|
Forums118
Topics9,199
Posts195,619
Members1,323
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
5 registered members (Karen Y, dedication, Nadi, 2 invisible),
3,500
guests, and 16
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Rosangela]
#109899
03/15/09 04:46 PM
03/15/09 04:46 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: Rosangela, thank you for answering my question. And, thank you for stating your position clearly. The idea that we can reach a point where we are no longer tempted from within sounds wonderful. Ellen wrote, "It is the privilege of every believer in Christ to possess Christ's nature, a nature far above that which Adam forfeited by transgression." {UL 18.3} She also observed: The higher attributes of His being it is our privilege to have, if we will, through the provisions He has made, appropriate these blessings and diligently cultivate the good in the place of the evil. We have reason, conscience, memory, will, affections--all the attributes a human being can possess. Through the provision made when God and the Son of God made a covenant to rescue man from the bondage of Satan, every facility was provided that human nature should come into union with His divine nature. In such a nature was our Lord tempted. He could have yielded to Satan's lying suggestions as did Adam, but we should adore and glorify the Lamb of God that He did not in a single point yield one jot or one tittle. {3SM 130.2}
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}
We should have no misgivings in regard to the perfect sinlessness of the human nature of Christ. {FLB 49.2}
He is a brother in our infirmities, but not in possessing like passions. As the sinless One, His nature recoiled from evil. He endured struggles and torture of soul in a world of sin. His humanity made prayer a necessity and privilege. {FLB 49.3}
He could have sinned; He could have fallen, but not for one moment was there in Him an evil propensity. {FLB 49.4}
In taking upon Himself man's nature in its fallen condition, Christ did not in the least participate in its sin. He was subject to the infirmities and weaknesses by which man is encompassed. . . . He was touched with the feeling of our infirmities, and was in all points tempted like as we are. And yet He "knew no sin." He was the lamb "without blemish and without spot." Could Satan in the least particular have tempted Christ to sin, he would have bruised the Saviour's head. As it was, he could only touch His heel. Had the head of Christ been touched, the hope of the human race would have perished. Divine wrath would have come upon Christ as it came upon Adam. Christ and the church would have been without hope. {FLB 49.5}
Not even by a thought could Christ be brought to yield to the power of temptation. . . . Christ declared of Himself, "The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me." {FLB 49.6}
Jesus did not allow the enemy to pull Him into the mire of unbelief, or crowd Him into the mire of despondency and despair. {FLB 49.7}
Christ's humanity was united with divinity, and in this strength He would bear all the temptations that Satan could bring against Him, and yet keep His soul untainted by sin. And this power to overcome He would give to every son and daughter of Adam who would accept by faith the righteous attributes of His character. {FLB 49.8} So, if I'm hearing you right, and I hope I am because it sounds so thoroughly amazing and awesome, we can expect to reach a point where our nature ceases to be sinful, where, like Jesus' human nature, it is free of any and all inward corruption, free of the hereditary evil propensities (inclinations, tendencies) which war against us, which tempt us to sin. "We should have no misgivings in regard to the perfect sinlessness of the human nature of" Mike, Tom, and Rosangela. When do people reach this point? What saith the Lord? R: Well, Mike, all we know is that even the 144,000 "can see little good [in their whole lives]. ... They are fully conscious of their weakness and unworthiness." {GC 618, 619} Are you saying we will never reach the point I described above? If so, then that complete deflates everything I thought you said. Also, are you saying the 144,000 are still guilty of sinning after probation closes, during JTOT?
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#109911
03/15/09 06:27 PM
03/15/09 06:27 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
Are you saying we will never reach the point I described above? If so, then that complete deflates everything I thought you said. I'm saying that if/when we reach this point, we will not know it. Also, are you saying the 144,000 are still guilty of sinning after probation closes, during JTOT? You've drawn a wrong conclusion from what I said. (See my answer to your previous question, above.)
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#109912
03/15/09 06:51 PM
03/15/09 06:51 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
Rosangela, the following insight makes it clear that Jesus empowers believers to use the same faculties of mind and body they were born with to imitate His sinless example. Mike, it's not clear to me if you are equating faculties with propensities. If so, the quote says, "The faculties he has are sanctified." What you believe is that the propensities man has are sanctified?
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Tom]
#109920
03/15/09 10:13 PM
03/15/09 10:13 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
The essence of temptation is putting self first. That's what it really comes down to. Now isn't it clear that if one has a sinful nature, the temptation to put self first would be greater than for one who doesn't? That’s why temptations have to be weaker, otherwise you won’t be able to bear them. Contrariwise, if you don’t have sinful tendencies you can bear stronger temptations. R: The sinful nature is your old heart, the old carnal mind (which was crucified).
T: Christ took upon His own sinless nature our own sinful nature, right? So, on the basis of your statement here, you're asserting that Christ took a carnal mind. What you believe, then, is that our sinful nature does not involve the spiritual/moral aspect. Is that correct? What sense does that make? No, we have no control over such things. Only *after* we become aware of the temptation can we deal with it. When we are presented with an idea which we determine, after thinking about it, is wrong, and choose not to do the wrong thing, we have not sinned. It's not a sin to have a temptation or to be tempted. So you think that thinking, “Oh, I want desperately to commit adultery, but I know that this is wrong, so God, help me to not commit adultery!” is not a sin? Well, I disagree with you. At that point, the person has already sinned. This proceeds from the evil of one’s heart, a.k.a. “sinful tendency,” and yes, God can remove it. Consider the inclination for music. Doesn't this come from the genes and chromosomes? A person has perfect pitch one's whole life, even if the aptitude for music is never developed. It doesn't go away. I’m not sure the transmission of sinful tendencies has to do with genes. But I know they have to do with the mind, and that the mind can be transformed. Besides, Ellen White says sinful tendencies can be removed from the life, that they can be turned in the right direction. Either we believe it, or we don’t. Similarly we all have an inclination to put self first. This inclination must be resisted; self must be crucified. This is the victory that Christ obtained for us. Ellen White does say that Christ denied self; and she says that He denied self in heaven, and that God denied self. However, she never said that He had to crucify and subdue self. On the contrary, she said: “ Christ did not need to fast for forty days because of inward corruption, or to subdue self. He was sinless. It was on our account that He fasted. He had been exalted by God, but He humbled Himself, and when He could have taken advantage of circumstances to favor Himself, He did not do this.” {21MR 11.4} I liked Arnold’s analogy of throwing a bird off a plane telling it that it must crash to the ground to do your will. The temptation is to go up. That was how Christ had to deny self. By the way, isn't the essence of a sinful nature its tendencies? When the Holy Flesh people argued that Christ had the nature of Adam before the fall, what could they have meant, other than a nature without the tendencies that ours has? Just how do you think their ideas were different than yours? (other than terminology). Removing the tendencies of the fallen nature is tantamount to removing the nature. You're saying the same thing they were. So please demonstrate that sinful nature = sinful tendencies, and that removing the sinful tendencies is tantamount to removing the sinful nature.
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Rosangela]
#109928
03/15/09 11:14 PM
03/15/09 11:14 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Before getting to your points and questions, I was particularly interested in your answer to the question I asked you regarding sinful flesh. Do you believe Christ came in sinful flesh? T:The essence of temptation is putting self first. That's what it really comes down to. Now isn't it clear that if one has a sinful nature, the temptation to put self first would be greater than for one who doesn't?
R:That’s why temptations have to be weaker, otherwise you won’t be able to bear them. Contrariwise, if you don’t have sinful tendencies you can bear stronger temptations. The temptation to put self first is weaker for someone with a sinful nature? R: The sinful nature is your old heart, the old carnal mind (which was crucified).
T: Christ took upon His own sinless nature our own sinful nature, right? So, on the basis of your statement here, you're asserting that Christ took a carnal mind.
R:What you believe, then, is that our sinful nature does not involve the spiritual/moral aspect. Is that correct? What's your answer to my question? Let's go in order. T:What sense does that make? No, we have no control over such things. Only *after* we become aware of the temptation can we deal with it. When we are presented with an idea which we determine, after thinking about it, is wrong, and choose not to do the wrong thing, we have not sinned. It's not a sin to have a temptation or to be tempted.
R:So you think that thinking, “Oh, I want desperately to commit adultery, but I know that this is wrong, so God, help me to not commit adultery!” is not a sin? Well, I disagree with you. I said only after we are aware of a temptation can we deal with it. To "desperately" want to commit some act would come a long ways after merely becoming aware of it. At that point, the person has already sinned. Sure, as at this point the desire has become "desperately" cherished. This proceeds from the evil of one’s heart, a.k.a. “sinful tendency,” and yes, God can remove it. This tendency can't be a part of "our sinful nature", or else Christ would have had it. You can't have it both ways. If Christ assumed "our sinful nature" and "sinful nature" does not include moral/spiritual nature, then it didn't for us either. Either "sinful nature" include moral/spiritual nature or it doesn't. Which way do you want it? You can't have it one way for Christ and another way for us, because, in this case, Christ would not have assume "our sinful nature." He would have assumed "not our sinful nature." T:Consider the inclination for music. Doesn't this come from the genes and chromosomes? A person has perfect pitch one's whole life, even if the aptitude for music is never developed. It doesn't go away.
R:I’m not sure the transmission of sinful tendencies has to do with genes. How could it not? Of course it does. By genetics we are passed inclinations. Do you think these are only inclinations to good things? But I know they have to do with the mind, and that the mind can be transformed. Besides, Ellen White says sinful tendencies can be removed from the life, that they can be turned in the right direction. Either we believe it, or we don’t. It would make sense that cultivated sinful tendencies can be removed from the life, and certain hereditary ones as well. It wouldn't make sense for genetic hereditary inclinations to be removed, as this isn't how genetics works. For example, consider someone with perfect pitch. This is never removed, even if the inclination towards musicality is never developed. Did Christ assume "our sinful nature"? "Either we believe it or we don't." Ellen White does say that Christ denied self; and she says that He denied self in heaven, and that God denied self. However, she never said that He had to crucify and subdue self. The Scriptures make clear that Christ had a self to be denied. He said He came not to do His own will, but the will of His Father. Paul said that Christ pleased not Himself. These statements only make sense if there's a crossing of wills involved here, and the crossing of wills could only involve the human nature of Christ, as the divine nature could not have been at odds with the Father's will. Christ said for us to take our cross and follow Him. That's clear enough. How Christ had to deny self was to do things self didn't want to do, just like we have to deny self. We are take up our cross and "follow" Christ. As Paul said, "I am crucified with Christ." Christ condemned sin in the flesh, our flesh. T:By the way, isn't the essence of a sinful nature its tendencies? When the Holy Flesh people argued that Christ had the nature of Adam before the fall, what could they have meant, other than a nature without the tendencies that ours has? Just how do you think their ideas were different than yours? (other than terminology). Removing the tendencies of the fallen nature is tantamount to removing the nature. You're saying the same thing they were.
R:So please demonstrate that sinful nature = sinful tendencies, and that removing the sinful tendencies is tantamount to removing the sinful nature. There's nothing to demonstrate. That's what we're talking about: tendencies. The whole crux of our disagreement involves tendencies. You don't believe Christ had the tendencies inherent to sinful flesh. If you take these tendencies away from sinful flesh, you no longer have sinful flesh, but holy flesh.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Rosangela]
#109939
03/16/09 12:50 AM
03/16/09 12:50 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Are you saying we will never reach the point I described above? If so, then that complete deflates everything I thought you said. I'm saying that if/when we reach this point, we will not know it. Also, are you saying the 144,000 are still guilty of sinning after probation closes, during JTOT? You've drawn a wrong conclusion from what I said. (See my answer to your previous question, above.) Thank you the clarification. Sorry I didn't get it the first time around. I am a bit surprised you cannot say with absolute certainty that that the 144,000 will reach that point. What makes you think it might not happen?
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Rosangela]
#109941
03/16/09 01:20 AM
03/16/09 01:20 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: Rosangela, the following insight makes it clear that Jesus empowers believers to use the same faculties of mind and body they were born with to imitate His sinless example. The leaven hidden in the flour works invisibly to bring the whole mass under its leavening process; so the leaven of truth works secretly, silently, steadily, to transform the soul. The natural inclinations are softened and subdued. New thoughts, new feelings, new motives, are implanted. A new standard of character is set up--the life of Christ. The mind is changed; the faculties are roused to action in new lines. Man is not endowed with new faculties, but the faculties he has are sanctified. The conscience is awakened. We are endowed with traits of character that enable us to do service for God. {COL 98.3} R: Mike, it's not clear to me if you are equating faculties with propensities. If so, the quote says, "The faculties he has are sanctified." What you believe is that the propensities man has are sanctified? Ellen wrote: 1. The natural inclinations are softened and subdued. 2. New thoughts, new feelings, new motives, are implanted. 3. A new standard of character is set up--the life of Christ. 4. The mind is changed; the faculties are roused to action in new lines. 5. Man is not endowed with new faculties, but the faculties he has are sanctified. 6. The conscience is awakened. 7. We are endowed with traits of character that enable us to do service for God. These insights lead me to believe that when people experience genuine rebirth, several things happen simultaneously, namely: 1. God implants within them new thoughts, new feelings, new motives, and endows them with traits of character that enable them to do service for Him. The original old faculties of the mind (will, reason, intellect, conscience) are sanctified and roused to action in new lines. 2. This new and improved condition enables them to rein in and subdue their softened natural inclinations (tendencies, propensities). A new standard of character is set up--the life of Christ. They strive daily to abide in Jesus and to mature in the fruits of the Spirit while imitating Jesus' sinless example. I do not believe their hereditary inclinations (tendencies, propensities) are eliminated or sanctified the moment they experience rebirth. The following insights make it clear that they shall have to rely on Jesus to empower them to rein in the lusts and affections of sinful flesh until He returns and rewards them with a new nature, one that does not tempt them from within to be unlike Jesus. The Christian will feel the promptings of sin, for the flesh lusteth against the Spirit; but the Spirit striveth against the flesh, keeping up a constant warfare. Here is where Christ's help is needed. Human weakness becomes united to divine strength, and faith exclaims, "Thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 15:57)! {SL 92.2}
He who has determined to enter the spiritual kingdom will find that all the powers and passions of unregenerate nature, backed by the forces of the kingdom of darkness, are arrayed against him. Each day he must renew his consecration, each day do battle with evil. Old habits, hereditary tendencies to wrong, will strive for the mastery, and against these he is to be ever on guard, striving in Christ's strength for victory. {AA 476.3}
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Tom]
#110037
03/17/09 12:07 AM
03/17/09 12:07 AM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
Before getting to your points and questions, I was particularly interested in your answer to the question I asked you regarding sinful flesh. Do you believe Christ came in sinful flesh? I’ve already answered this. I believe Christ came in sinful flesh/nature, as long as this sinful flesh/nature does not include His spiritual/moral nature. I also believe that sinful tendencies/tendencies to disobedience are in the spiritual/moral nature. T: The essence of temptation is putting self first. That's what it really comes down to. Now isn't it clear that if one has a sinful nature, the temptation to put self first would be greater than for one who doesn't?
R: That’s why temptations have to be weaker, otherwise you won’t be able to bear them. Contrariwise, if you don’t have sinful tendencies you can bear stronger temptations.
T: The temptation to put self first is weaker for someone with a sinful nature? Making you put self first is the aim of the temptation. Since it’s easier for you to put self first, and since the temptation cannot exceed your strength, it follows that the temptation for you must be weaker than for someone who does not have a sinful tendency. R: The sinful nature is your old heart, the old carnal mind (which was crucified).
T: Christ took upon His own sinless nature our own sinful nature, right? So, on the basis of your statement here, you're asserting that Christ took a carnal mind.
R: What you believe, then, is that our sinful nature does not involve the spiritual/moral aspect. Is that correct?
T: What's your answer to my question? Let's go in order. I’ve already answered this, too. Ellen White employs “sinful nature” in more than one sense. When she uses “sinful nature” in relation to Christ, she doesn’t refer to the moral/spiritual aspect, but when she is using the expression in relation to us, she refers mainly to the moral/spiritual aspect. “Christ says: ... I will transform your weak, sinful nature into the divine image, giving it beauty and perfection.” {TMK 106.3} Did Christ have a sinful nature that needed to be transformed into the divine image? Now, my question: What you believe is that our sinful nature does not involve the spiritual/moral aspect? R: So you think that thinking, “Oh, I want desperately to commit adultery, but I know that this is wrong, so God, help me to not commit adultery!” is not a sin? Well, I disagree with you.
T: I said only after we are aware of a temptation can we deal with it. To "desperately" want to commit some act would come a long ways after merely becoming aware of it. So your view is that the first time you think, “I wish/want/would like to commit adultery” this is not a sin. Well, I still disagree with you. R: But I know they have to do with the mind, and that the mind can be transformed. Besides, Ellen White says sinful tendencies can be removed from the life, that they can be turned in the right direction. Either we believe it, or we don’t.
T: It would make sense that cultivated sinful tendencies can be removed from the life, and certain hereditary ones as well. It wouldn't make sense for genetic hereditary inclinations to be removed, as this isn't how genetics works. For example, consider someone with perfect pitch. This is never removed, even if the inclination towards musicality is never developed.
Did Christ assume "our sinful nature"? "Either we believe it or we don't." As I said, she doesn’t say only cultivated tendencies can be removed from the life. “... that faith which works by love, and purifies the soul. It will cut away the hereditary tendencies to evil, and the wrong traits of character that have been strengthened by cultivation.” {ST, May 20, 1897 par. 12} R: Ellen White does say that Christ denied self; and she says that He denied self in heaven, and that God denied self. However, she never said that He had to crucify and subdue self.
T: The Scriptures make clear that Christ had a self to be denied. That’s what I said – that Christ denied self and God denied self. But Christ didn’t have to crucify and subdue self, like us. R:So please demonstrate that sinful nature = sinful tendencies, and that removing the sinful tendencies is tantamount to removing the sinful nature.
T: There's nothing to demonstrate. That's what we're talking about: tendencies. The whole crux of our disagreement involves tendencies. You don't believe Christ had the tendencies inherent to sinful flesh. If you take these tendencies away from sinful flesh, you no longer have sinful flesh, but holy flesh. Because we have been talking about sinful tendencies, removing sinful tendencies from the sinful nature is tantamount to removing the sinful nature. What is the logic of this argument?
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#110038
03/17/09 12:29 AM
03/17/09 12:29 AM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
MM: Are you saying we will never reach the point I described above? If so, then that complete deflates everything I thought you said.
R: I'm saying that if/when we reach this point, we will not know it.
MM: Thank you the clarification. Sorry I didn't get it the first time around. I am a bit surprised you cannot say with absolute certainty that that the 144,000 will reach that point. What makes you think it might not happen? I was not referring only to the 144,000. For instance, I think Enoch reached this point. Perhaps the apostle John. Perhaps Moses and Elijah. And perhaps some others.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
