Forums118
Topics9,199
Posts195,639
Members1,323
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Tom]
#108954
02/25/09 04:14 PM
02/25/09 04:14 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
Is prostitution, murder, or whatever other sin Christ's ancestors may have done, passed on genetically? When one sins, is his genetic makeup changed in a way that is passed on to his children? As Haskell put it in interpreting Ellen White from "The Desire of Ages," Christ assumed fallen humanity, with all its hereditary inclinations. This looks to be Ellen White's point here. Christ accepted the law of heredity, with all its inclinations, inclinations which were manifest in His ancestors. Sins cannot be passed genetically, but inclinations can be. We all know what these inclinations are like, as we're all tempted by them. The results of yielding to these temptations is shown in the history of Christ's ancestors. So you are saying that if I commit a sin, I am genetically altered such that chromosomes I pass on to my posterity will have an inclination to that same sin? And this is a physical phenomenon? And wouldn't you call that an evil (tending to sin) propensity (strong inclination)? Christ never yielded to the temptations which come from hereditary inclinations. He shared in our heredity, being tempted as we are tempted, but never yielded. There's a problem with that in my case. My strongest temptations are the result of cultivated sin, not hereditary inclinations. If Jesus was to be tempted as I am tempted, He needs to have cultivated sin. If all He had was hereditary, His problem was nothing compared to mine, not to mention (despite the fact that I am mentioning it now) that my heredity is 2000 years/50% worse than His. Furthermore, and more to the topic, the sad fact is that I sometimes desire and lust to sin, a propensity which I must struggle mightily against. Did Jesus also desire and lust to sin?
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Tom]
#108956
02/25/09 04:38 PM
02/25/09 04:38 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
Yes, as I said in my post 108862, there are other evidence to consider. Now, besides the Baker letter, Ellen White wrote on many other occasions about the subject in question: He [Christ] was born without a taint of sin, but came into the world in like manner as the human family.--Letter 97, 1898. {7ABC 462.2}
If she is not referring to tendencies, what does she mean here? That Christ did not sin before birth?
In the fullness of time He was to be revealed in human form. He was to take His position at the head of humanity by taking the nature but not the sinfulness of man. -- The Signs of the Times, May 29, 1901.
What does she mean with “not taking the sinfulness of man”? The sinfulness of man in the form of acts is not something one can “take.”
"Our Lord was tempted as man is tempted. He was capable of yielding to temptations, as are human beings. ... But here we must not become in our ideas common and earthly, and in our perverted ideas we must not think that the liability of Christ to yield to Satan's temptations degraded His humanity and He possessed the same sinful, corrupt propensities as man." {16MR 182.2}
He was capable of yielding to temptations but not because He possessed the same sinful propensities as man. If propensitites of disobedience are not sinful propensities, I don't know what are.
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#108957
02/25/09 04:42 PM
02/25/09 04:42 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
All influences, propensities, inclinations, tendencies that tempt us to sin are evil and sinful. Nevertheless, having them dwelling within us, "that is, in our flesh", does not corrupt or contaminate us while we are abiding in Jesus. So too, Jesus was not corrupted or contaminated by having them dwelling within His sinful flesh. Does desiring and lusting to sin contaminate us if we don't do it?
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: asygo]
#108959
02/25/09 04:46 PM
02/25/09 04:46 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
So you are saying that if I commit a sin, I am genetically altered such that chromosomes I pass on to my posterity will have an inclination to that same sin? No, I didn't say this. I said you have inherited inclinations which tempt you to sin. And wouldn't you call that an evil (tending to sin) propensity (strong inclination)? Neither Ellen White nor her contemporaries used this language in reference to genetically inherited inclinations, so no, I wouldn't. I think this would be extremely confusing in a topic where communication is already challenging. Let's get back to what Haskell said, which I think is very clear and easy to understand. "This is fallen humanity, with all its hereditary inclinations." Two points: 1.All the hereditary inclinations which are passed genetically were passed to Christ, just like any other child of Adam. 2.These hereditary inclinations are not evil propensities (which are something else). We agreed on point 2. Do we agree on point 1? T:Christ never yielded to the temptations which come from hereditary inclinations. He shared in our heredity, being tempted as we are tempted, but never yielded.
A:There's a problem with that in my case. My strongest temptations are the result of cultivated sin, not hereditary inclinations. This isn't a problem in terms of our discussion. It's simply a separate issue, which, as such, I'll treat separately.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Tom]
#108961
02/25/09 05:00 PM
02/25/09 05:00 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
There's a problem with that in my case. My strongest temptations are the result of cultivated sin, not hereditary inclinations. It's probably hard to know this for a fact, but this is certainly our impression of things. If Jesus was to be tempted as I am tempted, He needs to have (or take/bear) cultivated sin. This is true, and this point was treated in detail in A. T. Jones' sermons in 1895. (I altered your "have" with "or take/bear" to make clear I'm not suggesting Christ had to sin). If all He had was hereditary, His problem was nothing compared to mine, not to mention (despite the fact that I am mentioning it now) that my heredity is 2000 years/50% worse than His. Agreed. However, not all that Christ had was heredity. He bore our sins as well. He took our nature, or "flesh of sin", and in that flesh of sin He bore our sin, giving Him the whole package (indeed, much more, since you only have your own cultivated sins to deal with, while Christ bore the sin of the world), allowing Him to be tempted in all points as you are, and much, much more. Again, this is treated in detail in the 1895 GC A. T. Jones sermons. Furthermore, and more to the topic, the sad fact is that I sometimes desire and lust to sin, a propensity which I must struggle mightily against. Did Jesus also desire and lust to sin? He was tempted to do so. If you intend "desire" to mean the desires which come from temptations, what Ellen White calls to be strongly influenced, then yes. If you mean in the sense of an act of the will to choose to harbor a wrong thought, then no. The word "lust" is unfortunately ambiguous. In older English, it simply meant "desire." That is, it was a neutral word. In modern English, it's not. So some things written in the past which speak of "lust" mean "desire," so the context would have to determine whether this desire was good, bad, or neutral. For example, you could lust to be holy, which certainly sounds odd in modern English. Given you're using the word "lust" without reference to written statements of the past (i.e., simply the modern English usage of the word), then we can say without qualification that Christ did not lust to sin.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: teresaq]
#108962
02/25/09 05:02 PM
02/25/09 05:02 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
i am only jumping in to say that the way roseangela presents it is the way i have understood that statement when i read it. Thanks, Teresa. It seems that three of us interpret in the same way what Ellen White wrote in the Baker letter. Arnold said the same in his post #108485 (Feb 16): I interpret the Baker letter as making a statement of this form: Adam's posterity was born with X, but Jesus did not have X for one moment.
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Tom]
#108963
02/25/09 07:26 PM
02/25/09 07:26 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Yes, as I said in my post 108862, there are other evidence to consider.
Now, besides the Baker letter, Ellen White wrote on many other occasions about the subject in question: Yes, and these are what we should be considering, assuming they're not from private letters. In the fullness of time He was to be revealed in human form. He was to take His position at the head of humanity by taking the nature but not the sinfulness of man. -- The Signs of the Times, May 29, 1901.
R:What does she mean with “not taking the sinfulness of man”? The sinfulness of man in the form of acts is not something one can “take.” It is a rather odd expression, but we can see what she means by comparing it with similar expressions. For example: Everyone who by faith obeys God's commandments will reach the condition of sinlessness in which Adam lived before his transgression.(IHP 146) Clearly this isn't referring to sinful flesh (or sinful nature). Since she says that Christ took our sinful nature, yet not our sinfulness, it's easy to see that "sinfulness" must be something which does not pertain to "sinful nature." "Our Lord was tempted as man is tempted. He was capable of yielding to temptations, as are human beings. ... But here we must not become in our ideas common and earthly, and in our perverted ideas we must not think that the liability of Christ to yield to Satan's temptations degraded His humanity and He possessed the same sinful, corrupt propensities as man." {16MR 182.2}
He was capable of yielding to temptations but not because He possessed the same sinful propensities as man. Right. He was capable of yielding to temptations because He took our nature. However, He never sinned, so developed no corrupt propensities. She never used the word "carnal" in reference to Christ (by which I mean His assumed human nature), although she did use the word "sinful" (again, in reference to His assumed human nature) as well as other terms such as "offensive," "degraded," "fallen," etc. Anyway "carnal" was never used in this context (e.g., she never said that Christ took our "carnal nature"). Regarding taint of sin, if we see how she uses the term, we can see it doesn't apply to the physical nature. For example: The human nature of Christ is likened to ours, and suffering was more keenly felt by Him; for His spiritual nature was free from every taint of sin. (7 SDABC 449) Christ's *spiritual* nature was without a "taint of sin." Regarding her saying that He was born without a taint of sin, this could be simply a rejection of the Catholic doctrine of original sin; that is, denying the idea that one can receive the taint of sin simply by being born. I couldn't find any references to her saying that human beings are of necessity born with a taint of sin (nor that humans are born with a taint of sin at all). Actually, I think I only found on reference, which is the one you cited, although it seems to be repeated in many different compilations. I see it comes from a "Letter 97," which makes me wonder if this also might be from a private letter.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Tom]
#108964
02/25/09 07:45 PM
02/25/09 07:45 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
Of course it was Christ's *spiritual* nature that was without a taint of sin when He was born. This is my contention from the beginning. Post #108289 (Feb 13): But she says we are born with propensities of disobedience. Is this within the moral/spiritual realm of our nature or not? Is our spiritual nature without a taint of sin when we are born? "When Adam came from the Creator's hand, he bore, in his physical, mental, and spiritual nature, a likeness to his Maker. . . . Through sin the divine likeness was marred, and well-nigh obliterated. Man's physical powers were weakened, his mental capacity was lessened, his spiritual vision dimmed. {AG 246.2, 3} Are we born with full spiritual vision or is our spiritual vision dimmed?
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Rosangela]
#108965
02/25/09 07:58 PM
02/25/09 07:58 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
As far as Christ's humanity is concerned, genetically it was like ours, since he, like every child of Adam, accepting the working of the great law of heredity.
Christ had two differences from man.
1.He never sinned. 2.He was God.
So while it's fine and good for us to emphasize that Christ was like man in terms of heredity, in doing to we should make clear the distinctions above, which Ellen White was ever careful to do.
If terms of our birth, we may not have had the advantage of godly parents that Christ had, and we certainly did not have the advantage of being God. So in examining differences between Christ's birth and ours, these distinctions need to be born in mind.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Christ Desired and Lusted to Sin?
[Re: Tom]
#108966
02/25/09 08:02 PM
02/25/09 08:02 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
As far as Christ's humanity is concerned, genetically it was like ours Is a spiritual nature transmitted "genetically" or not?
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|