. 28:6-19; Ps. 37:10; Obadiah 16.
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.
The "situation" is the destruction of the wicked! What "situation" did you have in mind?
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/17/04 11:39 PM
quote:
Tom, it depends on how we use the word “force”. Luke, the Jedi, used the “force” for good. Call it what you want, force or power or justice, whatever, but one thing is certain, whether it is the glory of God or fire and brimstone that kills the sinners in the lake of fire, God is in control, and God is responsible. God is no less culpable either way.
When EGW says that force is not a principle of God's government, she doesn't mean something New Agish like the "force" in Star Wars. Why you would bring up Star Wars is a complete mystery to me.
It amazes me that you would write things like "God is not less culpable." It just blows me away. God is not culpable at all. He is culpable for nothing. Not for sin, not for suffering, not for death. This is Satan's accusation. The whole purpose of the Great Controversy is to show that God is NOT culpable. That's why the war is being fought.
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/18/04 08:45 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 07:44 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/18/04 09:27 AM
Mike: Oops! I think you don't actually mean "culpable", do you?
Culpable according to Webster is:
"deserving blame; blameworthy; punishable, blamable; guilty"
I doubt if your really want to blame God for sin, do you, Mike?
Doug: God assumes responsibility for eliminating sin, Jesus being the active agent for that wonderful Act. By His letting our sins kill Him on the Cross, THAT is how he takes our place, not by appeasing a bloodthirsty Father-Jupiter
demigod, eager for revenge. That's Satan's picture of it that he has palmed off so cleverly on the worldly churches.
Satan cons men by saying: "The Father is cruel and demands a death when you sin. See: he wants you to kill animals and He'll even kill His own Son to make Himself look Powerful. He is asking you to keep a Law that I could not even keep, even when I was the highest created being. So you have no chance in making Him happy."
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/18/04 09:36 AM
quote:
Whilst it is true that God is not culpable for sin - He assumes responsibility for it.
This is true, because God is kind and gracious.
What you wrote brings out the difference between God and Satan. Satan is the author of sin, suffering and death, but he blames God for it (and unfortunately many, even among SDA's, believe Satan).
Satan is responsible for sin, but refuses to take responsiblility for it. God, by contrast, is not responsbile for sin, but does assume responsibility for it. What a wonderful God!
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/18/04 03:23 PM
Yes, I agree; the Father always will take the blame on Himself,with no culpability, no guilt, no actual transgression of His own divine Law, as the loving father of any wayward child will take the blame on himself.
All child welfare agents know that a parent who refuses to take any blame, even if they themselves are clearly in total innocence, is not a fit parent.
They know that even though the parent is not culpable, their love for the child will create a willingness to take "the fall" to shield the child, even a trully unloveable child.
"The chastisment of our peace was upon Him.."Isa. 53:5
"Satan has kept up his system of cruelty, and still employs his planned agency of crookedness and deception, and accuses and condemns and tortures in order that he may control the conscience. While exercising his power in torturing those whom he controlled through demoniacal possession, he yet laid the blame of it upon the Lord God of heaven. He put his own interpretation on his Satanic actions, and charged God with being the author of all evil." {ST, December 4, 1893 par. 5}
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/19/04 12:49 AM
Tom wrote:
quote:
John, there is nothing in Christ's life that speaks of Him being cruel or arbitrary.
Nobody here is implying that there is/was. But still He will punish sin in a violent manner. Not cruelly, nor arbitrarily, but nonetheless violently. The inspired testimony on this is so voluminous, it's beyond me how you fellows can miss it and teach otherwise.
Ikan wrote: quote:
So wrath is defined as evil angels coming in to fill the vacuum left by God's departure.
Not in all cases, not even close. God does act Himself in violent ways from time to time; Inspiration is crystal clear on that in many places. How do you think the Flood happened, for instance? Both the Bible and Ellen White are very direct in stating that it was a direct action on the part of the Lord. quote:
God goes even further to tell us in unmistakeable language what it is that will destroy the wicked in the end. It is not Himself, but they who destroy themselves as the inevitable consequences of their choices:
So, do you think the wicked themselves bring forth this worldwide lake of volcanic, molten fire? How, pray tell, do they do that? quote:
Punish sinners and then kill them again, after bringing them back to life?
That's what Inspiration says, yes. I don't know why some of you guys have such a hard time with that, the statements are exceedingly plain.
Kevin: I'm afraid I find your theory on why some wicked suffer longer than others very speculative, and not at all supported by the Bible or the SOP.
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/19/04 04:03 AM
Please take 10 minutes after prayer to read this; please try to avoid skimming. We all need to be more meticulous in our reading of each other's posts to avoid misunderstandings and hasty condemnations....Thanks!
(My apologies for the long posts; a study of this nature makes requires some space, or we will be whirling in our own quips and sound bytes, condemning without really knowing what each other is saying. This takes solid investigation, and a desire to know.Our pioneers appreciated this fact, and many here have exhibited the same type of earnestness over the years. That's why I prize MSDAOL so much.)
I think it more wise to "lay more cards on the table" before we approach separate events, such as the Flood, Jericho or the Lake of Fire. There are too many primary elements to understand before we get to the events.
Unquestionably God's infinite love was manifested in the aeons before the sin disaster intruded upon the unblemished happiness of the creatures throughout the universe, but the manifestation of that love is even more wonderfully revealed since sin's entry.
Yet, while no one who has any understanding of God's Word, would even consider that He punished or destroyed before the appearance of iniquity, the vast majority are strongly convinced that necessity has demanded such actions from God since the rebellion began.
There are at least two reasons for this thinking.
Firstly, the human mind has long been educated to believe that the only way to overcome rebellion is by force. Therefore, because man is conscious of no other way than this, and because he is aware that the Lord does have a problem which must be solved, man, unless especially enlightened by God's Word under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit, cannot see that there can be any alternative but for the Lord to use force. But there is another way. Examinations will be made later, of incidents in Bible history to show that God's actions can be viewed in a different light altogether.
A second reason is that the mind has been trained to read Scripture references according to a certain method of interpretation. When read according to that system there are many Scriptures which will be understood as saying that God punishes, destroys and liquidates.
Consider the following examples.
"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
"And it repented the Lord that He had made man on the earth, and it grieved Him at His heart.
"And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air, for it repenteth Me that I have made them." Genesis 6:5-7.
"And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die." Genesis 6:17.
"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven;
"And He overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground." Genesis 19:24, 25
"And it came to pass, when God destroyed the cities of the plain, that God remembered Abraham, and sent Lot out of the midst of the over-throw, when He overthrew the cities in the which Lot dwelt." Genesis 19:29.
"And the Lord said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go." Exodus 4:21.
"And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt. . . . And He hardened Pharaoh's heart, that he hearkened not unto them; as the Lord had said." Exodus 7:3, 13
"And he said unto them, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour." Exodus 32:27
"The Lord is regarded as cruel by many in requiring His people to make war with other nations. They say that it is contrary to His benevolent character. But He Who made the world, and formed man to dwell upon the earth, has unlimited control over all the works of His hands, and it is His right to do as He pleases, and what He pleases with the work of His hands. Man has no right to say to His Maker, Why doest Thou thus? There is no injustice in His character. He is the Ruler of the world, and a large portion of His subjects have rebelled against His authority, and have trampled upon His law. . . He has used His people as instruments of His wrath, to punish wicked nations, who have vexed them, and seduced them into idolatry." The SDA Bible Commentary, 1:1117.
"It was to be impressed upon Israel that in the conquest of Canaan they were not to fight for themselves, but simply as instruments to execute the will of God; not to seek for riches or self-exaltation, but the glory of Jehovah their king." Patriarchs and Prophets, 491
"Like the men before the flood, the Canaanites lived only to blaspheme heaven and defile the earth. And both love and justice demanded the prompt execution of these rebels against God, and foes to man." ibid., 492
"And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and were in the going down to Beth-horon, that the Lord cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword." Joshua 10:11
"But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city." Matthew 22:7
A careful reading of the whole parable of which this last verse is a part, and the commentary on it in Christ's Object Lessons, 307-309, will show that the king is God, the armies were those of the Romans, the murderers were the Jews and the city was Jerusalem. The text was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Therefore the text is really saying, "And when God heard thereof, He was wroth: and God sent forth His armies, the Romans, and God destroyed the Jews, and God burned up Jerusalem."
"And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them." Revelation 20:9.
This is by no means a comprehensive list of statements of this nature. There is no special point in assembling every such quotation here. However, these are more than sufficient to provide the examples needed to show that there are many such Scriptures, which when interpreted according to the way our minds have been accustomed to interpret them, leave one with no option but to believe that God does use force to liquidate those who have rebelled against Him.
These are many folk today who read these texts, interpret them according to long-accustomed methods, and are quite satisfied to believe that God does behave as an executioner to those who refuse to obey His laws.
But in doing so they have to ignore several things.
Firstly, there are quite a number of statements which say the opposite from what these statements are interpreted to mean.
Secondly, there are the great principles which are embodied in the constitution of God's government. Thirdly, there are the terrible implications of holding such beliefs about God.
These will be considered in turn as we proceed, but firstly let a list be made of what some would call counter-statements. In reality they are not and cannot be counter-statements for there is no such thing as a contradiction in God's Word.
Here are some examples of such statements:
"The Lord is righteous in all His ways, and holy in all His works." "Thy testimonies [commandments or laws] that Thou hast commanded are righteous and very faithful." Psalms 145:17; 119:138
The Lord is righteous and the law is righteous. Therefore God is what the law is. It is the "transcript of His own character," Christ's Object Lessons, 315, and that law declares "Thou shalt not kill." Exodus 20:13. Therefore, if it is not in the law to kill, it is not in the character of God to kill.
So, "God destroys no man. Everyone who is destroyed will have destroyed himself." Christ's Object Lessons, 84.
"God destroys no one." Testimonies for the Church, 5:120.
"God does not stand toward the sinner as an executioner of the sentence against transgression; but He leaves the rejecters of His mercy to themselves, to reap that which they have sown. Every ray of light rejected, every warning despised or unheeded, every passion indulged, every transgression of the law of God, is a seed sown, which yields its unfailing harvest. The Spirit of God, persistently resisted, is at last withdrawn from the sinner, and then there is left no power to control the evil passions of the soul, and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan." The Great Controversy, 36.
"Satan is the destroyer. God cannot bless those who refuse to be faithful stewards. All He can do is to permit Satan to accomplish his destroying work. We see calamities of every kind and in every degree corning upon the earth, and why? The Lord's restraining power is not exercised. The world has disregarded the word of God. They live as though there were no God. Like the inhabitants of the Noachic world, they refuse to have any thought of God. Wickedness prevails to an alarming extent, and the earth is ripe for the harvest." Testimonies for the Church, 6:388, 389.
"This earth has almost reached the place where God will permit the destroyer to work his will upon it." Testimonies for the Church, 7:141.
"God keeps a reckoning with the nations. Not a sparrow falls to the ground without His notice. Those who work evil toward their fellow men, saying, 'How doth God know?' will one day be called upon to meet long-deferred vengeance. In this age a more than common contempt is shown to God. Men have reached a point in insolence and disobedience which shows that their cup of iniquity is almost full. Many have well-nigh passed the boundary of mercy. Soon God will show that He is indeed the living God. He will say to the angels, 'No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy. Let him work out his malignity upon the children of disobedience; for the cup of their iniquity is full. They have advanced from one degree of wickedness to another, adding daily to their lawlessness. I will no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing his work." The Review and Herald, September 17, 1901.
When Jesus was asked to destroy the Samaritans who had rejected Him, He replied to His disciples, "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village." Luke 9:55, 56.
"There can be no more conclusive evidence that we possess the spirit of Satan than the disposition to hurt and destroy those who do not appreciate our work, or who act contrary to our ideas." The Desire of Ages, 487.
"Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. His authority rests upon goodness, mercy and love; and the presentation of these principles is the means to be used. God's government is moral, and truth and love are to be the prevailing power." ibid., 759.
"The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority." ibid., 22.
We know that God does nothing that is contrary to the principles of His government. Therefore, He does not use force.
"Sickness, suffering, and death are work of an antagonistic power. Satan is the destroyer; God is the restorer." The Ministry of Healing, 113.
Here is a compilation of statements, emphatic and clear, asserting that God is not an executioner, does not punish, and destroys no one. When these and the first set are viewed side by side, there appears no possibility of their being reconcilable. No attempt has been made to search out and copy every statement which exists for one side or the other. This is not necessary because any further quotations would only say that which is already quoted in these representative selections.
These apparent contradictions present the Bible student with a problem. For some, it is "solved" by simply discarding faith in the Word of God, charging it and its Author with duplicity and inconsistency. Others simply ignore the words which they are unable to understand or do not really desire to accept, while they carefully collect the opposite set, building their faith accordingly.
This was the course adopted by the Pharisees and Jews prior to and at the first advent. In the Old Testament there were many prophetic statements describing both the first and second coming of Christ. One set naturally spoke of His coming in obscurity, shame, ignominy, rejection and to final crucifixion. The other set described a coming in indescribable power, glory and triumph in which all His enemies would be totally annihilated. To the Jewish mind, especially as it lost the Spirit's illumination, it was impossible to reconcile these seeming contradictions. Their solution was to ignore every statement which spoke of humility and obscurity and to dwell heavily on those which spoke of power and glory. Thus Satan trained their minds to reject the Saviour when He came. So clever was he, that he used the Scriptures themselves to accomplish this. Once they had embarked on that wrong principle of interpretation, then, the more they studied their Bibles, the more conditioned they became to reject the Saviour when He appeared. He came exactly as the Scriptures said He would, but not as they had read the prophecies. Therefore, because He did not fulfil the set of prophecies they had gathered, they rejected Him and thus lost their eternal lives.
Posted By: John H.
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/19/04 06:59 AM
Friend Ikan, I'm afraid that your view of what Inspiration says here is incomplete, which leads to its being incorrect. Let's look at some other statements which show beyond any doubt whatsoever that God does indeed kill when it suits His purpose:
"Fire flashing from the cloud [of the Lord's presence] consumed the two hundred and fifty princes who had offered incense."
{PP 401.1} [Korah's rebellion]
"The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits."
{GC 614.2}
"God has often visited judgment upon the false swearer, and even while the oath was on his lips, the destroying angel has cut him down. This was to prove a terror to evildoers."
{1T 202.2}
"In mercy to the world, God blotted out its wicked inhabitants in Noah's time. In mercy He destroyed the corrupt dwellers in Sodom. . . It is in mercy to the universe that God will finally destroy the rejecters of His grace."
{GC 543.3}
"The judgment visited upon Ananias and Sapphira was to be a warning to the church through all time. The sin committed by these persons was similar to that of Achan, and the power of God searched them out and brought swift retribution upon them."
{ST 05-05-81 para. 15}
"Ananias and Sapphira wished to be regarded as giving all, and yet keep part. In order to do this, they falsified. Both of them agreed to practice deception, but they did it at the cost of their lives. God struck them both with death. "
{13MR 188.04} (1899)
"The same angel who had come from the royal courts to rescue Peter, had been the messenger of wrath and judgment to Herod. The angel smote Peter to arouse him from slumber; it was with a different stroke that he smote the wicked king, laying low his pride and bringing upon him the punishment of the Almighty. Herod died in great agony of mind and body, under the retributive judgment of God."
{AA 152.1}
Numbers
22:32 "And the angel of the Lord said unto him [Balaam], Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass these three times? behold, I went out to withstand thee, because thy way is perverse before me:
22:33 And the ass saw me, and turned from me these three times: unless she had turned from me, surely now also I had slain thee, and saved her alive."
(Did the angel of the Lord lie?)
2 Kings 19:35
"And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses."
(The "angel of the Lord" did this; not Satan or his angels.)
Now let's look at the Flood account.
"The world was in its infancy; yet iniquity had become so deep and widespread that God could no longer bear with it; and He said, 'I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth.' He declared that His Spirit should not always strive with the guilty race. If they did not cease to pollute with their sins the world and its rich treasures, He would blot them from His creation, and would destroy the things with which He had delighted to bless them; He would sweep away the beasts of the field, and the vegetation which furnished such an abundant supply of food, and would transform the fair earth into one vast scene of desolation and ruin...."
{PP 92.1}
Lest anyone try to argue that God merely allowed Satan to cause the Flood, there's this:
"Satan himself, who was compelled to remain in the midst of the warring elements, feared for his own existence.....He now uttered imprecations against God, charging Him with injustice and cruelty."
{PP 99.3}
No, Satan didn't cause the Flood, it was the Almighty Himself. Both the Bible and SOP are crystal clear. Some might try to say that the Bible language has been misinterpreted due to the difference in ancient Hebrew idiom and our own; but that argument can't be used in the case of the SOP. Ellen White spoke and wrote modern-day English, and she was very clear that God does kill.
Very clear.
You also said that God cannot kill because of the Sixth Commandment. But Inspiration says that Christ is "above all law...free from the claims of the law." 4T 120.3. So the argument that God can't kill because He'd be breaking His own commandment falls flat here. God can do whatever He wants. He doesn't kill unjustifiably, but kill He does when humans pass the limit of His forbearance.
The bare facts are that both the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy declare again and again, in language that the simplest child can understand, that God does kill, and will punish sin by killing sinners in the lake of fire. He gains no pleasure from this (Ezekiel 18:32), but it will happen nonetheless. To deny this fact is to deny God's word, the plain statements of His messengers throughout the ages. Such a denial of the truth constitutes a dangerous delusion, since it misrepresents the very character of the Almighty.
Posted By: Doug Meister
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/19/04 09:24 AM
.
[ January 01, 2005, 07:48 AM: Message edited by: Doug Meister ]
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/19/04 10:13 AM
John, regarding your comment to me, if you divorce the punishment from sin from sin itself, in terms of cause and effect, then you make the punishment both cruel and arbitrary.
Arbitrary means "based on individual discreation, as opposed to law." If sin does not bring death in and of itself, then its punishment is indeed arbitrary. Please consider what the word actually means.
Secondly cruel means, "lacking of showing kindness or compassion or mercy." Your view fits this description to a tea. If, on the other hand, sin actually is deadly, then the final destruction of the wicked is kind, compassionate and merciful. It's only if God is inflcting pain that it's cruel.
You have not dealt, nor has anyone, with the fact that force is not a principle of God's government and that the principles by which accomplishes the destruction of sin if by love and truth. Your view does not fit with this, as it relies on force.
Finally, it appears to me that you did not read Ikan's post. If you read it, you did not pay attention to his points, or at least did not consider them or deal with them.
He pointed out that there are two groups of statements, some of which appear to show God's punishment as being arbitrary, and others which appear to show that punish is the result of rejecting God. He pointed out that these apparent contradictions need to be reconciled, and that what some do is to completely ignore one class of statements and just keep the others, just like the Israelites around the time of Christ just laid hold of the Second Coming prophesies while ignoring the First Coming ones.
And this is exactly what you did. You have not dealt with any of the statements which bring out principles which are contrary to your view, nor have you even attempted to do so. All you have done is quote statements in an unthinking fashion, just like those who think that hell is eternal do by quoting Rev. 20:10, Mark 9 whatver, and Luke whatever on the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. They do not attempt to deal with the issues involve, nor consider the impacts of viewing God's character in such a negative manner. You are acting just like they do.
It's fine for you to have a diverging view. There's no problem with that. But produce an argument which is based on reason, which discusses the principles involved.
Why does evil exist in the world? How does God eliminate it? Who is responsible for sin and death? What are the principles of God's government? Does God follow these principles in the destruction of the wicked? Please consider the issues involved in your comments.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/19/04 01:24 PM
quote:
Originally posted by John:
Kevin: I'm afraid I find your theory on why some wicked suffer longer than others very speculative, and not at all supported by the Bible or the SOP.
I'm sorry John, but I came to this conclusion after hours of reading the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy on this topic, especially when I was in college and graduate studies in Biblical and Ellen White writings. As well in the years afterword, which also also included reviewing others, such as Lynn Wood, Paul Heubach, Richard Nies, Jonathan Gallager, Daniel Dudah, all respected scholars in our denomination, and others who durring different times of our history and in different parts of the world, have come to similar conclusions. This is not to mention that the brilliant scholar Dr. Hepenstall could not decided which view was correct, and the friendship that grew between Lynn Wood and Dr. Prescott (and I think Willie White) yet you say this view is not at all supported by the Spirit of Prophecy. Too bad Hepenstall and Prescott (and Willie White?) did not have your clear insights.
You are welcome to show me where the above, especially Lynn Wood, has done sloppy work.
I honestly believe that this is what Mrs. White and the Bible teaches, this is what I read. John, I was a dyed in the wool believer in the literal fire hell until I began to seriously studying the Bible and Mrs. White. She is the one who convinced me of this view. Although I heard one joke once about this other view of hell, I had never studied with the other scholars who taught this view at the time. For me it was 3 years of just noticing things here and there in the Bible and Mrs. White's writings that lead me to this view, then after I came to this conclusion did I start to learn about the studies of others who have come to this and similar conclusions. But I studied these others after I had come to the conclusion that this is what the Bible and Mrs. White taught. The only knowlege I had of this view, prior to my finding it in the Bible and Mrs. White was that one joke. I have to follow what I honestly believe the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy to teach.
However I do not feel that we have been able to clearly present what we believe. I do not see in your attempts to critizise our view an understanding of what we are trying to say.
One of the first steps of criticising someone successfully is by showing that you honestly have looked at and show some understanding of what they are saying. I do not see this in your posts. Whe you quote us, you latch on to a portion of what was written but ignore the ballancing statements, thus you end up twististing our words to make them appear unballanced. I don't believe you are trying to be dishonest, I think you are subconsciously doing this. When you quote Mrs. White you ignore some of the quotes brought up to support this view, and you keep coming with Ellen White quotes that you think supports your view, yet these are still quotes that we agree with and have presented the same quotes to try to present our understanding. In fact to every quote you give, I give a harty "AMEN". But since you do not understand what we are teaching, you do not see how those quotes fit with what we are saying. You seem to be blinded by prejudice over what you think we must believe that you can not see what we actually do believe.
[ December 19, 2004, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: Kevin H ]
Posted By: Ikan
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/19/04 04:11 PM
I am sorry to have to post another long one, as I am unsure if it will be read, but the evidences that I, and several others, are being so misunderstood compels me to become abit more all-inclusive in my answers.
Bro. John: I am happy to deal with several of your good points here. You know our friendship over the years has been based solely on deep discussions over doctrine. You know me fairly well, as far as many of my stands go.
Firstly, your quote "above all law...free from the claims of the law." 4T 120.3 is openly about the Hebrew ceremonial laws, rites, sacrifices, in particular to the red heifer who had never been yoked, and it's symbolism as related to Christ.
But also when you re-read it, you will perhaps see that this wonderful lesson from the SOP(also published under the title "The Sacrifice of Separation." in the January 9, 1883 edition of the Review and Herald.)is about how angels cannot atone for man as a sacrifice, because they are able to sin, break the law of right-doing (The other Law), as fallen angels manifest so horribly. They are under the "yoke of obligation"...the obligation to obey and live forever; disobey and not live forever.
Jesus was not under an "either or " yoke before He was born in Bethlehem, yet He volunteered to take it....for me. He took that risk.
The article, to me, has nothing to do with God's willingness to break His own Ten Commandments, that He expects us to keep.
If one could show me where God had to steal, lie, rob, manipulate or use other evil and forbid ways to prop up His Kingdom, than perhaps I could concede He would kill in the same manner as evil men do.
To my mind, the life and teachings of Christ are the final, comprehensive declaration of what God is and does. His manifestation of the Father is so bright, so clear, and so total, that, for me, nothing more is needed. Therefore, it is the standard by which every argument about the Father's character is tested. If the argument presented cannot find support in Jesus Christ, then, no matter how logical it may seem to be, or how convincing it may appear, I reject it entirely, even though I may have no explanation for it as yet. My faith grasps the reality of Christ's mission as the outshining of the Father's countenance. I believe that God sent His Son into the world for the express purpose of penetrating the mists of error and delusion which Satan had cast around His character of righteousness. The confirmation of that faith is expressed in the resolution to accept nothing about God except that which is in total agreement with the witness of the Father attested to by His Son.
Therefore, if anyone wishes to successfully convince me that God destroyed the sinner, offering as evidence the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah, or any other punishments of the Old Testament era, then he must be able to bring proof that Christ, during His earthly mission, did the same thing. It is so impossible to do this that those who cling to the erroneous view that God does execute the sinner, claim that the revelation of God as given by Christ is only a partial manifestation of the Father which omits the sterner roles of judge and executioner.
Texts and statements quoted earlier expose this as fallacious thinking, for the manifestation of God as given by Christ was as complete as Christ, the superlative One, could make it. Nothing was overlooked or omitted.
No stand is taken here that there are two different revelations of God, the one given in Old Testament times versus that given by Christ. Not a single contradiction exists in the Word of God. There are no statements, rightly understood, which contradict the eternal principles of truth. On the contrary, when comprehended, they move from a position of apparent denial of the eternal verities, to one of mighty endorsement. Thus the true Bible student is not afraid of difficult statements. He may have to admit for the moment, that their true meaning eludes him, but he knows that it will not be for long, as the teaching Holy Spirit leads each trusting student along the glorious corridors of unfolding light.
Not every statement that can be presented has as yet been resolved. There remains one or two for which the correct understanding is still pending, but the Lord will make them clear in time. The fact that they cannot be explained just yet is no cause for fear or doubt. There is more than sufficient evidence in the great principles to establish beyond doubt, the truth of God's character.
But most have been unravelled and, for the help of those still struggling with some of them, an examination of the most commonly quoted will be undertaken. No attempt must be made to twist the statements to fit a desired conclusion. They must be examined to see exactly what they say and, just as importantly, what they do not say. All too often, the problem of interpretation lies in a tendency to assume that a statement infers something it does not. If this inference can be cleared away, the words will then be left free to say what they were intended to.
The Same Powers Problem that Bro. John brought up:
What I would rate as the most difficult is the one which reads:
"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. There are forces now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere." The Great Controversy, 614.
The portion of this statement causing the most difficulty is this, "The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits."
When a person does not have a clear grasp of the principles underlying God's character, it is easy to see how this statement could leave him with the conviction that holy angels destroy exactly as do evil angels. It would appear that the only difference is that holy angels destroy by God's command while the evil do it with His permission.
What happens is that everyone tends to read into this statement more than it actually says. Here is what the statement does not say:
"The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised in the same way by evil angels when He permits."
These four words, "in the same way," are not in the statement, neither are they inferred there. Furthermore, every principle of God's character forbids their being there. Yet, despite multiplied evidences to this effect, this is exactly what people read into the reference. They make no distinction between the work of God and of Satan and therefore between the character of each. This is serious.
There is a decided contrast between the role of the good angels and the evil ones. It is the heaven-appointed work of the righteous angels to hold back the four winds of strife for as long as possible. They only release them when God judges that any further remaining on station will impose their presence where it is not desired. There are many Scriptures which teach this.
"And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree." Revelation 7:1.
"There is a work yet to be done, and then the angels will be bidden to let go, that the four winds may blow upon the earth." Testimonies for the Church, 5:152.
"We are today under divine forbearance; but how long will the angels of God continue to hold the winds, that they shall not blow?" Testimonies for the Church, 6:426.
"Angels are now restraining the winds of strife, that they may not blow until the world shall be warned of its coming doom; but a storm is gathering, ready to burst upon the earth; and when God shall bid His angels loose the winds, there will be such a scene of strife as no pen can picture." Education 179,180.
"I saw four angels who had a work to do on the earth, and were on their way to accomplish it. Jesus was clothed with priestly garments. He gazed in pity on the remnant, then raised His hands, and with a voice of deep pity cried, 'My blood, Father, My blood, My blood, My blood! ' Then I saw an exceeding bright light come from God, who sat upon the great white throne, and was shed all about Jesus. Then I saw an angel with a commission from Jesus, swiftly flying to the four angels who had a work to do on the earth, and waving something up and down in his hand, and crying with a loud voice, 'Hold! Hold! Hold! Hold! until the servants of God are sealed in their foreheads.'
"I asked my accompanying angel the meaning of what I heard, and what the four angels were about to do. He said to me that it was God that restrained the powers, and that He gave His angels charge over things on the earth; that the four angels had power from God to hold the four winds, and that they were about to let them go; but while their hands were loosening, and the four winds were about to blow, the merciful eye of Jesus gazed on the remnant that were not sealed, and He raised His hands to the Father and pleaded with Him that He had spilled His blood for them. Then another angel was commissioned to fly swiftly to the four angels, and bid them hold, until the servants of God were sealed with the seal of the living God in their foreheads." Early Writings, 38.
"God keeps a reckoning with the nations. Not a sparrow falls to the ground without His notice. Those who work evil toward their fellow men, saying, How doth God know? will one day be called upon to meet long- deferred vengeance. In this age a more than common contempt is shown to God. Men have reached a point in insolence and disobedience which shows that their cup of iniquity is almost full. Many have well-nigh passed the boundary of mercy. Soon God will show that He is indeed the living God. He will say to the angels, 'No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy. Let him work out his malignity upon the children of disobedience; for the cup of their iniquity is full. They have advanced from one degree of wickedness to another, adding daily to their lawlessness. I will no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing his work.' " The Review and Herald, September 17, 1901.
"Satan is the destroyer. God cannot bless those who refuse to be faithful stewards. All He can do is to permit Satan to accomplish his destroying work. We see calamities of every kind and in every degree coming upon the earth, and why? The Lord's restraining power is not exercised. The world has disregarded the word of God. They live as though there were no God. Like the inhabitants of the Noachic world, they refuse to have any thought of God. Wickedness prevails to an alarming extent, and the earth is ripe for the harvest." Testimonies for the Church, 6:388, 389.
Every one of these statements confirms that the angels' role is to hold back those terrible powers which are only awaiting release to destroy the earth and the heavens. Angels are righteous. They have not instituted their ways in place of God's. Accordingly, they do only what the Lord would have them do. As surely as the God of heaven never destroys by direct action, neither do the angels. Therefore, the way in which they exercise those powers is by the withdrawal of their restraint upon them. The released energies pass from an inactive state into one of intense activity and consequently, of exercise.
This is the way in which the powers are brought into active exercise by holy angels when God commands, but it is not the way evil angels exercise them when God permits. Satan and his followers have studied the secrets of the laboratories of nature and the turbulent forces within man, until they know just how to activate them into destructive intensities. Thus, while God's angels are working to hold back these fearful elements, Satan and his company are working in the opposite direction.
But, whether they are released into active exercise by the holy angels, or manipulated by evil angels, they are the same powers. This is the principal thought that the statement is intended to convey. It does not discuss the way in which those powers are exercised. When it is recognized that this is the subject matter of the statement, there will be no problem in understanding it.
Far from proving that good angels, at God's command, sally forth and execute the unrighteous, this statement, by emphasizing that it is the same power in any case, verifies that they do not. If God undertook the work of executioner, He would not bother to use anything less than the greatest powers at His command. These certainly are not those in nature and in man. They are the almighty forces within Himself, forces so great that He merely has to speak and whole worlds appear and, in turn, disappear. Therefore, if God was the destroyer, it would not be the same powers as those used by the evil angels who have nothing of themselves but are dependent on what God has invested in nature and in man, to do their work of destruction. God does have almighty omnipotence and is not in any sense dependent on the relatively puny potentials He has given to this earth and its inhabitants. If these facts are kept in mind, then the statement presents no problem.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/19/04 11:08 PM
John, I want to appologize if I was too strong in my last post.
Posted By: Kevin H
Re: The Wrath of God - 12/19/04 11:49 PM
Maybe it would be good if I show some specific places where you do not show understanding of what we are trying to say:
quote:
Originally posted by John:
Let's look at some other statements which show beyond any doubt whatsoever that God does indeed kill when it suits His purpose:"Fire flashing from the cloud [of the Lord's presence] consumed the two hundred and fifty princes who had offered incense."
{PP 401.1} [Korah's rebellion]
"The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits."
{GC 614.2}
"God has often visited judgment upon the false swearer, and even while the oath was on his lips, the destroying angel has cut him down. This was to prove a terror to evildoers."
{1T 202.2}
"In mercy to the world, God blotted out its wicked inhabitants in Noah's time. In mercy He destroyed the corrupt dwellers in Sodom. . . It is in mercy to the universe that God will finally destroy the rejecters of His grace."
{GC 543.3}
"The judgment visited upon Ananias and Sapphira was to be a warning to the church through all time. The sin committed by these persons was similar to that of Achan, and the power of God searched them out and brought swift retribution upon them."
{ST 05-05-81 para. 15}
"Ananias and Sapphira wished to be regarded as giving all, and yet keep part. In order to do this, they falsified. Both of them agreed to practice deception, but they did it at the cost of their lives. God struck them both with death. "
{13MR 188.04} (1899)
"The same angel who had come from the royal courts to rescue Peter, had been the messenger of wrath and judgment to Herod. The angel smote Peter to arouse him from slumber; it was with a different stroke that he smote the wicked king, laying low his pride and bringing upon him the punishment of the Almighty. Herod died in great agony of mind and body, under the retributive judgment of God."
{AA 152.1}
Numbers
22:32 "And the angel of the Lord said unto him [Balaam], Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass these three times? behold, I went out to withstand thee, because thy way is perverse before me:
22:33 And the ass saw me, and turned from me these three times: unless she had turned from me, surely now also I had slain thee, and saved her alive."
(Did the angel of the Lord lie?)
2 Kings 19:35
"And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses."
(The "angel of the Lord" did this; not Satan or his angels.)
Now let's look at the Flood account."The world was in its infancy; yet iniquity had become so deep and widespread that God could no longer bear with it; and He said, 'I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth.' He declared that His Spirit should not always strive with the guilty race. If they did not cease to pollute with their sins the world and its rich treasures, He would blot them from His creation, and would destroy the things with which He had delighted to bless them; He would sweep away the beasts of the field, and the vegetation which furnished such an abundant supply of food, and would transform the fair earth into one vast scene of desolation and ruin...."
{PP 92.1}
I have no problem with any of these quotes. God does indeed kill in both the first death and the second death. The first death is when the body either wears out or meets a tragety. God has seen that there have been times when it is best to put some of his children to sleep. The problems at the flood. In Sodom and Gamorah they felt that they needed to help Baal and the gods of life by throwing their lifeforces on the side of the gods of life. In otherwords, they thought they were helping their herds produce more young and their crops produce more food, and that they were providing for the prosperity of their families and children if they engaged in all types of actvitites that we now realize are abusive, including child abuse and does not result in their desired outcome. Fire from heaven on some of the rebels and enemies. Etc. etc.
Jesus indicates that this first death is not the big issue, but what happens in the judgment. Mrs. White discusses the deceptions of Satan and the issues of the Great Controversy. What happens at the end to the saved and lost are based on fully answering Satan's deceptions and the nature of sin and the nature, character purpose and perpetuity of God's law which is a reflection of his character.
Now there is one story that I am willing to sound like you seem to expect me to sound like, is with Passover in Egypt. With the idea that the blood of the lamb invited Yahweh to passover (or stop for a visit) with that family, while those without the blood are not welcoming Yahweh, so Yahweh passes on through, and without the pressence of the sourse of life, death came into the house. But even here we see God controling the situation, as normally all the germs from all the deaths from the plagues would have killed people at random, but God limited the victim to only the first born.
Oh, by the way, would it be ok for me to point out that in your quote from the Korah rebellion, that the fire came from God's pressence, which is the point that we are argueing and supporting; that the fire is not from some different location. Since you are trying to argue against our view, it would be wise for you to avoid these statements that play right into our hand.
quote:
Originally posted by John:
Lest anyone try to argue that God merely allowed Satan to cause the Flood, there's this:"Satan himself, who was compelled to remain in the midst of the warring elements, feared for his own existence.....He now uttered imprecations against God, charging Him with injustice and cruelty."
{PP 99.3}
No, Satan didn't cause the Flood, it was the Almighty Himself. Both the Bible and SOP are crystal clear. Some might try to say that the Bible language has been misinterpreted due to the difference in ancient Hebrew idiom and our own; but that argument can't be used in the case of the SOP. Ellen White spoke and wrote modern-day English, and she was very clear that God does kill. Very clear.
Once again, I fail to see where this statement is supposed to bother us. There is no dissagreement on this point, and I just find myself baffeled that you think that this quote should be an argument against our view. Isaiah tells us that God is the author of weal and woe, that God is indeed in ultamate control. God claims to have done the harsh things to Job (dispite attempts from people who believe in a litteral fire hell to try to explain away those texts.) The terms "Milk" and "Honey" are terms talking about the hard and easy parts of life. God is the God of both. Jesus says that God causes the sunshine (famine, the hard parts of life) and rain (showers of blessings) to fall on both the just and the unjust.
When it comes to the final judgment, once again God is in control, and God does indeed provide an actvity that DOES INDEED end up KILLING THE LOST. The issue is whether or not this is the EXACT SAME ACTVITY THAT CAUSES HEAVEN TO BE HEAVEN FOR THE SAVED or is God doing two sepperat actvities, one to the saved and the other to the lost. For some reason the criticts want to make different arguments where no argument nor dissagreement exists. Once again it is not WHETHER OR NOT GOD KILLS, but HOW DOES GOD KILL!
quote:
Originally posted by John:
The bare facts are that both the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy declare again and again, in language that the simplest child can understand, that God does kill, and will punish sin by killing sinners in the lake of fire. He gains no pleasure from this (Ezekiel 18:32), but it will happen nonetheless. To deny this fact is to deny God's word, the plain statements of His messengers throughout the ages. Such a denial of the truth constitutes a dangerous delusion, since it misrepresents the very character of the Almighty.
Once again I have no problem with this statement, except for being baffeled that you for some reason think that I should have a problem with this statement. The only dissagreement we have is over what we believe the Bible and Mrs. White to teach what (or who) the lake of fire actually is, and over the exact mechanics as to how it kills the sinner. Again, this statement shows that you do not show any indicatation that you understand what we are trying to say. IT IS YOU JOHN who is claiming that we deny these truths, NOT US! WE BELIEVE and Afirm these truths! It is in how this truth works out that we hold different approaches to.
We want to present how we understand the Bible and Mrs. White to teach HOW the mechanics of this truth works out. But too many critics try to avoid the real issue by simply pretending that we don't believe these truths, and just defend the fact that this truth exists as a way to try to argue against us and think they simply solved the problem. In otherwords John, you keep barking up the wrong tree. You do not criticize our view, but you set up your own strawmen to knock down. You try to argue points where we have no quarel.
I don't mind what I teach to be criticized, but it would be nice if you could criticize what I'm actually teaching instead of things that I'm not teaching, but which you insist in imposing on my understanding.
[ December 19, 2004, 05:39 PM: Message edited by: Kevin H ]
Posted By: Daryl
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/18/05 11:40 PM
Here is a good example that shows the wrath of God in action:
quote:
1 Chronicles 21:15 MKJV
And
God sent an angel to Jerusalem to destroy it. And as he was destroying, Jehovah looked. And He repented of the evil and said
to the angel who destroyed, Enough! Stay your hand now! And the angel of Jehovah stood by the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite.
An angel of God destroying, not a fallen angel, but an angel of God.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/19/05 12:37 AM
Daryl, while I went ahead and addressed your post, it appeared to me that it didn't really belong in this thread. This thread, despite the open-ended sounding title, has up until now been discussing the destruction of the wicked at the final judgment. The topic discussing the flood, in spite of its more specific sounding title, on the other hand has been all over the place regarding what it has discussed. Continuing ...
If the goal is to understand God's character, the way to do this is by studying the life and character of Jesus Christ.
quote:
All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son." Testimonies for the Church, 8:286.
If we try to figure out what's happening in the Old Testament, and we choose to ignore the revelation God has given us, we are doomed to fail. Even the holy angels did not understand things until the cross:
quote:
Not until the death of Christ was the character of Satan clearly revealed to the angels or to the unfallen worlds. The archapostate had so clothed himself with deception that even holy beings had not understood his principles. They had not clearly seen the nature of his rebellion. (DA 758)
So if even holy angels couldn't understand things apart from Christ, why should we think we can properly divide the word of truth while ignoring Christ?
quote:
:In order to be rightly understood and appreciated, every truth in the Word of God, from Genesis to Revelation, must be studied in the light which streams from the cross of Calvary, and in connection with the wondrous, central truth of the Saviour's atonement. (5ABC 1137)
So in considering any incident, we should think of how the cross of Christ sheds light on the incident, because our theory of truth will be off if we don't (see the above guote).
If we take into account that God is often presented as doing that which He permits, the above quote should not cause difficulty. For example, from the same book we have:
quote:
And enquired not of the LORD: therefore he slew him, and turned the kingdom unto David the son of Jesse. (1 Chron 10:14)
If you were to take just this one quote, and use the same principle you're trying to apply above, you would conclude that God killed Saul. But Scripture often presents God as doing that which He permits, which is just what happened here.
Here's another example from Chronicals:
quote:
19 And the LORD said, 'Who will entice Ahab king of Israel into attacking Ramoth Gilead and going to his death there?'
"One suggested this, and another that. 20 Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the LORD and said, 'I will entice him.'
" 'By what means?' the LORD asked.
21 " 'I will go and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,' he said.
" 'You will succeed in enticing him,' said the LORD. 'Go and do it.'
22 "So now the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouths of these prophets of yours. The LORD has decreed disaster for you." (2 Chron. 18:19-22)
Whatever theory we come up with regarding God's wrath, it should be in harmony with other inspiration. For example, we have the following principles from the Spirit of Prophesy:
quote:
There can be no more conclusive evidence that we possess the spirit of Satan than the disposition to hurt and destroy those who do not appreciate our work, or who act contrary to our ideas." The Desire of Ages, 487.
quote:
Sickness, suffering, and death are work of an antagonistic power. Satan is the destroyer; God is the restorer." The Ministry of Healing, 113.
quote:
Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. (DA 79)
quote:
The Spirit of God, persistently resisted, is at last withdrawn from the sinner, and then there is left no power to control the evil passions of the soul, and no protection from the malice and enmity of Satan." The Great Controversy, 36.
So, in conclusion, I don't think taking a single text without any consideration to how the author of Chronicals frequently presents God as doing that which He permits, or the other principles I've laid out is not the best way to approach a study of God's wrath.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/19/05 12:56 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Daryl Fawcett:
As a result of the discussion in another topic I have created this topic on The Wrath of God where we can ask and answer such questions as:
1 - What is the wrath of God?
2 - Does God kill, or does man, etc. kill himself?
Let the discussion from that other topic begin and continue here.
I think what I posted is relevant in relation to the 2nd question I posted in the first post of this topic, which I created.
Also, such a clear text still needs to be explained. In the case of the text I posted, God clearly sent the angel to destroy, therefore, God in this instance did kill.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/19/05 02:00 AM
By the way, that isn't the only reference wherein it says who kills or destroys who?
quote:
Genesis 18:32 And he said, Oh do not let Jehovah be angry, and I will speak only once more. Perhaps ten shall be found there. And He said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake.
33 And Jehovah went His way as soon as He had left off talking with Abraham. And Abraham returned to his place.
Jehovah said that He will not destroy it for ten's sake.
Who will not destroy it? Jehovah God will not destroy it.
So, who destroyed Sodom & Gomorrah and its people? Jehovah God destroyed Sodom & Gomorrah and its people.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/19/05 07:27 AM
Regarding the appropriateness of the material, you're right. You started the thread, so should be able to direct it. Although it started in one direction doesn't mean it has to stay there.
Picking texts out at random out of context is a hopeless way to try to understand God's character. That is the goal, isn't it? God's character is revealed perfectly in Jesus Christ. THAT'S the place to start. Start there, get the principles, and then start romping around from place to place, and there might be some hope in getting it right.
For example, consider the following quote:
quote:
All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son. (8T 236)
Is this statement true? Does it mean anything? If it is true, and meaniful, then it must mean the following:
1.All that man needs to know of God was revealed in the life an character of His Son.
2.All that man can know of God was revealed in the life and character of His Son.
The corollary of this would be:
1. There is nothing which man needs to know of God which was not revealed in the life and character of His Son.
2. There is nothing man can know of God which was not revealed in the life and character of His Son.
So if we study isolated incidents without regard to the life and character of Jesus Christ, all we will be "learning" are things which we need not know and cannot know.
If we take some incident which seems to portray God in a way which is out of harmony with what was revealed in the life and character of Christ, we either need to find something in the life and character of Christ which supports our viewpoint, or rethink what we think.
Here's another quote to consider:
quote:
Force is the last resort of every false religion. (7SDABC 9)
If there's no difference between God and false religion, something seems wrong.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/20/05 06:10 AM
Thank you, Daryl, for pointing out the obvious. Yes, God has, and will, destroy unsaved sinners. The wrath of God is love. It is not contrary to His law or character to punish and destroy those who reject His love and salvation.
True, it is a "strange act", one that we cannot easily comprehend, but God knows what He is doing and, by faith, it is our duty and privilege to rejoice with the holy angels when God exercises His divine duty to punish and destroy the rejecters of His mercy.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/20/05 06:15 AM
quote:
Thank you, Daryl, for pointing out the obvious. Yes, God has, and will, destroy unsaved sinners. The wrath of God is love. It is not contrary to His law or character to punish and destroy those who reject His love and salvation.
Pardon me for being obtuse, Mike, but since this is obvious you should have no trouble doing this. Given that all we can know of God was revealed in the life and character of His Son in His humanity, please show me where in Jesus' life here on earth He destroyed someone who rejected His love.
Thank you.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/20/05 06:52 AM
Tom,
You need to see Christ in His four primary roles:1 - before His 1st Coming as Lord, King, Judge, and Saviour,
2- during His 1st Coming as
Saviour, Lord, and King,
3 - at and during His 2nd Coming as Saviour, Lord, King, and Judge.
4 - and finally at and during His 3rd Coming as Judge, Lord, and King.
His role during His first coming wasn't a role of condemnation, but solely a role of salvation or Saviour.
quote:
Luke 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
John 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
The above two verses are only a sample of the many verses that reveals what His role was during His 1st Coming or Advent.
For Him to condemn and destroy then, particularly during His time on earth, would be going outside of His desired role of Saviour, and even then when He does destroy, such as in the case of The Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, etc. He does it with sadness. It truly is His strange act.
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/19/05 11:07 PM
Thank you Daryl. This sort of post is more helpful then just quoting a text. You're approaching the problem in a logical way based on principles. IMO, that's the way we need to go.
Daryl:Tom,
You need to see Christ in His four primary roles:
1 - before His 1st Coming as Lord, King, Judge, and Saviour,
2- during His 1st Coming as Saviour, Lord, and King,
3 - at and during His 2nd Coming as Saviour, Lord, King, and Judge.
4 - and finally at and during His 3rd Coming as Judge, Lord, and King.
His role during His first coming wasn't a role of condemnation, but solely a role of salvation or Saviour.
Tom:Question:Does His role change His character? Obviously not. So perhaps a better question would be, if Christ is missing a role while here on earth, then was there some aspect of God's character which was not revealed?
In other words, when the Spirit of Prophesy says
quote:
All that man needs to know or can know of God was revealed in the life and character of His Son.
was this statement was in error, being imcomplete? It's really NOT all we can know, because it's missing the Judge role stuff.
Daryl:
Luke 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
John 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
The above two verses are only a sample of the many verses that reveals what His role was during His 1st Coming or Advent.
For Him to condemn and destroy then, particularly during His time on earth, would be going outside of His desired role of Saviour, and even then when He does destroy, such as in the case of The Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, etc. He does it with sadness. It truly is His strange act.
Tom:I don't see Jesus as being any different in His lifetime on earth then at other times. I believe the Spirit of Prophesy was correct in stating that all that we can know about God was revealed in Christ's life and character. There was nothing left out. Our problem is that we have misunderstood His character, and thus misinterpreted what happened in the Old Testament (and what will happen in the future).
If we start with Christ's life and character while here on earth, and use that as a reference point to compare to, then we have a chance of getting it right.
quote:
The earth was dark through misapprehension of God. That the gloomy shadows might be lightened, that the world might be brought back to God, Satan's deceptive power was to be broken. This could not be done by force. The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority. Only by love is love awakened. To know God is to love Him; His character must be manifested in contrast to the character of Satan. This work only one Being in all the universe could do. Only He who knew the height and depth of the love of God could make it known.(DA 22)
It's because we were confused that Christ came. Before Christ, there was a record of the Old Testament. It doesn't make sense to go back to that which was misunderstood in the first place to try to understand that which was given to correct the misunderstandings! Even holy angels did not understand the truth until the cross.
quote:
To the angels and the unfallen worlds the cry, "It is finished," had a deep significance. It was for them as well as for us that the great work of redemption had been accomplished. They with us share the fruits of Christ's victory.
Not until the death of Christ was the character of Satan clearly revealed to the angels or to the unfallen worlds. The archapostate had so clothed himself with deception that even holy beings had not understood his principles. They had not clearly seen the nature of his rebellion. (DA 758)
If even holy angels were confused until the cross, how much more will we be confused if we disregard it. Every truth, to be properly understood, must be studied in the light of Calvary.
I believe we can perfectly understood God's dealings with the wicked by studying Christ's life and character, especially at Calvary. In fact, just studying Calvary would provide the answer.
In Christ, we have all the answer right in front of us.
I agree with the strange work comment and God's sadness. I'm glad you see this as something God does with a heavy heart. I agree with you on this.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/19/05 11:38 PM
What does God say about Himself? quote:
Exodus 34:6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,
7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.
I wonder what God means by "that will by no means clear the guilty"?
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/20/05 01:22 AM
Well it wasn't something which wasn't revealed in the life of Christ! (pardon the double negative; how about, This was revealed in the life of Christ!)
quote:
The glory of God--His character--was then revealed: "The Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty."
This character was revealed in the life of Christ. That He might by His own example condemn sin in the flesh, He took upon Himself the likeness of sinful flesh. Constantly He beheld the character of God; constantly He revealed this character to the world. (Reflecting Christ 214)
So if we want to answer that question, we have but to look at the life and character of Christ. I have a thought as to what it means, but pardon me while I defer to ask your opinion. Where in Christ's life to you seem Him answering your question?
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/20/05 01:28 AM
Tom
Remember the many parables of Jesus, there are many who deal with refusal or neglect as responces to His preaching on the comming of His kingdom.
Posted By: John Boskovic
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/20/05 02:33 AM
quote:
I wonder what God means by "that will by no means clear the guilty"?
Mat 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven unto men.
Those who blaspheme against the holy spirit are rejecting the spirit of, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin. They are calling the holy spirit unrighteous.
Therefore by not partaking of God’s holy spirit of mercy, forgiveness and grace they remain in their own “righteousness” which is not forgiving, but exacting and accusing and holding guilty. Thus God cannot clear them by any means.
The great controversy is between good and evil;
between the justifier and the accuser;
between the gracious and the condemning;
between Christ and Satan;
between life and death;
between faith and fear;
between love and hate.
God offers us his holy spirit in salvation.
Which spirit are we of?
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/20/05 05:27 AM
quote:
Therefore by not partaking of God’s holy spirit of mercy, forgiveness and grace they remain in their own “righteousness” which is not forgiving, but exacting and accusing and holding guilty.
Amen!
Posted By: Tom
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/20/05 06:03 AM
The incidents that immediately came to my mind in Christ's life were the woman caught in adultery, Judas, and Jerusalem.
A couple of thoughts on the verse. First of all, the context is that Moses asked God to reveal him His character. God responded, "I will cause all my goodness to pass before thee" and then He proclaimed His character. This tells us that God's character is goodness. I note that it is the goodness of God which leads to repentance. It's also God's goodness which causes the death of the wicked (DA 108).
The Portuguese version says that God will be no means "innocent" the guilty, where "innocent" is a verb. That is, God will recognize the guilty as guilty, He will call a spade a spade.
Regarding the question of what it means to say "God will by no means clear the guilty" Waggoner writes:
quote:
This is God's name. It is the character in which He reveals Himself to man, the light in which He wishes men to regard Him. But what of the declaration that He "will by no means clear the guilty"? That is perfectly in keeping with His longsuffering, abundant goodness and His passing by the transgression of His people. It is true that God will by no means clear the guilty. He could not do that and still be a just God. But He does something which is far better. He removes the guilt, so that the one formerly guilty does not need to be cleared--he is justified and counted as though he never had sinned. (from Christ and His Righteousness; "The Lord Our Righteousness")
Posted By: John Boskovic
Re: The Wrath of God - 09/21/05 06:39 AM
quote:
God responded, "I will cause all my goodness to pass before thee" and then He proclaimed His character. This tells us that God's character is goodness. I note that it is the goodness of God which leads to repentance.
Oh that men would praise the LORD for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men!