I didn't say literal fire is terrible. I said setting someone on fire is terrible. The problem isn't the fire, but the purposeful use of fire to cause excruciating pain. I really, really cannot understand why this wouldn't just be so obvious that it wouldn't need to be explained. Would *you* set someone on fire as a means of punishing them?



I didn't say this either. What I said is that God did not take an arbitrary (or imposed) action to cause the wicked excruciating pain, either physical or mental.



You're not being consistent with your "X" and "Y" here (i.e. consistent with what I've written). My "X" is "God takes arbitrary (or imposed) action to cause the wicked excruciating pain." (I've been saying God does not do this.) My "Y" is "the wicked suffer as a result of choices they themselves have made." It seems to me that DA 764 explains this very clearly. She makes the point repeatedly that what the wicked suffer is the result of choices they have made. God allows them to experience the result of their choices, but doesn't impose suffering upon them.



I'd be very surprised if kland didn't agree with me regarding this.

So, setting someone on fire is terrible. But allowing someone to catch on fire, even though you had the power to stop it, is not terrible.


It's not obvious because while you say that setting someone on fire is terrible, you simultaneously say that it is not terrible that God will do something that will UNAVOIDABLY cause excruciating pain to the wicked.

If you don't understand what I'm talking about, consider how much pain the wicked will be experiencing while they are dead during the Millennium, and compare it with how much pain they will be experiencing while God is revealing His glory to them. One is painless sleep, the other is excruciating, eternally fatal suffering.

What is hard to understand is how you can condemn one view for being very painful, and promote another view that is much more painful.

I've never said this was God's greatest concern. Along the same lines, if this were God's greatest concern, He could simply not have created anyone.



I don't agree with your premise here. God does not do something which unavoidably results in excruciating pain for the wicked. The suffering of the wicked is due to their own choice. This is what I've been asserting. It seems to me clear this is what DA 764 is saying.

Also, I've not asserted that a person's not suffering is the most important thing to God. Again, if it were, He wouldn't have created anyone. Creating beings with free will entails risk. They may choose to sin. Where there is sin, suffering and death is inevitable. It's impossible that selfishness would not result in these things. What I've asserted is that God does not arbitrarily cause (i.e. impose) the wicked excruciating pain.

It's not just setting someone on fire that's being suggested, but setting someone on fire, for the purpose of causing them excruciating pain, and then not letting them die, nor letting the fire go out, nor letting the fire destroy the nerve endings so the pain can no longer be felt, that is being suggested. The worst part of this is "for the purpose of causing them excruciating pain."

I've not said God, in the judgment, allows people to be set on fire at all, but I'll discuss the concept, as on this earth God allows people to be set on fire. He also allows people to be raped, and tortured, and all sorts of terrible things. Do you think this is terrible of God, since He has the power to stop these things? Do you not see any difference between God's allowing rape and child abuse to happen, to name two terrible things, and His doing these things Himself?



As I said, I disagree with your premise. The pain the wicked experience is not unavoidable. Here's DA 764:



You keep wanting to cast things as if God is responsible for the suffering of the wicked. But He's not. They are responsible for their own suffering. This is what the above says, over and over.

If the wicked would not choose to reject God, they would not suffer. Their suffering is not unavoidable, but the result of their own choice. And God does not raise them in order to cause them suffering, but to allow them to take part in the judgment. Their voice must be heard. They are a part of the entire universe which renders judgment regarding God's character.



It's not that I don't understand it, but I don't agree with it.



One could argue the same thing now. How many people are suffering now? Wouldn't they be in less pain if they were dead? Yet God allows them to live. According to your argument, God is being as bad or worse in doing this than as if He set them on fire and caused them excruciating pain. This isn't a valid argument. God is not responsible for the pain and suffering we experience. He is doing all He can to bring these things to an end. He took upon, and takes upon, Himself immense suffering, and even more importantly, He took upon Himself the risk of failure and eternal loss, in order to bring these things to an end.



The "being very painful" is not the salient point. As I've pointed out several times, it is God's arbitrarily causing someone to suffer excruciating pain which is the problem.

Would *you* set someone on fire as a form of punishment? What do you think of the idea that you could be sentencing your loved ones to be set on fire? I'm asking this because those who hold this view generally believe that this will be their responsibility during the millennium, to determine for how long the wicked will burn, which would presumably include their loved ones, since it makes sense to suppose one would be involved in the judgment of people one knows.

Even assuming the premise that the wicked must be punished for their deeds, why would God select such a horrendous way of punishing them? Would you do this? Would you set people on fire who need to be punished? Or incarcerate them instead, letting them serve out a sentence. That's what our government does. Is our government more merciful than God?

Not just our government, but every government on earth does this. No government punishes their criminals by setting them on fire, and this is a sin-cursed earth filled with wicked people. Why would these treat others more humanely than God?

Chronological Order of Events(GC 666-673)

1. “As soon as the books of record are opened, and the eye of Jesus looks upon the wicked, they are conscious of every sin which they have ever committed . . . all behold the enormity of their guilt.”
2. “They vainly seek to hide from the divine majesty of His countenance, outshining the glory of the sun . . .”
3. “The wicked are filled with the same hatred of God that inspires Satan; but they see that their case is hopeless, that they cannot prevail against Jehovah . . . Their rage is kindled against Satan and those who have been his agents in deception, and with the fury of demons they turn upon them.”
4. “Fire comes down from God out of heaven.”
5. “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.”
6. “Some are destroyed as in a moment, while others suffer many days. All are punished according to their deeds.”
7. “In the cleansing flames the wicked are at last destroyed.”


Well, based on what you’ve written, is it safe to conclude you believe:

“Fire comes down from God out of heaven.” This describes Jesus revealing the character of God while the wicked revisit their sins. Chronologically this happens before 3 and 5.

“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.” Chronologically this happens after 6.

“Some are destroyed as in a moment, while others suffer many days. All are punished according to their deeds.” This describes Jesus revealing the character of God while the wicked revisit their sins. Chronologically this happens before 3 and 5.

“Why do you think the wicked continue to live after revisiting their sins?” Because God continues serving as their source of life.

“Do you agree that something happens that causes brain, blood, and breath functions to cease (resulting in second death)?” There isn’t enough testimony to determine the cause of death.

What you’re saying doesn’t make sense. On the one hand you say they are separated and cut off from the only source of life, while on the other hand you say God gives them existence. Why do you think this makes sense?


“What keeps them alive when they cut themselves off from life?” Also, do you agree each person will revisit each sin, one at a time, during judgment as if they were the only one on trial? Consider the following passage:

There is a record also of the sins of men. "For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil." Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment." Says the Saviour: "By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." {GC 481.2}

As the books of record are opened in the judgment, the lives of all who have believed on Jesus come in review before God. Beginning with those who first lived upon the earth, our Advocate presents the cases of each successive generation, and closes with the living. Every name is mentioned, every case closely investigated. Names are accepted, names rejected. {GC 483.1}

Though all nations are to pass in judgment before God, yet He will examine the case of each individual with as close and searching scrutiny as if there were not another being upon the earth. Everyone must be tested and found without spot or wrinkle or any such thing. {GC 489.3}

Every man's work passes in review before God and is registered for faithfulness or unfaithfulness. Opposite each name in the books of heaven is entered with terrible exactness every wrong word, every selfish act, every unfulfilled duty, and every secret sin, with every artful dissembling. {GC 482.1}

Thus was presented to the prophet's vision the great and solemn day when the characters and the lives of men should pass in review before the Judge of all the earth, and to every man should be rendered "according to his works." {GC 479.2}


Do you think they will revisit their sins, character, and life in full and complete detail as if they were the only one on trial? Or, do you think God will skip over certain sins or lump certain sins together and deal with them as one?


Do you think one of the “lesser sins” (4T 384) is sufficient to cause unimaginable suffering ending in second death?


By what means does God prevent sinners from dying prematurely during judgment? Please avoid the temptation to answer this question by saying, “He prevents them from reaping the real results of sinning.”


You also believe they are separated and cut off from the only source of life. Also, why do you think the insight above explains why and how evil angels live while separated and cut off from God?


You didn’t answer my question. Why do you think they were able to willfully sin in the presence of God without being consumed to death? Ellen wrote, “To sin, wherever found, our God is a consuming fire. . . wherever men came before God while willfully cherishing evil, they were destroyed.”


You didn’t answer my question.


If, as you say, the wicked will die in the same way and for the same reasons Jesus did, why, then, do you also believe Jesus conquered the second death and voluntarily died the first death? Does it mean you also believe the wicked will conquer the second death and then lay down their own life and take it up again?


If not symbols, what are they? Did God refer to earth as His footstool in the context of His dialog with Moses? Do you think Moses literally saw God’s back?


Do you think voice, hand, back, and face symbolize an increasing revelation and comprehension of God’s character? If not, do you think it’s literal?


Thank you for the verification.


If I’m hearing right, you believe we must be one with the Father to comprehend His character correctly, and this is what enables us to “bear” His character without it “consuming” us to death. “The glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one.” (John 17:22) Well, what about people who don’t know the truth about God, how can His character kill them? Can a lie about God kill them?


In DA 108 what is the difference between “consumed” and “destroyed”? Also, do you think the passage above literally means their body shall consume away?


Why did you say it? If, as you say, Jesus was a full revelation of God, why, then, didn’t His character kill them? You suggested it may not have lasted long enough or have been intense enough to kill them. How did He accomplish these things?


So, you believe He will somehow control the intensity and length of time His character impacts them.


Tom, you are expressing what you think Ellen meant. What you believe and what she meant may or may not be the same thing. That’s why we’re studying it. Does the following accurately reflect what you believe: Comprehending the character of God and experiencing the full force of sin and guilt in judgment will cause the wicked to 1) voluntarily refuse their place in heaven, and 2) cut themselves off from their only source of life and will result in second death.

I couldn’t find the quote "mercy, kindness, and love" (you posted above) in the SOP in the context of judgment. Are you referring to the following passage? If so, why do you think it says mercy, kindness, and love “will be used”? What do you mean by “will be used”?

Tom, I agree with Mike's point.

Ellen White says:

"By a life of rebellion, Satan and all who unite with him place themselves so out of harmony with God that His very presence is to them a consuming fire. The glory of Him who is love will destroy them."--DA 764.

So, it's God's glory, or presence, which destroys the wicked. But if the revelation of God's glory (which, according to you, is His character) occurs at the judgment, how does your chronology harmonize with this fact? When the wicked die, the judgment has already ended and they have turned on Satan.

That the glory of God is His character is affirmed by the SOP often. DA 108, which speaks of the same thing, saying the light of the glory of God, which gives life to the righteous, will slay the wicked, speaks in the very next sentence of Christ as "the revealer of God's character." It certainly makes more sense that it is the essence of God, His character, that causes the problem for the wicked, more than merely His physical problem one. After all, the issue involved is a spiritual one, not a physical one.

Regarding the chronological question, if His physical presence causes destroy them, then they would die at the judgment seat of Christ, since each one is present at the judgment seat of Christ.

If it is God's glory which destroys the wicked, then it's not a literal fire which does so, is it?

I didn't say this. DA 764 said this. I've quoted this quite a few times:



Regarding that God gives the wicked existence, it says this too:



Plus this is common sense. How could anyone exist unless God gave them existence?



If your idea is that every single sin a person has committed will be visited, one at a time, starting from when they were an infant, and covering every moment of their lives, I don't think this is what the passage is saying. This would take many years to accomplish.

She speaks of men's characters and lives passing through review. I think that's the right way of looking at it. This is very similar to what I've been saying, that each person's life will be examined, or reviewed, to the person himself.



I think God will examine the person's life with them, going through the points necessary for the person to see the important points, including where they turned away from the wooing of the Holy Spirit, rejecting the voice of Christ, making choices that set their character, and so forth.



I don't think thinking of this in terms of "sin" is the right way of looking at it. It should be though of in terms of "sin."

The essence of sin is selfishness. There are two laws one can just to life by. The law of life for the universe, which is self-sacrificing love, and the law of selfishness. One leads to life, and the other to death. The judgment will reveal how selfishness has ruined the character of each one who has chosen to live according to its principles.



You've said that God works to prevent people from dying prematurely, in the here and now. I'm saying He does the same thing in the judgment to keep them from dying prematurely that He does now.



I believe what DA 764 says, that "God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life. He is 'alienated from the life of God.'"



Why do you think I think this? Any of this? Either the premise or the conclusion? Where have I said anything about angels living while separated and cut off from God?



This is because your question is assuming certain things. I'm trying to ascertain where you get the assumptions from, and if you yourself agree with them.



Why do you think I think this? Do you think the angels didn't willfully sin in heaven? What is it of my thinking that you are taking issue with? What is it you think I think that you disagree with?



And your point is?



As in the previous question, I'd like to know where you're coming from. What is it you think I think that you are disagreeing with?



Is this what I said? I don't see that I said this. I see the above quote saying what I said. Why from what I wrote do you conclude I said what you concluded?



This question seems to be based on an assumption I'm not seeing the reason for.



Why would you ask such a question? You start out with a premise that, as far as I can see, is not based on something I've said, and from that reason to something ridiculous, that the wicked will conquer the second death when they lay down their own life and take it up again.

Before asking a question please consider:

1.Does this question make sense?
2.Have I already asked this question? (especially in the same post)
3.Am I asking something which is based on something which was actually said?



You wrote, "mere symbols."



Is it your contention that when God said that the earth is His footstool that this is a "mere symbol"? This isn't literal, but in Moses' case it was?



Do you think God is only 6 feet tall or so? Such that His back could be revealed to Moses? What is it you think happened?



I think the intent of the passage is to communicate spiritual truth, and that the spiritual truth being communicated has to do with character. I think the back and the face were an integral part of the Hebrew culture, that they understood clearly what Moses was saying.



The judgment reveals God's character, which makes the ugliness of their own sin apparent. Many things are being revealed. These are all intertwined. The sinfulness of the lives of the lost in its true bearing, their guilt, etc. These things I've already enumerated. I've also posted from Kevin H. and Ty Gibson who speak of the themes I mentioned in more detail.



MM, I've written out many times what I think this means.



I never said Jesus "somehow dumb downed" something. I think this is a rather odd way of looking at it. I've explained many times that sin ruins ones character, resulting in the problems described in places like DA 764:





I think this is an odd way to look at this. God is not trying to kill anyone. He wants to save people. He reveals Himself for the purpose of leading them to salvation. If they harden their hearts, this leads to destruction.



You asked the question, "For the sake of discussion, though, what do you think would happen if they chose not to refuse their place in heaven or cut themselves off from their only source of life?" I quoted from GC 542 to give my answer.

Regarding the question you are asking here, I would say that the wicked so ruin their characters by choosing to live according to the law of selfishness, that they are unable to live in a world (i.e., a reality) which consists of unselfishness. This is what I think the passage I quoted from GC 542 is conveying.