The Bible says that Jesus came in the fullness of time. What does that mean? Is it just an arbitrary time that God decided? Or was there some reason why Christ came when He did? Would His coming have been as effective had it been earlier? If not, why not?

Wasn't the timing of Christ's 1st Advent according to the 70 Week Prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 quoted below?



This prophecy gives the timing from the beginning of His earthly ministry to His Crucifixion.

From the above quote, I would say that "the fullness of time" is referring to the beginning of His earthly ministry.

It could be referring to the timing of His birth in Bethlehem.

Great questions, Tom. God directed things until the world was ripe for the first advent of Christ. Apparently it took time.

DA 32
So in heaven's council the hour for the coming of Christ had been determined. When the great clock of time pointed to that hour, Jesus was born in Bethlehem. {DA 32.1}

"When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son." Providence had directed the movements of nations, and the tide of human impulse and influence, until the world was ripe for the coming of the Deliverer. The nations were united under one government. One language was widely spoken, and was everywhere recognized as the language of literature. From all lands the Jews of the dispersion gathered to Jerusalem to the annual feasts. As these returned to the places of their sojourn, they could spread throughout the world the tidings of the Messiah's coming. {DA 32.2}

At this time the systems of heathenism were losing their hold upon the people. Men were weary of pageant and fable. They longed for a religion that could satisfy the heart. While the light of truth seemed to have departed from among men, there were souls who were looking for light, and who were filled with perplexity and sorrow. They were thirsting for a knowledge of the living God, for some assurance of a life beyond the grave. {DA 32.3}

Daryl, I was getting at the why. That is, why did Jesus come when He came? Was it just arbitrary? (to fulfill a prophecy) Or was there a reason God chose this specific time? MM's answer is getting at what my questions were asking.

MM, I think those are excellent points. Here's another question, related to the original one. We see that God did not immediately send Christ, but only after several millenia. First God with and through Israel. Why?

Tom, this is something that has troubled me over the years. Why God didn't allow Jesus to die immediately after Adam and Eve sinned is a mystery to me. The only thing that makes sense is that the onlooking universe needed time to observe Jesus and Satan handling the great controversy in the hearts and minds of humans.

For whatever reason Enoch's example was not sufficient to end the GC by allowing Jesus to die then. For whatever reason Noah's example was not enough, and Abraham's, and Joseph's, and Moses', and Samuel's, and David's, etc - none of these people or eras or dispensations adequately demonstrated the principles of the GC in a way that would have allowed Jesus to end the GC on the Cross. Even Jesus' own life and death didn't allow God to end the GC right then and there.

I don't get it! In the meantime, however, I am enjoying walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man, fellowshipping with Jesus now, waiting until He comes again. It doesn't matter to me, too much, if He doesn't return in my lifetime.

Well it's a good thing to ponder. A point which I've heard, which makes a great deal of sense to me, is that one question God wished to answer is what would happen is a people were to "worship" God with the intention of avoiding bad consequences they perceive would happen to them if they didn't. In other words, a "worship" inspired by fear.

We know that at first the angels were confused as to the principles of God's government. They cried out for vengeance. They wanted God to destroy His enemies whenever they dared to defy Him.

The Jews demonstrated what happens when one "worships" God from a wrong motive, for example, the motive of fear.

Consider the following from your favorite passage from the Desire of Ages:



This passage points out the danger of misunderstanding God. Had God allowed Satan to reap the result of his sin, he would have died, but the reason for his death would not have been clear. It would have appeared that it was due to something God was doing to Satan as opposed to what it really was, the result of his sin. This misunderstanding of God would have created an evil seed of doubt, and the sin problem would not have been cured. Indeed, things would have become worse.

So the reason, or a reason, that Christ did not come immediately upon Adam's sin was that there were lessons that needed to learn, which agrees with what you said. Had He come too soon, the problem of sin would not have been cured. The purpose for Christ's coming was to do away with sin, so the timing had to be right, so the purpose for which He came could be accomplished.

He came at a time so that His life and death would answer all of the questions that needed answers for time and eternity.

If the issue were simply legal, then He could have come and died right away.

And, if the issues were simply relational Jesus would have died right away. So, since both the legal and relational issues would have been best dealt with by Jesus dying right away – why didn’t He?

My favorite quote, however, addresses Lucifer's sin problem - not ours. In light of the following quote, why did God wait 4,000 years to do the one and only thing He could to motivate us to love and trust Him, to repent and cease sinning?

DA 761, 762
But even as a sinner, man was in a different position from that of Satan. Lucifer in heaven had sinned in the light of God's glory. To him as to no other created being was given a revelation of God's love. Understanding the character of God, knowing His goodness, Satan chose to follow his own selfish, independent will. This choice was final. There was no more that God could do to save him. But man was deceived; his mind was darkened by Satan's sophistry. The height and depth of the love of God he did not know. For him there was hope in a knowledge of God's love. By beholding His character he might be drawn back to God. {DA 761.5}

And, if the issues were simply relational Jesus would have died right away.

The relational issues involved not just humanity but the rest of the universe as well.

So, since both the legal and relational issues would have been best dealt with by Jesus dying right away – why didn’t He?

My goodness, MM, I just wrote about this! You must have read it, since you quoted from it.

My favorite quote, however, addresses Lucifer's sin problem - not ours.

It addresses both.

In light of the following quote, why did God wait 4,000 years to do the one and only thing He could to motivate us to love and trust Him, to repent and cease sinning?

Read my previous post, please. It's difficult for me to understand how you can ask a question, and I answer the question, and then you re-ask the same exact question as if I hadn't responded.

I hope we are all carefully reading and digesting one another's posts.

Communication is always a challenge, in the best of circumstances. It's especially so when one is limited to writing.

Tom

Questions from MM:

But what about all those people who lived 4,000 years before Jesus revealed all the truths you listed? What was their knowledge base, their source of victory? You say there are many things that motivate people to love and trust God, that the death of Jesus on cross is just one of them. Was it possible, based on the truths revealed before Jesus died on the cross, for people to “work out [their] own salvation”? If so, then why did Jesus have to die? If not, then why did Jesus wait 4,000 years?

The short history behind the questions:

TE: Only He who knew God best, being at the Father's side, could show us what God is really like. We are healed, reconciled, when we believe the truth which Christ came to reveal.

MM: But what about all those people who lived 4,000 years before Jesus revealed all the truths you listed? What was their knowledge base, their source of victory? You say there are many things that motivate people to love and trust God, that the death of Jesus on cross is just one of them. Was it possible, based on the truths revealed before Jesus died on the cross, for people to “work out [their] own salvation”? If so, then why did Jesus have to die? If not, then why did Jesus wait 4,000 years?

TE: Jesus died because He took our nature, lived amongst us, and bore our sins. According to the Spirit of Prophecy, the whole purpose of his earthly mission was the revelation of God, in order to set us right with Him.

EGW: He was pictured as one who could take pleasure in the sufferings of his creatures. The very attributes that belonged to the character of Satan, the evil one represented as belonging to the character of God. Jesus came to teach men of the Father, to correctly represent him before the fallen children of earth. Angels could not fully portray the character of God, but Christ, who was a living impersonation of God, could not fail to accomplish the work. The only way in which he could set and keep men right was to make himself visible and familiar to their eyes. That men might have salvation he came directly to man, and became a partaker of his nature.(ST 1/20/90)

TE: This [quote] makes clear that Christ had to come in order to correctly represent God before man. This is "the only way" in which He could "set and keep men right." He had to make Himself visible and familiar to their eyes.

MM: Why, then, did God wait 4,000 years to the one and only thing that could set and keep men right? Is it possible that there is a legal aspect that made it necessary for God to wait?

MM: Why, then, did God wait 4,000 years to the one and only thing that could set and keep men right? Is it possible that there is a legal aspect that made it necessary for God to wait?

No, that's not possible, because there's no reason why a death 4,000 years after Eden would be any more effecacious than a death at some other point in time.

Regarding why God waited, I wrote about this in quite a lot of detail. You didn't respond at all to what I wrote. You just reasked the same questions many, many times. If you wish to have a dialog, a conversation, it's necessary that you not just ask questions, but that you answer them as well, and that you acknowledge when questions have been answered.

You're asking good questions, MM, and I'm happy to continue discussing this with you, but I'd like to you to respond to my post where I addressed these questions.

Okay, Tom, here are the questions you have asked on this thread so far:

TE: The Bible says that Jesus came in the fullness of time. 1) What does that mean? 2) Is it just an arbitrary time that God decided? 3) Or was there some reason why Christ came when He did? 4) Would His coming have been as effective had it been earlier? 5) If not, why not?

1. The “time” refers to the 70 week prophecy.

2. God does nothing arbitrarily, therefore, no, it wasn’t just a date God pulled out of a hat.

3. The chapter entitled “The Fullness of the Time” in the DA addresses this question nicely. I posted an extract from it on page one.

4. I doubt it. God managed human history, the affairs of mankind and nations, in a way that made the day Jesus was incarnated the only right one.

5. See 4.

TE: 6) We see that God did not immediately send Christ, but only after several millenia. First God with and through Israel. Why?

6. Please rephrase this question. Thank you.

Here are the observations you, Tom, have made so far in this thread:

1. [O]ne question God wished to answer is what would happen is a people were to "worship" God with the intention of avoiding bad consequences they perceive would happen to them if they didn't. In other words, a "worship" inspired by fear.

MM: Do you mean to say God wanted the onlooking universe to see how wrong worshipping Him out of fear is?

2. We know that at first the angels were confused as to the principles of God's government. They cried out for vengeance. They wanted God to destroy His enemies whenever they dared to defy Him.

MM: Please post a quote confirming this point. Thank you.

3. The Jews demonstrated what happens when one "worships" God from a wrong motive, for example, the motive of fear.

MM: How does this relate to your title question?

4. Had God allowed Satan to reap the result of his sin, he would have died, but the reason for his death would not have been clear. It would have appeared that it was due to something God was doing to Satan as opposed to what it really was, the result of his sin. This misunderstanding of God would have created an evil seed of doubt, and the sin problem would not have been cured. Indeed, things would have become worse.

MM: If the holy angels were begging for vengeance and the destruction of God’s enemies why would they fear God if He had immediately punished and destroyed the evil angels?

5. So the reason, or a reason, that Christ did not come immediately upon Adam's sin was that there were lessons that needed to learn, which agrees with what you said. Had He come too soon, the problem of sin would not have been cured. The purpose for Christ's coming was to do away with sin, so the timing had to be right, so the purpose for which He came could be accomplished.

MM: How did delaying the punishment and destruction of evil angels help Adam with his sin problem? He wasn’t even alive when the evil angels rebelled.

6. He came at a time so that His life and death would answer all of the questions that needed answers for time and eternity.

MM: And yet the GC did not end when Jesus died on the cross. If His life and death alone answered “all of the questions” why is God allowing the GC to continue?

7. If the issue were simply legal, then He could have come and died right away.

MM: Why do you think so?

6) We see that God did not immediately send Christ, but only after several millenia. First God with and through Israel. Why?

sb "First God worked with and through Israel."

Here are the observations you, Tom, have made so far in this thread:

1. [O]ne question God wished to answer is what would happen is a people were to "worship" God with the intention of avoiding bad consequences they perceive would happen to them if they didn't. In other words, a "worship" inspired by fear.

MM: Do you mean to say God wanted the onlooking universe to see how wrong worshipping Him out of fear is?

I think rather than saying God wanted the universe to see how wrong worshipping Him out of fear is (which could give the impression that God wanted a bad thing to happen) I would say this is an issue God was aware of that could be a problem.

2. We know that at first the angels were confused as to the principles of God's government. They cried out for vengeance. They wanted God to destroy His enemies whenever they dared to defy Him.

MM: Please post a quote confirming this point. Thank you.



It's been quite awhile since I read whatever it is I read, so I'm not sure if this is what I was remembering or not. If it was, then I mistated things a bit as the angels aren't crying out for vengeance here, although they would have been sympathetic towards it.

3. The Jews demonstrated what happens when one "worships" God from a wrong motive, for example, the motive of fear.

MM: How does this relate to your title question?

I'm not suggesting this is a complete answer to the question, which I think is quite profound. But the thought is that there Jesus came at such a time that the effects of worshipping God out of fear could be seen.

4. Had God allowed Satan to reap the result of his sin, he would have died, but the reason for his death would not have been clear. It would have appeared that it was due to something God was doing to Satan as opposed to what it really was, the result of his sin. This misunderstanding of God would have created an evil seed of doubt, and the sin problem would not have been cured. Indeed, things would have become worse.

MM: If the holy angels were begging for vengeance and the destruction of God’s enemies why would they fear God if He had immediately punished and destroyed the evil angels?

You mean if God had allowed Satan and his host to reap the full result of their sin? That would have led to an evil seed of doubt being created. They would not have understood that death is the inevitable result of sin but would have misinterpreted it as an arbitrary act of God.

I have to admit their reaction, as described in "Reflecting Christ," is a bit curious. Sin had never had to be dealt with, so apparently even the angels had quite a bit to learn about how wonderful God really is.

5. So the reason, or a reason, that Christ did not come immediately upon Adam's sin was that there were lessons that needed to learn, which agrees with what you said. Had He come too soon, the problem of sin would not have been cured. The purpose for Christ's coming was to do away with sin, so the timing had to be right, so the purpose for which He came could be accomplished.

MM: How did delaying the punishment and destruction of evil angels help Adam with his sin problem?

Not "his" sin problem, but the problem of sin.



He wasn’t even alive when the evil angels rebelled.

That doesn't matter. What matters is that the principles of Satan and Christ be seen.

6. He came at a time so that His life and death would answer all of the questions that needed answers for time and eternity.

MM: And yet the GC did not end when Jesus died on the cross. If His life and death alone answered “all of the questions” why is God allowing the GC to continue?

I think I've answered this several times now. The GC continues because the Gospel has not been preached to all nations.

7. If the issue were simply legal, then He could have come and died right away.

MM: Why do you think so?

Because His death would have been just as effecacious immediately as it would have been 4,000 years later.

The main reason, in my opinion, why Christ couldn't have come just after Adam and Eve's sin is that Satan must first be given time to demonstrate the principles and results of his government, in order that, when Christ came, in the last act of murdering Him, the ties of sympathy between Satan and the heavenly world could be forever severed.

I think that's a good way of putting it, Rosangela. I also think the impact of worshiping God from a motive a fear was something that needed to be seen. This would answer the question as to why God did not just allow Satan and his host to suffer the result of their choice immediately when they made it.

TE: We know that at first the angels were confused as to the principles of God's government. They cried out for vengeance. They wanted God to destroy His enemies whenever they dared to defy Him.

MM: Please post a quote confirming this point. Thank you.

TE: “With an intense interest God's movements were watched by the heavenly angels. Would He come forth from His place to punish the inhabitants of the world for their iniquity? Would He send fire or flood to destroy them? All heaven waited the bidding of their Commander to pour out the vials of wrath upon a rebellious world. One word from Him, one sign, and the world would have been destroyed. The worlds unfallen would have said, "Amen. Thou art righteous, O God, because Thou hast exterminated rebellion."

TE: I have to admit their reaction, as described in "Reflecting Christ," is a bit curious. Sin had never had to be dealt with, so apparently even the angels had quite a bit to learn about how wonderful God really is.

MM: Can you blame the holy angels for waiting and wondering what God would do just before the incarnation of Jesus? Hadn’t God commanded them before to destroy sinners with fire and flood? It’s interesting to me that even before Jesus died on the cross the unfallen worlds would have acknowledged the justice of God in destroying the wicked. Had He done so would they have served Him out of fear? Apparently not!

EGW: Satan is a deceiver. When he sinned in heaven, even the loyal angels did not fully discern his character. This was why God did not at once destroy Satan. Had He done so, the holy angels would not have perceived the justice and love of God. (COL 72)

MM: This insight seems at odds with the quote from RC. What do you make of it? If the angels were anxious to destroy sinners just before the incarnation of Jesus, and would have been fine with it, why weren’t they ready for God to destroy Satan when he sinned? What happened between the fall of Lucifer and just before the incarnation of Jesus that caused the angels to be cool with destroying sinners? And all this before Jesus demonstrated the principles of the GC, before Satan severed the ties of sympathy between him and the unfallen angels.

…………………..

TE: The GC continues because the Gospel has not been preached to all nations.

MM: I agree. But there is more to it.

EGW: Yet Satan was not then destroyed. The angels did not even then understand all that was involved in the great controversy. The principles at stake were to be more fully revealed. And for the sake of man, Satan's existence must be continued. Man as well as angels must see the contrast between the Prince of light and the prince of darkness. He must choose whom he will serve. {DA 761.3}

…………………

TE: If the issue were simply legal, then He could have come and died right away.

MM: Why do you think so?

TE: Because His death would have been just as effecacious immediately as it would have been 4,000 years later.

MM: He is, after all, the Lamb slain from the foundation of world! However, we disagree as to why His life and death were required. Most importantly, though, we agree that His life and death revealed the truth about God’s character and kingdom, that they motivate us to love and trust God, and to repent and cease sinning. We will probably never agree that His death also served as a substitute death for pardoned sinners, that God had to punish and destroy Jesus as our substitute because the integrity of the law and the security of the universe required it, that it was necessary in order for God to have the legal right to pardon and save sinners.

R: The main reason, in my opinion, why Christ couldn't have come just after Adam and Eve's sin is that Satan must first be given time to demonstrate the principles and results of his government, in order that, when Christ came, in the last act of murdering Him, the ties of sympathy between Satan and the heavenly world could be forever severed.

MM: Doesn't this imply that the Fall of man was necessary? that 6,000 years of sinning was required to punish and destroy sinners? What if mankind hadn't sinned? Would God have destroyed the evil angels? And, what about the point I made in my previous post? Namely, this one:

"If the angels were anxious to destroy sinners just before the incarnation of Jesus, and would have been fine with it, why weren’t they ready for God to destroy Satan when he sinned? What happened between the fall of Lucifer and just before the incarnation of Jesus that caused the angels to be cool with destroying sinners? And all this before Jesus demonstrated the principles of the GC, before Satan severed the ties of sympathy between him and the unfallen angels."

We indeed do not agree in this.

God did not have to do any such thing in order to love, to forgive, to be merciful, and faithful. But there were those that doubted and accused, found fault, were jealous and condemning; those that usurped the law to demand revenge. Yet, it is those that God sought to save, and he gave his Son to bring them and us to light, and into their wicked hands was willing to deliver him so that they and we could see love, and forgiveness; and that they and we might loathe our justice that usurps the law for revenge.

When we thus see the truth, then are we able to partake of God’s grace, mercy, forgiveness, and receive his righteousness/judgment by faith. Thus being set free from the snare of the enemy, we have become the sons of God. Thus by the blood of the Lamb we have overcome the wicked one, and have been set free from the law of sin and death, to the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus.

JB: God did not have to do any such thing in order to love, to forgive, to be merciful, and faithful.

MM: True. Please note that no one disagrees with you on this crucial truth. But how do you explain the holy angels eagerly awaiting the command of God to punish and destroy sinners?

John, that was very well put, and heart-warming as well.

MM, do you agree with the rest of John's post as well? I'm wondering if "everyone agrees with this critical truth" includes John's whole post, or if you meant to limit your "everyone agrees" comment to just the snippet you quoted.

TE: We know that at first the angels were confused as to the principles of God's government. They cried out for vengeance. They wanted God to destroy His enemies whenever they dared to defy Him.

MM: Please post a quote confirming this point. Thank you.

Already responded to this. #81829 question #2.

TE: “With an intense interest God's movements were watched by the heavenly angels. Would He come forth from His place to punish the inhabitants of the world for their iniquity? Would He send fire or flood to destroy them? All heaven waited the bidding of their Commander to pour out the vials of wrath upon a rebellious world. One word from Him, one sign, and the world would have been destroyed. The worlds unfallen would have said, "Amen. Thou art righteous, O God, because Thou hast exterminated rebellion."

TE: I have to admit their reaction, as described in "Reflecting Christ," is a bit curious. Sin had never had to be dealt with, so apparently even the angels had quite a bit to learn about how wonderful God really is.

MM: Can you blame the holy angels for waiting and wondering what God would do just before the incarnation of Jesus? Hadn’t God commanded them before to destroy sinners with fire and flood? It’s interesting to me that even before Jesus died on the cross the unfallen worlds would have acknowledged the justice of God in destroying the wicked. Had He done so would they have served Him out of fear? Apparently not!

I think the issue is not being seen here. DA 764 speaks of it.



It is this evil seed of doubt that needed to be avoided. God needed to deal with sin in such a way that it would be evident that the destruction which results from sin comes from sin and not from Himself. Otherwise beings would have been motivated to worship Him from a motive of fear. The Pharisees showed what the results of such worship are. To use EGW's words, sullen obdience produces the character of a rebel. She also says such religion is worth nothing (that is, religion motivated by fear; that's from the SC section you had me read from, or just after).

EGW: Satan is a deceiver. When he sinned in heaven, even the loyal angels did not fully discern his character. This was why God did not at once destroy Satan. Had He done so, the holy angels would not have perceived the justice and love of God. (COL 72)

MM: This insight seems at odds with the quote from RC. What do you make of it? If the angels were anxious to destroy sinners just before the incarnation of Jesus, and would have been fine with it, why weren’t they ready for God to destroy Satan when he sinned?

The angels weren't aware of the dangers involved in worshipping God out of a motivation of fear; God was!

What happened between the fall of Lucifer and just before the incarnation of Jesus that caused the angels to be cool with destroying sinners?

What are you talking about? You'll have to fill me in as to why your asking this question.

And all this before Jesus demonstrated the principles of the GC, before Satan severed the ties of sympathy between him and the unfallen angels.

I don't know what your saying here. What's "this"?

…………………..

TE: The GC continues because the Gospel has not been preached to all nations.

MM: I agree. But there is more to it.

EGW: Yet Satan was not then destroyed. The angels did not even then understand all that was involved in the great controversy. The principles at stake were to be more fully revealed. And for the sake of man, Satan's existence must be continued. Man as well as angels must see the contrast between the Prince of light and the prince of darkness. He must choose whom he will serve. {DA 761.3}

The principles will be fully revealed when the Gospel is preached, so preaching the Gospel will be sufficient to bring things to an end.

…………………

TE: If the issue were simply legal, then He could have come and died right away.

MM: Why do you think so?

TE: Because His death would have been just as effecacious immediately as it would have been 4,000 years later.

MM: He is, after all, the Lamb slain from the foundation of world! However, we disagree as to why His life and death were required. Most importantly, though, we agree that His life and death revealed the truth about God’s character and kingdom, that they motivate us to love and trust God, and to repent and cease sinning. We will probably never agree that His death also served as a substitute death for pardoned sinners,

I actually agree with this, as I've stated many, many times; probably over 50 by now.

that God had to punish and destroy Jesus as our substitute because the integrity of the law and the security of the universe required it, that it was necessary in order for God to have the legal right to pardon and save sinners.

Yes, I agree that this part, that God has to kill someone in order to forgive someone else, doesn't make sense to me.

MM: What happened between the fall of Lucifer and just before the incarnation of Jesus that caused the angels to be cool with destroying sinners? And all this before Jesus demonstrated the principles of the GC, before Satan severed the ties of sympathy between him and the un-fallen angels.

TE: What are you talking about? You'll have to fill me in as to why your asking this question. I don't know what your saying here. What's "this"?

MM: The RC 58 quote makes it clear that the unfallen worlds were ready for God to command the holy angles to destroy, to exterminate the wicked. “The worlds unfallen would have said, ‘Amen. Thou art righteous, O God, because Thou hast exterminated rebellion.’” And all this before Jesus died on the cross.

……………………

EGW: “Before Christ's first advent, the sin of refusing to conform to God's law had become widespread. Apparently Satan's power was growing; his warfare against heaven was becoming more and more determined. A crisis had been reached. With an intense interest God's move-ments were watched by the heavenly angels. Would He come forth from His place to punish the inhabitants of the world for their iniquity? Would He send fire or flood to destroy them? All heaven waited the bidding of their Commander to pour out the vials of wrath upon a rebellious world. One word from Him, one sign, and the world would have been destroyed. The worlds unfallen would have said, "Amen. Thou art righteous, O God, because Thou hast exterminated rebellion." {RC 58.4}

TE: I have to admit their reaction, as described in "Reflecting Christ," is a bit curious. Sin had never had to be dealt with, so apparently even the angels had quite a bit to learn about how wonderful God really is.

MM: Can you blame the holy angels for waiting and wondering what God would do just before the incarnation of Jesus? Hadn’t God commanded them before to destroy sinners with fire and flood? It’s interesting to me that even before Jesus died on the cross the unfallen worlds would have acknowledged the justice of God in destroying the wicked. Had He done so would they have served Him out of fear?

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

TE: It is this evil seed of doubt that needed to be avoided. God needed to deal with sin in such a way that it would be evident that the destruction which results from sin comes from sin and not from Himself. Otherwise beings would have been motivated to worship Him from a motive of fear. The Pharisees showed what the results of such worship are. To use EGW's words, sullen obdience produces the character of a rebel. She also says such religion is worth nothing (that is, religion motivated by fear; that's from the SC section you had me read from, or just after).

MM: But the quote from RC 58 isn’t talking about the same time period as the one in DA 764. It seems to me that after watching the GC unfold for 4,000 years the unfallen worlds were ripe and ready for God to punish and destroy the wicked – and this was before Jesus died on the cross. There is nothing about the following insight that even remotely implies that what they had in mind was God withdrawing His protection and allowing Satan to unleash the pent up forces of nature:

“All heaven waited the bidding of their Commander to pour out the vials of wrath upon a rebel-lious world. One word from Him, one sign, and the world would have been destroyed. The worlds unfallen would have said, ‘Amen. Thou art righteous, O God, because Thou hast exter-minated rebellion.’" {RC 58.4}

………………….

EGW: Yet Satan was not then destroyed. The angels did not even then understand all that was involved in the great controversy. The principles at stake were to be more fully revealed. And for the sake of man, Satan's existence must be continued. Man as well as angels must see the contrast between the Prince of light and the prince of darkness. He must choose whom he will serve. {DA 761.3}

TE: The principles will be fully revealed when the Gospel is preached, so preaching the Gospel will be sufficient to bring things to an end.

MM: What don’t the angels know about the gospel? How will watching us preach the gospel help the angels “understand all that was involved in the great controversy”? What does “Man as well as angels must see the contrast between the Prince of light and the prince of darkness” mean? When and how will it happen?

…………………..

TE: Yes, I agree that this part, that God has to kill someone in order to forgive someone else, doesn't make sense to me.

MM: Did God kill Jesus on the cross? Or, did Jesus lay down His own life? He said, “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.” (John 10:17, 18)

I believe Jesus tasted and consumed our sin and second death on the cross. I do not believe God killed Him. The Father was with the Son when He laid down his own life. The reason Jesus had to do what He did on the cross was because the law required it. To earn the legal to par-don and save sinners Jesus had to pay the sin debt. The law demands a sin substitute, which is why Jesus became sin for us.

Golgotha revealed a different kind of victory over sin and destruction of sin and sinners to them. Obviously, God was not eager like them; but was long-suffering. It is not by attacking but by bearing that the victory was won. So not only did he suffer long in saving us from our unbelief, but he also suffered their disposition and eagerness in this matter, and had mercy toward the angels, that he might reconcile them to himself also. So even though they may not have sinned after the manner of unbelief; yet in their judgment, it was not the same spirit as in the Father; however they restrained themselves to see God's judgment. The glory of God as revealed in Christ was to reconcile all, including those eager Angels who did not have fullness of God’s glory in them.

• Col 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
  Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

• Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

Note the manner of destruction, and the nature of the battle fought.

MM: What happened between the fall of Lucifer and just before the incarnation of Jesus that caused the angels to be cool with destroying sinners? And all this before Jesus demonstrated the principles of the GC, before Satan severed the ties of sympathy between him and the un-fallen angels.

TE: What are you talking about? You'll have to fill me in as to why your asking this question. I don't know what your saying here. What's "this"?

MM: The RC 58 quote makes it clear that the unfallen worlds were ready for God to command the holy angles to destroy, to exterminate the wicked. “The worlds unfallen would have said, ‘Amen. Thou art righteous, O God, because Thou hast exterminated rebellion.’” And all this before Jesus died on the cross.

Why is this important?

……………………

EGW: “Before Christ's first advent, the sin of refusing to conform to God's law had become widespread. Apparently Satan's power was growing; his warfare against heaven was becoming more and more determined. A crisis had been reached. With an intense interest God's move-ments were watched by the heavenly angels. Would He come forth from His place to punish the inhabitants of the world for their iniquity? Would He send fire or flood to destroy them? All heaven waited the bidding of their Commander to pour out the vials of wrath upon a rebellious world. One word from Him, one sign, and the world would have been destroyed. The worlds unfallen would have said, "Amen. Thou art righteous, O God, because Thou hast exterminated rebellion." {RC 58.4}

TE: I have to admit their reaction, as described in "Reflecting Christ," is a bit curious. Sin had never had to be dealt with, so apparently even the angels had quite a bit to learn about how wonderful God really is.

MM: Can you blame the holy angels for waiting and wondering what God would do just before the incarnation of Jesus? Hadn’t God commanded them before to destroy sinners with fire and flood? It’s interesting to me that even before Jesus died on the cross the unfallen worlds would have acknowledged the justice of God in destroying the wicked. Had He done so would they have served Him out of fear?

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

TE: It is this evil seed of doubt that needed to be avoided. God needed to deal with sin in such a way that it would be evident that the destruction which results from sin comes from sin and not from Himself. Otherwise beings would have been motivated to worship Him from a motive of fear. The Pharisees showed what the results of such worship are. To use EGW's words, sullen obdience produces the character of a rebel. She also says such religion is worth nothing (that is, religion motivated by fear; that's from the SC section you had me read from, or just after).

MM: But the quote from RC 58 isn’t talking about the same time period as the one in DA 764.

The important point is the principle involved, which has to do with God's wishing that His true character be seen. It is knowing God as He is in truth which eliminates fear. Serving God out of fear leads to bad things. "Such religion is worth nothing" as EGW puts it. What the RC quote shows is that the angels learned about God's character from the cross, which is the point I was making.

It seems to me that after watching the GC unfold for 4,000 years the unfallen worlds were ripe and ready for God to punish and destroy the wicked – and this was before Jesus died on the cross. There is nothing about the following insight that even remotely implies that what they had in mind was God withdrawing His protection and allowing Satan to unleash the pent up forces of nature:

“All heaven waited the bidding of their Commander to pour out the vials of wrath upon a rebel-lious world. One word from Him, one sign, and the world would have been destroyed. The worlds unfallen would have said, ‘Amen. Thou art righteous, O God, because Thou hast exter-minated rebellion.’" {RC 58.4}

Right. You're making my point. The angels did not understand that death is the inevitable result of sin. They were confused as to the true nature of death, until the cross. That's what DA 764 points out. Without the cross, they were in danger of being confused by Satan's death, which could have created an "evil seed of doubt."

………………….

EGW: Yet Satan was not then destroyed. The angels did not even then understand all that was involved in the great controversy. The principles at stake were to be more fully revealed. And for the sake of man, Satan's existence must be continued. Man as well as angels must see the contrast between the Prince of light and the prince of darkness. He must choose whom he will serve. {DA 761.3}

TE: The principles will be fully revealed when the Gospel is preached, so preaching the Gospel will be sufficient to bring things to an end.

MM: What don’t the angels know about the gospel? How will watching us preach the gospel help the angels “understand all that was involved in the great controversy”? What does “Man as well as angels must see the contrast between the Prince of light and the prince of darkness” mean? When and how will it happen?

Not the angels. Man.

…………………..

TE: Yes, I agree that this part, that God has to kill someone in order to forgive someone else, doesn't make sense to me.

MM: Did God kill Jesus on the cross? Or, did Jesus lay down His own life? He said, “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.” (John 10:17, 18)

I believe Jesus tasted and consumed our sin and second death on the cross. I do not believe God killed Him. The Father was with the Son when He laid down his own life. The reason Jesus had to do what He did on the cross was because the law required it. To earn the legal to par-don and save sinners Jesus had to pay the sin debt. The law demands a sin substitute, which is why Jesus became sin for us.

DA 25, I think it is, says Christ suffered the death that was ours (meaning, of course, the death we would have died had Christ not come). So if God did not kill Him, then He won't kill the wicked.