Yes, of course, John. However, according to this observation death is the result of sinners killing each other - and not because sin is inherently toxic. It isn't sin that kills them, but rather sinners killing each other.

But isn't it a sin to kill each other? Therefore, isn't it a sin that kills?

Nope. Sin isn't a person. Sin is what we think, say or do. The reason why we sin is because we have a sinful nature. Unless we are born again all we can do is sin. Sin isn't what kills us. If we don't kill each other first, then we die because we do not have access to the tree of life. It's as simple as that.

Ah yes, but if we did not have sin, we would not kill.

He that kills others is only a step away from killing himself. Remember Saul?

Greed brings fear; fear brings death.

Again we have come full circle: Sin is only what you do, not what you are, according to. MM With this theory, the leper is blamed for his scabs, his wounds dressed, but no real attempt is made to face the disease and shed the virus that causes the suffering.

Sin may not be a chemical element, or sensible object, but neither is love or honesty or faith. Yet all are powers that are beyond human calculation and are quite real.

Anyone truly interested in this issue can research the EGW CD on these matters. Here are some quotes of God's Messenger:

"Sin is a disorganizer."
"Sin is a hateful thing."
"...sin is a tremendous evil."
"Sin is a mysterious, unexplainable thing."
"Sin is a heinous and offensive thing."
"Sin is a disgrace."
"Sin is the greatest of all evils."
" 'Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.' They were in the worst kind of bondage,--ruled by the spirit of evil."

Now if one waters down the statements above, and panders that sin is only the bad things we do, we might as well become Behaviouralists. It would save a whole lot of responsibilty and guilt.

You are right Phil.

But MM's point was that eternal life came from the "tree of life"; rather than that it came from every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

So I just thought he might see that the tree cannot assure eternal life to anyone, And that God did not create death by withdrawing the tree, but only made evident the need for the spirit (word of life) in order that life be lived eternally.

Mat 4:4 ...It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

So is the difference of trying to live by the "tree of life", rather than the "word of life".

The age old argument - Sin is a state of doing; no, sin is a state of being! And then there are those who say - It's both.

Yes, we have a sinful nature and it generates and communicates all manner of unholy thoughts and feelings. Initially, though, they are nothing more than temptations. It's not until we desire or do them that we become guilty of them.

Sin is not who and what we are. No way. Sin is the transgression of God's law in thought, word or deed. To say otherwise implies we are guilty of sinning because we have a sinful nature, which would also imply Jesus was guilty of sinning. We are sinners because we sin, not because we have a sinful nature.

AH 127, 128
The lower passions have their seat in the body and work through it. The words "flesh" or "fleshly" or "carnal lusts" embrace the lower, corrupt nature; the flesh of itself cannot act contrary to the will of God. We are commanded to crucify the flesh, with the affections and lusts. How shall we do it? Shall we inflict pain on the body? No; but put to death the temptation to sin. The corrupt thought is to be expelled. Every thought is to be brought into captivity to Jesus Christ. All animal propensities are to be subjected to the higher powers of the soul. The love of God must reign supreme; Christ must occupy an undivided throne. Our bodies are to be regarded as His purchased possession. The members of the body are to become the instruments of righteousness. {AH 127.2}