Hey William! Thanks for the input.

When you say "Stephen Bohr, Jeff Reich, Marvin Moore, and Ivor Myers as possible supporters of this view," what do you mean by "this view"? It looks like everyone you are mentioning has the same idea; is that right?

Actually, I think everybody would agree with this statement:



The question is how this operates. For example, in "The Great Controversy" we read:



I underlined the part of interest: "I have stayed the angel of justice."

How did this angel of justice strike, when it could no longer be stayed?



This whole chapter is a good read on the subject.

We see that when the limit is passed, then the angel of justice strikes, which is accomplished by the rejectors of His mercy to reap that which they have sown.

Where there's a difference of opinion is if this description is a general one of how God operates, or if it was an isolated incident, applicable to the destruction of Jerusalem, but not other cases.

Good ideas, all. And, yes, I see what you're saying about the method of operation. And what I meant was, those gents would each appear to agree that God kills based on their willingness to add a blurb for Wohlberg's book.

I'm afraid this topic is rather new to me so I have no strong opinion (as of yet), and mentioned the book's existence only as a reference point and conversation piece. Unfortunately, I cannot yet comment in depth at the moment. Carry on, mates.

William

Thank you for the interesting note.

What this really boils down to is a very simply difference in view that has in fact a very simple test. Do the people listed there - show any indication at all that they believe that content, context and writing style of passages such as following pages of quotes from Ellen White dictate that reader take the details as "real" and "true" or as simply exaggerated figures of speech?

Do the people listed there suppose that Ellen White is using a writing style intended to tell the reader NOT to take the details as "real" in the following two examples?


===============================================================================

Great Controversy - 673

Fire comes down from God out of heaven. The earth is broken up. The weapons concealed in its depths are drawn forth. Devouring flames burst from every yawning chasm. The very rocks are on fire. The day has come that shall burn as an oven. The elements melt with fervent heat, the earth also, and the works that are therein are burned up. Malachi 4:1; 2 Peter 3:10. The earth's surface seems one molten mass--a vast, seething 673

lake of fire. It is the time of the judgement and perdition of ungodly men--"the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompenses for the controversy of Zion." Isaiah 34:8. {GC 672.2}

Some are destroyed as in a moment, while others suffer many days. All are punished “according to their deeds." The sins of the righteous having been transferred to Satan, he is made to suffer not only for his own rebellion, but for all the sins which he has caused God's people to commit.

His punishment is to be far greater than that of those whom he has deceived. After all have perished who fell by his deceptions, he is still to live and suffer on. In the cleansing flames the wicked are at last destroyed, root and branch--Satan the root, his followers the branches. The full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah. {GC 673.1}

EW 294

The Second Death

Satan rushes into the midst of his followers and tries to stir up the multitude to action. But fire from God out of heaven is rained upon them, and the great men, and mighty men, the noble, the poor and miserable, are all consumed together.

I saw that some were quickly destroyed, while others suffered longer. They were punished according to the deeds done in the body. Some were many days consuming, and just as long as there was a portion of them unconsumed, all the sense of suffering remained. Said the angel, "The worm of life shall not die; their fire shall not be quenched as long as there is the least particle for it to prey upon." {EW 294.1}


Satan and his angels suffered long. Satan bore not only the weight and punishment of his own sins, but
295
also of the sins of the redeemed host, which had been placed upon him; and he must also suffer for the ruin of souls which he had caused. Then I saw that Satan and all the wicked host were consumed, and the justice of God was satisfied; and all the angelic host, and all the redeemed saints, with a loud voice said, "Amen!" {EW 294.2}

Said the angel, "Satan is the root, his children are the branches. They are now consumed root and branch. They have died an everlasting death. They are never to have a resurrection, and God will have a clean universe." I then looked and saw the fire which had consumed the wicked, burning up the rubbish and purifying the earth. Again I looked and saw the earth purified. There was not a single sign of the curse. The broken, uneven surface of the earth now looked like a level, extensive plain.

=======================================================


There is a follow on question about what to DO about the fact that the author writing in a style that would have the reader taking the details as actual fact. But that is step-2.

I would settle for the obvious on step-1.

in Christ,

Bob

i havent read the book so i dont know what it says, but it has been discussed on a couple of forums. there are a couple of forums that discuss the character of God and apparently some statements quoted in that book were not representative of the movement.

one of the forums does have a few "interesting characters" but i can assure you they speak for themselves, not the movement, nor the forums.

perhaps you would like to know for yourself what the character of God people believe, i hope? i find some of the discussions quite enlightening while others i could do without.

there are some in that movement that apparently do believe God never kills. it is an interesting perspective that i have not adopted, but am willing to listen to, tho, at the moment i still believe God has intervened at certain points.

there are articles that explain the perspective very well, should you be interested...

Bob, I'm sorry, but not sure if the series of questions were addressed to me concerning the individuals who gave blurbs. I understand the quotations to be rather literal, personally, if you are asking me directly.

I'm not sure why anyone should think otherwise, which is why I'm uncertain what you're arguing for, regarding how these two quotations are incongruent with the idea of God punishing, killing, and annihilating? If this comment was addressed to someone else, my apologizes.

William

I had come across this passage and thought it may apply here:


How was the wrath of the Lord kindled, how did the Lord smite the people? He gave them what they desired, let them suffer the results. What did Ellen White call this action? He punished them.

Quite generous, TeresaQ. I'll jostle with the offer a tad. Thank you.

William

Actualy I am only arguing that we accept the details as written. No change when it comes to GC 673 and EW294 I am arguing that they are written in a style that leads the reader to accept the details just as they are written, just as you appear to have done.

My argument is that you can not "undo" what you see written in GC 673 or EW 294 simply because the details are so unsettling yea shocking.

Rather we accept it - and move on, because as it turns out in the gospel plan- not every incident is flowers and fuzzy teddy bears. Some of it is would be most uncomfortable to watch -- starting with the crucifixion of Christ, the flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorah etc.

Yet they happened "for real" not simply in symbol.

in Christ,

Bob

this seems rather judgmental and untrue. it seems that you are saying some people got together and decided they didnt like the picture of the white throne judgment and decided to change it.

instead, from what i have seen, certain verses started to be seen-that happens as we continue to study-that contradicted previous verses and further study neccessitated coming to different conclusions.

the best example being the "eternal hell" verses. then other verses that contradicted that view started to be "seen" necessitating different conclusions.

or we can just decide that it is wrong and do no searching and investigating. each persons choice.

Oh-oh. This sounds like you may have an open mind.