The doctrine of hell

[Setyoufree]

Gal 3:13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree")....

Two things happened at the cross:

1] What the world, backed by Satan, did to Christ

2] What God did.

a] The world tortured Christ. They beat him; placed a crown of thorns on His head, etc.

b] God abandoned Christ.

What the world did to Christ has nothing to do with our salvation.

What God did is what saves. He abandoned Christ and therefore brought "the curse of the law" upon Him.

BTW, Ellen White has it right here:

"But now with the terrible weight of guilt He bears, He cannot see the Father’s reconciling face. The withdrawal of the divine countenance from the Saviour in this hour of supreme anguish pierced His heart with a sorrow that can never be fully understood by man. So great was this agony that His physical pain (what the world did to Christ) was hardly felt. Satan with his fierce temptations wrung the heart of Jesus. The Saviour could not see through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father’s acceptance of the sacrifice. He feared that sin was so offensive to God that Their separation was to be eternal. Christ felt the anguish which the sinner will feel when mercy shall no longer plead for the guilty race. It was the sense of sin, bringing the Father’s wrath upon Him as man’s substitute, that made the cup He drank so bitter, and broke the heart of the Son of God." [DA 753]

 

[14messenger]

Roman soldiers will not be in the Lake of Fire in Rev 20 to torment the wicked and ensure that the wicked pay the exact amount of debt owed for the exact amount of sin that they committed.

God will judge each accordingly and each will pay according to God alone.

 

[14messenger]

The 2nd death punishment is not "the punishment of Roman soldiers".

God is aware of each individuals heart and will judge accordingly as He alone has in mind.

 

[BobRyan]

In Luke 12:45-48 and in Matt 18 and in Is 53 the law demands "stripes" and "Torment" and "suffering -- lashes".

It is torment that is the payment of the 2nd death in those texts - just as we see in Rev 14:10-11.

The torment is specific - to the sin the debt owed. And repayment is "in full" and is in the form of suffering and torment.

Matt 18
32 Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me. 33 Should you not also have had compassion on your fellow servant, just as I had pity on you?’ 34 And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him. 35 “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.”




The payment is in suffering, stripes, torment and anguish of soul


Is 53

Surely our griefs He Himself bore,
And our sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.
6 All of us like sheep have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all
To fall on Him.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He did not open His mouth;
Like a lamb that is led to slaughter,
And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers,
So He did not open His mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away;
And as for His generation, who considered
That He was cut off out of the land of the living
For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due?
9 His grave was assigned with wicked men,
Yet He was with a rich man in His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.

10 But the Lord was pleased
To crush Him, putting Him to grief;
If He would render Himself as a guilt offering,
He will see His offspring,
He will prolong His days,
And the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand.
11 As a result of the anguish of His soul,
He will see it and be satisfied;
By His knowledge the Righteous One,
My Servant, will justify the many,
As He will bear their iniquities.



Luke says - many lashes vs few lashes in Hell - the Lake of Fire.

Luke 12
45 But if that slave says in his heart, ‘My master will be a long time in coming,’ and begins to beat the slaves, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk; 46 the master of that slave will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces, and assign him a place with the unbelievers. 47 And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, 48 but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.

 

[Setyoufree]

The torment is specific - to the sin the debt owed. And repayment is "in full" and is in the form of suffering and torment.

Matt 18:34 And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him. 35 “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.”

So you are suggesting that God will torture?

Is 53:The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed.....7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth....For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due

The world, under Satan, scourged & oppressed Christ, not God.

Luke 12:47 And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, 48 but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.

This is metaphoric talk. There's no flogging in the lake of fire. There's death - goodbye to life. This is the curse of the law.

Hebrews 12:5 "http://www.biblestudytools.com/nas/hebrews/12.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-12MY SON, DO NOT REGARD LIGHTLY THE DISCIPLINE OF THE LORD, NOR http://www.biblestudytools.com/nas/hebrews/12.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-13FAINT WHEN YOU ARE REPROVED BY HIM. 6 http://www.biblestudytools.com/nas/hebrews/12.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-14FOR THOSE http://www.biblestudytools.com/nas/hebrews/12.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-15WHOM THE LORD LOVES HE DISCIPLINES, AND HE SCOURGES EVERY SON WHOM HE RECEIVES."

Again, God doesn't actually scourge. This is metaphoric talk. God disciplines us out of His agape love, not out of malice.

 

[Achilles6129]

No, if you have God's nature then you will be like Him....If God torments, you will be in harmony with that principle.

Right, be in harmony. Doesn't necessarily mean that you will do whatever it is God does, only that you will agree that it is just.

Ah, but torment is not of God.

I'm sorry? Did you miss all of those passages I quoted about torment? Would you like to comment on them?

It's Satan's attribute.

Evidently it is not. Unless, that is, the two witnesses are of Satan:

"10 and the inhabitants of the earth will gloat over them and celebrate and exchange presents, because these two prophets had been a torment to the inhabitants of the earth." Rev. 11:10 (NRSV)

Well that is a loaded statement... while it is true that the Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth if we allow Him to, I suggest that the truth we need for salvation is very basic: Jesus is Lord, Jesus died for our sins, and Jesus rose from the dead.

No, Christ promises his followers that they will have the truth. Obviously, no lie is of the truth. And just as obviously, there aren't "two" truths, or "three," or "four" or whatever. Only one. So if someone's in disagreement as to exactly what the "truth" is, then obviously something is terribly amiss.

It can be difficult to know when to take something literally or figuratively when reading unless there are specific indications in the text to do so. As we saw with Jesus' use of hyperbole, the only way we knew to take it as hyperbole was because the literal understanding just didn't make sense in light of other scriptural teachings.

No, the literal understanding didn't make sense in the present context. My point is that "fire" and "torment" are repeated so often that there really is no reason to take them any other way than straightforwardly.

If you look at the entire body of Jesus' teachings, you will see that He spoke quite often in illustrations, parables, and metaphorical expressions. Such an understanding of His teachings on hell would not be out of line.

Yes, and he always made it clear he was talking in parables when he did so. A metaphorical understanding of hell is just not in line with the straightforward statements of Christ, sorry.

In a unique sense the saved are called sons of God (since by the new birth by the Spirit we become direct new creations of God), yet Paul clearly says that all mankind are children of God in Acts 17:28-29. The negative consequences of sin are felt by all humans in some way.

No, all mankind are not the children of God unless you wish to claim that the children of the devil are the children of God, which is, of course, impossible. Paul was talking in the sense that we are all creations of God. Here is an outline of the Biblical usage:

Greek Lexicon :: G1085 (KJV)

You will see that the passage is not in the slightest saying that all mankind are the children of God, but instead the creation of God. I am fully aware of modern Christianity's doctrine that all human beings are made in the image of God and I personally believe it has caused a great deal of theological damage throughout history:

" 38 the field is the world, and the good seed are the children of the kingdom; the weeds are the children of the evil one," Mt. 13:38 (NRSV)

"39 They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing[j] what Abraham did, 40 but now you are trying to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. 41 You are indeed doing what your father does.” They said to him, “We are not illegitimate children; we have one father, God himself.” 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now I am here. I did not come on my own, but he sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot accept my word. 44 You are from your father the devil, and you choose to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies." Jn. 8:39-44 (NRSV)

Notice how the Jews claim exactly what you are trying to say, that they are all children of God, and Christ contradicts them and calls them children of the devil instead. So clearly all mankind is not in fact the children of God, and there are many other Biblical passages that also prove this. Hence, God's children do not go to the lake of fire and brimstone - Satan's children do.

They are not acting in line with the image of God. Why does sin anger God so? I suggest that aside from the harm that it does to others, it is a direct affront to God because we who are made in His image are acting contrary to that image... thus blaspheming God.

If you were made in God's image you wouldn't do what is contrary to your nature:

"4 Everyone who commits sin is guilty of lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. 5 You know that he was revealed to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. 6 No one who abides in him sins; no one who sins has either seen him or known him. 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. Everyone who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. 8 Everyone who commits sin is a child of the devil; for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The Son of God was revealed for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. 9 Those who have been born of God do not sin, because God’s seed abides in them;[b] they cannot sin, because they have been born of God." 1 Jn. 3:4-9 (NRSV)

As I said, not every single part of our moral nature remains intact, yet the vast majority of God's moral law is in accordance with man's conscience... it is the severity of the punishment for breaking that law that man tends to rebel against.

In that case the vast majority of God's moral law is not in man's conscience. As more proof of this consider the case of the two witnesses.

The actions of Jesus towards sinners being the primary example.

There many statements/actions of Christ that do not fall in line with the usual portrait that gets painted for the general public.

Yet we still have a remnant of God's nature in our conscience... otherwise we would have no sense of guilt for our wrongs.

No, there is no part of God's nature in natural man's conscience at all, none whatsoever:

"7 For this reason the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law—indeed it cannot, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God." Rom. 8:7-8 (NRSV)

"14 But [f]a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually [g]appraised." 1 Cor. 2:14- (NASB)

...and many other passages.

Who says the testing has to be beneficial to the thing being tested? The testing in hell does not benefit the occupants of hell because they are completely given over to their sin.

Wouldn't that be torture, then?

What I am suggesting is that the fire symbolizes God's judgment in that fire consumes and brings to ruin, and thus God's judgment on unbelievers need not mean agony in burning flames.

It also burns and causes pain. Consider:

"22 Now the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham’s bosom; and the rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and *saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 And he cried out and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue, for I am in agony in this flame.’" Lu. 16:22-24 (NASB)

EDIT--------------------------

After reading what you said more carefully, I don't think I can completely agree with your point here. God is Spirit, not physical. Fire speaks of His judgment, which consumes and brings to ruin. God is in absolutely no way a literal fire.

END EDIT---------------------

Would you agree that there is something about physical fire that clearly has to do with the essence of God's being?

Let me ask you something... Do you truly love God as you see Him to be?

Absolutely. God is righteous, good, fair, and just. It's human beings who disobey his commands who are evil. The human race's idea of morality is way off and the book of Revelation (among other things) proves it.

 

[BobRyan]

Gal 3:13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree")....

Two things happened at the cross:

1] What the world, backed by Satan, did to Christ

2] What God did.

a] The world tortured Christ. They beat him; placed a crown of thorns on His head, etc.

b] God abandoned Christ.

What the world did to Christ has nothing to do with our salvation.

What God did is what saves. He abandoned Christ and therefore brought "the curse of the law" upon Him.

BTW, Ellen White has it right here:

"But now with the terrible weight of guilt He bears, He cannot see the Father’s reconciling face. The withdrawal of the divine countenance from the Saviour in this hour of supreme anguish pierced His heart with a sorrow that can never be fully understood by man. So great was this agony that His physical pain (what the world did to Christ) was hardly felt. Satan with his fierce temptations wrung the heart of Jesus. The Saviour could not see through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father’s acceptance of the sacrifice. He feared that sin was so offensive to God that Their separation was to be eternal. Christ felt the anguish which the sinner will feel when mercy shall no longer plead for the guilty race. It was the sense of sin, bringing the Father’s wrath upon Him as man’s substitute, that made the cup He drank so bitter, and broke the heart of the Son of God." [DA 753]

One more section highlighted.

 

[LarryP2]

There is only one common theme that runs through every single important SDA doctrine, either overtly or subtly: Denigrating and Degrading the effect of the Resurrection, or denying the Divinity of Christ.

Unless you understand that, they will stitch together an impressive and mind-numbing stew of half-verses and unrelated and out of context verses to baffle the unwary, illiterate and non-Biblically savvy. It is an extremely devious and deceptive non-Christian cult. I wasted my first 22 years in it, so I know of what I speak. If you understand how their corrupt and un-Biblical system works, you need not debate then on their specific stitched-together rambling collection of half verses and verses taken out of context, because they all are held together with the common "glue" of denying or denigrating the divinity of Christ, or the effect of the Cross, or the effect of the Resurrection. Or all three.

First and foremost, the SDA Church would not exist were it not for their multiple false predictions of Christ's return between 1843 and 1850. They devised an amazing stitched-together and botched misinterpretation of Daniel 8:14 to repeatedly falsely predict the return of Christ. Throughout the cult's lifetime, there have been a truly-jaw dropping massive number of their own theologians who have denounced the 1844 scandal and its mutant bastard child: The Sanctuary Doctrine or the "Investigative Judgment(IJ)" Many of their own top theologians have declared the entire debacle unscriptural and unbiblical. Sadly, the cult's General Conference always fires their dedicated theologians and pastors for being honest about this clearly non-Biblical doctrine. Raymond Cottrell, their most distinguished theologian, waited until his retirement to denounce this Satanic and unbiblical doctrine.

Misusing Daniel 8:14 like that denigrates Christ, how? By making his return the subject of human prediction, by binding him time wise into your erroneous scripture-sculpting and stitching fetish. Like the Bible is some sort of esoteric code that only a few insiders can crack, rather than the extremely simple and plainly-obvious story of Gospel salvation that was given to the entire world at the Cross.

The IJ was strictly a face-saving fraud, devised out of thin air to compensate for the colossal disaster of 1844. The cult now posits Jesus entered the Holy of Holy places in Heaven in that year, to commence review of our conduct to see if we have earned our salvation with good works (in particular, Sabbath keeping). This necessitates an incomplete and unfinished work on the Cross, and a severe denigration of the effect of the Resurrection. This is the REAL reason that Adventist do not worship on Resurrection Day (Sunday and Easter) and insist on their Salvation by works-based Sabbath instead. They want to cow their terrified and panicked members into huddling together in paranoid fantasy, and relieving them of their money most importantly. They instill a paranoid and panicked fear of Roman Catholicism, who they falsely claim "changed Saturday to Sunday," and that one day the Catholics will hunt them down and murder them for keeping the Sabbath. That is a fairy tale that is pure, unvarnished paranoid conspiracy theory. Hence, their Sabbath keeping is really based on virulent Anti-Papacy paranoia coupled with an Un-Biblical fetish of Salvation by Works. Again, this entirely non-Biblical doctrine of Sabbath Keeping was absolutely proven false by their own theology professor, Dr. Samuele Bachiochi.

The IJ itself led logically to many satanic cult doctrines like Sabbath Keeping, Works based Salvation, following the Levitical dietary laws, and various forms of non-Christian and heretical views on the Trinity. In fact, for the first 100 years, the cult revived the ancient Arian Heresy and outright denied the Divinity of Christ. Due to the outcry from orthodox Christendom, they watered down their Arianism, and now deceptively teach a modified Aryanism known as Thritheism (while deceptively claiming they believe in the Trinity). It still is not the Trinity that has provided Salvation "once and for all" and that is THE CENTRAL doctrine of Christianity. The Adventist anti-Trinitarian heresy eventually spawned such overtly and odious Satantic cults such as the Jehovah's Witnesses, Worldwide Church of God and the Branch Davidians. Adventism is much more deceptive and thereby much more successful than those three satanic cults in that the genius of Adventism is to disguise mutant and unbiblical cult doctrines with a thin veneer of superficially Christian-sounding doctrines that disguise its true core. They even managed to sucker cult expert Walter Martin into believing that they were Orthodox Christianity, even though at the end of his life, Martin was ready to write a new book denouncing them as a non-Christian cult once he realized that he had been "Had."

So when they focus obsessively on the Sabbath (which in actual practice, is MUCH more important to them than the Cross or the Resurrection) beware of their perspective. Disregard their ludicrous scripture-sculpting and scripture stitching, and go right for the jugular: Their odious and anti-Christian history of teaching heretical cult doctrines that deny or denigrate the Divinity of Christ and his role in the unified Godhead of the Trinity, his finished work on the Cross and his Resurrection.
Last edited by LarryP2; 20th March 2014 at 02:01 PM.

 

[BobRyan]

Why those at war with the Law of God - try to invent a rift between the New Covenant and the Law that is written on the heart and mind under the New Covenant -- is somewhat of a mystery.

But apparently not everyone chooses to engage in such antics - and this is true even among the pro-Sunday source listed below. (How "instructive")

 

[LarryP2]

It's no war against the real Truth of Christianity. Its an argument against a plainly non-Christian counterfeit. That is why St. Paul argued so vehemently against the SDA Church of his time: The Galatian heresy.

There is NO power over sin in the SDA Church's pathetic emphasis on the Mosaic Law. If there is one common theme in the Epistles of St. Paul, it is that the Real Deal gives people power over sin.

Your repetitive arguments for the Sabbath are just a ruse to get gullible Christians to divert themselves into a miserable cultish system. It's pretty easy to see that you NEVER discuss the Gospel with anywhere NEAR the intensity that you push the Sabbath. It is plain the Sabbath is FAR AND AWAY more important to you than the Resurrection!

You sculpt and stitch together verses and half verses which might impress a gullible and unsophisticated Christian and cause them to doubt their Salvation, and COMPLETELY cause them to overlook the REAL point of the Gospels.

I just did a search on all of your posts: I cannot find ONE example of your discussing the Resurrection, which is THE central doctrine of Christianity! If I am wrong, please correct me, but I was completely unable to find one time in your voluminous and repetitive posts where you have mentioned the Resurrection, let alone emphasized it!

 

[BobRyan]

It's no war against the real Truth of Christianity. Its an argument against a plainly non-Christian counterfeit. That is why St. Paul argued so vehemently against the SDA Church of his time:!

More facts less fiction please.

SDAs were not debating Paul 2000 years ago -- as it turns out.

And Paul affirms the TEN Commandments as the Commandments of God -- in actual scripture.

1. Paul never commands gentiles to "Love God WITH ALL your heart".
2. Paul never commands gentiles "not to take God's name in vain"
3. Paul never commands gentiles to ignore the writings of Moses.
4. Paul DOES tell gentiles that Moses' writings are still authoritative scripture in 1Cor 9:8-9 and 1Tim 5:18 and binding as being "Law" and as being "scripture".
5. Paul quotes from Moses and the TEN Commandments Eph 6:2. Full 5th commandment
6. Paul DOES teach that there remains therefore a "Sabbath rest for the people of God" Hebrews 4.
7. Paul DOES tell gentiles that "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of GOD" 1 Cor 7:19
8. Paul does tell gentiles "it is not the HEARERS of the Law that are just before God but the DOERS of the Law will be justifIED... on the day when according to my GOSPEL God will judge all mankind" Rom 2:13-16
9. Paul DOES ask that gentiles consider the doctrine of LAW "Do we then make void the LAW of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31
10. Paul DOES tell gentiles that it is only the lost who will "not subject themselves to the LAw of God neither indeed CAN they" Rom 8:6-8
11. Paul DOES tell gentiles that "The Law" is in fact "The LAW of Moses" and is to be used for testing doctrine 1Cor 9:8-9
12. Paul DOES tell gentiles that the OT text is to be used for Doctrine 2Tim 3:16

No wonder some pro-Sunday sources like those in the following list know enough not to place their argument at war with God's TEN Commandments.

 

[LarryP2]

The SDA Church has an OVERWHELMING history of denying the Divinity of Christ and belittling the effect of the Resurrection! For the first 100 years of its existence, it taught nothing but the extreme Arian heresy! Do you REALLY want me to post quotes from the founders? It is an extremely solid case. Here is just one:

"It is well known that the early Adventist leaders and founders were Arians, who denied the deity of Christ, and the Trinity. Their article "The Doctrine of the Trinity Among Adventists" by Gerhard Pfandi, of their Biblical Research Institute (referred to as "Trinity" henceforth) tells us on page 1:

"Two of the principal founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Joseph Bates and James White, were originally members of the Christian Connection Church which rejected the doctrine of the Trinity…Other prominent Adventists who spoke out against the Trinity were J.N. Loughborough, R.F. Cottrell, J.N. Andrews, and Uriah Smith…"
These SDA leaders denied Jesus’ deity and the Trinity. Joseph Bates, raised in the Congregational Church, repudiated the Trinity doctrine upon joining the Christian Connection Church. Bates learned the Sabbath doctrine from Rachel Oakes, a Seventh-day Baptist; however, Bates did not accept the Seventh-day Baptist doctrine of the Trinity. So, early Adventists had more in common with the Shakers, who not only kept the Sabbath and had prophets, but also believed in Arianism. Only by the turn of the century did Adventism begin to move out of Arianism to espousing Jesus’ deity, and subsequently, the Trinity. This was hard to do in light of Ellen White’s statements, spanning over 50 years, upholding Arianism."
Did Ellen White teach ‘A Different God’?

At best, the SDA's position on the Divinity of Christ and the Trinity is only slightly different than the Jehovah's Witnesses. It's no wonder that the Millerite debacle spawned all manner of virulent anti-Christian cults!

Your scripture sculpting of unrelated texts and partial texts is nothing more than a ruse to get real Christians to doubt their salvation. the SDA cult emphasizes the Sabbath as the central doctrine because they really DO believe that is the source of their Salvation. That has NOTHING to do with Christianity!

It's no war against the real Truth of Christianity. Its an argument against a plainly non-Christian counterfeit. That is why St. Paul argued so vehemently against the SDA Church of his time: The Galatian heresy.

There is NO power over sin in the SDA Church's pathetic emphasis on the Mosaic Law. If there is one common theme in the Epistles of St. Paul, it is that the Real Deal gives people power over sin.

Your repetitive arguments for the Sabbath are just a ruse to get gullible Christians to divert themselves into a miserable cultish system. It's pretty easy to see that you NEVER discuss the Gospel with anywhere NEAR the intensity that you push the Sabbath. It is plain the Sabbath is FAR AND AWAY more important to you than the Resurrection!

 

[Setyoufree]

"Christ felt the anguish which the sinner will feel when mercy shall no longer plead for the guilty race. It was the sense of sin, bringing the Father’s wrath upon Him as man’s substitute, that made the cup He drank so bitter, and broke the heart of the Son of God." [DA 753]

One more section highlighted.

And the Father's wrath is what according to the context?

1] He cannot see the Father’s reconciling face.
2] The withdrawal of the divine countenance from the Saviour...
3] Their separation was to be eternal...

So again, God wrath is:

Deut 31:17 "Then My anger will be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them and hide My face from them, and they will be consumed, and many evils and troubles will come upon them; so that they will say in that day, 'Is it not because our God is not among us that these evils have come upon us?'

 

[BobRyan]

The SDA Church has an OVERWHELMING history of denying the Divinity of Christ

Until you actually read the published statements of faith by the SDA church in the 1800's and 1900's - not one of which opposes the Divinity of Christ.

Admittedly a few people from the abolitioinist "Christian Connection" joined the Advent group and made a lot of news about their views - but those who came from Baptist and Methodist groups (as did Ellen White) never opposed the teaching of the Triune Godhead.

BTW - notice that this thread is not about your favorite subject??

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

And the Father's wrath is what according to the context?

1] He cannot see the Father’s reconciling face.
2] The withdrawal of the divine countenance from the Saviour...
3] Their separation was to be eternal...

So again, God wrath is:

Deut 31:17 "Then My anger will be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them and hide My face from them, and they will be consumed, and many evils and troubles will come upon them; so that they will say in that day, 'Is it not because our God is not among us that these evils have come upon us?'

No doubt those actions by the Father - were part of the package in suffering the exact amount of torment due for each sin for each person in all of time.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Setyoufree]

No doubt those actions by the Father - were part of the package in suffering the exact amount of torment due for each sin for each person in all of time.

in Christ,

Bob

Speculation....The Father is gone...Therefore He can't be responsible. You can't charge God with evil.

 

[food4thought]

Bump. Keeping this thread current on my profile. Feel free to comment.