Jesus - pre- or post- fall nature - experiment requested!

[bevin]

Quote:

---

One such error in QOD was that when Jesus was born, He had Adams nature BEFORE he fell in the Garden. Thats not true, this would be giving Jesus a edge over us sinners to resist sin. Jesus took on man's "sinfull nature"!!

---

This controversy has been around for some time. However I have never seen the simple test of 'experiment' applied to it.

Give ONE TEST that Jesus would indicate which nature Jesus had. i.e. one situation where a pre-fall nature would have Jesus visibly doing one thing and post-fall nature Jesus doing some other thing.

Some question He would answer differently, some situation He would handle differently.

A difference that makes no difference, is no difference.

/Bevin

[Nicodema]

I believe when Jesus incarnated, He took on humanity and human flesh in its post-fall condition.

It makes a difference to me, for the Truth's sake, whether it can be demonstrated to result in something He would have done differently or not. I may not be clever enough to think something up that fits the bill; that does not mean no such thing exists.

Just my 2 cents.

[Kevin H]

This is an argument that only comes from the 1950s, due to our ignorance of church history, this is an argument that should not be, as we simply will either reinventing the wheel, or end up in the dangers of one or the other of these two FALSE views.

The church debated this for centuries, and finally came to THE TRUTH. Jesus did NOT have a pre nor post fall nature, but Jesus had HIS OWN unique nature. This view has been the understanding of the church for the next several centuries until the 1950s with the publication of "Questions on Doctrine."

There was a pastor who did a beautiful job at discribing the traditional understanding of the Church. Mrs. White would consistantly quote this pastor, as SHE DEFENDED THE TRADITIONAL VIEW AS THE TRUTH!!!!!!

Sadly since our church leaders had been ignorant of Church history, when asked about the understanding of the nature of Christ, they were trying to say that we hold to the traditional view, but not knowing how to word this, they used very, very poor phraseing which has ripped our church appart, with both sides being ABSOLUTELY AND COMPLETELY WRONG!!! And the defenders of these two views using this false argument to develop in their lives the spirit of Satan.

Please, let's give up this controversy over poor wording and reject BOTH wrong views and return to the truth that came from so much study, that the church held through several centuries, and which Mrs. White endorced, and go to the sources of her quotes to see the full picture that she was drawing from.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Give ONE TEST that Jesus would indicate which nature Jesus [assumed]. i.e. one situation where a pre-fall nature would have Jesus visibly doing one thing and post-fall nature Jesus doing some other thing.

---

Luke 22:41 "And he [Jesus] was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast, and kneeled down, and prayed, 42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done."

Why would Christ's will be opposed to His Father....Christ knew that in order to save humanity God must abandon Him....Here Jesus is tempted by the fallen, humanity He assumed at the incarnation....But He doesn't sin for He says, "not my desire...but yours."

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Why would Christ's will be opposed to His Father....Christ knew that in order to save humanity God must abandon Him....Here Jesus is tempted by the fallen, humanity He assumed at the incarnation....But He doesn't sin for He says, "not my desire...but yours."

---

Why would any sentient being, perfect or not, want to go through what lay ahead? Perfect beings do not want to hurt themselves or others. This prayer shows some of Christ's limitations, but it does not show the fallenness of His nature.

Indeed, arguably a being that wanted to be hurt could be said to be fallen...

/Bevin

[Ron Lambert]

For many years, I was a pre-lapsarian. But finally after much thought and study--especially after reading Jack Sequiera and various articles from "The 1888 Message Study Committee," I came to embrace the post-lapsarian view.

Christ had to take the nature of Adam after the fall, because it was Adam after the fall who needed a Savior.

If Christ took the nature of Adam before the fall, then why wasn't Christ 16 feet tall or so, like Adam was originally created, according to Ellen G. White? (She said he was nearly three times the height of modern men.)

There's your test case, Bevin--if only you believed Ellen G. White.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Why would Christ's will be opposed to His Father....Christ knew that in order to save humanity God must abandon Him....Here Jesus is tempted by the fallen, humanity He assumed at the incarnation....But He doesn't sin for He says, "not my desire...but yours."

---

Why would any sentient being, perfect or not, want to go through what lay ahead? Perfect beings do not want to hurt themselves or others. This prayer shows some of Christ's limitations, but it does not show the fallenness of His nature.

Indeed, arguably a being that wanted to be hurt could be said to be fallen...

/Bevin

---

As God, Christ couldn't die...but as fallen man He could. Therefore it was our fallen, sinful life that tempted Him to say no....What was the issue? Save Himself (hence self-love) or save the human race! He was tempted to save Himself...something only attributed to fallen beings.... Hence, Christ took our fallen life indwelt with sin.

[Robert]

Excellent point!

[bevin]

None of these are tests that you could walk up to Jesus and apply. They are all obscure theological arguments that lack connection to the measureable universe.

Quote:

---

He was tempted to save Himself...something only attributed to fallen beings....

---

Where in the Bible do you find that only fallen beings can be tempted?

Just because post-fall Adam needs a saviour, it does not mean that the saviour needs a post-fall nature. You can pull someone out of the mud before you fall in yourself.

Furthermore God is going to glorify us - give us a pre-fall nature. This is the nature that must be tested - because it is the one we are going to have for all eternity.

/Bevin

[Robert]

• Mat 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he [Jesus] said unto him, Why callest thou me [Jesus as the Son of man] good? there is none good but one, that is, God....

There it is....Notice that the rich young ruler addressed Christ as a mere teacher (and not as the Son of God)....What did Christ as man say of Himself? "Why callest thou me good?" Then he precedes to tell this man there's only One good...God!

Now as God, Christ was sinless...but as man He was fallen...sinful!

Please remember Christ is God! He is not sinful...he didn't have a sinful nature, but He was "made sin"..."made under the law"....In all this He was made while fully remaining Himself (i.e., the Son of God).

So no...I am not calling Christ a sinner....I am calling the humanity He was "mad" - sinful.

No, not even by a thought did his minds say "yes" to sin...but because became what He was not by native right, he considered his human life sinful. It was sinful not because he was sinning, but because the life He was made was sinful.

Here's another one:

• 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

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?

Ps 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

Okay...at birth...no, at conception we receive Adam's fallen life. This life is under the curse of the law...condemned to die the 2nd death. Hence Christ as man was born under the law...under its condemnation.

For Christ as man to be made under law, He had to made like his brethren in all ways....Here's the quote:

• Heb 2:16 For surely it is not with angels that he is concerned but with the descendants of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brethren in every respect...

Rob

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Where in the Bible do you find that only fallen beings can be tempted?

---

Some facts:

1] Lucifer invented sin...the love of self (the opposite of God's selfless, agape love)

2] Lucifer "deceived" 1/3 of the unfallen angels....Paul calls sin a deceiver..."the deceitfulness of sin"! Heb 3:13...Hence the devil is the father of lies....

3] Unfallen Eve was deceived

4] Unfallen Adam was deceived....He didn't realize that by choosing Eve he was by default rejecting God....

So a sinless being can be deceived, but they are not tempted from within....Only after being conquered does Satan imbue his subjects with his own self-loving nature....

Since Christ [as the son of man] took our fallen life indwelt with sin, he was tempted to say no to his Father's will and live independent of Him....He was tempted to live for self!

Yet he was never deceived by indwelling sin....So for 33 years He lived a spotless life of obedience to his father's will....

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Just because post-fall Adam needs a saviour, it does not mean that the saviour needs a post-fall nature.

---

Like I said on another post - Christ didn't come to save our natures... ... He came to save "us" LEGALLY!

Let's look at some verses...then I'll ask you some questions:

Rom 6:6 For we know that our old self [our old life] was crucified with him [why?] so that the body of sin might be done away with....

Okay...was it sinful flesh that died "in Christ" or was it sinless flesh?

Paul states that Christ took our old self to the cross with Him and by doing so "the body of sin" was done away with....Hence, our sinful life died.

Rom 7:4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law [it demanded YOUR death] in the body of Christ ....

Okay...Paul was writing to the Roman believers....Were they sinners? Yes, although growing in grace....Therefore "sinners" were made to die...in the body of Christ.

Again, this proves that Christ took fallen, humanity into Himself in order to LEGALLY redeem us from the curse of the law. In other words YOUR fallen, life from Adam (the life we all share) had to die because God's Holy law demanded it. Hence, "YOU" died "in Christ"....Deity did not die, humanity died.

Rob

[bevin]

Quote:

---

So a sinless being can be deceived, but they are not tempted from within

---

You are making temptation something more mystical than it is.

He is an intelligent being applying rational thought to His immediate future. He knows what the alternatives are. He knows what the various outcomes are.

That alone is temptation. It does not require a flawed mechanism.

This was equally true of Adam, confronted with the choice about what to do about Eve. Satan isn't standing there tempting him - he is simply an intelligent being faced with choices.

/Bevin

[Kevin H]

Excellent points Ron. But they are dealt with in the Pre-QOD understanding of the nature of Christ (the traditional view before QOD and it's controversy split it into these two false choices). Look up the traditional view. Look up the sources where Ellen White picked some choice passages on this question (I'm sorry I can't remember the name of the author who Mrs. White kept quoteing on this point, but the informaton and his name is out there.) Remember Mrs. White wrote prior to the publication of QOD, in a world that had a fairly well agreed upon understanding of the nature of Jesus. She did not write in the context of the post QOD debate over which of the two false views to support.

Jesus had his own unique nature with ellements of both the pre and post fall nature of man, allong with it's own unique ellements. Yes, unlike the pre-fall Adam, he was not twice as tall as we are, got tired, etc. In Adam's prefall nature his appitites, desires and passions were naturally under the control of reason. Jesus' appitites desires and passions were not NATURALLY under the control of reason, but had, like us post fall people, needed to consciously place appitites, desires and passions under the control of reason. But a fantastic defination of THE sinful nature is found in the communion chapter of the Desire of Ages "There is in man a disposition to esteam himself more highly than his breathern, to serve self, to seek the highest place and often this results in evil surmisings and bitterness of spirit" Jesus did not have this disposition in him. Thus did NOT have THE post fall sinful nature.

Although we do not notice it in our current use of language, but in discussing the widerness temptations, Mrs. White gives at least one striking illustration that shows the correct understanding of the nature of Jesus (at least one that quickly pops into my mind) which I believe meets the experiment requested in the original post: Mrs. White discribes Jesus as being in a deep meloncholy. At the time of her writings the word "meloncholy" meant major depression and suicidal tendencies. Satan's temptation for Jesus to jump off the temple penical was a temptation for Jesus to commit suicide. Mrs. White's use of language is in line with the consept that you cannot temp someone to do such a dangerous act unless it was an actual temptation (Satan cannot tempt me to smoke, I'm not in a position to be tempted to smoke.) Had Jesus had the pre-fall nature of Adam, this would not have been a temptation to him. Had Jesus had the post-fall nature, Satan could have appealed to selfish reason or hurt for Jesus to jump. Satan could not have done that since Jesus did not have the sinful nature. Satan appealed to Jesus' unique nature by tempting him into the idea that his jump would bring glory to God. A very different approach than how Satan is able to approach to tempt us.

Once again I appeal to the readers here to RETURN to the pre-OQD understanding of the nature of Christ, where both sides in this current debate are wrong, and Jesus has his own unique character.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Thus [He] did NOT

have

THE post fall sinful nature.

---

No kidding....Jesus is God - He is divine. He has never had a sinful nature and never will. If Christ HAD a sinful nature He would be a sinner Himself (see Ps 51:5)

The question that must be asked is did Jesus come to save a sinless or sinful humanity? The answer can only be sinful humanity....Why? The law doesn't condemn sinless beings...it condemns sinners!

Now what does the law demand?

Ez 18:20 The person who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son.

What does this mean? Simply that guilt cannot be transferred! Legally no law will permit that...especially God's law. That means that the sinless Christ can't legally die instead of you....You have to die!

Did you die "in Christ"? If not, then you must justify yourself before God's law. In order to save you from the curse of the law, God had to put you into Christ. He did this at the incarnation by uniting our sinful life (under the curse) to Christ's divine, sinless life...This fully qualified Jesus to be our legal righteousness.

Here's some EGW:

• -BC- 7BC

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

  -CN- HEB8

  -CT- Hebrews

  -PR- 03

  -PG- 927

  By His obedience to all the commandments of God, Christ wrought out a redemption for man [mankind]. [How?] This was not done by going out of Himself to another [as in infused righteousness], but by taking humanity into Himself. [What type of humanity?]….To bring humanity into Christ, [:"red"]to bring the fallen race[/] into oneness with divinity, is the work of redemption.

  -BC- 7BC

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

  -CN- HEB8

  -CT- Hebrews

  -PR- 03

  -PG- 926

  “In Christ were united the divine and the human--the Creator and the creature. The nature of God, whose law had been transgressed, and the nature of Adam, the transgressor [hence after the fall], meet in Jesus--the Son of God, and the Son of man.”

[Robert]

• Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man [i.e., Adam] sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned

Note that Adam's sin was a corporate sin. The humanity that dwelt in him became poisoned by the principle of self...hence "all sinned" when Adam fell. If not please explain why David was considered a sinner by conception? [see Ps 51:5]

• — 13 for until the Law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

The law condemns...the wages of sin is death. Yet from Adam to Moses there was no posted law until Sinai. Nevertheless, sin was killing....Why? All sinned in Adam...

• ... 18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.

"In Adam" all men were condemned at the fall. Even so, "In Christ" all men were justified unto life....How so?

Because Christ assumed "us"! We are legally righteous "in Him." We must receive this truth by faith.

[Gerr]

Here are some Biblical facts.

1. Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit, Mt 1:20. NO human after Adam can claim that.

2. From birth He is called "that HOLY ONE," Lk 1:35. NO human can claim that.

3. From birth He is called "the Son of God," Lk 1:35. NO human except Adam can claim that.

4. "In Him is NO sin." 1 Jn 3:5. To me that means no sin committed nor had the tendency to sin

5. He was born of a woman. He became hungry. He became thirsty. He got tired. He needed sleep. He needed human companionship. In this sense He was "made like His brethren", Heb 2:17.

6. Jesus was compared to Adam as he came forth from the hand of his Creator, i.e. pre-fall, 1 Cor 15:45

7. Add them all up and this is what I come up with.

a) monogenes - unique in the absolute sence, the only one of a kind,

Someone who has all the physical liabilities of a fallen human nature, but the moral purity of the unfallen Adam.

What difference would this make for me? I am damaged goods, with "the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faints. From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness in it, but woulds and bruises and putrefying sores," Isa 1:5,6. I am therefore totally & completely dependent on Someone else for salvation.

Gerry

[Robert]

Quote:

---

5. He was born of a woman. He became hungry. He became thirsty. He got tired. He needed sleep. He needed human companionship. In this sense He was "made like His brethren", Heb 2:17.

---

AT Jones:

To be under the law is to be guilty, condemned, and subject to the curse. For it is written: "We know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that...all the world may become guilty before God." This because "all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Rom. 3:19, 23; 6:14....

"God sent forth His son, made...under the law, to redeem them that were under the law." Gal. 4:4,5. By His coming He brought redemption to every soul who is under the law. But in order perfectly to bring that redemption to men under the law, He Himself must come to men, just where they are and as they are, under the law.

And He did, for he was "made under the law;" He was made "guilty;" He was made condemned by the law; He was "made" as guilty as any man is guilty who is under the law. He was "made" under condemnation as fully as any man is under condemnation because of his violation of the law. He was "made" under the curse as completely as any man in the world has ever been or ever can be under the curse. For it is written: "He that is hanged ["on a tree"] is accursed of God." Deut. 21:23.

The Hebrew makes this stronger still, for the literal translation is: "He that hangeth on a tree is the curse of God." And this is exactly the strength of the fact respecting Christ, for it is written that He was "made a curse." Thus, when He was made under the law, He was made all that it means to be under the law. He was made guilty; He was made condemned; He was made a curse.

[:"red"]But bear in mind forever that all this He "was made." He was none of this of Himself, of native fault, but all of it he "was made."[/] And He was made it all for us: for us who are under the law; for us who are under condemnation because of transgression of the law....

Bearing guilt, being under condemnation and so under the weight of the curse, Jesus, a whole lifetime in this world of guilt, condemnation, and the curse, lived the perfect life of the righteousness of God, without ever sinning at all. Christ was made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law. And that blessed work is accomplished for every soul who accepts of that redemption....

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us." His being made a curse is not in vain: it accomplishes all that was intended by it in behalf of every man who will receive it. For it was all done "that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." Gal. 3:14.

Still, whatever was intended by it and whatever is accomplished by it, there must always be borne in mind by every soul the FACT that, in His condescension, in His emptying Himself and being "made in the likeness of men" and "made flesh," He was made under the law, guilty,--under condemnation, under the curse,--as really and as entirely as is any soul that shall ever be redeemed.

And having passed through it all, He is the author of eternal salvation and is able to save to the uttermost from deepest loss all who come unto God by Him.