That seems possible. Of course, God has no desire to cause anyone to suffer, but suffering and death are the inevitable results of sin.

I heard this explained thusly, that to say that Moses would see God's back was another way of saying that Moses would see the ground where God had just stood. Of course this would bring home your point even more.

Tom, it seems more reasonable to say that the inevitable result of sinners being in the unveiled presence of God's glory is suffering and death.

Thomas, I hadn't heard that before. Interesting. Thanx. I more inclined, though, to accept the facts of the story as it reads in the Bible.

When Moses asked to see God's glory, God proclaimed His character.



I understand Moses' only being able to see God's backside as meaning that God could only reveal a portion of His goodness; a full blown blast would be too much.

Pretty awesome when you think about it.

Mike, its a matter of accepting that the bible was not written in english, neither 16th century english nor 21th century english. Word pictures should not be expected to have exact correspondance.

What I stated, that suffering and death is the inevitable result of sin, is what EGW said. I think what she said is much more reasonable than your suggestion here, and I'll explain why.

What you suggest makes God, as opposed to sin, responsible for the death of those who disobey Him.

The argument of the enemy is that God will kill you if you don't do what He says. He presents God as an arbitrary ruler, with arbitrary laws, that He arbitrarily enforces by torturing and killing those who do not follow His arbitrary rules.

But the law is not arbitrary. It is a hedge which protects us from the results of disobedience, the consequence of which is death.

The principles of the law are love and unselfishness. Love and unselfishness are the principles of life. Selfishness and unbelief are the root of sin, the fruit of which is death. Not because God will kill you, but because you have chosen to accept principles, which have been melded with your soul, that can only result in death.

In the first chapter of "The Desire of Ages," EGW goes into this concept in detail. She talks about a circuit of beneficence, which she calls the principle of life for the universe, which is based on one receiving from God, and giving from that which one has received. The opposite of this principle of life, this circuit of beneficence, is to receive from God, and horde, not give from that which one has received, which is to say to live for self. The opposite of life is death. Life comes from unselfishness, from love, from giving. Death follows from selfishness, from not giving.

God seeks to teach us the principles of life.

This is a very good point. Even if the Bible were written in English, it still wouldn't be the case that one should expect in exact correspondence between what the prophet sees by revelation, and what one reads. But given that the Bible was written in a language and culture far removed from ours, it is even more the case that one should not expect the correspondence you have pointed out.

Tom and Thomas, if we cannot accept the Bible testimony at face-value, what makes you think we can accurately determine what it meant metaphorically? What it means to you metaphorically may not be what it meant to Moses, or whoever, way back then, right?

TE: The argument of the enemy is that God will kill you if you don't do what He says.

MM: Please support this insight with Scripture or the SOP. Thank you.

---

TE: God veils His glory, and prevents the natural result of sin to occur, which is death.

MM: So, sinners do not die the second death if God veils His glory? If this true, how, then, can you say sin is what causes sinners to die the second death?

Here's one which presents a similar thought:



On a related thought:





It's not me, is it? I've been quoting EGW, haven't I? Here's another one, a new one:



Another one:



One more:



But I'll return to the following, which I think is the clearest:



The wicked "place themselves so out of harmony with God" that simply being in the presence of God is to them a consuming fire. This should make it clear that it is not God doing something to them to cause them pain and death, but it is something they have done to themselves which causes them pain and death.