BobRyan Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 quoting Ralph Larson Secret Writers Violate Context The secret writers of Questions on Doctrine cut her sentence in half, laid the first half aside and put in the last half beneath their own contrary headings. We gaze at this in disbelief. This is the ultimate violation of context. The writer has been represented as having said the exact opposite of what she actually did say. This was done by a scholar with a Doctor of Philosophy degree, a seminary professor. And this is not an isolated example. It is typical. In my book, The Word Was Made Flesh, I devote 33 pages to exposing, point by point, the wrongful manipulations of evidence in the paragraph presented by Dr. Froom. I also present conclusive evidence that the statement given to Walter Martin that our church had never believed that Christ came to earth in the human nature of fallen man was a methodological monstrosity and a historical fraud. How could it happen? John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
BobRyan Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Well, here we go again. It seems pretty clear to me that Christ came with the fallen physical nature of Adam but had the moral nature of the unfallen Adam. Agreed - why is this sooo hard for Ralph??? I just don't see where they keep struggling with this. What is not to get!! They address real problems in the church then immediately fall of their own horse with this one!! in Christ, Bob John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
Twilight Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Well, here we go again. It seems pretty clear to me that Christ came with the fallen physical nature of Adam but had the moral nature of the unfallen Adam. That is a very interesting point you make there Gerry. Will require further study. Maybe a new thread? Could you do that please? Could you start a new thread with your biblical position for this view? Please post here if you do, so that I do not miss it. Mark :-) The best wisdom is always second hand...
BobRyan Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Website: http://www.stepstolife.org John 8:32 - The Truth will make you free“The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin." COL 316.
Moderators Gerr Posted December 4, 2009 Moderators Posted December 4, 2009 I think the kicker is on B, where it is stated that Christ took the fallen nature of Adam. It depends on what is meant by that statement. We all are like babies born to cocaine-addicted parents. As soon as we are out of the womb, we are slaves to cocaine (sin), and would partake of it as soon as the opportunity arises. I don't believe that was true with Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and was called "HOLY - THE SON OF GOD" (Lk 1:35). None of the children of Adam of the flesh are conceived of the Holy Spirit or are called "holy" UNTIL they are born again. On the contrary, we are "BY NATURE children of wrath," Eph 2:3 ESV, "children of the devil," 1 Jn 3:10. Not so with Christ. But on the other hand, Christ obviously did not take on the pre-fall physical nature of Adam - smaller, weaker, and hungered, thirsted, required sleep just like we do.
Moderators Gerr Posted December 4, 2009 Moderators Posted December 4, 2009 Please see my preceding post.
Robert Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 God's JUSTICE demands the death of the criminal. ... The first is "atoning sacrifice" -- Christ's atoning sacrifice "He made him to KNEW no sin to be sin in our behalf" 2Cor 5 -- and "he took the stroke for us -- to whom the stroke was DUE" Is 53. Sorry, that's a false gospel....You are the sinner...you need to die....Christ dying instead of you doesn't answer the law's demand of death. Why not? Christ wasn't the sinner...He never sinned. To punish Christ for crimes doesn't answer the law. The law requires your death: "The person who sin, he shall die"....The Father can't die in place of the son, or the son for the father....
LifeHiscost Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 You go with Ellen as the measuring stick of truth (which is heresy) and I'll go with the Bible.... I would believe that, Robert, except I happen to know you use her writings prolifically when they seem to support your position. Am I missing something here? Regards! Lift Jesus up!!
LifeHiscost Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 I think the kicker is on B, where it is stated that Christ took the fallen nature of Adam. It depends on what is meant by that statement. We all are like babies born to cocaine-addicted parents. As soon as we are out of the womb, we are slaves to cocaine (sin), and would partake of it as soon as the opportunity arises. I don't believe that was true with Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and was called "HOLY - THE SON OF GOD" (Lk 1:35). None of the children of Adam of the flesh are conceived of the Holy Spirit or are called "holy" UNTIL they are born again. On the contrary, we are "BY NATURE children of wrath," Eph 2:3 ESV, "children of the devil," 1 Jn 3:10. Not so with Christ. But on the other hand, Christ obviously did not take on the pre-fall physical nature of Adam - smaller, weaker, and hungered, thirsted, required sleep just like we do. Very good, Gerry. My understanding finds no fault with your post, as well as the reality that I have no inclination of placing this sinful mortal as being on a par with the spotless Son of God, even after being born from above. While the Father sees us as perfect, seeing us cleansed by the blood of Jesus, my present inclination toward sinful conduct had and has no place in reflecting the reality of Jesus' spotlessness, though I admit, with my submission to Him I can reflect His purity as the Holy Spirit works through the righteous acts of my person Jesus, the same yesterday, today, and forever. Praise God!!! Blessings! Lift Jesus up!!
LifeHiscost Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Sorry, that's a false gospel....You are the sinner...you need to die....Christ dying instead of you doesn't answer the law's demand of death. Why not? Christ wasn't the sinner...He never sinned. To punish Christ for crimes doesn't answer the law. The law requires your death: "The person who sin, he shall die"....The Father can't die in place of the son, or the son for the father.... If you are satisfied this conclusion above is your final, Robert, you present a picture that condemns all to the second death at Christ's third coming to this earth, which conclusion denies the gospel message that Jesus became our substitute and died, taking our penalty for sin. "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." 2 Corinthians 5:21 NKJV Regards! Lift Jesus up!!
Robert Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Originally Posted By: Robert You go with Ellen as the measuring stick of truth (which is heresy) and I'll go with the Bible.... I would believe that, Robert, except I happen to know you use her writings prolifically when they seem to support your position. Am I missing something here? Regards! So? I'll quote Billy Graham if I agree with him....In fact I'll quote who I want....
Robert Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." 2 Corinthians 5:21 NKJVRegards! How was He made sin? Was it only pretend? Explain the gospel!
LifeHiscost Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Originally Posted By: LifeHiscost "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." 2 Corinthians 5:21 NKJVRegards! How was He made sin? Was it only pretend? Explain the gospel! I wouldn't begin to believe I understood the full depth of the above truth. However there are some lessons I'm satisfied have been made plain. For one, when Jesus died He was accepting the penalty for all the sins of all the world, from the beginning of the human race. That means if you or I or anyone accepts His sacrifice in His dying in our place, He was actually willing to trade His rightful place in heaven, for eternity, for our rightful penalty is the second death which has no end. The reason I know He was willing to trade places for eternity is based on His Words on the cross, "...Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying,..My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" "Matthew 27:46 KJV Jesus was unable to see His resurrection as assured during His crucifixion, in affect, literally taking our death upon Himself or becoming sin for us. From henceforth, just as the bronze serpent was lifted up for the Israelites in the desert(Numbers 21), for them to look at and live, so all that is necessary now for us to receive His life is to look to Him dying on the cross for us, and by faith receive His life. And that is not pretend but becomes an actual transaction which acts of righteousness in the lives of the redeemed give witness to the gift. "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." James 1:17 KJV Blessings! Lift Jesus up!!
Moderators Kevin H Posted December 5, 2009 Moderators Posted December 5, 2009 Originally Posted By: LifeHiscost "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." 2 Corinthians 5:21 NKJVRegards! How was He made sin? Was it only pretend? Explain the gospel! I'm sorry Robert, but the gospel is NOT being able to give the right classroom lecture, we don't believe in righteousness by the ablity to craft the perfect lecture.
Moderators Kevin H Posted December 5, 2009 Moderators Posted December 5, 2009 You go with Ellen as the measuring stick of truth (which is heresy) and I'll go with the Bible.... Where did I ever say that she was the mesuring stick of truth? What I'm saying is that she has helped me to focus. She is more like a child on a trip through a museam who says "Oh! Look at that!" and helps you to notice things that would be missed if you just rushed through on your own. I can read all about archaeology, but when I read about prominant role (and misapplications) of the great controversy in the ancient world and how the Bible took the reader's knowlege of those issues for granted, yet today we live in a world that is quite ignorant of the great controversey. When I read that ancient court systems would have investigative phases of the judgement. When I read about poetic structures that point to say in Revelation that the center is the 3 beasts and 3 angels, she only causes me to take notice. When she talks about Sunday Laws, but seeing that she goes much deeper than we do (we are too stuck on days, and exact applications)she sees the issues of the principles of liberty of conscience, and we have a whole train of thought in the Bible of saveours and anti-saveours, a whole train of thought on the mark of the beast, all focused on liberty of conscience vs. enforced religion, and all in a narrow pathway between the two heresys of enforced religion, and "it does not matter what you believe, truth is with in you" but the recognision that there is an external truth in God, but that we all see through a glass darkly and we need the freedom to worship God based on where we are in our spiritual growth and our honest understanding of the Bible. When I read commentaries on Paul which divorce Paul from the rest of the Bible and where Paul happens to be nothing other than a very modern menber of the evangelical movement, an Paul who is only interested in the issues that Martin Luther faced, a Paul who has little room in heaven for those who are not modern evangelical Christians, where Righteousness by faith is replaced by righteousness by vocabulary, I am very hesatant. When I see studies that show how he fit into first century Judaism and how his writings fit with the Bible, where the gospel is about what Jesus does for us, whether we understand it or not, then I am very interested. Robert; Have you ever looked at this new approach to Paul that Biblical scholars are starting to discover? I invite you to contact Biblical Resources (just put in your google "Jim Flemimg" and "Biblical Resources") and get his lecture on "Acts: New Discoveries of the Ancient Church" and also get the notebook. Listen to them, look at the notebook and tell me first where it is heresy, then second, how Mrs. White has to be the measure of truth to listen to this Methodist archaeologest. If you cannot afford it, althought my finances are tight, I'm sure we can work something out with Biblical Resources where I can pay part if not all of it for that one series for you. And also, I'd like to invite you to get the original yellow and black copy of "Sanctuary and the Atonement" and read the 3 studies in Ellen White and show what is so heritical about the thoughts expressed there about her work. (sadly that book is out of print, but if your church libarary does not have it you should be able to get it by interlibarary loan. Also the Biblical Research Society of the General conference can send copies of the studies)
Robert Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Are you arguing with the Bible now Robert? You don't know, huh? You can't explain the gospel....That's why you have been sidetracked on the perfectionism heresy....
Robert Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 When she talks about Sunday Laws.... Look, EGW had light, it was just limited light. The Sunday laws of the future are an attack on the gospel....That will be the issue....
Steve Billiter Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Robert, If you call Ellen Whites writings heresy, then you are also calling the Bible heresy. her writings are in harmony with the Bible, or I would throw them out. It is Satan's plan to weaken the faith of God's people in the Testimonies. Next follows skepticism in regard to the vital points of our faith, the pillars of our position, then doubt as to the Holy Scriptures, and then the downward march to perdition. When the Testimonies, which were once believed, are doubted and given up, Satan knows the deceived ones will not stop at this; and he redoubles his efforts till he launches them into open rebellion, which becomes incurable and ends in destruction. {4T 211.1} It is Billy Graham who is the heretic: Robert Schuller: "Tell me, what do you think of the future of Christianity?" Billy Graham: "I think everybody who knows Christ, whether they are conscious of it or not, they're members of the Body of Christ...God's purpose is to call out a people for His name, whether they come from the Muslim world, Buddhist world, the Christian world, or the non-believing world, they are members of the Body of Christ, because they've been called by God. They may not even know the name of Jesus...and I think they are saved, and that they are going to be in heaven with us." Graham says it doesn't matter if you are Muslim or Buddhist, they are still saved and will be in heaven. How can one know Christ and not be conscious of it? Sure you can believe and quote whomever you want.Will that help you get to the kingdom of God? Will it help others get there? God Bless,
oldsailor29 Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Look, EGW had light, it was just limited light. The Sunday laws of the future are an attack on the gospel....That will be the issue.... Ellen White was taken in vision into the divine counsel, and she was shown many things. When a messenger of God is in the divine counsel, he/she sees all the other prophets who have ever been there and all the prophets of the future. And of course they see that which the Lord wants them to emphasize. EGW was shown that which the Lord wanted her to emphasize several times. These visionary experiences have given her the knowledge and authority to make the statements she has made. Lucifer does not have to attack the gospel. SDA preachers do that every Sabbath on a regular basis. They sing, "Turn Your Eyes Upon Jesus," then they read what Moses said instead. The Sunday laws are an attack on the sovereignty of God. This was Lucifer's first point of attack, and it will be his last. Alpha and omega. Prs God, frm whm blssngs flw http://www.zoelifestyle.com/jmccall
skyblue888 Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 oldsailor, Are you saying that the "alpha" and "omega" of apostasy in these last days is about the Sabbath? "The merits of His sacrifice are sufficient to present to the Father in our behalf." S.C.36.
Robert Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 The Sunday laws are an attack on the sovereignty of God. Absolutely not! It is an attack on the gospel and I can prove it....
oldsailor29 Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Originally Posted By: oldsailor29 The Sunday laws are an attack on the sovereignty of God. Absolutely not! It is an attack on the gospel and I can prove it.... Well, of course I could be wrong. Prs God, frm whm blssngs flw http://www.zoelifestyle.com/jmccall
Robert Posted December 5, 2009 Posted December 5, 2009 Originally Posted By: Robert Absolutely not! It is an attack on the gospel and I can prove it.... Well' date=' of course I could be wrong. [/quote'] Yes, according to the traditional view you are correct, but a more careful reading will reveal that the Sabbath will be a sign of the gospel restored. Here's Jack (and yes, I completely agree): When Matt. 24:14 will finally become a reality, the human race will be polarized into only two groups — believers and unbelievers. At that time, the Sabbath will become the seal of God just as circumcision was to Abraham [Rom. 4:11]. And Sunday will become the Mark of the Beast [Rev. 14:9,10 (12:9-12; 13:4)].
Recommended Posts