Christ's human nature...

[skyblue888]

Thus in the flesh of Jesus Christ--not in Himself, but in His flesh--our flesh which He took in the human nature--there were just the same tendencies to sin that are in you and me. And when He was tempted, it was the "drawing away of these desires that were in the flesh." These tendencies to sin that were in His flesh drew upon Him and sought to entice Him, to consent to the wrong. But by the love of God and by His trust in God, he received the power and the strength and the grace to say, "No," to all of it and put it all under foot. And thus being in the likeness of sinful flesh He condemned sin in the flesh.

All the tendencies to sin that are in me were in Him, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear in Him. All the tendencies to sin that are in you were in Him, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear--every one was put under foot and kept there. All the tendencies to sin that are in the other man were in Him, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear. That is simply saying that all the tendencies to sin that are in human flesh were in His human flesh, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear; He conquered them all. And in Him we all have victory over them all.

Many of these tendencies to sin that are in us have appeared in action, and have become sins committed, have become sins in the open. There is a difference between a tendency to sin and the open appearing of that sin in the actions. There are tendencies to sin in us that have not yet appeared, but multitudes have appeared. Now all the tendencies that have not appeared, He conquered. What of the sins that have actually appeared? "The Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all" (Isa. 53:6) "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." 1 Peter 2:24. Thus it is plain that all the tendencies to sin that are in us and have not appeared and all the sins which have appeared were laid upon Him. It is terrible. It is true. But, O, joy! In that terrible truth lies the completeness of our salvation.

A.T. Jones, 1895 General Conference Bulletin, p.266,267.

[Twilight]

Thus in the flesh of Jesus Christ--not in Himself, but in His flesh--our flesh which He took in the human nature--there were just the same tendencies to sin that are in you and me. And when He was tempted, it was the "drawing away of these desires that were in the flesh." These tendencies to sin that were in His flesh drew upon Him and sought to entice Him, to consent to the wrong. But by the love of God and by His trust in God, he received the power and the strength and the grace to say, "No," to all of it and put it all under foot. And thus being in the likeness of sinful flesh He condemned sin in the flesh.

All the tendencies to sin that are in me were in Him, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear in Him. All the tendencies to sin that are in you were in Him, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear--every one was put under foot and kept there. All the tendencies to sin that are in the other man were in Him, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear. That is simply saying that all the tendencies to sin that are in human flesh were in His human flesh, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear; He conquered them all. And in Him we all have victory over them all.

Many of these tendencies to sin that are in us have appeared in action, and have become sins committed, have become sins in the open. There is a difference between a tendency to sin and the open appearing of that sin in the actions. There are tendencies to sin in us that have not yet appeared, but multitudes have appeared. Now all the tendencies that have not appeared, He conquered. What of the sins that have actually appeared? "The Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all" (Isa. 53:6) "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." 1 Peter 2:24. Thus it is plain that all the tendencies to sin that are in us and have not appeared and all the sins which have appeared were laid upon Him. It is terrible. It is true. But, O, joy! In that terrible truth lies the completeness of our salvation.

A.T. Jones, 1895 General Conference Bulletin, p.266,267.

I appreciate that Jones was a Godly man Sky, but can you show what he is stating here from the bible and bible alone?

I have absolutely no reason to accept the above unless it can be shown from scripture.

We do this too much as a people, we present a position without clearly showing it from the Bible and then exclaim "we have the truth"!

We need to show it from the bible my friend. :-)

[John317]

Basic points and doctrines will be proved from Scripture, but as in the Bible, God's prophets don't only repeat what the previous prophet said. Ellen White wrote many things not found in the Bible, but neither do they contradict the Bible. God revealed details through her that aren't in the Bible. For instance, she wrote that while on the cross, Christ couldn't see through the portal of the tomb. The Bible doesn't make this kind of direct statement, but it isn't contrary to Scripture, either, (although some claim it is).

When it comes to the human nature of Christ, I think it's very important to have a good grasp of what Ellen White believed and wrote. She wrote clearly on the topic, but it's necessary to take into consideration everything she said, just as it is with the Bible. Any true understanding of this subject will be supported by both the Bible and Ellen White.

I think that when discussing these things among other Seventh-day Adventists, it shouldn't be required for every SOP statement or thought to be supported by a Bible verse. On the other hand, if we're talking with non-SDA, we should only use the Bible as authority.

[Twilight]

Basic points and doctrines will be proved from Scripture, but as in the Bible, God's prophets don't only repeat what the previous prophet said. Ellen White wrote many things not found in the Bible, but neither do they contradict the Bible. God revealed details through her that aren't in the Bible. For instance, she wrote that while on the cross, Christ couldn't see through the portal of the tomb. The Bible doesn't make this kind of direct statement, but it isn't contrary to Scripture, either, (although some claim it is).

When it comes to the human nature of Christ, I think it's very important to have a good grasp of what Ellen White believed and wrote. She wrote clearly on the topic, but it's necessary to take into consideration everything she said, just as it is with the Bible. Any true understanding of this subject will be supported by both the Bible and Ellen White.

I think that when discussing these things among other Seventh-day Adventists, it shouldn't be required for every SOP statement or thought to be supported by a Bible verse. On the other hand, if we're talking with non-SDA, we should only use the Bible as authority.

The problem here John317 is that you all accept the SOP (as do I), yet not one of you seem to agree in totality.

We should come back to the bible first, find the truth there and then check it against the SOP, so we can be sure we haven't wandered off track.

But at the moment, all people have done, is quoted one statement or another and voiced their understanding and yet not one cohesive argument from the bible has been put forward.

I am very interested in peoples views on this, but we MUST be able to show our position from the Bible.

If we have to hide behind SOP statements, to me, that proves we haven't really studied it out from the Bible, but have taken some statements from the SOP and then not backed them up.

That is so, so wrong.

It deeply concerns me when Gods people cannot share their position on a biblical authority alone.

If we say that we need "Ellen White" because she shed more light on the Bible, we are in effect saying the Bible is insufficient.

I know I am challenging most of you with this, but it is intentional.

We are people of the book!

So lets start showing that!

Mark :-)

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: skyblue888

Thus in the flesh of Jesus Christ--not in Himself, but in His flesh--our flesh which He took in the human nature--there were just the same tendencies to sin that are in you and me. And when He was tempted, it was the "drawing away of these desires that were in the flesh." These tendencies to sin that were in His flesh drew upon Him and sought to entice Him, to consent to the wrong. But by the love of God and by His trust in God, he received the power and the strength and the grace to say, "No," to all of it and put it all under foot. And thus being in the likeness of sinful flesh He condemned sin in the flesh.

All the tendencies to sin that are in me were in Him, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear in Him. All the tendencies to sin that are in you were in Him, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear--every one was put under foot and kept there. All the tendencies to sin that are in the other man were in Him, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear. That is simply saying that all the tendencies to sin that are in human flesh were in His human flesh, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear; He conquered them all. And in Him we all have victory over them all.

Many of these tendencies to sin that are in us have appeared in action, and have become sins committed, have become sins in the open. There is a difference between a tendency to sin and the open appearing of that sin in the actions. There are tendencies to sin in us that have not yet appeared, but multitudes have appeared. Now all the tendencies that have not appeared, He conquered. What of the sins that have actually appeared? "The Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all" (Isa. 53:6) "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." 1 Peter 2:24. Thus it is plain that all the tendencies to sin that are in us and have not appeared and all the sins which have appeared were laid upon Him. It is terrible. It is true. But, O, joy! In that terrible truth lies the completeness of our salvation.

A.T. Jones, 1895 General Conference Bulletin, p.266,267.

I appreciate that Jones was a Godly man Sky, but can you show what he is stating here from the bible and bible alone?

I have absolutely no reason to accept the above unless it can be shown from scripture.

We do this too much as a people, we present a position without clearly showing it from the Bible and then exclaim "we have the truth"!

We need to show it from the bible my friend. :-)

Last year when I shared the doctrine of salvation only through the merits of Christ, I did it solely from the point of view of the Testimonies and after careful and prayerful consideration you accepted that message wholeheartedly.

I don't know what has gotten into you Mark but lately you cannot accept anything except as "taught in the Bible"

What I just quoted from Jones is based on Scripture but you obviously missed those verses. I know you have this habit of skimming over things (you admitted it yourself) when you should take the time to read and re-read with a prayerful attitude.

I have witnessed instances where you asked for Scripture but when Scripture was quoted that did not satisfy you either. When God sends a message through His messengers, if we reject their message, we are rejecting Christ.

Jones was presenting the third angel's message at the 1888, 1893,1895,1897, 1899, 1901, and 1903 General Conferences. He was a messenger of God with a message. His message was not received but ridiculed and finally he was "crucified" by those who were determined to have their own way instead of God's way.

sky

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: John317

Basic points and doctrines will be proved from Scripture, but as in the Bible, God's prophets don't only repeat what the previous prophet said. Ellen White wrote many things not found in the Bible, but neither do they contradict the Bible. God revealed details through her that aren't in the Bible. For instance, she wrote that while on the cross, Christ couldn't see through the portal of the tomb. The Bible doesn't make this kind of direct statement, but it isn't contrary to Scripture, either, (although some claim it is).

When it comes to the human nature of Christ, I think it's very important to have a good grasp of what Ellen White believed and wrote. She wrote clearly on the topic, but it's necessary to take into consideration everything she said, just as it is with the Bible. Any true understanding of this subject will be supported by both the Bible and Ellen White.

I think that when discussing these things among other Seventh-day Adventists, it shouldn't be required for every SOP statement or thought to be supported by a Bible verse. On the other hand, if we're talking with non-SDA, we should only use the Bible as authority.

The problem here John317 is that you all accept the SOP (as do I), yet not one of you seem to agree in totality.

We should come back to the bible first, find the truth there and then check it against the SOP, so we can be sure we haven't wandered off track.

But at the moment, all people have done, is quoted one statement or another and voiced their understanding and yet not one cohesive argument from the bible has been put forward.

I am very interested in peoples views on this, but we MUST be able to show our position from the Bible.

If we have to hide behind SOP statements, to me, that proves we haven't really studied it out from the Bible, but have taken some statements from the SOP and then not backed them up.

That is so, so wrong.

It deeply concerns me when Gods people cannot share their position on a biblical authority alone.

If we say that we need "Ellen White" because she shed more light on the Bible, we are in effect saying the Bible is insufficient.

I know I am challenging most of you with this, but it is intentional.

We are people of the book!

So lets start showing that!

Mark :-)

A moment ago, I quoted Romans 1:3 which is all we need to know, that Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh. The flesh of David was sinful.

sky

[Twilight]

The Bible doesn't make this kind of direct statement, but it isn't contrary to Scripture, either, (although some claim it is).

Are you sure?

I think sometimes people do not realise that what Ellen White stated is in fact in the Bible, but they haven't looked in the right place yet...

Often the emotions and insights she shares about Christ on the Cross is found in the Psalms for instance.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

The problem here John317 is that you all accept the SOP (as do I), yet not one of you seem to agree in totality.

We should come back to the bible first, find the truth there and then check it against the SOP, so we can be sure we haven't wandered off track.

But at the moment, all people have done, is quoted one statement or another and voiced their understanding and yet not one cohesive argument from the bible has been put forward.

I am very interested in peoples views on this, but we MUST be able to show our position from the Bible.

If we have to hide behind SOP statements, to me, that proves we haven't really studied it out from the Bible, but have taken some statements from the SOP and then not backed them up.

That is so, so wrong.

It deeply concerns me when Gods people cannot share their position on a biblical authority alone.

If we say that we need "Ellen White" because she shed more light on the Bible, we are in effect saying the Bible is insufficient.

I know I am challenging most of you with this, but it is intentional.

We are people of the book!

So lets start showing that!

Mark :-)

A moment ago, I quoted Romans 1:3 which is all we need to know, that Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh. The flesh of David was sinful.

sky

We do not build a doctrine on one text Sky.

You need to present a case that conforms with all the statements on this subject.

Not point to one text as a proof text. :-)

[Twilight]

I think sometimes people do not realise that what Ellen White stated is in fact in the Bible, but they haven't looked in the right place yet...

Often the emotions and insights she shares about Christ on the Cross is found in the Psalms for instance.

An example of this is the health message.

The message of vegetarianism can be found in the bible, particularly when applied to our time.

But often people will present it at church from the SOP.

But if we just present it from the bible, those that oppose the health message have no grounds.

We really have to come to the point when all of our beliefs can be shown from scripture.

Back topic. :-)

Mark

[Twilight]

Last year when I shared the doctrine of salvation only through the merits of Christ, I did it solely from the point of view of the Testimonies and after careful and prayerful consideration you accepted that message wholeheartedly.

I don't know what has gotten into you Mark but lately you cannot accept anything except as "taught in the Bible"

What I just quoted from Jones is based on Scripture but you obviously missed those verses. I know you have this habit of skimming over things (you admitted it yourself) when you should take the time to read and re-read with a prayerful attitude.

I have witnessed instances where you asked for Scripture but when Scripture was quoted that did not satisfy you either. When God sends a message through His messengers, if we reject their message, we are rejecting Christ.

Jones was presenting the third angel's message at the 1888, 1893,1895,1897, 1899, 1901, and 1903 General Conferences. He was a messenger of God with a message. His message was not received but ridiculed and finally he was "crucified" by those who were determined to have their own way instead of God's way.

sky

Sky, if you have a point, you should be able to support it from scripture.

That is what Ellen White has counselled us to do.

I am requesting nothing different...

[Twilight]

I am glad that a time has come when something will stir our people to investigate the points of our faith for themselves. . . . My cry has been: Investigate the Scriptures for yourselves, and know for yourselves what saith the Lord. No man is to be authority for us. If he has received his light from the Bible so may we also go to the same source for light and proof to substantiate the doctrines which we believe. The Scriptures teach that we should give a reason of the hope that is within us with meekness and fear.--Letter 7, 1888, pp. 3, 4. (To Brother Healey, December 9, 1888.)

[Twilight]

But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines, and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority,--not one or all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain "Thus saith the Lord" in its support. {RH, June 7, 1906 par. 5}

So with this in mind...

I am demanding a "thus saith the Lord" from the Bible...

As we can see that I am in accord with the SOP, we can be sure that only something "good" has "gotten into me".

What do you say Sky?

Mark :-)

[skyblue888]

You know that I know that no doctrine is built upon one single text of Scripture but when it is written that Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, we know that David's flesh was sinful. So this passage of Scripture is the foundation Scripture and then we can build upon that foundation and by comparing this passage with Heb.2:14,17 and 4:15 it is made perfectly clear that Jesus had no advantage over any of us for "He was made to be sin that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." 2 Cor.5:21.

sky

[skyblue888]

But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines, and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority,--not one or all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain "Thus saith the Lord" in its support. {RH, June 7, 1906 par. 5}

So with this in mind...

I am demanding a "thus saith the Lord" from the Bible...

As we can see that I am in accord with the SOP, we can be sure that only something "good" has "gotten into me".

What do you say Sky?

Mark :-)

Yes and the Bible speaks of gifts, like the gift of prophecy as manifested through Mrs. White and this gift of prophecy mentions two messengers by name who were also called of God to give His message to the church and to the world.

"How long will you hate and despise the messengers of God's righteousness. God has given them His message. They bear the word of the Lord." T.M.97.

"If you reject God's delegated messengers, you reject Christ." T.M.97.

sky

[skyblue888]

[skyblue888]

Originally Posted By: John317

The Bible doesn't make this kind of direct statement, but it isn't contrary to Scripture, either, (although some claim it is).

Are you sure?

I think sometimes people do not realise that what Ellen White stated is in fact in the Bible, but they haven't looked in the right place yet...

Often the emotions and insights she shares about Christ on the Cross is found in the Psalms for instance.

Not always. The Lord gave Mrs. White insights into the life of Christ that the Bible does not touch upon. There are so many examples of that just in the book The Desire of Ages.

sky

[John317]

The problem here John317 is that you all accept the SOP (as do I), yet not one of you seem to agree in totality.

It's the same with the Bible-- any group of people who accept the Bible will not see everything exactly alike.

There are two major reasons for this: not all are taking into consideration everything the Bible teaches, and not everyone comes to the Bible with the same experiencces and background, and these do play a role in how we understand the Bible. For one thing, not everyone has the same understanding of language, and not everyone processes information the same.

Ellen White herself said that it isn't necessary or even desirable that everyone see everything exactly alike. There's always going to be differences in view with regard to the details of doctrines. As individuals-- and not referring to their letters-- Peter and Paul and James also didn't see everything precisely the same.

[skyblue888]

I do believe that Peter and Paul and James had different personalities abut they were "of one accord" as far as spiritual things are concerned. They did not have different "opinions" or "interpretations" of what constitutes the Gospel.

They may appear to contradict each other sometimes but it is only an apparent contradiction.

sky

[John317]

If we have to hide behind SOP statements, to me, that proves we haven't really studied it out from the Bible, but have taken some statements from the SOP and then not backed them up.

That is so, so wrong.

It deeply concerns me when Gods people cannot share their position on a biblical authority alone.

If we say that we need "Ellen White" because she shed more light on the Bible, we are in effect saying the Bible is insufficient.

As a Seventh-day Adventist discussing Christ and His nature with other Seventh-day Adventists, I don't have anything to apologize for in using the Spirit of prophecy. If I were not among SDAs, of course I would support everything by the Bible alone, but I'm among SDAs. That makes a difference-- or at least it should.

It isn't a matter of "hiding behind Ellen White," but of knowing that she is God's prophet and that God inspired her. To use Ellen White doesn't mean I haven't studied the Bible. That is an argument I hear all the time from people who oppose Ellen White every time Ellen White is quoted saying something they dislike or disagree with. (I'm not saying you oppose Ellen White-- I know you support her-- but I am just saying that it is the same argument and an untrue one.)

Ellen White's prophetic gift is like a magnifying glass on the Bible. She was raised up by God as His mouthpiece because people weren't stuying the Bible and applying it the way they should have, and also because she wrote the messages in modern English so that the people would be without excuse if they didn't understand and apply them to their lives.

Yes, I agree with you that the Bible is completely sufficient for all fundamenal truths necessary for salvation and for knowing God's will for our lives. Yet that isn't contradicted by the belief that Ellen White shed a great deal of light on the Bible's teachings.

[skyblue888]

Amen to that.

sky

[John317]

I do believe that Peter and Paul and James had different personalities abut they were "of one accord" as far as spiritual things are concerned. They did not have different "opinions" or "interpretations" of what constitutes the Gospel.

They may appear to contradict each other sometimes but it is only an apparent contradiction.

Yes, we agree here, sky. I'm not refering to their letters, which are inspired by the Holy Sprit-- and I don't believe they contain any genuine contradictions. I'm referring, rather, to what occurs in Galatians and Acts 10 and 11 and 21. As individuals, they grew spiritually in their understanding of the truth like everyone else, including Ellen White.

[skyblue888]

For those who are not interested in hearing what Ellen White or Jones and Waggoner have written, there is the "original thoughts" forum they can go to.

sky

[skyblue888]

Yes, we agree here, sky. I'm not refering to their letters, which are inspired by the Holy Sprit-- and I don't believe they contain any genuine contradictions. I'm referring, rather, to what occurs in Galatians and Acts 10 and 11 and 21. As individuals, they grew spiritually in their understanding of the truth like everyone else, including Ellen White.

____________________________________

Ha okay. Thanks John for clarifying that.

sky

[Twilight]

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Sky, if you have a point, you should be able to support it from scripture.

That is what Ellen White has counselled us to do.

I am requesting nothing different...

And so should you but God did not send Mrs. White or Jones and Waggoner for nothing. He sent them with messages for His people and these messages are to be received, beleived, and acted upon because they are based upon the Word of God.

sky [/quote']

I have not stated a position.

I am genuinely interested in this question.

But I do not want opinion, I want a "thus saith the Lord".

From the Bible Sky.

Those that do that, will have credibility as I consider their opinion.

So as I do not have a firm position to make at this point, I have nothing to prove.

I am interested in other peoples point of view.