"In Christ" what does that mean?

[teresaq]

yes!! i see only lack in myself and wonder how and when i shall love.

on occasion i see the minutest improvement, but it is only minute compared to the incomparable love God displayed towards us!!

[John317]

We are preparing to meet Him who, escorted by a retinue of holy angels, is to appear in the clouds of heaven to give the faithful and the just the finishing touch of immortality. When He comes He is not to cleanse us of our sins, to remove from us the defects in our characters, 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. Testimonies for the Church Volume Two (1868-1871), page 355, paragraph 1

[Guest]

Amen

[Guest]

We embrace the truth of God with our different faculties, and as we come under the influence of that truth, it will accomplish the work for us which is necessary to give us a moral fitness for the kingdom of glory and for the society of the heavenly angels. We are now in God's workshop. Many of us are rough stones from the quarry. But as we lay hold upon the truth of God, its influence affects us. It elevates us and removes from us every imperfection and sin, of what ever nature. Thus we are prepared to see the King in His beauty and finally to unite with the pure and heavenly angels in the kingdom of glory. It is here that this work is to be accomplished for us, here that our bodies and spirits are to be fitted for immortality. {2T 355}

[John317]

but you are one of the rare honest ones that actually calls the current set-up a creed.

What you call "a creed" are a description of 28 principle doctrines that the Seventh-day Adventist church believes. The prologue to the 28 Fundamental Beliefs denies they are a creed. I'm glad we have the FB because they tell people what we as a church believe. I agree with all of them. If I didn't I wouldn't have decided this was the church I wanted to join. I was attracted to this church after studying the Bible and finding that its beliefs are in full agreement with Scripture. I have no question that God raised up the Seventh-day Adventist church in order to proclaim the Third Angels Messages and help prepare a people for Christ's soon return.

Quote:

Seventh-day Adventists accept the Bible as their only creed and hold certain fundamental beliefs to be the teaching of the Holy Scriptures. These beliefs, as set forth here, constitute the church's understanding and expression of the teaching of Scripture. Revision of these statements may be expected at a General Conference session when the church is led by the Holy Spirit to a fuller understanding of Bible truth or finds better language in which to express the teachings of God's Holy Word.

[Guest]

Yep, the Bible is our creed.

[John317]

Amen

Quote:

We are preparing to meet Him who, escorted by a retinue of holy angels, is to appear in the clouds of heaven to give the faithful and the just the finishing touch of immortality. When He comes He is not to cleanse us of our sins, to remove from us the defects in our characters, 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. Testimonies for the Church Volume Two (1868-1871), page 355, paragraph 1

Notice some important things that come out of this quote:

1) When Christ comes, He won't cleanse us of our sins.

2) Jesus won't be coming to remove defects from our characters. All the cleansing from sin and the removal of defects from our characters must be done before Christ's return.

3) The saved will have holy characters BEFORE the close of probation, which occurs BEFORE the Second Coming.

Questions:

Is it the Holy Spirit who puts it in people mind's to teach that no one obeys God's commandments or is holy; that no one is overcoming sin; or if they aren't overcoming sin, it doesn't matter?

Is it the Holy Spirit who teaches that we will go on practicing sin until the resurrection or the Second Coming? Does her statement agree with the notion that sanctification has no relationship to being ready for Christ's return?

Would these words of Ellen White's be true if the only prerequisite for being prepared for Christ's return is being declared righteous?

[Guest]

The answer to all three questions is a resounding NO.

[Steve Billiter]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

but you are one of the rare honest ones that actually calls the current set-up a creed.

What you call "a creed" are a description of 28 principle doctrines that the Seventh-day Adventist church believes. The prologue to the 28 Fundamental Beliefs denies they are a creed. I'm glad we have the FB because they tell people what we as a church believe. I agree with all of them. If I didn't I wouldn't have decided this was the church I wanted to join. I was attracted to this church after studying the Bible and finding that its beliefs are in full agreement with Scripture. I have no question that God raised up the Seventh-day Adventist church in order to proclaim the Third Angels Messages and help prepare a people for Christ's soon return.

Quote:

Seventh-day Adventists accept the Bible as their only creed and hold certain fundamental beliefs to be the teaching of the Holy Scriptures. These beliefs, as set forth here, constitute the church's understanding and expression of the teaching of Scripture. Revision of these statements may be expected at a General Conference session when the church is led by the Holy Spirit to a fuller understanding of Bible truth or finds better language in which to express the teachings of God's Holy Word.

The Bible is our creed, yes. and it is mine. But my point is that no matter what the church says, technically, the 28 is still a creed, in itself that also includes all of scripture. Within it it says we accept the Bible and EGW. It also makes specific points.

Quick definitions (creed)

▸ noun: any system of principles or beliefs

▸ noun: the written body of teachings of a religious group that are generally accepted by that group

[Robert]

Quote:

So when someone points the finger, study their own posts and see if the behaviour they are pointing out, is actually there own.

"I know you are not saved."

"I know you are lost. Because you do not know the Lord."

Busted.... teehe

[Guest]

Quote:

teehe

That lipstick looks good on you Robert.

[Robert]

Quote:

teehe

That lipstick looks good on you Robert.

Thanks...it's my new color....

[teresaq]

But my point is that no matter what the church says, technically, the 28 is still a creed, ...

Quick definitions (creed)

▸ noun: any system of principles or beliefs

▸ noun: the written body of teachings of a religious group that are generally accepted by that group

The question is, "What is truth?" It is not how many years have I believed that makes it the truth. You must bring your creed to the Bible and let the light of the Bible define your creed and show where it comes short and where the difficulty is. The Bible is to be your standard, the living oracles of Jehovah are to be your guide. You are to dig for the truth as for hidden treasures. You are to find where the treasure is, and then you are to plow every inch of that field to get the jewels. You are to work the mines of truth for new gems, for new diamonds, and you will find them. {FW 77.1}

You know how it is with the papal power. The people have no right to interpret the Scriptures for themselves. They must have someone else interpret the Scriptures for them. Have you no mind? Have you no reason? Has not God given judgment to the common people just as well as He has to the priests and rulers? When Christ, the Lord of life and glory, came to our world, if they had known Him, they never would have crucified Him. God had told them to search the Scriptures: "In them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me" (John 5:39). {FW 77.2}

God help us to be Bible students. Until you can see the reason for it yourself and a "thus saith the Lord" in the Scriptures, don't trust any living man to interpret the Bible for you. {FW 77.3}

[pnattmbtc]

There was a lot of discussion regarding the formulation of the 28 (nee 27) fundamental beliefs, because of the creed question. On the one hand, there were those who wanted to say something, so other people would have a clear idea of what we believed. On the other hand were others who didn't want to product anything that smacked of being a creed.

I know the fellow who put together the part which speaks on the nature of Christ. He said it was very difficult, as there were factions on different sides who wanted to see it say certain things.

I thought the quote teresa presented was very interesting, about how the first SDA's saw a possible conflict between having a creed and the gifts. Ellen White herself has that famous quote (which Robert has presented) about the possibility of our having positions which are in error, and the need to allow for additional light.

[Woody]

Yes indeed! To love God with all our heart and our neighbor as ourselves..." For it is by our love for one another that we show our love for God. As I have repeated here a number of times before, by the quote you see below in my signature I am convicted every time I consider it. It has haunted me since the day I first read it. To think that I love God only as much as the person I love the least! Lord have mercy!

AMEN TOM

John 17 is telling us to Believe and to Love and ... it tells us to be united in this effort of sharing God's LOVE.

[Woody]

Quote:

God help us to be Bible students. Until you can see the reason for it yourself and a "thus saith the Lord" in the Scriptures, don't trust any living man to interpret the Bible for you. {FW 77.3}

What about dead men and women?

[pnattmbtc]

Returning to the "in Christ" idea, I'd like to address a point which has been raised, but not discussed in detail. The point has to do with the justice of attributing the punishment of one to the account of another. (This is assuming that the idea that the death of Christ has to do with the adjusting of accounts, but that's another discussion. For the sake of the point to be made in this post, we'll assume there's something to this.)

The "not in Christ" idea has Christ paying the price for you, the sinner, but that price only "counts" for you if you accept Him. So if you accept Christ, then you are "let off the hook" because Christ's punishment is credited in your place.

What the "in Christ" people are pointing out is that this is not just. That is, no judicial system allows the punishment of a crime to be satisfied by another who is not guilty.

Well, this isn't entirely true. If the punishment is the payment of a fine, then, of course, any one can pay that fine. However, if the punishment involves something personal, such as taking so many lashes of the whip, or spending so many days or months or years in prison, or being put to death, no judicial system allows one person to suffer the punishment of the other.

The "in Christ" people are pointing out that Christ did not suffer the punishment instead of us, but as us. That is, we (every person) suffered the punishment for sin because we were in Christ when He suffered that punishment.

This avoids the argument of injustice in terms of Christ's suffering in our place.

[pnattmbtc]

As I have repeated here a number of times before, by the quote you see below in my signature I am convicted every time I consider it. It has haunted me since the day I first read it. To think that I love God only as much as the person I love the least! Lord have mercy!

[teresaq]

Returning to the "in Christ" idea, I'd like to address a point which has been raised, but not discussed in detail. The point has to do with the justice of attributing the punishment of one to the account of another. (This is assuming that the idea that the death of Christ has to do with the adjusting of accounts, but that's another discussion. For the sake of the point to be made in this post, we'll assume there's something to this.)

The "not in Christ" idea has Christ paying the price for you, the sinner, but that price only "counts" for you if you accept Him. So if you accept Christ, then you are "let off the hook" because Christ's punishment is credited in your place.

What the "in Christ" people are pointing out is that this is not just. That is, no judicial system allows the punishment of a crime to be satisfied by another who is not guilty.

Well, this isn't entirely true. If the punishment is the payment of a fine, then, of course, any one can pay that fine. However, if the punishment involves something personal, such as taking so many lashes of the whip, or spending so many days or months or years in prison, or being put to death, no judicial system allows one person to suffer the punishment of the other.

The "in Christ" people are pointing out that Christ did not suffer the punishment instead of us, but as us. That is, we (every person) suffered the punishment for sin because we were in Christ when He suffered that punishment.

This avoids the argument of injustice in terms of Christ's suffering in our place.

that was explained very well and now i understand it whereas before i didnt. thanks.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

but you are one of the rare honest ones that actually calls the current set-up a creed.

What you call "a creed"...

[karl]

Originally Posted By: Tom

As I have repeated here a number of times before, by the quote you see below in my signature I am convicted every time I consider it. It has haunted me since the day I first read it. To think that I love God only as much as the person I love the least! Lord have mercy!

Here's the item from Tom's signature:

Quote:

I love God only as much as the person I love the least."

I was thinking about this in terms of conceptualizing the Gospel. What is the Gospel? What we perceive the answer to this question to be depends upon what we see the problem to be. If we see the problem to be a legal one, then the Gospel becomes the solution to this legal problem (e.g., God cannot legally pardon sin unless someone dies).

How about if we perceive the problem to be that we do not love? How much do we love the person we love the least? (e.g., those on this forum with whom we disagree; that's just on this forum! There may be others!) How does God enable us to love those who treat us badly? It's natural for us to return "eye for eye" and "tooth for tooth." How does God get us to turn the other cheek, to walk the second mile? Could it be that the Gospel answers this question?

Some say that God just counts us as righteous. He doesn't really make us righteous. So we just go on hating our brothers but God doesn't see it because He counts us as righteous for Christ's sake.

It's all in the counting.

Or is it?

[Guest]

If we don't allow him to do more than just count us as righteous, then we are just fooling ourselves, and we don't really know him.

It's a false gospel.

[Gerr]

If all God did/does is to reckon us righteous without making us righteous, then that would make Him a liar!

[Guest]

Yep, what you said.

[Robert]

If we don't allow him to do more than just count us as righteous, then we are just fooling ourselves, and we don't really know him.

It's a false gospel.

Oh boy...here we go....

The gospel isn't about what He does in us....It's what christ did 2000 years ago, period.

The fruits of the gospel is another subject....Why don't you say that when one accepts the gospel if there's no fruit once one's faith has matured, then it's a false faith?