The concept that "sin is in the genes" is not far off from its companion concept that "God is in the genes." The latter is pantheistic. We are told that pantheism in various forms will enter the church again in the last days. We are not far away.

Please read the following statement carefully.


In that quote, Mrs. White says, as bolded above, "Our condition through sin is unnatural, and the power that restores us must be supernatural, else it has no value." The attempts to ascribe all transfers of sin and its condition to DNA is but a masked attempt to present our condition through sin as a natural one, in direct opposition to Mrs. White's words. DNA cannot describe our condition through sin. Jesus had sinful DNA. But Jesus was not a sinner. Therefore, DNA cannot be pointed to as the sole source of sin. I would have to say, from my own understanding, that DNA has very little to do with the transmittal of sin. Influence, including the prenatal influence, has much to do with it--if not nearly everything excepting one's free choice in the face of some inviting temptation.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Green - how does "prenatal influence" work? You are a scientist, please give me the mechanism. There is prenatal influence. And most of it is via epigenetics. The switching on and off of gene expression. Oops, it is genetics again.

You attempt to class genetics with pantheism fails. God is not in the genes. Maybe you view it that way, but I certain do not. In fact, we can know the power of God by what He has made. Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:. This includes all life. But all life has been corrupted. How? But sin. How has it been corrupted? By one who chose to alter the law of how what God has made works.

If we can identify what is wrong in the DNA, sin as it were, can we fix it, we humans, repair the damage, without God? NO. In fact, the problem is that much of the information has been lost. The only way is for supernatural restoration. Read John 3, it tells you how this "new birth", (interesting term don't you think?) happens via the Holy Spirit, and faith in the one who over came this problem for us.

Free choice, the only reason we have free choice is because God stepped in in the beginning and put a block against what Satan had done. Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel. "seed", interesting term, don't you think?

I'm surprised you don't think what I am saying is equivalent to the Holy Flesh movement. I would refer you to 2SM 31 and following. Excerpts: The teaching given in regard to what is termed "holy flesh" is an error. All may now obtain holy hearts, but it is not correct to claim in this life to have holy flesh.... If those who speak so freely of perfection in the flesh, could see things in the true light, they would recoil with horror from their presumptuous ideas. ... The Scriptures teach us to seek for the sanctification to God of body, soul, and spirit. In this work we are to be laborers together with God. Much may be done to restore the moral image of God in man, to improve the physical, mental, and moral capabilities. Great changes can be made in the physical system by obeying the laws of God and bringing into the body nothing that defiles. And while we cannot claim perfection of the flesh, we may have Christian perfection of the soul. ... When human beings receive holy flesh, they will not remain on the earth, but will be taken to heaven. While sin is forgiven in this life, its results are not now wholly removed. It is at His coming that Christ is to "change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body" (Philippians 3:21). . . .  {2SM 33.3}

Presumptuous ideas - could see things in the true light? We have the science now to understand these statements. We can see in the genome, our flesh, the problem and I can say with a hearty AMEN that horror that is "us". This is not pantheism. This is corruption of what God has made. This is sin. I have not even presented 1% of what is now known of this problem. The pushback is too strong. Why is that? Who wants most to obscure the real nature of sin? Satan. EGW was so far ahead of her time when she spoke of the hereditary nature of sin. It is sin that causes all disease and suffering, not God. It is sin that kills, not God. Salvation is a healing process, not a legal process. All this has been obscured by the lies of Satan. We are not condemned for believing lies. We are condemned for not believing the truth. (PP 55.2)

GH, building on that quote from Ellen White, where she says "subdue the tendencies of our fallen nature" we look at the following:

Luke 1:35
And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

The Holy Ghost/power of the Highest came upon and overshadowed Mary and then it says "that holy thing" which in I would say to be equal to "sanctified" shall be born of thee.

Ellen White is clear that Christ was without the propensity to sin even from birth, or sin was subdued by the power of God from the womb.

"Be careful, exceedingly careful as to how you dwell upon the human nature of Christ. Do not set Him before the people as a man with the propensities of sin. He is the second Adam. The first Adam was created a pure, sinless being, without a taint of sin upon him; he was in the image of God. He could fall, and he did fall through transgressing. Because of sin his posterity was born with inherent propensities of disobedience. But Jesus Christ was the only begotten Son of God. He took upon Himself human nature, and was tempted in all points as human nature is tempted. He could have sinned; He could have fallen, but not for one moment was there in Him an evil propensity. He was assailed with temptations in the wilderness, as Adam was assailed with temptations in Eden.

Bro. _____, avoid every question in relation to the humanity of Christ which is liable to be misunderstood. Truth lies close to the track of presumption. In treating upon the humanity of Christ, you need to guard strenuously every assertion, lest your words be taken to mean more than they imply, and thus you lose or dim the clear perceptions of His humanity as combined with divinity. His birth was a miracle of God; for, said the angel, “Behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

These words do not refer to any human being, except to the Son of the infinite God. Never, in any way, leave the slightest impression upon human minds that a taint of, or inclination to, corruption rested upon Christ, or that He in any way yielded to corruption. He was tempted in all points like as man is tempted, yet He is called “that holy thing.” It is a mystery that is left unexplained to mortals that Christ could be tempted in all points like as we are, and yet be without sin. The incarnation of Christ has ever been, and will ever remain a mystery. That which is revealed, is for us and for our children, but let every human being be warned from the ground of making Christ altogether human, such an one as ourselves; for it cannot be. The exact time when humanity blended with divinity, it is not necessary for us to know. We are to keep our feet on the Rock Christ Jesus, as God revealed in humanity."

I would say to have Christ in us and we in Christ when we are reborn and transformed by the Holy Spirit brings us to that level as it dwells in us.

Now since all have sinned and fallen short, Christ through grace bridges the gap and we come before God cleansed from sin by His blood not our own merits.

To answer the question of this topic. Yes Jesus was born without sin. If He was not He could never die for our sins. This verse would then apply to Him. Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness (repent) of the wicked shall be upon him. 21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

These verses do not apply to us, we can't die for another's sins but Jesus the sinless one could bear our sins. If He had sinned He would not be able to bear ours and would not be our savior. He'd be a sinner like us.

While I understand what you are attempting to do here, one must not make incorrect statements to do it.

"Not all of the seaweeds have this ability", should tell you something about making blanket conclusions.

Show us the statements, please. What I've come across "kind of" says that, but it doesn't say what you are attempting to make it say. Maybe you are aware of statements I am not and can bring light to this.

Do all fucus attach to rocks only? Do other seaweed attach to things other than rocks? I don't know. But I do spot a potential problem when you mean all and only.

And was there seaweed?

Invalid conclusion.

You are talking about its inherit ability. It may have come after the flood. It may not have. It's present ability does not imply a time frame of when it initially had this ability.

Seaweed may have had the ability to grow in saltwater before sin, but it may not have used that ability.

A new thread was created to discuss salvation and the imputed righteousness of Christ separately. The new topic is What saves us?

I have not read the entire thread so I don't know if anyone has addressed this point. Jesus was not born in rebellion against His Father or He could not have lived a sinless childhood.

We have many comments on the nature of Christ in volume 7a of the SDA Commentaries which are all comments made by Ellen White. There is an entire section on the nature of Christ. I'll quote a few of her comments here.







There are more quotes but I think this is enough to demonstrate what Ellen White says on the subject.

I was around thirty when I first heard the above put forth by a SS teacher. I was positive he was speaking heresy and set out to prove him wrong. It took me decades but I proved to myself a few years ago when I first downloaded and read 7a of the commentaries that I was the one who was wrong.

I think Gods word is clear on this..

1 Peter 2:22
Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

2 Corinthians 5:21
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Hebrews 4:15
For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

1 John 3:5
And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

I agree.