Pardon? I'm not trying to hide anything. Why would you suggest such a thing?



Yes, that's what causes the suffering, the exposure of sin. Why are you speaking of hiding things?

I've said all along God is involved. I'm against the idea that God uses force, or that He tortures people. I haven't said He's not involved. It seems to me there may be a false premise involved here, as if God cannot be involved unless there is force applied, for example.

Ellen wrote:


What precisely do you believe will slay, destroy, consume the wicked?

Did you read what I wrote about the poison?

Here's what you wrote about poison: "Say that sin is represented by poisonous gas, and God supernaturally, unknown to each one, provides a filter which makes it so the poisonous gas does not immediately cause death, as, if God did not do this, it would appear that God was killing those who had in reality poisoned the air they breathe. In the judgment, God removes the filter. What causes their death? Is it God's removing the filter? One could certainly look at it this way, but this hides the true dynamic of what's going on. The real problem is the poison."

Poisonous gas is like sin, right? And the reason sinners live is because God filters the poisonous gas. Does this make plain the true dynamics of why sinners are able to sin and live?


How much poisonous gas is necessary to kill Satan? Does one sin contain enough poison to kill him?

What do you think the point of the analogy was, MM? If you can't answer this, it may be best to just drop this for now. It seemed to me from the first thing you said that you were getting the point I was trying to make, but then you asked how much gas is needed to kill Satan, which makes me think perhaps not.

Since poisonous gas in your analogy symbolizes sin, it seems reasonable to ask if one sin is sufficient to kill Satan. If not, it seems unnecessary for God to supernaturally prevent Satan from dying.

You've already asked this question in the past, and I answered it in detail. A real short answer is that it's not possible to commit just one sin (assuming one doesn't repent and become converted).

We both agree the reason sinners do not die the instant they sin is because God prevents it. Therefore, one sin is sufficient to cause sinners to die. Agreed?

One cherished sin would be enough to cause one to die. But of course, a cherished sin leads to more sin.

The essence of sin is selfishness. Selfishness can do no other than lead to suffering, misery and death.

Is there a difference between "one sin" and "one cherished sin"?