Regarding Romans 5:9, if one understands God's wrath Biblically, which is that it refers to His giving the objects of His wrath up or over to face the consequences of their choice, then I think Romans 5:9 could be either one, God's wrath or man's wrath. That it refers to man's wrath fits in with the idea of healing (which the Greek word translated "salvation" means). Paul would be telling us, in this case, how God heals us from our anger towards Him. He does so by revealing the truth about Himself in Jesus Christ. As we see the beauty of His character, we are led to repent, which heals us of our wrath.

Regarding the Numbers passage, that was not in response to Romans 5:9. It was an example of God's wrath, not man's.

Regarding God's not doing evil, yes, this applies to angels. God does not cause evil to happen. All the evil that happens involves beings with free will who choose to act contrary to God's will. If no being acted contrary to God's will, there would be no evil. Ever.

Sister White wrote, "A single angel destroyed all the first-born of the Egyptians and filled the land with mourning." Is she referring to an evil angel here?

She goes on to say, "When David offended against God by numbering the people, one angel caused that terrible destruction by which his sin was punished." Was this an evil angel?

Then she says, "The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands ...." When did holy angels exercise destructive power? When did God command them to do it? Is God less responsible because He only commanded them to do it? Are they more responsible because they carried out His orders?

In the same sentence she says, "... will be exercised by evil angels when He permits." When will evil angels exercise the same destructive power exercised by holy angels? In what way will it be identical? How will the destructive power evil angels will exercise in the future be the "same" as the destructive power holy angels have exercised in the past?

I think we're repeating ourselves here. Let's see if I can summarize. I believe:

a.Jesus Christ fully revealed God's character.
b.God does not contrary to how Jesus Christ acted.
c.Force is not a principle of God's government. He doesn't use force or violence to achieve His purposes.
d.God does not act contrary to His law, which is a transcript of His character, the character of which (i.e., the character of the law) was fully lived out in Jesus' life.

You disagree. You believe:

a.There are some things which Jesus did not reveal about God's character.
b.God sometimes acts contrary to how Jesus acted (e.g., in the judgment).
c.Sometimes God uses what could be called force or violence if it were anyone else besides God.
d.Anything God does is by definition OK.

Please correct my summary of your view if it's incorrect.

At any rate, the topic under discussion is the meaning of Christ's death, so perhaps we can share some thoughts regarding that (although we've discussed this point in pretty good detail as well; but then, it's a limitless field for study).

I need to hear your answers to the questions I posted above before I can address your summaries of our views. Would you mind?

I've answered them previously. Many times.

If you choose not to address the summaries of our views, that's OK. I have a pretty good handle on what you believe. I invited you to respond to my summary of your view because I don't want to be presenting you as believing something you don't believe.

Tom, I am having trouble understanding your view, which is why I am asking you the following questions. Please, Tom, help me out, and answer them. Thank you.

Sister White wrote, "A single angel destroyed all the first-born of the Egyptians and filled the land with mourning." Is she referring to an evil angel here?

She goes on to say, "When David offended against God by numbering the people, one angel caused that terrible destruction by which his sin was punished." Was this an evil angel?

Then she says, "The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands ...." When did holy angels exercise destructive power? When did God command them to do it? Is God less responsible because He only commanded them to do it? Are they more responsible because they carried out His orders?

In the same sentence she says, "... will be exercised by evil angels when He permits." When will evil angels exercise the same destructive power exercised by holy angels? In what way will it be identical? How will the destructive power evil angels will exercise in the future be the "same" as the destructive power holy angels have exercised in the past?

My answer is the same as previously.

I can't find your answer. Please point it out. What is the post number? Thank you.

I don't remember. I wrote pages and pages on this. I'm sorry, but I don't have time to repeat it all.

I did find something which is related, so I'll repost that. Sorry it doesn't address your question specifically, but it's dealing with the subject.(follows now)

There are those who think that the position that God does not kill requires one to explain away many Bible stories. I don't think it's a matter of explaining away all of the Bible Stories, but of understanding a general principle that can be applied to other circumstances. For example, in Scripture were read that God sent fiery serpents upon the Israelites because of their bickering, and that many died because of this. So this certainly sounds like God was killing them by way of snakes. But from the Spirit of Prophecy we discover that actually what happened is that God withdrew His protection. He didn't send any snakes anywhere. The snakes were already there.

God removed His protection and people died. That's the principle.

Another example of this would be the destruction of Jerusalem. Scripture tells us that God was responsible for the destruction of Jerusalem, that He took vengeance, and "killed" those who killed His Son. Yet from "The Great Controversy" we read:
The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown. Says the prophet: "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;" "for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity." Hosea 13:9; 14:1. Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work. By stubborn rejection of divine love and mercy, the Jews had caused the protection of God to be withdrawn from them, and Satan was permitted to rule them according to his will. The horrible cruelties enacted in the destruction of Jerusalem are a demonstration of Satan's vindictive power over those who yield to his control. (GC 35, 36)

Ok, here's the point. In Scripture, there's absolutely no record that these two events took place by way of God's withdrawing His protection. But we know this was the case from the Spirit of Prophecy. Was she "explaining away" these stories? I don't think so. I think she was enunciating a general principle that can be applied elsewhere, also without explaining away any stories any more than in these examples.

Why do we suppose that if God is being portrayed as violent, that there *isn't* an explanation? It seems like the hermeneutic being used here is "if the Bible says God is being violent, then He is, unless Ellen White says He's not, in which case He's not."

Another difficulty I have with the idea that God is violent is that is so contrasts from Jesus' life. Where was Jesus violent? Where did He kill anyone? I don't see how if this is the case (that God resorts to violence, when needed) that we could say that God is like Jesus Christ, if Jesus Christ never resorted to violence, no matter what. These seem like two different modus operandi. How could we say that "all that man can know about God" was revealed by the life and teachings of His Son in this case? It seems to me like a very important thing that we should know about God was left out in this case.

Here's one last objection. From the Spirit of Prophecy we read:
Force is the last resort of every false religion. (7 SDABC 976)

Now if we take the position that God does not ordinarily resort to violence, or force, but as a last resort will do so, is He not acting like "false religion"? Why point out that force is the last resort of every false religion if it's the last resort of true religion as well?

Here's something which deals with the passage:

"A single angel destroyed all the first-born of the Egyptians, and filled the land with mourning. When David offended against God by numbering the people, one angel caused that terrible destruction by which his sin was punished. The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits. There are forces now ready, and only waiting the divine permission, to spread desolation everywhere." The Great Controversy, 614.

The portion of this statement causing the most difficulty is this, "The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised by evil angels when He permits."

When a person does not have a clear grasp of the principles underlying God's character, it is easy to see how this statement could leave him with the conviction that holy angels destroy exactly as do evil angels. It would appear that the only difference is that holy angels destroy by God's command while the evil do it with His permission. [380]

What happens is that everyone tends to read into this statement more than it actually says. Here is what the statement does not say:

"The same destructive power exercised by holy angels when God commands, will be exercised in the same way by evil angels when He permits."

These four words, "in the same way," are not in the statement, neither are they inferred there. Furthermore, every principle of God's character forbids their being there. Yet, despite multiplied evidences to this effect, this is exactly what people read into the reference. They make no distinction between the work of God and of Satan and therefore between the character of each. This is serious.

There is a decided contrast between the role of the good angels and the evil ones. It is the heaven-appointed work of the righteous angels to hold back the four winds of strife for as long as possible. They only release them when God judges that any further remaining on station will impose their presence where it is not desired. There are many Scriptures which teach this.
"And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree." Revelation 7:1.

"There is a work yet to be done, and then the angels will be bidden to let go, that the four winds may blow upon the earth." Testimonies for the Church, 5:152.

"We are today under divine forbearance; but how long will the angels of God continue to hold the winds, that they shall not blow?" Testimonies for the Church, 6:426.

"Angels are now restraining the winds of strife, that they may not blow until the world shall be warned of its coming doom; but a storm is gathering, ready to burst upon the earth; and when God shall bid His angels loose the winds, there will be such a scene of strife as no pen can picture." Education 179,180.

"I saw four angels who had a work to do on the earth, and were on their way to accomplish it. Jesus was clothed with priestly garments. He gazed in pity on the remnant, then raised His hands, and with a voice of deep pity cried, 'My blood, Father, My blood, My blood, My blood! ' Then I saw an exceeding bright light come from God, who sat upon the great white throne, and was shed all about Jesus. Then I saw an angel with a commission from Jesus, swiftly flying to the four angels who had a work to do on the earth, and waving something up and down in his hand, and crying with a loud voice, 'Hold! Hold! Hold! Hold! until the servants of God are sealed in their foreheads.'

"I asked my accompanying angel the meaning of what I heard, and what the four angels were about to do. He said to me that it was God that restrained the powers, and that He gave His angels charge over things on the earth; that the four angels had power from God to hold the four winds, and that they were about to let them go; but while their hands were loosening, and the four winds were about to blow, the merciful eye of Jesus gazed [381] on the remnant that were not sealed, and He raised His hands to the Father and pleaded with Him that He had spilled His blood for them. Then another angel was commissioned to fly swiftly to the four angels, and bid them hold, until the servants of God were sealed with the seal of the living God in their foreheads." Early Writings, 38.

"God keeps a reckoning with the nations. Not a sparrow falls to the ground without His notice. Those who work evil toward their fellow men, saying, How doth God know? will one day be called upon to meet long- deferred vengeance. In this age a more than common contempt is shown to God. Men have reached a point in insolence and disobedience which shows that their cup of iniquity is almost full. Many have well-nigh passed the boundary of mercy. Soon God will show that He is indeed the living God. He will say to the angels, 'No longer combat Satan in his efforts to destroy. Let him work out his malignity upon the children of disobedience; for the cup of their iniquity is full. They have advanced from one degree of wickedness to another, adding daily to their lawlessness. I will no longer interfere to prevent the destroyer from doing his work.' " The Review and Herald, September 17, 1901.

"Satan is the destroyer. God cannot bless those who refuse to be faithful stewards. All He can do is to permit Satan to accomplish his destroying work. We see calamities of every kind and in every degree coming upon the earth, and why? The Lord's restraining power is not exercised. The world has disregarded the word of God. They live as though there were no God. Like the inhabitants of the Noachic world, they refuse to have any thought of God. Wickedness prevails to an alarming extent, and the earth is ripe for the harvest." Testimonies for the Church, 6:388, 389.

Every one of these statements confirms that the angels' role is to hold back those terrible powers which are only awaiting release to destroy the earth and the heavens. Angels are righteous. They have not instituted their ways in place of God's. Accordingly, they do only what the Lord would have them do. As surely as the God of heaven never destroys by direct action, neither do the angels. Therefore, the way in which they exercise those powers is by the withdrawal of their restraint upon them. The released energies pass from an inactive state into one of intense activity and consequently, of exercise.

This is the way in which the powers are brought into active exercise by holy angels when God commands, but it is not the way evil angels exercise them when God permits. Satan and his followers have studied the secrets of the laboratories of nature and the turbulent forces within man, until they know just how to activate them into destructive intensities. Thus, while God's angels are working to hold back these fearful elements, Satan and his company are working in the opposite direction.

But, whether they are released into active exercise by the holy angels, or manipulated by evil angels, they are the same powers. This is the principal thought that the statement is intended to convey. It does not discuss [382] the way in which those powers are exercised. When it is recognized that this is the subject matter of the statement, there will be no problem in understanding it.

Far from proving that good angels, at God's command, sally forth and execute the unrighteous, this statement, by emphasizing that it is the same power in any case, verifies that they do not. If God undertook the work of executioner, He would not bother to use anything less than the greatest powers at His command. These certainly are not those in nature and in man. They are the almighty forces within Himself, forces so great that He merely has to speak and whole worlds appear and, in turn, disappear. Therefore, if God was the destroyer, it would not be the same powers as those used by the evil angels who have nothing of themselves but are dependent on what God has invested in nature and in man, to do their work of destruction. God does have almighty omnipotence and is not in any sense dependent on the relatively puny potentials He has given to this earth and its inhabitants. If these facts are kept in mind, then the statement presents no problem.

(end; I didn't write this).