There will indeed be consciousness after death. But, what does it say about God's character that Jesus would employ a well known parable to teach the truth about embracing the truth now? I believe it goes to show God is willing to meet people where they are.

Now, is this what God was doing when He commanded Moses and the COI to stone sinners to death? Did He command it because it's what they expected of Him and HE didn't want to disappoint them or to alienate them? Of course not! God never sets aside the truth to win friends and influence people or to avoid being rejected.

Dense? No way! Stickler? Absolutely!!!

Perhaps you overlooked the bulk of my response to your questions or maybe you didn't recognize your questions because I reworded them ever so slightly. Here's what I posted above:


Also, please note that "No one was ever to kill" are your words. I was merely responding to them in point 2 and in my PS.

MM, you asked the question:



I believe what teresa is saying is that she doesn't understand why you are asking this question. You asked an "if ... then" question, which implies that the second part of the question depends upon the first part; that is, the "then" depends on the "if". She's asking you what the connection is, expecting that your question has something to do with her question in regards to Satan's accusations against the law. At least, this is what I am understanding her to be asking.

MM, I have a general question. Is it your view that God desires that anyone who broke any law be killed? I'm not speaking about the actual situation with Israel, but just a hypothetical question. God sets up a kingdom, with some number of subjects who will do just what he wants. Do you believe that God would have the righteous ones kill all the unrighteous ones?

Oh, I see what you mean. If that is what she had in mind, them yes, I need to clarify my question. Here is her question again in her own words:


First of all, I answered this question by simply saying, Yes. What I agreed to is that Satan believes men and angels are smart enough to determine whether or not God's command not to kill should be obeyed. I suppose this could be construed as an accusation against the law.

However, there is evidence in the Bible and the SOP to suggest Satan is partially right, that is, men and angels are smart enough to determine whether or not it is right and righteous in the eyes of God to kill. The commandment forbids murder. However, it was not considered murder and, therefore, not a violation of the law, when God commanded Moses and the COI to stone sinners to death.

how does any of that have anything to do with satans accusations against God and His law?
He claimed that angels needed no law;

but should be left free to follow their own will,

which would ever guide them right;

that law was a restriction of their liberty,

and that to abolish law was one great object of his standing as he did. The condition of the angels he thought needed improvement. Not so the mind of God, who had made laws and exalted them equal to himself. The happiness of the angelic host consisted in their perfect obedience to law.... {1SP 22.3}

Satan stood in amazement at his new condition. His happiness was gone. He looked upon the angels who, with him, were once so happy, but who had been expelled from Heaven with him. Before their fall, not a shade of discontent had marred their perfect bliss. Now all seemed changed. Countenances which had reflected the image of their Maker were gloomy and despairing. Strife, discord, and bitter recrimination, were among them. Previous to their rebellion these things had been unknown in Heaven. Satan now beholds the terrible results of his rebellion. He shuddered, and feared to face the future, and to contemplate the end of these things. {1SP 28.1}

He shuddered at the thought of plunging the holy, happy pair into the misery and remorse he was himself enduring. {1SP 32.1}

That shrugging emoticon is really cool.

a picture is worth a thousand words.

im thinking of starting a couple of topics on my "page", and would like some opposing views. you do it quite respectfully and hope you contribute.

i will state how i see it, then you can state how you see it. its for my children.

they can see it and get them thinking.

(for the time i have left online, anyway.)

I would put a parking law in a different category from a speeding law. And based on what you said, I think you would also.

But I still put the speeding law as a humanly imposed ordinance. Sure, there is danger in disregarding it, but the danger is not inherent in the speeding itself. If there were no cops, there would be no citations given for it - that "problem" would not exist.

Certainly, it would be wise to obey the speed laws, for our own safety and the safety of others. But why is disobeying it dangerous? Because if you don't obey, there is a greater likelihood of running into something you are not supposed to run into. Therefore, like the moral law, it protects us and those around us.

However, there is a big difference between the speed law and God's law. If there was nobody else around, say in the vacuum between us and the Andromeda Galaxy, one could go as fast as he can, and not be in danger. Go as fast as you want, and there is no harm. There is no inherent harm from going very fast.

God's law is different. Even if there was nobody else around, if you break it, you would be harmed. For example, if a hermit came to town, saw a woman and lusted after her, then went back to his cave, even if he never saw another person, there is still great harm done to himself by his adultery. There is inherent harm from breaking God's law, even if there was nobody else around but the sinner.


You are right in that gravity cannot be "broken." What I was trying to get across is that there are ways to counteract the effects of gravity. For example, airplanes use Bernouli's Principle to counteract gravity and keep from falling down. IOW, they "defy" gravity by using a force that goes in the opposite direction.

God's law doesn't work that way. You cannot find an "opposing" law that you can use to say that love is no longer required. And if you think you did, and lived without love, you would be damaging yourself. We were designed to love; there's no way around it.

Arnold, regarding the speeding law, it looks to me like you're saying the same thing I am. And on the gravity one too. In general, it looks to me that you see the law functioning as I do.

So let's apply this to a couple of things. The fall, the death of Christ, and the judgment. I'll be real brief.

Regarding the fall of Lucifer, I think the underlying issue is his desire for self-exaltation led him to deceive others in regards to God's character in order to win homage to himself. Since the law is a transcript of God's character, lying about the law served this purpose.

Regarding the fall of man, Lucifer deceived man in regards to God's character, which is how he caused man to fall.

Regarding the death of Christ, I think it's a mistake to separate His death from the rest of His life, but one could say His death was the apex of what His life was about. The whole purpose of His earthly mission was the revelation of God, to bring man into harmony with God, and His death was the high point of that revelation.

Regarding the judgment, I agree with your comments regarding the moral law protecting us from the damage that would ensue from breaking it. Eventually God allows the wicked to reap the full results of their sin.

Awaiting your comments.