Tom, God knows who will be saved and who will be lost. He has known this about everybody since before the beginning of time as we know it. He will not allow anyone to suffer death before their decision for or against Jesus is obvious to the onlooking universe. What about children who die before they reach the age of accountability? Are they lost or saved? Only God knows. Somehow it is also obvious to the onlooking universe (not including the human race). It won't be obvious to us until after we review their cases in heaven.

The case involving certain slaves provides insights:

EW 276
I saw that the slave master [SEE APPENDIX.] will have to answer for the soul of his slave whom he has kept in ignorance; and the sins of the slave will be visited upon the master. God cannot take to heaven the slave who has been kept in ignorance and degradation, knowing nothing of God or the Bible, fearing nothing but his master's lash, and holding a lower position than the brutes. But He does the best thing for him that a compassionate God can do. He permits him to be as if he had not been, while the master must endure the seven last plagues and then come up in the second resurrection and suffer the second, most awful death. Then the justice of God will be satisfied. {EW 276.1}

Tom:That is, God chooses the best moment for everything, since nothing happens which He does not permit.

Rosangela:Again, this is true in relation to one's salvation, which is God's primary concern.

By "this" you mean "everything" right? So you are asserting that God chooses the best moment for anything to happen which in some way involves a person's salvation, correct?

God isn't concerned with the best moment for me to eat an apple or with the best moment for your favorite team to win the game.

But these things *do* involve a person's salvation. Or at least they can. For example, many people get so worked up over the World Cup that it's the most important thing in their life. I'm sure there are people who have accepted Christ because of the result of a sporting event. Their team lost and they became so upset that they turned to Christ. Or their team won, but they didn't find the happiness they hoped to find, and they turned to Christ.

All the events of our lives impact our salvation in one way or another. Say I choose to eat an apple. Because I do that, I'm later for this event than I would have been had I not eaten it. Because I'm later, I meet someone I wouldn't have met otherwise. These events are all interwoven, so that everything we do impacts our own salvation and the salvation of others. So, to be consistent, one would need to assert that God chooses the best moment for everything.


And if He does everything to save some (and we know that He does), why doesn't He do this for all?

I'm not sure what you mean by "everything." God does everything He can, but He is restrained by circumstances, most importantly the free will choices that people make.

Again, does He have favorites?

No, God does not have favorites, but people make choices that put some in a more favorable situation than others. For example, the child raised in a godly home has a better chance of salvation than a child raised in a godless home. This isn't God's fault, and God will do everything possible to save the latter child (in fact, we know from the Spirit of Prophecy that God does *more* for the latter child), but some have more favorable circumstances than others.

The Bible says that "He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust," and that He shows no partiality. I'm asserting things on the basis of God's character. But what you are saying is that He cares for some and neglects others.

Where have I said that God cares for some and neglects others? I haven't offered an opinion on the matter of this thread. I'm simply pointing out what I perceive to be logical problems with the position you are asserting. I certainly haven't said that God cares for some and not for others. That's way out of line.

This isn't true. For example, certain slaves and children before the age of accountability do not have the opportunity to make such a decision.

Also, you didn't respond to my a) through e) argument (maybe you were planning to in another post; I'm just trying to make sure it was noticed. My apologies if you were planning to address it).

TE: "He will not allow anyone to suffer death before their decision for or against Jesus is obvious to the onlooking universe." This isn't true. For example, certain slaves and children before the age of accountability do not have the opportunity to make such a decision.

MM: It is true. God did not allow them to die before it was obvious to the onlooking universe. It was clear to them, and it will be clear to us when we get to heaven. "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known."

TE: Also, you didn't respond to my a) through e) argument (maybe you were planning to in another post; I'm just trying to make sure it was noticed. My apologies if you were planning to address it).

MM: Please see the bold section above. That's where I addressed it.

MM, I don't think you understood my argument. You certainly didn't address it. The argument strikes me as very clear. It's laid out point by point. I don't know how to make it clearer.

How do you know that a "huge number" won't be saved? However, even those who are not saved won't face the judgment and the lake of fire, which means they will be better than if they had lived and been lost.

Not generally, of course. But if on some occasion they really involve a person’s salvation, I believe God can and does intervene.


I agree. That’s why I have been emphasizing the limitation of each person’s circumstances.


My opinion is that they died not just because an evil man killed them, but because God, who is in control of the world, was taking everything into consideration when He permitted this to happen. He was considering “the present and future history” of those people (UL 375.3).

Tom, your argument seems to be that God cannot possibly know if certain slaves and children will choose to be saved or lost if He allows them to live longer. If that is what you are arguing, then, no, I do not agree with you.

Again, I agree with Rosangela. That is, I believe God knows who will choose to be saved and who will not choose to be saved. He will not allow anyone to die before their choice is obvious to the onlooking universe. This applies to certain slaves and children because God is omniscient. He has known about it since before the beginning of creation. But He allows people to live long enough so that it is obvious to the onlooking universe.

Tom:This leaves a huge number of children who will not be saved.

Rosangela:How do you know that a "huge number" won't be saved? However, even those who are not saved won't face the judgment and the lake of fire, which means they will be better than if they had lived and been lost.

If you read the argument, you will see why. It follows from the assumptions. Here's the argument:

a)Millions of Jews before the age of accountability were killed.
b)Presumably most of these were brought up by unbelieving parents.
c)Some pct. of these will not be saved.
d)This leaves a huge number of children who will not be saved (i.e. take part in the first resurrection) unless you wish to make the claim that *all* children of unbelieving parents will be saved.
e)The only way that none of the huge number of children would be better off had they not been killed is if none of them would have been saved had they lived.

Your asking about d). d) follows from a), b) and c). Even a small pct. of millions will result in a huge number.

The only way this wouldn't result in a huge number is if all, or nearly all, children of unsaved parents will be saved. But then the hypothesis that God chooses the best moment for all to die would be false, because if all or almost all children of unbelieving parents are saved, the best moment for the children of all these (who wouldn't later choose to be saved) to die would be in childhood.

So either you wind up with a huge number of children who won't be saved, one of which, at least, would have chosen to accept Christ had it lived, OR

since all (or nearly all) children of unsaved parents are saved (the only way it would be better for the Jewish hollocaust children to have lived), it follows that ALL children of unsaved believers (who wouldn't later choose to accept Christ) would be better off dead.

So either way the hypothesis that God chooses the best moment for everyone to die fails in the case of children of unsaved parents.

No, MM, what you are suggesting is not my argument. I invite you to consider each of the points a) through e). This argument is not dependent upon one's view of the future.