Roseangela: Will you please give me your opinion about these clear statements?:

""Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. His authority rests upon goodness, mercy and love; and the presentation of these principles is the means to be used. God's government is moral, and truth and love are to be the prevailing power." DA., 759.

"The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority." ibid., 22.

True: God has recorded in minute detail those occasions when His wrath has been manifested. The Bible is full of them, human history books are void of them...except insurance books which label all disasters an "act of God".

The Bible uses the terms "giving up" "gave them over" and many other similar expressions which are very revealing in the matter of God's wrath.

As I have stated, I see an aspect of "wrath" as the "God's turning away in revulsion from man for the hardness of their hearts."

2 Chronicles 30:7 "And be not ye like your fathers, and like your brethren, which trespassed against the LORD God of their fathers, [who] therefore gave them up to desolation, as ye see.
30:8 Now be ye not stiffnecked, as your fathers [were, but] yield yourselves unto the LORD, and enter into His sanctuary, which he hath sanctified for ever: and serve the LORD your God, that the fierceness of His wrath may turn away from you."

Psalms 81:10 I [am] the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt: open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it.
81:11 But my people would not hearken to my voice; and Israel would none of me.
81:12 So I gave them up unto their own hearts' lust: [and] they walked in their own counsels."

I could go on...however "two witnesses" should be enough.

Tom and Ikan,
God’s wrath against sin exists since the moment sin began to exist, and will last till sin is eliminated from the universe. God is restraining His wrath for a time, but He must eliminate sin, for sin is an evil ruinous to the universe. Eliminating sin is a deliberate act of God but it can in no way be classified as an act of force. God’s act is primarily against sin. The sinner will be destroyed because he is identified with sin. Sad, but unavoidable.

[ June 26, 2005, 02:40 PM: Message edited by: Rosangela ]

Restating one's beliefs while refusing to answer a candid set of questions for weeks on end,
Avoiding trains of direct responses to your own posts, these don't fair well for Berean discussion.

R: God’s wrath against sin exists since the moment sin began to exist, and will last till sin is eliminated from the universe. God is restraining His wrath for a time, but He must eliminate sin, for sin is an evil ruinous to the universe. Eliminating sin is a deliberate act of God but it can in no way be classified as an act of force. God’s act is primarily against sin. The sinner will be destroyed because he is identified with sin. Sad, but unavoidable.

T: If by "wrath" you mean "anger" or "hatred", it's true that God has always hated sin. He must, since it causes pain, misery and death to His children, whom He loves. Scripturally God's wrath is not constantly exercized, but is manifested when He "gives up" those against whom it is exercized to the results of their choice. (Deut 31:17, 18; Jer. 33:5; 2 Chron 29: 6, 8; 2 Kings 17:17-20; Ps. 27:9; Ps. 89:46; Ps. 143:7; Hosea 9:12; Lam. 2:5-7; Rom. 1:18-26)

You're correct that God's elimination of sin is not an act of force. It is His "giving up" those who have rejected Him to the results of their sin.

quote:

---

This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown. 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." Christ says, "All they that hate Me love death." Eph. 4:18; Prov. 8:36. 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. 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)

---

An interesting and important point is that it is the same thing which gives life to the righteous which causes the death of the wicked:

quote:

---

The light of the glory of God, which imparts life to the righteous, will slay the wicked. (DA 108)

---

Don't you mean "Phil: You're correct that God's elimination of sin is not an act of force. It is His "giving up" those who have rejected Him to the results of their sin."

I don't think Roseangela endorses this concept, and your post was written so that it looks to the "skimmers" that she had.

Ikan,

I have already stated my position over and over again in the several discussions about this subject. Anything else I might say would be just a repetition of what I have already said, but since you insist, I'll comment on the passages you quoted. Of course, like you, I don’t think that God kills with a blood-thirsty revenge heart. God is love, and there is no hatred in His heart except for sin. But sin is an evil ruinous to the universe, and He has fixed a day (Acts 17:31) on which He will eliminate it from His kingdom. Of course sin does not have an independent existence, but resides in the mind of sinners, and when God manifests His wrath against sin, which has been restrained for so long, sinners will be destroyed. God’s wrath against sin won’t affect negatively the righteous, because, like God, they also hate sin, but it will produce an unbearable agony in the wicked, which will cause their destruction. At the same time, externally, “the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up” (2 Pet. 3:10), and this fire will obviously consume the wicked. If it is your opinion that this is an arbitrary act on the part of God, or that by so doing He is using compelling power, I’m sorry but you will have to live with this, for this is what will happen.

Another thing is that you take some texts and apply them out of context.

First, when Ellen White speaks about force, she is no doubt referring to coercive or compelling power, as the passages you quoted make clear:

"Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. His authority rests upon goodness, mercy and love; and the presentation of these principles is the means to be used. God's government is moral, and truth and love are to be the prevailing power." ibid., 759.

"The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government; He desires only the service of love; and love cannot be commanded; it cannot be won by force or authority." ibid., 22.

On the other hand, she says that

“The power and authority of the divine government will be employed to put down rebellion; yet all the manifestations of retributive justice will be perfectly consistent with the character of God as a merciful, long-suffering, benevolent being.” {GC 541}

It is also true that it is written “God destroys no man”. But which is the context of these statements? In every single stance they are related to the case of pharaoh and all those who commit the sin against the Holy Spirit. What she means is that the sinner is responsible for the destruction of his own soul. The sentence that "God destroys no man" is followed by explanatory statements like, “The responsibility rests upon the sinner. By resisting the Spirit of God today, he prepares the way for a second resistance of light when it comes with mightier power; and thus he will pass from one stage of indifference to another, until, at last, the light will fail to impress him, and he will cease to respond in any measure to the Spirit of God” (RH, February 17, 1891). “ God did not compel Pharaoh to be lost. Every man who is lost destroys himself. When a man turns from the light given of God, and refuses to walk in it, that light becomes darkness to him.” (PH152 10.1). “The sinner destroys himself by his own impenitence. ... We want all to understand how the soul is destroyed. It is not that God sends out a decree that man shall not be saved. He does not throw a darkness before the eyes which cannot be penetrated. But man at first resists a motion of the Spirit of God, and, having once resisted, it is less difficult to do so the second time, less the third, and far less the fourth. Then comes the harvest to be reaped from the seed of unbelief and resistance. Oh what a harvest of sinful indulgences is preparing for the sickle! (5T 120.2)

On the other hand, she says clearly that

“A great price has been paid for the redemption of man, and none who are untruthful, impure, or unrighteous can enter the kingdom of heaven. If men do not make Christ their personal Saviour, and become true and pure and holy, there is only one course for the Lord to pursue. He must destroy the sinner, for evil natures cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Thus it is that sin, if not destroyed, will destroy the sinner, just as Satan designed it should.” {16MR 273.3}

"But if men cling to sin, they become identified with it. Then the glory of God, which destroys sin, must destroy them. ... The light of the glory of God, which imparts life to the righteous, will slay the wicked." {DA 107}

Thank you for your patience, Rosangela. It's true you have stated your position many times, but what you are writing now is a bit different than what you've written before. And there's nothing wrong with this. We've been dialoging back and forth, and if we have open minds, it's only natural that our positions should evolve. This is a good thing, and I'm not speaking only of you, but will include myself as well.

On the first paragraph you wrote, I agree with everything you wrote. I'm having some difficulty seeing what it is we disagree on, provided you hold:
1) There will come a specific time when God will act to do away with sin, which He does for the good of the Universe.
2) How He does this can in no way be classified as a use of force.

quote:

---

Eliminating sin is a deliberate act of God but it can in no way be classified as an act of force.

---

3) The earth will be burned up and the wicked will be consumed.
4) The light of the glory of God, which imparts life to the righteous, will slay the wicked.

I believe these 4 things to be true, and based on your post, and the previous one to it, it appears to me that you do as well. So it seems to me that we have a lot of common ground (and, indeed, it is a bit unclear to me what our uncommon ground is, if we agree on these 4 points).

The key to this, it seems to me, is point 4, which makes it clear that THE SAME THING which gives life to the righteous is what slays the wicked. If we get this one point, it seems to me, we won't be off on the big picture.

Tom,

Sometimes I also get confused, but there are points of disagreement, otherwise we wouldn’t be discussing for such long a time.
It seems to me there is a difference in our perspective. Your position is that it is sin which kills (with God having a passive role), while my position is that it is God who kills (although reluctantly), because He has to destroy sin.