A Reform-minded Seventh-day Adventist forum In our aim to exalt everything important, first and foremost, we seek to promote a clear understanding of Daniel, Revelation, the three angels' messages and the alpha and omega of apostasy.
Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 11:18 am Post subject: The Danger of Spiritualistic Theories of Death
I want to preface my remarks here by saying that I choose not to enter into debate with those who would defend what I consider to be spiritualistic theories, for we have been given clear counsel not to do that.
Ellen White wrote:
And I have been shown that we are not to enter into controversy over these spiritualistic theories, because such controversy will only confuse minds. These things are not to be brought into our meetings…If our ministers and teachers give themselves to the study of these erroneous theories, some will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. Evangelism, 624.
My participation in this forum is not to convince those who have already been charmed by Satan’s sophistries to turn about and give up their unholy ideas; for I know from much past experience that once Satan has worked his bewitching power on the human mind, it is almost impossible for those in the snare to escape. Instead, I seek only to sound a warning to those unsuspecting Adventists who, with eyes wide open, might venture onto Satan’s enchanted ground (spiritualism). Eugene Shubert and I would not be sounding the warning if there was no clear evidence that Maxwell’s theories contained elements of spiritualism. I think that Eugene and I have offered enough evidence in this forum to establish that underneath the sugar coating of Graham Maxwell’s teachings lie errors that have within them the seeds of destruction.
Here is one warning given to God’s people to avoid spiritualistic theories:
Ellen White wrote:
We have reached the perils of the last days, when some, yes, many, shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. Be cautious in regard to what you read and how you hear. Take not a particle of interest in spiritualistic theories. Satan is waiting to steal a march upon everyone who allows himself to be deceived by his hypnotism. He begins to exert his power over them just as soon as they begin to investigate his theories. Letter 123, 1904
Satan will begin to control the mind “just as soon as” one begins “to investigate his theories.” That is why, once taken in by Maxwell and others who promote this supposedly intellectually broader way of looking at salvation, it is almost impossible to convince them that they have given “heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils.” The great danger for Seventh-day Adventists who embrace these modern spiritualistic theories is that it will eventually lead them to “depart from the faith.” Nothing is more sad to me than knowing that the “majority will forsake us” in the not too distant future. What a tragedy that so many of my brethren who, having once embraced the truths of the Adventist message, will give it up because they, with eyes wide open, wandered onto Satan’s enchanted ground and did not discern the danger they were in.
The fact that “we are not to enter into controversy over these spiritualistic theories” is why I will not verbally joust with people who would defend Maxwell and that which he teaches. Debating these issues with those whose minds have been charmed by Satan’s sophistries “will only confuse minds.”
But while we are not to “enter into controversy over spiritualistic theories,” we must at the same time not remain silent on these subjects. The warning must be given because there are souls at stake.
Ellen White wrote:
When men standing in the position of leaders and teachers work under the power of spiritualistic ideas and sophistries, shall we keep silent, for fear of injuring their influence, while souls are being beguiled? Satan will use every advantage that he can obtain to cause souls to become clouded and perplexed in regard to the work of the church, in regard to the word of God, and in regard to the words of warning which He has given through the testimonies of His Spirit, to guard His little flock from the subtleties of the enemy. Manuscript 72, 1904, p. 6.
Recall that “We have reached the perils of the last days, when some, yes, many, shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils.” I have already witnessed several once-faithful Adventists who gave heed to seducing spirits and ended up making a shipwreck of their faith. One case in point is Dick Winn. I used to love hearing Dick Winn preach. At one time he was a teacher associated with the conservative self-supporting Adventist organization called Weimar Institute in California. He was a frequent speaker at camp meetings and traveled the country doing seminars at local churches on various subjects. But then Dick became charmed by the idea that God will not personally destroy the wicked with fire, bringing about the second death. Shortly after Dick Winn began to teach that the lake of fire was not literal, he departed from the faith, turning his back on his Adventist heritage. Dick wrote a devotional book in 1986 titled His Healing Love that was translated into many languages and sold all over the world. In his book, he asked the question: How hot is hell? Then he gave his answer.
Dick Winn wrote:
The day will come when those who refuse His [God’s] gracious invitation for friendship will be given what they have chosen: separation from Him. When you unplug your lamp, it doesn’t explode. The light just goes out. Nor do you need to beat on the bulb in anger for its ceasing to give light. That’s simply what happens when it is disconnected. By the same token, when one breaks union with God, life ceases. God does not, in anger, need to crush it out. To be separated from the Life-giver is to be dead eternally…The people God was addressing in Biblical times did not always understand this cause-effect principle [of cutting off the power to the lamp, or life to the wicked]. It was difficult for them to appreciate the destructiveness of being out of harmony with God. And so the Bible writers employed the imagery of consuming flames to describe the sureness and completeness of the destruction of life apart from God. But being apart from God is in itself the worst thing that could ever happen to a person. God doesn’t need to torch hellish fires to enhance what is already so terrible. His Healing Love, p. 332.
Sounds like Dick Winn and Graham Maxwell crossed paths somewhere. The pastor of my church was good friends with Dick Winn when they were both at Weimar Institute. I asked my pastor why Dick left the church. I could hardly believe his answer. Dick Winn, once a conservative, as are most who are associated with Weimar, began to turn so liberal that he no longer had any use for Adventism.
I am convinced at least one causal element for his departure from the faith was the bewitching influence of the pantheistic idea that he embraced—the idea that (as Winn wrote in his book) “To be separated from the Life-giver is to be dead eternally.” This, some would argue, is one of the identifying characteristics of the omega of apostasy. The alpha apostasy was the idea that God’s presence was in all life. The complement, or mirror image of that concept, is that if God removes His presence, death is the result.
Notice another familiar concept in Winn’s book, one that Maxwell constantly harps on. “The day will come when those who refuse His [God’s] gracious invitation for friendship will be given what they have chosen: separation from Him.” In other words, the wicked do not die the second death because they refused to let go of their cherished sins, but because they did not become friends with God. Dick Winn and Graham Maxwell would have us believe that the second death is not a matter of receiving the wages of transgressing the law and of not accepting Christ’s substitutionary death in the sinner’s behalf (that’s such a narrow, childish view), but only because they did not become buddies with their Creator. The bottom line is that Maxwell, Winn, and no telling how many others today believe that hellfire is just a metaphor.
Ellen White explained that embedded within the spiritualistic theories found in Kellogg’s The Living Temple was a “spiritualistic science of Satanic origin.” Battle Creek Letters, p. 103. If you will closely examine the above quote found in Dick Winn’s book, there you will find an example of how a simple scientific principle is used to illustrate how the wicked are destroyed. “When you unplug your lamp, it doesn’t explode. The light just goes out…By the same token, when one breaks union with God, life ceases.” What a charming idea. It sounds so logical. But this is “spiritualistic science of Satanic origin.” Note that in order to defend his simple, scientifically based theory, Winn has to bring in pantheistic theories and resort to pure conjecture. The pantheistic theory is that “To be separated from the Life-giver is to be dead eternally.” It is true that those destroyed in the second death will be eternally separated from God; but that is only the result of the second death. It is not the cause of their death. And Winn resorts to pure conjecture when he says that “The people God was addressing in Biblical times did not always understand this cause-effect principle [of cutting off the power to the lamp, or life to the wicked]. It was difficult for them to appreciate the destructiveness of being out of harmony with God. And so the Bible writers employed the imagery of consuming flames to describe the sureness and completeness of the destruction of life apart from God.” That’s pure conjecture, yet Winn uses this notion to prove his erroneous theory. Note that he does not offer a “thus saith the Lord” to prove his theories.
Ellen White wrote more about how Satan uses science to foster error.
Ellen White wrote:
In the future, truth will be counterfeited by the precepts of men. Deceptive theories will be presented as safe doctrines. False science is one of the agencies that Satan used in the heavenly courts, and it is used by him today. The false assertions that he made to the angels, his subtle scientific theories, led many of them from loyalty [as it led Dick Winn from loyalty]. Pacific Union Recorder, 12-31-03
Adventists who fall victim to the spiritualistic theories rampant in the church today would rather believe the words, theories, and assumptions of men than a plain “thus saith the Lord.” Instead of taking the clear words of the Bible at face value, they are charmed by theories that attempt to explain away the word of God—theories that supposedly are put forth to defend the maligned character of God.
Ellen White wrote:
By searching the Scriptures we are to know God, and Jesus Christ, whom He hath sent. The Bible has not been given for the benefit of ministers only; it is the book for the people; it is the comfort of the poor man…The Bible and the soul were made one for the other. The Signs of the Times, 8-20-1894.
Any person who has not already developed preconceived ideas (influenced by Maxwell and others) regarding the final destruction of the wicked will pick up the Bible and take at face value the plain words of God. The theories that some accept today regarding the destruction of the wicked constitute a wresting of the Scriptures, such as Winn’s conjecture that the people God addressed in Biblical times weren’t savvy enough to understand the higher intellectual theories of today; so “the Bible writers employed the imagery of consuming flames to describe the sureness and completeness of the destruction.” The consuming flames that destroy the wicked are imagery? That’s what Winn, Maxwell, and others say. Yes, there is much imagery in the Bible, but the rule of thumb is to understand the words of the Bible exactly as they are written, unless there is some overriding reason for not doing so.
What does the Bible say about the final destruction of Satan, the unfallen angels, and the wicked inhabitants of the earth who sided with Satan in his rebellion against the government of God?
Quote:
By the abundance of your trading you became filled with violence within, and you sinned; therefore I cast you as a profane thing out of the mountain of God; and I destroyed you, O covering cherub, from the midst of the fiery stones. Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor; I cast you to the ground, I laid you before kings, that they might gaze at you. You defiled your sanctuaries by the multitude of your iniquities, by the iniquity of your trading; therefore I brought fire from your midst; it devoured you, and I turned you to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all who saw you. Ezekiel 28:16-18 (NKJV)
That takes care of Satan and the fallen angels. What about the wicked inhabitants of this earth?
Quote:
“For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, and all the proud, yes, all who do wickedly will be stubble. And the day which is coming shall burn them up,” says the LORD of hosts, “that will leave them neither root nor branch. But to you who fear My name the Sun of Righteousness shall arise with healing in His wings; and you shall go out and grow fat like stall-fed calves. You shall trample the wicked, for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day that I do this,” says the LORD of hosts. Malachi 4:1-3.
They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them. Revelation 20:9.
His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. Matthew 3:12.
The LORD watches over all who love Him, but all the wicked he will destroy. Psalms 145:20.
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. Matthew 10:28.
The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. Revelation 20:13-15.
If all of this is imagery, then all previous generations, including that of Ellen White, have been terribly deceived and mistaken as to who destroys the wicked and how it will occur. Aren’t we fortunate that great teachers like Dick Winn and Graham Maxwell have come along to set us all straight?
Is the lake of fire a literal fire that burns the wicked to literal ashes? The Spirit of Prophecy sheds more light on this question. A most graphic and detailed description of the final destruction of the wicked is given in chapter 42 of The Great Controversy. After explaining all of the reasons why God is about to destroy the wicked, and how deserving they are of what comes upon them, the following narrative describes in no uncertain words what happens to the wicked.
Ellen White wrote:
“Upon the wicked He shall rain quick burning coals, fire and brimstone and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup." Isaiah 9:5; 34:2; Psalm 11:6, margin. Fire comes down from God out of heaven. The earth is broken up. The weapons concealed in its depths are drawn forth. Devouring flames burst from every yawning chasm. The very rocks are on fire. The day has come that shall burn as an oven. The elements melt with fervent heat, the earth also, and the works that are therein are burned up. Malachi 4:1; 2 Peter 3:10. The earth's surface seems one molten mass—a vast, seething lake of fire. It is the time of the judgment and perdition of ungodly men—"the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompenses for the controversy of Zion." Isaiah 34:8.
The wicked receive their recompense in the earth. Proverbs 11:31. They "shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts." Malachi 4:1. Some are destroyed as in a moment, while others suffer many days. All are punished "according to their deeds." The sins of the righteous having been transferred to Satan, he is made to suffer not only for his own rebellion, but for all the sins which he has caused God's people to commit. His punishment is to be far greater than that of those whom he has deceived. After all have perished who fell by his deceptions, he is still to live and suffer on. In the cleansing flames the wicked are at last destroyed, root and branch—Satan the root, his followers the branches. The full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah. —The Great Controversy, pp. 672-673
Maxwell must cringe when he reads that very clear description of the final destruction of the wicked, especially the part where some of the wicked “suffer many days.” Maxwell draws back in horror from the idea that God will punish the wicked, and he really squirms at the suggestion that some are punished longer than others. Well, here we have seen the truth in plain English.
Does Ellen White’s description of the final destruction sound similar to what Dick Winn, Maxwell, and many others today teach? If the fire that destroys Satan, his followers, and the wicked is “imagery,” then let’s tear out that chapter in The Great Controversy and throw it into the trashcan. Words mean things. The words in the above quote would have to be totally twisted to come up with the kind of theories held by many today who hold responsible positions as educators, pastors, and church leaders.
It is important to note that those who reject the plain words of Scripture and the truth as described in the above clear narrative cannot agree amongst themselves as to just how the wicked are destroyed. One theory is that when the wicked come into God’s presence as they march upon the New Jerusalem under the banner of Satan, the presence of God will, as a consuming fire, destroy them. So some say it is just God’s presence that does the destroying, and not God Himself. Follow the narrative below as Ellen White describes how the glory of the Eternal Father flows out around the entire earth, and yet the wicked are not destroyed by it.
Ellen White wrote:
Now [after the wicked are raised to life and they, led by Satan, advance on the New Jerusalem] Christ again appears to the view of His enemies. Far above the city, upon a foundation of burnished gold, is a throne, high and lifted up. Upon this throne sits the Son of God…The glory of the Eternal Father is enshrouding His Son. The brightness of His presence fills the City of God, and flows out beyond the gates, flooding the whole earth with its radiance.” GC 665.
If the wicked are destroyed by the mere presence of God because His presence is a consuming fire, then why are they not destroyed at that moment when “the glory of the Eternal Father…flows out beyond the gates [of the New Jerusalem], flooding the whole earth with its radiance”? That glory did not consume the wicked, for several other events take place before they are finally destroyed. So much for the first theory that the glory of God's presence destroys the wicked in the second death.
A second theory as to how the wicked will meet their final destruction might best be described in the quote used earlier from Dick Winn’s book. “…when one breaks union with God, life ceases…To be separated from the Life-giver is to be dead eternally.” Here is the pantheistic view of how the wicked are destroyed. God merely removes His presence from the wicked, and they die. It is true that once the wicked are destroyed in the second death, they will be forever separated from the presence of God, but it is not simply the withdrawal of God’s presence that causes the second death.
It should be obvious that the two theories I just described totally contradict each other. One holds that it is the wicked coming into the presence of God that brings about their destruction; and the other holds that it is the removal of God’s presence that brings destruction. This is an example of the confusion of spiritual Babylon.
If you want the truth on this matter in plain words, and in graphic detail, watch less television this coming week and read chapter 42 in The Great Controversy.
In an interview with Graham Maxwell that was published on the Internet, we may see how the subtle sophistries of Satan work to confuse minds. Maxwell states what he thinks is the way most Christians think when it comes to the predicament that fallen mankind is in. Here is his statement: "we are doomed--not just to die; we are doomed not just to be executed; we are doomed to be punished and then executed." Do you see the subtle insinuation here that if God punishes the wicked by making them experience pain in the lake of fire, and after suffering there for various lengths of time God then executes them, that would be a horrible thing. That would make God look vengeful and arbitrary. But the way Maxwell worded his statement is nothing but a clever spin on the truth, done in an effort to prove his case that God neither punishes nor kills the wicked in the second death.
We can ask a couple of simple questions to show the error in Maxwell's theory. Do we execute rabid dogs? Or do we in mercy put them out of their misery? God does not execute the wicked that have willingly placed themselves beyond the possibility of redemption. He destroys them. There is a big difference between executing the wicked (as Maxwell charges God would be doing if He is the one who actually kills the wicked with fire) and destroying them out of mercy to the wicked themselves and to the unfallen universe. Maxwell has totally distorted the truth on the matter of the final destruction of the wicked. This is a prime example of how Satan can spin light to make it appear as darkness.
God does not destroy the wicked out of vengeance, but out of mercy. If there were still unanswered questions in the minds of the unfallen worlds and in the minds of the redeemed, there might be some doubt as to God’s motive. But at the time when the wicked are finally destroyed, all of those issues will have been fully resolved. It would be Satan’s purpose to desire men to accept the idea that his own destruction, and the destruction of those who sided with him in rebellion against God, would be unjust and vengeful. If Maxwell and others take Satan’s side in this question of motive, then what must we conclude about them and the rest of their theories? The quote that follows reveals the real reason that God destroys the wicked:
Ellen White wrote:
Like the waters of the Flood the fires of the great day declare God’s verdict that the wicked are incurable. In mercy to the world, God blotted out its wicked inhabitants in Noah’s time. In mercy He destroyed the corrupt dwellers in Sodom…It is in mercy to the universe that God will finally destroy the rejecters of His grace…those who have not, through repentance and faith, secured pardon, must receive the penalty of transgression—‘the wages of sin.’ They suffer punishment varying in duration and intensity, ‘according to their works,’ but finally ending in the second death.” The Great Controversy, pp. 543,544.
It is mercy, and not revenge (as Maxwell insists), that is the motive behind the final destruction of the wicked.
Please, friends, walk as if on thin ice if you wish to venture into the spiritualistic theories of men like Graham Maxwell and Dick Winn. In fact, I beg you to please “Take not a particle of interest in spiritualistic theories,” for Satan begins to exert his power over people “just as soon as they begin to investigate his theories.”
Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 1:30 am Post subject: The natural consequences of sin
Looking Upward wrote:
The alpha apostasy was the idea that God’s presence was in all life. The complement, or mirror image of that concept, is that if God removes His presence, death is the result.
In other words, the fundamental message of Maxwell and Winn is logically identical to the major heresy of John Harvey Kellogg.
Looking Upward wrote:
Maxwell must cringe when he reads that very clear description of the final destruction of the wicked, especially the part where some of the wicked “suffer many days.” Maxwell draws back in horror from the idea that God will punish the wicked, and he really squirms at the suggestion that some are punished longer than others.
You are being extraordinarily kind to imagine Maxwell being uncomfortable with rejecting the Spirit of prophecy. Unfortunately, I believe that you are not following Maxwell's odd logic. As I see it, the Maxwell Interview has no quote proving that Maxwell is denying a final judgment that varies in duration and intensity according to works, only that the traditional view of it is absurd. Maxwell's ultimate conclusion about the last judgment is that God is not involved in the process.
Looking Upward wrote:
It should be obvious that the two theories I just described totally contradict each other. One holds that it is the wicked coming into the presence of God that brings about their destruction; and the other holds that it is the removal of God’s presence that brings destruction.
The commonality of those two theories is pantheism. The claim is being made that God isn't involved in the punishment of the wicked. In the two theories, God does not kill. Both Maxwell and Winn are saying that the great sovereign power to be reckoned with at the great white throne judgment is "natural consequences."
I'm rereading http://www.sdabeaconlight.org/omega today and am delighted that you added material to support the charge of pantheism in Adventism. You mentioned F. T. Wright and the belief about God using His power and then withdrawing it quickly but innocently. It's very much like my bow with the "taut" string analogy isn't it? The first time I had heard of this new pantheism was from a Sabbath School teacher about 35 years ago. I thought of it as odd sophistry at the time but didn't see the danger of it. Everyone else in that class was delighted with the teacher's theory and his ability to weave together so many intricate yet implausible details to make the theory work. He explained Noah's flood as God "letting go" and therefore God not being responsible for the deaths of those who drowned from the collapse of the water canopy that protected the earth.
At the time, I was very close to believing that the theory was crafted just for entertainment purposes. How outlandish a theory could this teacher devise just for the fun of being sensational, extreme and for showing off one's skill in defending such a specious belief?
Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:54 pm Post subject: Natural Consequences
Eugene, I have been revising my article on Maxwell from time to time as I come across more subject matter that sheds light on the spiritualistic nature of his theories. The thing that amazes me the most about these theories is how they so often directly contradict the plain teachings of Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy. In my article I have attempted to line up statement after statement made by A. Graham Maxwell, and then show how those statements attempt to make of none effect the inspired word. The subtle message that Maxwell wants to convey is that he has found a more elevated approach to salvation than that presented through inspired writers. Just like the serpent in Eden, he asks, "Has God indeed said this?" He then proceeds to enlighten us as to the real truth. The devil's first use of spiritualism was there in the Garden of Eden, and he has successfully deceived multitudes since then with his sophistries. Satan must be unmasked, and the only way to do that is to present the truth as God has revealed it through inspired writings.
The concept that the destruction of human beings we read about in the Old Testament is not to be charged directly to God but to natural consequences puts natural consequences above God. They undermine God's right to exact justice against His enemies. Those theories appeal to the unrenewed heart, just as New Age philosophies appeal to those who have no desire to conform to the requirements of God's law. Spiritualism has the appearance of godliness but without the power thereof.
I have said it before and I'll say it again: the sad thing in all of this is that so many people have already been caught in the spiritualistic snare of Satan. This is because church leadership has stood by mute while the enemy is amongst us. Those who unsuspectingly receive these last day, spiritualistic deceptions will have their minds unbalanced to the point that they no longer are able to discern truth from error. We can only pray that somehow God will break the hold that Satan has upon their minds and that they will return to the simple, clear word of truth.
I'm just curious why the exact 'physics' (or maybe 'metaphysics') of hell/annihilation/lake-o'-fire, etc., is of such importance. It sounds like one of those medieval debates about angels dancing on the head of a pin. If I am hit by a car, what good does it do me to debate about whether one should say "the car hit me" or if I should say "the person driving the car hit me"? I'm sorry if I'm just being dense here, but I don't understand what the significance of the debate is or how I would live any differently depending on what answer I finally arrived at. Please explain if you have the time.
Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 2:31 pm Post subject: There is no significance in debating delusions
Nathan,
Your bewilderment is understandable. And your question is a good one. This thread is about a popular fascination with spiritualism in Seventh-day Adventism. The mystery of iniquity can't be explained. To explain it is to defend it. While spiritualism in Adventism can't be explained, it does have the appearance you suggest.
The point is that many Adventists are saying (in effect) that if a driver of a car is speeding down a highway with cruse-control on and with his arms locked on the steering wheel—doing nothing but going straight—and then sees someone tied up in a chair in the direct path of the car and continues to do nothing (i.e., makes no effort to apply the brakes and stop or steer around that person and runs him over, killing him instantly), then the driver is completely innocent in that person's death. Allegedly, according to this Adventist gospel, the person behind the wheel didn't kill that other person, because the driver did nothing. The car killed him.
Posted: Sat Dec 23, 2006 3:03 pm Post subject: God's Character and Justice
Nathan, the truth about the destruction of the wicked is not a matter of how it would make me different. It's not about me at all. The significance of the debate involves the character and justice of God. God's character has been attacked and someone needs to speak the truth in His defense. The accusation by A. Graham Maxwell and others is that if God Himself directly destroys the wicked in what we call the second death, then He would be a vengeful tyrant. Yet that same accusation is not levied at God by those same people in the cases where He destroyed the wicked in the flood and the inhabitants of Sodom. Inspiration reveals that all of these destructions are consistent with God's character of mercy.
Ellen G. White wrote:
In mercy to the world, God blotted out its wicked inhabitants in Noah’s time. In mercy He destroyed the corrupt dwellers in Sodom…It is in mercy to the universe that God will finally destroy the rejecters of His grace. The Great Controversy, pages 542,543.
This statement makes us conclude that God just as surely destroys the wicked in the second death as He did in the flood and in Sodom, and all destructions were done out of mercy. Maxwell says God would be a tyrant. Inspiration says God would be merciful. Mercy is one of God's major attributes of character; and it is in mercy that He destroys the wicked. If I devise a theory that teaches that God would be a tyrant and vengeful if He destroys the wicked with literal fire, then I have perverted the character of God. It is God's character that is at stake here. Some slander His character by making God appear as one who is just waiting to smash us like flies if we step out of line. But His character is just as much maligned if we paint a picture of God as being so nice and loving that He would never exact vengeance upon His enemies.
Both the character and justice of God are brought into disrepute by any theory that distorts the truth about why the finally inpenitent are destroyed, who does the destruction, and how it is accomplished.
Ellen G. White wrote:
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 in mercy that God destroys the incurably wicked. It is also His justice that demands their destruction. After describing how the wicked are consumed to ashes in the fire that came down from God out of heaven, inspiration relates it all to the justice of God.
Ellen G. White wrote:
"The justice of God is satisfied, and the saints and all the angelic host say with a loud voice, Amen. While the earth is wrapped in the fire of God's vengeance, the righteous abide safely in the Holy City." Story of Redemption, p. 429.
Every chance Satan gets, he attacks the justice of God. Why? "Justice is the foundation of His throne, and the fruit of His love." The Desire of Ages, p. 762. The final destruction of the wicked satisfies God's justice. The false picture that Maxwell has painted of God is that if He directly destroyed the wicked, He would be seen as an evil being, rubbing his hands together in delight as the wicked writhe in the flames. This a false picture of our merciful God and is a direct attack on both His mercy and His justice.
We need to know the truth on this subject because to advocate and spread false theories about the justice and mercy of God only aids the enemy of souls in his warfare against God and His government.
Hello Nathan,
The importance of knowing what happens after we die is manifold. I would like to share one aspect of that importance. . .Many believe that when we die we go immediately to heaven or hell, if this was the case we would be able to communicate with them. and many who believe in immortality of the soul also believe that we can communicate with our dead relatives. Well, this just isn't so. We cannot communicate with our dead relativs because we know that they are asleep in the grave, not wondering around in some blissful state, or burning state looking at us.
The distruction of the wicked falls into the same idea, because if we believe that our punishment happens immediately when we die, well that leaves out much of the truth about judgement. This all goes right along with, and leads many into spiritualism.
Furthermore the destruction of the wicked is a merciful act of God to bring His whole creation back to its original plan. _________________ God Bless you
Jeff W
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
