As Seventh-day Adventists, we often hear the idea that the law is a transcript of God’s character. (If so, then because God doesn’t change, the law—which reveals His character—shouldn’t change either.) What, though, does that mean, this idea that the law is an expression of God’s character?
Suppose you lived in a land with a king whose word was law. (“The state, that’s me” one French king famously said.) Now, suppose the king issued laws that were repressive, nasty, hateful, unfair, discriminatory, and so forth. Would not those laws be a good representation of the kind of person the king was; would they not reveal his character?

Think through some of history’s worst despots. How did the laws they passed reveal what kind of people they were?

In this sense, the law reveals the character of the lawgiver. What, then, does God’s law reveal about God? When we understand God’s law as a hedge, a protection, something created for us, for our own good, then we come to understand more about what God is like.

This week we’ll take a look at the law and, by default, the Lawgiver.

As Seventh-day Adventists, we often hear the idea that the law is a transcript of God’s character. (If so, then because God doesn’t change, the law—which reveals His character—shouldn’t change either.) What, though, does that mean, this idea that the law is an expression of God’s character?

What this is essentially saying is,
The law is good; therefore, God is good.
Shouldn't it be the other way around?
God is good; therefore, the law is good.
WDYT?

Rather, it is saying that the law gives us insight into the character of the lawmaker. That is certainly true also.

Yes, this is true for us, but not for a large part of the professed Christian church. To them, the law is bad, faulty, imperfect. They don't see that if such is the case, the same is true about the Lawmaker.

"That the obligations of the Decalogue might be more fully understood and enforced, additional precepts were given, illustrating and applying the principles of the Ten Commandments." {PP 310} Since the Law of Moses reflects the Law of God it gives us a microscopic look into the Ten Commandments. Is this what many Christians find objectionable about the Law of God?

When it is in the heart to obey God, and every effort is made to obey, God sees that as acceptable service while Jesus makes up for our unavoidable deficiencies. True righteousness and holiness are imputed, not duplicated. What you fail to understand is that perfect harmony with God's law is a state of being, not merely a set of actions performed or avoided.

Is he now free to transgress God's law? Says Paul: "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." "How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" And John declares: "This is the love of God, that we keep His commandments: and His commandments are not grievous." Romans 3:31; 6:2; 1 John 5:3. In the new birth the heart is brought into harmony with God, as it is brought into accord with His law. When this mighty change has taken place in the sinner, he has passed from death unto life, from sin unto holiness, from transgression and rebellion to obedience and loyalty. The old life of alienation from God has ended; the new life of reconciliation, of faith and love, has begun. Then "the righteousness of the law" will "be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Romans 8:4. And the language of the soul will be: "O how love I Thy law! it is my meditation all the day." Psalm 119:97. {GC 468.1}

Satan represents God's law of love as a law of selfishness. He declares that it is impossible for us to obey its precepts. The fall of our first parents, with all the woe that has resulted, he charges upon the Creator, leading men to look upon God as the author of sin, and suffering, and death. Jesus was to unveil this deception. As one of us He was to give an example of obedience. For this He took upon Himself our nature, and passed through our experiences. "In all things it behooved Him to be made like unto His brethren." Hebrews 2:17. If we had to bear anything which Jesus did not endure, then upon this point Satan would represent the power of God as insufficient for us. Therefore Jesus was "in all points tempted like as we are." Hebrews 4:15. He endured every trial to which we are subject. And He exercised in His own behalf no power that is not freely offered to us. As man, He met temptation, and overcame in the strength given Him from God. He says, "I delight to do Thy will, O My God: yea, Thy law is within My heart." Psalm 40:8. As He went about doing good, and healing all who were afflicted by Satan, He made plain to men the character of God's law and the nature of His service. His life testifies that it is possible for us also to obey the law of God. {DA 24.2}

The idea that born-again believers are incapable of obeying the Law of God echoes the accusations of Satan.

Yes. But being more acutely aware of my defective traits of character isn't the same thing as acting them out in sinful ways. Do you agree? If not, why not?

PS - I don't understand how your question relates to my previous post. Please explain. Thank you.

Can any of us say that we never sinned since being born again?

A: True righteousness and holiness are imputed, not duplicated.

M: The idea that born-again believers are incapable of obeying the Law of God echoes the accusations of Satan.

R: Mike, "obeying the law" means a perfect obedience during your whole existence, from the moment you are born to the moment you die. Our efforts to obey are imperfect, because we sin, but God considers them as real obedience because of Christ's merit. So we can say we obey the law. This is what the quote Arnold alluded to says. Do you disagree?

It was possible for Adam, before the fall, to form a righteous character by obedience to God's law. But he failed to do this, and because of his sin our natures are fallen and we cannot make ourselves righteous. Since we are sinful, unholy, we cannot perfectly obey the holy law. We have no righteousness of our own with which to meet the claims of the law of God. But Christ has made a way of escape for us. He lived on earth amid trials and temptations such as we have to meet. He lived a sinless life. He died for us, and now He offers to take our sins and give us His righteousness. If you give yourself to Him, and accept Him as your Saviour, then, sinful as your life may have been, for His sake you are accounted righteous. Christ's character stands in place of your character, and you are accepted before God just as if you had not sinned. {SC 62.2}

More than this, Christ changes the heart. He abides in your heart by faith. You are to maintain this connection with Christ by faith and the continual surrender of your will to Him; and so long as you do this, He will work in you to will and to do according to His good pleasure. So you may say, "The life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me." Galatians 2:20. So Jesus said to His disciples, "It is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you." Matthew 10:20. Then with Christ working in you, you will manifest the same spirit and do the same good works --works of righteousness, obedience. {SC 62.3}

Can any of us say that we never sinned since being born again?

M: Yes. But being more acutely aware of my defective traits of character isn't the same thing as acting them out in sinful ways. Do you agree? If not, why not?

A: Of course it's not the same thing. You keep saying that as if anyone here believes otherwise. You are the only one here who ever brings it up. Here are some quotes to show that even true believers are defective:


A: You have seen all of these before, since I have quoted them to you before. But my question to you now is this: Is it a sin to have an imperfect character?

M: I don't understand how your question relates to my previous post. Please explain. Thank you.

A: I want to better understand what your idea of "righteousness and holiness" is. Your answer to my question above should help. You claim that all born-again believers are righteous and holy when it comes to keeping God's law. That doesn't sit well with what I have read in inspiration.


A: Note the similarity between the last part of that quote and my earlier quotes. Then note that this is talking about one who has been "reconciled to God through the blood of Christ."

The gospel of good news was not to be interpreted as allowing men to live in continued rebellion against God by transgressing His just and holy law. Why cannot those who claim to understand the Scriptures, see that God's requirement under grace is just the same He made in Eden-- perfect obedience to His law. In the judgment, God will ask those who profess to be Christians, Why did you claim to believe in My Son, and continue to transgress My law? Who required this at your hands--to trample upon My rules of righteousness? "Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." The gospel of the New Testament is not the Old Testament standard lowered to meet the sinner and save him in his sins. God requires of all His subjects obedience, entire obedience to all His commandments. He demands now as ever perfect righteousness as the only title to heaven. Christ is our hope and our refuge. His righteousness is imputed only to the obedient. Let us accept it through faith, that the Father shall find in us no sin. But those who have trampled on the holy law will have no right to claim that righteousness. O that we might view the immensity of the plan of salvation as obedient children to all God's requirements, believing that we have peace with God through Jesus Christ, our atoning sacrifice (RH Sept. 21, 1886)! {6BC 1072.8}

God requires at this time just what He required of the holy pair in Eden, perfect obedience to His requirements. His law remains the same in all ages. The great standard of righteousness presented in the Old Testament is not lowered in the New. It is not the work of the gospel to weaken the claims of God's holy law, but to bring men up where they can keep its precepts. {6BC 1073.1}

The faith in Christ which saves the soul is not what it is represented to be by many. "Believe, believe," is their cry; "only believe in Christ, and you will be saved. It is all you have to do." While true faith trusts wholly in Christ for salvation, it will lead to perfect conformity to the law of God. Faith is manifested by works. And the apostle John declares, "He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar" (RH Oct. 5, 1886). {6BC 1073.2}

Why would they say anything at all about it one way or the other? Did Jesus promise, "Whosoever abideth in him will continue to sin and repent"? Or, did He specifically say, "Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not"?

Jesus Himself had a "defective character" in the sense He bore in His sinful flesh the sins of the entire world.

D: Can any of us say that we never sinned since being born again?

M: Why would they say anything at all about it one way or the other? Did Jesus promise, "Whosoever abideth in him will continue to sin and repent"? Or, did He specifically say, "Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not"?

D: In theory we can, but in reality we can't?

Bearing the sins of the entire world didn't give Christ a "defective character". His own character remained spotless, pure, and sinless.

M: Jesus Himself had a "defective character" in the sense He bore in His sinful flesh the sins of the entire world.

R: He bore our sins and was condemned by them. How, then, did you come to the following conclusion: "Obviously, therefore, having defective traits of character does not cause guilt or condemnation"?

You wrote, "Of course it's not the same thing." Are you sure? Because you go on as if they are. You equate having defective traits of character with being guilty and condemned.

You ask, "Is it a sin to have an imperfect character?" It depends on whether or not you act it out in sinful thoughts, words, or behavior.

Exactly how Jesus "his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree" (1 Peter 2:24) isn't clear. But I suspect He bore our sins in "sinful flesh" (Rom 8:3). Which is more than merely imputing our sins on books in heaven. No doubt He bore them like born-again believers bear their past sins.

M: Exactly how Jesus "his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree" (1 Peter 2:24) isn't clear. But I suspect He bore our sins in "sinful flesh" (Rom 8:3). Which is more than merely imputing our sins on books in heaven. No doubt He bore them like born-again believers bear their past sins.

R: I don't bear my past sins. Christ is the sin-bearer, not me.

M: Yes. But being more acutely aware of my defective traits of character isn't the same thing as acting them out in sinful ways. Do you agree? If not, why not?

A: Of course it's not the same thing. You keep saying that as if anyone here believes otherwise. You are the only one here who ever brings it up. Here are some quotes to show that even true believers are defective:


A: You have seen all of these before, since I have quoted them to you before. But my question to you now is this: Is it a sin to have an imperfect character?

M: You wrote, "Of course it's not the same thing." Are you sure? Because you go on as if they are. You equate having defective traits of character with being guilty and condemned. You ask, "Is it a sin to have an imperfect character?" It depends on whether or not you act it out in sinful thoughts, words, or behavior. Jesus Himself had a "defective character" in the sense He bore in His sinful flesh the sins of the entire world. Obviously, therefore, having defective traits of character does not cause guilt or condemnation. So long as we subdue, subject, rein-in our defects to a sanctified will and mind we stand before God without blame or blemish.

A: No, I do not say they are the same thing. If it seems that way to you, that is only because you have fallen victim to a logical fallacy. Please remember syllogisms from your logic classes. Here are the premises: 1. Defective characters are condemned. 2. Sinful actions are condemned. Even if both are true, that does not necessarily mean that they are the same.

M: You wrote, "Is it a sin to have an imperfect character?" It depends on whether or not you act it out in sinful thoughts, words, or behavior.

A: This is where our hamartiologies are fundamentally, and perhaps irreconcilably, different. You believe that one can have a nasty, depraved, despicable, rotten, selfish, Satanic character and still be sinless as long as he can keep from acting out his evil intentions. I believe, as the 10th commandment clearly teaches, that sin happens in the heart, and sinful actions merely reflect the evil abundance of the heart.

The graces of the Spirit are borne in love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness. We have new affections, new appetites, new tastes. Old things have passed away, and lo, all things have become new. {TSB 135.2}

The old nature, born of blood and the will of the flesh, cannot inherit the kingdom of God. The old ways, the hereditary tendencies, the former habits, must be given up; for grace is not inherited. The new birth consists in having new motives, new tastes, new tendencies. Those who are begotten unto a new life by the Holy Spirit, have become partakers of the divine nature, and in all their habits and practices, they will give evidence of their relationship to Christ. When men who claim to be Christians retain all their natural defects of character and disposition, in what does their position differ from that of the worldling? They do not appreciate the truth as a sanctifier, a refiner. They have not been born again. {RH, April 12, 1892 par. 9}

The command, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect," would never have been given, if every provision had not been made whereby we may become as perfect in our sphere as God is in his. We are to be ever advancing from light to a greater light, holding fast what we have already received, and praying for more. Thus we shall never be left in darkness. {RH, April 12, 1892 par. 10}

M: I don't understand how your question relates to my previous post. Please explain. Thank you.

A: I want to better understand what your idea of "righteousness and holiness" is. Your answer to my question above should help. You claim that all born-again believers are righteous and holy when it comes to keeping God's law. That doesn't sit well with what I have read in inspiration.


A: Note the similarity between the last part of that quote and my earlier quotes. Then note that this is talking about one who has been "reconciled to God through the blood of Christ."

The gospel of good news was not to be interpreted as allowing men to live in continued rebellion against God by transgressing His just and holy law. Why cannot those who claim to understand the Scriptures, see that God's requirement under grace is just the same He made in Eden-- perfect obedience to His law. In the judgment, God will ask those who profess to be Christians, Why did you claim to believe in My Son, and continue to transgress My law? Who required this at your hands--to trample upon My rules of righteousness? "Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." The gospel of the New Testament is not the Old Testament standard lowered to meet the sinner and save him in his sins. God requires of all His subjects obedience, entire obedience to all His commandments. He demands now as ever perfect righteousness as the only title to heaven. Christ is our hope and our refuge. His righteousness is imputed only to the obedient. Let us accept it through faith, that the Father shall find in us no sin. But those who have trampled on the holy law will have no right to claim that righteousness. O that we might view the immensity of the plan of salvation as obedient children to all God's requirements, believing that we have peace with God through Jesus Christ, our atoning sacrifice (RH Sept. 21, 1886)! {6BC 1072.8}

God requires at this time just what He required of the holy pair in Eden, perfect obedience to His requirements. His law remains the same in all ages. The great standard of righteousness presented in the Old Testament is not lowered in the New. It is not the work of the gospel to weaken the claims of God's holy law, but to bring men up where they can keep its precepts. {6BC 1073.1}

The faith in Christ which saves the soul is not what it is represented to be by many. "Believe, believe," is their cry; "only believe in Christ, and you will be saved. It is all you have to do." While true faith trusts wholly in Christ for salvation, it will lead to perfect conformity to the law of God. Faith is manifested by works. And the apostle John declares, "He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar" (RH Oct. 5, 1886). {6BC 1073.2}

Arnold wrote, "True righteousness and holiness are imputed, not duplicated." I disagree. Jesus proved that humanity and divinity combined does not sin. In the case of born-again believers this reality is true while they are abiding in Jesus and partaking of the divine nature. It does not take into account the fact they have sinned in the past. The Law, like God Himself, looks at them as if they have never sinned.

In Christ, we are accounted as if we have never sinned. But more than this, we are empowered to manifest the same spirit, the same good works Jesus manifested.

However, I didn't mean it in the salvation sense. The fact we can recall our past sins with an ever deepening sense of regret and repentance is evidence we are bearing our past sins.

So too, Jesus bore the sins of the world both in this sense and in the salvation sense. Jesus had our sins and sinful traits of character. He bore them in sinful flesh. Having them, though, did not make Him guilty of sinning.

M: You wrote, "Of course it's not the same thing." Are you sure? Because you go on as if they are....

A: No, I do not say they are the same thing. If it seems that way to you, that is only because you have fallen victim to a logical fallacy. Please remember syllogisms from your logic classes. Here are the premises: 1. Defective characters are condemned. 2. Sinful actions are condemned. Even if both are true, that does not necessarily mean that they are the same.

M: You'll be happy to learn I agree with you.

You seem to be saying, No, born-again believers are incapable of rendering perfect obedience and righteousness because everything they think, say, and do is stained with sin and selfishness. Or, have I misunderstood your view?

I wish Tom was here to help. I'm blown away you two believe abiding in Jesus and partaking of the divine nature results in sinning and requires atonement, and that this will continue to be the case until Jesus returns and rewards us with a sinless nature.

M: You seem to be saying, No, born-again believers are incapable of rendering perfect obedience and righteousness because everything they think, say, and do is stained with sin and selfishness. Or, have I misunderstood your view?

A: When Mary was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit to conceive Jesus, was the result of that union completely and perfectly holy? Or was it mixed with selfishness and corruption?

Was the human nature of the Son of Mary changed into the divine nature of the Son of God? No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person--the man Christ Jesus. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature that died. Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible. {7ABC 446.2}

Through being partakers of the divine nature we may stand pure and holy and undefiled. The Godhead was not made human, and the human was not deified by the blending together of the two natures. Christ did not possess the same sinful, corrupt, fallen disloyalty we possess, for then He could not be a perfect offering. {3SM 131.1}

The Lord Jesus Christ, when He took humanity upon Him, was not for this reason less perfect. He came in this lowly garb that humanity might reach humanity. He hungered, He thirsted, He was weary and needed rest, He wept tears of sadness, He was "in all points tempted like as we are;" yet He was the divine Son of God. The human and the divine were blended, and those who humbly seek God through Him will be made partakers of the divine nature. {BEcho, September 2, 1895 par. 2}

The divine nature in the person of Christ was not transformed in human nature and the human nature of the Son of man was not changed into the divine nature, but they were mysteriously blended in the Saviour of men. {6MR 112.3}

Christ could have done nothing during His earthly ministry in saving fallen man if the divine had not been blended with the human. The limited capacity of man cannot define this wonderful mystery--the blending the two natures, the divine and the human. It can never be explained. Man must wonder and be silent. And yet man is privileged to be a partaker of the divine nature, and in this way he can to some degree enter into the mystery. This wonderful exhibition of God's love was made on the cross of Calvary. Divinity took the nature of humanity, and for what purpose?--That through the righteousness of Christ humanity might partake of the divine nature. This union of divinity and humanity, which was possible with Christ, is incomprehensible to human minds. The wonderful things to take place in our world--the greatest events of all ages--are incomprehensible to worldly minds; they cannot be explained by human sciences. The powers of heaven shall be shaken. Christ is coming in power and great glory, but His coming is not such a mystery as the things to take place before that event. Man must be a partaker of the divine nature in order to stand in this evil time, when the mysteries of satanic agencies are at work. Only by the divine power united with the human can souls endure through these times of trial. Says Christ, "Without me ye can do nothing." Then there must be far less of self and more of Jesus. {1888 332.1}

The way you state my position is inaccurate. I think your idea of what I am saying doesn't match what I think I'm saying. I try to state things clearly, in a way that's more accurate than the way you say it, but your words still come out the same. There's definitely a breakdown in our communication. So, don't worry too much about what I believe. Just consider what you think I believe, and know that I don't believe that. I hope that reduces your "blown-away-ness" a bit. Plus, full righteousness, which involves a completely lack of selfishness, might happen before Jesus returns.

[SOP quotes removed]
The incarnation of Jesus did not alter His divinity or His humanity. The two were mysteriously blended so as to preserve both in tact. What was the nature of Mary's human nature? "When man transgressed the divine law, his nature became evil, and he was in harmony, and not at variance, with Satan. There exists naturally no enmity between sinful man and the originator of sin." {GC 505.2} "He took upon Himself fallen, suffering human nature, degraded and defiled by sin. He took our sorrows, bearing our grief and shame. He endured all the temptations wherewith man is beset." {4BC 1147.4} Notwithstanding the fallen, sinful human nature He took upon His unfallen, sinless divine nature, Jesus "did not possess the same sinful, corrupt, fallen disloyalty we possess". Nevertheless, Jesus was tempted from within in the same way born-again believers are tempted from within, that is, His fallen, sinful flesh nature tempted Him from within with unholy thoughts and feelings. He resolutely resisted them and received no guilt or contamination in the process.