Sure, but there comes a point, where if I say “I think the Bible teaches Satan is a created entity, an angel, who is not all-knowing and is not omnipresent, and has no power to create or manipulate reality, only “accuse” and “deceive” (that is what he does in the Bible, he doesn’t use “forces”)” and you say “I think the Bible teaches that Satan knows all of science and can manipulate everything in the universe and corrupt all of the physical world and infiltrate and control human pysches” then we just fundamentally disagree about what the Bible says. There is nothing more to explain. We have come away from the Bible with very different pictures of what it teaches. It’s not really worth my time to dig up a bunch of verses and say “Look!” because I guarantee you will just read them differently than I do and assume they imply things I don’t think they imply. There is no “proving” to be done. We don’t use the same rules of hermeneutics or accept the same basic presuppositions about what the Bible even is and how it works.
Choosing to accept demonstrable scientific facts about things we can measure and observe is not the same thing as believing one preferred Bible interpretation over another. We’ve had this discussion a bunch of times but you don’t accept it, and without this basic presupposition, we don’t have enough common ground to have a discussion. The philosophical questions that you think must be resolved are not my questions because I don’t believe the Bible teaches what you say it does. And I don’t grant your givens, and you don’t grant mine, so our arguments are not going to be persuasive to each other.
These are all off-topic on this post. If you want to discuss them, start new threads, and address one of them at a time. But it gets frustating when you keep insisting things that aren’t true or are gross simplifications or insist on putting someone else’s claims into your own presuppositions that we don’t share. I think by “claiming allegory for the writings of Moses” you mean disputing that the Penteteuch had a single author, Moses." This really doesn’t have anything to do with allegory and shows that when people try to explain nuanced biblical scholarship to you, it somehow doesn’t compute in your brain and then you go around saying people claimed stuff they never came close to asserting. I have zero interest in your Old Testament Sanctuary service discussion. It’s an esoteric part of SDA theology I just don’t care to learn about and discuss. We have already discussed the Sabbath plenty, we don’t agree with your interpretation. Nobody owes you more of an “answer” if you aren’t convinced by ours. Sometimes people agree to disagree.
Whole books have been written on the topic of original sin and death and the EC position. There are multiple FAQs on the BioLogos website with well-researched, expert-reviewed answers to questions about death, sin, and the fall. This is just a silly accusation that holds no water.