Sanctification and Perfection friendly debate thread.

[John317]

It is here where the uber-conservatives and the former-SDAs err.

Many formers have already done that because they (like too many uber-conservatives today) hold her up to too high of a standard...

Never heard of "uber-conservatives". I thought at first it was a typo for "ultra." What are they and what do they believe?

Where do you see this word used? I ask because I'm interested in language. Probably something like "super" or "hyper," but has this word now been transferred from politics to the church?

[Robert]

She is not the be all and end all of biblical theology or correct doctrine.

Hey...that's my line! Oh, now I'm mad.... I'll see my lawyer about this copyright infringement!

[Robert]

As far as being safe to save, that is God's prerogative to decide; we certainly don't know.

The problem with this junk is that it steals assurance from believers. It puts doubt in their minds if they are saved and it turns them from trusting in the merits of Christ to looking at their own performance.

Rob

[Sulla]

I will go back over all the posts and answer and comment on them in a bit. But I have a question for any one who cares to answer. How does God know a person will not sin if he lets him into heaven. Is he going to give us a perfect character and body when he comes so we just have to accept this? Or does he give us a new character now in our time on earth? One that he perfects here as he leads us thru trials and temptations?

[Sulla]

John317

Quote:

Am I right that Bravus views sin more as "nature" and Sulla views sin as primarily "choice"?

Well yes but there are distinctions made about sin. For example known and unknown. Sin done in ignorance and sin that is a willful rebellion against God.

Quote:

The question of what is sin lies at the crux of the issue and how a person answers that question accounts for the differences in views here.

Agreed this is one of the things the sides differ on.

[Sulla]

Redwood

Quote:

I think that this is where we differ. My smaller picture and bigger picture ... is ALL about Jesus. It is not about me. I am nothing. Can I be trusted in heaven? NO. I am going to heaven on the basis of loving and accepting Jesus as my Saviour. When I See His Face ... I will be 'fit' for heaven. But not before.

To make your view more clear to me can you explain what happens that makes it so we can be trusted in heaven but not now? Clearly its the character the shows this according to Ellen White so is our character changed at the secound coming along with our body?

Quote:

We can toss Ellen White quotes back and forth till the cows come home. There are plenty on both sides. The same with the Bible. But unless you have the right glasses on ... you will continue to see either Grace or Works as the requirement for Salvation.

See the thing is there are not quotes on both sides. They all agree 100%. As Ellen White says....

Faith and works are the two oars that must be used to urge the bark against the current of worldliness, pride, and vanity; and if these are not used, the boat will drift with the current downward to perdition.

Quote:

Personally ... I don't think it really matters to your salvation. Once you and I get to heaven ... God will straighten it all out. IOWs ... I think that both conservatives and liberals ... legalists and grace centered Christians will make it to heaven. There will be some of each. It is just harder for the legalists to do so. But with God ... all things are possible.

This exercise just shows me that knowledge and splitting all these hairs .... is just plain over rated.

I have to say I cant agree on the first part. Its very important to know what true sanctification is. Now can we small matters we were never ment to know sure. But something as important as knowing how your life should look day to day as a Christian is very important.

[Sulla]

guibox

Quote:

Sulla and John 317, you say that we need to be safe to save. This lies at the heart of sinless perfection theology. if we need to be sinlessly perfect to be 'safe to save', then please explain how those dear saints who've died accidentally in a car accident before their time are safe to save.

I know many saints who've passed away that I plan to see in heaven who didn't achieve sinless perfection in this life and didn't have 50+ years to become 'safe to save'

What if you guys died tomorrow?

Would you be 'safe to save'??

Or is Christ's grace a good second option, a safety net if you don't achieve your perfection?

"I work for salvaton through the Spirit but if worse comes to worse, Christ's blood saves me.

Either you are 'safe to save' or you aren't. If I die tomorrow before I've achieved 'safe to save' status, and Christ's blood is enough to make me fit for heaven before I can achieve sinless perfection, then it is WHOLLY SUFFICIENT at ALL times.

Christ alone!

Can you guys not see the blasphemy here in this view?

Can't you guys see that this is simply salvation by works??

I fully hope you will address the logic of this post.

I think you misunderstand. Safe to save means that God knows you will not sin when you get to heaven. But see God knows the future so its possible for say the thief on the cross to be saved. Whats clear is God judges people on the light the have been given, their age, the people around them and everything else to judge perfectly. For a good example of this read about what Ellen White says about William Miller who never accepted the Sabbath.

But now you ask how does perfection fit into this. (Perfection in our area meaning not living in known sin) When we really give God 100% of our heart without holding anything back then the overcoming in the natural result. Does that mean we are not tempted no. Satan temps us every day to change our affections from God to things of this world. And when we choose something we know is wrong over God that is sin and rebellion.

[Rita]

what about the thief on the cross? How does he fit into this. We know he is going to heaven.

[Sulla]

Redwood

Quote:

John ... I would not want to stop all of your declarations. They show clearly why your point of view that is so dangerous. Continue.

Redwood I do think John has a point. If we believe in Ellen White and the Bible we have to show how EVERY quote fits into our understanding. We cant just throw out or overlook the ones we do not like. I want to see every quote on both sides I can. As a matter of fact the ones that are hard for me to explain are the ones I want to see the most. These are the ones that will show any error in my understanding.

[Sulla]

Rita

Quote:

what about the thief on the cross? How does he fit into this. We know he is going to heaven.

Well we are so very lucky we have a God that is all knowing. Since he can see the future he could tell if the thief was safe to let into heaven. Lets look at what Ellen White says.

This was a genuine conversion under peculiar circumstances, for a special and peculiar purpose. It testified to all beholders that Jesus was not an impostor, but sustained his character, and carried out his mission to the closing scene of his earthly life. Never in his entire ministry were words more grateful to his ears than the utterance of faith from the lips of the dying thief, amid the blasphemy and taunts of the mob. But let no one neglect present opportunities and delay repentance, presuming on the eleventh-hour conversion of the thief, and trusting to a death-bed repentance. Every ray of light neglected leaves the sinner in greater darkness than before, till some fearful deception may take possession of his mind, and his case may become hopeless. Yet there are instances, like that of the poor thief, where enlightenment comes at the last moment, and is accepted with an intelligent faith. Such penitents find favor with Christ. {3SP 159.1}

[Sulla]

Redwood

Quote:

I personally feel it is dangerous to allow any author to place us in a narrow box. By nature ... we are sinners. By choice ... we sin. We have all the advantages available to us from Heaven ... to not sin. But, none of us take full advantage of that. If we did ... we would not need a Saviour.

No no not at all. First even one sin at any time in our life means we are under a penalty of death. This alone means we have to have a saviour because ALL have sinned. And if God is the one giving us a desire to repent. Giving us a desire to overcome. Giving us a new heart. Giving us his power to help us. How can we ever say its our works doing anything. Without God we are nothing. Its only by clinging to him we have hope.

Quote:

Because of this .... Christ came to this earth to life and die for us. It is by HIS doing and dying that we are saved. It is not by any doing or choices that we may make on this earth except to acknowledge that we are totally helpless without the blood of Jesus.

You I think misunderstand me. Its not a single choose to sin. We are talking about choosing sin over God. If we choose God over sin and surrender %100 to him we will overcome. The single choices are just evidence of the big one.

Quote:

The glasses that view Ellen White must realize and cover each statement with the understanding that it is the perfect life of Jesus that saves us. And the only way we will ever be fit for heaven is when we see His face. That is when the fitness for heaven happens. Our part is to develop the character that accepts this. That must be perfect. The victory over sin will be incomplete until the second coming.

Asuming you believe all of Ellen Whites statements are true. Then you need to be able to explain how the statement below fits with what you just said. If you cant you have two choices. Either you are wrong or Ellen White was wrong.

When Christ shall come again to earth it will not be to purify and refine the characters of men, and to fit them for Heaven. His work then will only be to change their corruptible bodies and fashion them like unto Christ's most glorious body. Only a

41

symmetrical and perfect character will in that day entitle men to the finishing touch of immortality. {3SP 40.2}

Quote:

"It is God's design to restore that similitude by giving to man victory over sin and over every temptation. The restoration will be completed at the second coming." 7BC 649

I wanted to read this quote in context but its not on the Ellen White CD. Or is it not an Ellen White quote?

Quote:

"Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." 1 John 3:1-2

This does not seem to be backing up what you said as clearly as you think.

[Sulla]

Quote:

I really think the SDA church has become presumptuous in this belief. Like God needs our 'perfect' obedience of His commandments to be vindicated. The hard facts are that NOBODY has kept the law perfectly. Therefore, if this were a primary vindication of God, He'd never be vindicated.

Somehow we think that our Spirit filled works (which no matter which way you slice it, is our 'righteousness' which the bible calls 'filthy rags) gives us the right to call ourselves 'vindicators of God' when it does no such thing.

The law requires perfect obedience to mean anything in such an important regard. Anything less is nothing. This is why Christ came. He fulfilled the righteous requirements.

The law is not to be kept to vindicate God (in our human error and frailty, our attempts always fall short), nor to save us by sinless perfection (Christ already did this, why do we make His effort void by our own??)

It is done out of love and obeyed from a changed heart desiring to do God's will even in our human sinfulness. To think that we can do anything in this sinlessness to be special to God or earn our way into the kingdom is to miss the whole point of what the gospel is about.

Christ and Christ alone.

I think you missed the point. Or atleast mine:) Satan claims that even with a new heart and God dwelling in your doing his work in you no one can keep the law. He claims the law is unfair and unjust. And if the law cant be kept he is correct. For if there is an excuse for sin then its not sin. And Christ showed it was possible by taking fallen nature and doing it. See below.

Here the test to Christ was far greater than that of Adam and Eve, for Christ took our nature, fallen but not corrupted, and would not be corrupted unless He received the words of Satan in the place of the words of God. {16MR 182.2}

Thats why is is our perfect example. And why he proved that satan was wrong and that the law was able to be kept.

[Sulla]

Bravus

Quote:

Many of the quotes state that only through the power of Christ dwelling in us can we cultivate the character of Christ, and that this is our privilege and our duty, and that we are falling short of our destiny and our high calling if we fail to do so. I can agree with all of that, and although she states it in an unusual way sometimes, that is correct Biblical Christian theology. It's the quotes where she says, word for word, that God does not have the power to save us unless we have reached perfection, that are wrong, and not only for the reasons guibox raised about time.

No you misunderstand. She is saying the first part God working in us leads to the secound part perfection (in our sphere anyway) so this is just proof that you really did have God working in you.

So lets look at your quotes.

Quote:

When Christ shall come again to earth it will not be to purify and refine the characters of men, and to fit them for Heaven. His work then will only be to change their corruptible bodies and fashion them like unto Christ's most glorious body. Only a symmetrical and perfect character will in that day entitle men to the finishing touch of immortality. {3SP 40.2}

No where does this say we thru are works have to do this. God being in the converted heart has done this.

Quote:

in order to obtain it, we must have a perfect character. The angels of God are watching the development of character. Angels of God are weighing moral worth; and we are to obtain a fitness here to join the society of sinless angels. Do you expect that when Christ comes he will give you that fitness? Not at all. You must be found of him without spot, without blemish, or wrinkle, or anything like it. Now is the watching and trying time. Now it is the time to obtain a preparation to abide the day of his coming, and to stand when he appeareth. {RH, April 19, 1870 par. 10}

Again no place does it say by our works we are doing this. Its Gods work in us just now instead of later.

Quote:

When He comes He is not to cleanse us of our sins, to remove from us the defects in our character, or to cure us of the infirmities of our tempers and dispositions. If wrought for us at all, this work will all be accomplished before that time. When the Lord comes, those who are holy will be holy still. Those who have preserved their bodies and spirits in holiness, in sanctification and honor, will then receive the finishing touch of immortality. But those who are unjust, unsanctified, and filthy, will remain so forever. No work will then be done for them to remove their defects, and give them holy characters. The Refiner does not then sit to pursue His refining process and remove their sins and their corruption. This is all to be done in these hours of probation. It is now that this work is to be accomplished for us. . . . {CH 43.4}

Same thing with this one. Even notice the last line "accomplished for us". We agree God is going to do this work in us. You think it will be when he comes back. I think it will be in this life.

[Sulla]

Bravus

Quote:

Many of the quotes you provided, John, are more correct: they say that sanctification will bring us to perfection, and we might quibble over the definitions of perfection, but they do not say that that perfection is a condition of our salvation. *That* is where the heresy lies. EGW clearly understands, in other quotes, that it is Christ's righteousness alone that is necessary and sufficient for our salvation, but in the quotes above she at least seems to suggest that we must add our own perfection to it in order to be saved.

I should just add that attempting to understand my perspective by aligning it with New Theology, Old Theology, Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy is not going to make that much sense, since I do not ally myself with a particular camp or read a particular literature, but read broadly and test all against the Bible alone.

Think of it this way. We both believe we will be perfect in heaven. We both believe our works having nothing to do with our right to heaven. The difference is we believe God will give us a perfect character here and then the new body when he comes. Thats the difference. So really what we are saying is that people are refusing to accept their new character. Just like if when God came they would say no I dont want that new body:)

[Sulla]

guibox

Quote:

So which is it, John? You just said that being 'safe to save' didn't mean 'sinless perfection' but now you are?

I don't believe EGW was infallible. EGW came from a strong, Wesleyan/Methodist background. It would be foolish to think that she was not influenced by it and the Arminianism of her day. She also was growing theologically. Des Ford has quotes from her that show her moving away from a sinless perfectionist theology later on in her life. Plua, as Brevus and others have mentioned, quotes can be given from both sides of EGW.

You see, it is only when you make EGW infallible and the sole intepreter and exegeter of scripture that she must NOT be wrong in all areas. It is only when you make her words to be manna straight from heaven to be interpreted as is, never changed and a blanket statement for entire generations that her being wrong is an issue.

And most especially, it is when you place EGW and her writings in the wrong context of their role for the church instead of their proper place as is laid out by Paul that her being wrong becomes a serious issue.

It is here where the uber-conservatives and the former-SDAs err. They do not understand the role of EGW and her writings and that she was not to be a historian, exegete of scripture, theologian, biblical interpreter or sectarian leader.

EGW was not to be a straight jacket on biblical interpretation or changing our views. She encouraged changing what needed to be changed.

Anyway, my point is that I believe that EGW wasn't infallible and if we were supposed to believe that she could never be wrong, then we'd have to abandon her as she did make errors. Many formers have already done that because they (like too many uber-conservatives today) hold her up to too high of a standard and place expectations on her that should never have been placed. She made errors. She was wrong sometimes..that's okay. She was not meant to be infallible. She knew her limitations.

She is not the be all and end all of biblical theology or correct doctrine.

If she is, then we are a sectarian/cultic organization.

I suggest that you read the 1919 GC discussion led by AG Daniells on this matter. They were discussing the way EGW and the SOP were to be used.

There is another possibility. That is that you are not understanding the quotes you think agree with you. That you have a wrong understanding that is now forcing you to have to say Ellen White is wrong.

[Sulla]

Bravus

Quote:

Nup. If we stood in the sight of a holy God without a mediator we would be instantly consumed. Scripture is very clear on this point.

Not exactly after the secound coming we will not longer have a mediator since we will no longer be sinning and all past sins will be as if they never were. So like I said in the other reply. We do not agree on when this will happen.

Quote:

This can be read a couple of ways, but on its face is heretical. The blotting out of our sins in the book and the recording of 'Pardoned' is instantaneous, depending only on Jesus' perfect record being written over our mess. It's not a slow process where the sins get blotted out one by one as we stop doing them or as we repent and ask forgiveness, and if we happen to forget one or not yet recognise that it's sin and die, we're damned because an earlier section of the same page says that's what happens if *any* sins are left on the ledger in our account.

There is a difference between unknown sin and known sin. So you at the very least have to understand what she believed on this before you can accuratly understand her quotes. She makes a clear distinction between choosing sin and unknown sins.

Quote:

Bottom line is, the only way *any* of us are seeing heaven is with Jesus' perfect substitutionary sacrifice as the sole entry in our account. Anything else and every single one of us is hellbound.

Agreed our works count as nothing. The question is when God changes our character. If its here now then its a clear test of if we have really given our heart to him or not.

[Sulla]

Bravus

Quote:

Let me try to clarify the discussion a bit:

Are you (John317 and Sulla) saying:

1. That Ellen White does not teach that our own character and sinlessness are essential for our salvation, and that those of us who read her that way are mistaken?

Or are you saying:

2. That Ellen White does teach that our own character and sinlessness are essential for our salvation, and that this is in fact the case?

We can sling quotes back and forth for weeks, but clarifying this distinction might help to make the discussion more fruitful.

If it's the second, then I maintain that she is teaching heresy, and ironically heresy that is close to that which SDAs claim Catholics teach. If it's the first, then I look forward to a clarification of the relevant quotes that shows that she is teaching the Gospel.

Speaking for myself I am saying God gives us a new character now not when he comes. The question is do we accept it or not. I reject that my work can make me fit for heaven. I am nothing without Christ.

[Sulla]

John

Quote:

Aren't you talking about standing in the "presence" rather than within "the sight of" of a holy God without a mediator? If we were in the unprotected presence and full glory of a holy God, certainly we would be consumed, but that is not what Ellen White is saying in that passage. She is simply saying that from that point on, no sins are forgiven. When He comes, Christ does not come as intercessor, mediator or High Priest. Probation will have closed and sin will have been completely dealt with. He comes as King, not as High Priest. See Daniel 12:1; Hebrews 9: 28; Rev. 19: 11-16; Rev. 22: 11.

I think you said this better than I did:)

[Robert]

How does God know a person will not sin if he lets him into heaven.

[Sulla]

Quote:

The problem with this junk is that it steals assurance from believers. It puts doubt in their minds if they are saved and it turns them from trusting in the merits of Christ to looking at their own performance.

You know Ellen White says to live hour by hour - day by day. Making sure we are correct with God this moment. And not to worry about the future but have faith in God. But I think many people do it backwards they worry about the future and don't make sure they are correct with God hour by hour and day by day.

[Sulla]

Quote:

"Iniquity (our bent to self) will not arise a second time."

Not sure what this quote is from but its correct. But not having a bent to self does not mean you will not sin. Satan, Adam, Eve and untold numbers of angles all sinned while they were perfect. So the question is the how does God know we will not sin like them?

Quote:

We will be free from "indwelling sin" what Paul terms "the law of sin", which is the love of self (our bent to self).

So you make no distinction between body and character?

[Sulla]

Wow finally answered every relevant post up to this point. Now time for a break haha.

[Robert]

For example known and unknown. Sin done in ignorance and sin that is a willful rebellion against God.

Not from the law's point of view!

"For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law..."

[Sulla]

All you have to do is read the rest of it.

12For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

13For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

16In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

[Bravus]

OK, Sulla, you have made your position clearer. But there still seems to be the strong presumption that if we have not allowed God to completely give us a new character then we will be denied heaven. How is that different from our works contributing to our salvation.

Let me address it another way. We've talked about justification and sanctification, but not yet glorification. The claim you are making is that glorification is *purely* a physical change - restoration of our bodies to their potential for immortality - with no spiritual component.

What do the relevant (Biblical, not EGW) texts say about this? I suspect the transformation is more dramatic than simply a physical upgrade.