This dedicated blog post is for various inceptive Theological ideas that I have come to
have but which I have not yet studied out in full detail. However I have thus far found enough Bible and SOP support to consider them as valid/viable. Similar ideas that have been discovered and posted elsewhere in this blog, most even developed as full study posts, or even, as done in this post, have been posted in succinct summarizations and snippets. However this blog post is being dedicated only to inceptive and inchoative ideas, which will most likely later be expanded. As much as possible, the major points/reasons why they are being considered as potentially valid/viable Theological Views is also cited. They are posted as they may be Spiritually/Theologically beneficial to others. So here are my, more than less, exegetically noticed/observed Theological Musings:
Incarnation of God (the Son) as the Cherubim/Mighty Angel Michael = His ‘Being Begotten’
In the Bible, the Pre-Incarnate Jesus is repeatedly referred to as “the Angel of the Lord” (e.g., Exod 3:2-5; 23:20-23; Gen 32:24, 30; Judge 6:11-16; Zech 3:1-2) and also as discussed in this blog post (see also here), as Michael the Chief of Angels, was actually also a Mighty Angel, one of the Cherubim of God, which manifestly is the select group of Rev 8:2's 7 angels ‘which have stood established in presence of God’. (Cf. the depicting Sanctuary embroidery of these Cherubim on the MHP veil in Exod 26:31). Indeed as also substantiated starting here, upon His return to Heaven, Jesus was given the physical form of a Mighty Angel and this was manifestly the pre-incarnate glory that He had asked to receive again at the end of His Earthly ministry (John 17:5). In fact this Mighty Angel, Cherubim, Michael form actually resolves the long/much SDA-discussed Divinity of Christ issue in regards to Him having been “begotten” (Psa 2:7|Acts 13:33; John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; Heb 1:5; 5:5; 11:17; 1 John 4:9; cf. Pro 8:22ff/1 Cor 1:24, 30|5BC 1126.5) - [see e.g., discussions here, here, here, here, here, here and here][1] as, just as He was begotten as a Human, He also had been begotten as a Mighty Angel. In fact, just as the Humanly incarnate Christ was made to complete forget His Heavenly|Divine pre-existence, it very well may have been that when God the Father and the Son decided to created Angelic beings, Jesus was purposely incarnated from His Divine form to now also a, here physical, Mighty Angel form, indeed retaining his Divine Nature as when He was (later again) incarnated in Human physical form. This would then explain all of the jealousy of “Lucifer” when God kept showing great favor to Michael (PP 36.3), not knowing that He was actually “very God” as the Father Himself. It would also explain why God had done a public ceremony to, in due time, elevated/exalted Michael before all of the Angels (PP 36.2). It was manifestly to test the angels that God had done this Heavenly, concealed Angelic Incarnation of Christ, and only He and Michael (= “who is like God”) knew of these concealed facts. That was the Angel’s, also incontrovertible, equivalent of the center-located Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (Gen 3:3), and, of course, “Lucifer” failed that Heavenly testing. However a concurrent main reason for that Incarnation may have been out of a quite tangible necessity. Succinctly said here, as stated starting in this discussion post, the Bible is clear that God the Father ever dwells in “unapproachable light” (1 Tim 6:16; cf. EW 54.2), and apparently only Mighty Angels (which included|s Michael|Jesus) along with specially covered up Seraphims, are able to enter into that presence. So it very well may have been in order to have a, literally, “face to face” interaction with the Heavenly Beings that the Father and Jesus had decided to create and were about to do so, that, with both of them then being in this ‘unapproachable glorious form’ decided/agreed that Jesus should, like He did for His Earthly Incarnation, take on a more approachable form, and indeed so that the Angels can look to Him, their Chief, and see what God the Father, who they may never be able to see face to face, is like. As EGW was told by Jesus, God the Father has a bodily form (see in EW 54.2-56.1), however that form is apparently couched in an unapproachable Glory for most. (EW 92.1)
Now, perhaps Michael at first, like when later on Earth, following His Incarnation did not explicitly know that He was God in Human form until some time later, as it had been explicitly confirmed on earth some 35 years after, at His baptism (Luke 3:21-22) after having lived a faithful, sinless life proportional to God’s calling, thus “well-pleasingly” having passed God-appointed His test. In Heaven that “test” had been in God using Jesus to create all things. If then Michael, being then unaware of His actual innate Divinity, decided to become self-exalted and presume, as Lucifer would later do, to seek to, by unauthorized force, make Himself equal to God, then He too would havie failed this test, succumbing to the sin of covetousness and self-exaltation. But, despite this manifest great creative power, Michael never self-assumed this authority and thus, as Heb 1:5 & 5:6 pointedly state, ‘God the Father therefore exalted Him to be “His Son”’. This Sonship exaltation therefore occurred both in Heaven, and then later on Earth for Michael|Jesus. So this was all done to test Michael, and then the Angels, thus most inceptively defeating Lucifer’s argument that they were not free. God Himself had orchestrated a means by which to freely demonstrate their loyalty to Him.
Paul’s Likely Ascension
As discussed and referenced here, it is rightly generally understood that at the death of Christ, the OT saints who were raised went on to form (part of) the 24 elders. I however further believe that Paul went on to be a part of that (still being “gathered”) 24 elders group by being, as was Moses, resurrected after his death and taken to Heaven. [The 11 other martyred apostles went on to complete that Ethnic-Israel specific group (cf. Matt 19:28/Luke 22:29-30)]. The supporting reasons are as follow:
-Paul’s Spirit of Prophecy Gift - It is clear that Paul received many visions and (direct) revelations from Jesus (e.g., 2 Cor 12:1-7), starting with his conversion (Acts 9:3-7).
-Paul’s Spirit of Prophecy Gift - It is clear that Paul received many visions and (direct) revelations from Jesus (e.g., 2 Cor 12:1-7), starting with his conversion (Acts 9:3-7).
-‘Stay or Depart and be With Christ’ -Such revelations are what probably led him to, express, and when imprisoned in Rome (for the very first time -Phil 1:7, 13, 14), an otherwise most odd statement in Phil 1:21-26 of ‘hardpressedly wishing to either remain (as (still) “necessary”), or “depart” (Phil 1:23; =2 Tim 4:6b) to be with Christ’ as he was then manifestly greatly expecting that he would surely be martyred during this imprisonment. (Phil 2:17; cf. 2 Tim 4:6a) Most likely Jesus had confidentially revealed to him that, if faithful, this would be his end reward, perhaps/probably also when He was forewarning Paul of what he was going to greatly suffer in his ministry (Acts 9:15-16), -indeed particularly if he was most faithful in properly doing it (cf. 2 Tim 3:10-12). And that is the reason why he readily well knew to take all of his sufferings in stride, as stated earlier in that context (Phil 1:12-20). And his ‘knowledge and confidence’ may have been veiledly expressed in his statement in Phil 1:20 that: ‘he knows that he [i.e., himself personally] will not be put to shame in anything (also ‘whether through his living or his death’).’ In fact, as with the saving faith of Abraham (Gen 15:6), Paul may have been informed, “through the provision of the Spirit of Jesus Christ”, similarly that the basis for this “great expectation of his” was in a promise that a resolute faithfulness in ministry in the face of such physical odds/opposition would be “his deliverance/salvation” (Phil 1:19-20ff). [Perhaps this indicative revelation was all the underlying basis for Paul’s “better resurrection” and “cloud of witnesses [lit. martyrs]” statements in Heb 11:35-12:1]. Indeed this [SDA-patently-ignored] statement can honestly only mean that Paul was going to go to Heaven soon after his death, but has wrongly been taken to be a general statement as to what would happen to all believers upon their death. (And the episode in Acts 14:19-20|AA 184.2 may actually have been an outright resurrection, or at least a CPR-type reanimation, of Paul, as his time to die was then not, at least passably, right.)..
-Paul’s Dying Vision - The SOP reveals in AA 512.1a (cf. LP 332.2a) that as he was being executed, Paul received a vision similar to Jacob’s Ladder, and apparently, (unlike also John 1:51), without ‘angels ascending and descending upon it’, thus not implying/indicating: a Heavenly sustaining ministering, but more strictly: a then obtainable, through Christ (cf. Matt 27:51-53; Rev 1:18), way/access into Heaven (Gen 28:17), -indeed having a pointed ‘guaranteed (promised) reward (Gen 28:14) and assistance (=Gen 28:15)’) meaning [if faithful], hence why it was given to Jacob, with his pending/looming “Great Time of Trouble” vs. his murderously offended/ashamed/jealous, base-minded, brother. And in Paul’s present case, while on that beheading block, while the “assistance” aspect was not going to be implemented then (=no ministering angels present); the “reward” aspect however demonstrably was. And given the understanding that the righteous will eventually all be resurrected at the Second Coming, this special indication has not beneficial significance unless it is indicating a then readily obtainable way, i.e., through a soon after resurrection.
-Paul’s Ministry Cut Short -As inquired here for concrete documentation, an SDA preacher, (also restated by him here [01:04:40-01:08:35] -again without any specific references), made the interesting SOP point that: ‘Paul’s life and ministry was cut short because of, (‘unlike what was done for (the beloved) Peter when he was in prison (Acts 12:5)’), a lack of praying support from the Church.’ (~AA 417.2)[2] -Update (10-01-16): Finally the exact SOP statement was recited almost verbatim here[40:36ff] = LP 226.1, -a revelation on the indifference and antipathy of the Jewish/Jerusalem, (possibly even Gentile) Church against Paul which surely extended to the instance of his final imprisonment and death.
-Paul’s Sacrificial Sufferings -As seen in Paul’s great sacrificial work and sufferings (2 Cor 11:23-29, 32-33), (he indeed arduously travelled more than any other person in Bible times), he did painfully suffer much for the cause of God.
-Paul’s Pre-Notice -Paul was given quite impressive, most realistic, or in person, visions of Heaven (2 Cor 12:1-5). It is probably then that he was promised this translation reward, all quite similar to what was later said to EGW (EW 39.3; cf. 19.1-20.1).
-Paul’s Pivotal New Covenant Work -Like Moses and Elijah, his mission was a most pivotal one for the cause of God, to the point that it can be easily seen that were it but for his work amongst the Gentiles and his writings, there would not be a Christian Church today.
-Peter’s Martyrdom Pre-knowledge and Reward - Likewise, Peter, in 2 Pet 1:13-15, quite awarely spoke of his coming death through martyrdom, which he says was from what Jesus had showed him. This manifestly was revealed to him during the episode in John 21:18-19, 20-23, and it may have been warningly recently reminded to Peter in a revelation that the time for that martyrdom’s death was close. But here Peter evidently did also know that upon that martyr’s “departure” (=Greek: exodos #1841 = “Exodus” (Heb 11:22; cf. Exod 19:1 LXX)) of his, which, as it would be a (false) judicial executionary death, -which in the Roman Legal/Judicial system demanded some degree of a formal a trial process, and just as it did in Christ’s own “exiting”, i.e., his ‘executionary martyrdom process’ (Luke 9:31), he would, and just like the resurrected and ascended Christ, soon also receive a “better resurrection” (Heb 11:35b), =a “martyr’s reward”.
Earlier Rewarding of Martyrs for the Faith
A related idea to the one on Paul’s possible/probable post-martyrdom resurrection and early ascension to Heaven (as with Moses who was effectively “martyred” by the stubbornness of the people he was leading), is that, all those who lose their life for the sake of the Gospel, whether it is through martyrdom at the hands of foes, or through a directly related fatal illness or accident, are similarly resurrected sometime, most likely shortly, after their death and taken to Heaven. Again the supporting reasons for this theological view are here succinctly stated (more to be added later as this topic is more fully studied out):
-The Specially Resurrected with Christ were OT Martyrs - As also a “first fruit” of God’s doing here, those who were resurrected, and ascended, with Christ (the Ultimate Martyr) (=Matt 27:52-53), were prior, martyred people (DA 786.1; cf. Heb 11:35-39a; Matt 14:3-12; 23:34-35)
-Revelation’s Fifth Seal -This would explain the quite problematic statement in the Fifth Seal (Rev 6:9-11) where “living beings” (Gr. psyche =Gen 2:7 LXX; cf. John 15:13) [and not ‘disembodied souls’], and who manifestly do have full bodies, since they can wear their given white robes (also the attire of the resurrected saints), who are crying out to God to avenge them. While there is an applicable, purely Earthly application where the “psyche” here would be representative of “life blood”, and the “altar” representative of the “Church Ministry”, and would, from a purely Earthly view, be symbolic of a cry to God to avenge His faithful ones who were martyred during the persecutions during the 1260 year period, there can also be another, and even simultaneous applicable, from now a purely Heavenly view where it was symbolically shown to John in vision that priorly martyred “living beings”, despite since have been resurrected and taken to Heaven, are still being crushed by the “Altar” as they have yet to be avenged by God. So the white robes they get as “compensation”, which actually represents salvation, is actually consolingly saying: ‘for now, be consoled with having been saved’. In other words, ‘be consoled with having been taken to Heaven’ but your due vengeance will later come... when there are more “martyrs” like you. On the ‘purely earthly level’, that is until enough people on earth make then a living sacrifice and embrace the cause they had died for and thus can form a formidable army to physically take on that oppressing power, as it all came to be the case with the full-fledged Protestant Reformation; and one a ‘purely heavenly view’, that will similarly come to be when enough people will embrace the Final Message and join the 144,000 to form the Church Triumphant.
-Revelation’s Two “Witnesses” - Rev 11 vividly depicts the experience of God’s Two (ca. time of the end) “Witnesses” (Rev 11:3), -a word which in the Greek [=martys -Strongs #3144] came to seamlessly also speak of the “ultimate testimony/witness” as done by: “martyrs” (Rev 12:11b; e.g. Acts 22:20), and after these Two Witnesses/Martyrs complete their, as fully discussed in this post, Kingdom (Moses) and Spiritual (Elijah) testimonies, they are martyred (Rev 11:7)...but after 3.5 days they are given that “martyr’s reward” by being resurrected and taken to Heaven...and deliberately in this pivotal case, in the plain sight/awareness/understanding of their enemies. (Rev 11:11-12)....And this is all fully reflective of what Jesus, the archetype martyr had gone through, i.e., including a (soon) resurrection and ascension (e.g., Matt 16:21; Acts 1:9; cf. Rev 11:8b).
-Revelation’s Two “Witnesses” - Rev 11 vividly depicts the experience of God’s Two (ca. time of the end) “Witnesses” (Rev 11:3), -a word which in the Greek [=martys -Strongs #3144] came to seamlessly also speak of the “ultimate testimony/witness” as done by: “martyrs” (Rev 12:11b; e.g. Acts 22:20), and after these Two Witnesses/Martyrs complete their, as fully discussed in this post, Kingdom (Moses) and Spiritual (Elijah) testimonies, they are martyred (Rev 11:7)...but after 3.5 days they are given that “martyr’s reward” by being resurrected and taken to Heaven...and deliberately in this pivotal case, in the plain sight/awareness/understanding of their enemies. (Rev 11:11-12)....And this is all fully reflective of what Jesus, the archetype martyr had gone through, i.e., including a (soon) resurrection and ascension (e.g., Matt 16:21; Acts 1:9; cf. Rev 11:8b).
-James White in Heaven -Since James White notoriously died (on August 6, 1881) at the, actually, relatively, early age 60 because he had over exerted himself to help establish the SDA Church’s Institutions (CET 151.2; cf. 1T 105.3-111.3; see also the case of the ‘fatally neglected’ missionary Hannah More in 2T 332.1), thus also ‘for the sake of the Gospel’, it would explain his appearance in a “so real” dream to EGW shortly after his death, 37 days to be exact, (on September 12, 1881) (10MR 38.2-40.1 (=RY 161.1-163.2)), which has rightly levelled charges of either false vision or necromancy (see in here, -as with King Saul’s communicating with the (normatively) dead prophet Samuel) against EGW...and with really no satisfactory response from SDA’s (e.g., this futile, circuitous attempt)[3]. Yet EGW fully understood this to be a communication from God, and obeyed its counsel and did not go to Battle Creek to stand before the General Conference assembly, and even though she had balked at the concept that it was her husband who was appearing to her in full life.[4]
-Martyr’s Grouping in Heaven -This point here is an idea that has major contributing points in other SOP and Bible passages, but for now it can be cited in support that: in a vision in 21MR 325.3-327.7 that is to transpire under the Sixth Seal, and during the Great Time of Trouble (Rev 6:12-17 and then ch. 7) before the Second Coming (= 7th Seal -Rev 8:1), (-a Trial Time during which, in the pre-close of probation, thus manifestly in the “Little Time of Trouble”, many of the last generation faithful ones may also lose their lives (=Rev 14:13; 3SM 399.2)), EGW saw one of the 3-4 main groups which are to stand around the throne of God in the end (GC 665.2), namely the distinct group of martyrs, with the 144,000 amongst them as they had literally made a ‘living testimony/martyrdom’ for the faith (=Rev 14:13; 20:4*), indeed, equivalently, in the very face of threatened, and readily feasible, death. The appearance of the, pointedly physically dead martyrs, at this point in the prophetic timeline of final event, (even ‘out of position’ being here “close about the throne” instead of in their ‘2nd or 3rd place from the throne’ of GC 665.2), is key here and does speak of this pre-Second Coming reward of martyrs.
* Manifestly it is only the martyrs and the 144,000 who will be permitted to take part in the judgement, given that they have demonstrated themselves to be “sacrificially” most faithful (cf. Luke 22:28-30). This gives these ‘dead and “living/effective” martyred ones’ the chance to vindicate themselves in response to the request in Rev 6:9-11.
-Apostles+Martyrs ‘Grouping’ - In GC 667.3a, EGW is, manifestly directly, (depictively) shown (i.e., just as she is next (depictively) shown Nero, and then his mother), that, distinguishingly, (i.e. significantly, oddly, a relatively “long” while after priorly describing the redeemed in GC 665.2-3): ‘“amid the ransomed throng” the apostles of Christ, including Paul are present, and “with them” are the vast host of martyrs’. What is odd here is the way this group is here, (and after the thematic fact), singled out; and with, as reliable Church tradition relates, all of the 12 Apostles of Christ, and also Paul, having been martyred, -(and John himself was not (successfully) martyred only through the miraculous intervention of God who had a special purpose for him (AA 569.2-570.3|Rev 1:9; cf. John 21:22-23), it is thus seen that this is here a grouping in Heaven made up entirely of actual, (or attemptingly effective), martyrs, thus corroborating/substantiating what, as cited just above, had priorly been in vision likewise distinguishingly shown to EGW.
-Martyrs Already in Heaven -Oddly enough, in EW 18.2, EGW saw in vision that the 144,000, as they were travelling along in heaven, they “met a company who also were gazing at the glories of the place”, which Jesus told her were “martyrs that had been slain for Him”. The fact these two groups now meet, (and as discussed later, not even during the then completed Millennium), and also that EGW first notices that they have a red border on the hem of their garment, which all implies that she did not seen them at all before, i.e., during their 7-day trip from Earth (EW 16.2), during which they surely would have bumped into each other during the sure meetings and greetings then; which in turn also means that these martyred ones had not been part of the Grand Resurrection that had occurred just before that ascension (EW 16.1). Therefore it can be seen/concluded that they were already in Heaven. (Interestingly enough, while the martyr may have had this special reward/privilege of an early resurrection, the 144,000 (which will also include the final converts (Rev 7:9-14) = the final generation of “living/effective martyrs”) are themselves specially privileged by being the only ones who will be serving God in His Temple (EW 18.2b; cf. Rev 7:15); i.e., during the Millennium Age (cf. Rev 21:1-3, 22), when, most likely, the characters of many who were most mercifully, but justly, redeemed, will then still/yet have to be perfected.)
EGW also saw with those, as understood here, ‘martyrs already in heaven’, ‘an innumerable company of little ones that similarly had a hem of red on their garments’; -thus they had also been “martyred”. These are probably: defaultly, all infants who had been “murdered”, (i.e., for various unjust and evil (socio-economic) reasons, including abortion [5], [6]), while they were still in their age of innocence. (Cf. e.g., Matt 18:5-7, 10 = see here on Rev 18:21).
The fact that these resurrected and in Heaven martyrs are still complaining of being ‘spilled out and crushed under the altar’ (Rev 6:9-10) manifestly is because, as involved in EW 18.2, these martyrs are limited to only “gazing at the glories of the place” [=Mount Zion’s temple] and cannot yet (fully) partake in them until others, (manifestly the living saints, the 144,000), are also fully sealed. Then will that Temple work be activated and these resurrected martyrs can stop “resting” (Rev 6:11), and get to the work they love to do, which is, as they had done on Earth, sacrificially minister to others in Spiritual or physical need, even if it requires a sacrifice of their life. (=EW 18.2b; cf. Rev 7:13-17)
-Only Martyrs, from all righteous Dead, Reign - As presented in this section, from the exegetical point in Rev 20:4, only those who had been martyred (=Rev 6:9-11), and not all the righteous dead, “come to life” to reign with Christ in that “Plan A” Millennium.
The fact that these resurrected and in Heaven martyrs are still complaining of being ‘spilled out and crushed under the altar’ (Rev 6:9-10) manifestly is because, as involved in EW 18.2, these martyrs are limited to only “gazing at the glories of the place” [=Mount Zion’s temple] and cannot yet (fully) partake in them until others, (manifestly the living saints, the 144,000), are also fully sealed. Then will that Temple work be activated and these resurrected martyrs can stop “resting” (Rev 6:11), and get to the work they love to do, which is, as they had done on Earth, sacrificially minister to others in Spiritual or physical need, even if it requires a sacrifice of their life. (=EW 18.2b; cf. Rev 7:13-17)
-Only Martyrs, from all righteous Dead, Reign - As presented in this section, from the exegetical point in Rev 20:4, only those who had been martyred (=Rev 6:9-11), and not all the righteous dead, “come to life” to reign with Christ in that “Plan A” Millennium.
-Spiritualism Differentiation -In the light of the above mentioned revelatory passages such as Rev 6:9-11 and EGW’s dream (RY 161.1-163.2), this distinguishing/qualifying “martyrs” understanding may be key in differentiating, or simply explain away, the prophesied end time false appearances of dead loved ones, as indeed also mentioned in 21MR 326.1. (See comments on this here.).
-White Robes and Blood Red Hems -A simple comparative study on the “white robes” which are (evidently) consolingly given to the martyred ones in Rev 6:9-11 with EGW description of the martyrs in Heaven as having robes with bloody red hems, which echoes the theme of Isa 63:1-6 = Rev 14:17-20; and the fact that in Rev 19:8, (all) white robes are said to represent righteous acts, actually reveals two other special categories of people, beyond clearly manifest physical martyrs, who here qualify as those who are also “effectively” martyred, and thus entitled to this early reward. Succinctly said these are:
(1) Isa 63:1-6 = Rev 14:17-20: This prophetic segment depicts conscientious righteous ones who have acted the mandated part of God’s wrathful judgement dealing amongst rebellious peoples. This was repeatedly seen with God’s prophets, including Jesus (cf. Luke 4:16-30|DA 238.4ff; 239.3ff 240.4ff), who all literally had to sacrifice the comforts and “political correctness” to enter into such judgement for unignorable actions of, particularly, professed people of God. These prophets here could have, indifferently taken it easy, and only preach smooth, accepted thing, but they instead decided to, head-on, take on the cherished sins amongst peoples, and in many cases that came to cost them their lives.
And so, in Rev 14:17-20, the typological application of this prophecy is not at the literal Second Coming, but an endeavor to make the Babylonian power, which will have then spread throughout the world, to produce its toxic wine and thus openly and most objectively show its, unbiblical and self-defeating, true colors.
(2) Rev 19:8 - People who are prevented from executing attempted good works because of the unbelief, rejection, opposition, marginalization and even persecution of, even other, likewise professing believers, who should have helped, but for various prideful/selfish/jealous/sinful reasons, did not. These thus caused the Spiritual “lives”, and even literal lives of those faithful ones to be “cut short”, many times, through persisted, completely abandoned, efforts, resulting in the depleting of the physical health and usually subsequent premature death of them. And so they qualify as “effective martyrs”. As stated above, that is what occurred with James White and Hannah More. And so to them, white robes are also given to them as credited righteousness; -stemming from also the potential/possible good works for God which they would have done if they were not so rejected.
So any who indeed loses their literal, social or psychological life for the Gospel’s sake will indeed be special compensated by God.
-24 Elders likely Compositional Nature -With that understanding in mind, it can actually be understood that the 24 elders mentioned in Rev 4 & 5 are actually composed of 12 OT martyred saints and 12 Apostles of Christ, including Paul, who, according to Christian Historical tradition (see Foxe’s Book of Martyrs pp. 1-5 here) all suffered a martyr’s death. Of course that is in combination with the understanding given within this post that (1) Rev 4 & 5 had a fuller Historical fulfilment in ca. 70 A.D., (2) with the also discussed understanding therein that the 24 thrones are filled by various kingly representatives of God’s other worlds, and thus not the throne of only one group of 24 people, this prior literal fulfilment around 31 A.D. at the post-resurrection and ascension of Christ would have involved a group of (head) elders representing e.g., the 24 (would-be) groupings of Galaxies in God’s Universe, all present here to witness and celebrate the acceptable triumph of Christ. However for the ca. 70 A.D. grouping, as then it was God’s (OT)/Literal Israel that was going to be judged, representatives from that OT/Ethnic group, (and inherently not insignificantly or non-pertinently, people/martyr who had suffered premature death at the hands of, or because of, rebellious Israelites), form that quorum of elders and then filled in these thrones. The martyred Apostles would have been resurrected before the result of that judgement deliberation which fell on literal Israel/Jerusalem/its Temple in 70 A.D. (=COL 294.1). That also would have applicably fulfilled Christ’s promise to His 12 disciples in Matt 19:28|Luke 22:30. Of course the Apostle John lived through on Earth till the 90's A.D. and thus would not have been part of that group, and he would not have received this early reward because he actually did not die a martyr’s death. In fact his life had been miraculously sustain by God (AA 570.1). He had a particular responsibility to fulfill before dying, and that was to relate and write the visions of Revelation, as well as, (probably subsequently), write the complimentary, Fourth, (and non-synoptic) Gospel.[7]
-EGW Sees People of “All Sizes” in other Worlds - In a vision related in EW 39.3 (=Broadside2, January 31, 1849 par. 8), EGW said that she saw people in another world who were of “all sizes”, although they were also “noble, majestic, and lovely”.[8] I don’t read from EGW’s own testimony (also see in 1905 JNL, GSAM 257.2-259.1), that she actually had said that these people were all “tall” as Mrs. Truesdail claimed (1905 JNL, GSAM 260.4). But even if EGW had said “tall” instead of “all sizes”, it, reconcilingly, can actually be understood, as delineated below, that she was then describing the inhabitants of the second world she was shown, the one with 7 moons.
-Firstly-seen World: 4 moons (rosy-tinted belts) =EW 39.3a
-Secondly-seen World: 7 moons (belt + rings) =EW 39.3b (saw visiting Enoch); 1905 JNL, GSAM 260.4
-Thirdly-seen World: 6 moons
And from this possible, if not probable, distinction, in regards to the different (i.e., “all”) sizes of people she saw in that first world, these are probably reflective of the human martyrs which have been raised since Christ’s resurrection, and taken to heaven, and since been relocated to that other world. And thus, as EGW had seen in vision about the redeemed at the final resurrection (GC 644.3), they would have various heights...and it may take up to 1000 years to reach the full, optimal stature that Adam had (cf. here). These inhabitants of that first world, the “martyr’s New Planet”, which may actually be the home of other humans not from this Earth, would then have not sinned from the time of their resurrection, as those on earth had...and gradually they, along with the other martyrs who subsequently join them, will grow to their full physical heights by the “therapeutic healing” (Rev 22:2) provided by (leaves) of the Tree of Life that was also present there.
So it is manifest that the resurrected martyrs (some of who may not have yet had/have reached that restored full height), are living in these unfallen worlds, amongst unfallen people. And Enoch, who was merely visiting that Second, 7-moon, World, and said that his home was actually in the Holy City (EW 39.3), the New Jerusalem in God’s headquarters, as one who had been translated alive, was probably reflective of the 144,000, and thus had a special work to do for God in that City and its His Temple. (EW 18.2-19.1; cf. Rev 7:13-17). From EGW’s account in (EW 17.3-18.2) which describes for the most part the glorious things which are outside of the Holy City and its Temple, it is that the martyrs themselves do not yet enter that “Mount Zion’s” Holy City or its Temple, but the 144,000 (cf. EW 16.2), those who God allowed to go/live through great tribulations (and in such times death and God’s reward can be deemed as a much better alternative (See EW 17.2; conversely cf. Rev 9:6)), will be the first to actually enter that Holy City and minister in its Temple. But in the mean time, they evidently have been allowed to live in other unfallen worlds outside of this Heaven HQ realm.
In fact the sequence of the revelation to EGW involving that they only encounter the red-hemmed robbed martyrs and the little ones only after the Millennium era, after the Holy City has descended to Earth (EW 18.2), evidently (at least typifyingly) involves that those martyrs, coming then from their other “home” world(s), only “meet and mix” with the rest of the redeemed then, after all of the issues in this GC are all wrapped up, after the Millennium judgement.
-My Father’s Related Revelation -I have seen and believe that an instance of this early rewarding of Christian Martyrs was depicted to my father in the here-related (and interpreted) vision (vs. dream) he had in February 1970.
-My Own, and then My Mother’s, Revelations - Following a recent, independent, evidently likewise inspired, corroboration, see the theologically related dream, involving my godfather as this “rewarded martyr” given in detail in this document at: (to me - Apr. 5, 2012) pp. 424-425 & (to my mother - Sept. 23, 2013) pp. 426-430.*
* To me this all could also explain the revelation that my godfather told me he had received that ‘he would see Jesus return’ (i.e., alive), as he may have misinterpreted/misunderstood/thematically conflated a martyr’s reward which instead would have been alluded to/depicted in that revelation.
-For the jointly added Spiritual purpose/goal/reason why martyrs were given this special “reward”, see the Prophetic (True/Full) Latter Rain Scenario in the further&concretely corroborating Rev 19 (+Rev 20) blog post.
+Stephen has already met Paul -Miscellaneously, but relatedly, the popular sermonic quip that: (e.g.) ‘Stephen will be shocked to see Paul in Heaven/among the redeem’, as with ‘Isaiah vs. (possibly) King Manasseh’, is rendered moot by this understanding as the martyrs Isaiah and Stephen would have already been resurrected and taken to Heaven, with Stephen probably having been resurrected in time to witness the conversion of Paul (but Isaiah likely at the time of the special resurrection at Christ’s own resurrection (Matt 27:52-53)), and with Stephen also already having long met in person that later-martyred and resurrected Paul in Heaven.
The Origin of Skin Colors (=“Shades”)
As it was sufficiently expounded upon in this discussion thread, later resumed here and here, I will not here restate all of those, actually scientific and Biblical reasons why I have the resulting theory that the spectrum difference in skin colors today, as “bookmarkedly” seen in “Black” (which, non-pejoratively, is actually/truly “Brown”) on one end and White, (really ‘Off-White’) on the other, with the centrist, normative, “Tanned Color” in between, were all biologically (i.e., the actual science of tanning) caused by the prolonged sun exposure or lack thereof of the long-living people who lived soon after the Flood, when then the world, due to the titling of the Earth’s axis during the Flood, began to first have an uneven reception of the sun’s rays.
Furthering Post Script (01-11-13) - See much more on this view on skin colors, and their origins, in this related commenting, and also my more accurate, current understanding here.
Furthering Post Script (01-11-13) - See much more on this view on skin colors, and their origins, in this related commenting, and also my more accurate, current understanding here.
Seriously... Heaven Does “Wildly” Cheer!!!
... or Flabbergastedly Groan!!!
... or Flabbergastedly Groan!!!
I stumbled upon the following Youtube compilation video on the coast to coast reaction of Canadians during the 2010 Winter Olympics at the (typically Canadian) “where were you when” moment when the Gold Medal game-winning overtime goal (the now commonly called: “Golden Goal”) was scored by, (fairy-talely enough) NHL superstar Sydney Crosby"The Next One"). I also was similarly (really/actually “lampoonishly”) cheering at that moment, and yet not actually/necessarily because Canada had won, but because the Americans had not won. (Really they have enough else to nationally celebrate such as their “victory” in their fictitious and fabricated, murderous Iraq Oil-War (See here+here[blog]; cf. here =James 4:1-3 {cf. the prophetically-related 9/11-WW3 section|series}) -It is all like a bully throwing a (friendless) party because he is proud of having beat up the scrawny kid because he had taped up glasses.... but I digress.) And to another point, I could sense that if Canada had lost that game, the whole country would experience a collective stroke and then sink into a deep psychologically depressive state. That is quite clearly perceivable in the preceding compilation video of the Canadian people’s reaction to the tying goal scored by the American very late in the game. So just for the health and psyche of this Country [~cf. this music video (alt. video in case you didn’t get some references)], who, collectively, probably cared much more about the game than the average American, (probable case in point: 9 out of 10 Canadians knew about that game then, whereas the same ratio in America didn’t know about it; -and statistically, ratings-ly speaking ca. 67% of Canadians were watching it; while only ca. 9% of American were), I was hoping that Canada won.
But to my point here, as I watching the celebratory reactions in that video, I couldn’t help but pityingly lament that most people there don’t think that there is much more to this life/existence than, e.g., here, a Olympic Gold Medal game. This all then led me to muse about how similarly “bored” the Heavenly Intelligence must be at the cosmic/Great Controversy obliviousness of people on Earth, a real spiritual realm where much more significant issues are battled, won, or lost. Then I started to string up the various, many Bible and SOP passages which explicitly or implicitly state or allude to reactions and celebrations in Heaven and that all led me to think as to whether or not Angels in Heaven experience similar emotions, and that, extreme swing of emotions.
Well since the key ingredient to having such reactions is (1) not knowing what the future outcome will be; (2) considering that moment to be a “once in a lifetime” opportunity (i.e., in that Hockey Game: Canada winning gold, at “home”, against their arch rival Americans, and that gold medal being a Winter Olympic record-setting 14th by a country in a single Olympic, the one chance setting of sudden death overtime, the patriotic validation for at least the next 4 years, etc), (3) the almost 50-50 chance of defeat given the pointed circumstance and also the “strength” of the opponent, then I would say theologically say that as many similar “ingredients” were found in many Bible and Church History events, even to our present day (contrary to the popular belief by many SDA’s today that in/for Final (SOP) events, everything is currently set in stone and no “deviation from this script” is at all possible), that Angels do experience emotions and even swings of emotions.
So, e.g., when the earth-returning news broke in Heaven that Adam and Eve had sinned, the SOP’s (effective) statement that (cf. EW 149-153): ‘you could hear a pin drop’ was indeed not an exaggeration at all. The dumfounding and speechless thoughts of “HOW????... WHY????... WHAT NOW???” (as ‘“no way of escape” had been, at least, decided and/or hashed out then’), just dominated the air. When Israel rebelled against God and built a Golden Calf, and later were faithless on the borders of Canaan, the same reaction was surely felt, indeed even God Himself was ‘besides Himself’ shocked (Exod 32:7-10ff & Num 14:11-12, 20-23)!! From the time that the eternal fate of Jesus and the world increasingly hung in a precarious “Free Will’s” balance (Matt 26:36-45), all of Heaven watched in stunned silence. (DA 693.2) Conversely, when Jesus triumphed against all easily pursuable alternative odds, there indeed broke out a probably euphoric rejoicing in the universe, with emotions still vividly existing at Christ Ascension, Approval and Coronated event and ceremonies. (DA 833.2-834.1 & 835.1)
* [Though, as with Moses’ subsequent (controversialized) resurrection and ascension (Jude 1:9); a similar applicable/effective “martyr’s reward” may be/(have been) in store for Nabeel.# I.e.: While the (re-)expending of Divine Energy for the restoration of (vital) health is not actually owed to even the Believer in this life, the energy for their resurrection has been (tangibly) provided for by the Sacrifice of Christ. So that resurrecting expenditure towards an Eternal Life would not be an extra disbursement of Divine Energy.]
# Though, -all pertinent factors taken into consideration, the, =“faith-currency” (=): ‘Holy Spirit drives-obeying prayers for his resurrection’[10:21-13:14ff] of his (widowed) wife Michelle, (i.e. between the time of his death and his burial), (cf. 1 Kgs 17:20-22), were probably required to complete this martyr’s reward transaction .
But to my point here, as I watching the celebratory reactions in that video, I couldn’t help but pityingly lament that most people there don’t think that there is much more to this life/existence than, e.g., here, a Olympic Gold Medal game. This all then led me to muse about how similarly “bored” the Heavenly Intelligence must be at the cosmic/Great Controversy obliviousness of people on Earth, a real spiritual realm where much more significant issues are battled, won, or lost. Then I started to string up the various, many Bible and SOP passages which explicitly or implicitly state or allude to reactions and celebrations in Heaven and that all led me to think as to whether or not Angels in Heaven experience similar emotions, and that, extreme swing of emotions.
Well since the key ingredient to having such reactions is (1) not knowing what the future outcome will be; (2) considering that moment to be a “once in a lifetime” opportunity (i.e., in that Hockey Game: Canada winning gold, at “home”, against their arch rival Americans, and that gold medal being a Winter Olympic record-setting 14th by a country in a single Olympic, the one chance setting of sudden death overtime, the patriotic validation for at least the next 4 years, etc), (3) the almost 50-50 chance of defeat given the pointed circumstance and also the “strength” of the opponent, then I would say theologically say that as many similar “ingredients” were found in many Bible and Church History events, even to our present day (contrary to the popular belief by many SDA’s today that in/for Final (SOP) events, everything is currently set in stone and no “deviation from this script” is at all possible), that Angels do experience emotions and even swings of emotions.
So, e.g., when the earth-returning news broke in Heaven that Adam and Eve had sinned, the SOP’s (effective) statement that (cf. EW 149-153): ‘you could hear a pin drop’ was indeed not an exaggeration at all. The dumfounding and speechless thoughts of “
On a more GC macro level, when a local pastor decides to heed the prompting of the Holy Spirit and use his wider platform to openly and pointedly address a waywardness issue in the Church, Heavenly being no doubt break out in cheers and “High-Fiving”... but then when Church Administrators choose to ignore that call for reform, a gloomy look no doubt cast itself on the countenance of those same angels. When the Church makes other decisions which hinder God’s blessing on His Church, His Latter Rain blessing, which result in Final events having to be postponed, Heaven is surely most “silently/speechlessly) dejected (cf. EW 15.2). But when someone steps up to overturn the state of unacceptable affairs, then Heaven indeed rejoices and sing at an even higher note (cf. EW 15.2; 151.2).
There are many such examples explicitly cited and inferentially perceivable in the Bible and SOP, and with this Earth and its GC being described by Paul as a ‘Theater of the Universe’ (1 Cor 4:9), which in his day were live performances where anything could candidly happen beyond the storyline itself, it has all indeed been a sort of Hollywood action-packed, romantic social docu-drama thrilling adventurous mysterious epic historical war and paramilitary “paranormal/SCI-FI” (=supernatural), judicial, even biopic, disaster, really/actually unscripted, tragedy and/or triumph spectacle to this universe. Hence the most likely swings of genuine and candid responding emotions by most closely interested Heavenly Beings especially as they know much better than humans have been permitted to know thus far, (cf. in this post), that, in terms of achieving the expected end goal, this Great Controversy War is far from being “a wrap”/“in the can”!
There are many such examples explicitly cited and inferentially perceivable in the Bible and SOP, and with this Earth and its GC being described by Paul as a ‘Theater of the Universe’ (1 Cor 4:9), which in his day were live performances where anything could candidly happen beyond the storyline itself, it has all indeed been a sort of Hollywood action-packed, romantic social docu-drama thrilling adventurous mysterious epic historical war and paramilitary “paranormal/SCI-FI” (=supernatural), judicial, even biopic, disaster, really/actually unscripted, tragedy and/or triumph spectacle to this universe. Hence the most likely swings of genuine and candid responding emotions by most closely interested Heavenly Beings especially as they know much better than humans have been permitted to know thus far, (cf. in this post), that, in terms of achieving the expected end goal, this Great Controversy War is far from being “a wrap”/“in the can”!
Who were the “Nephilim” (Gen 6:1-4 || Num 13:33)??
This quite common question has more than less been satisfactorily answered (e.g., here) with the understanding that the “sons of God” were the righteous descendants of Adam through the line of Seth (cf. Matt 5:9; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; Rev 21:7), while the “sons/daughters of men” were the unrighteous descendants through Cain. However there are still some key issues which have not been satisfactorily addressed here and when done, it shows some great light on what led to the flood judgement. The term Nephilim in Gen 6:4 comes from the Hebrew word which means: “fallen ones” [Strongs #5307] and that evidently was the name given to those who lived unrighteously.
This quite common question has more than less been satisfactorily answered (e.g., here) with the understanding that the “sons of God” were the righteous descendants of Adam through the line of Seth (cf. Matt 5:9; Rom 8:14; Gal 3:26; Rev 21:7), while the “sons/daughters of men” were the unrighteous descendants through Cain. However there are still some key issues which have not been satisfactorily addressed here and when done, it shows some great light on what led to the flood judgement. The term Nephilim in Gen 6:4 comes from the Hebrew word which means: “fallen ones” [Strongs #5307] and that evidently was the name given to those who lived unrighteously.
So from the above foundational view on Gen 6:1-3, it can be seen that: originally the righteous ones stayed away from those unrighteous people through the enmity that God had placed in them (Gen 3:15|ST, July 11, 1895 par. 5), but then the righteous ones chose to take as wives those unrighteous “beautiful” women. And as typical, as seen with King Solomon’s debacle (cf. Neh 13:25-27), this ‘unequal yoking’ (2 Cor 6:14-15) resulted in the corruption of also the righteous ones and thus sin came to take an entrenched foothold and spread throughout the earth, leading to the total depravity by the time of the flood. Case in point, it is right upon this union that God then declares that ‘He will no longer strive with men’ and will ‘(actually) reduce their lives to (at best) 120 years.’ (Gen 6:2) Indeed, given that Adam (and probably also Eve) lived for over half the ca. 1700 years before the flood, their presence was probably a most vivid testimony that led many others to live righteously. So I am more inclined to think that the pre-flood world did not immediately devolve into a lawless realm, but that Cain and his descendants were in the minority for a while and due to them being inherently accursed by God (Gen 4:12-16), living as marginalized nomads. So I am seeing that it may actually be when the righteous ones started to intermarry with the unrighteous ones, that righteousness lost its supremacy as compromise with sin became the accepted norm all leading to the great sin and violence which almost completely took over by the time of the flood.
And just as God has over history typically greatly, even directly, blessed those who are faithful to Him, than those who are not, (and the recent great, foundational scientific and technological explosion which came about from the time of the Reformation on, and which has been advanced today, was mainly pioneered by most devote Christians), I wouldn’t be surprised if the righteous ones before the flood had much more advanced knowledge and were more developed than the unrighteous ones. Indeed, as seen with the Western world in present history, there is typically better development with people who adhere to laws based on Biblical morality than with those who live in lawless anarchy. So Cain’s descendants may have been suffering a inherent detrimental curse because of their sinful mentality and lawless living. [And, tellingly enough, as many objective observations and statistics show, the Western World, led by the United States, is, through lawless and immoral actions, increasingly steadily devolving to become an uncivilized and self-defeating society.] So it apparently is that when the “fallen ones” (=the “Nephilim”) came to united with the righteous ones, that much of the great knowledge being used for good that these righteous ones had came into the hands of these evil people and they most naturally used it for evil. Probably resulting in the genetic amalgamation producing the grotesque/freakish species of animals such as dinosaurs. (1SP 78.2) [All similar to Alfred Nobel’s discovery of dynamite, and Albert Einstein’s knowledge of atomic energy falling, into the hands of governments who wanted to develop a more powerful military weapon. (Nobel countered this development by instituting the Nobel Peace Prize.]
So I see that the union of the pre-flood righteous with the unrighteous led to the exponential growth of sin with those “fallen ones” then becoming empowered. And it is in this light that I understand Gen 6:4b by seeing that it was the children who were born out of the context of this union of good and evil, with the good having empowered/legitimized the evil ones, that ‘mighty men of renown’ came to be born of them, probably of the same type of “renown” as post flood Nimrod (Gen 10:8-9). Indeed evil men in history are most prominently remembered, even more than great righteous men. Perhaps, the pre-flood righteous people came to share a knowledge for civil organization which came to make the race of “fallen ones” to thrive in their evil endeavors (as with the Babel project Gen 11:4-6), as this would have taken them from being hapless, scattered wanderers and nomads to an organized and relatively orderly community. (cf. Gen 11:4). =PP 81.2
It is pertinently also important to rightly understand here that Num 13:33 speaks of another [post-flood] group of people called “Nephilim” (=“fallen ones”) and it may be because that group, who were sons of Anak, was a race of giants, and were also quite evil and ruthless/violence people, as were the evil antediluvians, that they came to be also called Nephilim by being: “fallen/evil people” who, like the people before the flood, were also (normatively) very tall people. (It is like illustratively calling Americans today: “Romans” because they, as a nation, manifest the same traits and actions of the Roman Empire).
Angels Which Excel in Strength (cf. Psa 103:20 KJV)
A very specific and deliberate qualifying statement made in the SOP is in regards to “angels which excel in strength”. They are said to have protected Noah’s Ark during the violent flood (TA 70.3); they provide a hedging guard around God’s faithful ones, particularly in times of physical threatenings (e.g., 4bSG 105.1; TA 13.1; LDE 266.2-267.1; RH, September 30, 1873 par. 7; MYP 53.1; cf. TA 177.3; etc.) However, from the wider context of my Theological studies done in this blog, I am now seriously thinking that this notion of “angels which excel in strength” has been somewhat glibly, and/or not deeply enough, grasped. In other words, most Christians probably assume that all angels are quite strong/powerful, but that does not seems to be the case.
It rather seems that, since angels are actually not flesh and bones, but “ministering spirits”, which moreover have a “fire-like” light qualities for their forms (Heb 1:7, 14 cf. Luke 24:39), -which is all tangibly necessary for them to be able to, indeed ‘swiftly like wind’, move about God’s Universe and minister throughout for Him, that they are defaultly made of photon “material” instead of tangible elements, producing flesh and bones, like humans are. But as God’s Creation is a materially tangible realm, and is now in stability jeopardy due to sin, I am musing here that since the occurrence of the Fall, God has had to create, or probably re-create/retrofit, a new order of angels which actually have much more tangible substance than regular angels. These are the angels which excel in strength by them being able to (1) tangibly interact with tangible things, rather than merely exert a Spiritual influence or, at best, a (limited) wind-gusting-induced affectation and (2) through probably the same special Spirit-based power that was given to Samson, be capable of exerting great force, which would be way beyond the probably thousands of pounds of force that they would naturally be able to exert if they are also, (as many who have seen angels in visions have claimed), ca. 20 feet tall.
So, illustratingly, this special company/contingence/division of angels would be God’s S.W.A.T. (Special Weapons and Tactics), which comparatively enough was formed following the violent degeneracy of American Civilian Society starting in the 1960‘s upon the high profile assassinations then. God’s regular order of (recording/observing/influencing) angels would be like the regular patrolling police force. So just like when patrolling, “constatating” and swift response/intervention for “normal” incidents is needed, the regular police force is only needed and dispatched, but when the perpetrator is utilizing higher caliber weaponry and force then the lumberous SWAT team is sent, God likewise dispatches these “angels which excel in strength” when force much beyond mere influencing and swaying will be needed to protect and/or remedy a situation, and at times which are manifestly addedly clothed in special protective armory for certain tasks (e.g., 4bSG 105.1b).
Manifestly Satan himself, and the angels who followed him, are all part of that initial, spirit-only creation of angels, and Satan of course does not have the power to create such physically stronger, or even substantively tangible, angels, which is why he can effect tangible feats through the possession of flesh and bone humans (e.g., Luke 8:27-29). Which also explains why and how Satan was both ‘compelled to remain within the warring destructive elements of the Flood, and was actually afraid of losing his life then (PP 99.3).
Guardian Angels - And derivedly, I would say that of the two angels which everyone has, one would be a regular/recording angel, and the other would be one of those angels which are made capable to excel in strength. I would also muse that the ‘Strength Angel’ is necessarily on duty 24/7 by humans (more pertinently: Believers and any designated unbeliever and/or prospective believer) throughout their lifetime (and upon that subject’s death they then can take a break and return to Heaven), in case of any emergency, while the Spirit Angel does the swift back and forth between Heaven and Earth (e.g., for special petitionings (Pr 62.5); -with, as discussed here, God’s Holy Spirit communication network specially reserved for immediate considerations and respondings).
9/11 Destructions - And in the light of all of this above, I would also say, given that the Spiritual evidence is that God’s Angels did effectuate the scientifically unexplainable free-falling and “powdering” destructions (=Isa 30:14) of the WTC Towers on 9/11 (see here; cf. this blog post), that it was a special, probably specially protectively armored group of Angels which excel in strength who executed this Divine mandate!
Number of Angels - Relatedly, it is often claimed that the numbering mention in Rev 5:11 of ‘10,000x10,000’ & ‘1,000x1,000’ = 100,000,000 & 1,000,000 represents the actual/literal total number of existing angels. But as that would be hard to reconcile with the Biblical information that every human has at least one (total of two alternating) recording angel(s), with the world’s population being +7,000,000,000,000 now, then that number of angels just wouldn’t be matching. Although I (now) go by the understanding that God had from the start created billions even trillions of angels in order to be His tangible ministering “hands, eyes and feet” throughout His vast Universe, minister, I however musingly reconcile this statement with the understanding that with that mention in Rev 5:11 being in ca. the year 90-95 A.D., was in regards to a Special Judicial Council that was being held then involving 24 Elders representing this Earth to decide the future of this fallen Planet all in the Light of the failed work of the First Century Christian Church to have had Finished the Work and ushered in the Second Coming and Kingdom of God then.
So that total number of attending angels of 100,000,000 and 1,000,0000 was in direct/pertinent relation to the actual total number of people who were living on the Earth then. The size of the world’s population then has been commonly guestimated to have been around 200,000,000 then, but as these models are all derived from Evolutionary presuppositions and assumptions which reverse-computingly impose that ‘millions of people had to be alive millions of years ago’, whereas the Biblical models involves that life on Earth is no older than ca. 6,000 years ago, and most pertinently here, that the world’s population was reset and restarted with only 8 people who had survived the Genesis’ Global Flood of/in ca. 2300 B.C. it instead could easily have only been ca. 100,000,000 alive on Earth by the end of the First Century A.D.. (Corroborating this is the data from a Roman Census in 14 A.D. which reckoned only a total of ca. 5,000,000 people in the quite vast hegemonic realm of Roman Empire then.) So these “100,000,000 + 1,000,0000" angels present in Heaven in Rev 5:11 for this determination of the future of this Planet’s Great Controversy probation and the continuance of allowed Historical Time (See more here, +further discussed a couple of sections below) would just have the angels who had been assigned to watch over and represent each human on the Earth.....But since each human is assigned 2 angels, and they manifestly do “taggingly” alternate in their covering duties, this total would actually be only half the total of the angels having been assigned to humans on this Earth, with the other half not in Heaven then at this Special Judicial Council being themselves on this assignment on the Earth. If a larger segment of God’s Universe had been involved in this Council other than just this Planet, then more representing angels would have been mentioned, and so cited, in this passage.
It can be objectingly argued that Rev 5:11 is based on Dan 7:10, which speaks of the convening of God’s Judicial Council/Court in the “time of the end” (i.e. 1798 A.D.+) to then determine God’s Kingdom implementation plans (Dan 7:13-14 = Dan 2:34-35, 44-45), but as my Theological/Prophetic understanding is that this “end” could have indeed occurred at the end of the First Century A.D., -(with “unsealed” Eschatological (=“last days” -Heb 1:2) prophecies not being fulfilled according to a: ‘1 day=1 year’ conversion/application], I have no problem seeing/understanding that Dan 7:10 was indeed projectingly looking forward to that time period....thus when the world’s total population could be seen by God that it would then be around 100,000,000 people.
Now, could there instead have only been 50,000,000 people living in the World in the late First Century A.D. and thus the “two (angelic) witnesses” of each human was present at that Heavenly Council...That is mathematically quite likely pointedly in regards to the Earth Population estimates, and in regards to the angels, other angels assigned to other sectors in God’s Universe would then have substituted for these Earth-assigned angels until that Council was over.
Commanding Angels - Further related to this is the information from the SOP that there are a rank of “commanding angels” (CA) beyond regular angels (RA), and these “CAs” are slightly taller than “RAs” (see 1SP 22.1; cf. 1 SG 48.2|TA 198.3-4; EW 272.2; -and there is still a higher order of Angels above CAs; i.e., the 7 Mighty/Cherubim Angels see e.g. 3SP 191.2) -(which is indeed a practically great advantage to have so that all RAs under their command can easily see, let alone readily recognize/identify, them. Thus the numbering in Rev 5:11/(Dan 7:10) may actually be indicating that there were 1,000,000 CAs, and 100,000,000 RAs, thus 1 CA for every 100 RA, thus these CAs being “Centurions”. So while the number of angels for today’s more populated world/universe would have increased, that 1:100 “Centurion” ratio & ranking probably has been retained.
Total Number of Angels - And I would further add here that, just as proper Biblical study about the contextually related 24 elders (Rev 4:4, 10) revealed that these were the pointedly human representatives of/from this planet, resurrected at Christ’s Resurrection and Ascension who here took their judging/jury seats on those 24 thrones (Rev 4:4) as the subject matter of this Throne Room Court Session was the affairs of this planet, but that there are similar 24 Elder representative individuals for each of the worlds and also galaxies (cf. Job 1:6ff) which God has created, and who likewise come to this Throne Room whenever it involves a session that is jurisdictionally and/or subject-matterly pertinent to them, I am also seeing here that there were/are actually many more angels than just ‘2 per living person on this planet Earth’, and thus those 100,000,000+1,000,000 which were present in the Rev 4+5 Throne Room Session, -being representatives of the probable ca. 50 or 100,000,000 people alive on the Earth in that late First Century A.D. time were the only ones there because it was this Planet’s, and its (“Milky Way”) Galaxy’s affairs which were under scrutiny then. All of the rest of the angels ministering to other created worlds (ca. 213,200 then, ca. 312,000 by today), and their galaxies, then were not summons as these matters were not pointedly pertinent to their ministering jurisdiction.
So, in summary, the above understandings about the number of angels is that Rev 4+5 only involved the angels who are commissioned to this planet, and not the totality of all God’s angels throughout His University. And yet, the number of angels for this Planet is probably a very large/significant percentage of the Universe’s total angels given that this Planet is the only one in rebellion against God’s Will, and this requires the most attention and ministry, pointedly in regards to looking after, as permissible, -certainly life-recording, each and every individual that is born/alive in it, and also given the fact that Satan and his fallen angels are focusing their attacks on this (lawfully accessible) Planet and its inhabitants (Rev 12:12).
Therefore the total number of angels were all existent long before any planet had been created, or more specifically, organized for human life. Thus the “myriads” (cf. Heb 12:22b) angels which saw and participated in “the war in Heaven” (Rev 12:7-10), a third of which followed after Satan (Rev 12:4 -cf. here); then merely had the duty to tangibly look after the created, but not yet organized galaxies and planets which God had priorly instantly created (cf. Gen 1:1) from the “unstorable”, thus immediately converted, bestowed Divine Glory of God the Son, and then afterwards, as God would begin to take a week of creative work per these galaxies to make them habitable for human occupation and habitation, these “Sons of God” & “Morning Stars” (=Job 1:6; 38:7; Luke +see in here in Fourth Church/Series section) angels were then each assigned to a newly formed planet....And then more angelic duties were required for humans on this Earth after/because it had fallen.
And thus also, from TA 287.1 (as expounded upon here[58:39ff]); God is indeed intending to substitutingly give such angelic roles and responsibilities to redeemed humans from this planet (=Rev 2:27-28), probably in relation to future worlds that He will then be continuing to create, and, as wider studies show, as Rev 2:27-28 is related to what preeminently takes place in Rev 19:14-16 all in relation to Rev 9:16; this may be all representative of how these redeemed functioning as ministering angels (Luke 20:34-36; Rev 7:15 - and with e.g., 2NL 163.2-164.2 taken into consideration); -yet pointedly only during the “Resurrection/Millennial/Jubilee” Age will later be using and exerting the influence of their experience to order the planets which God may, in an ensuing “Age”, compensatingly for the hardships tangibly endured (cf. GC 47.1-48.2; cf. John 16:20; Phil 2:8-9 = Rev 3:12) during the permitted object-lesson Great Controversy on this planet, give over to them, to, combining “Sons of God” and “Morning Stars” functions, and like Adam & Eve, populate and rule over (Gen 1:27-28).
_______________________________
Godhead and Universe’s Creation Steps
The joint topics of the Trinity, the Divine Nature of Christ and the Father-Son-Spirit hierarchy in the Godhead has been one of the most divisive within Christianity, and even within individual Christian Denominations (-see an example here amongst SDAs). In short here, I will outliningly present, -with some explaining commentary, what I have thus far gleaned from my various related studies to this issue, which I thinks helps to harmonizingly gel together some of the good and Biblical arguments made in various views.
Indeed, typically in an issue of controversy, either opposing side contain some element of truth, but they then adopt an all or nothing stance, and thus reject the whole view of their opponent, including the valid points. But here such good points are eclectically aggregated to build up the best overall view on this topic as available. [Such an harmonization was similarly, and successfully, done in regards to the Women’s Ordination Issue].
So the following is succinctly what I “musingly” perceive/see/think as to what was involved in the Godhead, and in practical relation to the Creation and Ordering of this Universe. (Perhaps, significantly, I have come up with the “perfect representation number of “7”such steps for/towards this end goal by God of ‘the Creation of all things’; -(interestingly enough, patternedly very similar to God’s subsequent 7-Day Creation steps when Organizing this Planet for habitation.)
0 - Eternal Existence of (Unified) God
The major point of contention in the Godhead debate is whether Jesus/God the Son was always existent and co-Eternal with the God the Father. I musingly venture here to propose a view that I think does not contradict with what is Biblically/SOP-validly claimed on either side of this discussion. I would say that in the earlier eras of Eternity, God was quantitatively “one”; -as in One being....As God is Eternal, this is not being reckoned as a First Step towards Creation as it was an always existent state.
1 - Godhead Split(?!) into God the Father, -Son, -Holy Spirit
....But then, and in order to Create all things, God consciously decided to necessarily split Himself into 3 entities, namely in a bodily-accessible/tangible form (=God the Son) and also in a spiritually-distributable/pervasive (cf. John 16:7-8) form (=God the Spirit). Now as this was merely a splitting into distinct entities and not an original creation, both God the Son and God the Spirit were able to continue to have the same substance as God the Father, but also seamlessly continue to have the same Mind/Spirit and thus the same Eternal cognizance, knowledge and memories (cf. John 14:10-11; 10:38)....
However, -with “flesh and bones” man having been created in God’s Image & Likeness (Gen 1:26) and God the Father Himself having a tangible (bodily) form (EW 54.2a), God may have done this splitting of Himself through a tangible DNA-cloning process, similarly to what God would deliberately do in regards to Eve so that she would be of the ‘flesh of flesh, and bones of bones’ of Adam (Gen 2:23; see here for the recently scientifically-corroborated reason why God chose the rib to do this human cloning).
It could be claimed that when God had multiplied Himself into also God the Son and Spirit, they did not have the same Eternal mind/Spirit, but I think that this would be most essential in order to claim that all 3 members of this now Godhead were existentially equal in every substantive way. So I do see that God made sure to also transfer an exact copy of his mind in these other two replica entities of Himself.
It can then be further presumed that these minds may even be interlinked together where they always know exactly what each other is thinking...but I would actually argue against such a claim/assumption given the many instances in the Bible and SOP where the Godhead is said to have convened together in a “Council” (not “Counsel”) in order to deliberate and make decisions. So while they may commonly share the same mind-content at the time of this God-Splitting, from that point on, they each had their distinct mind/thoughts, but of course are still in full harmony of belief and purpose, though, as seen in EW 149-153, they can have different views and disagreeing stances which need to be reconciled and settled.
2 - “Trans-form-ing” of God the Son into Michael the Archangel
Now when the Godhead decided to create the Universe, as discussed here, the energy to produce all of the needed material was bestow by God the Son as He allowed himself to become of a lesser glorious nature, becoming Michael the Archangel. This is where/when, as discussed here on Pro 8:22-31, that: ‘God the Father wisely “took possession” of God the Son in order to create (and still substantively own) all things’.
The role/duty of God the Spirit was also involved here, where He manifestly also underwent a form transformation, i.e. from a bodily being, to a Spirit, all in order to surveilling watch over, monitor and even hold together various aspects of God’s Creation. E.g. Gen 1:2 where, before atmospheric gravity could be was created, it was God the Spirit’s role to, while dispersed everywhere, simultaneously also: ‘(softeningly/relaxingly =calmingly & protectively*) “hover” over the “surface” of “(deep) waters”’ on the unformed/unorganized planets in order to keep them in place.
* Cf. Jer 23:9 & Deut 32:11 for uses of the Hebrew word here: “rachaph” (Strongs #07363a+b)]
3 - Creation of the Universe (including Galaxies, Stars/Suns, Planets)
Again here, as discussed in here, it is Theologically believed that once the bestowed energy of God the Son was taken possession of for Creation, it had to all be transformed into matter all at once as to store it up as energy would require having a bodily capable, thus Divine, Being to enclose it. So that would explain why there are many unorganized and uninhabited planets in many galaxies, yet still with many presently combusting stars (=suns) in/for those galaxies.
The main purpose for these stars, which indeed are distant suns, is manifestly in order to help keep the overall temperature of the Universe at a proper level for basic function, and likewise also a slight/basic degree of illumination.
4 - Creation of Leadership Angels (Cherubim/Mighty Angels & Seraphim)
Now when the above 4 steps towards the Creation of all things were achieved, the Godhead then also created His Angelic beings to be His tangible hands and feet throughout His Universe starting with the Head and Commanding Angels, namely: Cherubim/Mighty Angels and Seraphim. This, and the entire, Angelic Creation was likely also done from part of the bestowed glory of God the Son, thus from their (thus substantively worthy) Commander-in-Chief Michael the Archangel.
5 - Creation of Subordinate Angels
Pointedly the “myriads” of “foot-soldier”/“Rank and File” angels were now created in this step. Under the Head/Officer Angels, these angels seem to indeed all be on the same level, but having various tasks as they help to managed God’s Universe and assist His humanly-created beings.
As it can be argued that as “Commanding Angels”, -which, as discussed earlier, manifestly each command centurion-sized contingents, differ in their function than the more priestly Cherubim and Seraphim, they manifestly are a distinct part of these subordinate “Rank and File” Angels.
6 - Planets (e.g. Earth) Organized for Human Habitation
This is the step where the Godhead worked to organized the already created galaxies and planets for habitation by flesh and bone humans.
Then it therefore would be early in such a Sixth Step when, as the SOP reveals (see 3SG 36.1), the Godhead were convening to discuss this planned Creation, that Azazel =“Lucifer”/Satan became jealous for being left out of these deliberations and started and executed his Great Controversy rebellion, which culminated in the injunctively decisive War in Heaven (Rev 12:7-9).
This Planet Earth, which went on to Fall into sin, was the very first of such ‘Organization for Habitation’ Creation by the Godhead, and as discussed here, since that first week, God has manifestly been going about His universe every week to likewise do such a Planetary Occupation Creation elsewhere. Thus this would be over 312,000 such Earth-like God-organized singular Planets in 312,000 different Galaxies.
7 - Subsequent Galaxy Organizing and Inhabiting
As in the Creation Week, by the end of the Sixth step above, it would seem that God’s Universe Creation purposes would be complete, but as with the then appendingly-created Seventh-Day Sabbath/Rest (Gen 2:1-3), God’s Universe Creation Steps also has a Seventh Step, and also one which involves “rest”, for God. This is in the manifest fact that God seemingly has, as done in this Milky Way Galaxy, God has only organized a single planet per galaxy for immediate/ready human occupancy, and, getting right to the mused point here, God has left the other planets to, as discussed here, be occupied and even be readied for occupation, by the scientific discovery/knowledge and various engineering abilities of the humans in their own galaxies, -indeed also in regards to major components such as creating Ozone for a conducive Earth-like atmosphere (e.g. through harnessed nuclear fusion energy which would serve to heat an evaporate liquid water into a gaseous atmosphere).
This self-propagating-by-humans provision allows God to both rest, as well as to not have to dispense added Divine Energy towards this further/reproducing Creation, thus making it possible for Him to instead expend such energies towards so “seeding” another part of His vast, and manifestly still expanding, Universe for more and individually unique Human Beings.
Manifestly for Great Controversy preemptively-securing reasons, God has adopted this rudimentary and compartmentalized approach to the Organization of each galaxy for Habitation, so in the case that, as Eternally possible as Freedom of Choice is also Eternal, a planet/galaxy would rebel against God, their rebellion can be quarantined to, at most, their own galaxy. So the humans in each galaxy would be left to advance as they themselves cooperatively, lovingly and sinlessly work to do so.
Universe Creative Steps vs. Planet Creative Days
As variously hinted in the above unfolding presentation, it can be readily seen, especially by the Seventh Step above, just how much those 7 Steps towards the Creation of all things in God’s Universe, are templately similar to the 7 Steps/Days involved in the Organization for Habitation of this (and surely every other) “seed” Planet in a Galaxy. Here is a comparative charting of the 7 Steps in/for the Creation of the Universe and those for Organizing this/a Planet for Human Habitation:
 |
| 7 Steps/Days of Universe Creation & Planetary Organization |
This template similarity even is seen in how, -as discussed within here, in the 7-Day Creation Week, in the First 3 Days, God created the “Space & Containing” Aspects/Structures of this Planet, and then in the Last 3 Days, He recursively went back and filled in these spaces with their pertinent components....In specific detailing:
-On Day 1 of this Planet’s Organizing Creation, God created ‘the atmospheric spaces and capability for reflecting light’ (Gen 1:3-5); then on Day 4 He created the luminary bodies which would produce this light (Gen 1:14-19).
-On Day 2 God organized the liquid water bodies and water-based atmospheric sections (Gen 1:6-8); then on Day 5 He teemed both of these sectors with fish and birds respectively (Gen 1:20-23);
-On Day 3 God crafted the habitable territorial/land masses of the Earth (Gen 1:9-13); then on Day 6 He furnished, occupied and populated them up with vegetation; land creatures and humans respectively (Gen 1:24-31; 2:5-9ff);
And then of course, on the extra Day 7, He rested and created the Sabbath Rest. (Gen 2:1-3)
Similarly, in those above discussed 7 Steps/Measures towards the Creation of all things in this Universe:
-In Step 1 the prior single form/entity God split Himself, for differing functional purposes into into the Father, -Son and -Holy Spirit thus forming the “Godhead”; in Step 4 God likewise created a functionally-practical leadership entity, here for Angelic Beings.
-In Step 2 God the Son trans-formed Himself into Michael, the Chief of all the Angel in order to bestow His Glory so that all things could be created; in Step 5 the myriads of subordinate angels, those under the priestly Cherubim and Seraphim Head Angels, were created, appointed and structured as Commanding and Sentinel Angels.
-In Step 3 the Universe, its Galaxies and (unorganized) Planets and Stars/Suns were created; then in Step 6 God began to work on organizing a Planet per week in order to be conducive supporting life..
Then in Step 7 when God has completed the organization of a “seed Planet” in a galaxy He can “rest/cease” from Himself having to further organize other planets in those galaxies, leaving that responsibility to the Humans he had created on the seed planet, as they develop and advance in knowledge and capability.
So, in overall summary here, arguably, the most controversial part of this view is the Step 1 of the Creation of all things Sequential Model which posits that a priorly merely Unifiedly-Lone God engaged in splitting Himself up into 3 distinct entities, all for functional purposes in this Created Universe that He now would be ruling over. But other than that, I see that this 7-Step Theological Views is most plausible and acceptable.
___________________________
God & Substitutionary Life|Death:
-Theological Lessons From Nabeel Qureschi’s Passing
So by now, after further evaluation and testings, the “hidden truth” (a.k.a. “mystery” cf. Rev 10:6) Theological View about ‘God’s economical use of Divine Energy’ is not only most Theologically manifest, but it is also Theologically fundamental. In summary this view is that: with everything that exist being derived from energy, -both in terms of matter and movement, it is God Himself who has supplied that Creation’s Energy, through the bestowing of the Divine Glory of God the Son. After have rudimentarily created the Universe, God has since then been using that Energy to, every week/7 days, create a new habitable World for (newly created) humans to live in. But the crucial aspect of this, necessarily and best so, ‘Divine Energy created and supplied Universe’ is that if God is to have to expend energy to repair something which has failed/gone wrong in it, -which quarantinedly only occurs within the realm of this Sin-Fallen Planet and its (“Milky Way”) Galaxy, that is then energy which He cannot use towards either creating new things or people, -who have not sinned, or sustaining them in their perpetually eternal living. And even if God’s energy source is infinite, -(I rather see that it is renewably so), as the Universe is manifestly expanding, and so potentially infinite, that then is still expended energy that cannot be recovered. Meaning that expending it to make repairs on this fallen/sinful world comes at the cost of the Creation and/or optimal life of some other sinless human or life form. So that is all why a tangible Sacrifice, specifically of His Divine Nature, had to be made by Jesus [though not necessarily so through a physical bodily death], had to be done by (the sinless) Jesus Christ in order to supply all of the “reparation”/restorative energy for this Fallen World (and which at the same time allows other sinless beings not to suffer any loss).
The cancer illness and subsequent death of Nabeel Qureschi, to me, highlighted this tangible Theological reality of the “Economical implications of Divine Energy”. Meaning: for most observers, and as (albeit futilely and self-incriminatingly) faultfindingly harped upon by his Muslim opponents and enemies, Nabeel would seem like the perfect candidate for God to supernaturally intervene and heal him of his cancer. He most manifestly had a potentially most Christianly fruitful life ahead of him as a Christian apologist and evangelist. Surely he would have brought many people, even Muslims, like he had been, to Christ.* But/So why in the world then didn’t God heal him?!! As presented above, that would incontrovertibly have had to involve the expenditure of Divine Energy....and that would have been at the cost of someone else. Meaning that God could have made such a healing expenditure for Nabeel’s case, and it would have seem like an “economically” worthwhile “re-investment”. But that would involve some form of a cost (i.e. in regards to someone else). Pointedly speaking, that ‘some other form’ could also be in the situation where God, like with Jesus, would not intervene, but allow a fate/consequence, -(here generally from the natural consequence of a fallen world where cancer can indeed affect even the most faithful of Believers) on someone who would be deserving of His Saving/Healing Intervention, in order to be able to make such an expenditure on someone else who is not deserving (cf. 1 Pet 3:18)
* In my viewing (e.g. Youtube posted videos) thus far of the ministering of Nabeel Qureschi, the only issue that I have come across, -which may seem trivial and inconsequential to some, but actually is not at all, is the view he once expressed, -to my shock given his (otherwise) manifested Exegetical competence and Biblical faithfulness, was that, as he expressed in a November 4, 2013 presentation at Georgia Tech [01:28:54-01:31:21]: he did not believe that the account of Creation in Genesis was literal, as in ‘having occurred within one week, i.e. during 6 24-hour days’. And, at least to me, he cited reasons were even more harrowing as he, in my opinion, quasi-blasphemously, effectively claimed that ‘God could not have done all that in so short a time’.....Then his ‘substantiating’ reasons were just as much worrisome, claiming in one argument that: the word “slept” in Gen 2:21 {Heb: “yashen” -Strongs #03462}, -when God had put Adam in a “deep sleep” [tardemah #08639] in order to remove his rib and create Eve [actually here originally “inventing”the human-female gender being], meant a “long sleep”, thus one which would have lasted overnight/until the next day. (Well, at the very least, that wouldn’t have meant “millions of years”). But looking how that word is used in other places in the Bible, shows that it does not necessarily mean a “(normative) full night/time of sleep” i.e. 6-8 hours, but just a prolonged/extended time but which could only be a couple of hours.
For example, in Gen 41:5, the context of Gen 41:1-8 shows that Pharaoh had two dreams in one night and that he awoke from his “sleep” in between them...So, at the very least, his “(long) sleep” was ca. 3-4 hours long. Similarly in Jdg 16:19, surely Delilah did not make/allow Samson to sleep for a full 6-8 hours “on her knees” before she cut off his hair and awoke him to see if he could still defend himself. (It cannot be concretely determined if Elijah in 1 Kgs 19:5ff, though awoken in between once, had slept merely for part of a night, or overnight, and was then awaken, or even longer than that).
But here is the issue with God in Creation. On that Sixth Day, God, clearly using voice-activating effectuation, ordered that “the Earth (i.e. from itself)” ‘bring forth land creatures’ (Gen 1:24-25), meaning that, unlike for man who God personally hand-fashioned from the Earth (Gen 2:7), for the animals, God merely spoke the instructions, and that activated the processes which brought them forth from the Earth. So, as with all of the other thing which God had similarly instructed for existence, God did not have to spend individual time on each of them to create them. So let’s say this Creation of the land animals took half of that day (assuming, though not necessarily so, that God only started His day of Creation as sunlight/rise and ended when the sun set.) If He took 6 hours to speak and sustain that Creation of thousands (if only 2 of each kind), if not millions, of land creatures, that would leave him at least ca. 6 hours of day(light) to create just 2 humans. Certainly He could do so in that time. Moreover God, knowing He would need special time to personally hand-fashion man, could have accelerated the creation of the land animals in order to have sufficient time. Then, Adam was sleeping while God was creating Eve, so that of course wouldn’t require consecutively additional time. And then, as seen above, the “long sleep” that Adam slept could have been just a couple of hours long and not necessarily a normative full night-length sleep (i.e. 6-8 hours). So, even for just a total of 6 hours, -though it could have been much more, that leaves ample time for Adam to have named all of the animals which ‘God brought to him’ (Gen 2:19) e.g. over 4 hours, leaving ca. 2 hours for God to put Adam to sleep while He created Eve.
And, to further apply Nabeel’s argument/logic, -(and that is what I mean by such claims not only having limited implications, i.e. to just the understanding of Genesis, but rather to the whole of the Bible and thus the Christian message), if God needed to take 2-8+ hours to fashion/create Eve, i.e. from scratch, then, in/for the Final resurrection, (and even if one wrongly only believes that it will be the wicked/unsaved dead who will be bodily resurrected then and God would have already (individually) resurrected the righteous dead whenever they had died), how long will it “require” God to raise hundreds of billions of humans given that all of them will have to effectively be bodily re-created from scratch from the Earth since their dead bodies have since their death been completely decomposed “back to dust/dirt”??! All this to say that God certainly has to power to create (animals, humans) as fast as He wants to. I see that He injected as much process-sustaining energy as necessary to make it all happen within the 12-24 creation hours of the Sixth Day of Creation
Nabeel also cited another argument which I concede is understandable, although his effective point was that “Genesis is kind of logically confused as, (it seems to say that) the sun, moon and stars were not created until the 4th Day, however Genesis speaks of Light existing from the very First Day. The Exegetical/Biblical fixing of this issue is, as discussed & demonstrated here, that the Hebrew of Genesis speaks of God forming the ‘(atmospheric) conditions for Light’ on the First Day, and then filling in that created space/condition with the actual Luminary Lights on the Fourth Day.
And as such an understanding would also give problems, and proportionarily even more so, to people who claim/believe that Creation (“evolutionarily”) occurred over million/billion of years, such an argument can only be claiming that Genesis is in error here...or as Nabeel deemed it, this thus allows Genesis to be “interpreted”....’just like the book of Revelation needs to be’....And his repeated disclaimer[01:40:35ff] that, to me sounded completely non-sequitur, that: “he was not a theologian, and therefore did not deal with Genesis, per se”, clearly showed that Nabeel thought/beleived that the book, and statements in, Genesis, -most likely solely in regards to the first 3-11 chapters, needed to be “theologically” figured out/interpreted. -But the simple rebuttal here is that the book/prophecies of Revelation were explicitly stated to be “codified/signified” (Rev 1:1-3)...Not so for Genesis...It is only the ascribing to modern, so-called “science”, pointedly the Theory of Evolution, which leads one believe that Genesis needs to be interpreted according to such man-made theories.
So this stance and claims by Nabeel, and pointedly the far-reaching implications of such views/opinion had me concerned about him,# and particularly in the fact that if you are teaching that parts of the Bible can be so “re-interpreted” and according to human theories and scientific claims, then what, honestly, is to prevent someone from similarly questioning any, or every, other part of the Bible, particularly those which involve similar Super-natural/Extra-Scientific miraculous claims/interventions by God, including the Gospel and New Testament accounts which Nabeel seemed to think were beyond any such undermining. People today, even so-called Christians, as seen in the infamous “Jesus Seminar” group, which Nabeel had also cited in that presentation, indeed do such “Historical/Higher (also Theological)-Critical” dismissing of much of what the Gospels and New Testament say.##
# Though he did (apologetically) say at the end of that presentation [at 01:45:58-01:46:19] that he was open to being corrected if he said anything wrong. (He probably would have noticed the possible surprised look on the faces of some people when he had made such a claim about Genesis and Creation)
## The Divine Energy view/understanding also comes to provide a most plausible for the reconciling of the seemingly scientifically attested “million years in certain geological elements” and the ca. 6000 year recorded history since Creation presented in the Bible. First of all, it must be factored in that the geological date of things is greatly affected by several (historical/procedural) parameters, which many times cannot be precisely determined, even known at all today. So some geological things which may be determined to have been formed “billions of years ago” could have been, -as shown for the opening of the Creation documentary (embedded) in this post), only formed a few decades ago.
So the Divine Energy View involves that when Jesus, before the Creationof any being/thing, had agreed with God the Father to bestow His Divine Energy for the Creation and Sustaining of all things in that Created Universe, that energy could not be “stored as energy anywhere else, as that would actually require the creation of a God-level being to be able to contain it, which would bring things back to the square one problem....and “creating” a God cannot be done as “God” has to be inherently Eternal. So all of that Divine Energy had to be transformed into a (comparatively) inert state, and this is where/how/why I see that God converted that Energy into this (dark energy/mattered-composed) Universe and also all of the galaxies, suns/stars, moons, (mostly uninhabited) planets, etc that is found therein. So that “Divine Energy Mass Conversion”, which occurred to create all things, could have occurred a very long time ago, -not necessarily tens of billions of years ago, as all of the parameters involved in this formation are not accurately known today. That would also reconcile the understanding that the visible light of the suns/stars in the rest of the Universe has reached us after many years of travelling at light-speed. {see also here[09:13-14:35]} However this Planet only came to be organized for habitation by created human life only ca. 6000 years ago. Hence Gen 1:1-2 refers to that initial “Divine Energy Mass Conversion” Creation event, but Gen 1:3ff to that time ca. 6000 years ago when God then acted to organized this previously “without form and void” Planet for perfect human habitation. It indeed makes sense that God would not have first created a “without form and void” planet which the Holy Spirit had to ‘hover over its deep waters’ manifestly to keep them in their place, if that was only a brief first step. Gen 1:1-2 sounds like a state which lasted over an extended period of time.
Evidently I was neither wrong, nor the only one, to have been alarmed by such expressed Bible-undermining views and stances by Nabeel, as in his funeral, a close friend of his and mentor, James Tour, said, -here[40:55-43:20], that the very first lesson and exhortations he gave Nabeel, starting shortly after his cancer diagnosis, was that ‘he should accept every word as the Bible as true, as having been faithfully preserved as accurate and true by God’s Spirit, and should repent of any form of trying to critique and parse it as some of it being true/reliable and other parts as being doubtful.’ Frankly that is quite shocking to hear that Nabeel had such a (philosophical) stance in regards to Scriptures. Initially, after first having heard that anecdote, I had mishearingly thought that it was a recently converted Nabeel (thus around ca. 2005) who had had such a view, and that his above cited 2013 presentation at Georgia Tech was after that fact, and so Nabeel would therefore have opted to continue with such a stance about the Bible. But it was shocking to hear, -actually just now when I re-listened to it, that it was a 2016 Nabeel who still had such a stance, but it was reassuring to hear that he had since, as exhorted, repented of such doubting views.* (Hopefully, -and I do not think/see so, but this can indeed be an object-lesson for others, it wasn’t merely in a self-serving spirit in order to obtain a healing miracle from God.)...
* As seen here, Nabeel’s enemies have pounced on this shortcoming to try to disqualify his preaching...which does make sense in itself. If Nabeel is claiming/believing that certain parts of the Bible are up to personal subjective assumptions of them, moreover to be trumped by so-called Science, then why not likewise any other part??
Generally stated, it never ceases to amaze me that certain Christians claim to believe certain parts of the Bible, e.g. the New Testament, but doubt the rest of the Bible. If they believe e.g. that God can, and will resurrect them, which inherently will have to be a Supernatural act, then why is it so hard to believe that God could not have created the World in six, 24-hour days?? Many Christians do indeed, perhaps subconsciously so, nonetheless “foolishly” (cf. Luke 24:25-27) believe in the parts of the Bible which personally benefit them, but doubt those parts which “embarrass” them, i.e. in the light of supposed/so-called science. Clearly that all is just an effectively quasi-/self-idolatrous disposition and endeavor.
Nabeel himself was clearly a very scholarly educated, studious, informed and intelligent person and so, with, in my view, the chief contribution of higher education being the training of someone to know how to get the most accurate and best answers, I was finding strange that Nabeel did not know to consult the scientific and Bible-validating work of the various Biblical Creationist Christian ministries out there (like Answers In Genesis; see more cited in here) who do satisfactorily resolve such Origins issues.
So was Nabeel (effectively) initially guilty of such a sin, of upholding fallible claims of men about science above God?! Self-evidently...initially: “Yes”. Would that be why God chose not to heal him....Likely not... ...though the incident with Moses & his lone, but disqualifying, (public/leadership) faithlessness&disobedience sin (Num 20:8-12) shows that the more privileged and favored someone is with God, the stricter God will be in dealing with their sin. And though Moses pleaded for God to let him lead the people of Israel into Canaan, God would not change His mind and Moses died (Deut 1:37; 3:23-26). Moses even argued that “God had (then only) begun to show him His greatness and strong hand”, as if to claim that He would have not had acted so if he had had such greater revelation about God....But God evidently thought/saw that Moses had had enough revelation and understanding to have remained obedient. Indeed having had spent 40 days on a mountain top, if not in Heaven itself, with God, was more than enough revelation/knowledge for Moses to have known not to let people make him deviate from what God had said.
And this all leads me to the particular point of this musing discussion....Like Moses, David also greatly sinned against God....at least twice going by the capital punishment consequences which resulted from those sins. The first was in the matter of Uriah the Hittite and his wife Bathsheba (2 Sam 11:1-12:23) and the other was in the faithless and unlawful (i.e. manifestly also without collecting the plague-averting, “atonement money” of Exod 30:12ff, 16) Military Census of the People (2 Sam 24:1-17/1 Chr 21)....But in either case, it was not David who suffered the due capital punishment consequence for his sin. In the case of his adultery with Bathsheba and (“First Degree”) manslaughter of Uriah, it was David’s first born son from that adulterous affair with Bathsheba who was killed (2 Sam 12:13-23)....Whereas when the preceding king, Saul, had sinned, even lesser sins, God summarily disqualified him from his household continue to be kings in Israel (1 Sam 15:25-29) and, -as soon as David was anointed (1 Sam 16:13), God removed His Spirit from Saul (1 Sam 16:14-15ff).
But it should also be emphasized that also in David’s case, beyond the self-evident capital consequences from the sins of Adultery and Manslaughter/Murder, the faulting issue of: ‘having thus publicly embarrassed God & done great and far-reaching injury to His Cause before unbelieving people’ was explicitly cited (2 Sam 12:14|PP 722.4) as the “occasioning” underlying element for this punishment here.
In David, God had sought and (famously, finally) found “a man after His own heart”...and that is evidently why God had manifestly opted to do a “substitutionary trade-off” in order to preserve the life of David even after he had gravely sinned. But in any such substitutionary transaction, the “value” of the substitution must be of comparable worth. E.g. God could not choose a drunken vagrant in Israel to die in David’s stead. He instead had to choose someone here who would be a future king. For indeed, though Bathsheba was clearly not David’s only, nor even first, wife, (but actually his eighth and last cited one), having had married at least 6 while he was a fugitive for 13 years, he surely had had many sons prior to Bathsheba’s conception. And yet, it was David’s will, and manifestly approved by God (cf. 2 Sam 12:24-25), that the son of Bathsheba would succeed David on the throne, as Solomon indeed went on to do. So by killing this first born son of David and Bathsheba, God was indeed “comparatively” taking the life a future king to allow David to live, and with God already having planned (see 2 Sam 7) to do great things with this next king, as indeed He went on to do with Solomon.
But it should also be emphasized that also in David’s case, beyond the self-evident capital consequences from the sins of Adultery and Manslaughter/Murder, the faulting issue of: ‘having thus publicly embarrassed God & done great and far-reaching injury to His Cause before unbelieving people’ was explicitly cited (2 Sam 12:14|PP 722.4) as the “occasioning” underlying element for this punishment here.
In David, God had sought and (famously, finally) found “a man after His own heart”...and that is evidently why God had manifestly opted to do a “substitutionary trade-off” in order to preserve the life of David even after he had gravely sinned. But in any such substitutionary transaction, the “value” of the substitution must be of comparable worth. E.g. God could not choose a drunken vagrant in Israel to die in David’s stead. He instead had to choose someone here who would be a future king. For indeed, though Bathsheba was clearly not David’s only, nor even first, wife, (but actually his eighth and last cited one), having had married at least 6 while he was a fugitive for 13 years, he surely had had many sons prior to Bathsheba’s conception. And yet, it was David’s will, and manifestly approved by God (cf. 2 Sam 12:24-25), that the son of Bathsheba would succeed David on the throne, as Solomon indeed went on to do. So by killing this first born son of David and Bathsheba, God was indeed “comparatively” taking the life a future king to allow David to live, and with God already having planned (see 2 Sam 7) to do great things with this next king, as indeed He went on to do with Solomon.
So, in conclusion, if God has chosen not to supernaturally intervene to have healed Nabeel from this (probably) merely naturally-occurred disease (i.e. it was not from a punishment/curse from God), and indeed God could have healed him,* and, as with Job, people, including Nabeel himself, could not see a (sustained/persisted) sin in his life which would bar such a miraculous intervention by God....
* And a great manifestation of this possibility can be seen from an experience that Nabeel shared here which he had while undergoing treatment where God had evidently revealed to him in a prophetic revelation from two women just how he (medically) had come to develop this stomach cancer.
....And so, as this fate likely was not, -though still potentially possible, to serve as a Moses-like* object-lesson in regards to, despite great Biblical knowledge, harboring any degree of unbelief towards God’s word, then I am seeing this as being for a David-like Divine-energy saving, substitutionary transaction, where God withheld expending Divine (healing) energy on Nabeel so the He could then be “economically” be capable of expending it on some “ministry-potential comparable” other person. ...
....And so, as this fate likely was not, -though still potentially possible, to serve as a Moses-like* object-lesson in regards to, despite great Biblical knowledge, harboring any degree of unbelief towards God’s word, then I am seeing this as being for a David-like Divine-energy saving, substitutionary transaction, where God withheld expending Divine (healing) energy on Nabeel so the He could then be “economically” be capable of expending it on some “ministry-potential comparable” other person. ...
* [Though, as with Moses’ subsequent (controversialized) resurrection and ascension (Jude 1:9); a similar applicable/effective “martyr’s reward” may be/(have been) in store for Nabeel.# I.e.: While the (re-)expending of Divine Energy for the restoration of (vital) health is not actually owed to even the Believer in this life, the energy for their resurrection has been (tangibly) provided for by the Sacrifice of Christ. So that resurrecting expenditure towards an Eternal Life would not be an extra disbursement of Divine Energy.]
# Though, -all pertinent factors taken into consideration, the, =“faith-currency” (=
_______________________
Jesus’ Partial/Two-Stage Healing of a Blind Man (Mar 8:22-26)
This question was posed on Stephen Bohr’s Q&A show. (You can see it here at 02:33-06:42). They did not have an answer to it. However given an experience that had occur with and related to, myself, I was able to arrive at the most likely resolution of that matter...I have posted the response in the Youtube comments section of that video (here and here), but as it has long been the Satanic case with the Bohr ministry, -(ever since I exposed their redundantly-wasteful use of money[9] ...because as patent with these Synagogue of Satan SDA’s, whenever you touch their actual Mammon/Golden Calf (income) “Ezek 8:" gods (see here), they then act to silence you, they cowardly acted to mute/conceal my commenting so that no else but my user account can see my comments to their video. And “compoundedly” I was, with the ca. 112+ pointed questions that I sent to them, which they never could respond to validly/Biblically, just exposed their inherent, but indifferently cherished, deficiencies...So as indeed ‘Ezek 8 deluded SDASS’ they could not dare let anyone else see that they are merely concerned with making Capitalistic/Individualistic merchandising of God’s work with their systematized: “who will be the greatest” contending/competing...which indeed all results in their persisting shoddy, useless, vacuous, false “resolutions” of all/any key Biblical/Theological/Prophetic matter...Like failed Israel of old...just merely contented with going around in circles around the same mountain...and worse, both claiming that as God’s will and ideal. (=Ezek 8:12)...
LOL!!!...What a bunch of “(self-deluded and vexatious) grown up children” (=1SM 110.1)....
So that duly factually and Spiritually contextualized, here is the (resolving) response that I had posted there:
02:33-06:42 - I have recently had certain medical information, observed experiences (in fact, just a day before I viewed this video), as well as personal experience in regards to cataracts and its remedial surgery which have all come to help give me what I see to be the most logical/natural understanding in regards to this issue.
First of all, there are various eye conditions which may cause a person not to see, pointedly if/as they become more acute/severe. Developing cataracts is one of them. I wouldn’t think that people in Bible times would know/understand that medical nuance of conditions and so they just deemed every with eye condition where a person could no longer see as “blindness”...But, on the other hand, Jesus, through the Revelation of God the Father, both Master “Scientist/Doctors”, knew and understood those nuances...And so, just as there are different medical interventions to remedy each of these distinct “blindness” causing eye conditions, God inspired Jesus to use a different method to heal what most likely had been varying causes of “blindness” in those 4 people. So to me, that is why Jesus used 4 different methods, to, knowingly/signally, represent each of those varying causes/conditions. The end result of course is all been able to see again...
In regards to the “double healing” of the “blind” man in Mark 8:22-26, just yesterday I was checking up with a family member who had had cataract surgery the day before. They said that they could see better, but that their vision was a little blurry....Since I myself had had cataract surgery (at 44) but had had no issues at all of blurry vision afterwards, I became concerned and so looked up on line what could be the issue here...I then came across information that said that ‘it was actually normal to have blurry vision in the days, even weeks after cataracts surgery, and that it should eventually clear up’...
Well all that info and experience then helped me to surmise what may have occurred with that “blind” man in Mark 8:22-26....Given that no further details/explanations are given in the Bible, nor SOP, I would indeed surmise that he too actually had cataracts...and it had become so severe that he could not see, and so was summarily deemed to be “blind”...Well Jesus first healed his cataract issue...and/but then, as Jesus then actually knowingly [immediately] “followed up” on him, (just as a ophthalmologist today would do follow ups with his cataract surgery patient), by quite uniquely asking him: “Do you see anything?” [I.e. something that he is never recorded as asking in any of the other 3 (gospels-recorded) “blindness” healing miracles]. Well it seems that this man actually suffered from the subsequent effect of having blurry vision post “intervention”. Indeed seeing “men like trees” is seeing the shape of people but not focusedly/detailedly = blurrily). And so when Jesus had ascertain that this normative “post-op” condition was the case for him, He immediately proceeded to do, what would actually be a second distinct miracle, to supernaturally = immediately resolve that blurriness issue so that the man could immediate see clearly rather than “naturally” waiting a few days/weeks for the blurriness to clear up on its own...
So I see that Jesus had knowing reasons to proceed this way in, (also fully), healing cases of “blindness” and this was possibly done so just to signal to a future, more medically informed/capable, generation such as ours, that He actually always fully understood what was scientifically/medically (distinctly) going on in those cases....
_______________________
As with all of these Theological Musings, it would indeed behoove believers to Theologically grasp, from quite explicitly available gleanings in the Bible and SOP, that God and His Universe do not operate in a “hocus pocus” realm, but instead in a quite tangible, ordering & functioning, natural/scientific, cause and effect, realities.
Notes
[1] This GYC 2011 Seminar on the Trinity jointly presented by A.R.I.S.E. Institute co-workers David Asscherick and Jeffrey Rosario is quite interesting, indeed showing that there is much, much more corroborating evidence in the Bible (and also in the SOP), in support of the Trinity and all that this entails, than not. (Hearing these 4 presentations is indeed worthwhile if you can actually ignore the quite odd, running, reciprocal, snubbing vs. petty, ego-istic, “friendly fire” bantering between the two as they jointly present the seminars. By the latter presentations, they more than less seem to have resolved, at least “glossingly”, their, clearly competitive, differences/rivalry. [And though “one party” is demonstrably/factually more at fault than the other here, as ministry partners, they are duly, equivalently held at fault here. {“Exod 2:13-14a”}])
A notable point that was made (see this seminar at [37:06-43:50] was that, succinctly stated here: Gen 19:24 speaks of the action of two distinct entities of the Godhead, namely the Incarnate God the Son on Earth then, who has just come from visiting Abraham and is carrying out this judgement, and God the Father in Heaven who, actually through the “agency” of angels (as syntactically indicated in the Hebrew, and corroborated in the SOP at PP 160.2 (see also this discussion post [near its end])), sends the rain of fire and brimstone down from Heaven. The only, would-be, objection to that quite clear indication in that verse is: ‘why then are they both called “Yahweh”’; but that, all contextual contributions fully kept in consideration, actually speaks more of the close identity between God the Father and God the Son. (See a more protracted presentation of this point in this other sermon of Asscherick on that topic.)
[2] In the 01-07-2012 here [36:05-37:54], Dwight Nelson mentions the observation of theoretical physicist, theologian, writer, and Anglican priest, John Polkinghorne, who compared prayer with a laser, illustrating that: ‘the more there are people praying for a single issue, the greater/more amplified the strength/penetration of that “petition” to God.’ As Nelson pointed out in the opening of his next week’s sermon, that idea is corroborated in the SOP: 9MR 303.3 (cf. Matt 18:19-20). Indeed I would addedly compare this to, indeed a “petition”, where ‘the more there are people who sign it, the more standing/power/authority it has in effectuating what is being requested. And in the light of the Great Controversy realities, certain requests which will necessitate a supernatural and/or free will overriding action of God may need a definite ‘number of signatures’ in order for it to be authorizable. And thus, a lack of collective, and even enough prayers by Church members would indeed have been the reason why God could not act supernaturally to rescue Paul, as He had with Peter (Acts 12:6-11ff). Manifestly most of the Church then were glad that Paul was no longer around to “deal” with them as the need was. (Indeed just like the Pioneer SDA Church exiled Ellen White to, assumedly, “too far away” Australia in the 1890's.) However as also shown in my next musing, God seemingly already had a much greater reward for Paul, no matter what would be his final fate, and probably allowed the going through with an execution/martyr’s death in order to serve as an encouragement for future Church members who would similarly also be persecuted, arrested and martyred/executed.
To applicably expand on the valid ‘laser~prayer(s)’ illustrative comparison, I would further say that: a single person who faithfully and fervently presses an issue before God in prayer (cf. Luke 18:1-8), can, in this way, themself increase the intensity of their “laser” (= prayer). An example of this is Elijah’s seven verifications for the promised rain (1 Kgs 18:41-45a), for that action itself required much faith and earnestness, (see PK 155.1-157.2)*, with prayer, as actually a form of focused/deliberate/heartfelt communication with God, can thus be also conveyed/effectuated by one’s conscious faith actions.
The Biblical example that Dwight Nelson was expounding upon in that sermon was Daniel’s period of three weeks of praying until, manifestly there were enough power in those compiled fervent prayers to allow God to dispatch Michael Himself to then sway, and “touchlessly” subdue King Cyrus long enough for Gabriel to attend to Daniel; -as manifestly Cyrus’ free will was standing against all of the best will -swaying efforts of Gabriel (See Dan 10:1, 13, 18-21), which were probably being cancellingly offset by the will-swaying influence of Satan.** Evidently Gabriel’s Chief, Michael the Archangel, can do things with e.g, 10X the power of the same single efforts of Gabriel. However, in this GC, Michael can only be sparingly dispatched, less Satan, who clearly does not stand a chance against the strength, or manifestly here influence, of Michael (Jude 1:9), would cry “foul”. However, the compiled/accumulated strength of Daniel’s three weeks of prayer was manifestly collectively powerful enough to warrant that special, momentary, dispatching.
The level of genuine intensity (=one’s faith) of the prayer is also very significant, and efficaciously beneficial, at getting one’s prayer answered, -if it is in God’s will of course (1 John 5:14-15), (and if it is not, then God can, “refocusingly”, always then use those prayers to instead effectuate an much better alternative for the petitioner (Rom 8:28)), and so the genuine intensity (=amount of) faith in prayer (as God can easily, rightly ascertain/determine) can be illustrated by a laser beam’s wavelength, which in turn intrinsically/correspondingly determines the actual fervency (= frequency) of that laser. And so given enough genuine and fervent faith, a single person can, as Elijah did, ‘effectuate much’, even overruling, and that either way, (i.e., for a blessing or for a curse), over an entire nation of professed believers in God (=James 5:16-18).
Of course, the solution to ‘increasing the power of the laser here’ i.e., the power/effectiveness of one’s prayer, is not to, as condemned by Christ (Matt 6:7), engage in “vain repetitions” in either prayer or actions, as some, even Christian denominations believe/teach. God can easily “pick up” on such spuriousness and does not give credit to such ritualism. In fact since God does ‘know what we have need of before we ask for it’ (Matt 6:8), He may then only be looking for a genuine faith manifestation as well as, mainly, a compassionate prayer, as well as one that also is yearning for the advancement of the kingdom of God, as Jesus went on to exemplify (Matt 6:9-13, 14-15). And perhaps each genuine prayer session, as delimitedly determined by God, only can counts as ‘a single laser beam pulse’.
This ‘laser~ prayer(s)’ analogy can also inherently imply that: mindless, “scatter-brained” and rote prayers, especially when one knows them to sloughfully, lackadaisically and even indifferently be so, can be compared to how many time less powerful a ray of light from a handheld flashlight is compared to the, also more focused, beam of a smaller key chain laser unit.
(See more related discussion on this topic here).
(See more related discussion on this topic here).
* Perhaps Israel was not, even after that Mount Carmel episode, actually “worthy” of being blessed as they were then only believers in God by what they had defeatingly experienced and seen (i.e., by sight) and not “by faith”. (cf. 2 Cor 5:7)
** Cyrus was probably then being tempted by his counsellors (= the plural “kings” in Dan 10:13 cf. Dan 6:6-9ff -[“Darius (the Mede)” was the throne name of King Cyrus]), and/or even by Satan himself, to think to renege on his restoration permissions granted to Israel a couple of years before which would be why God would have had to here so earnestly and primarily strive with him to keep his word. Daniel, being the King’s prime minister may have been aware of these plannings, and here, was seeking to better understand God’s previously given prophecies in Dan 2; 7; 8; 9, and thus His will, in regards to the future of Israel (cf. Dan 10:14; SD 48.1-49.3ff). And so Daniel would, in Dan 10:1, have been praying have a better, and as he had probably previously understood, a reassuring knowledge of what was really going to happen, according to God’s sovereign plannings.#
This would also explain why Daniel was told, then in 536 B.C., by Gabriel that ‘the king of Greece was coming.’ (Dan 10:20b). As this ‘switch in world hegemony’ did not occur until 331 B.C., long after Daniel’s own lifetime, and with Gabriel saying that he was straightly going to return to ‘fight/battle with the king of Persia’ (Dan 10:20a), then this statement would really only be a comfort for Daniel, and his manifest worry here, if God had plans to “stir up” (cf. Isa 13:17) the king of the existing and powerful kingdom of Greece, who, as a nation, were then not under direct Persian rule (see here), [indeed strong enough to, just ca. 34 years later, begin to engage, head-to-head, the kingdom of Persia in what has become known as the Greco-Persian Wars, -lasting from 502-449 B.C.], to, if they would refuse to cooperate with God’s will, come against Persia, overthrow, and replace, it; -which would still fulfill the succession prophetically planned in Dan 2:39 & 7:5; 8:21-22; as well as fulfill to a “T” the (OT) Zion-restoring Apocalypse/Eschatology detailed in the Dan 11 prophecy with the “third king” after Darius the Mede (=Cyrus the Great (the Persian) (Dan 10:1; 11:1) spoken of in Dan 11:2 being a king right in the midst of these Greece vs. Medo-Persia Hegemony Wars, which would have turned out to be the one reigning right after Darius I the Great (521–486 B.C.). So it thus really is no accident that when the reign of that “third king” ended, Satan, clearly aware of what God had planned to restoringly start doing then, started, in the reign of the ‘fourth king’: Xerxes I The Great (485-465 B.C.) to raise up murderous opposition against the Jewish People in Haman (=book of Esther)...So, as determinatively typical with/for God’s professed people, it manifestly was the failure of the Jews to fully/properly heed these “Exile Return”, and then also, “Jerusalem Restoration” directives of God which went on to frustrate (=Jer 18:9-10) that Zion reestablishment (cf. Rev 14:1-5ff) attempt by God stipulated in Dan 11.
So, in passing here, Gabriel would have made Daniel aware that the Heavenly intelligence was doing all that it “permissively” could to keep the present status quo of God’s prophetic plan right on plan and track, as long as possible, but also reassured him that an alternative plan, in a soon fully empowered Kingdom of Greece, which, being ideologically chiefly humanists, and having a democratic base, did not have the same imperial and religious ambitions/exigences as Persia.
# Daniel was then given a more detailed plan of the future in the prophecy of Daniel 11, which, as discussed here, could have had a Literal, Historical fulfillment starting from Daniel’s time, as most SDA’s “Historicistically” interpret it, but, as with the Series of 7's in Revelation, could be entire fulfilled in a Spiritual, Eschatological application (i.e., one which has started in 1999 and is presently still ongoing.)
[3] Jud S. Lake’s (JSL) response here is “circuitous” because he repeatedly either skirts the actual substance of an issue to try to peripherally object at Sidney Cleveland’s claims, or he just ignores what was actually being “Startling” said by EGW and James S. White (JSW), in that dream with frankly evasive attempts to try to water them down. I’ll only be addressing Lake’s comments (reposted or merely referenced in bolded blue below) here as Cleveland’s comments, which try to emphasize a necromancy seance here, can be inclusively, calibratingly dealt with in my responses. (Of course, see the full/original discussion here. Its layout and presentation is sequentially, but not exhaustively followed below.)
JSL: In understanding any document of the past, its historical context must be considered:
The above description of the dream is part of a five-page letter written to Ellen’s son, Willie, on September 12, 1881 (Letter 17, 1881). I have carefully studied the entire letter, although it is not yet published (but soon will be). Here is the historical background to this letter:.....
It was interesting to get from Jud Lake the historical background and context of/for that dream of EGW, but it actually is irrelevant to properly categorizing the dream, i.e., in regards to trying to justify it as not involving communicating with someone who had died...which indeed not only never occurred in the Bible, or elsewhere in the SOP, but would go against Biblical teachings against that (cf. Job 7:9-10)
JSL: - Ellen was struggling with illness and the grief of losing her husband. Thus, she was in a weakened condition physically and emotionally.
-The fact that EGW was then emotionally weakened from the recent death of her husband would actually be a red flag if she later had a dream about him, as this could easily be claimed as being a biasedly induced dream, though I myself do not see that this was the case.
JSL: - She had been pleading with the Lord as to whether or not she should yield to Butler and attend the upcoming General Conference session, in spite of her physical and emotional condition.
-The fact EGW had been pleading with God to know what to do in regards to the demand on her to attend and speak at the upcoming General Conference Session, and God here did not respond to her through an angel, as He easily could, and arguably should, have for such a Church significant decision, speaks volumes to the symbolic significance of, moreover controversially, using James White for this instead.
1. The fact that EGW initially so vehemently objected to her dead husband speaking to her, and not, as Lake repeatedly preconceivedly, eisegetically insists, from the start merely see this as a representation of her dead husband, shows that she, from the start, understood that this appearance of James White was more than a symbolic representation...indeed, she surprisedly says: “BUT this dream seemed so real”...
2. Indeed EGW more lucidly knew all along that this was merely as dream...And this is all akin to her other visionary revelations which likewise seemed real, but she always knew they were visions or dreams. (Comparatively, Paul, a ‘New Covenant Moses’ of sorts, may have, as Moses before (Exod 24:2ff), had actual, (but for Paul: made-to-be-oblivious-to, or afterwards-ambiguitize), trips to Heaven (2 Cor 12:1-4ff). In fact, Paul’s uncertainty here may actually be echoing EGW’s expression that “It seemed so real”. And it would not at all be impossible for God to take the mind of a prophet in a revelatory experience and make them to sensorily share, as if they themselves were there in person, in an actual experience taking place in real life. Thus in this case, EGW would have literally met and conversed with her resurrected husband by her being mentally transported to an actual event of him riding in a wagon. (E.g., just like doctors today can perform an operation from a distance through internet-controlled robots...and it is as if they are right in that remote operation room.) So for EGW, it would indeed strikingly all seem real, as it actually was real. She was only not allowed to know for sure that it was, indeed as explicitly seen in JSW not answering her initial questioning as to whether or not this was all real, as it seemed. Indeed I have not seen EGW struggle with trying to determine if a dream was real or not, as she seemed to always lucidly understand that it was “just a dream”, but in this case, it shockingly was quite real, moreover, as it involved her priorly dead husband.
So it is mere semantics by Lake to claim that: “she did not say this dream “was real,” but that it “seemed so real.”“, as a dream, even a prophetic dream, is technically never real (i.e., the dreamer/prophet is never physically there, except if made to “sleep-travel” by God), as EGW was by then fully experientially knowledgeable of, but always only is vivid experience. So EGW making that observation here show how special this revelation and experience was, again, pointedly in regards to her interacting with her dead husband.
In fact, EGW may here just have been remarking how this dream involving her dead husband, who she knew to be dead, was ‘just as real as the other valid prophetic dreams that she had had’ which led her to immediately and enduringly believe that it must have also been from God. So she had the not fully understood notion that her husband was somehow alive in that dream...and, quite significantly, he would not tell her whether this was the actual case or not, for, as accurately understood now with this “martyr’s reward” understanding, that dream was to also have a secondary and wider application to Remnant Believers.
3. Though Jud Lake states that “God often spoke through vivid symbolic imagery in Scriptural prophetic dreams” it certainly never involved, as proscribed, a dead person, and EGW really should have dismissed this dream at least according to the Deut 13:1-5 understanding, moreover given how it also involved a seemingly selfish notion of looking out for oneself instead of God’s work as in Christ’s first Temptation (Matt 4:3-4), but it was manifestly the fact that it so closely resembled her prior other genuine revelations (and God never corrected her or her decision here), that led her to believe that it was from God.
And it is actually Jud Lake who “avoids the real issue” here as God here controversially and uniquely communicating through a dead James White (indeed instead of, unequivocally, an angel for such a crucial instruction (in fact EGW says (somewhere) that the presence of an angel in her dreams helps her to differentiate prophetic dreams from common ones), did nonetheless involve communicating through someone who people thought was dead. Of course the Biblically easily reconciling view is that JSW was then no longer dead, as like Moses and Elijah meeting with Jesus (Matt 17:1-13), was sent, albeit in a dream, to relate this likewise pivotal experiential counsel to God’s ministering prophet here. (with Jesus’s heaven-borne counsel being in regards to the fact that His Messianic mission would not end in immediate Triumph with that group of rejected people, but instead in cruel death.)
In fact, additionally, with EGW fully saying: “I awoke. But this dream seemed so real.”, she here seems to emphatically express that ‘eventhough she later clearly saw that she had awakened from a dream, it still seemed as if she had had a really lived-out experience instead of just a dream’ which thus speaks to how tangibly real that encounter with JSW actually was. Ironically enough, probably the only depictingly unreal thing in that dream was JSW’s pale appearance, which was probably done to drive home the instructional counsel from the dream to EGW.
4. Jud Lake’s argument here is laughably really quite desperately/red-herringly asinine. It was not as if EGW was ‘regularly and vividly communicating with her husband ever day and night since that dream, and thus could no longer feel lonely any more. She had only met with him once, and it was actually her who did not understand that this had been a real but subconscious meeting with JSW, and JSW did not clarify this for her, (probably being under command to not answer such questions either way, as the Truth in that matter would only later be fully understood). So she came out of that vivid dream experience with only a belief/understanding that she had merely representionally encountered her dead husband. And it would actually be such a vivid encounter which would have led her to later even more miss her husband.
So it was actually only EGW who here did not understand, again, as she was not confirmingly told, that this was a real encounter with JSW.
5. The argument here by Lake that this dream was only meant to be for EGW’s private concerns and not for the Church is both logically and Spiritually fallacious. First of all, “logically”, as already stated above, the heeding of this dream resulted in EGW, the SDA Church prophet, not participating in the upcoming GC...So it there most tangibly affected the entire denomination. If JSW had instead told her to ‘not have oatmeal for breakfast when she awoke that morning’, then that would most likely only have private implication and not denominational ones (unless the oatmeal had suddenly become poisonedly laced the night before). Furthermore the also stated quite explicit and direct instruction in the dream led EGW to then drastically shift the conveying means of her ministry from less of a personal and speaking presence to a more distant and written one. Like Moses and Elijah counselling Jesus at the pivotal point in his ministry, this manifestly was God’s way to injunctively respond to the lack of personal responsibility by other SDA’s to bear their share of denominational burden rather than to have, priorly JSW, and now EGW over exert themselves.*
Secondly, Spiritually, God actually never wastes a prophetic experience. While it initially may only have pertinence to that individual, it later can have a secondary wider application to others, particularly others going through the same circumstances. Surely this dream does not mean that only EGW should not over exert herself...Indeed, as stated below, SDA’s today should heed the principle of maximizing efficiency, mainly to all members of the body dutifully taking up their responsibilities and avoid needless, tire-spinning, repetitive waste, (which really on cajole neglectfully or decidedly indifferent people). I am sure EGW would have loved to have a computer/smartphone with a word processor suite and wireless broadband internet access with online services such as: email, video hosting, file sharing, cloud networking, etc. It is head-shakingly laughable how SDA’s today retardedly act and operate as if they were living in the mid-1800's...They really have nothing else to do than their rotely-religious convocations; -which moreover are lavishly held/concentrated where such facilitating technologies pervasively, profusely abounds (i.e., in the United States/North America), and which are mainly communicated/crafted in English.
* (Squarely reminds me of, as discussed here, (cf. pertinently enough here), how SDA’s today prefer to have SDA preachers come and preach a sermon to them in person when they could have easily instead clicked on an internet link to hear that already exactly-preached sermon. That frankly is a worshipful, gas-lighting and self-disculpating excuse, and all contributes to an atrophying in the Church, for both these speakers and its members, as well as the Mission/Work of the Church..and likewise involves this notion of SDA members not doing their share in meeting burdens, in this case, their, moreover, own self-educating burdens. Likewise here, everyone, both leaders/preachers and members, are so “busy” trying to etch out a living of their lives that they have no problem if the work of God takes a backseat to their various selfish pursuits. Patent Laodicean ignorance and attitude....They are indeed so completely clueless, and that repugnantly “blissfully” so (=Rev 3:16), to how exponentially much more that can be, and needs to be done in God’s work (=Rev 3:17) that they do not mind to settle for the elementary and rote basics. (Heb 5:11- 6:8|Isa 28:5-13).
As JSW went on to recognizingly state towards the end of that dream, he could have brought much more “precious jewels” before the people if he was not busy doing the work that they could and should have been doing themselves.
Willie White only “knew his mother was not telling him she actually spoke with his dead father”...because EGW had not certainly said, actually either way, that this is what had happened. She just there was going by her allowed personal assumption about what had actually taken place in this dream.
6. Whatever the “real issues” behind EGW dream here, she still communicated with /through someone who had died. Again, for such a significant and controversial issue, that only confused the point, and frankly it probably was only because it seemed “so real” that EGW became convinced that it was from God. Indeed not “real” as in a real dream, but “real” in the sense that JSW was so real (in fact “really there”). I venture to believe that in the back of her mind EGW understood, knowing the power and justice of God, that it indeed was JSW resurrected there, and understood from JSW silence to her opening questionings, that she was not to assert that it was JSW resurrected. Indeed her statement just before the end of the dream that: “"Well," said I, "James, you are always to stay with me now and we will work together."” showed that by the end of the dream she was convinced that JSW was indeed “real”, i.e., resurrected, for why else would she make such a comment if she only thought that this was only a dream. Surely she did not mean that a dead James would be assisting her in her work from then on...She instead saw from the dream that he was back and manifestly permanently so. So it must have been shocking to her when she awoke and realized that that was only a dream...but yet...how come it was so “real”??
JSL: {....His conclusion....}
-Jud Lakes’s concluding points from his primary analysis all patently miss the substantive points which transpired in that dream to instead deal with vacuously defensive and wishful ones.
“Further Analysis” section
JSL: [Notice Ellen's question is never answered.]
-JSW not answering EGW initial questioning, is not at all supportive of Jud Lake’s position. Indeed it would behoove God to make it clear then that JSW was not really there or alive..but that is actually not at all done.
JSL: Notice the unsupported assumption: Ellen White believes she is actually talking with James. Nowhere does Cleveland provide evidence for this assumption. He is only poisoning the well by associating with Ellen White the abomination of speaking with the dead. This is a typical fallacy that diverts attention away from the contradictory evidence to his charge.]
-Several statements in the dream shows that EGW did actually believe she was interacting with an alive JSW. It is literally impossible to objective miss these self-evident understandings of hers. If she did not, she would not have said virtually all of the things she, pointedly conversationally says throughout the dream which is literally 5 out of only 7 sentences she herself states in the dream. (The rest of the dream is JSW himself talking.)
JSL: [Again, if we take this dream in its context of the letter, it is clear that the spirit of dead James is not making predictions for his wife or giving her advice. Based on our analysis above, we are own solid ground when we say that God was communicating with Ellen, telling her not to take on the same stresses and strains upon herself that brought her husband to an early death.]
-Jud Lake keep futilely appealing to “context of the letter” to try to claim that it could not have been the dead spirit of JSW, but that is more tangentially irrelevant. JSW was (1) clearly made to be in that dream, either in person or in spirit, thus not as a dead person, and (2) he most certain was giving advice to EGW. In fact EGW went on to understand, from him being at her side as they are travelling along, that he was here to stay and take care of her as she/they continued to minister.
JSL: Then he reminds the reader this dream comes from a “divinely inspired” dream from her “dead husband.” Here is a classic example of reading into a document something that is not there. Within this same letter, Ellen refers to the brethren as “good brethern.” The issue behind this statement is laboring “unreasonably in emergencies, regardless of the laws of life and health.” Again, this is the point of the dream.
-The “good brethren” still needed to be chastised as they were manifestly, however “righteously”-intended, insouciantly/ditsily, being variously, (Spiritually) immaturely and irresponsibly, taxing and abusive towards now EGW (Heb 12:8-11; Rev 3:19; e.g, Matt 16:23).
Speaking of “the point of the dream”, when Jesus borrowed from Greek mythology to present the necessarily still veiled (Matt 13:10-17), point in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:31), it was because, as discussed at its entry in here, that He did not have another imagery context from which to make such an, and indeed ambiguously so, most pivotal point towards those rebellious Jewish leaders. However in this case, as already stated above, for that, moreover seemingly merely personal revelation to EGW, God should instead have clearly spoken to her through and angel which would not have caused any confusion by EGW as seen in her statements in that dream. But it was actually all because that revelation would have a secondary and wider application to the Remnant Church/Believers, and moreover involve the necessarily veiled understanding involved in the (candid) “martyr’s reward”, that He used this concealing, but still significantly/tangibly indicative approach instead.
JSL: No pact is made here! This is a most negative caricature Cleveland is endeavoring to portray. It is completely out of harmony with the internal and external contextual evidence accompanying the letter. Notice the next paragraph does not even address Ellen’s stated desire in the context of this dream.
-EGW did sound as if she had made some sort of “pact” with the dead in saying “"Well," said I, "James, you are always to stay with me now and we will work together."” merely in her expressing that she was, from then on, going to be accompanied a dead James, and they would work together. Perhaps the term “pact” is too loaded/strong in this context, but it certainly was an “understanding” of EGW in the dream. Indeed the “realness” of the dream only naturally led her to such a conclusion....and either way that EGW understood it here... all that she concretely knew was that James was (unconsciously) dead...So why make such a statement here,,,unless she, as a perceive, by then was privately convinced that JSW was resurrectedly real/alive now...
JSL: [She obviously believed God was specifically telling her not to go to the upcoming General Conference session through this dream. Cleveland continually puts this dream on a level with all her dreams and visions for the church. But as pointed out above, this dream was personal guidance for her own life, not for the church.]
-Again, and manifestly according to his commission. JSW is, however sequirturly: tacitly silent in regards to EGW’s statements. The most natural understandings from such silence where explicit and unequivocal clarification was respondingly due, is that ‘This was actually a possibility that could not be Truthfully denied, but keyly had to be left unanswered”.
JSL: Read the account of the dream above once again. She says no such thing as Cleveland asserts here. The contextual analysis above provides the evidence for correctly understanding this dream God gave Ellen White. Cleveland thus commits the fallacy of accent, which distorts and misrepresents the meaning of a statement.
-It, quite naturally shocked me that all along EGW had only interacted with JSW throughout the dream, but afterwards, in writing to Willie White, she straightly and most convincedly says that ‘it was the Lord’s instruction’. That clear fact based from the content of the dream just cannot be “not seen” as Jud Lake claims.
JSL: In conclusion, Mr. Cleveland’s article has failed in attempting to show that Ellen White conversed with her dead husband and received guidance from him. He has grossly distorted the contents of this letter and ignored (or concealed) evidence that disproves his claim....
-If one does not have the preconceived bias that ‘EGW would be speaking with, let alone heeding, a dead person in a dream of hers, they actually would not come to the defensive and wishful, indeed (pejoratively) “apologetic”, claims that Jud Lake does, but, also through similar ignorance of the Biblical “martyr’s reward” understanding, more justifiedly in line with what Sidney Cleveland had, to me, sincerely advanced, including with his reactions as to how this is all most hypocritical for EGW.
As stated above, this dream certainly has “Rich Man and Lazarus” resemblances, but for this case with EGW, using an angel instead of “dead” JSW would actually have been in supposed order. But with the priorly established Biblical “martyr’s reward” background in mind, as well as the related ‘(actual) Spiritualism’ understanding, not only can this dream be most accurately comprehended, but it can also be seen why God pivotally chose to use this, moreover scandalously concealing approach....
[4] The most plausible argument from an SDA that I have come across to try to reconcile this dream of EGW according to their traditional understanding of it that ‘James White was not actually alive’ is the one made here [in the “15/05/2016 at 23:22” comment] by Florin Laiu who cites the examples of EGW seeing Brothers Fitch and Stockman, who had then recently died, (EW 16.1; 17.1 (298.3-5)) and also Adam and Eve (GC 644.2-3) in vision. But as I subsequently responded there [in the “17/05/2016 at 0:12” comment], both of these (actually merely prophetic representation, i.e. not really actual life events] instances were in the context of the Second Coming, thus after the resurrection of the dead. That is not the case with James White in this dream. As also stated in my response, I do not see anywhere in EGW’s dreams and visions where she, -as done in this dream involving James White, interacts with anyone who has died in a pre-Final Resurrection context.
[5] Indeed just like God’s prophets and faithful witnesses ones who have usually been martyred by unrighteous people so that these vile ones can go about their evil course undisturbed, aborted infants are being similarly “sacrificed” for mainly various reasons of ‘personal socio-economic convenience’ (i.e., financial gain, career, social life, etc). And so aborted infants seem to be the majority of this group of ‘martyred little ones’,* who also seem to be parentless, hence them being shown in the SOP as having wings, probably until they could walk, and that very well, in order to carry them about from place to place.
* Which is all why, I see that the following reporting of having received a vision [see at 35:06ff], in this (full) testimony (during Eric Metaxas’ “Miracle Mondays” radio show segment) passes the Biblical prophetic (=miraculous/sign/God-Inspired) of 1 Thess 5:19-21 testing as actress April Hernandez-Castillo, -now also preacher & (Christian) TV host, relates {“SPOILER ALERT”}: shortly after having had a conversion and forgiveness experience, having been given a vision (i.e., while fully awake/lucid) in ca. 2007 (= ‘sometime after her movie Freedom Writers’), of her, then grown up, 5-year old-seeming, little girl which she had aborted at 19 in 1999 playing in a vividly green grass field in Heaven. [Her priorly vivdly, but purposely so, relating of her abortion procedure details made my insides feel like molten mush].
Also, given that the numbers don’t seem to add up, i.e., with the little girl having been aborted in 1999, she would have been 7 in 2000, and not ‘seeming to be 5’ as perceived/understood by Hernandez. Her little girl could have actually been 7 instead 5, but it may also be because God gave her a vision of a prior moment, i.e. from a year or two before, which, to me, could be corroborated by involved understanding with this Theological issue of martyrs, -including aborted infants, being periodically resurrected as groups and then taken to Heaven. In order words, it is not that instantaneously upon every death by martyrdom+abortion, (-which actually includes present day (adult) martyrs as presently occurring at the hands of ISIS cf. this article by Kirsten Powers), but only upon a set period of time, probably after the names of these martyrs have been, fast trackedly, processed in God’s/Christ’s ongoing Investigative Judgement session (Dan 7:10-13; 2 Cor 5:10). So if the interval for these resurrection and ascension period is, now, ca. 3-5 years, -[especially if it first depends on a specific number of martyrs having been reached (cf. Rev 6:11b), -perhaps 200,000,000 (Rev 9:16; -cf. the relevance of that number in here (~Rev 19:14ff)), possibly all down from a prior “generational” interval number of martyrs which was more slowly being reached every 20-30-40 years (cf. in the, also, (1970) vision of my father), -given that abortions have systematically come into the equation here since the/those early 1970's (e.g. the infamous/“landmark” initiating/“justifying” 1973 Roe v. Wade Decision [rejected later by “Jane Roe” -cf. more (starting) here] in the U.S.)], -all resulting in April Hernandez’s aborted girl having had actually been resurrected in 2001, and not soon after/upon her abortion (at 8 weeks) in 1999; which is why she appeared to be only 5 in 2007.
(P.S.: That all said just above here about this 5 vs. 7 age discrepancy, most Hollywood movies are filmed and completed ca. 1-2 years before they are released, and that is indeed the case with Freedom Writers which was in production, or “in the can”, around December 2005. So, doing the Math here, if April Hernandez experienced occurred shortly after she had completed the filming, her aborted child would indeed have been about 5 in/around December 2005. Notwithstanding, I am generally seeing from other above-discussed factors that the ‘periodic, grouped, resurrection of martyred/+aborted, people is still Biblically valid (cf. Rev 5:11)). (Hear April Hernandez-Castillo’s other (amazing) miracle story, with her friend, from a childhood incident: here)
(P.S.: That all said just above here about this 5 vs. 7 age discrepancy, most Hollywood movies are filmed and completed ca. 1-2 years before they are released, and that is indeed the case with Freedom Writers which was in production, or “in the can”, around December 2005. So, doing the Math here, if April Hernandez experienced occurred shortly after she had completed the filming, her aborted child would indeed have been about 5 in/around December 2005. Notwithstanding, I am generally seeing from other above-discussed factors that the ‘periodic, grouped, resurrection of martyred/+aborted, people is still Biblically valid (cf. Rev 5:11)). (Hear April Hernandez-Castillo’s other (amazing) miracle story, with her friend, from a childhood incident: here)
And so, one may basely, self-justifyingly ask (Deut 15:9): ‘if aborted infants receive this martyrs’ reward, then what would be the point/need of caring for these, (as it will be predominantly done in the NJK Project), who factually are the very “least of these” (Matt 25:45), with these being vitally most vulnerable ones? Indeed, at the currently known to be figure of ca. 65,000,000, aborted infants are the highest annual single cause of death in the world, being almost as much as all other annual deaths, from all other causes combined. Well the “Theological View” here is that since those who directly murdering these little ones, nor those who indifferently allowing them to be murdered instead of doing all they can to provide an alluring “life-preserving alternative”, will be saved because of these aware of sins of “commission” and “omission” (James 4:17). And so caring for these little ones being slaughtered is really for the most necessary salvation benefit of particularly professed Christians (John 14:15; 15:10, 12-14), yet not at all in a self-serving way (see LDE 219.2-3). And as such a life saving act will result in significant, but still sustainable, especially through applied technology, even God-suggested/inspired ones and empowered/blessed productivity (=Deut 15:9-10), global population increases, on top of ending murders, it also will have the purifying benefit of eradicating the deeply and “spiritually”/conscience-searedly (=“mind-alteredly”) entrenched Capitalistic roots/traits of selfishness, idolatry, theft, greed and covetousness which indeed are the basis for this indifferent slaughter of life. (Cf. Rev 9:20-21 in this post).
[6] Relatedly, succinctly addressed here, Doug Batchelor has expressed (e.g, in this May 10, 2003 sermon[21:14-24:06] which was questioned by a caller in this 7-03-2011 BAL (Encore) broadcast[22:04-27:21] to which he gave the same response) the view that ‘not all conceived and/or birthed life which died before age of accountability will be redeemed by God in the end’....and his main reason is ‘because if that was so, the grown/adult redeemed would just be swamped with too many children and heaven would be just a nursery for the first few hundred years’. Well for one thing, that “main reason”, (which is actually at completely dissonance with what Batchelor had earlier expressed in that 2003 sermon[6:06-7:28]; and recently more explicitly/detailedly during in this early 2013 SS study[37:51-38:46-39:51ff], (see also these links), in regards to the ‘sacredness of conceived/unborn life’); would make it that God justifies abortion, and moreover as the world currently “excusingly” does, for reasons of personal “economics”/convenience, and quasi population control. But the Bible and SOP answer is so much more just/righteous, logical and “comforting”; (i.e., compared to the spuriously sanctimonious-fuzzies-coated mindlessly heartless answer he gave to that woman caller who had lost a child due to a miscarriage before she became a Christian, -which was that even if, as he “believes”, her “unsaved” miscarried child would not be resurrected with the saved, ‘she still would not be disappointed in heaven’. As if God giving her another (“saved”) child would justly compensate for, or logically comfort of, the accidental innocent life that she had lost); for first, combining Christ words in Matt 18:14 & 25:45, it is clear that ‘God does not want, even the least of little ones, to, moreover unjustly, perish’; and secondly, as revealed in the SOP here in the EW 18.2 revelation: those “innumerable redeemed little ones” will have “little wings” which they will use to fly about. So that means they would not have to be carried about by adults to get around.
As for their (a) nursing, and even (b) overall caring:
(a) If God can rain manna from out of the blue skies, He surely can create a perfect “formula milk” which will fully provide for the health of that Child.
(b) As the Bible says that ‘God has an angel for (even) every little one’ (Matt 18:10), then surely these angels will provide that care assistance, or entirely so if needed, for them in their growing up years; -and with God probably having included an "ICU" Womb Unit to carry conceived life which had died pre-birth to necessarily their full 9 months pregnancy term.
And as presented in this overall Biblical “Martyrs’ Reward” understanding, it will actually be, as indeed depicted in EGW’s vision, the martyrs, who themselves had already tangibly shown that they have the self-sacrificing Spirit and Character of Christ (cf. DA 637.1ff), who will have also been contributing to this work of caring for these “little ones”, thus implicating that these innocent “little ones” do indeed get this just ‘early resurrection “reward”, and thus also, with that group of little ones shown with the martyrs in EW 18.2 chronologically being a latest group of little ones who had been resurrected just prior to the utter end (=Glorious Second Coming). The care of the innocent “little ones” who will be alive on that ultimate/anti-typical “Day of the Lord” (2 Pet 3:10-13) will fall within the contributing care of the non-martyred (thus not ‘early-rewarded’) redeemed resurrected and/or translated at that point.
Batchelor also cites Job depressed lament in Job 3:1-2 as a basis for his view. Well that quasi-suicidal expression certainly is not a “prescriptive”, and certainly not doctrinal/theological passage in the Bible, just as David’s schemings to commit adultery and murder are not. They are just candid descriptive passage....And, substantively, Job here was merely saying that ‘he would not “have seen the light”, i.e. be alive, in this life’, and was not expressing any (theological) thing about the (future) “afterlife”, -with God’s Martyr’s Reward not becoming an executed reality until after Christ’s resurrection (Matt 27:52-53). Batchelor then cites 1 Cor 7:14 as further basis/proof, but that clearly is a “proof text”, for, as he actually recognized, Paul is merely speaking of external sanctifying influence from an unbelieving husband or wife (1 Cor 7:10-13). So any sanctifying that is done here, including on the children, is through an observed modelling of right living by that believing spouse, and that just cannot be the pointed case for conceived but unborn children, or even for children who have not yet reached the age of accountability, and who up to then may just be innocently imitating whatever character and behavior they seen their (dominant) parent(s) exhibiting. However, as seen in the SOP passages/discussion posted starting from e.g., here and also here, an also Bible-sourced case can be made that a child’s character is shaped by the mother (or even participating father) from the womb. So that may resolve Doug’s other “substantiating” claim of ‘why no children were saved in Noah’s ark.’ And to that may be included the many innocent children which God inclusively ordered to be, or Himself, destroyed in punishments (e.g., Gen 18:32; 19:24; Deut 20:16-18 (for non-nearby cities in Canaan; versus Deut 20:12-15 for all others); Gen 15:16|1 Sam 15:18-19; Ezek 9:6, 9-10). I.e., the birthed pre-accountability children had nonetheless had witnessed enough open perversity in those nations to have had their character-slate been skewedly impressed towards evil dispositions (cf. Gen 6:5, 11-13). Indeed, as seen by the exception for far away cities in Deut 20:12-15, the whole reason was one of potential/probable exerted detrimental “influence”. It is for similar reasons that even animal, as still done today, had/have to be “put down” when they cross a certain line of violence (towards humans). (cf. Gen 6:7). And, of course, adult mothers who may have had a conceived life in them were inclusively not be left to live to first birth that (probably also “skewed” child).
But still, as God is a God of Justice and “Right-Doing’ (e.g., Gen 18:25; Psa 89:14; 97:12), it is much more likely that He will redeem those children which were not beyond an age of moral cognizance/understanding and innocents, for they either did not know God’s will at all (cf. Rom 5:13), or right from wrong (cf. Rom 14:23), and also themselves may not have (awarely) committed ‘inherently/naturally wrong’ acts. (See here; cf. Luke 12:48a; 1 Cor 1:18-32). And to cap off the point on the actual meaning of Paul’s words in 1 Cor 7:10-16 as being “merely externally influential” and not here intrinsically sanctifying, Paul always understood that such a sanctifying influence would only occur if that ideologically divergent family ‘consentingly stayed together’, and that they may actually instead agree to ‘separate’ (1 Cor 7:11-12, 15). Indeed as he effectively says: ‘One is not forced to stay in such an utterly dysfunctional relationship since it is not a given that the believing spouse could even be that ‘sanctifying influence’ on the others, including the children’. And at best, what can be “sanctifyingly” done when there is such a familial break up is what Job “intercessorily” did for his wayward children. (Job 1:4-5; cf. Pr 244.1-251.5; and relatedly here).
And, using the proper hermeneutical method of exegetically/rightly involving all pertinent passages on an issue to determine what the Biblical/Theological understanding is, towards that end of “Divine Justice”, God states in Law in Deut 24:16, and then prophetically more elaborately in Ezek 18 ‘an offspring will not be held guilty for what his parent(s) may have wrongly done’ (Ezek 18:14-20), and as the Biblical acts of utter destruction by God all have this same common denominator of abominable sins such as, (as also explicitly cited in the referenced examples above): violence, sexual perversion, paganistic/animalistic practices, which are most obviously against most basic natural laws (=Rom 1:18-32), then God not allowing ‘influence-reachable’ people tainted by these abominable traits to live, including also (innocently) tainted-to-some-tangible-degree conceived life/children, may Justly/Rightly be for a most tangible reason.
And not to be confused within this topic, as typically superficially done, God, in stating that: ‘He will punish of fathers sins up to children and grandchildren, i.e., up to the 3rd or 4th generations’ (Exod 20:5|Deut 5:9; Exod 34:7; Num 14:18), that actually can easily be fulfilled in a punishment upon actually then living, and even all adult generations who should have been exhortingly, reprimandingly and/or correctingly holding each other responsible to do God’s Will. I.e., if new generation occurs, as quite possible, every 20 years then ‘up to “four” generations’ of ages 80-60-40-20, could all be alive at the same time and thus the 20 year old great-grandchild could/should be holding even his great grandparent(s) to account. Likewise for even a 70-50-30-10 generational family set as even 10 year
old children are typically most forthcoming in exhorting righteousness to their elders. So if ‘up to that fourth generation’ deliberately, indifferently fails to do this, then they are they too are to be held responsible for the resulting unrighteousness. And if that fourth generation is too young..then that is where God cuts off accountability to the “third” (‘of at least “four” living’), generation. So when he effectuated e.g., the above cited utter destruction judgements on “those who hated him” (Exod 20:5b|Deut 5:9b), He justly held accountable people right up to their third or fourth, living, generations.
And this all conversely implies/involved that ‘too young fourth+ living generations’ could easily be spared an eternal judgement as the older generations then thus also incurred, and will be redeemed in the end. And it was probably in great mercy that God did not allow these abominable sins/character skewed/tainted/infected ones to live and grow up then as they would most likely only naturally/helpless “bloom” to produce abominable, and thus damning “fruits”. So God allowing them to also die then would actually work to preserve their redeemable innocence, and thus make it possible for them to be given Eternal Life.
So, recapping here: the Bible and SOP actually strongly paints the picture that all conceived human life who somehow died before the age of accountability will not be permitted to eternally perish by God (Matt 18:14; 25:45) but be redeemed by God (cf. Ezek 18:14-20), and be those ‘innumerable little ones who will have little wings to move about on their own’ (EW 18.2), ‘and will surely be fully cared for by their dedicatedly assigned angel(s)’ (Matt 18:10)! (Corroboratingly on this issue and its Theologically Biblical viewpoint, see in this prophetic dream of Ernie Knoll.)
...So Dougie Batchelor does not have to lament and worry that ‘his heavenly bliss will be ruined by having to change diapers and bottle-feed billions of infants’, because God will be taking care of that issue involving innocent lives Himself, -and actually, -in a potential&planned other way than just one, long before Doug himself would be resurrected in the Final (i.e. end of days) Resurrection and taken to Heaven....and, heads up, individuals with such a selfish-mindedness, which moreover tacitly endorses and advocates (cf. Matt 5:19) for the (moreover Eternal) death of ‘inconveniencing life’, -all perfectly reflective of Satan’s own selfish and unrighteous mindset, will not Christ’s ‘Testing’/Proving Final Judgement and thus not be trusted to be allowed into the Kingdom of God/Heaven. (Matt 5:20; 25:45-46; COL 384.2) That is indeed what God’s Law & Christ’s Gospel & Righteousness is (“Fully”/Truly/Spiritually) all about: To eradicate every minute trace of ‘Satan’s selfishness & death worldview’. (DA 20.3-21.1ff)
[7] That the (24) elders as well as the “sons of God” are synonymously spoken of as “angels” in the SOP, as discussed starting here and thus do not seem to be humans, is actually easily reconciled by the fact that any creature of God who has been enlisted to accomplish a special, especially witnessing and communicating mission for Him, (as angels are full time engaged in), are technically then, themselves also functions as “angels”, =God’s messengers. So in this instance, the 24 representative elders are functioning/ministering as judges (=effectively God's civilian/peers jury). (This is in comparison to other individuals in God’s Creation which are not directly “working” for God, but living out their existence, which indirectly is still in service for God.) And in Luke 20:36 Jesus also seems to make an implicated distinction between (inherent) angels and redeemed humans =“son of God”. Thus the “sons of God” in Job 1:6; 2:1 were actually functioning as “delegates” for that Heavenly council/convention and thus could be referred to as messengers/“angels” (=GC 518.3).*
And it is in this understanding that I find tacit corroboration of my related mused understanding, discussed here, that since the rest of the redeemed will [similarly] be functioning full-time as God’s sentencing (vs. trial) judges during the millennium (Rev 20:4), then they will then be ‘as the angels’ for part of the “resurrection age” (Luke 20:34-36), but after will be able to resume the normal full life that God had planned for this Earth.
* The ‘angel-like form’ revealed in 1SG 69.2 (cited here) seems more to be speaking of the initial physical height/stature, perhaps also physical definition, of man (=GC 644.3) more than their substance, especially as man was rather made out of the Earth’s ground/dirt, whereas, as discussed in here, I think that angels, by nature of their permanent function as Universe Messengers, have been made of photonic substances.
[8] And succinctly rebutted here, people in her day (e.g., James White (1847 JW, WLF 22.6); Joseph Bates (1905 JNL, GSAM 257.2-259.1); and a woman then present, Marion C. Truesdail (1905 JNL, GSAM 260.3-4 from Mrs. Truesdail's letter of Jan 27, 1891)) assumed that she had seen the planets Jupiter and Saturn (EGW mentioned a third world which had 6 moons, and then the ‘more enlightened “opening heavens”’), based on the common knowledge of their moons then, but, as stated here, EGW herself never said that these were those specific planets/“worlds”. All understood that this vision was given to convince a still doubtful Joseph Bates (LS 95.2) about the Divine origin of EGW’s revelations, which it did. And given how Bates was indeed most key in initiating and shaping many Doctrinal understandings of the Remnant (SDA) Church, starting with the Seventh-day Sabbath Truth (LS 95.3), it can be understood why God have taken these measures.
* The ‘angel-like form’ revealed in 1SG 69.2 (cited here) seems more to be speaking of the initial physical height/stature, perhaps also physical definition, of man (=GC 644.3) more than their substance, especially as man was rather made out of the Earth’s ground/dirt, whereas, as discussed in here, I think that angels, by nature of their permanent function as Universe Messengers, have been made of photonic substances.
[8] And succinctly rebutted here, people in her day (e.g., James White (1847 JW, WLF 22.6); Joseph Bates (1905 JNL, GSAM 257.2-259.1); and a woman then present, Marion C. Truesdail (1905 JNL, GSAM 260.3-4 from Mrs. Truesdail's letter of Jan 27, 1891)) assumed that she had seen the planets Jupiter and Saturn (EGW mentioned a third world which had 6 moons, and then the ‘more enlightened “opening heavens”’), based on the common knowledge of their moons then, but, as stated here, EGW herself never said that these were those specific planets/“worlds”. All understood that this vision was given to convince a still doubtful Joseph Bates (LS 95.2) about the Divine origin of EGW’s revelations, which it did. And given how Bates was indeed most key in initiating and shaping many Doctrinal understandings of the Remnant (SDA) Church, starting with the Seventh-day Sabbath Truth (LS 95.3), it can be understood why God have taken these measures.
The EGW-opposing argument made in here (see yellow boxed section), that ‘God would not so trick Bates into believing in EGW’ do not pass a Biblical and Spiritual comparison as the Bible relates instances where God has withheld the full facts on a matter for various, all faith-related and/or self-defense/greater-good, reasons. (e.g., Jer 20:7-12ff; the reason for the trials-testing of Job; Abraham and the “sacrifice” of Isaac; 1 Sam 16:1-5; John 16:12; Acts 1:6-8). And unlike the “Doubting Thomas” that Bates claimed to be like in regards to EGW’s experiences (LS 95.2), he, contrarily (John 20:24-29), was doubting the exact same evidence that all others had had. So God manifestly met that stubborn, faithless indifference with a revelation that Bates was left to believe however he wanted to...and he “naturally” assumed that EGW was shown planets within Earth’s own solar system.
[9] August 22, 2021
#92
Questions+Comment in regards to your (media) ministry plans
Why are your expending $350,000+ in order to have remote production capabilities? Can you not just film any of your remote presentations with multiple (e.g. 3) cameras and then do all the post production work on those videos in your ministry building studio?
Also, I gather from your prior fundraising appeals that you want to have live satellite broadcasting capability. Is there actually a logical, or Spiritual need for this? Seems to me that your present, mainly internet, broadcasting is in many ways much more efficient and sufficient, including in regards to costs while readily reaching a wide, global viewership.
Relatedly, do you have/post viewership statistics for your TV network? From the info available on Youtube, your viewership is, (compared to other SDA media ministries posting programs/videos on Youtube), quite low, with roughly a ca. 1000-1500 median viewership per video. Live viewership is even much lower.
I am sure you are confident that you have every Biblical thing handled, if not also figured out, but it seems to me that, rather than expending all this money on the “frills” of broadcasting, especially in this advanced internet age, funds could be more productively expending on actually variously improving the substance of your information, especially in matters of proper Biblical exegesis, as there is much, much “concretizing”* work that still needs to be done in that regards, and will require much more collaborative research and work than merely 1-3 “lone-ranging” pastors. Then the resulting product would literally sell itself...and not just mainly to SDAs....
* Indeed the typical SDA Church/Ministry are like builders who are eager to build a multi-story high rise building...when their foundation is not even actually set yet...including in regards to Luke 6:46-49....
No comments:
Post a Comment
This blog aims to be factual and, at the very least, implicitly documented. Therefore if applicable, any comment which contains unsubstantiated/unsupportable ideas will not be allowed to be published on this blog. Therefore make the effort to be Biblical, truthful and factual.
-It typically takes 1-2 days for an accepted submitted comment to be posted and/or responded to.
[If you leave an "anonymous" comment and, if applicable, would like to know why it may not have been published, resend the comment via email (see profile) to receive the response.]