Have you ever had children NJK? It takes lots of repetition for a child to learn. A&E where still babes despite the fact they were in “fully develop capacities”. Just because you have a brain that understand “you should not eat… if you do … you will die”; (1)they didn’t understand death, (2)they didn’t understand why God didn't want them to eat it, (3)they didn’t know God very much, (4)they didn’t know much at all for they were both just created. Their mind had no pre-collected experience to bounce all these questions unto.

I disagree. How would they know about death, when they never seen it? How would they know about God without knowing much about Him before hand?


1. How about the fact the tree was the only tree they were not to eat which makes it stand out from all the others.

2.It was placed "in the midst" of the garden... to their reach and their sight, so it would come to their mind all these questions when they passed by it.

3. And that God providing Satan to promote the knife! Look how shinny it is! Don’t you want to touch it?

Rom 8:20 "For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope"


Whose really bipolar here? You put Evil and Good in two opposite spectrum. I have consolidated them according to what the Bible reveals. Evil and Good both comes from God! See Post#134434 read “Dualism problem with Good and Evil”

Isaiah 55:8-9 "My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,' says the Lord. 'For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts."

God knows what He's doing when He created Evil and He will not miss the mark!

No, but I’ve had to deal with many of them, including first-handly myself at an applicable prior time. And I see, know and understand that some are much more obedient than others. It all a matter of how much they trust their parent. Adam and Eve were most cognitive enough to know to trust the one who had recently created everything, including themselves.



That indeed is my whole point..., (that is, as I am understanding things on purely a cognitive/responsible mature scale), Adam and Eve were not children, even in spirit. And Adam knew/understood enough to name all the animals, presumably within one day, and he had never seen them before. They understood much more on their first day than we’ll ever understand.



I do not see God telling them something which He knew they could never grasp, and not even explaining it if necessary (which you have not evidence that He did not), and considering this to be a fair test or even “sin” when they would have acted without such proper knowledge. (Rom 14:23). And Satan also mentioned the term death without any explanation. Indeed he pointed refers to it because he knew that he had to attack its “fearfulness” head on in order to sway them to his side. (cf. PP 54.2*) If Eve did not understand, she would have probably asked then: “What exactly is death??” Adam also first took note that Eve had not adversely changed in any detrimental way (i.e., begun to die), indeed including not having dropped dead. As EGW says, he saw that “no sign of death appeared in her” and so “decided to brave the consequences” (PP 56.2). Their future tangible observations of dead only serve to “bring vividly to mind the stern fact that death is the portion of every living thing.” (PP 62.1) and not inform them of what death actually was.

So they both knew what to look for. They just trust the Serpents claims more than God all revolving on this knowledge of what death entails. Again without such a knowledge the test would not have begun to be fair at all.

*(Sorry if you defaulty don’t accept EGW, even anything that she may say on a topic, (and given your view here, I can see why) but I do not see it as Biblical (1 Thess 5:19-21; Acts 17:11), especially in an SDA discussion, to so categorically reject the God’s “Spirit of Prophecy” (Rev 19:10). Indeed I exegetically do not see in regards to this issue that EGW had the accurate/Biblical understanding of “God and the Future”, however, as seen in a related thread (Post #132426ff), I do find/use her direct revelations (i.e., vs. her derived comments which are based upon her understanding of those revelations) to arrive at what the actual Biblical teaching is on this topic. The effective issue here is in regards to such direct SOP revelations is either EGW was merely relating what she had seen in vision or she was lying. I don’t see the latter as an option, especially all in God’s knowledge. An inaccurate understanding of direct revelations leading to inaccurate/incomplete statements is another, and non “sinful” thing, especially within the context of the GC where God is limited to what He can clearly reveal. So He does focus on the fundamental direct revelations.)



That’s just your, actually circular, assumption, the Biblical record implies that they fully understood that they would die if they ate of it.



On what do you base this claim on?? They met in person with Jesus, perhaps daily. And who knows how long these meetings went on before their fall.



Their perfect and fully developed faculties made them easily get up to speed on things. And if they did not know what death meant, they would have asked for an explanation, which they may indeed have, especially as when they were first told about this consequence, they had a full and impartial desire to obey God and do His will. The Devil’s temptation had not instilled any doubt in their mind yet. Indeed even if you have an ‘ignorant children’ view here, you can readily see/know from children that one of their common early question, especially when they have reached a certain cognitive level, that Adam and Eve surely had reached, is: ‘What does [word] means???’ E.g., What does “poison” mean? Indeed especially when they have no idea what it is, even to know that it may be an appealing thing.



(Answered above)



Well, succinctly said here, and even playing devil’s advocate here: it is not a “test”, i.e., a fair one, if you (a) provide the answers at the bottom of the test paper or conversely, (b) test on things that you never assigned and/or taught in class. This was all so “fairly done” for the same reasons that God had allowed Satan to fight “strength for strength” for the occupancy of Heaven at the beginning of this GC.

That is speaking of what God allowed to occur with creation, which includes animals, after the Fall. Indeed nature didn’t have to suffer the sin punishment as sinning Adam and Eve, but as Paul is saying here (vs. 21) God did this for the best of Creation. Perhaps God is going to recreate all animals that ever lived. Indeed, as seen in dogs, they have a quite advanced cognitive and relational level. So this ‘unwilling subjection’ will also be beneficial for them, especially if they are to be resurrected. So these verses probably succinctly answer the common/popular question: “Will Fido be in Heaven??”



It may help you here to understand that the Hebrew word for “evil” can merely mean “adversity/calamity”. (cf. Post #134082). That understood distinction may be seen in the LXX’s use of “kakos” (=‘cacophony’ thus “discordance/harm”) in Isa 45:7 vs. “poneron” (“evil” - e.g., Gen 2:9, 17; 3:5, 22). So God creating “adversities/calamities” to fulfill a purpose, as seen in His acts of judgement, is not actually “evil” as we extremely understand it. It is with judicious cause. However ‘forcing men to sin so that they can suffer evil’ is without any judicious and rational justification. Hence that extreme case would be “bipolar”.



You still have not/cannot explain why many have died in unsaved state, including at God’s own hand. So He would have quite evidently “missed the mark” here.

Such unanswered countering statements are still standing against your view so you may opt to address them, and that, head on.

Rom 8:19-21 – Talking about MAN, not Animals


Rom 8:20 is not mainly referring to the animals nor does v.21 implies this in any means. It mainly implies Man for sure because :

Context : V. 19 & 21 says 19. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God…..Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. “ I don’t think fido fitting this category.

God Creating Evil or Adversity

Yes I agree that God created EVIL or as you worded it “adversity to fulfill a purpose”. However, the Hebrew word employed here is “ra” meaning bad or evil. It comes from the root word “ra’a” proper meaning is “to spoil” and figuratively means “to make good for nothing”, i.e. bad.

However, I have no problem using your definition for I have the same understanding of that text in Is 45 that God creates adversity. To stay in those lines of thoughts, let’s note that the Hebrew word Satan means “adversary” by which with the presence of the prefix character He translated as “the” --it is literally translated as “Satan”, however that same word with the absence of the prefix is translated also as “adversary” by which could be anyone. Having this in mind and according to your understanding of Is 45 -- would you say that God created Satan? – The Adversary – for the purpose that God can manifest Himself?

Forcing or Not – Is not the Issue

God created the situation (the adversity) in the garden by putting the tree in the midst, and by providing a tree “promoter”(SATAN). Regardless if you want to view the result of this adversity that God created as ‘forcing or not – it still doesn’t change the fact that – (1) God created the situation, (2) God also Creator of ALL the players and (3)God is Sovereign and (4)in control of the rules and (5) what is allowed or not. (6) Sooooo…..God is ultimately Responsible.

Polarized Good & Evil becomes Unified

It is viewed as an extreme case of “bipolar” when we do not see the end from the beginning. Joseph at his time of captivity and being under the adversities that God brought in his life, at first he probably didn’t see the end from the beginning. But at the end, when He saw God’s big plan and purpose for the adversity so to use him to saved many; then the Evil was no more “bipolarized” from Good in his mind – they were both unified into God’s good plan “that all things work together for good" when he saw the end. So Joseph could say. Gen 50:19,20 "...Fear not: for [am] I in the place of God? 20. But as for you, ye thought evil against me; [but] God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as [it is] this day, to save much people alive. "

Did God Miss the Mark ?



???? I have already answered you this at least 3 times. But for some reason you seem to not register my answer. Just as in the life of Joseph God showed us that He foresaw a plan at the beginning and used Joseph to saved everyone; so it will be in the end of the great Jubilee where all Creation will be restore to it’s original estate. This is depicted in the Law of Jubilee and in the 3 harvests(Barley(Firstfruits), Wheat(Believers/Church), Grapes(unbelievers)). All the Harvests are Harvested, only the chaft is burned….Everyone are saved!!! God does not “miss the mark” as He has promised Rom 11:26 “All Israel shall be saved” .

God’s Vow

God made a vow in Is 45 in saying every knee will bow. And the word of the Lord will be fulfilled at the great White throne. Is 45:23-25 " I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. 24. Surely, shall one say, in the LORD have I righteousness and strength: even to him shall men come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed. 25. In the LORD shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory.

This vow is dependant on God's will and not man's will. It is God that made that vow and his word is sure and true. Every or ALL here or in the NT means EVERY and ALL Mankind. In verse 25 it specifies that ALL will be justified and shall glory. It doesn't say that this passage only means that the dead acknowledge that Jesus is king of king BUT they didn’t repent and would sin afterwards and that’s why they need to be annihilated. This text indicate that these people shall glory makes it clear that these people will be converted after the great white throne judgment. And that’s probably when these people will come unto the knowledge of the truth and be saved 1tim 2:4. Probably, only at that time they will see the end and concluded the same as Joseph once they see that the Evil was meant for Good.

God’s Saves ALL

God said to Abraham, that “ in thy seed (Jesus) shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. (Gen 12:3; 22:18; Acts 3:25; Gal 3:8) Here’s some texts that says directly or indirectly that God will save all (pas) Mankind. Most of these NT text uses the word pas g3956 [i]“including all forms of declension; all, any, every, the whole. Adj meaning “ALL”: including the idea of oneness, a totalily or the whole.”) (Ps 82:8; Acts 3:21; Eph 1:9,10; Col 1:20; Rom 8:19-23; 2Cor 5:19; Rom 5:15-18; 1Cor 15:22-28; Ep 1:3-10; Ph 2:11; 1Tim 4:10; 1 Tim 2:1-6; 1Jn 4:14; John 3:17; 1Jn 2:2; Jn 1:29; 1Jn 3:8; Rev 21:4,5; John 3:35; John 6:39; Jn 12:32; Num 14:21; Hab 1:12; Ps 36:6; Ps 103:6; Ps 148:6; …)

Here are the answers to your comments, Elle:

Elle: “Rom 8:19-21 – Talking about MAN, not Animals”
Rom 8-19-21 is actually/exegetcally speaking of the benefits that righteous men and women will come to have on all of God’s creation, indeed to reverse the curse that their sinning had brought upon it. This “Creation” is pitted against the “sons /children of God”. That is why Paul has to twice qualifyingly say after his ‘groaning statement’ in vs. 22, that ‘this also applies to humans, and that we, even believers, are also awaiting for this result from our own completed redemption’ (vs. 23). And so is the hope that, due to this permitted restoration of righteousness, everything wil again be made aright, including in nature/creation.

Elle: “God Creating Evil or Adversity”
I had updated my post to also include “calamity” as the definition of the Hebrew ra’. So there is a most accurate distinction between “calamity” and “adversary”.

Also Hebrew was not a perfect and “wordy” language and that is why the LXX does many times provide more accurate words for expression that were understood to be distinct in the Hebrew, however there was not a proper word to express it in that language. (That is why I also believed that God allowed Greek to become the major language of the World, even in Roman times, for the purpose of the accurate expression of the Gospel message.)

And God did freely allow for the development of an “adversary”, though without forcing anything.

Elle: “Forcing or Not – Is not the Issue”
Similarly, God’s placing of a testing tree in Eden is complete distinct from a claim that He forced Adam and Eve to eat from it. They freely chose to do that and therein is the fairness in all of this and the concept of freewill in this GC. Indeed without this tree for them to tangibly concretize a disobedience to God if so chose, there actually is no freewill. They could not chose something that was not there to choose.

And I do see that our difference here is on this issue of forcing Adam and Eve to choose evil vs. them freely choosing to do so.

Elle: “Did God Miss the Mark ?”
Joseph’s story. -God allowed what happened to Joseph to take place, i.e., played along with the free choice developments of his brothers, and thus “meant it for good” as one of the thousands of ways he could have succeed in just bringing Joseph to Egypt. And given the free evil disposition of his brothers, the Patriarchs of His Israel, this way was indeed the best one under those circumstances as God could also use it to most strikingly humble his brothers and serve as an object lesson for the nation of Israel.

So God could have easily brought Joseph to Egypt by giving him his famine-overcoming dreams while in Canaan and instructing him to travel to Egypt and relate them to Pharaoh as the solution, however God also had to deal with this evil and jealousy with these brothers, and perhaps also tinge of pride in Joseph.

Elle: “Did God Miss the Mark ?”
Perhaps I finally see your answer to your question here as you are directly answering it, i.e., head on. My question now is: Do you believe in some form of post-death second chance or purgatory. I.e. that between the death of a person and God’s final appearance, they will be given a chance to change. Thus, e.g., the Antediluvians; the people in Sodom and Gomorrah; the wicked people living in some nearby cities of Canaan that God ordered to be all killed, etc. all will have a post-death chance to be saved?? Of course then, being resurrected, basing this on “sight” and not “faith” as God’s gracious redemption actually necessitates.

You mention the Jubilee, which I believe will be forced to fully occur because God’s Church has failed in doing the work which would have skipped a full implementation of this type, do you believe that people will be resurrected to live a proper life during this pre-advent (cf. EW 286.1) Jubilee period. My view is that this will only apply to those who are alive then, and all still in faith. The Bible teaches that everyone seals their fate upon their death.

In regards to your claim of Rom 11;26, Paul qualifies “Israel” as only those who come to accept Jesus Christ. (E.g. Rom 9:6-8ff; cf. Gal 3:29 & Rom 2:28, 29)

Elle: “God’s Vow”
God’s vow in Isa 45:23-25 to have all bow before Him in acknowledgement does not mean that they confessing ones, indeed merely out of defeat, will be saved. Satan and evil angels will also bow, however they will not be saved. For those who will bow then, indeed while standing outside of God’s New Jerusalem, it will long have been too late. GC 668.2-671.2ff. Indeed just after that, they seek to continue their work of rebellion as stated in the Bible (Rev 20:7-11). You cannot build a teaching on one verse alone, i.e., you claim for Isa 45:25. (Perhaps you don’t accept the SOP direct revelation of those events, however that does not change those Biblical realities which the SOP serves to guide one to.)

Elle: “God’s Saves ALL”
God’s promise of worldwide (= indeed “all”) blessing through Abraham is not synonymous with those blessed people being Spiritually saved. It just means that God’s Triumphant Israel will have a most positive and beneficial impact on the entire world, yet people will still, as in Eden, be free to choose whether to live by God’s ways or not. However in the light of this realized blessing, they will seal their fate as they will then be acting in the light of great and clear knowledge of God and His righteous, and tangibly beneficial ways.

That's a relief!
Guess if God is the cause of evil, and the cause of me making bad "choices", and I don't really have a choice in the manner, but still will be saved, I don't have to worry. I can eat, drink, and be happy! No worries, no repentance. Yea! We are only puppets in some sort of charade or a distorted non-experiment.
Enjoy life to the fullest for tomorrow we ... live forever!

Indeed kland, sound to me like the post-modern fanciful way of thinking: ‘Everybody goes to Heaven in the end.’ Indeed no matter if they repent or not. Jesus obviously didn’t understand this purported “Gospel Truth”. (John 3:16-21)

It may be that we have :
a) long misunderstood God’s plan of Salvation
b) under-estimated His ability to bring us all to repentance ( “all knee shall bow” ),
c) the true meaning of Jesus judgment at His 2nd coming and after the Millenium;
d) and it’s process and progress throughout different ages -- Aion (an Age).

Ac 3:20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: 21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution ( or restoration) of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

It is the Ministry of Elijah to restore all things(Mat 17:11) and Ac 3:21 tell us that the restoration of all things was prophesied since the world began. Which means it’s been told to Adam and the generations after. We should find clear referenced about it in the Old Testament especially in the TYPE(e.g. the Law of Jubilee).

We all been taught that Jesus 2nd coming brings complete destruction of all things on the earth and only the “redeemed”(5% to 10%) will be saved. Then after the millennium, the 90% will be resurrected and will be annihilated after God’s judgment. That is not a restoration of all things and it is not what is depicted in the Law of Jubilee, nor according to the Redemption TYPE.

Our view of judgment is a severe punitive bias view based on our carnal perspective and what we are familiar with how the world judicial system deals with criminals. Let’s not forget that Man’s way is not God’s way. And that possibly our view of God’s Judgment is wrong.

Jesus is indeed coming to judge the world for all judgment has been committed to Him (John 5:27). But judgment is not synonymous with condemnation. The Greek word for judgment Krisis which means decision( by extension, a tribunal; by implication, justice (especially, divine law)). To judge means to rightly discern who is lying and who is telling the truth once the witnesses has been heard. He is able to bring a proper judgment in the case to restore the lawful order. He may judge the sinner by making him pay restitution, or he may judge the righteous by justifying or acquitting him.

Divine justice is done with a heart of love that pursues the truth. Where there is an offence (sin), love corrects the sinner through the judgment of the law. The sinner’s heart may well be hardened and self-centered; therefore from his view the law is evil, which is a false view that will be corrected with time. So, the purpose of the law is to correct and restore the sinner and to bring restitution to the victim according to the lawful order.

Therefore the judgment that Jesus is bringing upon the earth are meant to restore all things, not to destroy all things. Jesus judgment according to the law will bring knowledge of sin and thus will destroy the sin, not the sinner.

As usual with you Elle, in your replies, you only involve one side of the issue in your view and thus cause those claimed supporting texts to become unbalanced and go to an extreme that they do not mean. Case in point your “all things” is supposed to mean ‘even people who do not want to be saved.’ Did you not read the next two verses where Peter, anti-typically making the application to Christ, says:



That is speaking of the utter destruction of Hell Judgement.

Simply said, your view of the judgement, restoration and Divine Justice are one-sided and eisegetical and thus not according to what is revealed in the Bible or the SOP (Rev 19:10b) [i.e., direct revelations given to EGW], which you greatly err in summarily, defaulty, wholly rejecting.

My experience with SDA’s who so entirely reject the SOP is that they never had a proper understanding of how inspiration works and so when they come across an outright error in the SOP, which do occur, and/or an incomplete (personal) understanding of EGW, (which, when “completed’ by further Biblical study will not, at least Spiritually/Theologically oppose/contradict what EGW had said, but make it more full), they vexatiously just chuck the SOP out the window. That is not Biblical (1 Thess 5:19-21).

The views you are advancing are indeed contrary to the SOP, on top of the Bible’s testimony and it is thus quite easy to both: summarily not accept what you are claiming and also easily see/perceive that you are reading too much/or extremely into texts and making them say what they never (exegetically, -which includes comparative Biblical context) meant.