|
Forums118
Topics9,199
Posts195,612
Members1,323
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Tom]
#120747
10/21/09 03:30 PM
10/21/09 03:30 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
it sounds funny on the face of it, that a person would just burst into flames. It also sounds funny that light would come out of darkness just because God said so, but it did. You believe that it is possible for an electron to disappear and reappear a mile away a second later without any external force; that sounds funny. God is not limited by our standards of funny. Secondly, we're told that some will suffer for up to many days. That wouldn't be possible, unless God supernaturally took action to enable this fire to only cause pain, without killing the victim. Also, supposedly, the purpose of the fire would be to do what could only be called in this life "torture" the victim, God would have to take action to make sure the nerves were not destroyed by the fire, or else the victim's suffering would end prematurely. So this who line of hypothetical action has God acting in a very cruel and heartless manner, certainly contrary to the principles of "kindness, mercy, and love" which GC 542 expresses. All of that holds true for the mental anguish theory. One with few sins will be killed quickly by the mental anguish, while one with a lot of sins will suffer for many days. And how do they manage to suffer any of this, having been dead for a millennium? Because God made them alive again. That's the "kindness, mercy, and love" you are railing against, no? If you look at it that way, it is even more palatable than the "mental anguish death" that you espouse, since that mental anguish will be worse than physical burning, according to Ty, which you agree with.
What do you think? Ty didn't say the mental anguish will be worse than physical burning. ... The fire isn't less painful. When Ty said the flame was more terrible, he wasn't saying that the pain caused by love caused more physical pain then being set on fire. He was saying that the pain of love is worse than physical pain, which is true. If you've lost a loved one, a child or spouse in particular, then you can understand the idea Ty is expressing. The emotional pain of loss is worse, in a sense, then any physical pain. That's the point. Essentially, you are saying that if God allows physical suffering, He would be cruel. But if God allows mental suffering, it is perfectly fine, even if such suffering is worse than the physical pain.
By God's grace,
Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Mountain Man]
#120748
10/21/09 03:32 PM
10/21/09 03:32 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
However, if the idea is that it causes spontaneous combustion, that runs into a couple of problem. One is, it sounds funny on the face of it, that a person would just burst into flames. Secondly, we're told that some will suffer for up to many days. That wouldn't be possible, unless God supernaturally took action to enable this fire to only cause pain, without killing the victim. Also, supposedly, the purpose of the fire would be to do what could only be called in this life "torture" the victim, God would have to take action to make sure the nerves were not destroyed by the fire, or else the victim's suffering would end prematurely. So this who line of hypothetical action has God acting in a very cruel and heartless manner, certainly contrary to the principles of "kindness, mercy, and love" which GC 542 expresses. You're good at explaining what you think will cause the resurrected wicked to suffer mentally, but so far you haven't explained what will cause them to die physically. Do you think they will die of mental or emotional anguish? If not, what do you think will cause them to die? Another important thing you haven't explained is what you think God does to arbitrarily prevent sinners from dying the moment they sin. True, you readily admit He prevents it, but so far you haven't explained exactly how He does it. How does God counteract the inevitable result of sin (i.e. mental anguish and physical death)? An even more important thing you haven't explained is what you think God does to arbitrarily prevent resurrected sinners from dying the moment they revisit their first sin in judgment. What exactly does God do that enables them to unnaturally withstand death as they revisit millions of sins one at a time? Do you agree each sin is sufficient to cause intense suffering ending in death? If not, why not?
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Tom]
#120749
10/21/09 03:35 PM
10/21/09 03:35 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
Secondly, we're told that some will suffer for up to many days. That wouldn't be possible, unless God supernaturally took action to enable this fire to only cause pain, without killing the victim. Some have suffered for many millennia. That wouldn't be possible, unless God supernaturally took action to enable this sin to cause pain, without killing the victim. Isn't the pain of sin worse than fire?
By God's grace,
Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Mountain Man]
#120750
10/21/09 03:35 PM
10/21/09 03:35 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Do you think Nadab and Abihu spontaneously combusted? Or, do you think they died of means other than fire or the radiant light of God? If so, what do you think caused them to die? Also, what caused the following sinners to die: Numbers 16:35 And there came out a fire from the LORD, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incense. 2 Kings 1:10 And Elijah answered and said to the captain of fifty, If I [be] a man of God, then let fire come down from heaven, and consume thee and thy fifty. And there came down fire from heaven, and consumed him and his fifty.
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Green Cochoa]
#120759
10/21/09 09:48 PM
10/21/09 09:48 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Secondly, we're told that some will suffer for up to many days. That wouldn't be possible, unless God supernaturally took action to enable this fire to only cause pain, without killing the victim. Who told us this? Blessings, Green Cochoa. You didn't quote enough of this to have the context. If the fire spoken of is setting a person on fire, and the person burns like a torch, that person would die in a matter of seconds, unless God intervened in some way. Also, if the purpose of the fire is to cause pain, once the nerve endings were destroyed, they would no longer feel pain. That would also happen quickly. So it wouldn't be possible for a person literally set on fire to be suffering pain for hours or days unless God did something to counteract how fire normally works.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Mountain Man]
#120760
10/21/09 09:50 PM
10/21/09 09:50 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
M:It doesn't really matter, though, since this thread is basically a duplicate of the "What is the inevitable result of sin?" thread. It certainly does seem to me that I've answered these questions asked many times. So I agree that it doesn't matter. PS - Nothing in the passages above leads me to conclude God will withdraw and permit sin to run its course. Not sure what you mean by this. Nor do they make me think something other than God will punish and destroy the wicked. Yes, God punishes and destroys the wicked. That's stated many times. The disagreement isn't of this, but over how this works. Is the punishment arbitrary? Or is it a consequence of sin? Is the destruction arbitrary? Or is it a consequence of the choices the wicked have made? Or, to ask the question another way, how does the destruction work? Here's how I think it works. Sin causes us to believe things about God which are not true. This is seen in Adam and Eve's behavior after they sinned. God had not changed in His attitude toward them; He still loved them, just as much as before. But sin changed *them*. They ran and hid from God. They had become deathly afraid of Him, even though He had given them no reason to. Sin made them act irrationally. This impact of sin is unavoidable. It happened to Christ on the cross. Christ felt doomed. He felt lost, abandoned, without hope. But God had not changed. God still loved Christ, as much as ever. In fact, far from abandoning His Son, God was suffering with His Son. He left heaven to be close to Him. God and the angels were there at Calvary. God was crucified with Christ. But Christ couldn't sense these things. Instead, His sense was of being abandoned. This is what sin does to one. (Something important to note is that Christ was able to overcome this effect of sin by faith. He died triumphantly, convinced in His Father's goodness, regardless of His inability to see through the portals of the tomb.) If God did nothing to help us, sin would cause us to separate from God, who alone is the source of life, and we would perish. For example, "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) So God sends us light, in order to save us from the death of sin. This is how God saves us, and how He destroys us. If the light is heeded, it is for our salvation. If it is resisted, it is for our destruction. Consider Pharaoh. Scripture says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. The SOP makes it clear that God did so by sending Him light. The hardening of the heart took place as Pharaoh sent Him light. So God "hardened" his heart. How? By being nice to Him. That's the same way God destroys. The principles of mercy, kindness, and love are the means by which God destroys, just as these were the principles by which God hardened Pharaoh's heart. Actually, hardening Pharaoh's heart is how God destroyed him. When a person's heart becomes totally hardened, the person is lost. At the judgment, the person won't be able to stand the full revelation of God's character, which is His kindness, mercy and love. So what God does is to give us His mercy, kindness, and love in small doses, which is healing for us, if we respond. By this means God is able to save us from sin, and prepare us to meet Him in His full glory, which is the fullness of His kindness, mercy and love. If we refuse His kindness, mercy, and love now, we won't be able to stand it in the hereafter. We won't want to have anything to do with God, or those who love Him, and will voluntarily choose to be excluded from heaven. We will judge ourselves. The glory of God, *who is love*, will destroy us. It doesn't seem to me that you ever recognized the import of the "who is love" part. If the issue were a physical one, having to do with radiant light, the "who is love" part wouldn't fit in. But the real issue has to do with God's character. The preceding sentence says, "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." This is talking about character. The whole Great Controversy is about character. The character of God is under dispute. God vindicates His character through Jesus Christ. How we respond to the revelation of God's character is what fixes our destiny. Those who have chosen Satan as their leader and have been controlled by his power are not prepared to enter the presence of God. Pride, deception, licentiousness, cruelty, have become fixed in their characters. Can they enter heaven to dwell forever with those whom they despised and hated on earth? Truth will never be agreeable to a liar; meekness will not satisfy self-esteem and pride; purity is not acceptable to the corrupt; disinterested love does not appear attractive to the selfish. What source of enjoyment could heaven offer to those who are wholly absorbed in earthly and selfish interests?
...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. A life of rebellion against God has unfitted them for heaven. Its purity, holiness, and peace would be torture to them; the glory of God would be a consuming fire. They would long to flee from that holy place. They would welcome destruction, that they might be hidden from the face of Him who died to redeem them. The destiny of the wicked is fixed by their own choice.(GC 542-543) Not responding to the revelation of God's character is what fixes the destiny. If we don't respond to that revelation here, we won't be able to respond to it in the hereafter. God reveals His character through Jesus Christ; His kindness, mercy, and love; His goodness. This is how He destroys. Thank you for reiterating your view. But you still haven't answered the question. What causes resurrected sinners to die? If you were the coroner responsible for pronouncing them, what would you say was the cause of death? Or, do you believe God hasn't revealed it? A long time ago I said God hadn't revealed the cause of death in the terms like you are asking. Why do you think this is important? IMO the paragraphs that I posted, which deal with the principles involved in the destruction of the wicked, is what's important.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Tom]
#120762
10/21/09 10:04 PM
10/21/09 10:04 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
T:It sounds funny on the face of it, that a person would just burst into flames.
A:It also sounds funny that light would come out of darkness just because God said so, but it did. I don't think so. Why do you think so? You believe that it is possible for an electron to disappear and reappear a mile away a second later without any external force; that sounds funny. God is not limited by our standards of funny. Of course God could do this if He wanted to, but it didn't sound like you were suggesting something which God did, but something which just naturally happened. T:Secondly, we're told that some will suffer for up to many days. That wouldn't be possible, unless God supernaturally took action to enable this fire to only cause pain, without killing the victim. Also, supposedly, the purpose of the fire would be to do what could only be called in this life "torture" the victim, God would have to take action to make sure the nerves were not destroyed by the fire, or else the victim's suffering would end prematurely. So this who line of hypothetical action has God acting in a very cruel and heartless manner, certainly contrary to the principles of "kindness, mercy, and love" which GC 542 expresses.
A:All of that holds true for the mental anguish theory. No it doesn't. One with few sins will be killed quickly by the mental anguish, while one with a lot of sins will suffer for many days. And how do they manage to suffer any of this, having been dead for a millennium? Because God made them alive again. That's the "kindness, mercy, and love" you are railing against, no? God doesn't resurrect people for the purpose of making them suffer. One could say that the people wouldn't suffer if their parents didn't conceive them, so their parents should be held responsible. What causes the person's suffering is not something God does to them, but their own choices. DA 764 goes into this, as well as the passage in GC 541-543 which I quoted. What advantage do you perceive in putting things in such a way that God is acting cruelly? I don't understand this. First of all, we have the hideously cruel idea that God would cause people to suffer by burning them alive for many days. Then another suggestion is made, that they suffer because of their own sin, and the impact of that upon their mind and conscience as this is made known, and it is argued that in this view God is acting cruelly as well. So no matter what, God is acting cruelly. There is nothing God can do to be freed of the character of being cruel to the wicked. I disagree with this way of characterizing things. God has no desire whatsoever that the lost should suffer or die. Wherever there is sin, suffering and death are inevitable. (PP 522). It's not God's fault that this is the case. God has done all He can to save people from sin. If they refuse to be saved, then suffering and death is inevitable. Not because God will arbitrarily kill them or do something to them which in this life could only be called "torture," but because sin is based on the principle of selfishness, which is unable to promote anything but suffering and death. Essentially, you are saying that if God allows physical suffering, He would be cruel. I didn't say this at all. But if God allows mental suffering, it is perfectly fine, even if such suffering is worse than the physical pain. I just explained the difference. I'll requote what I wrote: Also, a big problem in this idea, apart from the obvious problem of having God acting unspeakably cruelly, is that in the physical fire scenario, God is arbitrarily inflicting the pain upon the wicked. Even if you argue that they catch on fire through some process of spontaneous combustion, God will still have to be taking arbitrary action to prevent the wicked from dying, or for their suffering to cease by not allowing their nerve endings to be destroyed. In the case of Nadab and Abihu, they would have suffered for seconds, not days.
In the scenario of the emotional and mental anguish that sin causes, God is doing nothing at all arbitrary to cause either suffering or pain.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Tom]
#120764
10/21/09 10:10 PM
10/21/09 10:10 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
M:You're good at explaining what you think will cause the resurrected wicked to suffer mentally, but so far you haven't explained what will cause them to die physically. Do you think they will die of mental or emotional anguish? If not, what do you think will cause them to die?
Another important thing you haven't explained is what you think God does to arbitrarily prevent sinners from dying the moment they sin. True, you readily admit He prevents it, but so far you haven't explained exactly how He does it. How does God counteract the inevitable result of sin (i.e. mental anguish and physical death)? You've asked this several times, and each time I've said I have no desire to go beyond what DA 764 says. Regarding what God does to prevent the wicked from dying, what difference does it make? However is it that would have caused Satan and his followers to perish, as the inevitable result of sin, had God left Satan to reap the full result of his sin, that's what God is preventing from happening. As EGW explained, God does so in order that characters can be developed according to the principles one has chosen. An even more important thing you haven't explained is what you think God does to arbitrarily prevent resurrected sinners from dying the moment they revisit their first sin in judgment. The same thing as before they were resurrected (when they were alive). Why is this important? I think you're focusing on things which aren't important at all, whereas the things which really are important, you're not considering. What exactly does God do that enables them to unnaturally withstand death as they revisit millions of sins one at a time? Do you agree each sin is sufficient to cause intense suffering ending in death? If not, why not? Perhaps if you thought of the problem in terms of "sin" as opposed to "sins," that might help. The problem of the lost is that they have chosen to live apart from God. It's inevitable that a person who rejects God will commit sins, but it's not the individual sins that are the problem, but that one has chosen to live apart from God. 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)
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Tom]
#120768
10/21/09 10:38 PM
10/21/09 10:38 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2021
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,003
The Orient
|
|
Secondly, we're told that some will suffer for up to many days. That wouldn't be possible, unless God supernaturally took action to enable this fire to only cause pain, without killing the victim. Who told us this? Blessings, Green Cochoa. You didn't quote enough of this to have the context. If the fire spoken of is setting a person on fire, and the person burns like a torch, that person would die in a matter of seconds, unless God intervened in some way. Also, if the purpose of the fire is to cause pain, once the nerve endings were destroyed, they would no longer feel pain. That would also happen quickly. So it wouldn't be possible for a person literally set on fire to be suffering pain for hours or days unless God did something to counteract how fire normally works. Tom, To say I didn't quote enough to have context is, in this case, nonsense. I quoted you saying that " we're told that some will suffer for up to many days." I asked simply "who told us this?" You wrote an entire paragraph telling me why you couldn't answer the question! The question is who? I am asking for a name, not a paragraph.  Blessings, Green Cochoa.
We can receive of heaven's light only as we are willing to be emptied of self. We can discern the character of God, and accept Christ by faith, only as we consent to the bringing into captivity of every thought to the obedience of Christ. And to all who do this, the Holy Spirit is given without measure. In Christ "dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in Him." [Colossians 2:9, 10.] {GW 57.1} -- Ellen White.
|
|
|
Re: The Suffering of the Lost
[Re: Green Cochoa]
#120778
10/21/09 11:09 PM
10/21/09 11:09 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
To say I didn't quote enough to have context is, in this case, nonsense. I quoted you saying that "we're told that some will suffer for up to many days." I asked simply "who told us this?" It's not nonsense. You're question doesn't even make sense without the context. That is, the "this" in your question "Who told us this?" has to be understood in order for the question you ask to make sense, and without the context, it can't be. You wrote an entire paragraph telling me why you couldn't answer the question! The question is who? I am asking for a name, not a paragraph. I wrote the post. Is this is what you wanted to know?
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
