Contradiction of greatest

[Ryft]

You can't realistically call the consequentialism view of moraility "self serving", as its implicit meaning is derived from the consequence of the moral act, not the context or belief system responsible for the act.

This is incomprehensible. No belief system—not even Christianity—can be "responsible for the act" because belief systems don't act! Please reformulate your objection intelligibly.

I have another question. On your view, what right does God have to put those he deems wicked into 'gehenna'?

Because the entire universe is produced by and belongs to him, the sovereign and univocal lawgiver who is the final court of arbitration. At the consumation of his purposes he will finally eradicate all sin and its every consequence from the face of his creation, which includes all those who prefer it and everything affected by it, and he will finally exist once again in open communion with his children. Those who want no part of a world like that will have their wishes granted; since the entire universe was made by and belongs to God, there is nowhere to evict them to, so they are to be eradicated along with everything else of sin. As C.S. Lewis put the matter quite succinctly, "There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'Thy will be done'."

P.S. You may have noted that I changed the wording of your question. You had asked, "By what right do you believe God has to put those he deems wicked into 'Gehenna'?" I did not think you meant to ask me about my rights to form and hold some belief, but rather about God's right to do some thing. So I took the liberty of rearranging your question and hope that I was correct about what your question really was.

---

The SDA church is considered outside mainstream Christianity ...

They are considered strange, but not unorthodox (outside mainstream Christianity). The SDA church affirms the orthodox creeds, including the authority of Scriptures.