Incredible quotation, I agree. Are you hearing her right? Why wouldn't you be, mate? Or is there a fragmenting endpoint I don't see for lack of a higher quotient.

William

Oh, your welcome. How thoughtful of you, thank you. Though instead of "sweet and gentle," no doubt what you had in mind and really meant is "rugged and tough as nails," right?

Right?

William

There are basic processes when conducting professional research of any kind, obviously. Gathering data is one of them. What historical researcher, for example, would dare test and analyze their hypothesis or finalize a conclusion based on ANYTHING unpublished? As students we're taught that any faulty postulation has zero credibility in serious research. And I certainly don't mean to sound smug or demean anyone in stating this most elementary of points. Yes?

William

how do you equate my original question with the thread in general?

There doesn't appear to be any lasting function for this kind of rhetorical ineptness. Why? Because any clear-minded, truth-seeking researcher will admit that in the Christological debate,

"The choice of the devout Adventist is therefore between Questions on Doctrine and Desire of Ages" (Zurcher).

Quite frankly, any other source of resolution is simply shortsighted and naive.

William

As one question among many. I think it was a good question.

Those with other preferences for sources of theology will have to forgive my regular usage of those connected to the youth conference movement. As a young person, it's not unheard of to gravitate toward those with a similar, though maybe not identical or even perfect, theological background. So it is through this homogeneous compulsion (do not like the way that sounded!) that I quote a compelling perspective on the soteriology of Steps to Christ from one of GYC's supporting architects:

[Titus 3 quoted] No, we are not saved by any merit from any of our own works done apart from God. But look at the pictures in these texts. Justification is here paired with metaphors of washing, of renewal, of a working of the Holy Spirit in us. No wonder Ellen G. White balances these things beautifully in Steps to Christ, pp. 62, 63:

"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.

"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.

"So we have nothing in ourselves of which to boast. We have no ground for self-exaltation. Our only ground of hope is in the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and in that wrought by His Spirit working in and through us."

Did you hear what inspiration said? “Our only ground of hope is in the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and in that wrought by His Spirit working in and through us.” We must have the counting and we must have the inward working. Together, these constitute “our only ground of hope.” On justification, the following also helps us.

"God requires the entire surrender of the heart, before justification can take place; and in order for man to retain justification, there must be continual obedience, through active, living faith that works by love and purifies the soul" (Faith and Works, p. 100).

One advocate of the New Theology position, says that this topic “is the great divide.” I concur, not in that this was the great divide upon which the Protestant Reformation was shaped, for it was not; but in that today it divides within the Church the New Theology advocates from the advocates of authentic Seventh-day Adventism. And which does Mrs. White ask? the “counted-only” question, “How shall a man be counted righteous?” or the “counted and changed” question, “How shall a man be made righteous?” Steps to Christ answers:

"How shall a man be just with God? How shall the sinner be made righteous?" (Steps to Christ, p. 23).

End Quote

A sidenote question begs, Isn't the Steps to Christ gospel the same one that Jones and Waggoner preached?

William

Strangely, it is the soteriology of Steps to Christ that keeps me from accepting the Christology presented by many postlapsarians. Note these passages from two chapters near and dear to most "old theology" proponents:
It should be clear that in terms of soteriology - what must we do to be saved - the nature of sinful man is the antithesis of the nature of God. Hence, we need to be healed, we need to be set free, we need a "renewing of our whole nature." And the result of all this change is that we become like Christ, making it obvious that in terms of the "soteriological nature" Jesus was not like sinful man.

Veering a little bit away from SC, but not from soteriology, we have MM's quote:
We may - must - possess Christ's nature. That means we don't possess it by default. That also means that what we do possess by default is not what Jesus possessed by default. At least, not when we're talking about how to be saved.

It is a nature far above unfallen Adam's nature. Obviously, I hope, this cannot be Adam's fallen, messed up, alienated, sinful, evil nature. (That reminds me of the PP quote that went by unnoticed, but we'll leave it that way for now.)


That attitude is one reason why I think postlaps are misinformed at best or malicious at worst. And I've come across the best and the worst.

I am, at least by Kirkpatrick's definition, a New Theologian. Yet, in terms of overcoming sin, I have yet to find anyone, Old Theologians included, who has a stronger stance against sin. While some call for complete overcoming of sin in the last generation, I call for complete obedience in THIS generation.

It is the unkind generalization of New Theologians displayed in your quote that led your GYC buddies to label me an antinomian. What a joke! (The ignorance is the joke. Being judgmental is never a joke.) But it is a joke that makes Jesus weep. Perhaps if they spent less time claiming that Jesus was like us, they might have more time left to become like Jesus.

But enough of that. Let us behold Jesus, and we will see the distinct difference between "His perfect nature" and ours. Then we can fall at the foot of the cross and be changed.

Whoa. Didn't mean to evoke anything negative, mate. Not sure I'm following everything you've just said, nor did I know they hurt you in some way, maybe we'll let things sit for awhile and come back to them a little later.

In any case, glad you're still breathing, at least till Rosa resurrects again. (PS: Just think Ming. . . no ring.)

William

We take turns. In a few weeks, it will be my turn to disappear while I move. Actually, I should disappear now. Got work to do.