Why SDAs Reject the Historic Creeds

[Dr. Rich]

God is angry with those who refuse to obey Him. It is just that simple! Obey and live or don't and die the second death!

[Sonny]

God is angry with those who refuse to obey Him. It is just that simple! Obey and live or don't and die the second death!

Okay, but I would like Miz3 to give me his version.

[Overaged]

This is nothing more than mixed logic/legalistic hocus pocus.

The Bible says nothing about "legal justification" which thus requires Jesus Christ to have "taken in His inner person" our fallen nature.

Using this kind of "logic/legalism" is nothing more than an attempt by some foolish theologians to satisfy the "grace" lobby and the "legalistic" lobby in one fell swoop.

The Bible cares absolutely NOTHING about these two foolish groups and their twisted Bible scholarship and twisted arguments as to whether we are saved by "grace" alone and thus not under any law, or the "legalistic" group that is so worried about the Law being destroyed.

In this attempt to settle the argument between the "gracites" and "legalites" we twist the Bible's true message. This does not work because none of it is:

LOL; thanks for the new words - "gracites" and "legalites."

You know; I have noticed both sides on this issue are using Bible verses to support their views on Christ's nature. (which is good). And as a result, both sides are laying claim to being "Biblical."

So now what do we do?

[Overaged]

To determine what is and what isn't biblical requires one to interpret the bible verses correctly. The result of incorrect interpretation has gnereated countless variations of christian churches.

Every preacher on the planet claims HIS interpretation is accurate, that it is "biblical", because he said so. Nothing new there.

How do we know any given man has interpreted scripture correctly? Simple, by comparing their interpretation to the inspired interpretation of the Lords messenger, Ellen White. You can simply chose who you want to follow, or, you can conjur up your very own interpretation! Your call...

Well; this is one way to get some, but not all clarifications. As much as I like to use Ellen White's writings; to aid in Bible study, I cannot agree that this should be the main source of "interpretation." The Bible is, and always has been it's own, best interpreter.

[John317]

The Bible is, and always has been it's own, best interpreter.

So true!

[skyblue888]

Just another way of saying that Scripture is explained by Scripture.

sky

[miz3]

God is angry because Adam disobeyed Him!

[Sonny]

God is angry because Adam disobeyed Him!

[miz3]

Sonny,

God is angry at me because of Adam's disobedience against God.

[Sonny]

Sonny,

God is angry at me because of Adam's disobedience against God.

But Adam is the one who sinned against God - why is He mad at you for something Adam did?

[miz3]

But Adam is the one who sinned against God - why is He mad at you for something Adam did?

Because God wanted to be! Without our say so God placed Adam's disobedience on all humanity which is why we humans are disobedient. We didn't get the chance to "choose" between obedience and disobedience. God by fiat is mad at us because of Adam's disobedience.

All this is in the Book of Romans written by Paul.

[Sonny]

Because God wanted to be!

Then God is unfair! Unless I sin Adam's sin then I shouldn't be guilty of Adam's sin. Now if I commit Adam's sin then I can see God holding me guilty.

Now, what was Adam's sin? Gen 2:16 Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

miz3, I didn't eat from the tree of good and evil. I've never even seen it. So I've never sinned Adam's sin.

[Dr. Rich]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Because God wanted to be!

Then God is unfair! Unless I sin Adam's sin then I shouldn't be guilty of Adam's sin. Now if I commit Adam's sin then I can see God holding me guilty.

Now, what was Adam's sin? Gen 2:16 Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."

miz3, I didn't eat from the tree of good and evil. I've never even seen it. So I've never sinned Adam's sin.

Sonny, For crying out loud--you wouldn't even be here today because of Adam's sin except for Jesus stepping in to pay the penalty for THAT sin!

[Dr. Rich]

Originally Posted By: miz3

This is nothing more than mixed logic/legalistic hocus pocus.

The Bible says nothing about "legal justification" which thus requires Jesus Christ to have "taken in His inner person" our fallen nature.

Using this kind of "logic/legalism" is nothing more than an attempt by some foolish theologians to satisfy the "grace" lobby and the "legalistic" lobby in one fell swoop.

The Bible cares absolutely NOTHING about these two foolish groups and their twisted Bible scholarship and twisted arguments as to whether we are saved by "grace" alone and thus not under any law, or the "legalistic" group that is so worried about the Law being destroyed.

In this attempt to settle the argument between the "gracites" and "legalites" we twist the Bible's true message. This does not work because none of it is:

LOL; thanks for the new words - "gracites" and "legalites."

You know; I have noticed both sides on this issue are using Bible verses to support their views on Christ's nature. (which is good). And as a result, both sides are laying claim to being "Biblical."

So now what do we do?

Well duh? Use the words of Jesus ONLY! That is--if you want the real truth!

[Sonny]

Sonny, For crying out loud--you wouldn't even be here today because of Adam's sin except for Jesus stepping in to pay the penalty for THAT sin!

I didn't commit THAT sin. Did you? Did Miz3? I don't think you guys were there, were you? If so you guys are kind of old, huh?

[Sonny]

This is why Christianity isn't doing very well. You guys present not a God of love, but a god who blames us of sins done by another individual - Adam.

[Sonny]

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned

Sin entered the world through Adam. How so? Adam, as you say, disobeyed. But then Paul says, "All sinned".

Were you there when Adam sinned? "No", not as an individual. "Yes", because our lives came from Adam.

We are the multiplication of his life. So when Adam sinned his humanity became contaminated with "iniquity". When Adam had children he passed to them a life void of God's Spirit and therefore a slave to indwelling iniquity.

So we were born spiritually dead and our hearts were in harmony with our bent-to-self (iniquity). So "in Adam" all died. We died spiritually and therefore we were born slaves to our love of self.

The fact that we are born with natures bent-to-self is enough to condemn us. Why? Because flesh & blood (our fallen humanity) can't enter heaven. We must have "holy flesh" - that is, a spiritual body to enter heaven.

So we aren't guilty of Adam's sin (eating from the tree) unless we commit that same sin. But we are condemned because we share his life.

If you don't buy this let me use an example. Let's say you are riding with me on my motorcycle. I'm a bit intoxicated and I take a curve too fast. Now my sin is I'm intoxicated and because of my carelessness I kill myself and you.

Now why did you die too? Was it because you sinned? No, it was because you died because of my sin. You were condemned because you were linked to me.

[Gustave]

All this difficulty with the SDA rejection of the Creed can be boiled down to a simple fact...

...And that's SDA's don't view Christ as Diety in and of Himself.

several posts back I quoted your prophet Ellen White - where she explicitly said....

...That God risked loosing His Son ETERNALLY and that this risk was realized PRIOR to Christ coming to earth ( Incarnation ).

...If Christ - PRIOR to Incarnation - risked His "FUTURE" eternal existence by accepting the 'assignment' to try and save humanity.

...That means had Christ failed "HE" ( Christ ) would CEASE TO EXIST from the point of failure into ETERNITY.

I've already demonstrated,according to SDA theology, Christ's Divinity was 100% The Father's "ON LOAN" to Christ....

...And you ( along with others here ) have the audacity to boldly affirm that Christ's Divinity was not subject to death.

...Thinking that somehow your affirmation is going to give you a "pass" for Orthodoxy in this area.

...It's too late for that because I know what you folks really mean by your statements.

...Is that Divinity CAN'T die because only The Father is Divine in the ultimate sense.

...So if Christ FAILED the Divinity "in Him" would simply go back to the Father.

...No More Christ but God's still around! Nice! ( somone give me a vomit bag )!

I hate to be the one to break it to you that Ellen's MULTIPLE affirmations that Christ was putting His FUTURE ETERNAL EXISTENCE at steak....

....PRIOR to leaving heaven to be born of the Blessed Virgin.

....Is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile with her statement that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for Divinity to sink and die!!!

...Unless you pour-in the completely alien concepts of what and WHO The Son is.

Catholics immediately recognize that as "the teachings of Antichrist".

1 John 2,22

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son

If you accept that Jesus IS the Christ you must accept the following.

Ephesians 1,4

According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children BY JESUS CHRIST to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will

This fundamental truth is repeated so many times in Sacred Scripture you should seriously take a step back...

...And gasp in outright horror at just where Ellen White's most maggoty anti Biblical teachings have stranded you.

...You are rejecting crystal clear Scriptures that even Martin Luther and your general run of the mill Fundie Baptist accept.

...I pray you eventually begin to realize the actual theological area you are in here.

You do realize that by rejecting that The Father PREDESTINED that Salvation would come THROUGH His Only Son......

....Is both rejecting The Father & The Son - it's a textbook rejection

[miz3]

Then God is unfair! Unless I sin Adam's sin then I shouldn't be guilty of Adam's sin. Now if I commit Adam's sin then I can see God holding me guilty.

The Bible has an answer for your question:

"What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,

and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”[f]

16 It does not, therefore, depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[g] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[h] 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?"

Romans 9:14-24.

There it is Sonny. Verse 14 asks your very question and then gives the correct answer.

Verse 19 again asks you very question and again gives you the correct answer.

Not my answer but this is God's Answer!

[miz3]

Sonny,

Because you and others feel that God is not a God of love as presented in the Bible that you have an obligation to twist and change what the Scripture actually says in order to make a "new god" who sounds and appears more loving and more soft.

In doing this you are creating a whole new god that is not the God of the Bible. You believe that by twisting this theology that you are doing a good thing.

However, what you are doing is NOT BIBLICAL!

Like I showed in Romans chapter nine God is both arbitrary and loving at the same time. God is both selfish about Himself and everything He does while at the same being unselfish and doing mercy for others. Read Romans chapter nine very carefully and you will see that what I am saying is very true.

[miz3]

Sonny,

God condemned us for Adam's sin and made us the objects of His Wrath. Its not fair? We are now being punished for Adam's sin and God by fiat makes us all guilty.

However, in like manner, God made us Righteous through Jesus Christ even though we can never live a righteous life on our own. In other words even though we did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING RIGHTEOUS God made us to be righteousness. This is also not fair? We are given credit for Righteousness that only Jesus Christ did and God by fiat makes us righteous (Justified) as if we had never sinned.

Because of Adam.............we are all condemned to death even though we did not commit the sin.

Because of Jesus Christ........we are all made Righteous even though we did not commit even one scintilla of righteousnes.

God does this as Romans nine states to demonstrate God's greatness and God's power and in addition to demonstrate the Greatness of God's Mercy!

It is all about God and what God does and what God is!

We indeed are just the "pawns" who God makes like the potter makes the clay. The potter makes the clay to demonstrate his/her greatness and magnificent abilities. The clay is nothing but an entity to demonstrate the potter's greatness and abilities. The clay has no other use except that. The potter does everything by fiat.

As Paul points out in Romans chapter nine that is how God is in regard to us. God is the Potter humans are the clay. Our sole purpose is demonstrate God's greatness and abilities.

The potter/clay metaphor is interesting in addition to what I have already said because indeed you and I are really nothing but "clay"!

The problem with so many other theories of the theology of the gospel is that they are all about:

1. Elevating the human entity and getting credit for the human entity and making the human entity a vital component and the central character in the Plan of Salvation (which is why so many hate that Romans chapter nine exists). God is the central and only important Character in the Plan of Salvation. Humans are just a prop!

2. Trying to massage, twist, manipulate the picture of God so He appears to be more humane, more fair, less arbitrary, more equal to humanity, etc. This is why Sonny made the statement "that Christianity is not doing so well". We think we have to make God appear less blood thirsty, etc.

3. It is all about satisfying the human perceptions of God. We think by teaching such erroneous theology that we can then get more Christian adherents. Life and existence is not about Christianity. Life and existence is about God and what God does and what God wants. Humans hate this God is Great because it clashes with the human pride and the human's desire to be the most important.

4. Humans want a God who fits into their "world". A god who cares about the "environment". a god who wants to wipe out human suffering. A god who all about "world peace". Etc. etc. etc. This is a "compassionate god". This a god we can all love????

[Sonny]

Romans 9:14-24.

You left out Paul's conclusion:

verse 30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law [legalism].

So here's the problem: The Jews claimed that God owed them heaven because of their law keeping. They insisted on salvation their way.

God's answer?

verse 18 Therefore He [God] has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.

Back to verse 32: For they [the Jews] stumbled at that stumbling stone [Christ]. 33 As it is written: "Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense, And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame."

You see the gospel doesn't give men any credit. It takes their glory and slams it in the dust of the ground. Many resist this and thus they harden their hearts. Why? Because Christ is a rock of offense. He offends the so-called righteous.

[miz3]

You left out Paul's conclusion:

I'm not sure what you are trying to say by quoting the rest of Romans chapter nine.

I don't see anything in the rest of chapter nine that negates anything I have asserted.

Forgive my missing your point.

[Overaged]

Sonny,

God is angry at me because of Adam's disobedience against God.

God is angry at everyone in the world because of meat-eating. He is even angry at you for knowing about meat; even if you don't eat it.

[miz3]

Overaged,

That is hilarious!