"His Holiness"?

[jasd]

>>He is an Antichrist because he ascribes to his own works the omnipotent capability of conquering sin, death, devil, hell, and the wrath of God. An Antichrist lays claim to the honor of Christ. He is an idolater of himself. The law righteous person is the worst kind of infidel.

I save myself and others." This is the impression the monks give out.

The Pope is the Antichrist,

They train sinners who are ten times worse than any thief, whore, murderer….

The pope commands us to look away from the promises of God in Christ to our own merit.

Let the Pope perish.<<

I suspect that the moderator, observing the tenor of the selected and bolded superlatives in the lead post this page --made the judgement call that the “rhetorical question” was --an encore struck upon a more personal note.

>>"You must be Catholic?"<<

Providing that it was a question not of ‘bolded’ implications but one rather, galvanized by an overture of curiosity,

I could live with the question; however, as I’ve already noted in the thread ‘Refugee’ --I am neither Xtian nor SDA; otherwise, where there is discourse limited to topic/issue only, should affiliation matter?

>>What if someone were defending Ellen White and I said, "you must be Adventist?"…<<

I should think that might depend upon what you’d posted and bolded aforehand…, and if there was a perception that the “rhetorical question” was, by indication of word order, an inflected form of the accusatory, might it not?

Anyway, I’m certain no offense was intended and no offense is taken.

By the way, do you really subscribe to the excesses of Luther? and (are you aware that the Catholic and Lutheran accords was signed by JP II?)

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Jas 2:14 What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works?

---

Yes, let's tackle this dogma of works:

• 15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them….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. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” [Matthew 7:15,16, 21-23]

First of all, what does it mean to “come…in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly...are ferocious wolves”?

Paul makes it clear:

• “Beware of the dogs [wolves], beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision; 3 for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh”….[Phil 3:2-3]

• I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. [Acts 20:29-30]

Apparently these “dogs” (evil workers) place confidence in sinful human flesh, but how so?

• Verse 4 “Although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: 5 circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel,…as to the Law, a Pharisee….as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.” [Phil 3:4-6]

Notice two things when it comes to the fruit of the “evil workers” (wolves):

• 1] They draw away disciples unto themselves. This can be seen in Matt 23:

“They do all their works to be seen of men: 6 they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats …7 they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them ‘Rabbi.’ [or your Holiness]….12 For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. …15 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees [& Popes], you hypocrites ! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are!

• 2] They claim to be blameless (holy).

It is very interesting that the preconverted Paul considered himself blameless with respect to his law-performance (see Phil 3:6), but after his conversion we see a different Paul:

But what things were gain to me [see Phil 3:2-6], those I counted loss for Christ. 8Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss … and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. [Phil 3:7-9]

Noticed that the converted Paul consider his righteousness (his holiness) as mere dung! Further inspection reveals Paul carried this mindset through his life:

• “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.” [1 Tim 1:15]

So Paul considered himself as sinner (the opposite of holy) in the continuous present tense. He also looked at his righteousness (when compared to God) as dung! That is the fruit of accepting the genuine gospel.

The fruit of a perverted gospel (such as Catholicism teaches) produces self-righteous fruit that will condemn the believer in the judgment.

So on the one hand we have the humble Paul, but on the other hand we have proud Prelate in his majestic robes! A fitting description of the robes of his own righteousness….

So James is right: “A man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.”

If a man’s faith is in a perverted gospel, his fruits will condemn him. The works prove he is in the camp of righteousness by works.

On the other hand if a man’s faith is in the doing and dying of Christ alone, his fruits will justify (testify) to his faith in genuine gospel. The genuine gospel places the glory of men in the dust! It humbles him….His boast is “in the Lord” and not in himself. (see 1 Cor 1:31)

Contrast this with the proud Pontiff:

• How striking the contrast between the overbearing pride of this haughty pontiff and the meekness and gentleness of Christ, who represents himself as pleading at the door of the heart for admittance, that he may come in to bring pardon and peace, and who taught his disciples, "Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant." [GC 1888 58]

[Robert]

Quote:

---

"The law righteous person is the worst kind of infidel.: ML

---

Look at Paul before his conversion! He was stoning believers....Look at his claims...his pride (as to the law, blameless)

Look at the Popes when they had the power of the state behind them...they persecuted the faithful. Legalism produces cold-hearted, self-righteous fruit....

Quote:

---

They train sinners who are ten times worse than any thief, whore, murderer….

---

There are many similarities between the Popes and the Pharisees of Christ's day:

Matt 23:15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you traverse sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.... 34 Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.

Why? "The law righteous person is the worst kind of infidel."

[Robert]

Here's what self-righteousness and legalism produce:

Stephen speaking to the Jews:

• 51 “You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52 Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him— 53 you who have received the law that was put into effect through angels but have not obeyed it.”

  54 When they heard this, they were furious and gnashed their teeth at him. 55 But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56 “Look,” he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”

  57 At this they covered their ears and, yelling at the top of their voices, they all rushed at him, 58 dragged him out of the city and began to stone him. Meanwhile, the witnesses laid their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul.

  59 While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60 Then he fell on his knees and cried out, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he fell asleep.

[jasd]

I don’t mean to leave the impression that I’ve put you on ignore. Summer’s arrived and we’ve had, here in Oregon, a string of sunny days this past week… and, from past year’s experience, I’ll have a couple of weeks before the soil dries out where it needs a pickaxe to dig.

So, it is digging, digging, and digging, --ditches for irrigation and power lines, ditches for stone wall foundations, for sunken garden, for raised-bed garden, for fence posts, --and I’m too tired to post.

I’ll be getting to the points you’ve raised best I’m able to, --irregularly and with some dislocation, as the case will be.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

…wasn’t the lamb of God to be represented by a spotless lamb or goat, that is, without blemish…? Extending that thought…, isn’t fallen humanity a contradiction of ‘without blemish’?

---

Fallen humanity (or even better, sinful humanity) is most definitely blemished for it is sinful!

---

True, true. There is no ‘without blemish and without spot’ in fallen, or “sinful humanity”, is there? That being said,

surely, you are not putting forward that Christ could have possessed man’s fallen nature, yet have been the Christ-as-without-blemish-and-without-spot because He was sinless? If so,

the dogma of the Immaculate Conception more fittingly obtains in providing the Atonement Sacrifice, per my humble opine.

>>As God, Christ's divinity was positively sinless or without sin. The Holy Spirit called Christ, as God, "that Holy thing"! (see Luke 1:35) But the humanity that Christ's divinity took at the incarnation was our fallen humanity under the law's curse!<< [ed.]

Writ seems to have been quite pointed in its requirements regarding the atoning sacrifice _as representative of Christ_ demanding that it be --at least without spot, --if not [exactly] ‘without blemish’ (Dan 1:4).

>>That can be seen in the following:

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, 5 in order that He might redeem those who were under the Law....<<

Per, born of a woman, --that is rather straightforward and is not ‘generally’ disputed. “born (or made, KJV) under the Law”, bears parsing, as use of this text to establish the nature of Christ may be carrying the text further than it may have been meant to be taken, per example...

1Tim 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, [:"red"]but for[/] the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, v10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons,…

Providing that we’re on the same page regards law, perhaps Galatians 4:4 means to convey that Christ was subject to the Jewish economy, that is, --to the Law of Stones, statutes, ordinances, and judgements, much as you and I are subject to the police powers and the jurisprudential system of laws and regulations of our own economy; not necessarily, to imply a connotation of an inherent sinfulness or a predisposition to it -- attached to the divine nature of the Redeemer by a semantically loaded ‘humanity’.

>>What does it mean to be "born of a woman"?

Job 15:14

What is man, that he can be clean? Or he that is born of a woman, that he can be righteous?<<

Well, as much as James 5:16 …prayer of a righteous man availeth… is Writ, I can only surmise that Job was taking rhetorical license in that particular passage.

>>When are we considered sinners?

Ps 51:5

Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.<<

In that, the subject is the nature of Christ, surely, the above text is not put forward to substantiate that Christ was conceived or was born sinful?

>>The minute Christ's divinity assumed our fallen humanity, that humanity came under the curse of the law.<<

1Tim 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man,…

Was Christ ever unrighteous?

>>That's what Paul means by "born under the law". To be "under law" is death and condemnation.<<

Sometimes, one wonders at what St Paul truly means. I mean, St Paul, though admitting that (he that wrought effectually … to the apostleship of the circumcision,…) {Gal 2:8} were unto the mission of Saints Peter, James, and John to the Jews, he, yet, withstood St Peter’s mission to the Jews --before the brethren of Antioch.

As to a law unto “death and condemnation…, yes, Christ needed to propitiate for the law of mortality. That being said,

the story of Boaz and Ruth should remind that ‘redemption’ required only a ‘near’ relationship…

[Robert]

Quote:

---

the dogma of the Immaculate Conception more fittingly obtains in providing the Atonement Sacrifice, per my humble opine.

---

On a slightly difference note...did you know that believers have been made "partakers of the Holy Spirit" [Heb 6:4] and that "the Spirit of God dwells in you" [1 Cor 3:16]? Of course there are other verses, but I'll give only one more:

• "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you?" 1 Corinthians 6:19

Even though I disagree strongly with Catholicism, I think that even Catholics believe this truth....Do you?

Rob

[jasd]

>>On a slightly difference note...did you know that believers have been made "partakers of the Holy Spirit" [Heb 6:4] and that "the Spirit of God dwells in you" [1 Cor 3:16]? Of course there are other verses, but I'll give only one more:

"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you?" 1 Corinthians 6:19

Even though I disagree strongly with Catholicism, I think that even Catholics believe this truth....Do you?<<

jasd #169374 - Mon Apr 25 2005 10:24 PM

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The Pope claims infused righteousness.

---

Not certain as to how you are defining “righteousness” but, wouldn’t the indwelling HS be infused righteousness? and, isn’t that indwelling a promise… to even such as JP II?

---

[jasd]

>>No wonder Paul was able to foretell the abominations that Antichrist would bring into the Church.<<

See below (post), the attributes of ‘antichrist’ according to Writ. Luther was here, more boisterous than factual.

>>…Christ Himself prophesied, Matthew 24:5, "For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."<<

If I remember correctly, “I am [Christ]” has Christ supplied without it occurring in text. Text literally reads: “I am”, or more implicit than direct, “I AM”, which was being taken up as a mantra of the New Age movement when I left Los Angeles…

>>Whoever seeks righteousness by works denies God…<<

I think even flagellants concede that it was the sacrifice of Christ upon that cross that both initially and ultimately saves. That being the case, the cant of “I believe” is yet, inadequate, except for the few.

>>…and makes himself God.<<

Luther’s attempt at whole cloth scurrility? The Bible teaches man-as-god only in the lower case.

>>He is an Antichrist because…<<

Luther seems not to have read 1st and 2nd John. The papacy, in spite of its faults, cannot have this also… ascribed to it. It is untrue, unBiblical, and poor exposition. That is not to say

that the next pope will not be the antichrist; he may very well ascend to the papacy from the land of frogs.

>>…he ascribes to his own works the omnipotent capability of conquering sin, death, devil, hell, and the wrath of God.<<

The papacy and RCs have indeed, heretofore, committed and propagated excesses.

>>An Antichrist lays claim to the honor of Christ. He is an idolater of himself.<<

Agreed. However, it is not to Jesus Christ that the “Antichrist” lays claim but to the ‘anointing’ (Christos).

>>The law righteous person is the worst kind of infidel.<<

He may have been right herein, as St Paul declared the “law” to have been becoming obsolete even as he spoke; therefore, attempting to submit to the “law” may be indicative of ‘idolatry’ --after a fashion.

>>Those who intend to obtain righteousness by their own efforts do not say in so many words: "I am God; I am Christ." But it amounts to that.<< [ed.]

Redundant…, and elocutionary. However, I suppose the above turns upon how one defines “righteousness”.

>>They usurp the divinity and office of Christ.<<

So, theologically speaking, man’s righteousness is of Gd, but is there no sweat, which forms upon the brow of those righteously endeavouring…?

>>I save myself and others." This is the impression the monks give out.<<

Admittedly, for many centuries, in many countries, and among many tribal units those supposedly representing Christ did so abysmally.

>>The Pope is the Antichrist,…<<

Sheesh. Luther cannot be taken seriously in this assertion. It is hugely laden with prejudice bred of a 16th century milieu.

>>…because he is against Christ, because he takes liberties with the things of God, because he lords it over the temple of God.<< [bolded:mine]

“…because he is against Christ”? The terminology shifts from the substitute to the adversarial.

>>I cannot tell you in words how criminal it is to seek righteousness before God without faith in Christ, by the works of the Law.<<

Hoorah! agreement, but we could have done without the attached “…works of the Law”.

>>It is the abomination standing in the holy place. It deposes the Creator and deifies the creature….<<

Fustian maliloquence…

>>I cannot get over the blindness of the Pope's theologians. To imagine that the mighty forces of sin, death, and the curse can be vanquished by the righteousness of man's paltry works, by fasting, pilgrimages, masses, vows, and such gewgaws.<<

I concur. Here, Luther waxes eloquent. “gewgaws” :-o That is not to say that,

man inherits the kingdom without having shed abroad --works of grace. (Thief: noted)

>>These blind leaders of the blind turn the poor people over to the mercy of sin, death, and the devil. What chance has a defenseless human creature against these powers of darkness?<<

Tragic. True, of his time.

>>They train sinners who are ten times worse than any thief, whore, murderer….<<

Sounds awfully familiar to Jesus’ condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees; yet, He said they sat in Moses’ seat…

>>Let the Pope perish. --M Luther (events, --and his dislike for Tetzel, overtook the man and somewhat engulfed him without really defining whether he wore the hat of the Reformer, the Revolutionary, the Provocateur, the Jew-baiter, or just –the Reactionary. Nevertheless,

his life continues on as the stuff of legend. And so, it was with the legendary nailing of the theses to the door of the Castle church --that it began.)

[Robert]

Quote:

---

>>On a slightly difference note...did you know that believers have been made "partakers of the Holy Spirit" [Heb 6:4] and that "the Spirit of God dwells in you" [1 Cor 3:16]? Of course there are other verses, but I'll give only one more:

"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you?" 1 Corinthians 6:19

Even though I disagree strongly with Catholicism, I think that even Catholics believe this truth....

Do you?

<<

jasd #169374 - Mon Apr 25 2005 10:24 PM

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The Pope claims infused righteousness.

---

Not certain as to how you are defining “righteousness” but, wouldn’t the indwelling HS be infused righteousness? and, isn’t that indwelling a promise… to even such as JP II?

---

---

The question was asked of you...do YOU believe the Holy Spirit is in you???

Rob

[DaveM1936]

Quote:

---

surely, you are not putting forward that Christ could have possessed man’s fallen nature, yet have been the Christ-as-without-blemish-and-without-spot because He was sinless? If so,

the dogma of the Immaculate Conception more fittingly obtains in providing the Atonement Sacrifice, per my humble opine.

---

The nature of Christ has been argued about for almost 2000 years.

As I see it, there are 3 possiblites.

1. Christ had the nature of Adam BEFORE the fall.

2. He had the nature of Adam after the fall.

3. While He was born with no inclination to sin like we were, He had a body just like you and me. This is my position.

Mary was a sinner. She may have lived a better life than I have. But as a member of the human family, she was saved through Christ just like all of us have to be in order to be saved. IMO, Jesus was born with the nature we receive at the new birth. Just like us, He had to resist tempations to go it alone. The difference was that He could have gone it alone by taping into His divine nature. Since we cannot do that, He choose to live life and fight tempations the same way we need to. By total dependence on God.

Your friend,

Dave M

[DaveM1936]

Are you a Catholic? Your post sounds just like one. You certainly are not a Lutheran or an SDA.

Your friend,

Dave M

[Robert]

• The nature of Christ has been argued about for almost 2000 years.

  As I see it, there are 3 possibilities.

  1. Christ had the nature of Adam BEFORE the fall.

  2. He had the nature of Adam after the fall.

  3. While He was born with no inclination to sin like we were, He had a body just like you and me. This is my position.

Sorry Dave, none of those answers the demands of God's law.

A close study of God's law reveals 3 requirements:

1] You must be perfect in performance

2] Imperfection must result in the 2nd death - hence "The soul that sins, it must die."

3] You must be perfect in nature - i.e., you must have no indwelling sin (as in sin nature).

Paul and Christ clearly state that no one is measuring up to the law's demand of unblemished righteousness [Rom 3:23/Matt 19:17]. Hence we fail # 1.

Because we are all sinners, God's law legally demands that WE must die. Christ's death instead of our death is meaningless because He is not the sinner. The Bible clearly states that "the soul that sins, it must die."

Well, if we die eternally what's the use?...Hence we fail # 2

Both David and Paul tell us that we are sinners by birth [Ps 51:5/Rom 5:18]. Hence we are condemned because we fail # 3.

If Christ HAD our fallen nature (meaning it was His own), then He Himself would be a sinner in need of a Savior....

[Robert]

Quote:

---

The question was asked of you...do YOU believe the Holy Spirit is in you???

---

• "Do you [the believer] not know that your body is the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit, Who is [:"red"]in you[/]?"

If we take your theology, jasd, to its ultimate conclusion...you must conclude that "the HOLY Spirit" is sinful because IT dwells in sinful, human flesh....

Now you have a huge conundrum!

[Robert]

Quote:

---

• "Do
  you
  [the believer] not know that
  your body
  is the sanctuary of
  the Holy Spirit
  , Who is
  [:"red"]in you[/]
  ?"

---

Since the Holy Spirit, who is sinless, can tabernacle in a humanity, which is fallen and sinful, then apparently the two (i.e., the divine & the unholy) can coexist together without one becoming infected by the other!

• -BC- LHU

  -TI- Lift Him Up

  -CN- 3

  -CT- Lift Him Up as the Son of Man

  -PR- 02

  -PG- 76

  “Was the human nature of the Son of Mary [which was sinful] changed into the divine nature [which was and is sinless] of the Son of God? No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person--the man Christ Jesus. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature [His assumed humanity] that died. [:"red"]Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible.[/]

Please note that the Holy Spirit does not become you (jasd)! Likewise you do not become the Holy Spirit. You and the Holy Spirit are mysteriously blended in the one person, jasd.

• 2 Peter 1:3 His divine power has granted to us [believing sinners] all things that pertain to life and godliness...that through these you [the believing sinner] may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of passion [our sinful disposition], and become partakers of the divine nature..

Again, please note that we believers (who are sinful) have become "partakers of the divine nature" (which is sinless). The two have become one, yet distinct.

In other words we are sill mortal, but the divine nature is immortal. We are sinful, but the divine nature is sinless.

Our sinful flesh does not corrupt the divine nature. At the same time we are not sinless (Holy) because God's Spirit dwells in us for we have not become Him. The Holy Spirit is in us as a seal...that is, as proof of our salvation.

[Robert]

• -BC- 7BC

  -TI- S.D.A. Bible Commentary Vol. 7

  -CN- HEB 8

  -CT- Hebrews

  -PR- 03

  -PG- 927

  "By His obedience to all the commandments of God, Christ (as God) wrought out a redemption for man [mankind].

  [How?]

  This was not done by going out of Himself to another, but...

You see Catholicism teaches that God, through the Spirit, comes into you and infuses you with His righteousness so that you are now holy and immortal. In other words this heresy teaches that you and God are one in the same. Blaspheme!!!! Let's continue:

• This was not done by going out of Himself to another, but by taking humanity into Himself.

  [What type of humanity did Jesus assume?]

  ....To bring humanity into Christ, [:"red"]to bring the fallen race[/] into oneness with divinity, is the work of redemption.

[DaveM1936]

Quote:

---

If Christ HAD our fallen nature (meaning it was His own), then He Himself would be a sinner in need of a Savior....

---

First, I stated that my position on the nature of Christ was that while He had no inclination to sin like we do, He still had a body just like us. Although born sinless, He had a body that was totally human. He got hungry, thirsty, tired. He aged just like us. He looked just like us. He choose to fight temptations in the same manner that we must.

Your posts really had nothing to do with the nature of Christ. I was focusing on Jesus, not on how we must live.

Your friend,

Dave M

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

If Christ HAD our fallen nature (meaning it was His own), then He Himself would be a sinner in need of a Savior....

---

Although born sinless, He had a body that was totally human. He got hungry, thirsty, tired. He aged just like us. He looked just like us.

---

That's all nice and dandy, but that does nothing in answering the demands of God's law.

• 1] The law demands the death of the sinner!

  2] Christ isn't the sinner.

  3] Therefore, Christ couldn't have LEGALLY died in your/our place.

What do you do with this truth? You have two choices:

1] You can turn to Catholicism for your answers. If you do they will teach you that when the Holy Spirit moves in He infuses you with His righteousness, i.e., to say, you are made Holy. That's why the Pope can refer to himself as holy (what blindness!)

2] Or you can accept Paul's gospel that "we" legally died to the demands of the law "in Christ" (see Rom 6:6/Rom 7:4).

To understand the 2nd choice you must realize God MADE the entire human race "in Adam". Even Eve came from Adam's side....

When Adam sinned his life became infected with the principle of "self"....Since his offspring were mere copies of his own fallen life, they also received a life in its fallen condition and under the curse.

EGW:

• Adam sinned, and the children of Adam share his guilt [condemnation] and its consequences [eternal death]. [FW 88]

Hence the life you current enjoy is nothing but Adam's life Xeroxed a zillion times over....Yes your life experiences differ, nevertheless you (all of us) share this fallen life. I call it our corporate fallen life because we all share that one life....

To LEGALLY redeem us from all aspects of sin, Christ as God had to assume our fallen corporate life. He did this by uniting our fallen life from Mary's womb to His sinless, Divine, immortal life.

If, as Catholicism states, Mary's womb was cleansed from all traces of sin then Christ did not assume our fallen life under the curse, but rather our sinless life before the fall.

Clearly Christ came to save us from "the curse of the law"! He didn't come to save unfallen humanity...He came to save fallen humanity. And this He did by His doing and dying.

[DaveM1936]

Here is the entire paragraph you quoted from. As usual you only used a part of a sentence.

Quote:

---

We have reason for ceaseless gratitude to God that Christ, by His perfect obedience, has won back the heaven that Adam lost through disobedience. Adam sinned, and the children of Adam share his guilt and its consequences; but Jesus bore the guilt of Adam, and all the children of Adam that will flee to Christ, the second Adam, may escape the penalty of transgression. Jesus regained heaven for man by bearing the test that Adam failed to endure; for He obeyed the law perfectly, and all who have a right conception of the plan of redemption will see that they cannot be saved while in transgression of God's holy precepts. They must cease to transgress the law and lay hold on the promises of God that are available for us through the merits of Christ. {FW 88.3}{quote]

God has never changed His character nor the reflection of His character in the law. Obedience is not an option for us. Notice that she points us to the "how".

1. Flee to Christ.

2. Claim the promises.

3. Take advantage of Christ's merits.

4. Study the plan of redemption.

5. Accept Christ's perfect life as a gift to us.

You continue to ignore my question. What do you believe concering the nature of Christ? I am willing to discuss the direction you want to take this discussion. But I am stuck on the nature of Christ until you share what you beleive.

Your friend,

Dave M

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Here is the entire paragraph you quoted from. As usual you only used a part of a sentence.

---

That wasn't very nice....Please look at the context of what I was stating:

• When Adam sinned his life became infected with the principle of "self"....Since his offspring were mere copies of his own fallen life, they also received a life in its fallen condition and under the curse.

Then I used EGW to back up my pont:

• "Adam sinned, and the children of Adam share his guilt [condemnation] and its consequences." [FW 88]

My point was we are sinners by our relationship to Adam. His life is our life, multiplied.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Obedience is not an option for us.

---

Okay, then obey just like Christ....Be selfless to the point of homelessness. Love your enemies...not in lip service, but be willing to lay down your life for eternity so that your murders can have heaven in your place. That's obedience...that's love.

Maybe you should say "growth" is not an option for us?

Rob

[Robert]

Quote:

---

I am stuck on the nature of Christ until you share what you beleive.

---

That's what I have been discussing....

[Robert]

• Quote:

  ---

  "Do
  you
  [the believer] not know that
  your body
  is the sanctuary of
  the Holy Spirit
  , Who is
  [:"red"]in you[/]
  ?"

  ---

  Since the Holy Spirit, who is sinless, can tabernacle in a humanity, which is fallen and sinful, then apparently the two (i.e., the divine & the unholy) can coexist together without one becoming infected by the other!

  -BC- LHU

  -TI- Lift Him Up

  -CN- 3

  -CT- Lift Him Up as the Son of Man

  -PR- 02

  -PG- 76

  “Was the human nature of the Son of Mary [which was sinful] changed into the divine nature [which was and is sinless] of the Son of God? No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person--the man Christ Jesus. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature [His assumed humanity] that died. [:"red"]Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible.[/]

Please note that the Holy Spirit does not become you (jasd)! Likewise you do not become the Holy Spirit. You and the Holy Spirit are mysteriously blended in the one person, jasd.

• 2 Peter 1:3 His divine power has granted to us [believing sinners] all things that pertain to life and godliness...that through these you [the believing sinner] may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of passion [our sinful disposition], and become partakers of the divine nature..

Again, please note that we believers (who are sinful) have become "partakers of the divine nature" (which is sinless). The two have become one, yet distinct.

In other words we are sill mortal, but the divine nature is immortal. We are sinful, but the divine nature is sinless.

Our sinful flesh does not corrupt the divine nature. At the same time we are not sinless (Holy) because God's Spirit dwells in us for we have not become Him. The Holy Spirit is in us as a seal...that is, as proof of our salvation.

---

Calling jasd...where are you?

[jasd]

The RC catechism: excerpted…

1. The sinner cannot ‘merit’ justification through merit; it is a freely given gift from Gd.

2. He is justified gratuitously by the pure mercy of God, not on account of his own or any human merit, but purely through the merits of Jesus Christ; for Jesus Christ is our only mediator of redemption, who alone, by his passion and death has reconciled us to his Father.

3. A sinner may obtain the grace of justification by good works proceeding from a broken and penitent heart*, because these are necessary predispositions and conditions, but no works of his own can ever merit the grace of justification... (*hmm, somewhat of a like regeneration of “Repent and be baptized”, is it not?) [ed.]

4. Sanctifying grace … is within us. It is the pure gift of God's liberality to us... [ed.]

Am I right to surmise that if a post-it with ‘Faith’ written on it were attached to the above, and ‘works’ in point #3 excised… this catechistic excerpt would resonate sympathetically to your own theology? It may be

that you and the RCs hold together in concord… Anyway,

does it not seem that the catechistic excerpt above exemplifies a rapprochement between Saints James and Paul?

[jasd]

>>Yes, let's tackle this dogma of works:

…and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, [:"red"]ye that work iniquity[/].” [Matthew 7:15,16, 21-23]<< [ed.]

Doesn’t the text highlight the characteristics (that is, works of iniquity and works done iniquitously) of the ‘works’ spoken of…? I don’t think anyone suggests that ’iniquitous’ works are salvific.

>>First of all, what does it mean to “come…in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly...are ferocious wolves”?

Paul makes it clear:

“Beware of the dogs [wolves], beware of [:"red"]the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision[/]; 3 for we are [:"red"]the true circumcision[/], who worship in the Spirit of God and [:"blue"]glory in Christ Jesus[/] and put no confidence in the flesh”….[Phil 3:2-3]

I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. [Acts 20:29-30]<< [ed.]

Beware of the dogs

Beware of the evil workers

Beware of the false circumcision

Do you suppose St Paul is employing a climactic figure of ascending syntactic sequence? or do you suppose he is addressing three differing groups? (I’m inclined to believe he is using ascending syntax; referring-to and additionally, turning the tables on the ‘Judaizers’ by using a play on the familiar term for the ‘goyim-not of us’ [/loosely]…, that is, dogs) Anyway,

it seems to me that St Paul is referencing those who sought to bind the new Xtian –under the Mosaic Law,

rather than to such as JP II.

It becomes apparent in the epistles of St Paul that he treats with a thema of liberty vs a form of works, --the Mosaic Law, and one of liberty conjunctive with another form, that is, --works of grace.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

• Quote:

  ---

  "Do
  you
  [the believer] not know that
  your body
  is the sanctuary of
  the Holy Spirit
  , Who is
  [:"red"]in you[/]
  ?"

  ---

  Since the Holy Spirit, who is sinless, can tabernacle in a humanity, which is fallen and sinful, then apparently the two (i.e., the divine & the unholy) can coexist together without one becoming infected by the other!

  -BC- LHU

  -TI- Lift Him Up

  -CN- 3

  -CT- Lift Him Up as the Son of Man

  -PR- 02

  -PG- 76

  “Was the human nature of the Son of Mary [which was sinful] changed into the divine nature [which was and is sinless] of the Son of God? No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person--the man Christ Jesus. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature [His assumed humanity] that died. [:"red"]Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible.[/]

Please note that the Holy Spirit does not become you (jasd)! Likewise you do not become the Holy Spirit. You and the Holy Spirit are mysteriously blended in the one person, jasd.

• 2 Peter 1:3 His divine power has granted to us [believing sinners] all things that pertain to life and godliness...that through these you [the believing sinner] may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of passion [our sinful disposition], and become partakers of the divine nature..

Again, please note that we believers (who are sinful) have become "partakers of the divine nature" (which is sinless). The two have become one, yet distinct.

In other words we are sill mortal, but the divine nature is immortal. We are sinful, but the divine nature is sinless.

Our sinful flesh does not corrupt the divine nature. At the same time we are not sinless (Holy) because God's Spirit dwells in us for we have not become Him. The Holy Spirit is in us as a seal...that is, as proof of our salvation.

---

Calling jasd...where are you?

---

Jumping around, Jasd? Here's where you need to be...Yes?