The Serpent and the Seed (sermon by Arnold Sy Go)

Satan was successful in his attack on man in the Garden of Eden. The same devious tactics still work today. What is our defense?

My sermon from 10/25/08 is up at my website. Just click the link.

Don't forget to listen to the matching Children's Story. The sermon will make more sense.

Believing the truth revealed by Jesus Christ!

Amen Tom. Asking for his assistance doesn't hurt either

Interesting answer. Have you listened to the sermon?

Nice picture, Christ. No Arnold.

Arnold, nice sermon. Wish I could have been there to hear it in person. I especially liked your chiasm. And, of course, I liked how you explained victory over sin. Thank you.

PS - Was that a picture of you?

That's the first step to recovery.

I can't take credit for that "anti-chiasm" (or FIFO as someone suggested). I got that first from Stephen Wallace.

The new thing I learned while studying for this sermon is that God had to come down to show that God is love. Any other way would not have addressed the underlying problem.


It's just another way of saying the same old truth: To be saved is to be saved from sin, which is essentially selfishness.

No. That was George. If you want a picture of me, go to the photo gallery at the Mentone site. I'm the old, fat guy in the youth group picture.

What about the fact if A&E had not sinned God could have ended the GC favorably without Jesus having to die on the cross?

Arnold, I didn't see an old, fat guy in the youth group photo. Instead, I saw a fit, handsome, middle-aged man wearing a blue fleece and jeans. Was that you in the process of judo-chopping a six pack of water bottles (or whatever that blue thing is)?

Yeah, that was me. That wasn't water, it's the Guesstures box.

Fit and handsome... I'll tell my wife that news.

The point was that ONLY God can do the job; no other being is qualified to show that God is love.

But if A&E did not sin, then He wouldn't have needed to come here. However, he still needed to manifest His love, somewhere, somehow. Exactly where and how, I don't know.

Amen!

Guesstures Box? What is that? Please, don't keep me guessturing. Ha!

Guesstures is a game.

Here's another quote:

I liked the sermon, too. I like sermons which offer practical instruction for the Christian life. And I could understand it easily (it was a little easier to understand than the children's story).

I want to investigate this idea that I presented in my sermon (actually, just barely touched on it), that faith in God's love for us is THE shield against sin.



How comprehensive a solution is it to truly believe God's love for us? How much of the sin problem does it solve? How much of a role do "believing God's word" and "obeying God's command" in the battle over a person's salvation?

What do you guys think?

As I was studying for this, I thought of making a link between the three-step path into sin - distrust God's love, disbelieve God's word, disobey God's command - and the threefold nature of man - spiritual, intellectual, physical. I think there's something there, but I knew that I did not have time to do it any kind of justice in one sermon, and since I'm not the head pastor, I do not have the luxury of doing a multi-part series on it. So I put it aside. Maybe we can investigate that as well.

I think all of it.



I think these ideas are often misunderstood. If "believing God's word" were understood to mean, "believing the Good News," then that would work, as well as the idea of "truly believing God's love for us," as these are really two ways of saying the same thing. I would say the same thing about the phrase, "obeying God's command," since His command is to "believe in Him whom He has sent." But people often think of "obeying God's command" as something we do, as opposed to Someone in whom we believe.



I don't think so. That is, it seems to me that there's just three items here, and nothing more to it than that. Someone could just as easily say there's a link between the three-step path to sin and God's triune nature, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

This is just my gut reaction. If you could develop the link into something concrete, I'd be interested in seeing this.

Otoh, while I'm not seeing this link, I think the idea of the three-step path itself is right on target! Also your idea in the other direction (three step path to sin).

I'd express it this way myself. We know the whole Great Controversy started over God's character. By misrepresenting God's character, Satan was able to deceive angels and men, and thus lead them into sin. We have:

a.Misapprehending God's character
b.Distrusting God.
c.Acts of disobedience (sin)

So what's the solution?

a.Understanding God's character.
b.Believing in Christ.
c.Acts of obedience.

While what you say is true, I don't think that's all there is to it. Re: A&E, we can't say that believing the Good News (if it even existed then) and believing in Jesus were all they were dealing with.

God literally said something: Eat that fruit and you will die. A&E literally had to believe those words were true. It goes to the fundamental belief that God does not lie.

And God literally gave a command: Don't eat that fruit. A&E literally had to obey that command, if they wanted to stay out of trouble. It goes to the fundamental belief that God has the authority to tell us what to do.

As for us today, I think believing and following God's word are still important. Even if I believed that God loves me, and I love Him back, it behooves me to learn what He said, believe them, and obey any instructions He may give. It is not safe to take the position that some have: God loves me, I love God, I'm going to do whatever pops into my head.

I also successfully resisted the urge to link it to Moe, Larry, and Curly.


I'll post it later. I wanted to see first if others had any ideas, and see if anyone makes the same link I thought of. If someone else also sees it, there's a better likelihood that I'm not just imagining things.

I could have gone that way too, but I would have lost the direct application of the PP quote, and the alliteration. I even considered adding the subtitle of "Dissing the Devil."

Anything that helps people remember the truth is a good thing.

The Good News is "When you've seen Me, you've seen the Father!" That existed, but they didn't believe it. They believed instead the serpents misrepresentations of God's character; God was a liar, God didn't have their best interests in heart. It was believing these untruths that led to Adam and Eve's disobedience. *This is the fundamenatal issue*. Not the disobedience itself, but that which led to the disobedience.

From the DA quote:



How did Satan seek to gain control? By misrepresenting God. This is the fundamental problem, the root of the issue. The disobedience was the fruit.



Which has to do with God's character. Adam and Eve believed that God was lying, or at least possibly lying, and they distrusted Him, leading to their disobedience.



This isn't the fundamental issue. The fundamental problem is not that God said one thing and they acted contrary to what He said. The fundamental issue is that they didn't believe God to be good or trustworthy.

God desires that we have an intelligent appreciation of His character, and that we obey Him because we are convinced that His principles are right. Not because He says so, but because we ourselves believe His ways are right and true. He doesn't desire the obedience of a robot, where He says, "do this," and the robot does it.



Certainly this is important, but not for reasons of authority. It's not like the Army, where someone who is in command says something, and the underling does it because he is outranked.



This is because His ways are right and true. The principles He espouses are the principles of self-sacrificing love, which are the principles of life.

========
There is a new thread to address the issue of how obedience and understanding relate. Click here: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?

We'll continue the discussion there. Now,
========

I thought some of my favorite EGW quotes on love could be useful:

"The conditions of eternal life, under grace, are just what they were in Eden--perfect righteousness, harmony with God, perfect conformity to the principles of His law. ... God has made provision that we may become like unto Him, and He will accomplish this for all who do not interpose a perverse will and thus frustrate His grace. ... By the revelation of the attractive loveliness of Christ, by the knowledge of His love expressed to us while we were yet sinners, the stubborn heart is melted and subdued, and the sinner is transformed and becomes a child of heaven. God does not employ compulsory measures; love is the agent which He uses to expel sin from the heart. By it He changes pride into humility, and enmity and unbelief into love and faith." {MB 76, 77}

"Every soul saved will be saved through love, which begins with God. True conversion is a change from selfishness to sanctified affection for God and for one another." {1SM 115.1}

Yielding to temptation begins in permitting the mind to waver, to be inconstant in your trust in God. If we do not choose to give ourselves fully to God then we are in darkness. When we make any reserve we are leaving open a door through which Satan can enter to lead us astray by his temptations. He knows that if he can obscure our vision, so that the eye of faith cannot see God, there will be no barrier against sin. {MB 92.1}

They saw Jesus, and they ran away from Him! Anyway, you're talking about the time after they had already been deceived; I'm talking about the time before that. You're talking about cure; I'm talking about prevention.


Think about that. That's the thought that led to me think of the link to man's threefold nature.


But that's only part of it. They could have thought that God simply didn't know what He was talking about. It's not just a matter of trusting God's goodness, but also His competence.


I disagree with you here, and we'll discuss it more in the other thread where we started it (if I can find it again). You are treating God as your equal, as if you could stand in judgment of His words and decide for yourself if you should or should not follow. He gave 10 Commandments, not 10 Explanations.

When I deal with my kids, I want them to obey because they see the wisdom in my commands. But that sometimes requires more maturity than they currently have. In the meantime, I want them to obey what I said, even if they don't understand why I said it. If they don't, they might not survive long enough to gain the needed maturity. So I want them to trust that I want what's best for them, and I know what I'm doing, even if they don't.

That's how it is with God. If I was as wise as Him, maybe the two of us can sit around and dissect His commands and decide if I concur. But I'm not. So, I obey, with a child-like trust that He wants what's best for me, and He knows what He's doing, even if I don't.


If you don't understand the rationale for one of God's commands, or maybe even don't know that God commanded it, do you think there will be negative consequences for doing the opposite of God's will?


Are these principles still in effect if I don't understand why? IOW, is going against God's will inherently hurtful?

I've quoted this one many times. This whole thing is a nice quote. She's commenting on "Be ye therefore perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect."

The cure is the same as the prevention: Believing the truth about God.



You'll have to spell this out for me.



This would also has to do with His character, although I think it's unlikely they would think God to be incompetent. After all, He created them.



Yes, we seem to disagree here. First of all, I am not treating God as my equal; I perceive Him to be as you do. I am guessing for you to say this that you perceive desiring to understand why a certain thing is desired is equivalent to treating someone else as equal(?) That is, I'm a bit perplexed as to why you would think I'm treating God as an equal because I assert that He doesn't desire robotic obedience.

I understand with a young child that you give a command ("Don't cross the street without me!") because they don't understand the danger involved, but I can't think of a counterpart in our case. We are not children, but have reached the age of accountability. What would be an example of something God wants us to do without understanding why?



I think this question is based on a false premise, which is that it's possible to do God's will without understanding the why involved. I don't think it's God's will that He says, "Jump!" and we say, "How high?" That's the Army. God's kingdom is moral. It's not based of God's authority, but on His character. It's not run by the principles of force, but on the basis of love, and love must be freely given, and must be based on understanding.



If God's will is that you understand His principles, it's not possible to do His will without understanding why. Or, to put it another way, a fundamental part of His principles is that the why be understood.

Just a quickie...


There is no problem with wanting to understand. In fact, there would be a problem with not wanting to understand.

But requiring understanding BEFORE rendering obedience is a problem. That would be treating God as an equal, because you are putting yourself as the final arbiter of what should or should not be done.

I don't think obedience is possible without understanding, so I wouldn't view this as a "requirement," in terms of, "I refuse to do this unless I understand" but it's a requirement in terms of God "requires" that we understand before we can obey; or, to put it another way, obedience without understanding is not something desire by God, nor of interest to Him, because He doesn't care for slavish, or robotic, obedience.

Obedience based on faith, hope, and charity, rather than on understanding, is beautiful - not robotic.

Does anyone have an example of a situation where obedience is rendered in spite of not knowing why it is required?

What about the fact if A&E had not sinned God could have ended the GC favorably without Jesus having to die on the cross?

"... faith in God's love for us is THE shield against sin." Yes, but only if it is faith that works by love and purifies the soul. However, I am more inclined to believe the shield against backsliding is abiding in Jesus. "He that abideth in him sinneth not." (1 John 3:6)

Walking in the Spirit and partaking of the divine nature are also necessary to avoid backsliding and for maturing in the fruits of the Spirit. "Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh." (Gal 5:16) "Be partakers of the divine nature . . . for if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins." (2 Peter 1:4, 8, 9)


A&E believed God loved them but it didn't prevent them from eating the forbidden fruit. So belief without corresponding works is not enough to prevent sin. To believe in Jesus is to behave like Jesus. "He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also." (John 14:12)

Regarding a solution to the sin problem. Believing God loves us does nothing to atone for past sins. It does not in the least satisfy the just and loving demands of law and justice (so far as past sins are concerned). Death must come in consequence of sin. The integrity of the law must be upheld and preserved.

"The Lord requires at this time just what He required of Adam in Eden--perfect obedience to the law of God. We must have righteousness without a flaw, without a blemish. God gave His Son to die for the world, but He did not die to repeal the law which was holy and just and good. The sacrifice of Christ on Calvary is an unanswerable argument showing the immutability of the law. Its penalty was felt by the Son of God in behalf of guilty man, that through His merits the sinner might obtain the virtue of His spotless character by faith in His name. {FW 89.3}


No one will be saved without good words and works. Therefore, belief and behavior are essential to ones salvation. "While we are to be in harmony with God's law, we are not saved by the works of the law, yet we cannot be saved without obedience. The law is the standard by which character is measured. But we cannot possibly keep the commandments of God without the regenerating grace of Christ. Jesus alone can cleanse us from all sin. He does not save us by law, neither will He save us in disobedience to law. {FW 95.3}


Seems to me the path to sin involves one step, namely, neglecting to abide in Jesus. Of course, this applies to born again believers who are abiding in Jesus. Otherwise, people who have not experienced the miracle of rebirth they sin by default. They cannot not sin. No step needs to be taken to sin. They sin naturally and instinctively. Thus, rebirth and abiding in Jesus is everything. It is the end all (cease from sin), be all (without fault, blameless).

"The converted student has broken the chain which bound him to the service of sin, and has placed himself in the right relation to God. His name is enrolled in the Lamb's book of life. He is under solemn obligation to renounce evil, and come under the jurisdiction of God. Through earnest prayer he is to cleave to Christ. To neglect this, to refuse his service, is to forfeit the favor of the Great Teacher, and to become the sport of Satan's wiles. {FE 514.1}

"The impressions of the Holy Spirit if disregarded today, will not be as strong tomorrow. The heart becomes less impressible, and lapses into a perilous unconsciousness of the shortness of life, and of the great eternity beyond. Our condemnation in the judgment will not result from the fact that we have been in error, but from the fact that we have neglected heaven-sent opportunities for learning what is truth. {DA 489.5}

Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command? is now open. Let's continue this topic there.

Okay. But please address #104674 and #104675 (my last two posts on this thread). Thank you.

I already answered #104674 in my post #104444.

I will definitely come back to the other one, since that's what I wanted to investigate.

While all of those things you mentioned are true, they can be considered the inevitable result, and can only result from, having faith in God's love to us.

For example, if I don't believe that God loves me, why would I abide in Him? That's like living with a spouse who doesn't love you. But if I know He loves me, the natural response is to love Him back, and all the other things you mentioned.

Then, if you have faith in God's love, as the SOP says, "you are secure."

BTW, faith that doesn't work by love or purify the soul is not really faith.

They did not believe God's love. Read this:
As you said, "To believe in Jesus is to behave like Jesus." If they really believed, they would have obeyed. But they didn't, so they didn't.

Here's how she puts it in another place:
So if we want to get rid of selfishness, and all sin is selfishness, the fundamental solution is to behold God's love.

Arnold, I very much appreciate what your sharing here. How does this principle play out in Lucifer's case in heaven? He was totally familiar with God's love and yet it didn't prevent him from sinning and rebelling against God.

Yes, Satan knew God's love. But he stopped at the intellectual level (step 2 in my ladder). He did not trust God's love, that God loved him enough to give him everything that was good for him. This was the point where he began with Eve, insinuating that God was withholding something that was good for her.

Instead of trusting God's love, Satan believed that he loved himself more. And thus, selfishness was born.

Amen!!!

Arnold, are you saying Lucifer's love for God was faulty and imperfect before he sinned and rebelled? Would this explain why he sinned and rebelled?

The initial problem was his misunderstanding of his love FROM God. His damaged love FOR God resulted from this initial problem. And once you start down that road, sin and rebellion are not far away.

Arnold, are you saying this explains why Lucifer sinned and rebelled? Also, please explain what "misunderstanding of his love from God" means?

I only outlined my understanding of the steps Lucifer took to perdition. As for explaining it, I can't even begin to try; I am limited to describing it. Why, in the light of God's presence, anyone would even start to doubt His love is beyond me.

"misunderstanding of his love from God" = thinking that it is possible to find love from another source that is of higher quality or greater quantity than the love we receive from God.

IOW, if you think someone else loves you more than God, then you don't know how much God loves you.

Ellen makes it clear Lucifer's relationship with God was perfect. Nothing was lacking. There was no more God could do to reflect or reveal His love more fully. Listen:

But even as a sinner, man was in a different position from that of Satan. Lucifer in heaven had sinned in the light of God's glory. To him as to no other created being was given a revelation of God's love. Understanding the character of God, knowing His goodness, Satan chose to follow his own selfish, independent will. This choice was final. There was no more that God could do to save him. But man was deceived; his mind was darkened by Satan's sophistry. The height and depth of the love of God he did not know. For him there was hope in a knowledge of God's love. By beholding His character he might be drawn back to God. {DA 761.5}

It is impossible to explain the origin of sin so as to give a reason for its existence. Yet enough may be understood concerning both the origin and the final disposition of sin to make fully manifest the justice and benevolence of God in all His dealings with evil. Nothing is more plainly taught in Scripture than that God was in no wise responsible for the entrance of sin; that there was no arbitrary withdrawal of divine grace, no deficiency in the divine government, that gave occasion for the uprising of rebellion. Sin is an intruder, for whose presence no reason can be given. It is mysterious, unaccountable; to excuse it is to defend it. Could excuse for it be found, or cause be shown for its existence, it would cease to be sin. Our only definition of sin is that given in the word of God; it is "the transgression of the law;" it is the outworking of a principle at war with the great law of love which is the foundation of the divine government. {GC 492.2}

I didn't say that God held something back, that He could have shown more love. What I said was that Lucifer didn't have faith in it. Had he trusted God's love, he wouldn't have trusted "his own selfish, independent will." That is the same problem you and I have whenever we sin - we think we love ourselves better than God.

Did Lucifer ever make it past "step 2", the intellectual level, before he sinned and rebelled? If so, what led to his lack of faith in God? Why did he question His love? Personally, taking into consideration the quotes I posted above, I don't think we can know why. What do you think?

I don't think we can know why. However, we can know what happened, and take steps to avoid it happening to us.

Amen! Lucifer knew God so well it is a mystery to me that he ended up rebelling. If it weren't for the fact God says sin shall not arise a second time I would fear it could. If it can happen to Lucifer who am I to think it couldn't happen to me? Thank you Jesus for the promise in Nahum 1:9.

That's why the SOP says, "Know and believe the love that God has to us, and you are secure; that love is a fortress impregnable to all the delusions and assaults of Satan." {MB 119.2} Mere intellectual assent to a set of facts, despite how our church does things, does not constitute conversion.

Is there any objective way to know a person has experienced genuine rebirth? Can we know it about ourselves?

We are told that we will know them by their fruits. However, it is nearly impossible to know all of a person's fruits this side of eternity.

But we can know it about ourselves. Even though our deceitful hearts make it difficult, it is possible. We must ask ourselves: Who has the thoughts, who has the heart, of whom do we love to think and converse? Honest answers to questions along this line will help reveal where we stand.

Regarding ourselves

Amen! Thank you, Arnold and Tom. The Holy Spirit never leaves us in darkness or under the spell of the deceitfulness of sin. In Christ we are dead to sin and awake to righteousness and true holiness. And we definitely know it when we're not abiding in Jesus, when we've reverted back to the mind of the old man. God loves us too much to leaves us in sin or ignorance.