But you always said this. You never said otherwise. You didn't change your mind. This is word for word what you've always said.

Also, it's false. Repentance and pardon does have to involve sin in order to happen. This is easy to see by simply considering what sin and righteousness are.

All unrighteousness is sin, and sin is transgression of the law. (1 John 5:17; 1 John 3:4) Righteousness is obedience to the law. The former requires repentance and pardon. The latter does not.

Consider this description of Lucifer's actions:



Was Lucifer acting righteously or unrighteously when he did these things?



All unrighteousness is sin. Was Lucifer acting righteously or unrighteously?

You didn't answer my question. I asked what you thought it meant. You just said it wasn't literal. You didn't answer the question.

Specifically, I'd like to know what you think God was doing to bring this about.

Didn't you notice I said, "Not sure what you're asking here."?



Your response is a bit too limited in scope. She was describing a principle, actually several principles. Here's one:



This is limited to the destruction of Jerusalem, but deals with how God deals with sin in general. This is why there's so much detail here, so we can learn and understand the lesson and principles involved. Note she wrote:



This is, again, a statement of principle.

She brings out the same principles in GC 614 as here:



That this is dealing with the 7 last plagues is clear by the statement, I think maybe from EW, that kland quoted earlier (among other reasons). That statement pointed out that when Jesus leaves the sanctuary, the 7 plagues begin.

So here we see the same principles at work. By studying GC 35-37, we can understand the principles at work in the plagues (which are repeated in GC 614, although not in as much detail).

Tom, it seems like we've reached an impasse. Is there anything in particular you'd like to discus?

Yes.

From what you've written, I understand that you believe the principles of GC 35-37 to be very limited in scope. They deal with the destruction of Jerusalem, and other events which are like that, but are simply one means by which God destroys.

You view that God destroys, and He does so in different ways, and Jerusalem is just one of these ways. Sometime He destroys by ordering holy angels to remove their protection, and allow evil angels to destroy, but sometimes He destroys by having the holy angels to the same work that the evil angels do themselves. There's really no difference between what holy angels or evil angels do in terms of destroying. In fact, there's no way we could tell which government is which, unless somehow we could identify which voice is the voice of God.

And therein lies the problem. If there's no difference in the actions which one performs, how can you identify the voice? When Satan comes to impersonate Christ, if there's no difference between what Satan does and what Christ does, how can you tell the difference?

One other point to bring out is that what I understand GC 35-37 to be saying is that God permits Satan to destroy when the Spirit of God has been so persistently resisted that He is no longer responded to. God's act is a passive act. God destroys by being passive. As a passive act, God is not responsible for destruction.

However, in contrast, what I hear you saying is that God is *always* ultimately responsible for destruction, and never Satan. Satan is merely God's puppet, simply a means to an end. God desires revenge, and He will have His revenge one way or another. Is this correct? (i.e., this is how you view things)

One final point which I've brought up a number of times, but I don't recall being responded to, is the question of how God could use violence/killing/maiming/destroying/etc., given these things are part of Satan's government. You would agree that these things pertain to Satan's government, correct? So how can they find a part in God's government?

To explain the question further, before sin existed, none of these other things existed (i.e. violence/killing/maiming/destroying/etc.) These were all things invented by Satan, as Satan is the author of sin and all its results. Before sin, for all eternity past, none of these things were a part of God's government. So is God's government defective? If God constrained to use the methods of Satan's government in order to win the Great Controversy? He can't win the Great Controversy by using the methods of His own government? If God has to use the methods of Satan's government to win, that would seem to prove that Satan's accusations that God's government is defective is correct.

As sovereign Lord and Savior, Jesus is in control – not sin, not self, not Satan, not natural law. True, we manage the choices, but Jesus, and only Jesus, manages the consequences. He manipulates the outcome of our choices in a way that guarantees the great controversy plays out favorably for God. Sometimes He handles things personally, sometimes He commands holy angels to manage matters for Him, sometimes He commands His chosen people to take care of business for Him, sometimes He permits evil angels to cause death and destruction, and sometimes He allows unholy humans to mete out justice. And, of course, there are times when Jesus simply allows us to experience the natural cause and effect consequences of our choices. No matter how we slice it, though, Jesus is in control of the outcome of our choices. He leaves nothing to fate, chance, or Satan.

Thus, it isn’t a matter of Jesus and Satan managing matters in similar ways. No, not at all. Jesus is sole sovereign of the Universe. Satan is merely a vassal of state, merely one of many fallen subjects under the control of King Jesus. When Jesus permits evil angels to cause death and destruction, He does so as King of kings and Lord of lords. Satan is not at liberty to wield power indiscriminately. He cannot cause death and destruction until he receives permission from Jesus. Nevertheless, Jesus doesn’t leave it up to Satan to decide what to do. It is Jesus who determines what serves as suitable punishment. And then, because Satan cannot be trusted, Jesus also commands holy angels to do whatever it takes to ensure evil angels do not exceed His established limits. So, as you can see, it has nothing to do with Jesus and Satan representing two opposing governments which happen to have similar ways of exercising justice and judgment.

When choices and circumstances force Jesus to cease protecting sinners and to permit them to suffer punishment, He does so through tears of anguish. Jesus hates it when things force Him to punish those for whom He suffered and died to save. But He loves justice more than He loves injustice. Jesus cannot, as sovereign Lord and Savior, sit back and allow sinners to sin with impunity as if it doesn’t matter. Sin does matter, and judges who tolerate it are more culpable and more deserving of punishment. Jesus is not free to sit back and let Satan mete out justice. As judge and jury, it rests with Jesus to ensure justice is served in accordance with the laws of the land. Justice and judgment accomplishes many things, one of which is to inspire and motivate people to live in harmony with the laws. Jesus cannot leave such an important task to Satan. The Devil did not invent punishment. Justice and judgment are two of the many eternal attributes of God Almighty.

Re: paragraph 1.

1.When you say that Jesus is in control, not other things, do you mean to imply by this that the things which happen are His will? (by His will, I mean things He wants to have happen).

2.When you say He "manipulates" the outcome of our choices, that doesn't sound too good. Do you understand why? Is this really the word you wish to use?

3.It sounds like your conception is that God uses Satan like a puppet. Is this correct?

Re. Paragraph 2.

1.I said nothing about Jesus and Satan managing matters in similar ways. I spoke of them acting the same. I don't see any difference between how you perceive Satan and God to act. Both seem unspeakable cruel, severe, and harsh. Although if Satan is God's puppet, it seems like God should be the responsible one for Satan's cruelty. That is, if Satan is simply carrying out God's orders, which appears to be what you're saying.

2.I guess I should clarify if this is what you're saying. Do you perceive that when Satan acts, he is simply carrying out God's orders?

3.It looks like you're writing that Jesus determines a punishment, lets the evil angels do what they want to cause havoc and destruction, and then sends the holy angels to mop up any left over maiming/killing/torture/cruelty/violence that remains to finish up the punishment, since the evil angels can't be trusted. You don't see a problem with this sort of picture of God? You don't see any disconnect between this and the life of Jesus Christ during His earthly ministry? I find this picture incredible.

Re. par. 3.

1.I'm not sure what you're talking about here. Are you talking about the final judgment? If so, it appears you don't believe that sin causes suffering on its own accord, or, if it does, not enough. I suppose you must believe sin causes some suffering. So I suppose God makes allowances for that, to your way of thinking, and only imposes additional suffering on top of that to get to right quota of suffering that justice demands.

Tom,

As incredible as it seems, do you think there might be something to the Yin-Yang comment I had made in the past? The concept and terms seem to me to fit in more than one way. From part of Wikipedia:

I think Mikes last statement is clear. I disagree with it and I think the bible disagrees with it. Maybe now when there need remain no question on where Mike stands on this question, the next phase of the discussion can commence? Assuming the discussion is going somewhere beyond figuring out what Mike thinks about this subject.

1. He doesn’t want people to make sinful choices. But since they do, it is Jesus’ responsibility to ensure the outcome serves God’s ultimate goal, namely, a great controversy that ends favorably for God.

2. The word “manages” can be used in its place. I’m referring to Jesus manipulating inanimate things so that our choices play out in ways that best serve God’s ultimate goal. However, Jesus also exercises His powers of influence to ensure people do certain things that best serve God’s ultimate goal (Daniel 10:13 is an example).

3. Jesus knows exactly what Satan will do and uses it to serve God’s ultimate goal.


1. Satan is not free to do as he pleases. He can only do that which Jesus permits him to do. Unlike Satan, Jesus is totally free to do as He pleases.

2. I suppose Satan is free not to do what Jesus permits him to do. But it seems unlikely he would reject an opportunity to cause death and destruction.

3. I wrote, “Satan is not at liberty to wield power indiscriminately. He cannot cause death and destruction until he receives permission from Jesus. Nevertheless, Jesus doesn’t leave it up to Satan to decide what to do. It is Jesus who determines what serves as suitable punishment. And then, because Satan cannot be trusted, Jesus also commands holy angels to do whatever it takes to ensure evil angels do not exceed His established limits.” The holy angels are on scene to ensure evil angels do not cause more death and destruction than permitted by Jesus.


1. I wasn’t referring to the final judgment. The emotional and physical suffering sinners experience in this lifetime is not, in fact, the real result of sin. The fact is if Jesus allowed sinners to experience the full, inevitable result of sin the instant they sin no one would survive the first sin. In fact, the human race would have ended with the death of A&E. During the final judgment, it is the fire light of God’s physical person and presence that will cause sinners to experience the full, inevitable result of sin, namely, emotional and physical suffering that ends in death.