"God does not kill" Books

[victoryword]

Hi

I asked the question below on the "Traditional Adventists" forum but received no reply. Hoping to do better here.

I am not SDA but lately I have read some literature by SDA authors that has caught my interest, primarily in the area of God's character. I have read some books by Herb Montgomery, Elliot Douglin, Marilyn Campbell, Ty Gibson, FT Wright and a few others.

Some of my internet surfing has shown me that many in your denomination are divided over the Character of God message, particularly in the area of belief that God never kills.

I was hoping to get some of your thoughts on this subject and see how prevalent this subject is and if there are any other recommended resources.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Hi

I asked the question below on the "Traditional Adventists" forum but received no reply. Hoping to do better here.

I am not SDA but lately I have read some literature by SDA authors that has caught my interest, primarily in the area of God's character. I have read some books by Herb Montgomery, Elliot Douglin, Marilyn Campbell, Ty Gibson, FT Wright and a few others.

Some of my internet surfing has shown me that many in your denomination are divided over the Character of God message, particularly in the area of belief that God never kills.

I was hoping to get some of your thoughts on this subject and see how prevalent this subject is and if there are any other recommended resources.

This is new information for me. I was a member of the SDA denomination for 3+ decades and never heard the "God does not kill" argument. However, I am merely one guy so maybe others here can confirm whether this was a part of their reality.

BFA

 

[Soon144k]

The argument for the idea that God does not kill comes from those that believe that whenever God punishes anyone He uses Satan to do it. They cite Job as an example of this. There belief is based in the idea that 'God is all love all the time'.

Does this mean that Satan is going to wipe out all of the wicked for God at the very end before he then commits suicide and thus eliminates all sin from the universe? I don't think so.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

The argument for the idea that God does not kill comes from those that believe that whenever God punishes anyone He uses Satan to do it. They cite Job as an example of this. There belief is based in the idea that 'God is all love all the time'.

Does this mean that Satan is going to wipe out all of the wicked for God at the very end before he then commits suicide and thus eliminates all sin from the universe? I don't think so.

If this true, wouldn't an SDA view this as God breaking His own moral, eternal commands?

BFA

 

[NoelAsa]

The argument for the idea that God does not kill comes from those that believe that whenever God punishes anyone He uses Satan to do it. They cite Job as an example of this. There belief is based in the idea that 'God is all love all the time'.

If God is using Satan to kill is he not killing? In the example of Job God told Satan he could do whatever he wanted to do to him, but not kill him. Therefore, if God uses Satan to punish people or to kill them, with his permission, is he then not also a part it?

There are many places in the Old Testament where God has commanded people to be killed, or has done it himself. Thinking of Exodus as an example at the moment.

 

[Princessdi]

Exodus is a good example. An even more extreme one is where Saul disobeys God's command to kill ALL of the enemy, and brings back cattle, loot, and the king. The Prophet came and killed the king right then and there after blasting Saul for not doing so as commanded.

If we go back tot he beginning, who killed the animal to give Adam and Eve clothing...after they sinned?

Now, there is a such thing as "what God allows". God did allow satan to torture Job. He does allow death and all kinds of attrocities to happen. They may not be His Will, but they are things "He allows".

This line of reasoning that God uses satan to kill is close to the end time doctrine that states that God will use some creatures from hell to torment the undecided after the rapture.........sorry, flashing back to the Left Behind series.

 

[victoryword]

Thanks for the replies so far. I can see that Adventists are as diverse theologically as many other Christian groups on theological perspectives. Nonetheless, you all raise some good points that should be considered.

I did attempt to read a rebuttal book by SDA Steve Wohlberg called "The Character of God Controversy" but he appeared to quote the late Ms. White's opinion when he was not able to support a certain point with Scripture so I lost interest (Though I may consider reading it again). I don't mind people quoting from their admired pioneers (I often like to quote from Andrew Murray, EM Bounds, and other great classic writers myself), but I think he want overboard. Reading the SDA progressive statements, I think you guys would probably agree.

Anyway, thanks for the responses. I'll check back to see if anyone else has some insight on this and have been involved in this area of teaching. Blessings.

 

[Laodicean]

Hi

I asked the question below on the "Traditional Adventists" forum but received no reply. Hoping to do better here.

I am not SDA but lately I have read some literature by SDA authors that has caught my interest, primarily in the area of God's character. I have read some books by Herb Montgomery, Elliot Douglin, Marilyn Campbell, Ty Gibson, FT Wright and a few others.

Some of my internet surfing has shown me that many in your denomination are divided over the Character of God message, particularly in the area of belief that God never kills.

I was hoping to get some of your thoughts on this subject and see how prevalent this subject is and if there are any other recommended resources.

Okay, another view to add to your views.

Of course, God kills. And only God has the authority to kill as He pleases, because He is the author of life. All life belongs to Him and He can decide if and when to reclaim His own life. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with God choosing to kill. It is His prerogative and His alone. He kills, and He is totally just when He does so.

When God says "Thou shalt not kill," He is saying that we created beings do not have the authority to take anyone else's life, for all life belongs to Him and only He can decide who should live and who should die. This is entirely God's right, not ours.

Just my two cents....

 

[Sophia7]

Hi

I asked the question below on the "Traditional Adventists" forum but received no reply. Hoping to do better here.

I am not SDA but lately I have read some literature by SDA authors that has caught my interest, primarily in the area of God's character. I have read some books by Herb Montgomery, Elliot Douglin, Marilyn Campbell, Ty Gibson, FT Wright and a few others.

Some of my internet surfing has shown me that many in your denomination are divided over the Character of God message, particularly in the area of belief that God never kills.

I was hoping to get some of your thoughts on this subject and see how prevalent this subject is and if there are any other recommended resources.

My husband was an Adventist pastor for 10 years, and we encountered the "God doesn't kill" idea in some of our churches. It was especially popular in one church, where some of the members had been taught that by a previous Adventist pastor. I've heard that Graham Maxwell teaches it, but I don't know of any specific evidence to that effect. Perhaps it is implied in his view of the atonement or inferred by his followers.

I've also seen some online coverage of the issue. I came across a review of a book by Steve Wohlberg and Chris Lewis on the Spectrum (a progressive Adventist publication) site. In that book, Wohlberg and Lewis argue that God does kill although they apparently refrain from naming any proponents of the "God doesn't kill" theory. A Spectrum interview with Lewis includes this question and answer:

Question: The book refers to many Adventist proponents of the "God-doesn't-kill theory," though declining to mention any of them by name. Did you converse with any of those proponents or ascertain their views through reading their writings? In other words, how did it become evident that there was, as the book puts it "a controversy" over the character of God in Adventism?

Answer: I have a number of friends who subscribe to the “God-doesn’t-kill theory” and have spent many hours dialoguing with them. As I mentioned above, in the course of this dialogue, I began to wonder if this was new light.

The proponents of this theory genuinely want God to look good. They believe that their theory paints God in an accurate light. Their analogies sound logical. However, when I compared the ideas involved in this system of belief with the Bible, I found that it did not stand close scrutiny. It contradicts Scripture.

As an example, the way that God’s wrath is defined in this belief system is said to come from the first chapter of Romans. However, what Romans 1 really teaches - if one reads it honestly - is something very different, as we show in the book[.]

Much in this belief system is also based on the well-known verse in Romans 6 which states that “the wages of sin is death.” Once again, as we discuss in the book, a careful study of this verse teaches something very different from the end-conclusions of this theory.

These are a couple of examples. The bottom line is that while this theory - which is being taught widely in Adventism by many people who I like very much and care deeply for - is, nonetheless, erroneous, and leads to conclusions altogether different from what the Bible teaches.​

Also, the Adventist Biblical Research Institute site (an official Adventist site) has a few articles that address the topic:

• Biblical Research Institute - Does God Destroy?
• Biblical Research Institute - Does God Get Angry?
• Biblical Research Institute - Wrath of God

Those were written in the 1980s and early 1990s, so apparently the Adventist Church has been concerned about this issue for at least a couple of decades.

 

[Sophia7]

The argument for the idea that God does not kill comes from those that believe that whenever God punishes anyone He uses Satan to do it. They cite Job as an example of this. There belief is based in the idea that 'God is all love all the time'.

Does this mean that Satan is going to wipe out all of the wicked for God at the very end before he then commits suicide and thus eliminates all sin from the universe? I don't think so.

The Adventists that I know who believe that God doesn't kill argue that God's judgment is just the natural consequence of sin and that God doesn't actively punish anyone; they view God as passively allowing natural consequences to take effect. I've never heard any of them say that "whenever God punishes anyone He uses Satan to do it."

 

[Sophia7]

Thanks for the replies so far. I can see that Adventists are as diverse theologically as many other Christian groups on theological perspectives. Nonetheless, you all raise some good points that should be considered.

I did attempt to read a rebuttal book by SDA Steve Wohlberg called "The Character of God Controversy" but he appeared to quote the late Ms. White's opinion when he was not able to support a certain point with Scripture so I lost interest (Though I may consider reading it again). I don't mind people quoting from their admired pioneers (I often like to quote from Andrew Murray, EM Bounds, and other great classic writers myself), but I think he want overboard. Reading the SDA progressive statements, I think you guys would probably agree.

Anyway, thanks for the responses. I'll check back to see if anyone else has some insight on this and have been involved in this area of teaching. Blessings.

I see that you mentioned the Wohlberg/Lewis book. Sorry, I hadn't read through the whole thread when I wrote my last post. I haven't read that book, but I found the review that I linked to above interesting. I'm not familiar with Chris Lewis, but I know that Steve Wohlberg is a very traditional Adventist, so it's not surprising that he would use Ellen White's writings to back up his views if he couldn't provide biblical support. Traditional Adventists view Ellen White as a prophet/messenger of God and as "a continuing and authoritative source of truth" (one of the SDA fundamental beliefs), so when they quote her, it's with a different mindset than other Christians have when they quote Andrew Murray or C. S. Lewis or Martin Luther or other prominent Christian writers/theologians. Just something to keep in mind when you read books by conservative Adventists.

 

[victoryword]

Okay, another view to add to your views.

Of course, God kills. And only God has the authority to kill as He pleases, because He is the author of life. All life belongs to Him and He can decide if and when to reclaim His own life. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with God choosing to kill. It is His prerogative and His alone. He kills, and He is totally just when He does so.

When God says "Thou shalt not kill," He is saying that we created beings do not have the authority to take anyone else's life, for all life belongs to Him and only He can decide who should live and who should die. This is entirely God's right, not ours.

Just my two cents....

While some Christians (SDA and otherwise) may push the "God doesn't kill" envelope too far in one direction, your post seems to push it too far in another direction, making God appear arbitrary and killing for His personal pleasure. You may correct me if I am wrong but you did say, "God has the authority to kill as He pleases." My Bible says:

For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye. (Eze. 18:32)

Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? (Eze. 33:11)
​

It is clear from Scripture that God has had to kill (and there is a difference between "killing" and murdering - see John 8:44 and 1 John 3:8-16) but it is also obvious that God has never did it because it "pleases" Him.

 

[victoryword]

I see that you mentioned the Wohlberg/Lewis book. Sorry, I hadn't read through the whole thread when I wrote my last post. I haven't read that book, but I found the review that I linked to above interesting. I'm not familiar with Chris Lewis, but I know that Steve Wohlberg is a very traditional Adventist, so it's not surprising that he would use Ellen White's writings to back up his views if he couldn't provide biblical support. Traditional Adventists view Ellen White as a prophet/messenger of God and as "a continuing and authoritative source of truth" (one of the SDA fundamental beliefs), so when they quote her, it's with a different mindset than other Christians have when they quote Andrew Murray or C. S. Lewis or Martin Luther or other prominent Christian writers/theologians. Just something to keep in mind when you read books by conservative Adventists.

Sophia

Thanks for your informative posts. The quoting of Ms. White so extensively in some writings has been the thing that has perplexed me the most with some of the SDA literature I have read. I am especially perplexed when someone is making a good Biblical point and could have simply used a passage of Scripture to support it, but instead quotes from "the Great Controversy" or some other writing by her.

I have read so many diverse opinions by SDAs concerning the place of authority that her writings have in the SDA denomination. While most seem to repudiate the idea that her writings are on the level with Scripture, some books seem to quote her as much or more than they quote the Bible.

However, I did enjoy a video I purchased for our church from Amazing Facts called "The Cosmic Conflict." Since I have always held most of those type of views (Having read books such as "Earth's Earliest Ages" by G. H. Pemberton, "War in Heaven" by Derek Prince, and others), it was great seeing some of what I have always held to played out in visual effects (except Brother Doug did occasionally sneak in one or two unique SDA perspectives, but nothing so outright that non-SDA people could not enjoy the film altogether). It was from there that I began to show more interest in this group.

Anyway, thanks all for your comments. God bless.

 

[Laodicean]

While some Christians (SDA and otherwise) may push the "God doesn't kill" envelope too far in one direction, your post seems to push it too far in another direction, making God appear arbitrary and killing for His personal pleasure. You may correct me if I am wrong but you did say, "God has the authority to kill as He pleases."

Good point. I could have used a better word. "God has the authority to kill as He sees fit." When I used the word "pleases," it was off the cuff and with my own private understanding of what "He pleases" meant. I see now it can be interpreted badly. Since I believe that God is good and only pure good, "pleases" could not mean killing arbitrarily, with relish, and without good reason. I'm sorry it came across as making God look bad.

Sometimes, the way things are expressed, especially in the Old Testament, it can make God look harsh and vengeful, but I know He is not, for He says that He is "merciful and gracious, longsuffering and abundant in goodness and truth," Exodus 34:6, and this description is repeated through the Old Testament and into the New, especially in the ultimate display, the cross.

As a note: When God kills, as He sees fit, I don't question His judgment and try to argue away His action. Instead I bow to Him and say instead that God is always right and we are always wrong in anything that is at issue in my mind.

My Bible says:

For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye. (Eze. 18:32)

Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? (Eze. 33:11)
​

​

I agree with your point. If my use of the word "pleases" means, to you, "pleasure" then please know that that is absolutely not what I meant. I retract that word.

It is clear from Scripture that God has had to kill (and there is a difference between "killing" and murdering - see John 8:44 and 1 John 3:8-16) but it is also obvious that God has never did it because it "pleases" Him.

Agreed. And I also agree that there is a difference between killing and murdering. Good points.

 

[victoryword]

Good point. I could have used a better word. "God has the authority to kill as He sees fit." When I used the word "pleases," it was off the cuff and with my own private understanding of what "He pleases" meant. I see now it can be interpreted badly. Since I believe that God is good and only pure good, "pleases" could not mean killing arbitrarily, with relish, and without good reason. I'm sorry it came across as making God look bad.

Sometimes, the way things are expressed, especially in the Old Testament, it can make God look harsh and vengeful, but I know He is not, for He says that He is "merciful and gracious, longsuffering and abundant in goodness and truth," Exodus 34:6, and this description is repeated through the Old Testament and into the New, especially in the ultimate display, the cross.

As a note: When God kills, as He sees fit, I don't question His judgment and try to argue away His action. Instead I bow to Him and say instead that God is always right and we are always wrong in anything that is at issue in my mind.

​

I agree with your point. If my use of the word "pleases" means, to you, "pleasure" then please know that that is absolutely not what I meant. I retract that word.




Agreed. And I also agree that there is a difference between killing and murdering. Good points.

We all slip and mispeak. Nevertheless, your clarification shows that we are very much in agreement concerning the nature of God.

 

[victoryword]

The Adventists that I know who believe that God doesn't kill argue that God's judgment is just the natural consequence of sin and that God doesn't actively punish anyone; they view God as passively allowing natural consequences to take effect. I've never heard any of them say that "whenever God punishes anyone He uses Satan to do it."

Come to think of it, I have never really read that either. Usally what the "God does not kill" group teach is that God, after much rejection, He lifts His protection from the sinning one and Satan is given free access. I actually agree with this perspective 100%. There is much Scripture proving this. I have always held to a nuanced version of this perspective (being a Charismatic) but the "God does not kill" group reinforced this from a Biblical perspective. Their literature has been very helpful in this regard.

Also, many of them do show us how sweet, kind and loving God really is.

Where I find problems is when they say that God NEVER kills directly when there is too much Scripture showing otherwise. Many in my own Christian Camp hold to similar views (I was almost ostracized once when showing them from the Bible that God, has on very rare occasions, inlficted some with sickness as punishment. That's like preaching HERESY in my camp )

 

[Sophia7]

Sophia

Thanks for your informative posts. The quoting of Ms. White so extensively in some writings has been the thing that has perplexed me the most with some of the SDA literature I have read. I am especially perplexed when someone is making a good Biblical point and could have simply used a passage of Scripture to support it, but instead quotes from "the Great Controversy" or some other writing by her.

I have read so many diverse opinions by SDAs concerning the place of authority that her writings have in the SDA denomination. While most seem to repudiate the idea that her writings are on the level with Scripture, some books seem to quote her as much or more than they quote the Bible.

However, I did enjoy a video I purchased for our church from Amazing Facts called "The Cosmic Conflict." Since I have always held most of those type of views (Having read books such as "Earth's Earliest Ages" by G. H. Pemberton, "War in Heaven" by Derek Prince, and others), it was great seeing some of what I have always held to played out in visual effects (except Brother Doug did occasionally sneak in one or two unique SDA perspectives, but nothing so outright that non-SDA people could not enjoy the film altogether). It was from there that I began to show more interest in this group.

Anyway, thanks all for your comments. God bless.

No problem. It's true that you will find diversity in the attitudes of individual Adventists toward Ellen White. Traditional Adventists do quote her extensively, and although they don't believe that they equate her with Scripture, that is the impression that they sometimes give. Also, in many Adventist Sabbath School classes, people will quote something by Ellen White, and that puts an end to any further discussion on the topic because she is accepted as the final authority. I saw that happen often during my time in Adventism (36 years, until I left three years ago). When Scripture does address something, her words are seen as inspired interpretation, and on matters not addressed by Scripture, she is viewed as having the authority to present "new light" or what Adventism calls "present truth."

On the other hand, many Adventists ignore most of what she wrote or reinterpret it to fit their beliefs. I did that for most of my Adventist experience, but I still thought that I believed in her as a prophet until I came across too many problems in her writings and contradictions with Scripture to continue to overlook them.

Most Adventists who do adhere strictly to her writings would never admit to viewing her as an "infallible interpreter of Scripture," but in practice many do apply her writings that way. In his book More Than a Prophet, Graeme Bradford highlights the struggles that many Adventists have faced regarding the questions of her inspiration and authority. I disagree with many of his conclusions, and ultimately his arguments helped me realize that I could no longer accept Ellen White as a prophet, but his quotations of prominent Adventists who have wrestled with these questions speak to the mindset that many Adventists have toward her writings (emphases in bold and dark red added below; italics are the author's):

There is grave danger that Seventh-day Adventists may so exalt the gifts of one individual and, in so doing, ignore and stifle the many other gifts that God has and is giving His church. This does not lead to a healthy, growing body. Paul declares that all the gifts are needed, even those we do not seem to hold in high esteem.

One cannot help but wonder at the cost to the church over the years when so many were told to forget their convictions in the area of expertise. Experts in the areas of history, theology, science and education were told to put aside what they believed and taught because it was seen to be contrary to what Ellen White had written some 100 years before. A few years ago extracts from the diaries of Seigfried Horn were written up in Spectrum. This man was held in high esteem in the scholarly world, within and outside the church. Yet the diaries reveal his inner conflict with trying to be loyal to Ellen White (for whom he had much respect) and what he knew to be true from his area of expertise.420

Another highly respected biblical scholar within Adventism, Hans LaRondelle also tells of his struggle: "As my knowledge of Scripture increased, I gradually awakened to my responsibility and duty to test Ellen White's interpretations and applications of Scripture by the norm of 'Sola Scriptura.' Over time this caused some re-evaluations of my unlimited confidence in her as the final interpreter of Scripture. I was forced to redefine the God-appointed function of her gift of prophecy. As Adventists, we do not stress any limitation to her prophetic gift. The result is that all her writings are easily taken as infallible, verbal inspiration by God for the remnant church, on equal level of authority as the Bible itself. . . . as an infallible interpreter of Scripture. . . . Never once did she suggest that her mission was part of the canonical 'testimony of Jesus' mentioned six times in the book of Revelation (1:2,9; 6:9; 12:17; 19:10; 20:4)!"421

The dilemma faced by LaRondelle should not have been necessary if a true biblical understanding of the gift had been understood. Adventism has allowed one gift to overwhelm and suppress the many other gifts God has given the body. The danger is that instead of strengthening the body, a misuse of this one gift may actually be detrimental to the health and growth of the body. . . .

A. G. Daniells wrestling with the problem of authority said "the question is to what extent men are free to pursue an original investigation of the Scripture, and to follow the honest conclusions at which they arrive. I personally stand for liberty. . . . it looks to me as though we have another question to settle, and that is whether we are a free people, in the matter of biblical research, and in the matter of following the light that comes to us from such research"423 (emphasis added).

Edward Heppenstall wrote, "Ellen White calls upon us to make sure that all the truths we hold are firmly established upon the Scriptures. Therefore we deplore the idea that anything else should have prior authority over the Bible. Let her writings be our guide but not our jailer, our shield but not our straightjacket. The Scriptures comprise God's final word to us424 (emphasis added). (217-218)​

Personally, I no longer view her writings even as a guide because I've tested them by the standard of Scripture, and they've failed. However, I can relate to the struggles described in the above paragraphs because I have experienced some of them myself.

 

[Sophia7]

Come to think of it, I have never really read that either. Usally what the "God does not kill" group teach is that God, after much rejection, He lifts His protection from the sinning one and Satan is given free access. I actually agree with this perspective 100%. There is much Scripture proving this. I have always held to a nuanced version of this perspective (being a Charismatic) but the "God does not kill" group reinforced this from a Biblical perspective. Their literature has been very helpful in this regard.

Also, many of them do show us how sweet, kind and loving God really is.

Where I find problems is when they say that God NEVER kills directly when there is too much Scripture showing otherwise. Many in my own Christian Camp hold to similar views (I was almost ostracized once when showing them from the Bible that God, has on very rare occasions, inlficted some with sickness as punishment. That's like preaching HERESY in my camp )

That is what I've heard, also, from the "God doesn't kill" camp within Adventism. Of course, our Adventist members would have considered being charismatic "heresy."

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I did write an article on my blog related to this subject you might want to read:
Adventist Media Response and Conversation: A response to Chris Lewis interview

 

[victoryword]

I did write an article on my blog related to this subject you might want to read:
Adventist Media Response and Conversation: A response to Chris Lewis interview

First, you lost me at this point in your blog when you said:

Thirdly the Bible is not God’s Word. At best it contains some of God’s words.

Since I fully accept the Bible (Scriptures - that which is written) as the Word of God, just as Jesus did (John 8:56; Matt. 4:1-11) then I have little respect for any writing by anyone who does not.

Second, you wrote:

Maybe it is my own lack of knowledge but I would be interested in knowing who this book is really addressing.

Maybe you have recanted this later in your blog, but if you do not even take the time to fully research your subject, why write a blog on it? A search on the internet would have given you the names of some of these people and would have even provided you with source material. For example, SDA Elliott O' Douglin has a free book on his website title, "God's Character: The Best News in the Universe."

Nonetheless, thanks for your input into this subject.