...because I thought the line of thought was about Jesus coming to make known God's character, fully and completely.

M: Can people who "deny the existence of the Creator, and challenge the God of heaven to strike them dead on the spot if their position is wrong" perform good works which "involve God" and are not "destitute of the principles of pure love"?

T: 1. Haven't you been making this claim?

M: 1. No. I've been saying the people specified above can perform generous actions without the power of Jesus, without God being "involved".

T: I wasn't speaking about "generous actions." I spoke about doing good.

Please name a "generous action" that does not qualify as "doing something good".

Ellen wrote, "The record of kindly deeds and generous actions will reach into eternity. {4T 490.2}

Also, since this is specifically what we've been discussing, do you think the good works named above (helping feed, clothe, and shelter the poor and needy) performed by the people named above (who "deny the existence of the Creator, and challenge the God of heaven to strike them dead on the spot if their position is wrong") qualify as "kindly deeds and generous actions"? If not, why not?

T: The question is, what evidence is there that a person would know Jesus Christ personally and conclude that God does not exists. Your answer, it should be clear to see, has nothing to do with this. That is, "There is very little evidence, while hanging on the cross, anyone believed in the existence of God because of having known Jesus personally" in no way addresses your claim that a person knowing Jesus Christ personally would conclude that God did not exist.

M: Of all the people who knew Jesus personally I cannot say with certainty who ended up believing God does not exist.

T: Or even not with certainty. You couldn't even hazard a guess. So there is no evidence to support your claim.

M:Do you know of anyone who knew Jesus personally that changed their belief about the existence of God because of Jesus?

M: What I can say is the day Jesus died very few people believed He was the Messiah, and knowing Him would have, therefore, made very little difference in whether or not they believed in the existence of God.

T: You are saying:

1.Few peopled believed Christ was the Messiah when He died.
2.Therefore knowing Christ would make very little different in whether or not they believed in God's existence.

Why do you think statement 2 depends upon statement 1? For one thing, it could be the very reason didn't believe He was the Messiah was *because* they didn't know Him. Then knowing Him would fix both problems (not believing He was the Messiah, and not believing that God existed).

M:How many people do you think, on the day Jesus died, were convinced beyond doubt He was the Messiah? How many were unsure? And, how many were absolutely certain He wasn't? Of all the people you name in each category, how many do you think, on the day Jesus died, changed their mind about the existence of God? I suspect none of them changed their minds.

What I can say is the day Jesus died very few people believed He was the Messiah, and knowing Him would have, therefore, made very little difference in whether or not they believed in the existence of God.

T: However, Romans 1 tells us that all are without excuse, because what can be know of God is known by them, because God Himself has shown them. So why would the existence of God part even be an issue?

M:Good point. Knowing Jesus personally, therefore, would not have, on the day He died, changed their belief about the existence of God.

However, I also happen to believe people can, even though they have no excuse, "deny the existence of God."

Ellen makes this point very clear. I understand, of course, you believe there is no such thing as people who truly believe God does not exist.

You believe everyone is convinced beyond no doubt God does indeed exist.

I disagree.

"Satan takes advantage of still another class, and leads them still further to deny the existence of God. They can see no consistency in the character of the God of the Bible, if he will torment a portion of the human family to all eternity in horrible tortures; and they deny the Bible and its Author, and regard death as an eternal sleep. {1SG 116.1}

M: I'm beginning to suspect you believe the description of people who "deny the existence of the Creator, and challenge the God of heaven to strike them dead on the spot if their position is wrong" must be interpreted to mean they actually do believe in the existence of God. Am I misunderstanding you?

T: According to Romans 1, what can be know of God is known by all (which is why they are without excuse). They should glorify God and give Him thanks because of this. You seem to believe that this applies to all only at some point in time, but after that point in time, they forget, or something like that. There are a couple of problems with this idea. One is that the reason they are without excuse is because what can be know of God is known by them. Take away that, and they are no longer without excuse, which contradicts the assertion that all are without excuse. Secondly, it says that the reason what can be known of God is known because God Himself as manifest Himself to them. This being the case, assuming we don't question God's ability to manifest Himself to others, we would have to conclude that God was able to successfully manifest Himself to them, so that what the verse says is true (that they should glorify God, and give thanks to Him). This suggests more than simply knowing that God exists, but knowing something about Him (otherwise, why would they be without excuse for not glorifying Him or giving Him thanks?) Thirdly, knowing of God, because God has manifested Himself, is not something one forgets. One can choose not to think on these things, or believe them, hence they "deny" these things, and even make audacious challenges, but the points made in Romans 1 still hold.

M:As I suspected, you believe there is no such thing as people who truly believe God does not exist.

According to you,

all their claims to the contrary are simply lies.

When Ellen wrote about people who "deny the existence of God" you take it to mean they do indeed believe God is real and exists.

In the 1SG 116 quote posted above, how do you explain the difference between the class who "deny the existence of God" and the other classes highlighted below:

Quote:
Satan told his angels to make a special effort to spread the deception and lie first repeated to Eve in Eden, Thou shalt not surely die. And as the error was received by the people, and they believed that man was immortal, Satan led them still further to believe that the sinner would live in eternal misery. Then the way was prepared for Satan to work through his representatives, and hold up God before the people as a revengeful tyrant; that those who do not please him, he will plunge into hell, and cause them ever to feel his wrath; and that they will suffer unutterable anguish, while he will look down upon them with satisfaction, as they writhe in horrible sufferings and eternal flames. Satan knew that if this error should be received, God would be dreaded and hated by very many, instead of being loved and admired; and that many would be led to believe that the threatenings of God's word would not be literally fulfilled; for it would be against his character of benevolence and love, to plunge beings whom he had created into eternal torments. Satan has led them to another extreme, to entirely overlook the justice of God, and the threatenings in his Word, and represent him as being all mercy, and that not one will perish, but all, both saint and sinner, will at last be saved in his kingdom. In consequence of the popular error of the immortality of the soul, and endless misery, Satan takes advantage of another class, and leads them on to regard the Bible as an uninspired book. They think it teaches many good things; but they cannot rely upon it and love it; because they have been taught that it declares the doctrine of eternal misery. {1SG 114.2}

Satan takes advantage of still another class, and leads them still further to deny the existence of God. They can see no consistency in the character of the God of the Bible, if he will torment a portion of the human family to all eternity in horrible tortures; and they deny the Bible and its Author, and regard death as an eternal sleep. {1SG 116.1}

Then Satan leads another class who are fearful and timid to commit sin; and after they have sinned, he holds up before them that the wages of sin is (not death, but) an eternal life in horrible torments, to be endured through the endless ages of eternity. Satan improves the opportunity, and magnifies before their feeble minds the horrors of an endless hell, and takes charge of their minds, and they lose their reason. Then Satan and his angels exult, and the infidel and atheist join in casting reproach upon christianity. They regard these evil consequences of the reception of popular heresy, as the natural results of believing in the Bible and its Author. {1SG 116.2}

M: Also, since this is specifically what we've been discussing, do you think the good works named above (helping feed, clothe, and shelter the poor and needy) performed by the people named above (who "deny the existence of the Creator, and challenge the God of heaven to strike them dead on the spot if their position is wrong") qualify as "kindly deeds and generous actions"? If not, why not?

T: If they are genuinely good deeds, then there was a dependency upon God, a power from outside oneself, as the quote you brought out previously states.

MM, are you aware of some people who say, God does not exist because I hate Him. Try and resolve that. What people say is not necessarily what they believe. Satan believes in God, but that doesn't mean he's a Christian nor changed his life for the better.

My statement still stands.

T: The question is, what evidence is there that a person would know Jesus Christ personally and conclude that God does not exists. Your answer, it should be clear to see, has nothing to do with this. That is, "There is very little evidence, while hanging on the cross, anyone believed in the existence of God because of having known Jesus personally" in no way addresses your claim that a person knowing Jesus Christ personally would conclude that God did not exist.

M: Of all the people who knew Jesus personally I cannot say with certainty who ended up believing God does not exist.

T: Or even not with certainty. You couldn't even hazard a guess. So there is no evidence to support your claim.

M: Do you know of anyone who knew Jesus personally that changed their belief about the existence of God because of Jesus?

T: You made the claim. I didn't. I was disagreeing with your claim. There's no need to question me about a claim I didn't make.

M: What I can say is the day Jesus died very few people believed He was the Messiah, and knowing Him would have, therefore, made very little difference in whether or not they believed in the existence of God.

T: You are saying: 1.Few peopled believed Christ was the Messiah when He died. 2.Therefore knowing Christ would make very little different in whether or not they believed in God's existence. Why do you think statement 2 depends upon statement 1? For one thing, it could be the very reason didn't believe He was the Messiah was *because* they didn't know Him. Then knowing Him would fix both problems (not believing He was the Messiah, and not believing that God existed).

M: How many people do you think, on the day Jesus died, were convinced beyond doubt He was the Messiah? How many were unsure? And, how many were absolutely certain He wasn't? Of all the people you name in each category, how many do you think, on the day Jesus died, changed their mind about the existence of God? I suspect none of them changed their minds.

T: This utterly didn't address my question at all. You made a statement, the logic of which I didn't see, so I asked you to support that logic. You just asked me questions. I don't see that what you said before makes any sense. Could you please explain why you think it makes sense? That is, you said this: "What I can say is the day Jesus died very few people believed He was the Messiah, and knowing Him would have, therefore, made very little difference in whether or not they believed in the existence of God." It's the "therefore" I'm questioning. "Therefore" means that thing 2 depends upon thing 1. I outlined this in my question to you.

T: However, Romans 1 tells us that all are without excuse, because what can be know of God is known by them, because God Himself has shown them. So why would the existence of God part even be an issue?

M: Good point. Knowing Jesus personally, therefore, would not have, on the day He died, changed their belief about the existence of God.

T: Ok, so you're taking back what you said before.

M: However, I also happen to believe people can, even though they have no excuse, "deny the existence of God."

T: Clearly. We don't need Ellen White for this. That people deny the existence of God is common knowledge.

M: Ellen makes this point very clear. I understand, of course, you believe there is no such thing as people who truly believe God does not exist.

T: That's what Romans 1 says.

M: You believe everyone is convinced beyond doubt that God does indeed exist.

T: I didn't say this. I said what Paul said, that all are without excuse because that which can be known of God was manifested to them by God, and that they know enough of God that they are not without excuse if they are not thankful to Him or glorify Him.

"Satan takes advantage of still another class, and leads them still further to deny the existence of God. They can see no consistency in the character of the God of the Bible, if he will torment a portion of the human family to all eternity in horrible tortures; and they deny the Bible and its Author, and regard death as an eternal sleep. {1SG 116.1}

M: I'm beginning to suspect you believe the description of people who "deny the existence of the Creator, and challenge the God of heaven to strike them dead on the spot if their position is wrong" must be interpreted to mean they actually do believe in the existence of God. Am I misunderstanding you?

T: According to Romans 1, what can be know of God is known by all (which is why they are without excuse). They should glorify God and give Him thanks because of this. You seem to believe that this applies to all only at some point in time, but after that point in time, they forget, or something like that. There are a couple of problems with this idea. One is that the reason they are without excuse is because what can be know of God is known by them. Take away that, and they are no longer without excuse, which contradicts the assertion that all are without excuse. Secondly, it says that the reason what can be known of God is known because God Himself as manifest Himself to them. This being the case, assuming we don't question God's ability to manifest Himself to others, we would have to conclude that God was able to successfully manifest Himself to them, so that what the verse says is true (that they should glorify God, and give thanks to Him). This suggests more than simply knowing that God exists, but knowing something about Him (otherwise, why would they be without excuse for not glorifying Him or giving Him thanks?) Thirdly, knowing of God, because God has manifested Himself, is not something one forgets. One can choose not to think on these things, or believe them, hence they "deny" these things, and even make audacious challenges, but the points made in Romans 1 still hold.

M: As I suspected, you believe there is no such thing as people who truly believe God does not exist. . .

T: I agree with Paul.

M: According to you . . .

T: Paul.

M: . . . all their claims to the contrary are simply lies.

T: If they disagree with what Paul said, I go with Paul.

M: When Ellen wrote about people who "deny the existence of God" you take it to mean they do indeed believe God is real and exists.

T: I take it to mean that they deny God's existence. However, I still agree with what Paul said.

M: In the 1SG 116 quote posted above, how do you explain the difference between the class who "deny the existence of God" and the other classes highlighted below:


T: I understand this as saying that Satan misrepresents God's character, to such an extent that rather than believe in such a God, they deny His existence. However, I don't see this as contradicting what Paul said. I believe these people, as Paul said, know of God because God Himself has manifest Himself to them, so that they are without excuse in not glorifying Him or giving Him thanks.

M: Also, since this is specifically what we've been discussing, do you think the good works named above (helping feed, clothe, and shelter the poor and needy) performed by the people named above (who "deny the existence of the Creator, and challenge the God of heaven to strike them dead on the spot if their position is wrong") qualify as "kindly deeds and generous actions"? If not, why not?

T: If they are genuinely good deeds, then there was a dependency upon God, a power from outside oneself, as the quote you brought out previously states.

M:The fact you say "if" suggests you believe it is possible for people who "deny the existence of the Creator, and challenge the God of heaven to strike them dead on the spot if their position is wrong" to cooperate with God and perform "genuinely good deeds."

Do you believe this is possible?

MM;I never intended for you think I was claiming there were people who knew Jesus personally and ended up concluding God does not exist.

Anything is possible. However, I strongly doubt anyone who personally knew Jesus changed their mind about the existence of the one and only true God. Please accept this as what I believe (disregard whatever else I said that led you to think otherwise).

All I'm saying is I don't think knowing Jesus caused anyone to change their mind about the existence of the one and only true God.

I may be wrong. There have may been people who didn't know of, or didn't believe in, the existence of the one and only true God (as opposed to pagan gods) and changed their mind after meeting Jesus. Do you know of such a person?

M: Good point. Knowing Jesus personally, therefore, would not have, on the day He died, changed their belief about the existence of God.

T: Ok, so you're taking back what you said before.

M:Not sure. However, I believe at some point everyone believes in the existence of God.

Some people go on thereafter to "deny the existence of God."

You seem to think no one is truly successful at believing God does not exist. I disagree.

M: However, I also happen to believe people can, even though they have no excuse, "deny the existence of God."

T: Clearly. We don't need Ellen White for this. That people deny the existence of God is common knowledge.

M:I suspect your definition of "deny the existence of God" is different than mine. I think it means they believe God is no more real than the tooth fairy. What do you believe it means?

T: I understand this as saying that Satan misrepresents God's character, to such an extent that rather than believe in such a God, they deny His existence. However, I don't see this as contradicting what Paul said. I believe these people, as Paul said, know of God because God Himself has manifest Himself to them, so that they are without excuse in not glorifying Him or giving Him thanks.

M:Do you agree with me, then, that in spite of what they once believed about God that some people go on to conclude God is no more real than the tooth fairy?

19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Also, you didn't answer my question. Of the four classes of people Ellen named in the passage above, how do the other three differ from those who "deny the existence of God"?

In your opinion, considering the kinds of quotes I posted, do you feel Ellen taught there is no such thing as a true atheist, that deep down everybody believes in the existence of the one and only true God?

Satan takes advantage of still another class, and leads them still further to deny the existence of God. They can see no consistency in the character of the God of the Bible, if he will torment a portion of the human family to all eternity in horrible tortures; and they deny the Bible and its Author, and regard death as an eternal sleep. {1SG 116.1}