Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 What you are presenting in vicarious atonement. The problem with this heresy is that makes a mockery of God. You see the law demands our death - our 2nd death. Since Christ isn't the sinner (we are) His substitution becomes impossible. For one God cant' die. Sin kills...the wages of sin brings death. Was Christ just playing dead then? No. So how could Christ take the curse of the law when He wasn't even guilty of sin? You see the vicarious atonement is legal fiction. It is a lie, but on the other side you have Christ as one's example. Hence these guys say that Christ had a sinful nature and by conquering it we must to the same too. Both are heresies and both must be avoided. Rob Quote
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 To say "you were perfect in all your ways until iniquity was found in you," signifies that Lucifer was attempting to hide his sin. He was trying to keep it hidden and secret. This is ridiculous, John. This you are making this up as you go. Lucifer is the father of self-love. It's his invention. Self-love is diametrically opposed to God's selfless agape love. At some point God's agape love took a u-turn towards self - i.e., back towards Lucifer. It was Lucifer who bent it back towards himself. Once this happened Lucifer no longer reflected the self-emptying love of God. He fell in love with Himself. This is when "iniquity was found in him." We have this problem too... Quote
Moderators John317 Posted January 30, 2009 Moderators Posted January 30, 2009 Do Ellen White quotes on the topic of Jesus' nature have any meaning to you? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Do Ellen White quotes on the topic of Jesus' nature have any meaning to you? Ellen White is not the measuring stick of truth. Rob Quote
Moderators John317 Posted January 30, 2009 Moderators Posted January 30, 2009 Originally Posted By: John317 To say "you were perfect in all your ways until iniquity was found in you," signifies that Lucifer was attempting to hide his sin. He was trying to keep it hidden and secret. This is ridiculous, John. This you are making this up as you go. Lucifer is the father of self-love. It's his invention. Self-love is diametrically opposed to God's selfless agape love. At some point God's agape love took a u-turn towards self. It was Lucifer who bent it back towards himself. Once this happened Lucifer no longer reflected the self-emptying love of God. He fell in love with Himself. This is when "iniquity was found in him." We have this problem too... I'm not saying anything different from you here. All I'm saying is that the expression of "iniquity was found in you" is a reference to the fact that Satan was attempting to keep it hidden. He didn't want it known. He tried to hide it under the guise of trying to help the other angels gain their freedom. It was a lie. But yes, you're right about the self-love. He changed as a result not of his nature but of his choices. His choices is what caused his nature to change and become "fallen." His nature before that point was the same as all the other angels. God made him perfect. And he was perfect until he began to entertain and then cherish wicked thoughts against Christ and God. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted January 30, 2009 Moderators Posted January 30, 2009 Originally Posted By: John317 Do Ellen White quotes on the topic of Jesus' nature have any meaning to you? Ellen White is not the measuring stick of truth. Rob I know you don't care what she wrote and would just as soon make a roast with her precious, beautiful books which the Spirit of God helped her to write. But I was asking guibox. Anyway, how come you quote her so often from time to time, then quickly chuck her? For those who believe in her, she does not have to be the "measuring stick" in order for her words to be of importance. Beside, you quote Jack Sequeira a great deal. Is he a measuring stick? He must be because I have never heard you say he makes errors? By the way, what errors. If you don't name the errors, I'm going to assume you really think he doesn't make any. (Just kidding!) Prophets don't only have to repeat what is in the Bible. If God raised up a prophet now, the test would not be that the prophet must only say what is already in the Bible. The test is whether the prophet contradicts the Bible. That is the test of all the Scriptures. The test for Joshua was whether he wrote anything that contradicted the first five books. It wasn't whether he added anything. Of course he added something. That is why it was written, because more was needed. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Anyway, how come you quote her so often from time to time, then quickly chuck her? Quote the good stuff, chuck the bad stuff. Of course you don't see error because she must be infallible. Rob Quote
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 All I'm saying is that the expression of "iniquity was found in you" is a reference to the fact that Satan was attempting to keep it hidden. Not true. Lucifer really thought that self-love was a better system then agape. The love of self sounds wonderful. Even folks here like Gerry say that we are to love ourselves. It's a christian virtue. What a deception. Rob Quote
Neil D Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Originally Posted By: John317 All I'm saying is that the expression of "iniquity was found in you" is a reference to the fact that Satan was attempting to keep it hidden. Not true. Lucifer really thought that self-love was a better system then agape. The love of self sounds wonderful. Even folks here like Gerry say that we are to love ourselves. It's a christian virtue. What a deception. Rob i suspect that self-love is more practical than agape love...therefore, it is a point of reference that most can understand. Quote Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve. Â George Bernard Shaw Â
guibox Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 What you are presenting in vicarious atonement. The problem with this heresy is that makes a mockery of God.You see the law demands our death - our 2nd death. Since Christ isn't the sinner (we are) His substitution becomes impossible.For one God cant' die. Sin kills...the wages of sin brings death. Was Christ just playing dead then? No.So how could Christ take the curse of the law when He wasn't even guilty of sin? I'm assuming this is directed at me. Tell me Robert...Why are we 'sinful'? Is it simply because we commit sin or is it because of who we are? If it is because of who we are then you must state that Christ took upon Himself our sinful condition. You can't have it both ways. He takes our fallen nature but not our separation. However, this cannot be so for it is was this condition that we cannot save ourselves from and what was separating us from God. First and foremost, Christ had to be our Savior, our substitute, our 'in place of', not merely our example. Atonement must come first. For this atonement to happen the 'spotless lamb' had to take our place but to be more than we are to remove this sin, otherwise we with the power of the Spirit could simply overcome our sins just like Christ did. Christ could not have done that had he taken this fallen nature, this sinful condition we are in. Remember that the full wrath of God was poured out on the cross. Like the lamb who was spotless and innocent before the priest transferred the sins to it, the sins of the world, the separation from God of a sinful condition, was then experienced by Christ and He did die the second death. People, the sacrificial system was there for a reason. Look at it and the analogy. What you are proposing is that the people took a lamb that was sinful just like them, with flaws and blemishes. A substitute means taking the place of...it implies being different, it implies being what we are not, and thus it cannot be what we are. It must be more than that to take our place, to save us from our sinful condition. Quote www.corbel.theacaistory.com
Moderators John317 Posted January 30, 2009 Moderators Posted January 30, 2009 Originally Posted By: John317 Anyway, how come you quote her so often from time to time, then quickly chuck her? Quote the good stuff, chuck the bad stuff. Of course you don't see error because she must be infallible. Rob She wrote against the concept that people were to divide up the testimonies between what they accepted and what they rejected. She compared that to people dividing up the Bible in the same way. See first volume of Selected Messages. This, for example-- Quote: Both in the [battle Creek] Tabernacle and in the college the subject of inspiration has been taught, and finite men have taken it upon themselves to say that some things in the Scriptures were inspired and some were not. I was shown that the Lord did not inspire the articles on inspiration published in the Review, [REFERENCE HERE IS TO A SERIES OF ARTICLES THE WRITER OF WHICH ADVOCATED THAT THERE WERE "DIFFERENCES IN DEGREES" OF INSPIRATION. SEE THE REVIEW AND HERALD, JAN. 15, 1884.--COMPILERS.] neither did He approve their endorsement before our youth in the college. When men venture to criticize the Word of God, they venture on sacred, holy ground, and had better fear and tremble and hide their wisdom as foolishness. God sets no man to pronounce judgment on His Word, selecting some things as inspired and discrediting others as uninspired. The testimonies have been treated in the same way; but God is not in this.--Letter 22, 1889. Selected Messages Book 1 (1958), page 23, paragraph 1;Chapter Title: The Inspiration of the Prophetic Writers; No Man to Pronounce Judgment on God's Word Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Originally Posted By: Robert Not true. Lucifer really thought that self-love was a better system then agape. The love of self sounds wonderful. Even folks here like Gerry say that we are to love ourselves. It's a christian virtue. What a deception. Rob i suspect that self-love is more practical than agape love...therefore' date=' it is a point of reference that most can understand. [/quote'] Self-love is a given...it's natural. Quote
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 She wrote against the concept that people were to divide up the testimonies between what they accepted and what they rejected. So, I'm to accept EGW's writings even though she claims fallibility? Something is fishy here.... Quote
Moderators John317 Posted January 30, 2009 Moderators Posted January 30, 2009 Originally Posted By: John317 She wrote against the concept that people were to divide up the testimonies between what they accepted and what they rejected. So, I'm to accept EGW's writings even though she claims fallibility? Something is fishy here.... You have to decide if she delivered the message of God in the Testimonies and in the Conflict Series or whether she was a false prophet and wrote her own opinions and messages. The definition of a false prophet is one who gives his own message while claiming it to be from God. Were the prophets and apostles infallible? Did they claim infallibility? Yet are we right to divide up the Bible according to degrees of inspiration? Some people do that. Even some Adventist scholars say that the Old Testament prophets are more authoritative than the New Testament writers. Each person has to make up his own mind on these things. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 What you are proposing is that the people took a lamb that was sinful just like them, with flaws and blemishes. Christ is sinless - He is without flaw and blemishes. Hence He is called that "Holy Thing", but...the humanity He came to LEGALLY save is sinful and fallen. We stand condemned under the law. To save us the Son of God was mysterious blended to our humanity in the womb of Mary. We call that the incarnation. The Son of God remained Himself (Spirit), yet in lived in our sinful humanity from the cradle to the grave. It wasn't His...it was ours. Now, it seems everyone is avoiding one big question: If the Holy Spirit can live in us*, and not be corrupted, why couldn't Jesus live in our flesh 2000 years ago? Yes? * 1 John 4:4 But you belong to God, my dear children. You have already won your fight with these false prophets, because the Spirit who lives in you is greater than the spirit who lives in the world. * 1 Cor 6:19 Or don't you know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, who lives in you and was given to you by God? You do not belong to yourself, Quote
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 You have to decide if she delivered the message of God in the Testimonies and in the Conflict Series or whether she was a false prophet and wrote her own opinions and messages. Wow, if you going to hold a gun to my head then EGW must go, but I don't have to make that choice. I am free to reject the bad and accept the good. I don't have to ask permission. It's nice that way. Rob Quote
Moderators John317 Posted January 30, 2009 Moderators Posted January 30, 2009 Originally Posted By: guibox What you are proposing is that the people took a lamb that was sinful just like them, with flaws and blemishes. Christ is sinless - He is without flaw and blemishes. Hence He is called that "Holy Thing", but...the humanity He came to LEGALLY save is sinful and fallen. We're in essential agreement on this. Jesus assumed fallen, sinful human nature. Did the Logos-- the Christ-- "become flesh"? John 1: 14 The Spirit of Prophecy agrees: That He might accomplish His purpose of love for the fallen race, He became bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh. The Faith I Live By (1958), page 48, paragraph 4 Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 1 Cor 6:19 Or don't you know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, who lives in you... The Bible says, "God is Spirit" - it also says that "God is agape". God cannot sin - it's impossible. There's nothing in God that can even remotely respond to sin. His love is outward - there's no "self" in God's love. He loves you more than Himself because there's no self-love in the divinity of God. Having said that, the 3rd person of the God-head (who can be omnipresent) - the Holy Spirit - upon conversion comes and tabernacles in you. In other words God resides in your sinful body. Q: Does that make Him a sinner? A: No! Why? Because He didn't change...He didn't become you...He remained God. Q: Does that make you Holy - sinless? A: No! Why? Because other that having your mind renewed you still retain your sinful nature. So both by performance and nature you are unlike the Holy Spirit who is in you. In other words you remain yourself, although your mind was renewed. Both of you are in one body, but you are not God and He is not you (a sinner). Rob Quote
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Did the Logos-- the Christ-- "become flesh"? By His obedience to all the commandments of God, Christ wrought out a redemption for man. This was not done by going out of Himself to another, but by taking humanity into Himself. Thus Christ gave to humanity an existence out of Himself. To bring humanity into Christ, to bring the fallen race into oneness with divinity, is the work of redemption. Christ took human nature that men might be one with Him as He is one with the Father, that God may love man as He loves His only-begotten Son, that men may be partakers of the divine nature, and be complete in Him (RH April 5, 1906). Christ "took" human nature. He clothed His Deity with humanity. He remained Himself while taking upon Himself our fallen lives. Quote
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Let every human being be warned from the ground of making Christ altogether human, such an one as ourselves; for it cannot be. The exact time when humanity blended with divinity, it is not necessary for us to know. [5BC 1128] 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, meet in Jesus--the Son of God, and the Son of man. [7BC 926] Quote
Moderators John317 Posted January 30, 2009 Moderators Posted January 30, 2009 Both of you are in one body, but you are not God and He is not you (a sinner). But that's not what happened in the incarnation. When the Holy Spirit dwells in our body, He does not become human. And we do not become God. In the case of Christ, He became human. He was not just dwelling in a human body. He became a man. He was and is both fully God and fully man. The man Jesus Christ was truly tempted to sin and he could have sinned. He could have fallen. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Robert Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 In the case of Christ, He became human. No, He assumed humanity. Your view makes Christ a sinner! Quote
Moderators John317 Posted January 30, 2009 Moderators Posted January 30, 2009 Originally Posted By: John317 Did the Logos-- the Christ-- "become flesh"? By His obedience to all the commandments of God, Christ wrought out a redemption for man. This was not done by going out of Himself to another, but by taking humanity into Himself. Thus Christ gave to humanity an existence out of Himself. To bring humanity into Christ, to bring the fallen race into oneness with divinity, is the work of redemption. Christ took human nature that men might be one with Him as He is one with the Father, that God may love man as He loves His only-begotten Son, that men may be partakers of the divine nature, and be complete in Him (RH April 5, 1906). Christ "took" human nature. He clothed His Deity with humanity. He remained Himself while taking upon Himself our fallen lives. Both Ellen White and the Bible say that Christ "became" a man. Why would you have a problem saying what the Spirit of Prophecy and the Bible say? Ellen White says dozens of times that Jesus Christ became a man. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted January 30, 2009 Moderators Posted January 30, 2009 Originally Posted By: John317 In the case of Christ, He became human. No, He assumed humanity. Your view makes Christ a sinner! When I say Jesus Christ became a man, I am using Biblical language. It is precisely what John 1: 14 says. The word "became" flesh. 2 John 7 says that Jesus is still in the flesh and that it's the spirit of antichrist that rejects this truth. By saying Jesus was a man or that the logos became human, we're not denying His deity. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.