Seems to me the law of God has been in force since before the fall of A&E. True, God did not execute A&E the instant they sinned; instead, He implemented the plan of salvation. Nevertheless, death did come in consequence of their sin. Jesus is the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." (Rev 13:8) To symbolize His death God covered A&E with animal skins.

In the case of Cain, again, God chose not to execute them the instant they sinned. Why not? No doubt to teach other important lessons. Ellen provides a sensible reason why God let Cain live:


In the case of Lamech, God chose not to execute him for good reasons. Not much is said about it, but perhaps it was to dedmonstrate the negative results of polygamy? Listen:


And, what of the millions of other sinners who escaped immediate punishment for their sins? I suppose the Flood was soon enough. The antediluvians were punished for their sins in the Flood. Not that they didn't suffer the consequences of sinning before they died in the Flood. Sin always pays it wages in suffering and death. But the Flood was different. That was God punishing them.

this isnt a question of whether the law of God was in effect or not. that was a given. but an eye for an eye was not in effect. according to egw-and indirectly the bible-mild, or no, consequences didnt make the world a better place.

i think where the tom-camp have a problem with this is the lack of love in carrying out consequences. we do it in the spirit of satan not the spirit of God. nor do we do it with restoration in mind, if possible.



or God ending all the violence. as He will do at the second and third comings. so is God ending it the same as God punishing?

Teresaq, an interesting insight to consider is the fact sinners die a long, lingering death, instead of being immediately executed, because God implemented the plan of salvation. Otherwise, the human race would have ended with the immediate execution of A&E. As a result, people experience varying degrees of suffering and death. Sin pays its wages according to the degree of sinfulness. This could be construed, I suppose, as a natural form of "eye for an eye".

It appears, though, that God Himself does not execute justice according to the "eye for an eye" principle, at least not during probationary time. It seems to be all or nothing with God, or what is sometimes referred to as "full cup" justice. But when He called out the Jews as His chosen people and nation, He seems to have thought it prudent to implement a system of justice based on the "eye for an eye" principle. I like what you said about it (I think it was you), that it was to prevent people from executing justice unfairly.

i dont think i did say that. i believe it was tom.

but i like the



that seems to be a very real possibility and i think he has a lot of ellen white backing. others may not see it that way, but i believe it is probably the best explanation of Gods dealings with us.

check it out if you are so inclined and let me know what you think.

An interesting article indeed. I enjoyed reading it. It was well thought out and mapped out. But it seems to overlook the fact God does not start over afresh with a group every time a new believer joins the church. That is, God does not revert back to thundering from Sinai and treating the group like Stage 1 sinners every time a Stage 1 sinner joins the group. This being the case, how do new Stage I sinners progress through the other stages when the group is well past, say for example, Stage 5?

I suppose they would have the benefit of the Bible record of God dealing with sinners slowly progressing through the various stages. Also, they would have the benefit of reading about the various stages in the article you posted. Plus, they would have the benefit of the examples of the existing members at church who are at Stage 5 and beyond. Ultimately, they have Jesus as an example of what it means to be a child of God.

Having all these testimonies at their disposal would seem to preclude some of the lower, less favorable stages. Who can honestly start off at Stage 1 in light of all these concrete examples? Also, God has not actively interacted with the church in a very long time, at least not like He did in the days of Moses or in the days of Jesus. In other words, we do not see or hear God working with us on different levels as we pass through the various stages described in the article you posted.

At this point, it is all very academic, depending on what we read about in history books, especially in the Bible. Nothing will change, so far as we can observe, as we progress from one stage to another. That is, God will treat us the same way He has been treating us all along. For example, we will not see God one day thundering from Sinai and then speaking to us with a still small voice several stages later. God is not active like this any more, not like He used to be. We have the Bible to read, so He doesn't have to act differently any more.

Of course, we know God will pour out the latter rain when the time is right, which depends on several factors, one of them being - enough people need to be at Stage 7. Then we can expect God to change how He interacts with His church.

hmmmm, we certainly are individuals and do get different understandings out of the same material.

i had to go back and review the paper a bit because i didnt remember it quite saying the same thing.

Perhaps I missed something. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, or so I've been told. What did you see that makes you think I saw something different?

i dont see how you got that from this statement.

Oh, okay. I see what you mean now. Thank you. It's just that when I read through the article I got the impression the author was describing group dynamics, the progression of the majority of individuals in a group. God seems to do this, too, at times. Looking at the last days church, He labeled them Laodicea no doubt because more than half of the individuals in the group are lukewarm.

But nowadays I don't see God acting in progressively different ways toward the church or toward the world in order to accommodate the majority need of individuals in a group. God seems to be silent. He is neither thundering nor whispering. At least not like we read about it in the Bible. He is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

The author seems to be saying God treats a group differently as the majority of individuals move from one stage to another and that such treatment motivates growing and maturing until the group attains the final stage. So, my question is, in light of what the author of the article postulated, how can a group progress from one stage to the next since nowadays God remains the same, since He doesn't act any differently no matter what stage the group has attained?

God does act differently, depending on what stage the group has attained. To assert God remains the same doesn't mean God doesn't adjust for the given groups, but that His adjustments are consistent with adjustments He would have made for similar groups throughout history.