Arnold, I haven't been dealing with this. I've been dealing with the question of the person who inadvertently curses before dying. You looked to be saying that God wouldn't allow such a person to die without having a chance to repent. That seemed unnecessary to me, so I explained why I thought this, and have been asking for clarification on your part.

It seems like your answer is that a person would need to be kept alive in order to manifest what kind of creature he is. I can't see that this has anything at all to do with the question at hand, which is why a person who inadvertantly cursed would need to be kept alive. That a person would need to manifest his character would seem to be necessary irrespective as to whether or not he inadvertantly curses.



Since you brought this up, I don't think the reason the GC has been delayed has to do with this at all. The GC is in reference to God's character. The delay has to do with God's character, not with whether or not we know who will or will not be happy in heaven.





These two passages speak well to this theme.

One final question is you said you are looking at a penal aspect, but then mentioned Maxwell and a bunch of non-penal things, which strikes me as a bit odd.

One final point deals with this:



I didn't suggest the whole story consisted of what I posted. I was dealing with a specific question, which is why someone who inadvertantly cursed would need to be kept alive so that he could repent. I still don't see why this should be the case.

Here's the quick, non-comprehensive answer: That person who claims to be a follower of Christ, who God says reflects His character and would have a good time hanging out with Him forever, has just proven himself to be a potty mouth who takes God's name in vain. He stained his own record, as well as God's character. Either God keeps him alive to show what kind of man he is, or God says, "I'm taking him up here, and if you don't like it, that's your problem."

According to the SOP, the character is not determined by an occasional good deed or misdeed. If you saw from examining a person's record in judgment that a person loved God and his fellows, believe the principles of His kingdom, and that whenever he inadvertantly sinned (say cursed as an example) repented, and the person died before having an opportunity to repent, and this person would be happy in heaven, do you think there would be a problem?

How do you understand the theif on the cross? Consider cursing as an example. If he were an ordinary theif, he cursed. Was he instantly cured of this habit while on the cross? (Would he have even known it was wrong?) It seems like he should have been kept alive to show what sort of person he was. Or is this an example of God's saying "I'm taking him up here, and if you don't like it, that's your problem."

The actual word is "revealed" not "determined." The character is not revealed by occasional good or bad deeds, but by the tendency of the habitual words and acts.

And according to the SOP, it is in a crisis that character is revealed. What did our hypothetical curser reveal during his crisis?


That would be up to each individual juror.

If I was the accuser, and I'm sure Satan is much smarter than me, I could say, "Look at this Christian's character. He seems nice for the most part, but when a crisis comes and push comes to shove, he will act contrary to the law of love that he professes to uphold. When all is well, he's perfectly fine. But when the crisis comes, he speaks like a dragon. That's the kind of person that reflects God's character, because that's how God is."

If God keeps him alive long enough to repent, Satan has nothing to accuse, and the jurors have evidence of fruits meet for repentance. That's a much better solution to the problem.


God did keep him alive long enough to show what kind of man he was: a converted evangelist.

At first, both thieves railed upon Christ. But after a time, one thief changed his tune, even rebuking his companion. There was seen a radical change.

Did he keep blaspheming God? We don't have a record, but based on what we do know, I doubt it.

Arnold, I wrote:



Please answer this.



I was sharing her thought, a thought I thought you were familiar with, which you look to have been by your response. Did you not understand the thought? It looks like you understood it. Is it necessary to use a direct quote anytime a reference to a familiar thought from the Spirit of Prophecy or Scripture is made?



That the person had not completed the process I laid out.



This would be assuming there's a problem, which is my question. Is there a problem? Does a person need to be up to j to be saved?



I agree. Why the additional requirement to repent for inadvertant sins?



Agreed. Many who inadvertanly sin have manifest such a radical change.



I haven't been speaking of blaspheming God, but of cursing. The context of this discussion is a driver is in an accident which kills him, and just before dying, and before having an opportunity to repent, the person says a bad word and dies. The person, in other respects, is like the theif on the cross, one who has evidenced in his life and character to be one who would be happy in heaven, which is to say one who loves God and his fellow, one who believes in the principles of heaven. It has been further supposed that this person in every other time he has said a bad word, since being converted, has repented of it.

Is it necessary for God to keep such a person alive so that he can repent of the bad word spoken? If so, why?

"Reveal" and "determine" mean two different things. You are right, I am very familiar with that quote. That's why I always notice when people say "determined" when EGW actually said "revealed" in SC.

Compare the COL quote. A crisis determines character? No. She said a crisis reveals character. So also, she said character is revealed, not in good or bad anomalies, but in the habitual words and acts.


I think giving ammo to Satan is a problem.

Does the person need to go to J? I already answered that. If the steps before J constitute sin, then Yes, a person needs to go to J. If not, then No.

Do you think the steps before J are sinful?


It's not an additional requirement; it IS the requirement. He was bad, then was given the opportunity to manifest that he was no longer bad. That's the same thing all the redeemed have to go through.


King Saul manifested that radical change. If God allowed him to die as soon as he started his downward path, would that have kept Saul from damnation?


I was working with the understanding that cursing is blaspheming. Don't you think so?


God's standard is very high indeed.


If I was the accuser, and I'm sure Satan is much smarter than me, I could say, "Look at this Christian's character. He seems nice for the most part, but when a crisis comes and push comes to shove, he will act contrary to the law of love that he professes to uphold. When all is well, he's perfectly fine. But when the crisis comes, he speaks like a dragon. That's the kind of person that reflects God's character, because that's how God is."

Why are you so against God keeping someone alive in order to manifest His grace in their lives? Is it too hard for God? Or perhaps, you think it is too hard for sinful man to be holy all the time? I don't see why you can't believe that God will do that if it makes the judgment process so much easier.

Anyway, here's something to consider about inadvertent sin:

We were talking about the examination of someone's character in the judgment. Their character is determined, upon observation, not by the occasional good deed or misdeed. "Revelation" would not have expressed my meaning. Had I been quoting Ellen White, I would have put quote marks around what she wrote.

Did you have some trouble understanding what I was saying?



Yes. This is clear isn't it? If saying a curse is a sin, then so is thinking it. I don't see why you are unsure about this.

Based on your answer here it appears to me that it is your position that God cannot allow a person to die who thinks a curse without having a chance to repent of it. Is this correct?



You said the requirement was to shaw he was a converted evangelist. That's not the same as being totally cured from cursing to the point that you don't even think it. It seems very unlikely to me that the thief would have been instantly cured of cursing.



Your position is that if he inadvertently said or thought of a curse word then he would be bad, and God could not have allowed him to die?



By saying that he started his downward path, you are implying that he was in rebellion. Being in rebellion, he would need to repent. This is not the same issue as an inadvertent sin.



No. Blaspheming is speaking ill of God, not saying a swear word.



And this is just on the negative side! The positive side is even more difficult. We are required to speak well of others, the most positive way possible, even of those we don't like, even of our enemies.



If one considers someone like the thief on the cross, it seems very unlikely that he had overcome every possible sin, including cursing, for example. He was almost certainly thinking with swear words, as that was likely the world in which he lived. I'm sure had he learned about cursing, he would have gone through the a through j process and been cured of it, like other saints with the similar difficulty.

It seems to me that your theology would require God to keep him alive until he had conquered this sin and any other similar sin. I'm not against God keeping people alive for whatever reason He wishes, but against a theology which would require things which aren't required by Scripture. For example, I don't see how the thief on the cross would fit with what you are suggesting. It seems like your theology would require God to instantaneously cure him from cursing.

Perhaps I don't find that so hard to believe because I lived through it.

When Jesus raised Lazarus, He did not do it in increments, slowly restoring his body while they all stood there waiting. He did it in an instant. Healing the cursing mind shouldn't be harder than that, right?

Of course, healing doesn't always happen in an instant. Most of the time, it goes through stages. But God is able to speed up the process whenever He chooses.

And if the thief's situation required instant healing, I don't have a problem with God doing it. He did it for me, and I wasn't even dying.

Well, if "reveal" would not have expressed what you meant, then you should have prefaced it with "according to the me" instead of "according to the SOP" because the SOP says "reveal."

This is what I'm asking. Did the thief's situation required instant healing? Did God have to instantly heal him of cursing and every other like sin? (by "like sin" I mean sins that most people take time to overcome)