One might consider the postulate that, as Seventh-Day-Adventists; we have, or have received the "final word" regarding truth as being (IMO) a very narrow and definately arrogant point of view.
Brother Crawford, I must agree with you that we must be "thoroughly convinced in our own minds what is truth"...However, the opposite would hold true also: One might believe a lie to be true [Romans 1:25] relevant only to our "preception of the image of God", and that horribly distorted as it is in the minds of many today; being taught as "truth" from the pulpit and many are taken in by its deceitfullness...Man gives The Holy God, Creator attributes of man in suggesting that God should await to "punish" the wicked as the result of their having "broken the rules"...To put God in such a light is to say that He merely wishes vindication through His wrath - a common idea - yet terribly wrong. God's wrath has nothing at all to do with punishment.
The "punishment of the wicked" will come upon them as no suprise. "Every knee will bow, and tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord". He has done everything in His power to win back our "trust" and, to "restore" us back to the relationship with Him that we had before the Fall...Do you really believe that we will spend a thousand years "judging the wicked"? No, no, no!!! God, in His mercy will conduct a thorough investigation into His way of having handled the "sin problem". And, with it all said and done, we will see that He can indeed be "trusted" - that there is no reason to fear Him for we love Him -Righteousness - and Freedom...
In regard to the "two groups saved". Take an example of Enoch - Elijah; versus say the thief on the cross. Both Enoch and Elijah were in such close communion that leaving this world for the Heavenly one was simply the "next step"...But the thief, he had no time to set his "behavior right" now did he? For him, as it is (IMHO) with many, his belief; faith; TRUST in what God would do in him inspite of his record; is what ultimately will save...He is then, a "saved sinner"...He gains access to the presence of God because he believed in his heart that Jesus could do for him what was impossible for him to do for himself...what ever else the thief may have been - his faith - and ultimately our own - is based not on speculation, or a desire to avoid the consequences - oh no! It is based on a true witness and the fact [evidence] which we are able to weigh and base our decission upon. God would have no other form of service...and truly, this would lead to service of love...
Brother Myers, I suspect we are saying the same thing from slightly different prespectives. The Great Controversy is not at all based upon the results it has here on earth...the entire universe is at stake. God must vindicate His character...And, how can He do so if He "requires a death" for sin. That is Satan's claim...sin requires its due...How could we, or any being in the universe feel "safe" around a God who required the "Life of His Son" as "substitute" for the "life of the sinner"?
Although in one sense Jesus requires a life [His life] for a life [our life]; it is not mind you "death for death"...The "wages of sin is death"; not my dear friends, "that God will have to kill you"...
I personally do not really think that there are going to be "two groups" who are saved. And, it has nothing to do with the behavioral condition of the human race. It has to do with God's ability to "HEAL US" if we will allow Him to do so :-)
This is I'm sure something which is not at all going to be contended with [in a civil manner any way] by several here, as their position precludes the "power of God unto salvation"...Those who are in this catagory will lift up the cross, but deny it's power as Mrs. White said in many places - it will be those who are most conservative in their beliefs who will be in the end, our worst enemys...
Eternity closes upon us all too soon to be ignorant of the Nature and Character of God -and our "display" of God before men...Or, perhaps I can put it in a little more personal a way...When I break into a rage at a neighbor for a personal slight - it really is not the display of rage for which I feel worst - no, and I will and have told many during my new Christian walk that, I am most ashamed not for the display but for the total MISREPRESENTATION OF GOD! Sure, there is sorrow for the "act"...but it really is secondary. God, and even the neighbor will forgive the act - but what might I ask, is the longer effect of such a display if my neighbor knows that I profess to be a Christian...
If I am not "thrown-off" this forum for "blasphemy", perhaps we can "reason" out the differences between the "legalistic view" and the view in light of what is a stake [to the nature - character- and government of God] in the universe...
I submit to you that should not a human being on this planet have ever accepted Christ in the illustration at the cross - Christ would still have come, died, and resurected to the Glory which He shared with the Father...Why? Because God need to allow Satan every opportunity to show exactly what his form of government really was. Self-centered; self-destructive; self-deceiving.
It is not we who must vindicate the character of God. He must do that for Himself. We may be participants in the effort to do so only if we are willingly submitted to letting Him do what we cannot do for ourselves.
God's grace and peace to all.
Your brother in Christ Jesus.