Made Him to be sin

[pnattmbtc]

​How?  Why?  How can you be tempted to do wrong when you have nothing in your that is anti-agape (or anti-God)?

​

This is an important question to consider.  In regards to Satan, we have an  impenetrable mystery, as there is no
reason why Lucifer should have sinned.  Perhaps one could say that he, in essence, tempted himself.  But he was
created perfect, so there's no reason why he should have done this.

However, once Satan exists, then a reason can be given for how others after him fell, and that is centered on
Satan's mispresentations of God's character.  By misrepresenting God's character, he got angels to sin, and slso humans.

The fundamental purpose of Christ's life was not to die to satisfy a legal requirement, but to reveal the Father, so that
the damage done by Satan could be undone.  Thus we read that the great work of redemption was for angels and unfallen beings as well as for us, although they had no sin.

[Robert]

​In regards to Satan, we have an  impenetrable mystery, as there is no reason why Lucifer should have sinned.  

​I agree....the same can be said of Adam & Eve before the fall.

[pnattmbtc]

​I agree....the same can be said of Adam & Eve before the fall.

​I mostly agree with this.  It is a bit less of a mystery, since Satan already existed, but still there is no reason it should have happened.

[Robert]

The fundamental purpose of Christ's life was not to die to satisfy a legal requirement, but to reveal the Father, so that
the damage done by Satan could be undone.  Thus we read that the great work of redemption was for angels and unfallen beings as well as for us, although they had no sin.

​The primary reason was to save the human race from under His own law that justifiably condemns all men. Through the gospel we learn of God's agape....

Edited May 19, 2015 by Robert

[pnattmbtc]

​The primary reason was to save the human race from under His own law that justifiably condemns all men. Through the gospel we learn of God's agape....

​

This is a limited view of Christ's mission.

"Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him 
the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose 
of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God. In Christ was arrayed before men the paternal 
grace and the matchless perfections of the Father. In his 
prayer just before his crucifixion, he declared, “I have manifested thy name.” “I have glorified thee on the earth; I have 
finished the work which thou gavest me to do.” When the 
object of his mission was attained,--the revelation of God to 
the world,--the Son of God announced that his work was 
accomplished, and that the character of the Father was made 
manifest to men. (ST 1/20/1890)"

If we accept the idea set forth here, that Christ's mission was the revelation of the Father,
then every act of Christ's life is relevant to that mission.  If we take the limited view
that Christ came only, or primarily, to satisfy a legal requirement, then most of the Gospels
have limited relevance.  If you look at the Gospels themselves, where can you find even
a single reference that Christ came to satisfy a legal requirement?

On the other hand, Christ as a revelation of the Father is everywhere.

[Samie]

Christ came down to this world to give it life (John 6:33). Obviously, the world is dead, otherwise He would not have given it life. Christ said what He does is the Father's will (John 6:38). That Christ came to save and to reveal the Father are both Scripturally sound.

[pnattmbtc]

Christ came down to this world to give it life (John 6:33). Obviously, the world is dead, otherwise He would not have given it life. Christ said what He does is the Father's will (John 6:38). That Christ came to save and to reveal the Father are both Scripturally sound.

​The way He saves us is by revealing the Father.

[Samie]

Without shedding of blood there is no remission (Heb 9:22). The Father saved us through His Son. The Son died, Not the Father; I guess the Son is not revealing by His death that the Father can die.

[8thdaypriest]

If salvation is just about erasing the record of my sins, then I don't even NEED to know about the Father.  According to Robert and Samie, Christ DIED, and by that ACT all sins of all human beings were erased forever. 

But salvation is about me receiving the indwelling Spirit of Christ, so that I will NOT WANT to sin against the Father any longer. 

Why would I CONSENT to this indwelling, by a divine Being I neither know about, nor feel any need of?  But IF I see the goodness of the Father, thru His Son, THEN I will desire the indwelling.  I will BELIEVE in the goodness of God, and in His love for me.  He demonstrated that love, thru Jesus.   

It is ABOUT saving me from sinning, not just from the record of my past sins.  It's about my rehabilitation.  It's about my healing. 

If a convict is found NOT GUILTY of the crime he actually committed, what does that do for him, or for society?  He will just continue to commit crimes.  He is not rehabilitated.  His mind is unchanged. 

[pnattmbtc]

Without shedding of blood there is no remission (Heb 9:22). The Father saved us through His Son. The Son died, Not the Father; I guess the Son is not revealing by His death that the Father can die.

​"Revealing the Father" = "Revealing the character of the Father"

[Samie]

If salvation is just about erasing the record of my sins, then I don't even NEED to know about the Father.  According to Robert and Samie, Christ DIED, and by that ACT all sins of all human beings were erased forever. 

But salvation is about me receiving the indwelling Spirit of Christ, so that I will NOT WANT to sin against the Father any longer. 

Why would I CONSENT to this indwelling, by a divine Being I neither know about, nor feel any need of?  But IF I see the goodness of the Father, thru His Son, THEN I will desire the indwelling.  I will BELIEVE in the goodness of God, and in His love for me.  He demonstrated that love, thru Jesus.   

It is ABOUT saving me from sinning, not just from the record of my past sins.  It's about my rehabilitation.  It's about my healing. 

If a convict is found NOT GUILTY of the crime he actually committed, what does that do for him, or for society?  He will just continue to commit crimes.  He is not rehabilitated.  His mind is unchanged. 

​Like a broken record in this forum, it had been repeatedly pointed out by this layman that born with our names in the book of life, the name of the game is overcoming. We already are members of the family of God, part of the body of Christ, attached to Him Who is our Strength for overcoming evil with good, indwelt and led by the Holy Spirit. We each have our own individual battles to fight, individual decisions to make. There are times when a person decides NOT to follow the leading of the Spirit to overcome evil with good. But that is not the end of the battle yet. He can still choose to overcome . His sin committed having been forgiven on the cross is not counted against him. In fact, God remembers that sin NO MORE. He still is attached to the body of Christ Who continually justifies us. There is hope while alive.

But If a person PERSISTENTLY refuses to follow the leading of the Spirit to overcome evil with good until his death, then his name will be blotted out from the book of life, effectively dismembering him from the family of God and removed from the body of Christ.

Overcomers are those who when faced with the opportunity to sin, decides NOT to commit the same sin again but instead decides to follow the leading of the Spirit to do good. It is God Who decides who the overcomers are. And their names will NOT be blotted out from the book of life.

[Robert]

​

If you look at the Gospels themselves, where can you find even a single reference that Christ came to satisfy a legal requirement?

​The gospels tell of the life of Christ. They are historical documents of His life.

Paul's letter give us the mechanics of the gospel, i.e., how God saved us in Christ.

The importance of the gospel is given in the following:

" And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." Matt 24:14

Rev 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, ....

We are to preach the gospel.  When it is restored and preached the end will come.  Notice the emphasis is on the gospel....

[Robert]

​The way He saves us is by revealing the Father.

​No!  The Father is revealed in the gospel, but that's not why Christ came.

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come ,God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 

5 To redeem (save) them that were under the law...

 

Christ came to legally answer His own law so that He could justly save men from condemnation to justification of life.  

[8thdaypriest]

​Like a broken record in this forum, it had been repeatedly pointed out by this layman that born with our names in the book of life, the name of the game is overcoming. We already are members of the family of God, part of the body of Christ, attached to Him Who is our Strength for overcoming evil with good, indwelt and led by the Holy Spirit. We each have our own individual battles to fight, individual decisions to make. There are times when a person decides NOT to follow the leading of the Spirit to overcome evil with good. But that is not the end of the battle yet. He can still choose to overcome . His sin committed having been forgiven on the cross is not counted against him. In fact, God remembers that sin NO MORE. He still is attached to the body of Christ Who continually justifies us. There is hope while alive.

But If a person PERSISTENTLY refuses to follow the leading of the Spirit to overcome evil with good until his death, then his name will be blotted out from the book of life, effectively dismembering him from the family of God and removed from the body of Christ.

Overcomers are those who when faced with the opportunity to sin, decides NOT to commit the same sin again but instead decides to follow the leading of the Spirit to do good. It is God Who decides who the overcomers are. And their names will NOT be blotted out from the book of life.

​Samie,

You are off topic.  Please contain your posts to those which explain what is meant by "made Him to be sin".  This post is more appropriately placed in the "Are we born justified" thread.  Thanks

Edited May 21, 2015 by 8thdaypriest

[pnattmbtc]

​No!  The Father is revealed in the gospel, but that's not why Christ came.

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come ,God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 

5 To redeem (save) them that were under the law...

 

Christ came to legally answer His own law so that He could justly save men from condemnation to justification of life.  

​

Yes!

"Jesus came to teach men of the Father, to correctly represent him before the fallen children of earth. Angels could not fully portray the character of God, but Christ, who was a living impersonation of God, could not fail to accomplish the work. The only way in which he could set and keep men right was to make himself visible and familiar to their eyes.That men might have salvation he came directly to man, and became a partaker of his nature. The Father was revealed in Christ as altogether a different 
being from that which Satan had represented him to be. Said Christ, “Neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.”

The first phrase says, "Jesus came to teach men of the Father."  This theme is present throughout the Gospel of John (e.g. John 1:18).

If Christ came to legally answer His own law, one would certainly have expected to have said so somewhere.

 

Edited May 21, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[pnattmbtc]

​The gospels tell of the life of Christ. They are historical documents of His life.

Paul's letter give us the mechanics of the gospel, i.e., how God saved us in Christ.

The importance of the gospel is given in the following:

" And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." Matt 24:14

Rev 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, ....

We are to preach the gospel.  When it is restored and preached the end will come.  Notice the emphasis is on the gospel....

​Notice Matt 24:14, which you quote above "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come."  So "this gospel" is the gospel, and it is something that Christ actually taught.  Where did Christ teach what you're teaching?

[Samie]

​Samie,

You are off topic.  Please contain your posts to those which explain what is meant by "made Him to be sin".  This post is more appropriately placed in the "Are we born justified" thread.  Thanks

​Oh, sorry, Sis Rachel. Please allow me to explain a bit.

First, my post was in reply to your post in this thread where you mentioned my name. So, I thought it proper for me to post in this same thread where you mentioned my name.

Second, your post in this thread that my "off-topic" post responded to says (highlighting in red is mine):

If salvation is just about erasing the record of my sins, then I don't even NEED to know about the Father.  According to Robert and Samie, Christ DIED, and by that ACT all sins of all human beings were erased forever. 

But salvation is about me receiving the indwelling Spirit of Christ, so that I will NOT WANT to sin against the Father any longer. 

Why would I CONSENT to this indwelling, by a divine Being I neither know about, nor feel any need of?  But IF I see the goodness of the Father, thru His Son, THEN I will desire the indwelling.  I will BELIEVE in the goodness of God, and in His love for me.  He demonstrated that love, thru Jesus.   

It is ABOUT saving me from sinning, not just from the record of my past sins.  It's about my rehabilitation.  It's about my healing. 

If a convict is found NOT GUILTY of the crime he actually committed, what does that do for him, or for society?  He will just continue to commit crimes.  He is not rehabilitated.  His mind is unchanged. 

​Hence, I responded with "overcoming" that shows the overcomer's decision of NOT WANTING to sin against the Father any longer. If my "off-topic" post should have been properly placed in the other thread, I guess you should have, in the first place, posted your above post in that thread.

Anyway, again, sorry.

[Samie]

​Notice Matt 24:14, which you quote above "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come."  So "this gospel" is the gospel, and it is something that Christ actually taught.  Where did Christ teach what you're teaching?

​Hi, pnattmbtc;

Not answering for him, but since I have the same position as Robert's in the use of Matt 24:14, please consider this:

The gospel popularly being preached to the world teaches that people need to first believe before they can be attached to Christ and written in the book of life. This simply means that the gospel people hear requires people to believe first to be attached to Christ. Indirectly, the preacher is teaching that while apart from Christ, people can do SOMETHING - they can believe to be attached to Christ.

But Christ Himself said that apart from Him, we can do NOTHING (John 15:5). Quite opposite to what the preachers teach.

This is why Robert & I are of the position that the gospel Christ wanted preached before He comes again is not the one being popularly preached.

 

[pnattmbtc]

Hi Samie.  I should probably make clear what I'm agreeing with and what I'm disagreeing with.

First of all, I agree that there is a corporate aspect to the Gospel, that this is important, and that this way of thinking is foreign to Western thought, by and large, and should be emphasized as a part of what we present when the Gospel is preached.  To the best of my knowledge, since the Reformation, Waggoner was the first to present this idea.  For example:

Thank God for the blessed hope! The blessing has come upon all men. For "as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of One the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life." Romans
5:18, KJV. God, who is no respecter of persons, "has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places." Ephesians 1:3. The gift is ours to keep. If anyone has not this blessing, it is because he has not recognized the gift, or has
deliberately thrown it away. (The Glad Tidings)

Robert Wieland learned this idea from Waggoner, and Sequeira learned it from Wieland, and Robert learned it from Sequeira, and each time it seems to morph a bit.  The area where I have the biggest difference of opinion, with everyone except Waggoner, is in regards to the emphasis on the legal part.  Actually, this wasn't a big deal to Wieland either, but he did speak of it some (mostly motivated by wanting to counteract Desmond Ford's theology).  But if you look at Waggoner's writings, you won't find the legal aspect there, although you can find the corporate idea.  And the same thing is true regarding A. T. Jones.

What's the problem with emphasizing these issues in terms of the law?  The problem here is that it makes the things that happen seem to be arbitrary on the part of God, as opposed to being cause and effect.  The death that comes as a result of sin is a result of a person separating himself from God, who alone is the source of life.  Acting according to self-love is death, because living for self cannot bring life, as life comes from God alone.  The law *describes* this problem, but it doesn't create it.  The problem would still be there without the law.  The problem is our being estranged from God.

How do we get connected to God?  To answer that question, consider what separates us from God.  For both humans and angels, the fundamental problem was from the beginning believing lies about God's character.  Believing the truth about God enables us to be healed.  Here's a passage from the Desire of Ages:

But even as a sinner, man was in a different position from that of Satan. Lucifer in heaven had sinned in the light of God's glory. To him as to no other created being was given a revelation of God's love.  Understanding the character of God, knowing His goodness, Satan chose to follow his own selfish, independent will. This choice was final. There was no more that God could do to save him. But man was deceived; his mind was darkened by Satan's sophistry. The height and depth of the love of God he did not know. For him there was hope in a knowledge of God's love. By beholding His character he might be drawn back to God. DA 762)

Peter speaks of Christ's dying to "bring us to God."

Waggoner says the following:

A propitiation is a sacrifice. The statement then is simply that Christ is set forth to be a sacrifice for the remission of our sins. “Once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” Hebrews 9:26. Of course the idea of a propitiation or sacrifice is that there is wrath to be appeased. But take particular notice that it is we who require the sacrifice, and not God. He provides the sacrifice. (Waggoner on Romans, commenting on Romans 3:25)

According to my perspective, everything recorded in the Gospels is relevant in the most direct way to the Gospel, because the Gospel is the good news about God, and the whole purpose of Christ's mission was the revelation of the Father (this last part is quoting from the Spirit of Prophecy; here's the quote:)

Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose 
of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the rev-elation of God. In Christ was arrayed before men the paternal 
grace and the matchless perfections of the Father. In his prayer just before his crucifixion, he declared, “I have mani-fested thy name.” “I have glorified thee on the earth; I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.” When the 
object of his mission was attained,--the revelation of God to the world,--the Son of God announced that his work was 
accomplished, and that the character of the Father was made manifest to men. (ST 1/20/90)

This idea she got straight from John 17.

So if the whole purpose of Christ's mission was the revelation of God, then in everything recorded in the Gospels, we see the Gospel!  We see the purpose of Christ all thorughout, and nothing which Christ did or said is not Gospel.  So when we present the Gospel according to Matt 24:14, it is sufficient (and necessary) that we present what Christ did and taught.

On the other hand, if the Gospel is a legal theory, then that would be rather dissapointing, to put it mildly.  What about what Christ said and did?  How can that not be the Gospel?  

I think my perspective makes sense, as it makes everything Christ said and did Gospel.  On the other hand, if one is to view the Gospel as a legal argument, then I would repeat the challenge I presented earlier, which is where did Christ teach such a thing?  Surely the Gospel must be found in the teachings of Christ.  Paul didn't make up anything knew or teach a Gospel that Christ didn't teach.

Hopefully this helps set out my thinking.  I'll await your response.

Edited May 22, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[Samie]

Thanks for clearing out things, pnattmbtc.

My response is simple: Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the embodiment of the gospel.

My recent post is just to emphasize the point that preachers now who HONESTLY believe they are preaching the gospel Jesus was referring to in Matt 24:14, appear not to be aware that they are teaching OPPOSITE to what the embodiment of the gospel Himself taught.

[Samie]

Getting back to Waggoner's statement you quoted (highlighting in red is mine):

Thank God for the blessed hope! The blessing has come upon all men. For "as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of One the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life." Romans 5:18, KJV. God, who is no respecter of persons, "has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places." Ephesians 1:3. The gift is ours to keep. If anyone has not this blessing, it is because he has not recognized the gift, or has deliberately thrown it away. (The Glad Tidings)

Sorry, but where you don't, I see a legal aspect in the portion I highlighted.

I believe that whether a person believes it or not, recognizes it or not, throws it away or not, the fact that he was born with his name written in the book of life remains.  The writing of our names was made possible by the Father Who saved us by His grace given us in Christ Jesus BEFORE time began and made manifest when Christ incarnated (2 Tim 1:9, 10).

[Robert]

​Notice Matt 24:14, which you quote above "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come."  So "this gospel" is the gospel, and it is something that Christ actually taught.  Where did Christ teach what you're teaching?

​Through Paul....

[pnattmbtc]

Getting back to Waggoner's statement you quoted (highlighting in red is mine):

Sorry, but where you don't, I see a legal aspect in the portion I highlighted.

I believe that whether a person believes it or not, recognizes it or not, throws it away or not, the fact that he was born with his name written in the book of life remains.  The writing of our names was made possible by the Father Who saved us by His grace given us in Christ Jesus BEFORE time began and made manifest when Christ incarnated (2 Tim 1:9, 10).

​It's not legal.  You can see this easily by looking at the context.  Just google "The Glad Tidings" and you can find it on line.

[pnattmbtc]

Thanks for clearing out things, pnattmbtc.

My response is simple: Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is the embodiment of the gospel.

My recent post is just to emphasize the point that preachers now who HONESTLY believe they are preaching the gospel Jesus was referring to in Matt 24:14, appear not to be aware that they are teaching OPPOSITE to what the embodiment of the gospel Himself taught.

​If we take as a premise what we read from the Spirit of Prophecy,that the whole purpose of the mission of Christ was the revelation of the Father.  From that standpoint, that Jesus Christ was (or is) the embodiment of the Gospel makes perfect sense.

However, if we take the viewpoint that the Gospel is something like everybody has their name written in the book of life, and the names of overcomers will stay there, but the names of those who don't overcome will be blotted out, then how does the statement that Jesus is the embodiment of the Gospel make sense?  How is Jesus Christ the embodiment of what you're saying about names being written or blotted out of the book of life?

[pnattmbtc]

​Through Paul....

​This response doesn't work.  First of all, Jesus said "this gospel" in reference to words He, Jesus, was saying, so He couldn't have been referring to the future words of some as yet unnamed person.  Secondly, Paul would be horrified with the idea that he was thought to have been teaching a Gospel that Jesus Christ didn't teach.  That what Paul thought he was teaching what Christ taught comes though throughout Paul's epistles.