Why SDAs Reject the Historic Creeds

[miz3]

Quote:

Verse 14 says plainly God spoke these words to the serpent (i.e., Satan)

Alright John317 I misspoke you are correct it was the serpent.

However that does not change anything else I said.

[miz3]

When in Galatians 3: 16 the apostle Paul speaks of "seed" (singular) in reference to Christ, he's talking about Christ being a literal descendent of Abraham, not a spiritual descendent. Believers become Abraham's "seed" through faith by their connection to Christ. Gal. 3: 29. We are indeed spiritual "seed," but Christ is literally of the "seed of Abraham." Similarly, Romans 3: 1 says that as to his human nature, Christ was of the seed of David. Paul is certainly NOT saying that Christ was of the spiritual seed of David. Christ is a literal descendent of David. As God Himself promised and swore to David, the Messiah was to come out of David's body. There is only one way that could happen: the fetus that was Jesus would have to be placed in the uterus of a female descendent of David. That is exactly what happened to the virgin Mary. Gal. 4: 4 makes that point plainly: Christ was "born of a woman," which means Christ was a real human.

Jesus Christ was the LEGAL seed of all those you spoke of above.

In addition, we have already demonstrated more than once how Jesus Christ could not be the "genetic" heir. Also, the Spiritual heir is applicable as well because Paul states that Christ is the Head of the Church. Jesus is not separate from His Church. So Jesus Christ is both LEGAL HEIR and SPIRITUAL HEIR!

Yes Mary "birthed" Jesus Christ as Galatians 4:4 states but that is a long way from saying that genetic material was involved.

[miz3]

Hebrews 2:14 seems pretty clear to me: "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same." Not a different flesh and blood, but the same flesh and blood.

I don't disagree with this Scripture!

However, even though Jesus Christ was "flesh and blood" like us does not mean that Jesus Christ had a "sinful nature" like you and I.

Read my former posts about this very thing.

Also because Jesus Christ had "flesh and blood" does not mean genetic material was involved.

Our "flesh and blood" gets hungry, thirsty, tired, etc. and Jesus Christ's "flesh and blood" also experienced those very things.

What Christ did not experience was our "sinful nature".

[skyblue888]

The mystery of Godliness is not God in holy flesh but God in sinful flesh. Christ did not condemn sin by making a pronouncement from Heaven. He relinquished the form of God for ever and took the form of a servant and condemned sin in the flesh by living a sinless life in sinful flesh.

This is the doctrine of Christ. The other is the doctrine of antichrist.

sky

[miz3]

Can't have heredity without genetics.

Legal heredity goes on all the time!

Spiritual heredity comes right from Scripture via Paul!

So we can have heredity without "genetics"!

[skyblue888]

"Many look on this conflict between Christ and Satan as having no special bearing on their own life; and for them it has little interest. But within the domain of every human heart this controversy is repeated. Never does one leave the ranks of evil for the service of God without encountering the assaults of Satan. The enticements which Christ resisted were those that we find it so difficult to withstand. They were urged upon Him in as much greater degree as His character is superior to ours. With the terrible weight of the sins of the world upon Him, Christ withstood the test upon appetite, upon the love of the world, and upon that love of display which leads to presumption. These were the temptations that overcame Adam and Eve, and that so readily overcome us.

Satan had pointed to Adam's sin as proof that God's law was unjust, and could not be obeyed. In our humanity, Christ was to redeem Adam's failure. But when Adam was assailed by the tempter, none of the effects of sin were upon him. He stood in the strength of perfect manhood, possessing the full vigor of mind and body. He was surrounded with the glories of Eden, and was in daily communion with heavenly beings. It was not thus with Jesus when He entered the wilderness to cope with Satan. For four thousand years the race had been decreasing in physical strength, in mental power, and in moral worth; and Christ took upon Him the infirmities of degenerate humanity. Only thus could He rescue man from the lowest depths of his degradation.

Many claim that it was impossible for Christ to be overcome by temptation. Then He could not have been placed in Adam's position; He could not have gained the victory that Adam failed to gain. If we have in any sense a more trying conflict than had Christ, then He would not be able to succor us. But our Saviour took humanity, with all its liabilities. He took the nature of man, with the possibility of yielding to temptation. We have nothing to bear which He has not endured." Desire of Ages, 116-118.

[Sonny]

Yes Mary "birthed" Jesus Christ as Galatians 4:4 states but that is a long way from saying that genetic material was involved.

It had to be our fallen, genetic material passed down from Adam. Otherwise Paul couldn't state that "your old life was crucified with" Christ. He couldn't say that "you died to the law through the body of Christ". Either your humanity from Adam died or Paul is a liar. If he is right (and I know he is) then your genetic substance had to be "in Christ" for Paul to make that statement.

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

But when Christians claim that because we are tempted (succesfully by Satan), based on what James said, then go on to claim that Jesus also was tempted the same way, then they are indeed saying what Miz3 has objections to.

Consider this (incorrect) reasoning John317:

1. We are tempted because we have sin in us (James and Rom 7).

2. Christ was tempted the same way (Heb).

3. Therefore Christ had sin "in Him".

This is the conclusion many Adventists come to and indeed teach.

In fact some are so vocal as to say that if you do not agree with this you are teaching the doctrines of Anti-christ.

But what Miz3 is objecting to, (as I understand it), is that this, what appears logical, path actually has some information missing and should actually be reasoned like this:

1. We are succesfully tempted because we have sin in us that has not been dealt with by God (James and Rom 7), we are powerless against it.

2. Christ was tempted by Satan externally, in all points, but Satan was unsuccesful. (Heb).

3. Christ had no sin "in Him" (1 John), nothing to respond to Satans suggestions.

4. Therefore Christ had a human body, but the lusts and desires of the flesh, were absent, He came with Adams pre-fallen moral and spiritual nature, but with Adams post fallen Body, but that body had no sinful propensities in it.

5. Christ was tempted exactly the same way Adam was tempted "pre-fall", but was disadvantaged in that He had a fallen human body that had been ravaged by millenia of sin.

That I believe is the scriptural truth of the matter, it is the only answer where all the math adds up...

Now I am not asking you to accept this, but just asking whether you understand the point I am making? :-)

Which basically is this:

Christ was spiritually tempted as Adam was Pre-fall.

But He had a fully human body that was post fall.

But that post fall body had no sin in it.

You nailed it!

And I am not trying to get others to accept this point of view, but I would welcome them stating whether they understand the argument. :-)

[Sonny]

So we can have heredity without "genetics"!

Nonsense....

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Sonny

...Both Romans 6:6, Romans 7:4 tells us that OUR OLD LIFE died when Christ died. That's clear. The question is from where did Christ receive our humanity?

Answer: It had to be from the womb of Mary. Otherwise it makes no sense why Mary was involved.

Excellent point. If Jesus didn't receive humanity from Mary, why didn't God simply place Jesus on this earth apart from being in Mary's womb? He could easily have done so if He had wanted to. But the Bible distinctly and clearly teaches that the Messiah would be from the body of King David. That is obviously speaking of more than legal descent from David.

The only way God could fulfill this promise to David is by placing the embryo in the uterus of a woman who was a descendant of David. That is clearly what the NT shows God did.

Jesus didn't have the lusts of satan, satan wasn't His father...

Jhn 8:44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

[Twilight II]

"Many look on this conflict between Christ and Satan as having no special bearing on their own life; and for them it has little interest. But within the domain of every human heart this controversy is repeated. Never does one leave the ranks of evil for the service of God without encountering the assaults of Satan. The enticements which Christ resisted were those that we find it so difficult to withstand. They were urged upon Him in as much greater degree as His character is superior to ours. With the terrible weight of the sins of the world upon Him, Christ withstood the test upon appetite, upon the love of the world, and upon that love of display which leads to presumption. These were the temptations that overcame Adam and Eve, and that so readily overcome us.

Satan had pointed to Adam's sin as proof that God's law was unjust, and could not be obeyed. In our humanity, Christ was to redeem Adam's failure. But when Adam was assailed by the tempter, none of the effects of sin were upon him. He stood in the strength of perfect manhood, possessing the full vigor of mind and body. He was surrounded with the glories of Eden, and was in daily communion with heavenly beings. It was not thus with Jesus when He entered the wilderness to cope with Satan. For four thousand years the race had been decreasing in physical strength, in mental power, and in moral worth; and Christ took upon Him the infirmities of degenerate humanity. Only thus could He rescue man from the lowest depths of his degradation.

Many claim that it was impossible for Christ to be overcome by temptation. Then He could not have been placed in Adam's position; He could not have gained the victory that Adam failed to gain. If we have in any sense a more trying conflict than had Christ, then He would not be able to succor us. But our Saviour took humanity, with all its liabilities. He took the nature of man, with the possibility of yielding to temptation. We have nothing to bear which He has not endured

." Desire of Ages, 116-118.

I would love to see a quote where Ellen White states that Christ was tempted by a "lust or desire" of the flesh, an internal temptation.

An explicit internal temptation, such as James describes happens to us.

If you can find such a statement Sky, please post it here.

Mark :-)

[Sonny]

...Both Romans 6:6, Romans 7:4 tells us that OUR OLD LIFE died when Christ died. That's clear. The question is from where did Christ receive our humanity?

Answer: It had to be from the womb of Mary. Otherwise it makes no sense why Mary was involved.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

But when Christians claim that because we are tempted (succesfully by Satan), based on what James said, then go on to claim that Jesus also was tempted the same way, then they are indeed saying what Miz3 has objections to.

Consider this (incorrect) reasoning John317:

1. We are tempted because we have sin in us (James and Rom 7).

2. Christ was tempted the same way (Heb).

3. Therefore Christ had sin "in Him".

This is the conclusion many Adventists come to and indeed teach.

You nailed it!

This is not true. Seventh-day Adventists are not suggesting that it is sinful for us to be tempted. I don't know of any SDAs who are teaching what you claim above. I think a major area of misundersgtanding has been that you appear to believe that we sin merely by being tempted. SDAs have not concluded that Christ had sin in Him. If you know of any who have come to this conclusion, please quote them.

Let me summarize:

1) Jesus Christ did not have "propensities of sin." (SDA BC vol. 5, pages 1128, 1129)

("We need not retain one sinful propensity"-- SDA BC vol.7, page 943) Ellen White uses "propensity" not to mean what we inherit, but to refer to chosen or cultivated habit patterns. They are clearly chosen patterns of thought, or cultivated tendency. A sinful propensity is permitted to develop from our inherited bent to evil. Jesus never developed such sinful propensities.

2) "Christ had all the strength of passion of humanity, but never did He yield to temptation to do one single act that was not pure and elevating and ennobling." (In Heavenly Places, 155) "Passion" in this sense refers to acceptable human desires passed on by natural heredity.

3) Jesus Christ did "not possess the passions of our human, fallen natures." (SDA BC 7-A 659) Here "passions" refer to the development of the sinful tendencies passed on through the inherited stream. So "sinful propensities and passions" refer to those passions which sinners choose to develop after birth. Christ never developed these passions. He never sinned.

4)Christ took the humanity of His mother, Mary, who had a fallen, sinful nature. Christ took the same flesh that we, fallen, sinful humanity, possess. Christ "accepted the results of the working of the great law of heredity. What these results were is shown in the history of HIS EARTHLY ANCESTORS. HE CAME WITH SUCH A HEREDITY..." DA 49;

5) Christ resisted temptations from within and did not overcome sin by the power of His own inherent nature. Rather, Christ resisted and overcame sin and the Devil by the power of the Holy Spirit, by the power and strength given Him from God. SDA BC, vol 7, page 930; YI, April 25, 1901; 1 SM 252; DA 24, 130, 363, 756; 3 SM 130.

6) Christ "fought the battle [against sin and Satan] as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss." DA 49

7) Christ took upon Himself the form and nature of fallen man. Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4a, page 115. He assumed our fallen condition, our sinful nature. EW 150; Letter 106, 1896; MM 181; Ms. 94, 1893; RH Feb. 24, 1874 and Dec. 15, 1896; SDA BC vol. 5, page 1131; 1 SM 253; SR 44.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

When in Galatians 3: 16 the apostle Paul speaks of "seed" (singular) in reference to Christ, he's talking about Christ being a literal descendent of Abraham, not a spiritual descendent. Believers become Abraham's "seed" through faith by their connection to Christ. Gal. 3: 29. We are indeed spiritual "seed," but Christ is literally of the "seed of Abraham." Similarly, Romans 3: 1 says that as to his human nature, Christ was of the seed of David. Paul is certainly NOT saying that Christ was of the spiritual seed of David. Christ is a literal descendent of David. As God Himself promised and swore to David, the Messiah was to come out of David's body. There is only one way that could happen: the fetus that was Jesus would have to be placed in the uterus of a female descendent of David. That is exactly what happened to the virgin Mary. Gal. 4: 4 makes that point plainly: Christ was "born of a woman," which means Christ was a real human.

Jesus Christ was the LEGAL seed of all those you spoke of above.

In addition, we have already demonstrated more than once how Jesus Christ could not be the "genetic" heir....

Yes Mary "birthed" Jesus Christ as Galatians 4:4 states but that is a long way from saying that genetic material was involved.

Please explain, then, how God's promise to David was fulfilled-- that the Messiah would be "the fruit of David's body."

Also, if Christ did not recieve His humanity from Mary, why did Ellen White write the following:

Christ took the humanity of His mother, Mary, who had a fallen, sinful nature. Christ took the same flesh that we, fallen, sinful humanity, possess. Christ "accepted the results of the working of the great law of heredity. What these results were is shown in the history of HIS EARTHLY ANCESTORS. HE CAME WITH SUCH A HEREDITY..." DA 49.

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

But when Christians claim that because we are tempted (succesfully by Satan), based on what James said, then go on to claim that Jesus also was tempted the same way, then they are indeed saying what Miz3 has objections to.

Consider this (incorrect) reasoning John317:

1. We are tempted because we have sin in us (James and Rom 7).

2. Christ was tempted the same way (Heb).

3. Therefore Christ had sin "in Him".

This is the conclusion many Adventists come to and indeed teach.

This is not true. Seventh-day Adventists are not suggesting that it is sinful for us to be tempted. I don't know of any SDAs who are teaching what you claim above. I think a major area of misundersgtanding has been that you appear to believe that we sin merely by being tempted. SDAs have not concluded that Christ had sin in Him. If you know of any who have come to this conclusion, please quote them.

Let me summarize:

1) Jesus Christ did not have "propensities of sin." (SDA BC vol. 5, pages 1128, 1129)

("We need not retain one sinful propensity"-- SDA BC vol.7, page 943) Ellen White uses "propensity" not to mean what we inherit, but to refer to chosen or cultivated habit patterns. They are clearly chosen patterns of thought, or cultivated tendency. A sinful propensity is permitted to develop from our inherited bent to evil. Jesus never developed such sinful propensities.

2) "Christ had all the strength of passion of humanity, but never did He yield to temptation to do one single act that was not pure and elevating and ennobling." (In Heavenly Places, 155) "Passion" in this sense refers to acceptable human desires passed on by natural heredity.

3) Jesus Christ did "not possess the passions of our human, fallen natures." (SDA BC 7-A 659) Here "passions" refer to the development of the sinful tendencies passed on through the inherited stream. So "sinful propensities and passions" refer to those passions which sinners choose to develop after birth. Christ never developed these passions. He never sinned.

4)Christ took the humanity of His mother, Mary, who had a fallen, sinful nature. Christ took the same flesh that we, fallen, sinful humanity, possess. Christ "accepted the results of the working of the great law of heredity. What these results were is shown in the history of HIS EARTHLY ANCESTORS. HE CAME WITH SUCH A HEREDITY..." DA 49;

5) Christ resisted temptations from within and did not overcome sin by the power of His own inherent nature. Rather, Christ resisted and overcame sin and the Devil by the power of the Holy Spirit, by the power and strength given Him from God. SDA BC, vol 7, page 930; YI, April 25, 1901; 1 SM 252; DA 24, 130, 363, 756; 3 SM 130.

6) Christ "fought the battle [against sin and Satan] as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss." DA 49

7) Christ took upon Himself the form and nature of fallen man. Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4a, page 115. He assumed our fallen condition, our sinful nature. EW 150; Letter 106, 1896; MM 181; Ms. 94, 1893; RH Feb. 24, 1874 and Dec. 15, 1896; SDA BC vol. 5, page 1131; 1 SM 253; SR 44.

I am not sure you are fully understanding what I am saying John317, I am in no way suggesting external temptation is sin, but internal temptation comes from inherited and cultivated tendencies which Christ did not have. :-)

I have read through your post and had no problem until I got to here:

Christ resisted temptations from within

Could you please clarify what you mean by this and support it with any SOP you can.

I have never found any statement to indicate that Christ had "sin in Him" that He had to contend with.

From the SOP.

Anything explicit, you could share would be good (although I am pretty sure you will not find it).

[John317]

I have read through your post and had no problem until I got to here:

Christ resisted temptations from within

Could you please clarify what you mean by this and support it with any SOP you can.

I have never found any statement to indicate that Christ had "sin in Him" that He had to contend with.

I am not saying-- and Ellen White never taught-- that Christ "had sin in Him." I am categorically denying that Christ had sin in Him.

Is being "tempted from within" the same as having sin in Him, in your understanding?

Is it a sin to be tempted from within if that temptation is resisted by the power of the Holy Spirit?

Ellen White says that Christ experienced the inclination to do wrong but that Christ did not follow those inclinations. He overcame them by the same power that you and I have access to-- the power of the Holy Spirit. See SDA BC, vol. 7, page 930.

Do you believe that Jesus Christ received the human nature from His mother Mary and that Christ was a literal descendent of Adam, Abraham, and David? (Check out DA 49)

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

I have read through your post and had no problem until I got to here:

Christ resisted temptations from within

Could you please clarify what you mean by this and support it with any SOP you can.

I have never found any statement to indicate that Christ had "sin in Him" that He had to contend with.

Is it a sin to be tempted from within?

In our flesh we have "lusts and desires" which are in fact "sin" as defined by Paul.

That inherited and cultivated sin in our flesh is there in all of us.

We are born full of sin.

That is why we have to be born again and cleansed.

And if that sin is there and known and not dealt with, we are judged by it.

[Twilight II]

Is being "tempted from within" the same as having sin in Him, in your understanding?

Is it a sin to be tempted from within if that temptation is resisted by the power of the Holy Spirit?

Do you believe that Jesus Christ received the human nature from His mother Mary? (Check out DA 49)

The lusts and desires we have in us are indeed sin.

That is why Christ could not have had those lusts and desires in Him.

Because they come from Satan, the father of those lusts and desires.

-----------------------

We are tempted from without, that temptation from without finds an answering chord in our flesh.

The very act of responding to that external temptation is sin.

The problem is we are so full of sin, that we cannot but help respond to that sin.

The external temptation, joined to the internal lusts and desires in us, overcomes us every time.

The Holy Spirit puts to death the lusts and desires of the flesh, so that they are removed.

-----------------------

Mary was the mother of Jesus, but the Holy Spirit conceived Him.

I see no reason to suppose that the inherited tendencies to sin were passed on to Christ, in fact I only see evidence to support the opposite.

But Christ clearly had a fully human post fallen body (or nature).

[John317]

Jesus didn't have the lusts of satan, satan wasn't His father...

Have I said or implied that Jesus had the lusts of Satan?

What statement of mine, if any, makes you say this?

[John317]

Did Christ receive the humanity of Mary?

Was Christ a literal descendent of Adam, Abraham, and David?

[John317]

We are tempted from without, that temptation from without finds an answering chord in our flesh.

The very act of responding to that external temptation is sin.

I agree. But Christ did not respond to that external temptation, nor do we have to. And Christ did not repond to any temptation, either from within or from without. Each time Christ was faced with a choice of either following His own will and inclination and following God's will, Christ always chose to follow God's will. As He said, "Not MY WILL but YOUR WILL be done." "I seek not to do My OWN WILL." "I came down from heaven not to do My own will."

Christ constantly had to resist the inclination to follow His own will.

[John317]

...Mary was the mother of Jesus, but the Holy Spirit conceived Him.

But Christ clearly had a fully human post fallen body (or nature).

I would like to be clear about where you believe Christ received that fully human post-Fall body and nature which He assumed. In other words, what was the source Christ's flesh? Wasn't that flesh the same as yours and mine and every other child of Adam?*

*Christ took the humanity of His mother, Mary, who had a fallen, sinful nature. Christ took the same flesh that we, fallen, sinful humanity, possess. Christ "accepted the results of the working of the great law of heredity. What these results were is shown in the history of HIS EARTHLY ANCESTORS. HE CAME WITH SUCH A HEREDITY..." DA 49;

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

We are tempted from without, that temptation from without finds an answering chord in our flesh.

The very act of responding to that external temptation is sin.

I agree. But Christ did not respond to that external temptation, nor do we have to. And Christ did not repond to any temptation, either from within or from without. Each time Christ was faced with a choice of either following His own will and inclination and following God's will, Christ always chose to follow God's will. As He said, "Not MY WILL but YOUR WILL be done." "I seek not to do My OWN WILL." "I came down from heaven not to do My own will."

Christ constantly had to resist the inclination to follow His own will.

There is no example of Christ having to resist a hereditary internal inclination to do evil anywhere in the SOP that I am aware of.

Christ choosing the Fathers will over His own, was the very "same" temptation that Adam dealt with in the Garden of Eden.

Adam was tempted and fell when he had no sinful tendencies in him whatsoever.

Christ met the temptation exactly the same way:

SOP: "could have sinned; He could have fallen, but not for one moment was there in Him an evil propensity. He was assailed with temptations in the wilderness, as Adam was assailed with temptations in Eden. {5BC 1128.4}"

Christ did not "have to have" the lusts and desire in Him that James talks about us having, to be "tempted in all points as we are".

This unfortunately is what many Adventists are presenting.

This is the point I am trying to get across to you.

I do not expect you to accept it or agree with it, but would like you to understand it.

Mark :-)

P.S.

I am making no judgement about your beliefs or trying to tell you what you believe.

I am merely sharing an idea with you, that I believe is totaly biblical and a subtle correction of error in Adventist mindsets that becomes huge in its implications in victory over sin.

[Dr. Rich]

John317, I thought you believed that Michael became Jesus?

[John317]

The pre-incarnate Christ was known by the name of Michael the Archangel. The Bible also calls the same person "the Word of God."