Present doctrine of atonement fallacies

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: karl

Christ's death was the ultimate expression that God gives His LIFE to us.

Amen!

Quote:

The focusing on Christ's death in modern theology, and especially forensic theology, has often obscured the fact that salvation is all about receiving His LIFE.

Agreed!

so its His life up to the cross and His resurrection that give us life? His death brings us to repentance, or should?

something im trying to grasp and havent found words for yet, so if im not making sense that is why...

[fccool]

Quote:

If you say you can praise God for masturbation, I will tell you that I know people who consider all kinds of unmentionable immoral acts to be lovely and good and praiseworthy. If we can praise God for these things, it says more about ourselves than about the truth or about God. There was a time when I also thought many evil things were lovely and good and noble.

....

As you've said yourself, God's thoughts are not our thoughts. Human thoughts are largely that masturbation is OK and even good, but God sent a message through Ellen White to tell us differently. We can either accept or reject that message. It's up to us to agree or disagree, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a sin according to the principles laid down in the Bible and the plain words of the woman whom the church believes God inspired to give us His messages.

John, before you go too far with assumption and condemnation, thinking that we are perverse generation who enjoy breaking God's law and disobey and curse His prophets...

I'm not advocating masturbation as recreational activity .

Now, Ellen White did state that masturbation was wrong, but she also said that we should go by the Bible when any argument of validity arises. Biblically, we have principles concerning sexuality.

1) Abstain from fornication (sexual immorality)

2) Practice sex within the context of marital relation

3) Don't withhold sex from partner

4) Avoid lust (mental fornication)

5) Avoid homosexual relations or bestiality

Masturbation is glaringly absent... WHY? If majority of boys masturbate at certain period in their lives... then why wouldn't God condemn it? Was He waiting for Ellen White to reveal this in the last days?

If you are going to feed "accept of reject" talk, then why not back it up by the Bible? Bible is blatantly clear on issue of sexual purity.

Before you take my views on masturbation too far you have to UNDERSTAND MY POINT.

1) God's will for us to have sexual partner (in marriage)... EARLY IN LIFE. People were not made to wait until 24-25 to get married and remain virgins. In Ancient culture, the girls married as soon as they hit puberty... 13-14. Boys ... 16-17. The marriage was generally arranged. The idea of dating was absolutely absent in their culture.

I lived in such culture, and my parents frequently joked about already picking me a bride... when I was 5. Then I would reply that I don't ever want to be married... I'd rather be single for life... and for a while they were concerned that I was gay because I poured my life into academics and sports and did not set my goals on "relationship" until after college.

To sum up, it was not God's will for us to "hold our horses" till we were 25. It's not consistent with human physiology as God designed us. We were to take up a bride as soon as our bodies called for it.

2) In today's world... in us the average marriage age is:

United States: 27.8 for men, 25 for women. (2000)

If you think that any kid will not fulfill his curiosity in these 10 years of his adult life... you are living in lala land. Most survey's indicate that between 90-98% percent of boys masturbate. I can tell you right now that virtually all boys will at some point in their life masturbate given the our cultural view of marriage and dating and what constitutes to be an adult.

3) Fundamentalist Christians like yourself would like to ignore the above facts and try to fight the fire with guilt. How?

- By avoiding the subject of sex like wildfire

- By not being honest when it comes to the subject

- By ignoring the realities of human physiology

- And by creating an illusion in minds of kids that you somehow avoided all of that, when in fact you were no better than them at all!

So, instead of guiding, and encouraging young people through the ways of purity... What did your generation do? They made sex to be a "dirty deed". Something that we should not talk about at all.

Your generation are responsible for sexual revolution because you refused to talk about sex in a proper manner outside of condemning "the evil deeds", and instead let the world develop their own opinions... which resulted in 180 swing to the other extreme. You guys canonized your preferences with no underlying explanation, because you were too afraid to hand the kids responsibility they should have had.

Now, our kids have to live in the world that resulted from your view of sexuality... or lack there of.

And when they use masturbation as a coping mechanism with overwhelming sexual pressure that they deal with on everyday bases in this world... what do you do? You lie to them!

You tell them that it is sinful beyond imagination and it breeds all sorts of disease and blindness. It is no wonder that they don't believe you anymore.

[John317]

What follows is very frank talk about a sexual matter. If anyone is offended by such language, STOP READING NOW.

I agree with much that you say and also have some disagreements. We can talk about those sometime maybe on a discussion devoted to the topic or some related issue.

For now just let me say I am not condemning you. I'm simply trying to say that the fact that we might think something is praise-worthy doesn't make it so. Christians change their minds about those things over time as the Spirit teaches and guides and convicts. Only about 6 years ago, I was involved in all kinds of sexual immorality that I would be ashamed to mention now. I'm what you would call a "conservative Christian" now but there was a time not long ago when "anything went." I know about masturbation from experience because my older brother taught it to me when I was about 6 and 7 years old. And by the time I was 14, I used to enjoy taking other boys my age into my tree house in Loma Linda and teaching them. I know from my own personal experience that Ellen White is right about masturbation. I have never known a man or boy who masturbated without lusting in his mind. A man reaches a point during the process where he cannot control his thoughts or his body's urges. It was one of the main things that kept me from living a Christian life devoted to God. I had wanted to serve Jesus from a young age, but instead, from about 14 until not many years ago, I was addicted to those kinds of immoral activities. They literally took over my life. I felt that I couldn't stop them, and it was the reason I didn't become a pastor. I quit because I had no desire to stand up in church and preach when I had been doing the things I felt that I could not control all through the week.

My experience is not unusal. I can't tell you how many men I met whose lives were devoted to satisfying their sexual urges. I worked in a mental hospital in San Bernardino and knew patients who couldn't function because of their addiction to masturbation. Some literally could not go half an hour without doing it. It ruins marriages and people's relationships with Christ. WE can't live a pure life for God while practicing those things. We think we can-- I thought I could for years-- but it's a lie. We think, "Well, just this once. I know God understands and will forgive." Yes, He does understand and yes, He forgives, but that is not the problem. The problem is what it does to us and the scars it leaves.

Do not think that I would condemn anyone. How could I? I'm just serious about something that I know destroys lives. Am I saying maturbation has these effects on all men or that it destroys everyone who does it? No, of course not. But one never knows if one is going to be one of those, and there are many. But even if a man thinks he can do it without sinning in his mind, he's a fool if he thinks he's its master. Sin crouches at the door and it wants you but by God's power you must overcome it. Either that, or it will overcome you.

[Guest]

Amen!

[Nic Samojluk]

If you believe this, why do you quote her as an authority?

[Nic Samojluk]

1. The proto-gospel found in Gen 3:15 antedates ANY of the prophecies that you say provide an alternative ending. This passage predicted an injury (serpent bruising his heel) to the Messiah. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

2. The atonement sacrifice of Abel and the patriarchs that prefigured a sacrificed Messiah antedates any of those you call alternative scenarios.

3. The call for the sacrifice of Isaac prefiguring the Father's sacrifice of His Son antedates any of the so-called alternative scenarios.

4. Isa 53 is unequivocal about what was to happen to the Messiah.

5. And John says the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world. He was predestined to die.

6. Which leads me to believe that those so-called alternative scenarios were the earth-made-new or the restored state that the prophets were seeing.[/

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

If deity didn't die, so that Christ only died as a human being, then it's a human life that would be used for debt payment.

Good thinking! This is evidence that the legal theory of atonement is a very defficient way of explainin the death of Jesus Christ.

[Robert]

For two reasons: I cite her because you seem to believe that she is infallible, and I also cite her whenever her views agree with the Bible.

Been there...said that....Excellent point!

[Robert]

Quote:

If deity didn't die, so that Christ only died as a human being, then it's a human life that would be used for debt payment.

Good thinking! This is evidence that the legal theory of atonement is a very defficient way of explainin the death of Jesus Christ.

No, guys...we died....The law demands our death. We died to the law in the body of Christ. When One died, all died because all men were gathered up into Christ. The law can only be satisfied if you die. So either you can accept your death in Christ or you must suffer your own personal death under law.

[Nic Samojluk]

eating Christs flesh would be taking in His words, the bible...drinking His blood would be appropriating His life...

[Nic Samojluk]

God didnt kill the ram in the case of abraham...and abraham still was under the assumption he was to slay isaac...

Excellent again! To me, the experience of Abraham teaches us that God did not require and did not want the death of his Son. It is high time that we blame the one who had been "a murderer from the beginning" for the crucifixion of Jesus."

[Robert]

Originally Posted By: teresa

God didnt kill the ram in the case of abraham...and abraham still was under the assumption he was to slay isaac...

...God did not require and did not want the death of his Son. It is high time that we blame the one who had been "a murderer from the beginning" for the crucifixion of Jesus."

This is good reading, if you read it....

[fccool]

What follows is very frank talk about a sexual matter. If anyone is offended by such language, STOP READING NOW.

.....

Sin crouches at the door and it wants you but by God's power you must overcome it. Either that, or it will overcome you.

John,

I appreciate your honesty, and as I've said before... I have a great amount of respect for it.

Yet, I think that all of us tend to relate to other people from our own perspective thinking that our experience is general.

For example, It's very difficult for my wife to erase emotional abuse that she has to put up with from her overbearing mother. For her mom, nothing she ever does is good enough. There's always waves of criticism that she comes back home crying after.

I was raped as a child, and I don't see it being a memory that messes my sexual life. I feel free from any baggage, no matter how unpleasant that memory is, I've learned to forgive the person (I don't even know who it was). So, comparatively I tend to think that her emotional abuse does not compare to mine. I mistakenly throw her in the same category as me, and I expect he to be just as I am when it comes to certain struggles when I demand her to let go.

BUT, SHE'S NOT ME. She does not struggle with the same things that I was.

Likewise, I think you tend to throw people in the same category, expecting them to experience the same struggles as you did.

Sure, I've heard of two guys in our school who began with watching porn together, which progressed to group masturbation, and ended up with homosexual favors and full-blown homosexuality. I'm also aware of the sexual addicts. BUT the issue at heart is NOT SEX. IT IS NOT!!!!

Sex addicts will pervert the marital sex likewise. The issue is lack self-control, which results in abuse. We can't throw everything into one big pile of "NO" because of your experience.

I know that I absolutely can't be around chocolate. I forbid my wife to by it in any quantities, because it triggers a frenzy that's very hard to control for me. In such case, I choose to avoid it. I would not demand you to do the same, because of my experience.

You have to consider implications of what you are saying:

1) We don't use condoms or birth pills for contraception, but we do practice it. Is it wrong to do so?

2) Artificial insemination is practiced by many Adventist couples. Is it wrong for them to do so?

3) Many Christians struggle with their culturally mandated marriage age expectations. Is it wrong for them to use masturbation to avoid sexual immorality, granted that it's done without lust?

Several years ago, I've got epididymitis... with my urologist actually encouraging release in order to avoid the problems. He said that holding multiplies carcinogens in body which could lead to some problems down the road... so some ejaculation is necessary to maintain healthy reproductive system.

Sure, our bodies do have mechanism to release and ejaculate involuntarily. But I did find it problematic that in my case, being single at 25, in our pornographic culture ... turned me into a hormonal disaster, and suppressing all of that lead to some testicular issues down the road.

So, please! I respect you, but once again... you are cannonizing your experiences. The Bible was written from man's perspective, and yet it's silent on masturbation. I would not expect woman's OPINION of it to reflect the reality. Our physiologist are different when it comes to this issue.

You may believe that it was "inspired commentary"... but her statement was in fact ... word-for-word repetition of accepted though on the subject by her contemporaries and predecessors, which again and again proven to be untrue FOR OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of people.

[Nic Samojluk]

For instance, Ellen White wrote that masturbation is sinful and harmful. Many people today dispute those statements and say that Ellen White was wrong.

[Nic Samojluk]

It is not uncommon for men to be aroused to the point of involuntary ejaculation.

True, which would be very embarrassing for a young man on his first date with a girl. He would have to rush to clean himself up a little.

[Gerr]

Quote:

Your interpretation seems to negate the main message of the Bible from Genesis through Revelation, which is: Obey and live. Disobey and die.

"For no one can ever be made right with God by doing what the law commands. The law simply shows us how sinful we are. But now God has shown us a way to be made right with him without keeping the requirements of the law, as was promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets long ago. We are made right with God by placing our faith in Jesus Christ. And this is true for everyone who believes, no matter who we are." Rom 3:20-22 NLT.

Quote:

This was the message to Adam and Eve; it was the message contained in the blessings and curses recited by the Israelites before they entered the promised land; it was the message given to Abraham, King David, King Solomon, and the message repeated to Israel by all the prophets. To argue that this permanent truth did no apply to the people that crucified Jesus makes no sense to me.

See above.

Quote:

Jesus did believe that Jerusalem [could have opted to accept him as their Messian. This is precisely why he was so disappointed on his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He wept because he realized that the Jewish leaders had chosen a path which would result in the destruction of the Holy City.

Coulda, shoulda, woulda.

Quote:

It seems to me that you are misinterpreting God’s predictions. The Lord has always painted before men a double possible scenario, one if they are obedient and another if they disobey. This was true with Lucifer, Adam and Eve, the chosen nation, and with the Jewish leaders who crucified Jesus.

His death was inevitable. He was preddestined to die.

Quote:

The killing of Jesus was the last thing God wanted them to do; this is why Jesus gave them so much evidence of his divinity and power. To claim that god wanted Jesus to die is to twist what the Bible teaches regarding the character of God. God did know that this could be the outcome given human moral freedom, but to claim that it represented God’s will is to blame God for the evil deeds of humans and the Devil.

"Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand." Isa 53:10 ESV

"But the Lord was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand." NASB

Quote:

It should be remembered that the promises and threatenings of God are alike conditional. {Mar 61.1}

Yes, but God knew what choices they were going to make.

[Nic Samojluk]

Masturbation, on the other hand, is a misuse or abuse of God's creation.

Perhaps you are confusting use with abuse. Ellen White also stated that there can be abuse when sexual activity in a marriage is too frequent. Overeating is sinful as well.

[Gerr]

To all,

How did a discussion on the atonement degenerate into masturbation and condoms?

Can we get back to the atonement?

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

Shane: Onan was not masturbating. If he was he would have been by himself. What he did was coitus interruptus which involved another person - his sister-in-law. He used her for his own sexual pleasure - like she was a prostitute.

You are right. But isn't masturbation the same thing in principle?

Masturnation is using one's sex organ for the purpose of private, selfish pleasure instead of using it as God intended us to use it: for procreation and sexual pleasure with one's marriage partner. In other words, God intended it to be used for another and not only for ourselves.

Another thing that Onan did that was evil is that he deliberately-- and even defiantly-- refused to fulfill his responsibility to his brother and thus to the communinity and to God.

Emptying the bladder provides a certain amount of pleasure and it provides a relief as well. Do not impose your morals on a soldier who might be away from his wife for long periods of time!

[pnattmbtc]

so its His life up to the cross and His resurrection that give us life? His death brings us to repentance, or should?

something im trying to grasp and havent found words for yet, so if im not making sense that is why...

[Gerr]

Quote:

If deity didn't die, so that Christ only died as a human being, then it's a human life that would be used for debt payment.

Good thinking! This is evidence that the legal theory of atonement is a very defficient way of explainin the death of Jesus Christ.

One should not be wedded to one particular view of the atonement because all the metaphors that the Bible uses will have a breakdown somewhere along the line. That's why so many metaphors are used to illustrate certain aspects of the truth.

As I said before, while God is loving and merciful, He also has to deal with the law & its demand for justice. IOW, how can He be merciful and just at the same time when He accepts a sinner into the presence of a holy God whose eyes cannot countenance evil?

[pnattmbtc]

For two reasons: I cite her because you seem to believe that she is infallible, and I also cite her whenever her views agree with the Bible.

[pnattmbtc]

The practice of documenting sources was not established in biblical times; besides, Bible writers did not make us believe that they were not dependent on other human sources. The practice of giving credit to other authors was fairly established when Mrs. White was writing. James White once complained that other publishers were borrowing from Adventist sources without giving proper credit. On top of all this, Ellen White made me believe that she was no dependent on other authors for what she was writing.

There's a lot of misinformation on this subject.

David Conklin has researched this subject for years, meticulously documenting instances of similar phrases used in a number of different books. For example, looking through the following link, one can see every instance of similar phrases from "The Desire of Ages" and other books that have been mentioned as sources from which Ellen White supposedly plagiarized.

http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/David/index.html

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

It should be remembered that the promises and threatenings of God are alike conditional. {Mar 61.1}

Yes, but God knew what choices they were going to make.

This opens up a can of worms. If the choices we make are knowable before we make them, then it's not possible for us to make any other choice than that which is known. Many have difficulty understanding this concept for some reason, I'm not sure why, but it's nevertheless the case.

For example, say God sees that tomorrow you will make the choice to have pizza for lunch, and this fact is recorded. We'll say it's recorded at noon today, and you'll have your pizza at noon tomorrow. What's the situation as of 11:00am tomorrow?

1.God saw that you would choose to eat pizza.

2.God recorded this fact.

If you didn't have pizza tomorrow at noon then what God recorded would be false, which is impossible.

Here's another way of seeing the contradiction:

1.If God knows with 100% certainty that a given thing will occur, say X, then X is 100% certain to occur.

2.If X is 100% certain to occur, then no being can act in such a way that X does not occur.

So if God knows with 100% certainty that you will have pizza tomorrow at noon, not only can you not do anything to prevent this from happening, but no one can. It's 100% certain to occur.

Many people misunderstand this topic thinking in terms of causality, as if God's knowledge of an event causes it to occur. This isn't the issue. The issue is not that there's a causal relationship between the knowledge of an event and the event occurring (i.e., knowing that an event will occur does not cause the event to occur). The problem is that there's a logical contradiction in the following:

1.Future events can be 100% known.

2.Future events can be changed.

You can have one or the other, but not both. If the future event can be changed, then it's being known is contingent upon its ability to be changed.

Put another way, if it's possible for you to choose not to have pizza tomorrow, then it cannot be 100% known that you will pizza tomorrow (because if you choose not to, you won't). If it's 100% known that you won't choose not to have pizza, then it can't happen that you won't make this choice. It's not that you don't have the physical ability to make the choice, but it's not logically possible that you will make this choice, given the assumption that it's 100% known that you won't.

[pnattmbtc]

How did a discussion on the atonement degenerate into masturbation and condoms?

Can we get back to the atonement?

The subject came up because it's been implied (if "implied" is a strong enough word) that God desires that we "obey" Him by doing things we either consider to be morally wrong, or that we have no idea whether its wrong or not; that our reason is bypassed, and it's not necessary for their to be evidence to support the command.

At least, this has been what I've been understanding has been asserted, and I've been trying to clarify for a number of days now, and by many posts. Instead of getting a clarification, I got questions regarding gay activities and masturbation, the question seeming to be that one shouldn't do these things simply because it says somewhere they shouldn't be done, but there isn't any reason or evidence that these things are wrong. This would be a round-about way of arguing, by means of a counter-example, that my assertion was wrong, that God does not desire that we "obey" Him in a way that

1.Has us do things we believe are morally wrong.

2.Does not involve our reasoning.

The reason I have put "obey" in quotes is that I do not believe it's possible to obey God without our reason being involved, or by doing things we consider to be morally wrong. To put it another way, morality and reason are integral parts to obedience.

So this answers the question as to how these other subjects came into the discussion. Hopefully it's clear how the question of reason and morality in obedience connects to the atonement. I hope the questions I've been raising are addressed. To wit:

1.Does God command us to do things we believe are morally wrong?

2.Does God expect us to obey Him in a way that does not involve are reason?

3.Does God give us sufficient evidence upon which to base our faith, and thus obey Him? (this supposes that to obey requires faith; also it should be noted that "sufficient" means "enough to for the basis for a sound decision" and not "so much as to not leave any room for doubt or answer any possible question.")

4.What would it say about God if the answer to the above questions is "Yes."?