Where does it say God restrained Herod or those people from killing Jesus? I read where Jesus escaped such attempts but not where such people were restrained.

A strange act that is, nonetheless, performed by God Himself?

(kland)What if you find out that God doesn't punish and destroy people but permits them to separate from Him and the result is death?How would that make you feel?

Jesus earned the right on the cross to judge, punish, and destroy sinners. Ellen White wrote:

Death entered the world because of transgression. But Christ gave His life that man should have another trial. He did not die on the cross to abolish the law of God, but to secure for man a second probation. He did not die to make sin an immortal attribute; He died to secure the right to destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil. He suffered the full penalty of a broken law for the whole world. This He did, not that men might continue in transgression, but that they might return to their loyalty and keep God's commandments and His law as the apple of their eye. {TM 134.1}

Ellen White wrote:

The plea may be made that a loving Father would not see His children suffering the punishment of God by fire while He had the power to relieve them. But God would, for the good of His subjects and for their safety, punish the transgressor. God does not work on the plan of man. He can do infinite justice that man has no right to do before his fellow man. Noah would have displeased God to have drowned one of the scoffers and mockers that harassed him, but God drowned the vast world. Lot would have had no right to inflict punishment on his sons-in-law, but God would do it in strict justice. Who will say God will not do what He says He will do?--12MR 207-209; 10MR 265 (1876). {LDE 241.3}

She says God drowned the antediluvians - not nature. Plus she says God can do it whereas it would be a sin for men to do it.

Verses 13-16 above are not directly related to what the sixth angel will do when he pours out the sixth vial.

And, yes, evil angels unwittingly fulfill the will and purpose of God in such cases. I suppose they are ignorant or hoping things will not play out according to God's plan. If they believed it would serve God's overall plan seems to me they wouldn't go along with it. The following passage goes along with the dynamics in Rev 16:13-16.

2 Thessalonians
2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.


I don't see a significant difference between God sending serpents to bite them and not preventing the poison from killing them or allowing serpents in the area to bite them and not preventing the poison from killing them. Do you? If so, please explain why.

BTW, do you agree with the idea that there are times when God does not allow death and destruction through the "withdraw and permit principle"? Keep the following in mind:

Especially solemn is the apostle's statement regarding those who should refuse to receive "the love of the truth." "For this cause," he declared of all who should deliberately reject the messages of truth, "God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." Men cannot with impunity reject the warnings that God in mercy sends them. From those who persist in turning from these warnings, God withdraws His Spirit, leaving them to the deceptions that they love. {AA 266.2}

The wicked have passed the boundary of their probation, and the Lord withdraws His protection, and leaves them to the mercy of the leader they have chosen. Satan will have power over those who have yielded themselves to his control, and he will plunge the inhabitants of the earth into one great, final trouble. As the angels of God cease to hold in check the fierce winds of human passion, all the elements of strife will be let loose. The whole world will be involved in ruin more terrible than that which came upon Jerusalem of old. {Mar 275.2}

God had subdued before them the fierce beasts of prey and the venomous reptiles of the forest and the desert. If with all these tokens of His love the people still continued to complain, the Lord would withdraw His protection until they should be led to appreciate His merciful care, and return to Him with repentance and humiliation. {PP 428.3}

i guess it depends on whether we believe we really have an enemy seeking to steal, kill and destroy, i think.

And, yes, evil angels unwittingly fulfill the will and purpose of God in such cases. I suppose they are ignorant or hoping things will not play out according to God's plan.

If they believed it would serve God's overall plan seems to me they wouldn't go along with it.

The following passage goes along with the dynamics in Rev 16:13-16.

2 Thessalonians
2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Men cannot with impunity reject the warning which God in mercy sends them. A message was sent from heaven to the world in Noah's day, and their salvation depended upon the manner in which they treated that message. Because they rejected the warning, the Spirit of God was withdrawn from the sinful race, and they perished in the waters of the Flood....Looking down to the last days, the same Infinite Power declares, concerning those who "received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved": "For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12. As they reject the teachings of His word, God withdraws His Spirit and leaves them to the deceptions which they love. GC 431)

I don't see a significant difference between God sending serpents to bite them and not preventing the poison from killing them or allowing serpents in the area to bite them and not preventing the poison from killing them. Do you? If so, please explain why.

Do you see a difference between not preventing your child from getting in a car accident (e.g. he's come of age to drive, and you let him drive, after passing driver's ed and getting a license) and running over him with a car?

No, this illustration is not correct at all to represent the incident mentioned (the serpents). An accidental death is not what we are discussing here. The death of many was certain without God's protection.

About the death of the Egyptians. Was it accidental? (I'm here addressing some of Teresa's points too.)

Who/what killed the Egyptians? They themselves, because of their sin? Of course in a sense yes - they were responsible for their own death; but they did not cause their own death. It was caused by the sea, and the sea was directly controlled by God. He could have waited for the Egyptians to go back (which EGW makes clear they had already begun to do). So the conclusion is inescapable that God killed the Egyptians.

“They remembered the judgments that the God of the Hebrews had brought upon them in Egypt, to compel them to let Israel go, and they thought that God might deliver them all into the hands of the Israelites. They decided that God was fighting for the Israelites, and they were terribly afraid, and were turning about to flee from them, when ‘the Lord said unto Moses, Stretch out thine hand over the sea, that the waters may come again upon the Egyptians.’” {1SP 209.2}

...

I don't believe the difference between God and Satan is in the manner of destruction – Satan destroying actively and God destroying passively (by removing His protection).

In fact, there is no difference between destroying actively and destroying passively. God Himself teaches this in the story of David and Uriah. Although David did not personally take the life of Uriah, he is still accused of having “struck down Uriah the Hittitie with the sword” (2 Sam. 12:9).

The difference between God and Satan is in the motivation for destruction. Satan destroys to make others suffer, God destroys in mercy – mercy in limiting the miserable existence of those who are destroyed, and mercy to others for whom they became a menace.

“He [God] gives life, and He will take life, if that life becomes a terror and a menace.” {2SAT 186.4}

One illustration more correct to represent some situations we are discussing here would be that one I presented in the discussion about the flood to which I provided the link. Suppose the mayor of a city whose dam was not in good conditions builds a reinforcement system. One day, however, the people of that city say to him, “Go away, we don’t want you here and we don’t want your protection. Remove the reinforcement system you built!” Then he goes away and, respecting the wish of the people (sigh), he removes the reinforcement system of the dam, knowing that it will break and that the water will inundate the city and kill everyone.
In the example of the dam, which mayor would be less guilty of the death of the whole city? He who opened the floodgates or he who removed the reinforcement system?