Tom, if I were to respond to your view of God by referring to Willy Wonka, wouldn’t you be tempted to assume I was comparing them?


What are the rules evil angels must abide by when God gives unrepentant sinners over to them? Are they at liberty to bless or to curse or to do whatever suits their fancy? Or, are they required to work within well defined limits which prevent them from doing as they please including whether or not they are free to bless sinners?


Until a certain point is clearly understood, it makes sense to me to include the ongoing dialog until it is. It’s not any more trouble to repost it with the new comments.

You wrote “It's impossible that God would withdraw from His role of managing nature and nothing undesirable happened.” Why do you say impossible? What if evil angels worked to prevent the forces of nature from causing death and destruction when God ceased doing it?

You also wrote “When God ceases to restrain evil angels and evil beings, they reveal their true character. It's impossible for selfish beings to act in any other way than selfishly.” How does God restrain evil men and evil angels without violating their freedoms? What does He do to prevent them from doing what they would like to do? And, how is this fair?


The Bible and the SOP often speak of nature as if nature can think and speak and express emotions. I’m sure you’re familiar with this idea. “The mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands.” Does this make sense to you?

At any rate, above you wrote “It's impossible that God would withdraw from His role of managing nature and nothing undesirable happened.” Obviously you believe the forces of nature would naturally cause death and destruction if God ceased preventing it.

You wrote “I'm saying that nature is not self-acting, and that it requires the management and supervision of God, and that if God withdraws from that function, that nature will not function properly. The result of that is very likely to be bad.” I agree.


What are the two opposing forces in your analogy? I believe other outcomes are possible when God ceases managing the forces of nature because evil angels could work to prevent the natural outcome, they could prevent bad things from happening, they could work to make things go on as usual. Do you agree? For example, do you think the evil angels could have worked to prevent the Flood from killing millions of women and children and infants? If not, why not?


I’m referring to local things like the fires of Sodom. IOW, did God have to work to prevent the outcome from being worse than it was? If so, how and why? What role did evil angels play, if any, in the death and destruction that happened when Sodom and her inhabitants were burned to ashes? Or, do you think the evil angels could have prevented it? If not, why not?


Yes, I am familiar with the idea that evil angels bless sinners with riches, but are these sinners God has given over to Satan? Are we to assume that anyone not serving God faithfully He gives over to evil angels in the same sense He gave over Sodom and Jerusalem?


What is it I’m wanting you to do? “Cite Bible or SOP passages to affirm this view.” Of course by “this view” I’m referring to what preceded, namely, “the SOP says the reverse”, that is, the reverse of what I said, namely, “I was getting the impression you believe evil angels will always cause the death and destruction God is willing to allow them to cause.” Please quote the Bible or the SOP where it describes evil angels doing the opposite of, or something less than, what God was willing to allow them to do.


I guess you wouldn’t since you do not believe God knows the end from the beginning, namely, you don’t believe He knew with certainty that Lucifer and one-third of the angels and the entire human race were going to sin and rebel before He created them.

But the statement above makes sense to those who believe the following inspired insight:

“The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam. It was a revelation of "the mystery which hath been kept in silence through times eternal." Rom. 16:25, R. V. It was an unfolding of the principles that from eternal ages have been the foundation of God's throne. From the beginning, God and Christ knew of the apostasy of Satan, and of the fall of man through the deceptive power of the apostate. God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency. So great was His love for the world, that He covenanted to give His only-begotten Son, "that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16. {DA 22.2}


1. “God is vengeful and bloodthirsty.” God said, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay.” I concede “bloodthirsty” was a poor choice of words. What I meant to convey was that He demands justice.

1a. “Blaming Satan for the existence of sin and death assumes Satan, and not God, is in control of sin and death.” Satan did not create FMAs, therefore, he didn’t create a situation where sin and death were inevitable. See 3 below.

2. “Throughout eternity we will praise God for punishing sinners and destroying them in the lake of fire.” True. It’s because He did what was right and righteous.

3. “I think it is obvious that God is responsible for creating a situation where sin and death was inevitable.” See quote above.

4. “God is the author of death.” Poor choice of words. What I mean is that God chose to create FMAs in spite of knowing in advance which ones would sin and rebel and die in the lake of fire.

5. “But the fact is, He has killed (i.e., destroyed) hundreds and thousands and millions of people since the Flood, and He will kill millions and billions more in the lake of fire.” There are five different ways death and destruction has happened since the Fall.

1. God did it Himself.
2. God commands holy angels to do it.
3. God permits the forces of nature to do it.
4. God permits evil angels to do it.
5. God permits evil men to do it.


The humane hunter story you wrote does not explain why God commanded Moses and the COI to stone sinners to death. It assumes He gave in to human expectations and commanded something He wasn’t in favor in order not to incur their disfavor, that is, He went along with it because it’s what they expected and He chose not to correct the problem at that time. In my opinion, though, this doesn’t speak well of God. Do you think it speaks of Him? If so, why?


Yes, everything must be understood in light of the dynamics involved in the death of Jesus on the cross, especially what made it necessary and why God was willing to go through with it. The following passage is pertinent to the topic of this thread:

Hebrews
10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

In an attempt to build bridges (selfishly motivated, as I'd like to see the discussion continue)

1.kland, I know MM pretty well, in some ways, and feel sure he wasn't feigning offense. I agree with you that what I wrote was perfectly reasonable, and MM was wrong to complain, but would be very surprised if the offense he experienced wasn't heart-felt.

2.MM, I don't think kland was being intentionally "unloving." I don't sense any animosity at all from kland towards you. I think he thought your response was unwarranted, and was amazed, more than anything else, by what you wrote (I sort of was too), and he misinterpreted thy "why" of it.

would the reference to willy wonka have to do with the issue under discussion? or would it be an invalid point? in other words, did the papacy act according to their view of God? and do we know what willy wonkas view of God is? and most importantly would a fictional character be a legitimate comparison as opposed to a very real and horrifying historical reality?

since i am sure you want answers from the sop: ...I was informed that the inhabitants of earth had been degenerating, losing their strength and comeliness. Satan has the power of disease and death, and with every age the effects of the curse have been more visible, and the power of Satan more plainly seen. Those who lived in the days of Noah and Abraham resembled the angels in form, comeliness, and strength. But every succeeding generation have been growing weaker and more subject to disease, and their life has been of shorter duration. Satan has been learning how to annoy and enfeeble the race. {EW 184.2}

The willing subjects of Satan are faithful and active, united in one object. And although they will hate, and war with, each other, yet they will improve every opportunity to advance their common interest. But the great Commander in Heaven and earth has limited Satan's power. {4bSG 105.2}

back to the real issue that the enemy has stolen time and time again:I saw that in our journeying from place to place, he had frequently placed his evil angels in our path to cause accident which would result in our losing our lives; but holy angels were sent upon the ground to deliver. Several accidents have placed my husband and myself in great peril, and our preservation has been wonderful. I saw that we had been the special objects of Satan's attacks, because of our interest in, and connection with, the work of God. As I saw the great care God has every moment for those who love and fear him, I was inspired with confidence and trust in God, and felt reproved for my lack of faith. {4bSG 106.3}

MM, I was referring to something which actually happened in history, applying the logic which was suggested to a particular case. This is a very common thing to do in discussions like this, especially when discussing ethics.

I'm still interested in an answer to the question.



It would have to be more the latter than the former in order for the Great Controversy to make sense, right? That is, the point of the GC is for time to be given so Satan can reveal who he is and God can reveal who He is. If God dictates every little thing that Satan can and cannot do, then Satan wouldn't really be revealing who he is, would he?



Evil angels don't have the ability to manage nature. They have the ability to cause certain things to occur (as we see in Job, for example) but only God can manage creation.



He restrains evil angels from killing everybody, or else there'd be no way to continue the GC. In Job it says He puts a hedge around them. Do you think being protected by a hedge violates the freedoms of evildoers?



Again, in Job it says He set a hedge around him. As to how its fair, it's fair because Satan have been given ample opportunity to demonstrate the principles of his government, and to present his claims in regards to God. It is not necessary for God to allow Satan to destroy all humanity to be fair. Indeed, this would be counterproductive, as it would not allow an examination of the evidence, so those who would examine it wouldn't exist.



What does the "forces of nature" being "free to do as they please" mean? I'm sorry, but this doesn't make sense to me.



The analogy is this:

A.God manages nature. If He "lets go," bad things are likely to happen.
B.You manage your car. If you "let go," bad things are likely to happen.



No. Evil angles do not have the capability to manage nature, any more than they can create life.



No, for the reasons specified above.



I'd guess not.



They led people to rebel against God.



I suppose you're talking about once it started. If so, I doubt it, for the same reasons as the Flood.



This was the impression I got from the quote.



This is not the impression I got from the quote. For example, Jerusalem didn't happen for many centuries.



This didn't help. Why don't you try starting from scratch. Forget we had this conversation, and you want to request I cite something from the SOP. What is it you're requesting?



You're mistaken here. I do believe God knows the end from the beginning.



That's not what "know the end from the beginning" means. It refers to knowing the end of a path. Say there are two paths. God knows the end of each path; He knows the end of the path from the beginning of the path. It's not dealing with which path will be chosen, but the end of the path; hence the "end from the beginning."



Not really, since it's based on an idea which is false, in regards to what knowing the end from the beginning means. Also, there are statements like the following to consider:



Given your POV, this statement wouldn't make sense, since, given your presuppositions, heaven wouldn't have been in any peril whatsoever.

Basically your idea is one influenced by Greek thought; it's not Hebrew. Augustine got it from the Greeks, and we (Western Civilization) got it from him. But it's not in a Hebrew thought (from where we get the Scriptures).

From the Scriptures were read many things like the following:



These thoughts don't jibe with the Greek ideas.

If you want to continue discussing this, I suggest a different thread.

It's rather curious to me that you brought this up. I don't see the connection.

I'll stop here, since this post is already quite long, and catch the rest of your post later.

The great apostasy originally began in a denial of the love of God, as it is plainly revealed in the Word. Provision was then made whereby fallen man might have a powerful revelation of the love of God, and be given an opportunity to return to his allegiance to Jehovah. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (John 3:16). "I lay down my life for the sheep," says Christ (chap. 10:15). "The bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world" (chap. 6:51). Here is a revelation of the power mighty to save "to the uttermost." God is light and love. {UL 149.4}
Who could bring in the principles ordained by God in His rule and government to counterwork the plans of Satan and bring the world back to its loyalty? God said: I will send My Son. "God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16. This is the remedy for sin. Christ says: "Where Satan has set his throne, there shall stand My cross. Satan shall be cast out, and I will be lifted up to draw all men unto Me. I will become the center of the redeemed world. The Lord God shall be exalted. Those who are now controlled by human ambition, human passions, shall become workers for Me. Evil influences have conspired to counterwork all good. They have confederated to make men think it righteous to oppose the law of Jehovah. But My army shall meet in conflict with the satanic force. My Spirit shall combine with every heavenly agency to oppose them. I will engage every sanctified human agency in the universe. None of My agencies are to be absent. I have work for all who love Me, employment for every soul who will work under My direction. The activity of Satan's army, the danger that surrounds the human soul, calls for the energies of every worker. But no compulsion shall be exercised. Man's depravity is to be met by the love, the patience, the long-suffering of God. My work shall be to save those who are under Satan's rule." {6T 236.2}

Through Christ, God works to bring man back to his first relation to his Creator and to correct the disorganizing influences brought in by Satan. Christ alone stood unpolluted in a world of selfishness, where men would destroy a friend or a brother in order to accomplish a scheme put into their hands by Satan. Christ came to our world, clothing His divinity with humanity, that humanity might touch humanity and divinity grasp divinity. Amid the din of selfishness He could say to men: Return to your center--God. He Himself made it possible for man to do this by carrying out in this world the principles of heaven. In humanity He lived the law of God. To men in every nation, every country, every clime, He will impart heaven's choicest gifts if they will accept God as their Creator and Christ as their Redeemer. {6T 237.1}

Christ alone can do this. His gospel in the hearts and hands of His followers is the power which is to accomplish this great work. "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!" By Himself becoming subject to Satan's misrepresentations, Christ made it possible for the work of redemption to be accomplished. Thus was Satan to show himself to be the cause of disloyalty in God's universe. Thus was to be forever settled the great controversy between Christ and Satan. {6T 238.1}

Satan strengthens the destructive tendencies of man's nature. He brings in envy, jealousy, selfishness, covetousness, emulation, and strife for the highest place. Evil agencies act their part through the devising of Satan. Thus the enemy's plans, with their destructive tendencies, have been brought into the church. Christ comes with His own redeeming influence, proposing through the agency of His Spirit to impart His efficiency to men, and to employ them as His instrumentalities, laborers together with Him in seeking to draw the world back to its loyalty. {6T 238.2}

Men are bound in fellowship, in dependence, to one another. By the golden links of the chain of love they are to be bound fast to the throne of God. This can be done only by Christ's imparting to finite man the attributes which man would ever have possessed had he remained loyal and true to God. {6T 238.3}

Those who, through an intelligent understanding of the Scriptures, view the cross aright, those who truly believe in Jesus, have a sure foundation for their faith. They have that faith which works by love and purifies the soul from all its hereditary and cultivated imperfections. {6T 238.4}

I assume perturbed is not considered having animosity.

I find it very difficult to believe someone who appears to me to dish it out to others with offensive bullishness and to construe comments in such a way which have left several wondering how he got that out of them, would be easily offended. Hence, I dish it back as thinking that's how you communicate with such. In light of the dishonesty of James, it appears to me his reactions and appearance of unwillingness to consider an alternative viewpoint are very similar. What MM's motivations are, however, remain unclear unless it has to do with what I alluded to with malice as he regards God directly drowning, burning, and sending plagues upon people as not torture or force or violence, but love.

But, I have to consider the possibility that maybe you are correct. Some people use similar defensive mechanisms. Perhaps his brashness hides a most sensitive and easily offended individual underneath. I will try to consider such in the future. I guess seeing what James did, made me think MM was the same, but maybe MM is truly, honestly searching and we need to try to overlook his sometimes not so pleasant interactions. It will be most difficult for me, but I will try.

Thank you. And I will try to be less brash and bullish. In future I would appreciate it if you and I could stick to the facts and leave off the character commentaries. Thank you.

I do not doubt or discount papal history. Yes, their view of God forced them to kill people who opposed their view. No, Willy Wonka is not a parallel or comparison to the papacy.

Arnold wrote “God sometimes causes painful things to happen, if that will be eternally beneficial.” Mentioning papal atrocities in the context of this insight begs the question - What do they have in common? I'm still not sure I understand why Tom brought it up. Do you? If so, please explain it to me. Thank you.


Amen! These insights reflect very nicely what I believe about it. Thank you for sharing them. I hear her saying, God protects people from the assaults of evil angels when it serves His purposes to do so, and that He sometimes permits evil angels to cause death and destruction within well established and enforced limits when it serves His purposes to do so.

The question is - What are the rules evil angels must abide by when God gives unrepentant sinners over to them? Are they at liberty to bless or to curse or to do whatever suits their fancy? Or, are they required to work within well defined limits? And, do these limits sometimes prevent them from blessing unrepentant sinners whom God has given over to them? Or, are they always free to bless them?

Awesome insights. Thank you for sharing them. However, do you think they explain the outpouring of the plagues? If so, how?

I can explain it (and have). That "God sometimes causes painful things to happen, if that will be eternally beneficial" is articulating a principle. Here it is:

1.It is OK to cause painful things to happen, if that will be eternally beneficial.

Also, it should be noted, in the context of the painful things which happen, we're talking about things which are excruciating painful, like plagues, not minor things.

This principle made me think of people during Medieval times who would cause painful things to happen, thinking they were right in so doing, because it would be eternally beneficial.

This is the same principle.

I don't think anyone has actually addressed the question yet, have they? I'm still interested in an answer. Do the ends justify the means?