Christ's human nature...

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

Sorry, Mark, but that is not the point under discussion.

I think it relates Gerry.

Consider this.

We are supposed to be "dead to sin".

Which indicates Jesus was dead to sin.

Once we understand that, as a born again individual, maybe we will then understand Jesus' experience and nature. :-)

Mark :-)

G: To me that's like saying He was not born with any propensity or inclination to sin.

[Dr. Shane]

G: What's the post # where you answered the questions?

Oh, I didn't answer all of them. Most of your questions have been answered by other members. However it seems like you simply dismiss the answers when you don't agree with them. But that doesn't mean we have to keep answering over and over again.

[Dr. Shane]

G: So NO ONE is now under condemnation? ALL are now saved?

While that is not exactly on topic... the answer is...

YES. Yes! AND AGAIN YES!

All we have to do is accept our salvation. The sins of everyone were on Jesus. The only ones that will not be in heaven are those that would find no joy there.

[Gerr]

I wish Prescott were here to answer some questions for me. He does say that Jesus came in sinful flesh just like ours, but nowhere did I see him claiming that Jesus had inherent propensities to/for evil. It may very well be that by the sinful flesh that he was referring to that Jesus had, he may very well be talking about the same nature that EGW was talking about, i.e. the kind of nature that was the product of over 4,000 years of degeneration but without the sin. In which case, I can see why EGW would/could endorse it.

As for Cottrell, nowhere does he make any reference that Jesus was born with ANY propensities to/for sin either. His main thrust, it seems to me, is that the human nature that Jesus took is like ours in that He had flesh & blood. He makes this statement: "Through sin man has separated himself from God, and his fallen nature is opposed to the divine will..." I wish I could ask him if he thought Jesus was born with an inherent nature that was separated & opposed to the divine will. If He did, He would have been born under wrath Himself & would have needed a savior just like the rest of us.

It is interesting to me that neither Prescott nor Cottrell mention Rom 7, where Paul says that natural fallen flesh is indwelt by sin, and "captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members."

Pnat, do you think Jesus had indwelling sin? That His body was "captive to the law of sin" that dwelt n "members?"

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

G: So NO ONE is now under condemnation? ALL are now saved?

While that is not exactly on topic... the answer is...

YES. Yes! AND AGAIN YES!

All we have to do is accept our salvation. The sins of everyone were on Jesus. The only ones that will not be in heaven are those that would find no joy there.

G: Tricky Shane! You qualified your answer by: "All we have to do is accept our salvation." Of course!!! A GENERAL amnesty was declared at the Cross. But until that is accepted, the sinner is still at war with the gov't of heaven. SO BEFORE ONE HAS ACCEPTED THAT SALVATION THAT IS BEING OFFERED, IN WHAT CONDITION IS HE? DOES A NEWBORN HAVE THE CAPACITY TO ACCEPT IT?

[Dr. Shane]

The newborn is born sinless (unless there is such a thing as pre-natal sin). However that innocent baby has a wicked nature and is destined to sin. At least, that is what the Bible teaches. The pope teaches something different.

[Gerr]

Shane: Oh, I didn't answer all of them. Most of your questions have been answered by other members. However it seems like you simply dismiss the answers when you don't agree with them. But that doesn't mean we have to keep answering over and over again.

G: Please, show me the post# answering these questions:

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

WE ALL DIE IN ADAM. WHY? WE ARE ALL BORN CHILDREN OF WRATH. WHY? WHY DO SUFFER THE PENALTY OF SOMEONE ELSE'S TRANSGRESSION UNLESS THERE IS SOME IMPUTATION OF GUILT?

AND WHAT DID PAUL MEAN WHEN HE SAID: "SIN THAT DWELLS IN ME," "CAPTIVE TO THE LAW OF SIN THAT DWELLS IN MY MEMBERS"???

DID JESUS HAVE SIN DWELLING IN HIM JUST LIKE ALL OF US? DID HE HAVE SIN DWELLING IN HIS MEMBERS MAKING HIM CAPTIVE TO IT?

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

G: So NO ONE is now under condemnation? ALL are now saved?

No. The condemnation in Adam was undone by Christ, but one can veto Christ's work by unbelief.

[Gerr]

The newborn is born sinless (unless there is such a thing as pre-natal sin).

G: The prenatal sin that ALL babies are born with is the sin of our representative Adam. You refuse to acknowledge this because it sounds like original sin which you have already labeled as erroneous since it is of Catholic origin. There is no way that an unborn can commit sin on its own VOLITION! The sin of the unborn is a representative sin. If the USA bombed Iran, we, as constituents/citizens of the USA who voted for our leaders that decided to bomb Iran, would all share in that responsibility, even though we may have been personally against it.

S: However that innocent baby has a wicked nature and is destined to sin. At least, that is what the Bible teaches. The pope teaches something different.

G: Shane, if a baby has a wicked nature, that means that baby is INFECTED WITH SIN! Having a wicked nature, it has to be born wicked. Conceived infected with sin, it has to be BORN A SINNER! THAT IS WHAT THE BIBLE DOES TEACH. AND THAT IS WHAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO TELL YOU FOR SEVERAL PAGES.

NOW THE QUESTION AGAIN - WAS JESUS CONCEIVED/BORN WITH A WICKED NATURE?

[Gerr]

Quote:

G: So NO ONE is now under condemnation? ALL are now saved?

No. The condemnation in Adam was undone by Christ, but one can veto Christ's work by unbelief.

G: What you really saying in a different way is that salvation is/was offered to everyone at the cross, but it is not ours until it is accepted, as Prescott pointed out.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I think it relates Gerry.

Consider this.

We are supposed to be "dead to sin".

Which indicates Jesus was dead to sin.

Once we understand that, as a born again individual, maybe we will then understand Jesus' experience and nature. :-)

Mark :-)

G: To me that's like saying He was not born with any propensity or inclination to sin.

He was born walking with God.

The temptation came from without, as He was "dead" to that which was within.

That is the state of the Born Again believer, they are "dead" to sin and alive unto God.

That was Jesus' experience.

It is not to say the potential to sin wasn't in Him.

But He was born with a "circumcised heart and spirit".

He was seperate from the sinful nature in His body and therefore it was dead and He was dead to it.

That is my understanding.

Mark :-)

[Gerr]

G: To me that's like saying He was not born with any propensity or inclination to sin.

He was born walking with God.

The temptation came from without, as He was "dead" to that which was within.

That is the state of the Born Again believer, they are "dead" to sin and alive unto God.That was Jesus' experience.

It is not to say the potential to sin wasn't in Him.

G: As free moral agents, of course, EVERY CREATED BEING has the potential to sin. But the issue that you are skirting, Mark, is this: Was Jesus born with a wicked nature just like ours? Was He born with INHERENT PROPENSITY/INCLINATION to do wrong?

But He was born with a "circumcised heart and spirit".

He was seperate from the sinful nature in His body and therefore it was dead and He was dead to it.

That is my understanding.

Mark :-)

G: To me, all these amounts to saying that He was not born with a wicked nature or inherited any propensity to do wrong.

[doug yowell]

But He was born with a "circumcised heart and spirit".

He was seperate from the sinful nature in His body and therefore it was dead and He was dead to it.

That is my understanding.

Mark :-)

G: To me, all these amounts to saying that He was not born with a wicked nature or inherited any propensity to do wrong.

[pnattmbtc]

I wish Prescott were here to answer some questions for me. He does say that Jesus came in sinful flesh just like ours, but nowhere did I see him claiming that Jesus had inherent propensities to/for evil.

[pnattmbtc]

G: To me, all these amounts to saying that He was not born with a wicked nature or inherited any propensity to do wrong.

d:And would indicate that Jesus was BORN with a different nature then every other human being is born with.Even if one argues that it was a "sinful" or "fallen" nature it still is drastically different.

Christ was born with a sinless, divine nature, which is drastically different than any other human being. We're told that Christ took "our sinful nature" upon His own sinless nature. Christ's nature was sinless and divine. Upon that nature He took "our sinful nature."

[pnattmbtc]

G: So NO ONE is now under condemnation? ALL are now saved?

T:No. The condemnation in Adam was undone by Christ, but one can veto Christ's work by unbelief.

G: What you really saying in a different way is that salvation is/was offered to everyone at the cross, but it is not ours until it is accepted, as Prescott pointed out.

[pnattmbtc]

The only ones that will not be in heaven are those that would find no joy there.

I think this is exactly right, and the only way of looking at the issue that makes sense.

[doug yowell]

Christ was born with a sinless, divine nature, which is drastically different than any other human being. We're told that Christ took "our sinful nature" upon His own sinless nature. Christ's nature was sinless and divine. Upon that nature He took "our sinful nature."

I'm good with that description. The question for me is when and how did He do that?Was He born fighting a lifelong battle against His propensities towards evil(like me)? Was Jesus naturally predisposed to fits of anger, self-centeredness,sexual identity questions and at the same time the natural sexual predisposition? The predisposition is something that most observent parents note during development.Did Jesus exhibit any sinful propensities before He became responsible for His thoughts and actions? Many mysteries here.

[Twilight]

G: To me that's like saying He was not born with any propensity or inclination to sin.

G: As free moral agents, of course, EVERY CREATED BEING has the potential to sin. But the issue that you are skirting, Mark, is this: Was Jesus born with a wicked nature just like ours? Was He born with INHERENT PROPENSITY/INCLINATION to do wrong?

G: To me, all these amounts to saying that He was not born with a wicked nature or inherited any propensity to do wrong.

The potential to sin, does not need sin to be present, as in Eves case.

Jesus took a human form, with a human body.

But because He was born, born again, under the rule and direction of the Holy Spirit, that human flesh never once had a chance to exert itself.

It lay dead.

Dormant.

But had Satan managed to get Christ to take His eyes off of His Father, that flesh would have "come alive" so to speak.

This is my understanding, although I do not think I am explaining it well.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

G: To me, all these amounts to saying that He was not born with a wicked nature or inherited any propensity to do wrong.

And would indicate that Jesus was BORN with a different nature then every other human being is born with.Even if one argues that it was a "sinful" or "fallen" nature it still is drastically different.

I think the bible does indicate that Jesus was different to "fallen Adam".

I do not think Jesus had the Rom 7:14-25 experience, rather the Rom 8 experience.

But we can have exactly the same experience as Him when we are born again.

And that makes sense.

Because God has promised to enable us to walk with Him like Jesus did, the conditions would have to be the same.

Born Again.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

I'm good with that description. The question for me is when and how did He do that?Was He born fighting a lifelong battle against His propensities towards evil(like me)?

Yes! This was the 1888 message. Many taught this, including Jones, Waggoner, Prescott, and Fifield. Here's something from Fifield that comes to mind:

Quote:

It is my experience that in nine cases out of ten, when men consider those temptations in the fourth chapter of Matthew, which are typical of all his temptations, they fail to recognize their likeness to our own. They make him tempted in all points like as we are not, rather than like as we are.(Fifield sermon #1, 1897 GCB)

Jones spoke of how to Christ was imputed our sin, in addition to His taking our fallen nature, and that the combination of these two things enabled Him to be tempted as we are. Often in this discussion, the part that Christ took our sin is left out. This didn't just happen at Calvary. At the very beginning of His ministry John said, "Behold the lamb of God, who is bearing the sin of the world." (literal translation)

Quote:

Was Jesus naturally predisposed to fits of anger, self-centeredness,sexual identity questions and at the same time the natural sexual predisposition?

This is a poor way of putting it. We need to be really careful how we express things. The Baker letter makes this point.

Jesus Christ was sinless and divine. This is what He was intrinsically, and this didn't change when He took our humanity upon Him. However, His humanity was like our humanity. He was "made of the same stuff" that we are; the same DNA, the same law of heredity.

If we say something like Jesus was naturally predisposed to fits of anger, etc., that sure sounds like that's making Him sinful. We must be very clear that Christ was sinless. But upon His own sinless nature our sinful nature. So He took upon Him a nature which was predisposed to such things, but He Himself was not.

Quote:

The predisposition is something that most observent parents note during development.Did Jesus exhibit any sinful propensities before He became responsible for His thoughts and actions? Many mysteries here.

Christ never sinned. Exhibiting a sinful propensity would be sinning, wouldn't it?

I don't think this is good language either. Our spiritual forefathers wrote tons and tons about this, and didn't use this language. I think we're safe using the same language they used.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry

I wish Prescott were here to answer some questions for me. He does say that Jesus came in sinful flesh just like ours, but nowhere did I see him claiming that Jesus had inherent propensities to/for evil.

Pnat: I don't think anyone used this language ("inherent propensities to/for evil"), except perhaps Baker, given the counsel he received. I've quoted Haskell. He quoted EGW, and explained:

G: Well, EGW certainly used it. Here's that Baker letter again:

"The first Adam was created a pure, sinless being, without a taint of sin upon him; he was in the image of God. He could fall, and he did fall through transgressing. Because of sin his posterity was born with inherent propensities of disobedience. But Jesus Christ was the only begotten Son of God. He took upon Himself human nature, and was tempted in all points as human nature is tempted. He could have sinned; He could have fallen, but not for one moment was there in Him an evil propensity."

I have asked you before & maybe you have answered it in one of the posts that I haven't read yet, but here's the question: Paul describes the natural man in Rom 7 as indwelt by sin, "captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members." Would you say that Christ was indwelt by sin? With sin dwelling in the very fibers of His members?

No, I have not read Jones' sermons except the one you posted. My time is limited and getting shorter, plus I'm not a fast reader, so I try to spend most of my study time with the Texbook & less with the commentaries.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

G: To me that's like saying He was not born with any propensity or inclination to sin.

G: As free moral agents, of course, EVERY CREATED BEING has the potential to sin. But the issue that you are skirting, Mark, is this: Was Jesus born with a wicked nature just like ours? Was He born with INHERENT PROPENSITY/INCLINATION to do wrong?

G: To me, all these amounts to saying that He was not born with a wicked nature or inherited any propensity to do wrong.

The potential to sin, does not need sin to be present, as in Eves case.

Jesus took a human form, with a human body.

But because He was born, born again, under the rule and direction of the Holy Spirit, that human flesh never once had a chance to exert itself.

It lay dead.

Dormant.

But had Satan managed to get Christ to take His eyes off of His Father, that flesh would have "come alive" so to speak.

This is my understanding, although I do not think I am explaining it well.

G: If the fallen flesh with its inclination/propensity to sin was already dead when He was conceived or at birth, again, what you are saying to me is that He WAS NOT born with a wicked nature with its inherent propensities to do wrong.

[Gerr]

Pnat: Actually the Good News is better than that:

So this is saying one will be saved unless they "resist this drawing."

G: If the sinner is not saying, "Yes or I accept", that means he's resisting or saying, "No."

[Gerr]

Quote: Doug:

Was Jesus naturally predisposed to fits of anger, self-centeredness,sexual identity questions and at the same time the natural sexual predisposition?

Pnat: This is a poor way of putting it. We need to be really careful how we express things. The Baker letter makes this point.

Jesus Christ was sinless and divine. This is what He was intrinsically, and this didn't change when He took our humanity upon Him. However, His humanity was like our humanity. He was "made of the same stuff" that we are; the same DNA, the same law of heredity.

If we say something like Jesus was naturally predisposed to fits of anger, etc., that sure sounds like that's making Him sinful. We must be very clear that Christ was sinless. But upon His own sinless nature our sinful nature. So He took upon Him a nature which was predisposed to such things, but He Himself was not.

G: But that is exactly what fallen human nature is - inclined to fits of anger, lust, & all the rest that Doug listed. Did Jesus have to contend with them? As Mark pointed out, we don't have to have these propensities to be subject to temptation. Lucifer, Adam & Eve were exhibits of that.