The righteousness and majesty of the Mosaic Law

I thought I’d give my testimony of the deep appreciation I have for the Law of Moses – ceremonial, civil and the ten Words of God. Few Adventists seem to view it for the treasure that it is. We honour the Ten Commandments but few carefully study the rest of the Mosaic books that expound their principles. Few meditate on it like David, exhort it like the prophets and live it like the ancient devout. But it is the same law, the same principles that Christ delighted in and were written on his heart.

When I read Deuteronomy, and passages like Lev 19 and the chapters following Ex 20, I’m so impressed by the wisdom, justice and mercy contained in the statutes God gave Israel. If we want the character and law of God to be written on our heart as it was on Christ’s some of the best sources to study are the passages that expound and apply it. No doubt this scripture was a main resource for Christ as a child and young man.

It was Christ's mission to restore honour to the Law. "He shall magnify the law and make it honourable". It wasn't that the law was dishonourable but that it was dishonoured. Perhaps the greatest single contribution of Ellen White was her deep understanding of the glory and immutability of the law and character of God.

The civil laws of Israel were adapted to a theocracy. Behind them and under girding them are the Ten Commandments. If we take the context into account, they are an exhaustless resource in helping us today to apply those principles.

I confess, Mark, that I haven't spent a lot of time over the last few years studying the 613 Mosaic Laws. Can you share a few examples from it that has been a source of blessing for you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitzvah

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_mitzvot

Hello Mark,

I share your interest and wonder in these oft-neglected statutes and judgments. This morning's study brought me to Ruth, whose story is a moving example of the righteousness and mercy demonstrated by those who honour the law. Naomi, Ruth, Boaz. Here we witness the providence of God when His people are subject to the Law, even in the face of tragedy and loss. The individual precepts which comprise the Decalogue were designed with such wisdom as to accomodate every emergency and circumstance of the brethren.

Neglect and ignorance of these same laws is the reason for the selfish lives of modern Christians. Though we are not civily governed by a theocracy, these spiritual principles will be voluntarily applied by God's people. Today there is no method of enforcement, as there was in ancient Israel. Rather, the voluntary subjection of the mind to Christ. The laws will be written on the fleshy tables of the heart.

I believe the majority of these laws in principle apply to us today and that we will be held to account.

Ken LeBrun has written a Bible and Spirit of Prophecy booklet entitled 'The Elijah People and the Lost Law', published by Teach Services. It is not a popular message, as I believe a mere 144,000 will espouse and cherish the spirit of faithful obedience and sacrifice. They will be called the restorers of the breach.

Thank you for the inspiring message.

Gordon

I'm glad that resonates with you Gordon, and with the Hulquists - the owners of Teach Services. I have lost touch with them, but I know they've done a good work over the years. I was a close friend of Erie Anne Hulquist's mother Ila Wood (Crawford) who lived in Kingston Ontario, close to me, most of her life but was originally from the Maritimes.

MM, I don't want to limit your study of the Mosaic Law in any way by pointing to one particular passage, but since you asked I'll give you one of my favourites. This passage below was at the core of Christ's teaching but it's been tarnished by subsequent misapplications. If we would study these and other passages more in their contexts we could have a part in the work of Christ to magnify the law once again, and make in honourable in the hearts of the noble-minded of our day:

By the way, that's from Lev 19.

Thank you, Mark. It's refreshing and encouraging to know that such things were taught in the OT. It's too bad so many Jews missed it. It is also too bad it is lost upon so many of us today. My unceasing prayer is that I will be like Jesus in every way, which, of course, means knowing the way, the details. Again, thank you for sharing this thread. I look forward to studying it more.

2 Timothy
2:15 Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

How is this tarnished by its applications in christian history?

19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.

Tomas, the three verses that precede the one you quoted give a more complete picture and help explain what Christ had in mind when he said "love your neighbour as yourself." Of course his parable of the Good Samaritan fills in the picture as well.

One main area where this command of the Mosaic law has been misapplied is in using it as an excuse to condone sin. A church that loves sin will paint the loving reproofs of those who resist the tide of evil as not good neighbours, but look at verse 17.


One of the main benefits of the study of the Mosaic Law is that it will restore our sense of balance. Its study would help cure a worldly view of love that displaces the abiding principles of the word with mere sentimintality on the one hand, and a sharply critical and judgmental attitude on the other. It's often those who are the most ready to condone sin in a brother who are also the most judgmental of those who are genuinely trying to help him.

Witness for example the case of the woman caught in adultery and how this might have played out differently. If the Pharisees who were attempting to trap Christ had applied these few verses of the Mosaic law in their own neighbourhood and church – ‘Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: [but] in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour,’ - they would have held the men accountable first who were guilty of committing the greater sin.

In fact it may be said that without the Mosaic law, we cannot have a balanced understanding of the Scriptures. Mary applied the law of Moses to her newborn Son.

"And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord (Luke 2:22)

Jesus came to fulfil this law (Matthew 5:18).

How could Jesus fulfil this Law without knowing its completeness?

How can we?

"Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city" Revelation 22:14

How could a people do these commandments without knowing them?

To quote scripture or precept without foundation in the law would be quoting scripture out of context, as Mark has illustrated. This is a fruitful lesson and an encouragement to study the Word, Our Great Treasure House.

"Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law" Psalm 119:18

Gordon

And what when the Mosaic law says, you do so and so and you shall surely die, while the NT says, you are free to do so-and-so in Christ? What then?This might not be the best of examples since these people knew all of these verses by heart, and worked very very hard to straw all the gnats that came their way. But as they where trying to trap Jesus, justice wasnt on their agenda. And further, while an emphasis on the law might, I say might, produce good conduct, it will not produce neither love nor compassion. Jesus rebuked these people for that aswell. (Have you ever seen a loving pharisee in your church or anywhere else?)

Mark

I think the quicksand marsh that you warn about on the left side of the road is a legitimate concern. However, if the solution takes you to be balancing on the verge to the abyss on the other side of the road, thats a legitimate concern aswell.

I do not see a significant shift from the OT to the NT so far as the principles of the Mosaic Law is concerned. Just because the church in the NT no longer operates under a theocracy in the same way the nation of Israel did in the OT, especially as it applies to the death penalty, it doesn't mean God has changed His mind about it in the NT.

The judicial aspect of the Mosaic Law is just as binding and legitimate in the NT as it was in the OT. The only difference in the NT is that God will execute the death penalty Himself at the end of time in the lake of fire. This is not to say that the Jews in the OT were not also required to "give place unto wrath" or to "overcome evil with good".

Romans
12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but [rather] give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance [is] mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
12:20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
12:21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

!

I'm not making a comment one way or the other about the Mosaic law here, but just pointing out that what the pharisee was not an emphasis on the law. That was a symptom. The problem of the pharisee was not due to the law.

Leviticus chapters 1-7 Laws on offerings.
Leviticus chapters 8-9 The anointing of the tabernacle and priesthood.
Leviticus chapters 10 The unclean fire of Nadab and Abihu
Leviticus chapters 11 Laws on food animals
Leviticus chapters 12-15 Laws on uncleanness before the Lord
Leviticus chapters 16 Laws for the priest for the day of atonement
Leviticus chapters 17 Laws on the butchering of animals
Leviticus chapters 18 Laws on sexual relationships
Leviticus chapters 19-20 Laws relating to the 10 + some apparently miscellaneous others
Leviticus chapters 21-22 Laws relating to the priests
Leviticus chapters 23 The feasts of Israel
Leviticus chapters 24 Miscellaneous temple routine and capital crimes
Leviticus chapters 25 Laws on sabbath years and jubilee years, laws on acceptable slavery and servanthood
Leviticus chapters 26 Promises and threats on the people for their following the law
Leviticus chapters 27 The value of man and beast and possessions in gold

How much of this relate to us, today?

What if the problem of the pharisee was due to making such an effort to keep the law that anything else was secoundary? As in "I do not care if this man was suffering or not, the law says no work, and it means NO WORK!!!. And yet here you come and do work to heal him?? How dare you break the sabbath by healing this man?, and they went away plotting to kill him..."

As with all laws the nature of the righteusness of him who is applying the law is the issue.

What John said. The problem is with the person, not the law.

We have the same issue with the Spirit of Prophecy, as an example. These writings can be the greatest of blessing, or used like a sledge hammer in a way she never intended.

The problem of the pharisee (to find one, look in the mirror), is the disposition to judge another, or oneself, according to man-made rules and ideas. The law was given because of transgression, in order to lead us to repentance, to lead us to Christ. However, as Paul puts it, the law can be used unlawfully. Then the final result is to take one using the law further away from God rather than closer to Him. But is the problem with the law? May it never be! The law is holy, and just, and good.

There's sort of a catch 22 here, a vicious circle. The solution is to somehow see the truth about God, who is gracious, wonderfully merciful, kind, forgiving and patient. Once we get a glimpse of His true character, then these other things fall into place. Christ had this in mind when He said, "Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these other things shall be added unto you."

TV: How much of this relate to us, today?

MM: Some of them apply in principle but not in particular. In other words, the principle behind it still applies but the exact details no longer apply. The difference has to do with being a chosen nation as opposed to be a being a chosen church.

Would you mind giving this reply specifically relating to the chapter identification I made?

TV: Would you mind giving this reply specifically relating to the chapter identification I made?

MM: Sure. Here is a sample of what I mean (of course, it goes much deeper):

Leviticus chapters 1-7 Laws on offerings.

MM: The manner in which offerings were made is symbolic of the death of Jesus. It verifies that Jesus is Messiah. Today it encourages us to offer our very best for the Lord.

Leviticus chapters 8-9 The anointing of the tabernacle and priesthood.

MM: It illustrates how holy and sacred Jesus is, and how important holiness and faithfulness are.

Leviticus chapters 10 The unclean fire of Nadab and Abihu

MM: Same thing as above.

Leviticus chapters 11 Laws on food animals

MM: It teaches us how important health is, that our bodies are the temple of God.

Leviticus chapters 12-15 Laws on uncleanness before the Lord

MM: Same as above.

Leviticus chapters 16 Laws for the priest for the day of atonement

MM: It teaches us how God will eliminate confessed and pardoned sins in order to save sinners and to restore paradise lost.

As far as I can see, you are saying that the first 16 chapters of leviticus are usefull to us by what they tell us about God and ourselves/our relationship with God. I agree. What I do not see is any indication that the contents of leviticus chapters 1-16 is still binding law for us today. Again I agree.

Thomas

The dietary laws still apply (chapter 11).

But previously you said:

"Leviticus chapters 11 Laws on food animals

MM: It teaches us how important health is, that our bodies are the temple of God."

So does chapter 11 contain teaching to help us understand how important health is, or does it contain law which if broken will be punished as it is written down? Cant be both at the same time. Either it is teaching us something or it is comanding us something.

Tomas what law do you think was written on Christ's heart if it was not the Law of Moses? Isn't it true that the principles of the Ten Commandments are accurately reflected throughout all of the Mosaic Law? Isn't is true that this same moral law originates in the heart and character of Christ, the Word? Do you think the Law of Moses creates Pharisees? Pharisees create themselves by greiving away the Holy Spirit and refusing submission to God and to the "weighier matters" of His Law.

The Mosaic Law is full of human and divine compassion and justice. Christ was able to pour out the character of God into it because His sacrifice is eternal. The character of God didn't improve with age so that we serve a new and improved, post-Calvary God. The law is as eternal as His sacrifice. Since His sacrifice is eternal, His character was the same at Sinai as it was at Calvary.

Mark, I don't think you're responding to the spirit of Thomas' point. His (obvious to me) intention in speaking of an emphasis of the law is an emphasis of the law itself (devoid of God; like a bunch of rules) might produce good conduct, but will produce neither love or compassion. He's not speaking against the law, but against an unadvised emphasis upon it.


Tom

Mark:
Hos 6:6 For I desire goodness, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt-offerings. [says the Lord]

Rom 3:20 Therefore, no human being will be justified in God's sight by means of the works prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the full knowledge of sin.
Rom 3:21 But now, apart from the law, God's righteousness is revealed and is attested by the Law and the Prophets-
Rom 3:22 God's righteousness through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction,
Rom 3:23 since all have sinned and continue to fall short of God's glory.
Rom 3:24 By his grace they are justified freely through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,
Rom 3:25 whom God offered as a place where atonement by Christ's blood could occur through faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because he had waited patiently to deal with sins committed in the past.
Rom 3:26 He wanted to demonstrate at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the person who has the faithfulness of Jesus.
Rom 3:27 What, then, is there to boast about? That has been eliminated. On what principle? On that of works? No, but on the principle of faith.
Rom 3:28 For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works prescribed by the law.
Rom 3:29 Is God the God of the Jews only? Is he not the God of the gentiles, too? Yes, of the gentiles, too,
Rom 3:30 since there is only one God who will justify the circumcised on the basis of faith and the uncircumcised by that same faith.
Rom 3:31 Do we, then, abolish the law by this faith? Of course not! Instead, we uphold the law.

Rom 7:1 Don't you realize, brothers-for I am speaking to people who know the law-that the law can press its claims over a person only as long as he is alive?
Rom 7:2 For a married woman is bound by the law to her husband while he is living, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning her husband.
Rom 7:3 So while her husband is living, she will be called an adulterer even if she lives with another man. But if her husband dies, she is free from this law, so that she is not an adulterer if she marries another man.
Rom 7:4 In the same way, my brothers, through Christ's body you also died as far as the law is concerned, so that you may belong to another person, the one who was raised from the dead, and may bear fruit for God.
Rom 7:5 For while we were living in the flesh, sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies to bear fruit for death.
Rom 7:6 But now we have been released from the law by dying to what enslaved us, so that we may serve in the new life of the Spirit, not under the old written code.
Rom 7:7 What should we say, then? Is the law sinful? Of course not! In fact, I wouldn't have known sin if it had not been for the law. For I wouldn't have known what it means to covet if the law had not said, "You must not covet."
Rom 7:8 But sin seized the opportunity provided by this commandment and produced in me all kinds of sinful desires. For apart from the law, sin is dead.
Rom 7:9 At one time I was alive without any connection to the law. But when the commandment came, sin sprang to life,
Rom 7:10 and I died. I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death.
Rom 7:11 For sin, seizing the opportunity provided by the commandment, deceived me and used it to kill me.
Rom 7:12 So then, the law itself is holy, and the commandment is holy, just, and good.
Rom 7:13 Now, did something good bring me death? Of course not! But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it used something good to cause my death, so that through the commandment sin might become more sinful than ever.

Rom 8:1 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in union with Christ Jesus.
Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death.
Rom 8:3 For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to deal with sin. He condemned sin in the flesh
Rom 8:4 so that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Rom 8:5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit.
Rom 8:6 To set our minds on the flesh leads to death, but to set our minds on the Spirit leads to life and peace.
Rom 8:7 That is why the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile toward God. For it refuses to submit to the authority of God's law because it is powerless to do so.

Tomas you quoted this:
That quote summarizes my point. The law has no power to convert. But it does have power to convict. That is its purpose. What I'm advocating is that we allow it to do its intended work in our hearts so we can live the spirit filled life - the law of the Spirit of life. The only way that will happen is if we begin to have some of the same appreciation for the law - its beauty and wisdom and balance - that the great men and women of scripture did, including all of the Apostles.

Mark,

There is a whole lot of context to that short sentence. I hope you consider the whole of it.

Remember prooftexting never did anyone any good.

Just something which came to mind.

Which goes to show, as Tom as provided, that the Bible says that the law has power to convert.

MS: The law has no power to convert. But it does have power to convict.

DF: Which goes to show, as Tom as provided, that the Bible says that the law has power to convert.

MM: The power that causes a “radical change” within us is the Holy Spirit – NOT THE LAW. The law, by itself, is powerless. The law is one of many tools the Holy Spirit uses to inspire us to pursue conversion and salvation through Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. When “the Spirit of God reveals to him the full meaning of the law, what a change takes place in his heart!” (RC 64) We “cannot possibly keep the commandments of God without the regenerating grace of Christ. Jesus alone can cleanse us from all sin.” (FW 95)

OHC 141
The law without faith in the gospel of Christ cannot save the transgressor of law. The gospel without the law is inefficient and powerless. The law and the gospel are a perfect whole. . . . The two blended--the gospel of Christ and the law of God--produce the love and faith unfeigned. {OHC 141.4}

6BC 1070
There are no saving properties in the law. It cannot pardon the transgressor. The penalty must be exacted. . . . The punishment has been endured by the sinner's substitute. . . . In the councils of heaven, before the world was created, the Father and the Son covenanted together that if man proved disloyal to God, Christ, one with the Father, would take the place of the transgressor, and suffer the penalty of justice that must fall upon him (MS 145, 1897). {6BC 1070.4}

GC 468
"The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul." Psalm 19:7. Without the law, men have no just conception of the purity and holiness of God or of their own guilt and uncleanness. They have no true conviction of sin and feel no need of repentance. Not seeing their lost condition as violators of God's law, they do not realize their need of the atoning blood of Christ. The hope of salvation is accepted without a radical change of heart or reformation of life. Thus superficial conversions abound, and multitudes are joined to the church who have never been united to Christ. {GC 468.2}

It's the last quote that MM provided that brings out the converting the soul aspect of Psalm 19:7


It says that without the law "they have no true conviction of sin and feel no need of repentance." This is what I see as the converting power of the law. Of course, it is the Holy Spirit who convicts as a result of what The Father did in sending His Son, and what the Son did by dying for us.

1Co 15:55 O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?
1Co 15:56 The sting of death is sin; and the power of sin is the law:
1Co 15:57 but thanks be to God, who giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

The law is a metaphor, isn't it, for that which is right? That is, when people are converted, they aren't literally converted by the literal law. I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were. The elements of conversion are brought out here:



The Holy Spirit convicts us of sin (that's what "the law" is talking about, right?), while it is the love of God revealed from the cross which draws us to Himself, and motivates us to be united to Him.

"Conversion" really has to do with seeing things from a new perspective. We used to look at things one way, but now we look at them another way; we've been converted.

The love of Christ is what, more than any other thing, changes us.

TE: I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were. The elements of conversion are brought out here:

EGW: How, then, are we to be saved? "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness," so the Son of man has been lifted up, and everyone who has been deceived and bitten by the serpent may look and live. "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." John 1:29.

The light shining from the cross reveals the love of God. His love is drawing us to Himself. If we do not resist this drawing, we shall be led to the foot of the cross in repentance for the sins that have crucified the Saviour.

Then the Spirit of God through faith produces a new life in the soul. The thoughts and desires are brought into obedience to the will of Christ. The heart, the mind, are created anew in the image of Him who works in us to subdue all things to Himself.

Then the law of God is written in the mind and heart, and we can say with Christ, "I delight to do Thy will, O my God." Ps. 40:8.

MM: Tom, I do not understand, in light of the quote you posted, how you can say - "I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were." Sister White wrote that the Holy Spirit writes the law of God in the mind and heart of those who have been saved. Your experience does not coincide with this description.

Paul confessed, "For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." He is saying that he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. Paul id not experience true, genuine conversion and rebirth until after he understood the law of God.

In light of what Paul and Sister White wrote about the law of God and conversion and rebirth I do not understand how you can say you experienced conversion without knowledge of the law of God. How come Paul was unable to experience conversion without a saving knowledge of the law of God and you were?

Romans
7:7 What shall we say then? [is] the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
7:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin [was] dead.
7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
7:10 And the commandment, which [was ordained] to life, I found [to be] unto death.
7:11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew [me].

How differently two people can read the same passage. I understand Paul to be saying that "he died in sin as he understood the law of God."
O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if [it be] yet in vain.
He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, [doeth he it] by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that hangeth on a tree:
That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

For if the inheritance [be] of the law, [it is] no more of promise: but God gave [it] to Abraham by promise.
Wherefore then [serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; [and it was] ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but God is one.
[Is] the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Paul says "when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." You write Paul says he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. These seem like opposites.

As to my experience being different than Paul's, Paul was raised a Jew, and had an acquaintance of the law from birth. I wasn't. I was presented the Gospel by a girl I had met at school. She presented the Christ had died for me on the cross, that He would be my Savior if I asked Him to. The Holy Spirit bore witness of this truth. I realized I needed to make a decision, and, thankfully, I chose to respond to the Holy Spirit's appeal. I accepted Christ as my personal savior. From that point on my whole life changed. I had an interest in Scripture, and in telling others about Christ.

My experience is by no means unique, MM. Your comments make me curious as if you understand what conversion is really about. It's not about sinful habits. It's about Christ.

Tom, conversion is character transformation. We are creatures of habit. When we consciously say "yes, You be in control" to the Holy Spirit there is a complete transformation of the motivating principle of our lives. In saying "yes" we are assenting to the principles of righteousness in the Holy Law of God.

A conversion that assents to any standard other than the Divine will as manifest in scripture, summarized in those ten holy Words is suspect at best. Our Evangelical brothers and sisters, many of them sincere, would like to make a disconnect between the law and grace as though one is at odds with the other. In doing that they present a skewed picture of the character of God, his mercy and his justice. The genius of Adventism, and we can take no credit for it ourselves, is in its return to the ancient truths of scripture on this subject that mercy and truth are met together in Christ and that the government of God, his character is founded firmly on eternal legal principles, the rule of Law; that the gospel teaches liberty from sin, not by means of destroying the law, but by writing those sacred principles on our hearts.

Anyone who demeans the law demeans the character of God and of his Son. My goal in starting this thread is to point to the Mosaic Law and the character of God as being eternally one and the same and to point to the beauty of that law which the supposed servants of God have for decades and centuries, often ignorantly, been derogating.

Regarding the work of the law in 'converting the soul', in Psalm 19, David, Moses and the prophets understood the principles that Paul speaks of when he says that the 'letter kills' but the Spirit gives life. The law of the Spirit of life operates in the person through grace. The letter brings conviction but only when the individual responds by confession and repentance can the work of grace take place and the law be written on the heart.

This is the essence of the New Covenant isn't it - that in contrast to the Jews who said "All that the Lord has spoken we will do" but did not love or do the will of God, in the final generation there will be a people who may not make such a high profession but who will cherish the law in their hearts and who will immerse themselves in its principles.

I agree with this.

Mark, do you see that we are in disagreement somewhere?

MM: Tom, the following is an extract from a quote you posted to explain what happened when you were converted:


MM: How can you quote this passage to explain what happened when you were converted and then insist - "I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were." Again, here is what she says happens when someone is converted:

1. “If we do not resist this drawing, we shall be led to the foot of the cross in repentance for the sins that have crucified the Saviour.” Again, this is not how you described your conversion. You make it clear you did not repent. You knew nothing of the law so you could not repent.

2. “The thoughts and desires are brought into obedience to the will of Christ.” Neither does this describe your conversion. You knew nothing of the law, therefore, you knew nothing of obedience or the will of Christ.

3. “Then the law of God is written in the mind and heart, and we can say with Christ, ‘I delight to do Thy will, O my God.’ Ps. 40:8.” Again, this does not describe your conversion. You could not say with Christ, “I delight to do Thy will, O my God”, because you knew nothing of God’s will or His law.

Again, Tom, in light of the quote you posted, I do not see how you can say it describes what happened when you were converted. Jesus taught, “Repent ye, and believe the gospel.” And Peter proclaimed, “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” And yet you would have us believe you experienced conversion without repenting of your sins. You are contradicting Jesus Himself.

TE: My experience is by no means unique, MM. Your comments make me curious as if you understand what conversion is really about. It's not about sinful habits. It's about Christ.

MM: Again, in light of the quote you posted, in light of what Jesus and Peter said about it, how can you insist repenting is not necessary before we are converted, before we believe and receive the gospel?

………………………….

MM: Paul confessed, "For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." He is saying that he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. Paul did not experience true, genuine conversion and rebirth until after he understood the law of God.

TV: How differently two people can read the same passage. I understand Paul to be saying that "he died in sin as he understood the law of God."

TE: Paul says "when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." You write Paul says he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. These seem like opposites.

MM: Do you two really believe Paul was “alive” in sin before he had a saving knowledge of the law? Paul described it this way, “But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.” (1 Tim 5:6) Indeed, Paul was not alive in sin. He was dead in sin and trespasses before he had a saving knowledge of the law.

Ephesians
2:1 And you … were dead in trespasses and sins …
2:5 Even when we were dead in sins …

Colossians
2:13 And you, being dead in your sins …

Again, Tom, in light of the quote you posted, I do not see how you can say it describes what happened when you were converted. Jesus taught, “Repent ye, and believe the gospel.” And Peter proclaimed, “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” And yet you would have us believe you experienced conversion without repenting of your sins.

I didn't say this.

You are contradicting Jesus Himself.

No I'm not. I quoted Sister White, and said that described my experience. If you're disagreeing with something I wrote, you need to quote it.

TE: My experience is by no means unique, MM. Your comments make me curious as if you understand what conversion is really about. It's not about sinful habits. It's about Christ.

MM: Again, in light of the quote you posted, in light of what Jesus and Peter said about it, how can you insist repenting is not necessary before we are converted, before we believe and receive the gospel?

No.

………………………….

MM: Paul confessed, "For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." He is saying that he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. Paul did not experience true, genuine conversion and rebirth until after he understood the law of God.

TV: How differently two people can read the same passage. I understand Paul to be saying that "he died in sin as he understood the law of God."

TE: Paul says "when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." You write Paul says he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. These seem like opposites.

MM: Do you two really believe Paul was “alive” in sin before he had a saving knowledge of the law?

Paul was convicted of his need for Christ because he realized he was unable to keep the law. That's what he's saying. This conviction of his inability to provide the righteousness the law requires was death to him. That's why he says he died. What EV wrote is right. He "died" as he understood the law of God.

A saving knowledge of the law? In all the reading of Pauls letters that I have done, this is one aspect of the law I havent found mentioned yet. Could you tell me where to find it? In the context I have found, Paul does not qualify what kind of knowledge of the law he is refering to, merely that: Howbeit, I had not known sin, except through the law: for I had not known coveting, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet: but sin, finding occasion, wrought in me through the commandment all manner of coveting: for apart from the law sin is dead. And I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died; and the commandment, which was unto life, this I found to be unto death: for sin, finding occasion, through the commandment beguiled me, and through it slew me.

It migth be that the truth of both mercy and Truth joining in the person Jesus Christ is the genious of theoretical adventism. In the adventism one is likely to encounter however, either one of those is likly to be treated as Cindirella, the stepchild who must sneak out to be able to go to the ball.

What does mercy and truth have to do with legal principles and rule of law?

The gospel does not destroy the law, but it destroys the legal principles which are by nature devoid of mercy.

John, say some more about "legal principles" please.

TE: I didn't say this.

MM: Then what did you mean when you said - "I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were." How did you know what sin was if you didn’t even know what the Ten Commandments were? That's what Paul would want to know, right? How can you repent without knowledge of sin? Jesus told His disciples how to help others experience conversion and rebirth.

He said, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” Is this what happened when you were converted? Were you taught to observe “all things” Jesus commanded?

………………………………..

MM: You are contradicting Jesus Himself.

TE: No I'm not. I quoted Sister White, and said that described my experience.

MM: But your description does not coincide with Sister White’s description. Please read the quoted section above. It plainly shows how your description is different. And it certainly does not coincide with what Jesus said about it.

TE: If you're disagreeing with something I wrote, you need to quote it.

MM: I did. Here is what I quoted - "I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were." This is the fourth time I’ve quoted it.

………………………………


TE: No.

MM: Then what are you saying? What is the truth about repentance and observing “all things” Jesus commanded us to observe as it relates to the gospel and conversion?

………………………………..


TE: Paul was convicted of his need for Christ because he realized he was unable to keep the law. That's what he's saying. This conviction of his inability to provide the righteousness the law requires was death to him. That's why he says he died. What EV wrote is right. He "died" as he understood the law of God.

MM: Tom, in response to my post you said, “You write Paul says he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. These seem like opposites.” Do you think Paul was “alive in sin” before he acquired a saving knowledge of the law? What do you think is "opposites”?

TV: A saving knowledge of the law? In all the reading of Pauls letters that I have done, this is one aspect of the law I havent found mentioned yet. Could you tell me where to find it?

MM: Thomas, I believe it is inherent in what Paul wrote. One of the many things the law does is it points us to Jesus, who alone can save us. Tom Ewall might be able to explain it better. Here’s how Sister White describes it:

FW 29
Sanctification is obtained only in obedience to the will of God. Many who are willfully trampling upon the law of Jehovah claim holiness of heart and sanctification of life. But they have not a saving knowledge of God or of His law. They are standing in the ranks of the great rebel. He is at war with the law of God, which is the foundation of the divine government in heaven and in the earth. These men are doing the same work as their master has done in seeking to make of none effect God's holy law. No commandment-breaker can be permitted to enter heaven; for he who was once a pure and exalted covering cherub was thrust out for rebelling against the government of God. {FW 29.2}

OHC 141
What is to bring the sinner to the knowledge of his sins unless he knows what sin is? The only definition of sin in the Word of God is given us in 1 John 3:4. "Sin is the transgression of the law." The sinner must be made to feel that he is a transgressor. Christ dying upon the cross of Calvary is drawing his attention. Why did Christ die? Because it was the only means for man to be saved. . . . He took upon Himself our sins that He might impute His righteousness to all who believe in Him. . . . The goodness and the love of God lead the sinner to repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. The awakened sinner . . . is pointed to the law he has transgressed. It calls to him to repent, yet there is no saving quality in law to pardon the transgression of law, and his case seems hopeless. But the law draws him to Christ. However deep are his sins of transgression, the blood of Jesus Christ can cleanse him from all sin. . . . {OHC 141.3}

The law and the gospel go hand in hand. The one is the complement of the other. The law without faith in the gospel of Christ cannot save the transgressor of law. The gospel without the law is inefficient and powerless. The law and the gospel are a perfect whole. The Lord Jesus laid the foundation of the building, and He lays "the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace unto it." Zech. 4:7. He is the author and finisher of our faith, the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. The two blended--the gospel of Christ and the law of God--produce the love and faith unfeigned. {OHC 141.4}

The purpose of the Law underlined, the lack of saving power in the law boldened. Ellen agrees with my understanding of what Paul is saying.

TE: I didn't say this.

MM: Then what did you mean when you said - "I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were." How did you know what sin was if you didn’t even know what the Ten Commandments were? That's what Paul would want to know, right? How can you repent without knowledge of sin? Jesus told His disciples how to help others experience conversion and rebirth.

You're a strange one to ask this question, since you say all the last six commandments are known instinctively. When I said I didn't know what the Ten Commandments were, I meant I couldn't tell you what they were. I knew something about them, like Moses had brought them down from a mountain, and threw them, and they broke.

He said, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” Is this what happened when you were converted? Were you taught to observe “all things” Jesus commanded?

Were your raised an Adventist? I'm asking this because you appear to have no conception about what it's like to be a non-SDA Christian.

………………………………..

MM: You are contradicting Jesus Himself.

TE: No I'm not. I quoted Sister White, and said that described my experience.

MM: But your description does not coincide with Sister White’s description. Please read the quoted section above. It plainly shows how your description is different. And it certainly does not coincide with what Jesus said about it.

It did correspond with her description. It doesn't correspond with your understanding of her description, perhaps, but as I read it I say, "Yes, that's just what happened to me."

TE: If you're disagreeing with something I wrote, you need to quote it.

MM: I did. Here is what I quoted - "I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were." This is the fourth time I’ve quoted it.

Which is true. I didn't know what they were. Many, many people are converted that could not list the Ten Commandments. Do you doubt this?

………………………………

Quote:
TE: My experience is by no means unique, MM. Your comments make me curious as if you understand what conversion is really about. It's not about sinful habits. It's about Christ.

MM: Again, in light of the quote you posted, in light of what Jesus and Peter said about it, how can you insist repenting is not necessary before we are converted, before we believe and receive the gospel?

TE: No.

MM: Then what are you saying? What is the truth about repentance and observing “all things” Jesus commanded us to observe as it relates to the gospel and conversion?

When a person is converted, he is brought into harmony with God. The Holy Spirit begins a process of education. I never said anything about not needing to repent. You just made that up.

………………………………..

Quote:
MM: Paul confessed, "For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." He is saying that he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. Paul did not experience true, genuine conversion and rebirth until after he understood the law of God.
TE: Paul says "when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." You write Paul says he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. These seem like opposites.

MM: Do you two really believe Paul was “alive” in sin before he had a saving knowledge of the law? Paul described it this way, “But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.” (1 Tim 5:6) Indeed, Paul was not alive in sin. He was dead in sin and trespasses before he had a saving knowledge of the law.

TE: Paul was convicted of his need for Christ because he realized he was unable to keep the law. That's what he's saying. This conviction of his inability to provide the righteousness the law requires was death to him. That's why he says he died. What EV wrote is right. He "died" as he understood the law of God.

MM: Tom, in response to my post you said, “You write Paul says he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. These seem like opposites.” Do you think Paul was “alive in sin” before he acquired a saving knowledge of the law? What do you think is "opposites”?

Paul wrote that when the law came, he died. You wrote before the law came, he was dead.

MM: Thomas, I believe [a saving knowledge of the law] is inherent in what Paul wrote. One of the many things the law does is it points us to Jesus, who alone can save us.

TV: The purpose of the Law underlined, the lack of saving power in the law boldened. Ellen agrees with my understanding of what Paul is saying.

MM: I agree with it, too. But I also agree with the other quote I posted. I believe they harmonize perfectly. “Sanctification is obtained only in obedience to the will of God. Many who are willfully trampling upon the law of Jehovah claim holiness of heart and sanctification of life. But they have not a saving knowledge of God or of His law.” (FW 29)

I believe people need “a saving knowledge of God [and] His law.” No, the law does not save us. We both agree. A saving knowledge of the law, therefore, can only mean embracing Jesus as our sin-atoning Saviour.

TE: You're a strange one to ask this question, since you say all the last six commandments are known instinctively.

MM: Which is true. Do you agree?

TE: When I said I didn't know what the Ten Commandments were, I meant I couldn't tell you what they were. I knew something about them, like Moses had brought them down from a mountain, and threw them, and they broke.

MM: Again, if you couldn’t tell someone what they meant, how, then, could you know what sin is, how could you repent of sin – a key step, according to Jesus and Peter, in the process of conversion?


TE: Were your raised an Adventist? I'm asking this because you appear to have no conception about what it's like to be a non-SDA Christian.

MM: I started living with an Adventist family at the age of 15 after I was expelled from Boystown. I became a Christian at age 22. How does this answer my question, though? Is the SDA church the only one that follows the method Jesus prescribed for leading people through the process of conversion? Were you not taught to observe everything Jesus commanded us to observe?


TE: It did correspond with her description. It doesn't correspond with your understanding of her description, perhaps, but as I read it I say, "Yes, that's just what happened to me."

MM: It certainly does not correspond with the brief description you provided here. Is there more you’re not telling us? Did you repent of your sins? Did you understanding the meaning of the Ten Commandments? Were you taught to observe everything Jesus commanded us to observe? If not, how, then can you insist that the description Sister White provided above describes your conversion experience?


TE: Which is true. I didn't know what they were. Many, many people are converted that could not list the Ten Commandments. Do you doubt this?

MM: People who claim to be converted and yet have zero saving knowledge of the law did not experience true, genuine conversion. They did not experience it in God’s appointed way. Rebirth is not as common as you make out. It is rare. Most people are not taught to observe everything Jesus commanded, thus, most people do not complete the process of conversion. But it’s never too late to finish it. Sister White encouraged many, so many, people to complete the process of conversion, to experience a true, genuine, and thorough conversion.

6BC 1075
The new birth is a rare experience in this age of the world. This is the reason why there are so many perplexities in the churches. Many, so many, who assume the name of Christ are unsanctified and unholy. They have been baptized, but they were buried alive. Self did not die, and therefore they did not rise to newness of life in Christ (MS 148, 1897). {6BC 1075.7}

CSW 91
Their life is not in accordance with their profession; their influence is an offense to God. They need a thorough conversion. Their hearts are so filled up with rubbish that there is no room for ennobling, elevated truth. The soul temple needs to be refined, purified, cleansed; for Satan rather than God is abiding in the heart. {CSW 91.1}

2T 638
Brother E needs a thorough conversion. It is not enough for men to profess the truth. They may acknowledge the whole truth, and yet know nothing--have no experimental knowledge in their daily life--of the sanctifying influence of the truth upon the heart and life, or of the power of true godliness. {2T 638.2}


TE: When a person is converted, he is brought into harmony with God. The Holy Spirit begins a process of education. I never said anything about not needing to repent. You just made that up.

MM: You are being stingy with information. It’s been like pulling teeth. Your testimony is vague. Say more, please. Did you repent of your sins before or after you claim to have experienced biblical conversion?


TE: Paul wrote that when the law came, he died. You wrote before the law came, he was dead.

MM: You didn’t answer my question. Was Paul “alive in sin” before he experienced true, genuine conversion?

……………………………….

What is the difference between spurious conversions and true, genuine conversions? What is “the true interpretation of genuine conversion”? (UL 221)

MM: Then what did you mean when you said - "I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were." How did you know what sin was if you didn’t even know what the Ten Commandments were? That's what Paul would want to know, right? How can you repent without knowledge of sin? Jesus told His disciples how to help others experience conversion and rebirth.

TE: You're a strange one to ask this question, since you say all the last six commandments are known instinctively.

MM: Which is true. Do you agree?

Not like you do. I agree that people have a basic notion of what's right and wrong, but I don't see a distinction between the first four commandments being mental, and for which we aren't responsible (without further instruction), and the last six being moral, for which we are (without further instruction).

Anyway, I think you missed my point, so I'll try to be more clear. My point is that given that the six commandments are instinctive, as you assert, then why would the fact that I can't tell you what they are mean that I couldn't be convicted of sin? By your own way of looking at things, everyone, regardless of whether they can enumerate the Ten Commandments, is convicted of sin, right?

TE: When I said I didn't know what the Ten Commandments were, I meant I couldn't tell you what they were. I knew something about them, like Moses had brought them down from a mountain, and threw them, and they broke.

MM: Again, if you couldn’t tell someone what they meant

MM, how can you get what I said wrong, when you just quoted what I said right before writing a response? Don't you look at what you're responding to? I said, "I couldn't tell you what they were."

MM:, how, then, could you know what sin is, how could you repent of sin – a key step, according to Jesus and Peter, in the process of conversion?

According to you, everyone can do this for the last six commandments, so why should I be any different?

Quote:
He said, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” Is this what happened when you were converted? Were you taught to observe “all things” Jesus commanded?

TE: Were your raised an Adventist? I'm asking this because you appear to have no conception about what it's like to be a non-SDA Christian.

MM: I started living with an Adventist family at the age of 15 after I was expelled from Boystown. I became a Christian at age 22. How does this answer my question, though?

I brought this up because you seem to equate conversion with tennants of SDAism. But most converted people know nothing about our beliefs. They drink coffee, don't observe Sabbath, drink alcohol, don't pay tithe, eat pork, maybe weren't baptized by imersion, and many other things. Yet they know Jesus Christ, and are converted. Most Christians fall in this category.

Is the SDA church the only one that follows the method Jesus prescribed for leading people through the process of conversion? Were you not taught to observe everything Jesus commanded us to observe?

Even among SDA's, the all things that Jesus commanded us to observe is not agreed upon. For example, God gave us a most precious message, the purpose of which was to prepare the way of His Coming. To me, that should be included, but you see no need to study these messages, thinking Step to Christ is all you need. That doesn't prove you're not converted.

Quote:
MM: How can you quote this passage to explain what happened when you were converted and then insist - "I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were." Again, here is what she says happens when someone is converted:

Does she say anything her description about having to know what the Ten Commandments are? No, she doesn't. She says we respond to the drawing love of God as revealed by Christ crucified. That's what I did.

1. “If we do not resist this drawing, we shall be led to the foot of the cross in repentance for the sins that have crucified the Saviour.” Again, this is not how you described your conversion. You make it clear you did not repent.

You're making this up. I already pointed this out to you. I said nothing of the sort.

You knew nothing of the law so you could not repent.

2. “The thoughts and desires are brought into obedience to the will of Christ.” Neither does this describe your conversion. You knew nothing of the law, therefore, you knew nothing of obedience or the will of Christ.

3. “Then the law of God is written in the mind and heart, and we can say with Christ, ‘I delight to do Thy will, O my God.’ Ps. 40:8.” Again, this does not describe your conversion. You could not say with Christ, “I delight to do Thy will, O my God”, because you knew nothing of God’s will or His law.

I don't know how to respond, other than to say that you are jumping to a whole bunch of unwarranted conclusions. I said I could not tell you what the Ten Commandments are. I would guess this applies to over 90% of the people who are converted. I know someone who was converted at the age of 4 or 5, or perhaps a little older, but still quite young. He remembers the appeal to give his heart to the Lord, and responded. He remembers being born again. I'm sure he could not have told you what the Ten Commandments were.

MM: Again, Tom, in light of the quote you posted, I do not see how you can say it describes what happened when you were converted. Jesus taught, “Repent ye, and believe the gospel.” And Peter proclaimed, “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” And yet you would have us believe you experienced conversion without repenting of your sins. You are contradicting Jesus Himself.

I never said anything about not repenting. You just made this up. No matter how often you repeat it, it will still be just as false that I said anything even remotely suggesting this.

TE: It did correspond with her description. It doesn't correspond with your understanding of her description, perhaps, but as I read it I say, "Yes, that's just what happened to me."

MM: It certainly does not correspond with the brief description you provided here. Is there more you’re not telling us? Did you repent of your sins? Did you understanding the meaning of the Ten Commandments? Were you taught to observe everything Jesus commanded us to observe? If not, how, then can you insist that the description Sister White provided above describes your conversion experience?

You keep asking and saying the same things over and over again. Do you edit your posts at all? The third sentence says, "Did you understanding the meaning of the Ten Commandments?" That's not even a proper question. This is way longer than it needs to be. Anyway, I've already responded to all these questions several times now, even in this very post.

Quote:
TE: If you're disagreeing with something I wrote, you need to quote it.

MM: I did. Here is what I quoted - "I know when I was converted, I didn't even know what the Ten Commandments were." This is the fourth time I’ve quoted it.

As I pointed out, I would venture that over 90% of Christians, when they were converted, could not tell you what the Ten Commandments were. I would venture that even after being converted, many could not tell you. I would even venture that a fair percentage of converted SDA's could not list the Ten Commandments for you.

TE: Which is true. I didn't know what they were. Many, many people are converted that could not list the Ten Commandments. Do you doubt this?

MM: People who claim to be converted and yet have zero saving knowledge of the law did not experience true, genuine conversion. They did not experience it in God’s appointed way. Rebirth is not as common as you make out.

You're making this up too. I've never made any statement stating anything regarding how common rebirth is.

It is rare. Most people are not taught to observe everything Jesus commanded, thus, most people do not complete the process of conversion. But it’s never too late to finish it. Sister White encouraged many, so many, people to complete the process of conversion, to experience a true, genuine, and thorough conversion.

6BC 1075
The new birth is a rare experience in this age of the world. This is the reason why there are so many perplexities in the churches. Many, so many, who assume the name of Christ are unsanctified and unholy. They have been baptized, but they were buried alive. Self did not die, and therefore they did not rise to newness of life in Christ (MS 148, 1897). {6BC 1075.7}

CSW 91
Their life is not in accordance with their profession; their influence is an offense to God. They need a thorough conversion. Their hearts are so filled up with rubbish that there is no room for ennobling, elevated truth. The soul temple needs to be refined, purified, cleansed; for Satan rather than God is abiding in the heart. {CSW 91.1}

2T 638
Brother E needs a thorough conversion. It is not enough for men to profess the truth. They may acknowledge the whole truth, and yet know nothing--have no experimental knowledge in their daily life--of the sanctifying influence of the truth upon the heart and life, or of the power of true godliness. {2T 638.2}

Quote:
MM: Again, in light of the quote you posted, in light of what Jesus and Peter said about it, how can you insist repenting is not necessary before we are converted, before we believe and receive the gospel?

TE: No.

MM: Then what are you saying? What is the truth about repentance and observing “all things” Jesus commanded us to observe as it relates to the gospel and conversion?

TE: When a person is converted, he is brought into harmony with God. The Holy Spirit begins a process of education. I never said anything about not needing to repent. You just made that up.

MM: You are being stingy with information. It’s been like pulling teeth. Your testimony is vague. Say more, please. Did you repent of your sins before or after you claim to have experienced biblical conversion?

How many times to I have to answer the same question? Repenting of sin is a part of EGW's description that I quoted. It happens when the love of good is revealed. I quoted Romans 2:4 for you (the goodness of God leads us to repentance)

Quote:
MM: Tom, in response to my post you said, “You write Paul says he was dead in sin before he understood the law of God. These seem like opposites.” Do you think Paul was “alive in sin” before he acquired a saving knowledge of the law? What do you think is "opposites”?

TE: Paul wrote that when the law came, he died. You wrote before the law came, he was dead.

MM: You didn’t answer my question. Was Paul “alive in sin” before he experienced true, genuine conversion?

Was Paul "alive in sin."? Why should I have to answer such a question? Why would you insist that such a question be answered?

You ask many questions of the "have you stopped beating your wife" variety. That is, the question itself has implicit assumptions, for example, that you are beating your wife to start with. There's no way to answer this question "yes" or "no" without tacitly acknowledging the implicit assumption. Similarly for me to answer the question "was Paul alive in sin" would be to acknoweldge that Paul's being alive in sin had something to do with the discussion, which is doesn't.

Paul said that when the law came, he died. His point was that he became aware of his condition as a sinner, and his need for Christ. He wasn't saying anything about being alive or dead in sin when he made the statement that "then the law came, and I died."

……………………………….

What is the difference between spurious conversions and true, genuine conversions? What is “the true interpretation of genuine conversion”? (UL 221)

A genuine conversion is one where the converted person has genuinely given his heart to Jesus Christ, and the desire of whose life is to be in harmony with God.

Quote:
What the majority of professed Christians need, is genuine conversion. {OHC 218.4}

The reason there are so many spurious conversions in these days is that there is so low an appreciation of the law of God. {FW 96.3}

Neither words nor profession, but fruits--the forsaking of sins, and obedience to the commandments of God--show the reality of genuine repentance and true conversion. {5BC 1077.5}

No conversion is genuine which does not change both the character and the conduct of those who accept the truth. The truth works by love, and purifieth the soul. {SD 288.3}

These quotes point out the fruit of a converted person. The means for conversion is faith.

Wonders if Mike will tell us that being able to recite the ten commandments is a fundamental demand of a born again christian, alternatively a clear fruit of a born again christian?

TV: Wonders if Mike will tell us that being able to recite the ten commandments is a fundamental demand of a born again christian, alternatively a clear fruit of a born again christian?

MM: Thomas, Jesus Himself addressed a question very similar to yours. I agree with His answer. Knowing and showing, willing and doing, are both important.

Matthew
19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19:19 Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Matthew
22:36 Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
22:39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Mark
10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
10:18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God.
10:19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.

Luke
18:19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none [is] good, save one, [that is], God.
18:20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.

John
14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
15:11 These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and [that] your joy might be full.
15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

MM: Thomas, Jesus Himself addressed a question very similar to yours. I agree with His answer. Knowing and showing, willing and doing, are both important.

I'm not understanding your comment. Are you saying that being able to list the Ten Commandments is a requirement to enter into heaven?

TE: Not like you do. I agree that people have a basic notion of what's right and wrong, but I don't see a distinction between the first four commandments being mental, and for which we aren't responsible (without further instruction), and the last six being moral, for which we are (without further instruction). Anyway, I think you missed my point, so I'll try to be more clear. My point is that given that the six commandments are instinctive, as you assert, then why would the fact that I can't tell you what they are mean that I couldn't be convicted of sin? By your own way of looking at things, everyone, regardless of whether they can enumerate the Ten Commandments, is convicted of sin, right?

MM: Yes, I believe the principles inherent within the last six commandments are known instinctively from birth. That’s how Jesus created us. “As through Christ every human being has life, so also through Him every soul receives some ray of divine light. Not only intellectual but spiritual power, a perception of right, a desire for goodness, exists in every heart.” (RC 106) This, of course, does not apply to the first four commandments.

The difference between knowing what is morally right and wrong before and after we embark upon the process of conversion is that the Holy Spirit reveals our sinful habits in light of the cross. Such a revelation makes all the difference in the world. Do you agree? Please answer this question. Thank you.


TE: MM, how can you get what I said wrong, when you just quoted what I said right before writing a response? Don't you look at what you're responding to? I said, "I couldn't tell you what they were."

MM: If you couldn’t tell what they “were” how, then, could you tell what they “mean”?


TE: According to you, everyone can do this for the last six commandments, so why should I be any different?

MM: So, do you agree people instinctively know what is morally right and wrong, and that this natural knowledge corresponds to the last six commandments? And, does such knowledge enable people to instinctively relate their sinful habits to the 10Cs, without knowing what they were, so that they naturally understand sin is the transgression of the law?


TE: I brought this up because you seem to equate conversion with tennants of SDAism. But most converted people know nothing about our beliefs. They drink coffee, don't observe Sabbath, drink alcohol, don't pay tithe, eat pork, maybe weren't baptized by imersion, and many other things. Yet they know Jesus Christ, and are converted. Most Christians fall in this category.

MM: Are you assuming everyone who claims to be a converted Christian is a converted Christian? How can you be sure? The SOP makes it clear that conversion is rare. And yet you seem to think it is quite common. Nevertheless, there are people who are converted Christians in the eyes of God, and yet they do not understand “all things” Jesus commanded us to obey and observe. God winks at such ignorance, but He also holds the SDA church responsible for their ignorance. No one will be translated alive while sinning ignorantly (because they were not told how to obey and observe everything Jesus commanded). Why do you suppose that is?


TE: Even among SDA's, the all things that Jesus commanded us to observe is not agreed upon. For example, God gave us a most precious message, the purpose of which was to prepare the way of His Coming. To me, that should be included, but you see no need to study these messages, thinking Step to Christ is all you need. That doesn't prove you're not converted.

MM: Are you arguing that not even the Remnant Church is doing it right? That she is not teaching people how to obey and observe everything Jesus commanded? That not even SC teaches the truth about justification and righteousness by faith?


TE: Does she say anything her description about having to know what the Ten Commandments are? No, she doesn't. She says we respond to the drawing love of God as revealed by Christ crucified. That's what I did.

MM: Yes, she does teach that a saving knowledge of the law and love of God is indispensable. You claim you did not even know what the 10Cs were.


TE: You're making this up. I already pointed this out to you. I said nothing of the sort.

MM: I reread your posted testimony and you never once said you repented of your sins or sinful habits. Did you? If so, how did you know what to repent of?


TE: I don't know how to respond, other than to say that you are jumping to a whole bunch of unwarranted conclusions. I said I could not tell you what the Ten Commandments are. I would guess this applies to over 90% of the people who are converted. I know someone who was converted at the age of 4 or 5, or perhaps a little older, but still quite young. He remembers the appeal to give his heart to the Lord, and responded. He remembers being born again. I'm sure he could not have told you what the Ten Commandments were.

MM: Again, you did not experience conversion in God’s appointed way. Conversions means living in harmony with the law and love of God. You did not even know what the 10cs were, so your “thoughts and desires” were not “brought into obedience to the will of Christ” at the moment you claim you were converted. Nor could you declare, as did Jesus, “I delight to do Thy will, O my God” simply because you had no idea what God’s will is, at least not at that point, because you were not taught how to be like Jesus. The day you claim you were converted is the day you embarked upon the “patient, protracted process” conversion. It is not the day you completed the process of conversion.


TE: I never said anything about not repenting. You just made this up. No matter how often you repeat it, it will still be just as false that I said anything even remotely suggesting this.

MM: Please explain how you repented. Thank you.


TE: You keep asking and saying the same things over and over again. Do you edit your posts at all? The third sentence says, "Did you understanding the meaning of the Ten Commandments?" That's not even a proper question. This is way longer than it needs to be. Anyway, I've already responded to all these questions several times now, even in this very post.

MM: You have yet to answer my questions. I repost them hoping you will answer them.


TE: As I pointed out, I would venture that over 90% of Christians, when they were converted, could not tell you what the Ten Commandments were. I would venture that even after being converted, many could not tell you. I would even venture that a fair percentage of converted SDA's could not list the Ten Commandments for you.

MM: Tom, do you think this is why Sister White was shown that “many, so many,” are not truly, genuinely converted?


TE: You're making this up too. I've never made any statement stating anything regarding how common rebirth is.

MM: According to your own testimony, people experience true, genuine conversion, in accordance with Matthew 28:19 and 20, all the time. Since, according to you, conversion is so easy, so simple, why wouldn’t it be common? But if what you assert is right and true, why did Sister White say conversion is rare? Why did she write that “so many” people have not experienced true, genuine conversion?


TE: How many times to I have to answer the same question? Repenting of sin is a part of EGW's description that I quoted. It happens when the love of good is revealed. I quoted Romans 2:4 for you (the goodness of God leads us to repentance)

MM: You are being vague. You keep insisting you have answered my questions, but there is no record of it.


TE: Was Paul "alive in sin."? Why should I have to answer such a question? Why would you insist that such a question be answered?

MM: Because you have been arguing against it. Do you agree with me that Paul was dead in sin before he acquired a saving knowledge of the law and love of God? Yes or no, please. I realize you don’t think it is relevant. But please humor me. Thank you.


TE: A genuine conversion is one where the converted person has genuinely given his heart to Jesus Christ, and the desire of whose life is to be in harmony with God.

MM: Are you saying genuinely converted people are born again largely ignorant of the law and love of God, but that they have a “desire” to learn what it means to be like Jesus, to live like Him?


TE: These quotes point out the fruit of a converted person. The means for conversion is faith.

MM: Actually, Tom, they clearly teach that truly, genuinely converted people, namely, people who have experienced and completed the “patient, protracted process” of conversion in God’s appointed way, understand and obey and observe everything Jesus commanded. Which, of course, is the fruit of faith. Your testimony does not coincide with the insights taught by these quotes.

MM: Thomas, Jesus Himself addressed a question very similar to yours. I agree with His answer. Knowing and showing, willing and doing, are both important.

TE: I'm not understanding your comment. Are you saying that being able to list the Ten Commandments is a requirement to enter into heaven?

MM: Jesus made it clear that being able to repeat the 10Cs by remote memory is not enough. Jesus was also very clear about the relationship between "doing His will" and salvation, and "not doing His will" and damnation.

Matthew
7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

John
3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

John
9:31 Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth.

Romans
10:5 For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them.

James
4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin.

1 John
2:17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
2:29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.

1 John
3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

3 John
1:11 Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.

Are you sure you are not abusing the remnant church concept?Mike, surely you must see that this claim is pure presumption. On what grounds are you telling Tom what *his* conversion experience was and what it wasnt? Mike, time to unmount that high horse before you fall off and hurt yourself.

So you are saying that not only is it necessary that one be able to repeat the 10 Commandments, that that's not even enough?

MM, I started to answer the really long post, on the previous page, but it became clear to me that it was going to become really, really long, and you weren't dealing with the points I made. You answered my questions with more questions. You jump to conclusions with no basis to do so.

For example, you wrote, "You make it clear you did not repent." also "And yet you seem to think it (conversion) is quite common."

Rather than recognize these baseless accusations for what they are (baseless), you continue to repeat them. It would be better if you retracted them.

If you wish to organize your thoughts a little more clearly, such as making a list of questions or points you'd like me to address, I'll be happy to address your questions. I would also appreciate it if you would address the questions and points I made in some other way than simply asking me more questions or making points about some other subject.

For example, I've pointed out that you seem to have no concept about what conversion entails for a non-SDA. As I pointed out, most non-SDA's drink, eat pork, don't keep Sabbath, many dance, and many other things could be listed. Are none of these people converted?

Do you agree that most converted Christians are not SDA's?

I will respond to one portion of the post:



How about the youngster I mentioned? Did he also not respond in God's appointed way?

Also, it seems you are implying the Holy Spirit goofed in His job. He should have waited to show Christ to me until after I had first been taught what the Ten Commandments were. That seems to be your suggestion.

TV: Mike, surely you must see that this claim is pure presumption. On what grounds are you telling Tom what *his* conversion experience was and what it wasnt? Mike, time to unmount that high horse before you fall off and hurt yourself.

MM: Okay.

MM: Jesus made it clear that being able to repeat the 10Cs by remote memory is not enough. Jesus was also very clear about the relationship between "doing His will" and salvation, and "not doing His will" and damnation.

TE: So you are saying that not only is it necessary that one be able to repeat the 10 Commandments, that that's not even enough?

MM: What do you think Jesus meant in the following passages? I believe they teach understanding and doing the will of God are required. Do you agree?


TE: For example, I've pointed out that you seem to have no concept about what conversion entails for a non-SDA. As I pointed out, most non-SDA's drink, eat pork, don't keep Sabbath, many dance, and many other things could be listed. Are none of these people converted?

MM: Only God knows who is truly converted. Jesus taught His disciples to teach people to observe everything He commanded. Do you agree?

TE: Do you agree that most converted Christians are not SDA's?

MM: I don’t know. Do you?

TE: How about the youngster I mentioned? Did he also not respond in God's appointed way?

MM: Did his conversion harmonize with Jesus’ prescription in Matthew 28:19, 20?

TE: Also, it seems you are implying the Holy Spirit goofed in His job. He should have waited to show Christ to me until after I had first been taught what the Ten Commandments were. That seems to be your suggestion.

MM: When did I imply such a thing? Is not Jesus the very personification of the 10cs? His life and teachings magnify them, right?

Isaiah
42:21 The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make [it] honourable.

1.I think the statements of Jesus mean exactly what I said in saying the genuiness of our conversion will be shown by the things we do and say.

2.I asked "are none of these people converted"? in regards to non-SDA's who eat pork, drink wine, etc. You really can't answer this question, "no"? You're really unsure about this?

3.Yes, most converted Christians are non-SDA's. You're really unsure about this too?

4.I explained his conversion. Does a five year old need to be able to recite the 10 commandments?

5.You stated I "did not experience conversion in God’s appointed way." This seems to imply the Holy Spirit goofed by not following God's appointed way.

Actually it's rathy haughty of you to presume to make such a declaration.

Everything you have written, and are writing, makes me wonder, what do you think conversion is about? Your posts are full of rules that must be followed, and practically devoid of what's really important, which is a relationship with God though Jesus Christ by faith.

Have you every given your life to Christ? If so, what was the experience like? Did it consist of your reaching the last sinful habit which the Holy Spirit revealed, your confessing it, and then a realization of "O.K., now I have no more sinful habits. I'm converted!"

I'm shared my conversion story with you. I'd very interested in hearing yours.

1.I think the statements of Jesus mean exactly what I said in saying the genuiness of our conversion will be shown by the things we do and say.

MM: Great. But I believe “the things we do and say” are, if we complete the “patient, protracted process” of conversion in God’s appointed way, in harmony with everything Jesus commanded us to obey and observe. I strongly suspect we disagree.

2.I asked "are none of these people converted"? in regards to non-SDA's who eat pork, drink wine, etc. You really can't answer this question, "no"? You're really unsure about this?

MM: I really cannot say with certainty who is truly, genuinely converted or not. Only God knows. Anything is possible, right?

3.Yes, most converted Christians are non-SDA's. You're really unsure about this too?

MM: Based on Matthew 28:19 and 20 I agree with Sister White that conversions are “rare”. Jesus said, “Many are called, but few are chosen.” I suspect most so-called conversions are partial and incomplete, that most of them constitute the beginning of the process, not the completion of it, and that most people are ignorant of the difference because they haven't been taught the truth about it.

4.I explained his conversion. Does a five year old need to be able to recite the 10 commandments?

MM: Does a five year old need to be converted? Can a five year old comprehend the need for or the meaning of conversion? In what way is a five year old different before and after conversion? The Jews preferred age 12 – why? Can a five year old experience true, genuine conversion as prescribed and described in Matthew 28: 19 and 20 if they cannot “recite” the 10Cs? Here’s what God commands us to teach our children:

“And ye shall teach them [i.e., “all these commandments which I command you”] your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt write them upon the door posts of thine house, and upon thy gates.” (Deut 11:19, 20)

5.You stated I "did not experience conversion in God’s appointed way." This seems to imply the Holy Spirit goofed by not following God's appointed way. Actually it's rathy haughty of you to presume to make such a declaration.

MM: I am sorry this dialogue makes you think that I am being “haughty” or that the Holy Spirit “goofed”. I do not believe, based on your brief testimony, that you completed the “patient, protracted process” of conversion on the day you believe you were converted. I believe you embarked upon the process on that day, but I do not believe you completed it, in God’s appointed way, on that day.

I am not being judgmental. I am simply basing my observation on the content of your testimony and the description of true, genuine conversion given in the Bible and the SOP. If this offends you then I am happy to end this dialogue immediately. I am even willing to go back and delete my posts, if that’s allowed on MSDAOL. Let me know what you want me to do.

TE: Everything you have written, and are writing, makes me wonder, what do you think conversion is about? Your posts are full of rules that must be followed, and practically devoid of what's really important, which is a relationship with God though Jesus Christ by faith.

MM: Again, I’m sorry.

TE: Have you every given your life to Christ? If so, what was the experience like? Did it consist of your reaching the last sinful habit which the Holy Spirit revealed, your confessing it, and then a realization of "O.K., now I have no more sinful habits. I'm converted!" I'm shared my conversion story with you. I'd very interested in hearing yours.

MM: I learned about many of the things Jesus commanded us to obey and observe between the ages of 15 and 17. But I did not embark upon the “patient, protracted process” of conversion until the age of 22. I do not believe I completed the process until I was 35. The reason it took so long is I was taught that overcoming my sinful habits took time and patience, that sinning and repenting was a normal part of the process of sanctification. Thus, I tolerated my frequent failures, even though I was miserable.

In 1995, however, I discovered the truth about conversion and rebirth, the truth as it is in Jesus. I believe I completed the process of conversion at that time. Do I have any more sinful habits God hasn’t “exposed” (SC 29) to my sight yet, that He is allowing me to sin in ignorance until the time is right? I do not believe so. “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God.” (Rom 8:16)

Did discovering and embracing the truth as it is in Jesus cause me to lose the ability and freedom to commit known sins? No. Have I sinned since embracing the truth as it is in Jesus? Unfortunately, I have. The gift of repentance, praise God, empowers me to confess and forsake my sin. The Holy Spirit restores the relationship my sin severed.

But when I faithfully and diligently keep my eyes on Jesus, when I am abiding in Him, when I am walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man I do not sin against my Lord and Saviour or against my fellow humans. Indeed, the truth makes me free. I love it. Thank you, Jesus.

Okay? Okay what?

Thomas, I explained it to Tom. Also, your comment about a "high horse" was less than endearing.

What else should I call the repeated statement that Toms conversion wasnt real?

1.I think the statements of Jesus mean exactly what I said in saying the genuiness of our conversion will be shown by the things we do and say.

MM: Great. But I believe “the things we do and say” are, if we complete the “patient, protracted process” of conversion in God’s appointed way, in harmony with everything Jesus commanded us to obey and observe. I strongly suspect we disagree.

It sounds to me like you are wanting to make the "things we do and say" the means to converation, rather than the fruit of it. If that's the case, then yes, we disagree.

2.I asked "are none of these people converted"? in regards to non-SDA's who eat pork, drink wine, etc. You really can't answer this question, "no"? You're really unsure about this?

MM: I really cannot say with certainty who is truly, genuinely converted or not. Only God knows. Anything is possible, right?

You really cannot answer the question as to if there are *any* non-SDA Christians who do things like eat pork that will be saved? I find that truly amazing.

3.Yes, most converted Christians are non-SDA's. You're really unsure about this too?

MM: Based on Matthew 28:19 and 20 I agree with Sister White that conversions are “rare”. Jesus said, “Many are called, but few are chosen.” I suspect most so-called conversions are partial and incomplete, that most of them constitute the beginning of the process, not the completion of it, and that most people are ignorant of the difference because they haven't been taught the truth about it.

How does this address my question? There are hundreds more nominal non-SDA Christians than nominal SDA Christians. The "rare" conversions (which, btw wasn't a universal pronouncement, but was qualified) apply, in her writing, take in SDA's, don't they? Just as a hypothetical case, let's say conversions are really, really uncommon, like 1 in a million. That would make for over a thousand converted non-SDA's vs. 20 SDA's. You'd have to have no sense of mathematics, or some really odd assumptions about how likely SDA's are to be converted vs. non-SDA's to not grasp that the majority of converted Christians are non-SDA's.

How frequently a conversion takes place has nothing to do with this. Maybe you are not very good at math, and this is what has led you to make the statements you have that I think conversions are common, when I stated nothing to that extent. Was it my asserting that the majority of converted Christians are non-SDA's that led you to erroneously jump to this conclusion? If so, you should recognize that no frequency of conversion is implied by this statement, only a relative frequency. That is, what is important, in order for my assertion to by true, is the relative assertion of SDA's vs. non-SDA's, not the frequence of either given group by itself.

For example, if we change the estimate above of frequence of conversion to 1 in a thousand, instead of 1 in a million, you'd wind up with over a million converted non-SDA's, and 20,000 or so SDA's.

Do you understand the point?

4.I explained his conversion. Does a five year old need to be able to recite the 10 commandments?

MM: Does a five year old need to be converted?

Um, yes. What an odd question.

Can a five year old comprehend the need for or the meaning of conversion?

Yes.

In what way is a five year old different before and after conversion?

My friend was different because he had given his life to Christ, asked him for forgiveness, and wanted to live as a follower of Christ.

The Jews preferred age 12 – why? Can a five year old experience true, genuine conversion as prescribed and described in Matthew 28: 19 and 20 if they cannot “recite” the 10Cs?

Yes, MM, he can. Ellen White speaks to this in her writings. You're not familiar with this? There are examples of this in Scripture, such as Samuel.

Here’s what God commands us to teach our children:

“And ye shall teach them [i.e., “all these commandments which I command you”] your children, speaking of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt write them upon the door posts of thine house, and upon thy gates.” (Deut 11:19, 20)

I'm confused as to what you think conversion is. Conversion is represented by Christ knocking on the door of the heart. We hear the knocking and respond. He comes in and fellowships with us. A child can understand this.

5.You stated I "did not experience conversion in God’s appointed way." This seems to imply the Holy Spirit goofed by not following God's appointed way. Actually it's rathy haughty of you to presume to make such a declaration.

MM: I am sorry this dialogue makes you think that I am being “haughty” or that the Holy Spirit “goofed”. I do not believe, based on your brief testimony, that you completed the “patient, protracted process” of conversion on the day you believe you were converted.

I don't need your approval. I have the assurance of the Holy Spirit.

Have you not experienced conversion? If you haven't, I can see why you would be confused as to mine. If you have, I don't see how you could be confused. When one is converted, one knows it.

I believe you embarked upon the process on that day, but I do not believe you completed it, in God’s appointed way, on that day.

I am not being judgmental. I am simply basing my observation on the content of your testimony and the description of true, genuine conversion given in the Bible and the SOP. If this offends you then I am happy to end this dialogue immediately. I am even willing to go back and delete my posts, if that’s allowed on MSDAOL. Let me know what you want me to do.

Here's something Waggoner wrote:



Waggoner has it exactly right. It is everyone's privilege to know the truth, and one holds a truth directly from God, the confusion of others has no bearing on one's confidence, because one's confidence is built on the Rock.

TE: Everything you have written, and are writing, makes me wonder, what do you think conversion is about? Your posts are full of rules that must be followed, and practically devoid of what's really important, which is a relationship with God though Jesus Christ by faith.

MM: Again, I’m sorry.

Regarding what you should do, if you are sincerely sorry for something you've written, I accept that, and there's nothing you need to do beyond that. I'd suggest, if you feel there's something you wrote in error, simply that you perhaps be more careful in the future.

I appreciate your concern. I wasn't really offended by what you wrote, as I think you more just expressed yourself poorly than anything else.

TE: Have you every given your life to Christ? If so, what was the experience like? Did it consist of your reaching the last sinful habit which the Holy Spirit revealed, your confessing it, and then a realization of "O.K., now I have no more sinful habits. I'm converted!" I'm shared my conversion story with you. I'd very interested in hearing yours.

MM: I learned about many of the things Jesus commanded us to obey and observe between the ages of 15 and 17. But I did not embark upon the “patient, protracted process” of conversion until the age of 22. I do not believe I completed the process until I was 35. The reason it took so long is I was taught that overcoming my sinful habits took time and patience, that sinning and repenting was a normal part of the process of sanctification. Thus, I tolerated my frequent failures, even though I was miserable.

In 1995, however, I discovered the truth about conversion and rebirth, the truth as it is in Jesus. I believe I completed the process of conversion at that time. Do I have any more sinful habits God hasn’t “exposed” (SC 29) to my sight yet, that He is allowing me to sin in ignorance until the time is right? I do not believe so. “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God.” (Rom 8:16)

Did discovering and embracing the truth as it is in Jesus cause me to lose the ability and freedom to commit known sins? No. Have I sinned since embracing the truth as it is in Jesus? Unfortunately, I have. The gift of repentance, praise God, empowers me to confess and forsake my sin. The Holy Spirit restores the relationship my sin severed.

But when I faithfully and diligently keep my eyes on Jesus, when I am abiding in Him, when I am walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man I do not sin against my Lord and Saviour or against my fellow humans. Indeed, the truth makes me free. I love it. Thank you, Jesus.

This is an odd testimony of conversion, MM. It has me concerned. Most people's conversion would be along the lines of what I shared, or of what Waggoner said, or of what Paul experienced. That is, the Holy Spirit reveals Christ crucified. One sees one's need for a Savior. One responds to the wooing of the Spirit, and accepts Christ as one's personal Savior.

Your testimony doesn't mention any of these things. There is no mention of the cross, of the love of God, or of faith. This is concerning. Have you ever given your heart to the Lord? Have you ever prayed, "God be merciful to me, a sinner?" Do you understand what it means to say that this is a worth and faithful saying, that Christ came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief? (or is this something which applied only to Paul?)

I do thank you for sharing this with me.

TE: It sounds to me like you are wanting to make the "things we do and say" the means to converation, rather than the fruit of it. If that's the case, then yes, we disagree.

MM: When we complete the process of conversion in God’s appointed way “the things we do and say” will be in harmony with everything Jesus commanded us to obey and observe. I do not believe they are the fruit of conversion; rather I believe they are the fruit of abiding in Jesus. Conversion makes it possible for us to abide in Jesus.


TE: You really cannot answer the question as to if there are *any* non-SDA Christians who do things like eat pork that will be saved? I find that truly amazing.

MM: Saved or converted? Which is it? If they are not observing everything Jesus commanded then I am sure they have not completed the process of conversion in God’s appointed way. But this does not necessarily mean they are not saved. If they are living up to the light they believe is true and right then they are saved. It doesn’t matter if they do not complete the process of conversion before they die. They will come up in the first resurrection.


TE: How does this address my question? There are hundreds more nominal non-SDA Christians than nominal SDA Christians. The "rare" conversions (which, btw wasn't a universal pronouncement, but was qualified) apply, in her writing, take in SDA's, don't they?

MM: The “rare” quote applies to “this age of the world”, not only to SDAs. “The new birth is a rare experience in this age of the world.”

TE: Just as a hypothetical case, let's say conversions are really, really uncommon, like 1 in a million. That would make for over a thousand converted non-SDA's vs. 20 SDA's. You'd have to have no sense of mathematics, or some really odd assumptions about how likely SDA's are to be converted vs. non-SDA's to not grasp that the majority of converted Christians are non-SDA's.

MM: Your equation assumes non-SDAs can complete the process of conversion irrespective of the fact they are not observing everything Jesus commanded. The purpose of conversion is to restore people to righteousness and true holiness, not to lead them half way out of darkness.

TE: That is, what is important, in order for my assertion to by true, is the relative assertion of SDA's vs. non-SDA's, not the frequence of either given group by itself.

MM: Again, you are assuming non-SDAs can complete the process of conversion, which they cannot, because they cannot observe everything Jesus commanded.


TE: I'm confused as to what you think conversion is. Conversion is represented by Christ knocking on the door of the heart. We hear the knocking and respond. He comes in and fellowships with us. A child can understand this.

MM: Conversion is a process which results in people obeying and observing everything Jesus commanded. You seem to disagree with this definition.

TE: Waggoner has it exactly right.

MM: I agree. “In effect, every person must be converted just as Paul was.” Paul was able to observe everything Jesus commanded the moment he completed the process of conversion.

TE: This is an odd testimony of conversion, MM. It has me concerned. Most people's conversion would be along the lines of what I shared, or of what Waggoner said, or of what Paul experienced.

MM: My conversion experience agrees with what Paul and Waggoner described.

TE: That is, the Holy Spirit reveals Christ crucified. One sees one's need for a Savior. One responds to the wooing of the Spirit, and accepts Christ as one's personal Savior.

MM: My conversion experience included each of these steps.

TE: Your testimony doesn't mention any of these things. There is no mention of the cross, of the love of God, or of faith. This is concerning.

MM: My conversion experience was possible because of the cross, God’s love, and faith.

TE: Have you ever given your heart to the Lord? Have you ever prayed, "God be merciful to me, a sinner?" Do you understand what it means to say that this is a worth and faithful saying, that Christ came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief? (or is this something which applied only to Paul?)

MM: My conversion experience included all of the above.

MM: When we complete the process of conversion in God’s appointed way “the things we do and say” will be in harmony with everything Jesus commanded us to obey and observe. I do not believe they are the fruit of conversion; rather I believe they are the fruit of abiding in Jesus. Conversion makes it possible for us to abide in Jesus.

You are saying:
1.We are not converted until after we do everything Jesus commanded. (first sentence)
2.Being converted makes it possible to abide in Jesus.
3.Do everything Jesus commanded is the fruit of abiding in Jesus.

Do you see the contradiction here? If we can't do everything until after we are converted (because being converted makes it possible to abide in Jesus, and doing everything is the fruit of abiding in Jesus), and we aren't converted until after we do everything, that's a contradiction.

In general, the problem I see in your idea of conversion is that we have to perform good works in order to be converted. It is because of your understanding of conversion that you emphasize sinful habits, and doing everything Jesus commanded, as opposed to mercy, forgiveness and faith, not to mention the cross, or the love of God.

TE: You really cannot answer the question as to if there are *any* non-SDA Christians who do things like eat pork that will be saved? I find that truly amazing.

MM: Saved or converted? Which is it? If they are not observing everything Jesus commanded then I am sure they have not completed the process of conversion in God’s appointed way. But this does not necessarily mean they are not saved. If they are living up to the light they believe is true and right then they are saved. It doesn’t matter if they do not complete the process of conversion before they die. They will come up in the first resurrection.

I think I'm seeing the problem. By "conversion" you mean what most people would call "perfection." By "saved" you mean what most people would call "converted." I think we've been talking past each other to a fair extent.

TE: How does this address my question? There are hundreds more nominal non-SDA Christians than nominal SDA Christians. The "rare" conversions (which, btw wasn't a universal pronouncement, but was qualified) apply, in her writing, take in SDA's, don't they?

MM: The “rare” quote applies to “this age of the world”, not only to SDAs. “The new birth is a rare experience in this age of the world.”

Well, now I'm confused again, because you are using the expression "new birth" in the context of conversion. Maybe you understand "new birth" to mean "perfection" as well.

It's obvious you have a different internal lexicon than the rest of us. What does "new birth" imply? Is it the same as "conversion"? I'll assume yes (you can correct me if I guessed wrong). Now conversion is perfection (from above; it's doing "everything Jesus commanded" and not having any sinful habits, which sounds like perfection, but you may have some other definition in mind for perfection, so I'll just say it's what most people think of as perfection.)

Ok, so if conversion = perfection, and new birth = conversion, then new birth = perfection. From earlier in the post you say some will be saved, although they are not converted. Would you also say that some are saved even though they are not born again?


TE: That is, what is important, in order for my assertion to by true, is the relative assertion of SDA's vs. non-SDA's, not the frequence of either given group by itself.

MM: Again, you are assuming non-SDAs can complete the process of conversion, which they cannot, because they cannot observe everything Jesus commanded.

Ok, so you are saying no non-SDA's are converted. Would you also say that no non-SDA's are born again?
I'll stop here. I don't think the rest of the post added anything new.

This topic seems to have gone off-course, or another topic seems to have come in here. I will comment in "Does God wait to reveal sinful habits"

TE: Do you see the contradiction here? If we can't do everything until after we are converted (because being converted makes it possible to abide in Jesus, and doing everything is the fruit of abiding in Jesus), and we aren't converted until after we do everything, that's a contradiction.

MM: I do not view it as contradiction. These are steps in the process of conversion.

TE: In general, the problem I see in your idea of conversion is that we have to perform good works in order to be converted.

MM: Conversion is a process, not a power. The power to be like Jesus is result of abiding in Jesus.

TE: It is because of your understanding of conversion that you emphasize sinful habits, and doing everything Jesus commanded, as opposed to mercy, forgiveness and faith, not to mention the cross, or the love of God.

MM: Were it not for mercy, faith, the cross, forgiveness, and the love of God - none us would be around to experience conversion or rebirth.

TE: I think I'm seeing the problem. By "conversion" you mean what most people would call "perfection." By "saved" you mean what most people would call "converted." I think we've been talking past each other to a fair extent.

MM: Wrong again. By the “process of conversion” I mean the time it takes people to learn about everything Jesus commanded us to obey and observe. By “perfecting character” I mean growing in grace and maturing in the fruits of the Spirit as we abide in Jesus after we complete the process of conversion. By “saved” I mean living up to the light we believe is true and right whether or not we have completed the process of conversion. By “converted” I mean people who have completed the process of conversion. By “new birth, rebirth, born again” I mean people who have completed the process of conversion. These are normal definitions.

TE: From earlier in the post you say some will be saved, although they are not converted. Would you also say that some are saved even though they are not born again?

MM: Again, people are saved if they are living up to the light they believe is true and right. It doesn’t matter if they complete the process of conversion before they die. To be translated alive, however, they must complete the process of conversion.

TE: Ok, so you are saying no non-SDA's are converted. Would you also say that no non-SDA's are born again?

MM: No one is born again if they do not complete the process of conversion. And no can complete it if they do not learn how to live in harmony with everything Jesus commanded. They may be in the process of converting and living up to the light they have, but they cannot complete the process until learn how to be like Jesus in every way. Again, this does not mean they are lost. Also no one can remain converted if they neglect to “stay converted” moment by moment. We must consciously choose to abide in Jesus or we cease, by default, to continue abiding in Him.

Maybe you should all stop here and establish some word definitions as they relate to the words saved, converted, save, conversion, etc.

We may also need to define how this meets the definition of The righteousness and majesty of the Mosaic Law topic.

Here is how I am using certain words:

By the “process of conversion” I mean the time it takes people to learn about everything Jesus commanded us to obey and observe.

By “perfecting character” I mean growing in grace and maturing in the fruits of the Spirit as we abide in Jesus after we complete the process of conversion.

By “saved” I mean living up to the light we believe is true and right whether or not we have completed the process of conversion.

By “converted” I mean people who have completed the process of conversion.

By “new birth, rebirth, born again” I mean people who have completed the process of conversion.

I am bringing this quote forward from page 4 to demonstrate how conversion and salvation entered the discussion.

................................

MS: The law has no power to convert. But it does have power to convict.

DF: Which goes to show, as Tom as provided, that the Bible says that the law has power to convert.

MM: The power that causes a “radical change” within us is the Holy Spirit – NOT THE LAW. The law, by itself, is powerless. The law is one of many tools the Holy Spirit uses to inspire us to pursue conversion and salvation through Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. When “the Spirit of God reveals to him the full meaning of the law, what a change takes place in his heart!” (RC 64) We “cannot possibly keep the commandments of God without the regenerating grace of Christ. Jesus alone can cleanse us from all sin.” (FW 95)

OHC 141
The law without faith in the gospel of Christ cannot save the transgressor of law. The gospel without the law is inefficient and powerless. The law and the gospel are a perfect whole. . . . The two blended--the gospel of Christ and the law of God--produce the love and faith unfeigned. {OHC 141.4}

6BC 1070
There are no saving properties in the law. It cannot pardon the transgressor. The penalty must be exacted. . . . The punishment has been endured by the sinner's substitute. . . . In the councils of heaven, before the world was created, the Father and the Son covenanted together that if man proved disloyal to God, Christ, one with the Father, would take the place of the transgressor, and suffer the penalty of justice that must fall upon him (MS 145, 1897). {6BC 1070.4}

GC 468
"The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul." Psalm 19:7. Without the law, men have no just conception of the purity and holiness of God or of their own guilt and uncleanness. They have no true conviction of sin and feel no need of repentance. Not seeing their lost condition as violators of God's law, they do not realize their need of the atoning blood of Christ. The hope of salvation is accepted without a radical change of heart or reformation of life. Thus superficial conversions abound, and multitudes are joined to the church who have never been united to Christ. {GC 468.2}

Here is how I am using certain words:

By the “process of conversion” I mean the time it takes for people to come to the place where they give their heart to Christ.

By “perfecting character” I mean becoming more like Christ in character.

By “saved” I mean the same thing as being converted.

By “converted” I mean people who have given their heart to Christ.

By “new birth, rebirth, born again” I mean the same thing as converted.

By "giving their heart to Christ" I mean the "believing in Christ" or "accepting Christ as one's personal Savior," the process described by Jesus Christ in His interview with Nicodemus, and commented upon by Ellen White in the chapter "Nicodemus" from "The Desire of Ages," page 175, 176.

TE: Do you see the contradiction here? If we can't do everything until after we are converted (because being converted makes it possible to abide in Jesus, and doing everything is the fruit of abiding in Jesus), and we aren't converted until after we do everything, that's a contradiction.

MM: I do not view it as contradiction. These are steps in the process of conversion.

But they're contradictory steps. You didn't consider the contradiction, which I pointed out above. You can't abide in Jesus until you're converted, and you can't complete the process of conversion unless you're abiding in Jesus. You've cut some stuff out from the post I was responding to, but if you go back there, you can see the contradiction in more detail.

TE: In general, the problem I see in your idea of conversion is that we have to perform good works in order to be converted.

MM: Conversion is a process, not a power. The power to be like Jesus is result of abiding in Jesus.

This doesn't impact my observation in any way. You still see that we need to do works in order to be converted. This is very clear. You've said as much many times.

TE: It is because of your understanding of conversion that you emphasize sinful habits, and doing everything Jesus commanded, as opposed to mercy, forgiveness and faith, not to mention the cross, or the love of God.

MM: Were it not for mercy, faith, the cross, forgiveness, and the love of God - none us would be around to experience conversion or rebirth.

My observation was that because of your understanding of conversion, you emphasize sinful habits, and doing everything Jesus commanded, as opposed to mercy, forgiveness, faith, the cross, and the love of God. If you simply look at what you post, you will see that this is the case. Your theology dictates the things you think are important, and these are what you talk about.

TE: I think I'm seeing the problem. By "conversion" you mean what most people would call "perfection." By "saved" you mean what most people would call "converted." I think we've been talking past each other to a fair extent.

MM: Wrong again.

"Again"? That's a bit cheeky. Where was I wrong before?

By the “process of conversion” I mean the time it takes people to learn about everything Jesus commanded us to obey and observe. By “perfecting character” I mean growing in grace and maturing in the fruits of the Spirit as we abide in Jesus after we complete the process of conversion.

What YOU mean by "perfection" is not important to my comment. If you read what I wrote, I said by "conversion" you mean what MOST PEOPLE would call "perfection." Before chiding someone for being "wrong again," you might wish to read what you're responding to more carefully.

By “saved” I mean living up to the light we believe is true and right whether or not we have completed the process of conversion. By “converted” I mean people who have completed the process of conversion. By “new birth, rebirth, born again” I mean people who have completed the process of conversion. These are normal definitions.

Normal for you maybe, but not for anyone else. I doubt anyone else on this forum shares these defintions. The nomral definitions for "converted" or "born again" or "new birth" or "rebirth" are "what happens when one accepts Christ as one's personal Savior." What you consider "saved" is closer to what everyone else considers "converted" "born again" etc.

TE: From earlier in the post you say some will be saved, although they are not converted. Would you also say that some are saved even though they are not born again?

MM: Again, people are saved if they are living up to the light they believe is true and right. It doesn’t matter if they complete the process of conversion before they die. To be translated alive, however, they must complete the process of conversion.

Again, what you are calling "conversion," most people would call "perfection" (or, more accurately, "perfection of character").

TE: Ok, so you are saying no non-SDA's are converted. Would you also say that no non-SDA's are born again?

MM: No one is born again if they do not complete the process of conversion. And no can complete it if they do not learn how to live in harmony with everything Jesus commanded. They may be in the process of converting and living up to the light they have, but they cannot complete the process until learn how to be like Jesus in every way. Again, this does not mean they are lost. Also no one can remain converted if they neglect to “stay converted” moment by moment. We must consciously choose to abide in Jesus or we cease, by default, to continue abiding in Him.

So this is "yes," right? It has to be, if one must follow the 28 fundamental beliefs in order to be born again.

MM: I agree it involves giving their heart to Jesus. But we disagree as to what state it is in when they complete the process of converting. I believe the sins that were practiced before conversion are revealed, confessed, and crucified when they complete the process. You disagree.

“The sins that were practiced before conversion, are to be put off, with the old man. With the new man, Christ Jesus, are to be put on “kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering.” (SD 300)


MM: But you also believe it involves God revealing to them the sinful habits He chose not to expose to their sight before they completed the process of conversion. But the SOP describes it very much differently. She says people see “every” sinful habit for what it is before they complete the process of conversion.

“One ray of the glory of God, one gleam of the purity of Christ, penetrating the soul, makes every spot of defilement painfully distinct, and lays bare the deformity and defects of the human character. It makes apparent the unhallowed desires, the infidelity of the heart, the impurity of the lips. The sinner's acts of disloyalty in making void the law of God, are exposed to his sight, and his spirit is stricken and afflicted under the searching influence of the Spirit of God. He loathes himself as he views the pure, spotless character of Christ.” (SC 29)


MM: I believe people are saved, in accordance with the conditions stated above, before they complete the process of converting from sinning to not sinning to maturing in the fruits of the Spirit.


MM: Converted from what to what? Your definition means people have completed the process of conversion before they crucify their old man habits of sinning. The SOP describes it very much differently.

“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.” (6 BC 1101)

MM: You say conversion is not about sinful habits, but the SOP says the “former habits” are given up, that “all their habits and practices” are in harmony with the law and love God. She goes on to say that people who “retain” their sinful habits have not been born again.

“When a soul is truly converted, old habits and natural evil besetments are done away in Christ Jesus and all things become new.” (TMK 247) “There is not a stain in the character because God is enthroned in the heart and Christ does not war against Christ.” (1 S&T 246) “Transformation of heart means an entire change of the entire man.” (TDG 48)

MM: You say people are converted before they know about their sinful habits, before they give them up. The SOP says their “old habits” are done away with, that there is “not a stain in the character”, that an “entire change" is wrought. The only way this can happen is if they learn how, during the process of conversion, to obey and observe everything Jesus commanded. Otherwise, an entire change of the entire man could not happen.


MM: We disagree as to the timing of when someone experiences the miracle of rebirth and in what state they are in when they complete the process of conversion. You believe they are born practicing certain sinful habits. I believe they are born again dead to sin and awake to righteousness, abiding in Jesus, growing by faith in grace and maturing in the fruits of the Spirit.


MM: Again, we disagree as to the condition of the heart after they complete the process of conversion. Here is what I believe:

“The heart must [1] first accept the truth as it is in Jesus. This is the foundation of true religion. [2] Conviction of sin then begins to be felt; the sin-sick soul, feeling his need of a physician, comes to Jesus of Nazareth for pardon. [3] Taking up the warfare against the enemy, he looks to Jesus for strength to resist temptation. He watches unto prayer, and searches the Scriptures. The truths of the Bible are seen in a new and intensely interesting light, and the Spirit of God opens to him their solemn importance. He studies the life of Christ, and the more clearly he discerns the spotless purity of the Saviour’s character, the less confidence he has in his own goodness; the more steadily and closely he views Jesus, the less he discovers of perfection in himself. [4] His self-righteousness disappears, and he falls, all helpless and broken, upon the Rock, Christ Jesus.” (LHU 273)

MM: As the sinner progresses through the steps outlined above he is experiencing the process of conversion. But he does not complete the process until after he falls, all helpless and broken, upon the Rock, Jesus Christ. You seem to believe he experienced conversion at step 1. But the SOP makes it clear people do not experience conversion until after they complete step 4. Here is how she describes falling on the Rock as it relates to rebirth:

“Those who are now first, who have been untrue to the cause of God, will soon be last, unless they repent. Unless they speedily fall upon the Rock and be broken, and be born again, the spirit that has been cherished will continue to be cherished.” (TM 80)

“Many have accepted the theory of the truth who have had no true conversion. I know whereof I speak. There are few who feel true sorrow for sin, who have deep, pungent convictions of the depravity of the unregenerate nature. The heart of stone is not exchanged for a heart of flesh. Few are willing to fall upon the Rock and be broken.” (5T 218)

MM: Again, people do not experience true conversion and rebirth until after they fall upon the Rock and are broken, which is after they complete step 4 outlined in the quote above.

TE: You didn't consider the contradiction, which I pointed out above. You can't abide in Jesus until you're converted, and you can't complete the process of conversion unless you're abiding in Jesus.

MM: I’m sorry I gave you that impression. That’s not what I believe at all. Instead, I believe we confess, in light of the cross, during the process of conversion that our sinful habits must be given up. The power by which we confess our sinful habits (the Holy Spirit impressing us from without) is not the same power by which we crucify them (the Holy Spirit empowering us from within). We complete the process of conversion when our last sinful habit is revealed and confessed. We begin abiding in Jesus and maturing in the fruits of the Spirit the instant we complete the process of conversion.

TE: You still see that we need to do works in order to be converted.

MM: The “works” we do during the process of conversion, before we are born again, that is, before we complete the process, is to confess our sinful habits, as they are revealed in light of the cross, must be given up and crucified. These works are not the same works we experience while abiding in Jesus and maturing in the fruits of the Spirit after we complete the process of conversion, after we are born again.

TE: My observation was that because of your understanding of conversion, you emphasize sinful habits, and doing everything Jesus commanded, as opposed to mercy, forgiveness, faith, the cross, and the love of God. If you simply look at what you post, you will see that this is the case. Your theology dictates the things you think are important, and these are what you talk about.

MM: Not true. We are focusing on our points of disagreement. It does not mean, however, that the areas we agree on are not as important.

TE: "Again"? That's a bit cheeky. Where was I wrong before?

MM: See previous response. You often draw wrong conclusions about what I believe. Brother Den has been bringing this to your attention. I have been guilty of this too.

TE: What YOU mean by "perfection" is not important to my comment. If you read what I wrote, I said by "conversion" you mean what MOST PEOPLE would call "perfection." Before chiding someone for being "wrong again," you might wish to read what you're responding to more carefully.

MM: What I mean, what you mean, and what others mean is VERY important to me. Neither one of us are authorities on Bible truths. Hopefully we are here to learn the truth and not to convince or persuade the other what we think people should believe about our version of the truth.

TE: Normal for you maybe, but not for anyone else. I doubt anyone else on this forum shares these defintions. The nomral definitions for "converted" or "born again" or "new birth" or "rebirth" are "what happens when one accepts Christ as one's personal Savior." What you consider "saved" is closer to what everyone else considers "converted" "born again" etc.

MM: I addressed this in my previous post.


TE: So this is "yes," right? It has to be, if one must follow the 28 fundamental beliefs in order to be born again.

MM: No one is considered “born again” in the eyes of God if their thoughts, feelings, motives, desires, words, and behavior no different before and after they are supposedly converted. The following quote makes this point clear.

“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.” (6 BC 1101)

TE: You didn't consider the contradiction, which I pointed out above. You can't abide in Jesus until you're converted, and you can't complete the process of conversion unless you're abiding in Jesus.

MM: I’m sorry I gave you that impression. That’s not what I believe at all. Instead, I believe we confess, in light of the cross, during the process of conversion that our sinful habits must be given up. The power by which we confess our sinful habits (the Holy Spirit impressing us from without) is not the same power by which we crucify them (the Holy Spirit empowering us from within). We complete the process of conversion when our last sinful habit is revealed and confessed. We begin abiding in Jesus and maturing in the fruits of the Spirit the instant we complete the process of conversion.

So abiding in Jesus has absolutely nothing to do with completing the process of conversion, since one cannot abide in Jesus until *after* one has completed the process of conversion. Therefore people who are saved, but have not completed the process of conversion (e.g. non-SDA Christians who do not follow all the 28 fundamental beliefs of SDA's) have never abided in Jesus, since they have not completed the process of conversion.

TE: You still see that we need to do works in order to be converted.

MM: The “works” we do during the process of conversion, before we are born again, that is, before we complete the process, is to confess our sinful habits, as they are revealed in light of the cross, must be given up and crucified. These works are not the same works we experience while abiding in Jesus and maturing in the fruits of the Spirit after we complete the process of conversion, after we are born again.

What are the works we do after the process of conversion has been completed? Am I correct in assuming that Luther was saved, but had not completed the process of conversion? (since he drank, and did other things not in the 28 fundamental beliefs).

TE: My observation was that because of your understanding of conversion, you emphasize sinful habits, and doing everything Jesus commanded, as opposed to mercy, forgiveness, faith, the cross, and the love of God. If you simply look at what you post, you will see that this is the case. Your theology dictates the things you think are important, and these are what you talk about.

MM: Not true.

It *is* true that this is what you talk about. We've been conversing for three years, or more, on many different topics, and you talk about the same things, which are the things you're talking about it.

You'll notice that Daryl asked the question, "What does this have to do with the topic"? which is a good question.

We are focusing on our points of disagreement. It does not mean, however, that the areas we agree on are not as important.

TE: "Again"? That's a bit cheeky. Where was I wrong before?

MM: See previous response. You often draw wrong conclusions about what I believe.

You often draw wrong conclusions by not reading carefully. I wasn't commenting on what you believe when you made your statement that I was "wrong." I was commenting on what most believe, and I was accurate in what I wrote.

Brother Den has been bringing this to your attention. I have been guilty of this too.

I agree that you often draw wrong conclusions about what I believe, that's true. That's why I've urged you to quote men, which, to be fair, you've been doing a very good job of as of late.

I virtually always quote you when I'm describing what you belief, so if I'm drawing wrong conclusions, it's just because your use of words is different than mine. (e.g., you differentiate between "saved" and "born again," which is unusual).

TE: What YOU mean by "perfection" is not important to my comment. If you read what I wrote, I said by "conversion" you mean what MOST PEOPLE would call "perfection." Before chiding someone for being "wrong again," you might wish to read what you're responding to more carefully.

MM: What I mean, what you mean, and what others mean is VERY important to me.

In the context of the veracity of my statement, it's not important. You're misreading the intent of my statement. You took issue with what I wrote based on your idea of what "perfection" means. But my statement was based on what *others* think perfection means. If you want to take issue with that, you'd have to produce some evidence that most people do not perceive perfection along the lines of what I said. In the context of my statement, what you believe about perfection is not important.

You're going off on a tangent here.

Neither one of us are authorities on Bible truths. Hopefully we are here to learn the truth and not to convince or persuade the other what we think people should believe about our version of the truth.

TE: Normal for you maybe, but not for anyone else. I doubt anyone else on this forum shares these definitions. The normal definitions for "converted" or "born again" or "new birth" or "rebirth" are "what happens when one accepts Christ as one's personal Savior." What you consider "saved" is closer to what everyone else considers "converted" "born again" etc.

MM: I addressed this in my previous post.

Quote:
TE: Ok, so you are saying no non-SDA's are converted. Would you also say that no non-SDA's are born again?

MM: No one is born again if they do not complete the process of conversion. And no can complete it if they do not learn how to live in harmony with everything Jesus commanded. They may be in the process of converting and living up to the light they have, but they cannot complete the process until learn how to be like Jesus in every way. Again, this does not mean they are lost. Also no one can remain converted if they neglect to “stay converted” moment by moment. We must consciously choose to abide in Jesus or we cease, by default, to continue abiding in Him.

TE: So this is "yes," right? It has to be, if one must follow the 28 fundamental beliefs in order to be born again.

MM: No one is considered “born again” in the eyes of God if their thoughts, feelings, motives, desires, words, and behavior no different before and after they are supposedly converted. The following quote makes this point clear.

“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.” (6 BC 1101)

You didn't answer the question I asked. I agree with your comment, that our outward behavior will testify to the genuineness of our conversion. However, *my* question is if one needs to follow the 28 fundamental beliefs in order to be born again.

TE: You'll notice that Daryl asked the question, "What does this have to do with the topic"? which is a good question.

MM: Fair enough.

I appreciate what Mark wrote at the beginning of this thread: