The post was addressed to you. At any rate, are you suggesting her view of the destruction of the wicked is different in DA as compared to EW? If so, please cite examples. Thank you.

Of course the penal, substitutionary death of Jesus did not change God's mind about wanting to do whatever it takes to save penitent sinners. God bound Himself by His word and by His law to execute the death penalty in consequence of man's sin. Here is how the SOP worded it:

CON 21, 22
But a plan was devised that the sentence of death should rest upon a Substitute. In the plan of redemption there must be the shedding of blood, for death must come in consequence of man's sin.... And thus Christ would fully vindicate His Father's law. {Con 21.3}

1SM 308
Through disobedience Adam fell. The law of God had been broken. The divine government had been dishonored, and justice demanded that the penalty of transgression be paid. {1SM 308.1}

AG 139
Justice demands that sin be not merely pardoned, but the death penalty must be executed. God, in the gift of His only-begotten Son, met both these requirements. By dying in man's stead, Christ exhausted the penalty and provided a pardon. {AG 139.2}

FLB 102
These lessons were taught to the chosen people of God thousands of years ago, and repeated in various symbols and figures, that the work of truth might be riveted in every heart, that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. . . . Justice demanded the sufferings of man; but Christ rendered the sufferings of a God. He needed no atonement of suffering for Himself; all His sufferings were for us; all His merits and holiness were open to fallen man, presented as a gift. {FLB 102.4}

FE 283
When all hope was excluded from Adam and Eve in consequence of transgression and sin, when justice demanded the death of the sinner, Christ gave Himself to be a sacrifice for the sin of the world. The world was under condemnation. Christ became substitute and surety for man. {FE 283.1}

PP 325
Love no less than justice demanded that for this sin judgment should be inflicted. God is the guardian as well as the sovereign of His people. He cuts off those who are determined upon rebellion, that they may not lead others to ruin. {PP 325.2}

PP 492
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. {PP 492.2}


Let's take a look at the quotes you posted (my comments follow her quotes):

"The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government...(DA 22) Correct. Destroying impenitent sinners with water and fire were not acts of force; instead, they were divine acts of punishment. Which is something man has no right to do.

"Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. (GC 35, 36) God never caused or permitted evil to befall impenitent sinners without righteous reasons.

"God does not force the will or judgment of any. (GC 541) True.

"God could have destroyed Satan and his sympathizers as easily as one can cast a pebble to the earth; but He did not do this. Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. {DA 759.1} Of course not. In the end, Satan's destruction in the lake of is justified.


"God desired to teach them that from His own love comes the gift which reconciles them to Himself. {DA 112} Yes, and that gift involved Jesus paying our sin debt of death on the cross.

"The atonement of Christ is not a mere skillful way to have our sins pardoned; {7ABC 464.2} True, it included other important aspects as well.

"As the Saviour is lifted up before the people, they will see his humiliation, his self-denial, his self-sacrifice, his goodness, his tender compassion, his sufferings to save fallen man, and will realize that the atonement of Christ was not the cause of God's love, but the result of that love. Jesus died because God loved the world. The channel had to be made whereby the love of God should be recognized by man, and flow into the sinner's heart in perfect harmony with truth and justice." {RH, September 2, 1890 par. 7} Amen! Jesus' death on the cross accomplished many wonderful and needful things, not the least of which was to demonstrate God's love and desire to save us at any cost.

None of the quotes you posted, though, debunk the penal substitution view of atonement.

You've quoted these from EW many times, so I have in mind the ones you regularly quote. The DA ones I've quoted many times, so you should know those well. I'll quote one of them here:

What does this have to do with penal atonement? Some comment as to why you think this has something to do with the topic your are using it for would be helpful.

I noticed a similar thing in a recent discussion regarding the first four commandments vs. the last six. You cited a whole bunch of quotes, but they weren't talking about what you were. This makes it hard to follow your thought.

Rather than a whole bunch of quotes not dealing with the subject just one, two or three which make the point you wish to make would be good. Or, if it's difficult to see what the point is, if you made it clear, that would be appreciated.



Here's another one. What does this have to do with what you wrote? You wrote this:



What does the PP 492 quote have to do with Jesus' "penal, substitutionary death"?

When do they receive these "results"? And what "results" is she referring to? And, how does this view of God differ from the view Jesus revealed to her earlier on in her ministry?


It speaks about "justice" demanding the execution of judgment. One of the many reasons Jesus had to live and die the perfect life and death was to satisfy the demands of law and justice, which is, of course, in harmony with love. All throughout the history of the GC thus far, law and justice have required God to execution the death penalty. God always acts in harmony with the loving principles of law and justice.

AG 139
Justice demands that sin be not merely pardoned, but the death penalty must be executed. God, in the gift of His only-begotten Son, met both these requirements. By dying in man's stead, Christ exhausted the penalty and provided a pardon. {AG 139.2}

At the judgment.



Death.



Why do you think it differs?



The vast majority of the time, evil is not speedily visited by justice. You say this happens, "All throughout the history of the GC thus far, law and justice have required God to execution the death penalty." yet of the billions of sinful acts which have occurred throughout human history, what you are suggesting has occurred refers to a handful of incidents. So how is this evidence for your point of view?

Thank you for answering the first two questions. I agree unsaved sinners receive the "results" at judgments. But I do not agree death is the only result. The Bible and the SOP make it clear the "results" include the punishment of suffering before they die. Not even you believe they die instantly.


That's how this recent volley of posts got started. I asked Scott for evidence that Sister White's view of God became less harsh over time. You seem to agree with him. But so far neither one of you have posted the quotes to establish your assertions.


True. But law and justice allow for this because Jesus has already paid the sin debt of death. Law and justice have already been satisfied. The unfolding of the GC under the plan of salvation creates a first death scenario not originally envisioned by law and justice.

The suffering is the result of the judgment.



Why do you think what Jesus reveled to her differed as opposed to her understanding of what was revealed? If you just look at what she wrote, it's easy to see that what she wrote was different. Just look at DA 764, or DA 108 and compare that with the EW passages that you've quoted. I've asked you many, many times to reconcile these, and you never have even attempted to do so.

I believe in the EW passages she wrote down what she saw, and in other passages, including the DA ones I cited and GC 541-543, another one which comes to mind, she explains what she understands these visions to mean.

I didn't understand your law and justice comment.

In judgment they are allowed to feel the full force of their sins. This is what causes them to suffer. True, they also suffer because in judgment they were found guilty and undeserving of eternal life in Paradise. Missing out on eternal life in Paradise is a bummer, but the lion's share of the suffering they experience comes from feeling the undiluted combined force of their sins.


I believe what Jesus revealed to her early on in her ministry and what He revealed to her later on in her ministry describe different ways and means God has employed, and will yet employ, to punish and destroy impenitent sinners. That's how I reconcile the different things Jesus has revealed to her.


That's fine for you to say, but it's too bad for you she didn't say it herself - not once. How do you reconcile this fact?


The reason sinners do not experience the natural, undiluted, unprotected consequences of sinning, the moment they sin, is due to the fact God intervenes and prevents it. Had God not implemented the plan of salvation, sinners would have died on the same day they sinned. The human race would have ended with the death of the A&E.

When God implemented the plan of salvation it protected A&E and their descendants from dying on the same day they sin. One of the many byproducts of implementing the plan of salvation is a first death scenario. The long, lingering first death sinners experience is not the natural, inevitable consequences of sinning. It is one of the fruits of the plan of salvation.

Law and justice requires God to punish and destroy sinners on the same day they sin. Jesus satisfied this just and loving requirement by becoming our substitute, by becoming the Lamb slain from the foundation of world. In this way God earned the legal right to grant sinners probation, and to offer them pardon and eternal life.

As the GC plays out, law and justice can, under the first death scenario, allow God to prevent or protect sinners from speedily experiencing justice for their sins. The reason law and justice can allow God to manage the consequences of sinner's choices in this way is because Jesus has already paid the actual price for their sins, namely, the second death.

Agreed.



It would be hard to know how to apportion this, but I agree that their suffering is caused by the revelation of truth in regards to their sins, their destiny, and their character.



There's no evidence to suggest that Jesus revealed something different to her. Indeed, the evidence is that she wrote these different books using the same source of revelation. She simply interpreted what she had been revealed to different degrees. In the Desire of Ages she explained the meaning in greater detail of what she had been shown earlier.



There's nothing to "reconcile." The evidence suggests the source of revelation for the different books was the same. There's no evidence her writings in these different books were inspired by a completely fresh set of visions. If you wish to assert this, the onus is on *you* to provide the evidence that she was revealed different things. I can just as easily say, "That's fine for you to say, but it's too bad for you she didn't say it herself - not once. How do you reconcile this fact?"




Satan isn't dead.



Satan isn't dead. If what you were saying were true, wouldn't Satan be dead? Unless Jesus died for him?



How does it allow Satan to live?