Would that open up evolution? Creation scientists tell us no new structures are created. But, if satan could create structures, could he create something much different that just confusion within the species?

Today, genetic engineering is done via transposable elements. These things can be designed to target very specific regions of the DNA. Human DNA is full of them. Plant DNA is full of them. Animal DNA - the same. If all creation groans together (Romans 8:22) and it is caused by sin, then how does this happen? Genetic engineering fits for Genesis 3:18. "Seed" in Genesis 3:15 fits genetics, in perhaps multiple ways.

Adam's sin is passed to his descendants. This is by BOTH heredity and cultivation as EGW says it. If it is inhereted, then how? TEs fit. DNA is an alphabet used for writing the information that builds from raw materials an organism, and also how to run and maintain that organism.

Believing lies about God was not the fall! Believing the lies led to the fall!

Her fall occurred when she ate the fruit.

EGW makes an interesting statement, and that is that here have been a succession of falls. Not just fall, but multiple.


So loss of health, beauty, and moral power, disease of every kind increased. Man's lifespan markedly decreased after the flood. This is more that just lacking access to the Tree of Life. This is a continual corruption of our nature. EGW uses the term, the "accumulation of sin" or "accumulation of contamination", or "accumulated suffering". TEs sure do that, hey continue to accumulate.

Over the last year, after first hearing this genetic hypothesis, almost every disease I've looked at will ultimately have as an underlying cause transposable elements. Metabolic pathways that lead to heart disease, stroke, cancer, autoimmune disease, and infection risks from eating meat and dairy, directly caused by transposable elements. And this data published in top scientific journals. Send me a PM and I'll email you a packet some of the documents.

Sincerely, you’ll need to list where you see these claimed “9 or 10 times” because I really do not see “all”, if any, of these actual mentions. This further explained “life” as “the life of God” makes this sounds to me more like an intended emphasis on a “quality of Life” vs. merely “life” here.

I’ll have to cut this pointed discussion short because it has the potential of being as futile as trying to get you to admit the plain reading of Gen 3:22-24 and PP 60.3.

Of all of the things that EGW says that the came to be “Finished” at the Cross, I do not see a statement that:


Please provide the reference for that paragraph.



The point indeed was that the paragraph you cited did not say this.

Similarly, your underlying tenet for the “organic” extent of your view is that, and correct me if I am wrong, ‘in the Cross, the organic relationship between sin and death can clearly be seen.’ Then how and why didn’t, even angels, not get the understanding that “sin results in death” from the billions of Human deaths before the Cross, starting with Abel’s???



List these ways...



DA 763.4-764.1 is not “simply quoting Scripture.” It makes statements and quotes/references Scriptures to support these points.



What follows in DA 764.2 builds upon this basis in DA 763.4-764.1 of the start and permitted time for Satan’s rebellion so that it would be seen that his destruction was fully justified. Something (i.e., the justified destruction of Satan, and not “death itself”) the angels would not have understood had it been immediately carried out in Heaven. That is the entire point of EGW in these statements and not an attempt to demonstrate an organic relationship between sin and death, something that was clearly seen and was actually easily understood by all.

I would agree with that statement only if this death is Biblically understood as being the result of being deprived of the Tree of Life, which, as I said before, was manifestly tangibly supplied of its “supernatural, life-giving power” from God Himself. In other words, I do not see that this, ultimately/originally ‘Life from God’ does not come to humans “ethereally/spiritually” or ‘by osmosis’ but tangibly, through, here the Fruit/Aroma of a Tree of Life.

Where we disagree here is that, since you see that this is not arbitrary, then it must then involve a directly active agent in itself. I also see that it was not arbitrary, but that the “harmful” element in this that made it not arbitrary was in the consequences and measures that God knew he would have to take for this tangible, thus deliberate, “disobedience”. And that was in barring access to the Tree of Life, which I also see, started the self-corruption of Man’s previously perfect genes with the absence of the “supernatural, God power/ingredient” init that had prevented this.



As I say, I can see this as the only way and means by which God can inject this supernatural element in the system of “non-immortal” man and Creation.



Does not this bold segment also preclude the injection of misinformation and TE’s from the fruit itself as you claim.



A “pleasurable sensation” can be caused in a person by many things other than an “ingested drug”. This is called “euphoria” which is a “an exhilarating psychological state of pride and optimism; an absence of depression”. E.g., winning a sporting event or money causes this “pleasurable sensation”. So this did not have to be something tangibly found in the fruit. It was probably just a feeling of: “Hey look, I just did what I wanted, even disobeying God Himself....I must know more than Him.... Wow, etc”



It was indeed this addictive “euphoric” feeling of thinking to be as great and even greater than God Almighty, indeed becoming a god yourself, that Satan wanted to instill in man. Keep in mind the premise in Satan’s temptation of ‘being like God’ (Gen 3:5). So it was in this most addictive way that Satan wanted to, and (still) has greatly taken this world captive. To say that this was something tangible as a drug would also destroy our freedom, just like someone forcing a person done and injecting enough crack in their system to make them an addict. They did not become an addict by a free choice of theirs. God is also painted as unjust for punishing us from having been “addictively drugged” with sin. Eve may have freely eaten of the banned fruit, but she may not have asked to be so made into an “addict.”



As you say, the first felt ill-effect was a feeling of being naked and being ashamed of this. It can however be said that they were still genetically perfect and that until the next time to eat again (or for the first time?) of the fruit of life came and went.



I have revised/calibrated my understanding here to understand as sin being both mental and physical and with both able to come to affect the body tangibly. Sinful/adverse thinking can affect the body however many of its harmful effects may be cured by the powers in the fruit of life, which is probably what necessitated its banning. However the absence of the fruit, as I see it, caused the human body to go haywire and self-corrupt itself. Still some sinful thinking, if they really cause not harm to the body can and will only be dealt with on a purely spiritual level, and that through the Sacrifice of Christ which prominently involved this atoning for man’s fallen “psyche”.



The foundational, Biblical/Theological problem with this view is that it gives Satan creative powers. That is readily seen in the ‘potential issue/question’ that kland went on to bring up in a follow up post. I do not see how this is possible for any created being. I rather see that what he does bring about, even as new, is from working with what already exists, just like humans today concoct things, even noxious/harmful things (e.g., agents for biological weapons) in labs. So I see that Satan came to ‘“sow” his noxious herb’ only after he had done some even genetical “amalgamation” from what already existed, indeed just like weeds can come to sprout in a perfect lawn simply from what already exists in that lawn. The ingredients of the “fruit of life” either transmitted to nature through the water or the air, could have also prevented the occurrence of this weed seed and God in Gen 3:17-19 apparently knew that this would be the natural result of this “Life ingredients” being removed from nature. So from this weed seed/gene Satan may have developed even more types of “noxious herbs and tares” and actively “sowed” them about the earth. (“sowing” and “amalgamating” is not the same thing as ‘originally creating as God can/does.’

Indeed the implied understanding that Satan could create goes against passages like John 1:3 that Jesus was the original Creator of everything. (I.e., before the point of secondary amalgamations or “genetic engineering”.)



I consider your TE hypothesis to be applicable/true only on a secondary level, i.e., sometime following the fall, in order to make things worse for man, and thus indeed variously take him captive, though that really would be should yourself in the foot because causing harm and disease is really not the way to prove that your way is better than God’s. However, I do not see it as being inceptive, i.e., that Satan (or God) had tangibly injected it into the banned fruit. Perhaps this genetic corruption in man would only have been realizable only after the time to eat of the Tree of Life had come and gone, then resulting in man’s immune system to vulnerably degrade from its perfect state. So injecting this prior to that time would have been useless as Man’s perfect body them would probably have successfully fought it off, removing it from the system. Also did Satan even know that God would ban the Fruit of Life from Man if they sinned. That may be why he said/believed that sinful man would not die. (However as I also believe that his own life clock was ticking since he had been cast out of Heaven, where probably Created Being have access to a similarly fruit of life, probably aromatically, he may have been aware of this probability and thus would indeed have “outrightly lied” here.)

I guess I also came to misunderstand “nature”, due to just reading and reacting to your response, as “human nature”, which is evidently what you had misread/misunderstood, but is not what I had actually initially said. My statement had been:



Which in turn had been a response to your “everything changed” SOP quote.

So in regards to Creation/Nature my short answer is, Yes, it would have remained perfect since, as I understand it, it also was being kept perfect by the ingredients of the tree of Life, either by water or “aromatically”. That is why, as I previously said, I believe that the Garden of Eden which continued to have the Tree of Life even after the Fall and Expulsion of Man, continued to remain in it’s perfect state of over 1700 years while on Earth until just before the flood as the Tree was allowed to continue to diffuse this supernatural elements, or like the River of Life in Heaven, it was all in the water, and the Tree of Life was exclusively enable to produce Fruits of Life from this Water of Life.

I didn’t think this could do that...



Succinctly said here, given my prior fuller and contextualizing explanation, I think she did not fully understand all of the Theological implications involved in this statement and thus, only express this Truth as she best understood it. (“Misrepresent” or even “overstated” implies deliberate intent, which she did not have.)



The fact that the pertinent verbs here are expressed as “volitions” and “possibilities” (i.e., the Greek imperative mood - “the mood furthest removed from certainty” (Wallace, 485) - hence the resorting to “force”), shows that this is merely a desired wished. I.e., the Investigative Judgement has ended but there are still some teetering cases on both sides. So Jesus’s “wish” is that they will remain just where they are at so that He will not have made a wrong decision either way. Indeed in the unknown future as saved person may, after this judgement ends, “chicken out” and change sides. Conversely an unbelieving person may decide to follow the truth. So this is a statement that this should not come to pass, and Jesus has both the liberty and power to indeed forcefully harden/sustain people in both camps after this close of probation so that would not be the case, so that saved people will not be lost and “filthy” people will not make base ascents to the truth now fully/tangibly seeing the signs being fulfilled. (Matt 16:4).

So this statement, furthermore makes no mentions of what the future in Heaven will/should be. Man will always have the freedom to rebel against God if they insist. While Christ may be mercifully towards those who will be threatened with death after the close of probation and intervene to help prevent them from falling away (e.g. giving them sustain dreams), In heaven, with everything then proven, this merciful act would be outright and unjustified force against one’s inherently deliberate rebellious desires.

Really? How is that? Did Satan create life? No. Viruses - I would propose are an invention of Satan. Are they alive? No. They require intact living cellular systems in order to replicate. They take over a living organism. But they are not "alive". What we see in genetics is that TEs have modified all living organisms. The difference between placentals and marsupials? TEs. The genes are basically the same. How those genes are express, which is controlled by the TEs is the difference.

Satan can not and has not created life. But he has a powerful intellect that can be used to corrupt that life.

Humans have been given creative powers. We can create little people in our own image. Something I do not think Satan can do!

The point made is that if entropy did not exist, then man could not have been created as naturally dying. You say you could only agree with this if death is Biblically understood as being the result of being deprived of the Tree of Life, but it should be easy to see that my statement has not dependence whatsoever upon what your saying, or, more generally, upon the Tree of Life at all.

My statement is simply that if there is no entropy, then it could not be said that man was created in a state of naturally dying. That doesn't make sense. Man could only be said to be "naturally dying" if entropy existed.

Ok. This in itself will make the post long, so I'll make this its own post.

1.This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God.
2.The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown.
3.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."
4.God gives them existence for a time that they may develop their character and reveal their principles. This accomplished, they receive the results of their own choice.
5.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.
6.The glory of Him who is love will destroy them.
7.At the beginning of the great controversy, the angels did not understand this.
8.Had Satan and his host then been left to reap the full result of their sin, they would have perished;
9.It would not have been apparent to heavenly beings that this was the inevitable result of sin.