Forgiveness of sin

[Robert]

 

It appears you are making the case that Christ was not qualified for heaven, until the resurrection.  I don't want to be putting words into your mouth.  This is what you are arguing, isn't it? 

Christ had to accomplish 3 things in order to qualify us for heaven and eternal life:

1] Live a perfect life in accordance with God's law while in our corporate humanity.

2] Take the curse, the justice of the law, in our humanity

3] Be raised with a glorified, sinless humanity in order to be our High Priest.

1 cor 1:30 But by His (God's) doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and justification and sanctification, and redemption, 31 so that, just as it is written, "LET HIM WHO BOASTS, BOAST IN THE LORD."

Edited September 24, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

 Christ, although having take our fallen nature, was not permeated with the love of self. 

His assumed humanity, which is ours from Adam, was permeated with the love of self.   Hence He took upon His Deity a condemned humanity.  Yet, His mind never consented to sin, not even for a moment.  Therefore He lived a perfect life in OUR sinful flesh.

"He (as God) took upon Him our sinful nature."  (EGW)

Note it wasn't His sinful nature.

"In taking upon Himself man's nature in its fallen condition, Christ did not in the least participate in its sin." (EGW)

Note His mind never yield to the desires of our sinful nature.  He defeated sin in sinful men....

Edited September 24, 2015 by Robert

[pnattmbtc]

Thanks for the explanations Robert.  These were clear.  I'll have some comments later.

[pnattmbtc]

One's paradigm will determine to a great extent how one reads Scripture.  Scripture is amazing in this way,
that it accommodates so many paradigms.  I think this has something to do with how God inspired the writers,
having the desire to meet people regardless of their paradigm.

Only one person's paradigm was perfect, Jesus Christ's, which has to do with why He alone was able to present
such a beautiful picture of God.

One question to consider is, what is the main problem that God had to solve?  Was it a legal problem?  If we see the main problem as legal, then we will, of course, see the solution as being legal.  Everyone agrees as to what the solution was: Christ lived a perfect life, died for our sins, and was resurrected.  But there is a great deal of disagreement as to how this solution works.

What is it that allows one to get to heaven?  Under the legal paradigm, God set up a legal solution, and if you agree with the preconditions to qualify for that solution to be applied in your behalf, then you allowed into heaven.  The qualification would be believing in Christ, and that has its own problems in terms of defining what that means.  But if you do this correctly, if you believe correctly, then God will apply the legal remedy on your behalf, and you can go to heaven.  A difficulty in this paradigm is that the change to one's actual person, to one's being, or soul, becomes either unimportant or incidental; it's not the main thing.

Another paradigm is that the change to one's being *is* the main thing.  How does one become transformed from a "me first" being, governed by the sin principle of self-love, to one who is goverened by the principles of the government of God, self-sacrificing love?

Consider the following passage:

Could those whose lives have been spent in rebellion against God be suddenly transported to heaven and witness the high, the holy state of perfection that ever exists there,-- every soul filled with love, every countenance beaming with joy, enrapturing music in melodious strains rising in honor of God and the Lamb, and ceaseless streams of light flowing upon the redeemed from the face of Him who sitteth upon the throne,--could those whose hearts are filled with hatred of God, of truth and holiness, mingle with the heavenly throng and join their songs of praise? Could they endure the glory of God and the Lamb? No, no; years of probation were granted them, that they might form characters for heaven; but they have never trained the mind to love purity; they have never learned the language of heaven, and now it is too late. A life of rebellion against God has unfitted them for heaven. Its purity, holiness, and peace would be torture to them; the glory of God would be a consuming fire. They would long to flee from that holy place. They would welcome destruction, that they might be hidden from the face of Him who died to redeem them. The destiny of the wicked is fixed by their own choice. Their exclusion from heaven is voluntary with themselves, and just and merciful on the part of God. (GC 542-543)

This struck me years ago as I first understood it, and has had a profound impact on my paradigm.  I saw that if God wanted there to be an eternal hell, there was no need to have a separate place, but He could simply force everyone to stay in heaven and not let them die.  That would be eternal torment for those who had rejected God during their lives.

If it were possible for the character to change after death, then God could conceivably save everyone; this is the premise of Universalism.  If it is not possible for the character to change after death, if we take the position that the Gospel solution is a legal one, then we run into the problem of making God capricious, given that God changes the character of the believer in Christ after he dies (i.e., the beliver dies with one character, but is resurrected with another).  Why capricious?  Because if God can arbitrarily change the characters of those who do not love Him who accept certain facts, then why not just change everybody's character, so all could be taken to heaven?  Doesn't God want everybody in heaven?  He gave His Son to die for everyone.  Having done that, so that a legal remedy could be applied, why not apply this remedy to everyone, and change their characters when they die, so they would be happy in heaven?

What makes more sense to me is that the heart of the problem is the human mind, and the solution to the problem is how to get human beings to think differently, from a "me first" way of thinking, to a way of thinking which is in harmony with how God thinks, who is, after all, the Being with whom we need to learn to get along with.  This is the problem I see God dealing with, whose brilliant solution was to send His Son as a representive of Himself, to show us what He was really like.  This is what I see to be the theme of Paul's theology, although his way of communicating it may not be as clear as, for example, John.  But I see that both John and Paul have the same theme in mind, which is that God sent His Son as a reprentative of Himeself in order to fix the problem with the human mind.

This was the tack (although using my words, of course, not his) that A. Graham Maxwell took when he wrote the commentary on Romans back in the 50's I think.  I think Maxwell was right on point in his understanding of Romans.

[8thdaypriest]

Christ's assumed humanity did not have to taste the second death unless He sinned, and He did not sin in thought or deed.

The second death  is for "the soul that sinneth, it shall die" Ezek 18:4.

Christ died for our sins, as he paid the penalty for sin. "He was the propitiation for our sins" (1John 2:2) He died neither for His assumed fallen nature nor for His own sins. He died for our sins and that should be crystal clear to all Christians.

We are born with a fallen nature, but we are not born sinners, for sin is the trans gression of the law (1 John 3 :4)

Adam's seed die the first death not because they are born with a carnal, fallen nature, but rather because Adam's sin removed mankind's access to the tree of life.

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: ...  3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

The lower passions have their seat in the body and work through it. The words "flesh" or "fleshly" or "carnal lusts" embrace the lower, corrupt nature; the flesh of itself cannot act contrary to the will of God. We are commanded to crucify the flesh, with the affections and lusts. How shall we do it? Shall we inflict pain on the body? No; but put to death the temptation to sin. The corrupt thought is to be expelled. Every thought is to be brought into captivity to Jesus Christ. All animal propensities are to be subjected to the higher powers of the soul. The love of God must reign supreme; Christ must occupy an undivided throne. Our bodies are to be regarded as His purchased possession. The members of the body are to become the instruments of righteousness. 182 {CCh 137.1}

 

 

 

The will is the governing power in the nature of man, bringing all the other faculties under its sway. The will is not the taste or the inclination, but it is the deciding power which works in the children of men unto obedience to God or unto disobedience.  {FLB 154.4}

 

It is not a sin to have a fallen nature with its accompanying inclination to disobedience. It is only sin when we do not execise the will to reject wrong thoughts and desires. Of ourselves we cannot do this,  hence we all soon become sinners and our natures become corrupted. in addition to being fallen. But when we unconditionally surrender self to Christ, we become born again and have the opportunity to become "partakers of the Divine Nature and to escape the corruption that is in the world thourgh lust"  ( 2 Pet 1:4)  ) and power is given us through grace to bring "every thought to the obedience of Christ. (2 Cor 10:5)

 

Our character is changed  during the sanctification process but our carnal natures still war against the spirit , and we are to  die daily  through self denial and self control ( crucifying  the flesh) until our vile bodies are changed at Christ's coming. But our characters must be fit for Heaven before  Christ returns.

 

 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.  Gal 5:24

 

 

I liked your post Jackson.  But I have a question concerning the one sentence I highlighted in red. 

Are you saying that Christ cannot return UNTIL every one of his sheep, have "fit" characters?  And exactly what IS a "fit" character?  Does it mean that these people have stopped sinning - even by a thought?  Or does it mean, that they long - with heart, mind, and strength - to belong to Christ forever? 

According to prophecy, Jesus will return at "the time appointed", which means that DAY is already known to God.  I don't believe that Jesus is watching His sheep, waiting for perfection, so He can come to rescue them. 

[Robert]

Christ's assumed humanity did not have to taste the second death....

Gal 3:13 "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us"

What is the curse of the law?

Gal 3:10 "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."

Gal 4:4 "When the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, 5 to redeem those under law..."

Christ's mind never allowed our humanity, indwelt with our bent-to-self, to sin.  Yet that humanity was polluted by the fall of Adam.  Therefore Christ, as our corporate head, died the 2nd death.  According to Paul when "One died, all died".  Christ's death was a corporate death.  We have met the justice of the law "in Christ".  If He didn't died our 2nd death than the law has not been satisfied and you, through your performance, must merit heaven.

Are you up to it?

Edited September 26, 2015 by Robert

[Wingnut]

Hi All

I see the "sinful" nature of man (and Christ while on earth) to boil down to the following...

We all like to have our own way.  So does God our Father and so does Christ, and so does Satan.  This is just the natural state of most critters, including my cat, who definitely likes getting his own way.

1.  It is the natural (easiest) state for ever being to want to do its own will.

2.  It is God our Father's natural state to want to do His own will.

3.  Because He has all power, He alone gets to do exactly what He wants, or "thy will be done..."

4.  Even Jesus while on earth and today in heaven does not get to do his own will if this is contrary to the Father's.

5.  If anyone goes against the Father's will, this is sin.

6.  Only the Father cannot sin, because sin (by definition) means going against the Father's will.  

7.  Every other being in heaven or earth can sin because the moment they oppose the Father's will they are in sin.

8.  Christ was clearly tempted to go against the Father's will when He sweated blood in Gethsemane.  He did not sin, because he suppressed His own will in favour of doing the Father's will.

9.  In future and forever, Christ and all of us will be subject to the Father 1Cor 15:28

10.  Being tempted to do your own will when it is in opposition to the Father's will is not sin.

11.  Christ is the only one who has lived without actually going against the Father's will.

12.  Adam and Eve even before "the fall" were tempted to go against the Father's will.  This was not sin until the actually caved into that temptation.

13.  After "the fall" they were still tempted to do their own thing and go against the Father's will.  Because the ball was already rolling, it steadily built up steam, and the momentum to sin increased.

14.  There was no such thing as "the fall" of man.  Man's nature before and after "the fall" was always to do his own will.

15.  Folks who say we have a "fallen nature" are thinking in a fuzzy, ill-thought-through manner.  They imply that we have inherited the desire to do our own thing from the fallen Adam and Eve.  I say this is nonsense because even before the fall every creature with free-will wants to do its own will - even Adam and Eve before "the fall".

16.  The only thing which changed at "the fall" is that mankind actually gave into their desires to go against God.

17.  Exactly the same logic applies to "the fall" of Lucifer who became Satan.  Lucifer, like all of us, wanted to do his own will.  When he caved into that desire by opposing God, he then was in sin.  The other fallen angels did not inherit a fallen nature from Satan.  They too chose of their own free will to follow Satan in opposing God.

18.  I have inherited not one iota of fallen nature from Adam or any of my ancestors.  I was born as a totally selfish baby wanting to have my own way, wanting to be fed when I was hungry (irrespective of the tiredness of my mother).  I have inherited not one iota of fallen nature from Satan either.

19.  Where my ancestors and Satan have contributed to my sin is they have surrounded me with bad examples which I knowingly or unknowingly have copied, of my own free will.

20.  My whole reason for life is to learn to subject myself to God and His Son (who perfectly conforms Himself to His Father's will too).

21.  While I am learning, God extends me grace (meaning a breathing space without the punishment I deserves for opposing the Father).

Apologies for this long-winded first post.  I don't see the incarnate Christ as being hard to understand.  Neither He, nor I nor you have a "fallen nature".  We just have a very natural tendency to want to do our own wills.  The second Adam resisted this pull unlike the first Adam.  Otherwise, the process of temptation was the same for them as it is for us today.

[Robert]

Neither He, nor I nor you have a "fallen nature". 

Rom 7:14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. 21 So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23 but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God--through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.

Mark 7:21 For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. 23 All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.' "

Ellen White: "Through sin the whole human organism is deranged, the mind is perverted, the imagination corrupted. Sin has degraded the faculties of the soul. Temptations from without find an answering chord within the heart, and the feet turn imperceptibly toward evil."

 

 

Edited September 27, 2015 by Robert

[Wingnut]

Hi Robert

I have no problem with anything in your reply.  We all have an inclination to do our own wills.  That IS what constitutes a sinful nature (when our will opposes God).  But a sinful (wilful) nature is not the same as a "fallen" nature.  Fallen implies a change from lofty to lower.  My assertion is that Lucifer was self-willed before and after his sin, so was Adam, so was Eve, and you and I were born as wilful babies.  Nothing changed after Adam and Eve's sin. They had to be wilful before eating the fruit or they would not have eaten it.  All that changed was now there was a little momentum towards giving in to self will which opposed God's will.

 

I have never heard where this supposed "fallen nature" resides.  Is it in our DNA?  Or did God or Satan add a spiritual component to our brain making us more self willed or more susceptible?  I would love to hear someone explain the mechanics of this supposed fallen nature.

We have a sinful nature because we were created by God that way, self-willed.  We, like Adam and Eve have to tame that nature.  Nothing has changed.

I agree with what Ellen says.   Momentum towards self will is more prevalent today than before the first human sin.

 

[Robert]

Nothing changed after Adam and Eve's sin.

Gen 1:27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them;  male and female he created them.

At creation mankind, both male & female, were created in God's image.  God is spirit (John 4:24). Mankind is composed of flesh & blood.  So the creation account can't be referring to this.  Then what?

Another text states that "God is love" (1 John 4:8).  The word "love" comes from the Greek "agape".  Agape is a love that is not self-seeking (see 1 Cor 13:5/1 Cor 10:24).  So when Moses states that mankind was created in God's image it means they perfectly reflected God's agape love.

Now, Adam & Eve didn't have children until after sin.  What happened after they sinned?  You say, "nothing changed", but is that what the Bible states?  Answer: No!

Gen 5:1 "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created."

So Moses is repeating the Genesis account of chapter one.  Then he makes a distinction. 

Verse 3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth: 

Now, instead of being in the image of God, we are born not with agape, but a u-turn agape, which is the love of self.  It's agape, bent back.  The Bible calls this iniquity.

Ez 28:14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth (i.e., Lucifer) ; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. 15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created , till iniquity was found in thee. 

 

Edited September 27, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

Hi Robert

We all have an inclination to do our own wills.  That IS what constitutes a sinful nature (when our will opposes God).

I disagree. Look at what Paul said in Romans chapter 7. 

 For I have the desire (i.e., will)  to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For what I do is not the good I want to do (i.e., will to do); no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

Here's the NKJV:

 For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. 16 If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. 17 But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.

So really the "will" cannot be the sin nature, because it wants to do good.

Paul repeats this in verse 22:

" For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man."

The born-again believer wills to do good, but unless he allows God's Spirit to control his sinful nature, he will meet in defeat.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Robert

[Wingnut]

Gen 1:27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them;  male and female he created them.

At creation mankind, both male & female, were created in God's image.  God is spirit (John 4:24). Mankind is composed of flesh & blood.  So the creation account can't be referring to this.  Then what?

Another text states that "God is love" (1 John 4:8).  The word "love" comes from the Greek "agape".  Agape is a love that is not self-seeking (see 1 Cor 13:5/1 Cor 10:24).  So when Moses states that mankind was created in God's image it means they perfectly reflected God's agape love.

If I read you correctly Robert, you are saying that mankind is no longer in the image of God or after His likeness.

I could ask any Christian I know whether we (NOW) are created in the image of God and after His likeness and they will agree with me, that we still are in His likeness.  I presume that everyone on this forum will agree with me too.  All that this means is that my cat is after the cat kind, just as man is after the God kind at creation and still today.  Nobody I know would try to say that some humans (those with agape) are in God's image, and the rest of mankind is not.  Well I cannot say "nobody" since you are the first to define "in His likeness" as an agape issue.

[Wingnut]

I disagree. Look at what Paul said in Romans chapter 7. 

 For I have the desire (i.e., will)  to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For what I do is not the good I want to do (i.e., will to do); no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

So really the "will" cannot be the sin nature, because it wants to do good.

 

You say you disagree with me, but I cannot see how.  Everything you or I do we do because we will it.  Good and bad.

Our sinful nature refers to those times when we fail to do that which is in line with what God wills.  That is not some fallen state or new phenomenon.  Paul's battle with himself is no different to Adam's battle before he ate - "I know I must not eat this fruit but I am drawn to it simply because it is there as a choice".

Again I say free will is a natural, God-given state (in fact part of being "In His likeness").  Being tempted occurred before the "fall" of man and Lucifer.  Being conflicted is not a result of some "fallen state" since Adam, Eve and Lucifer were conflicted before their supposed "fall", just as Paul was in his day.  

 

[pnattmbtc]

2.  It is God our Father's natural state to want to do His own will.

Why would you think this?  God is agape.  Agape's natural will is *not* to do its own will, which is made clear in many ways in Scripture.  For example, 1 Cor. 13 "Agape seeketh not its own".  The cross is a testament as to the natural state of agape. 

[pnattmbtc]

I have never heard where this supposed "fallen nature" resides.  Is it in our DNA? 

Yes, of course.  How else could it be passed from one generation to the next? 

[Robert]

If I read you correctly Robert, you are saying that mankind is no longer in the image of God or after His likeness.

2 Cor 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ (by faith is implied), he is a new creature (creation): old things are passed away ; behold , all things are become new. KJV

First, what does it mean to be "in Christ"?

The "in Christ" motif is the gospel.  It is our position "in Christ".  So "in Christ" we have glorified, sinless, immortal humanity in the heavens.  In Him "all things are become new".  In Him we are without indwelling sin.  The following texts refer to this truth:

Eph 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us 5 even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ —by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus... NASB

Col 1:3 He (God the Father) has (past tense) rescued us from the power of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of his beloved Son, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. NASB

Are we in heaven?  No, not yet, but yet "in Christ" we already a new creation.  In Him all things have become new.

In the believer, who is still in the flesh, the only thing that has become new is his mind/heart.  His heart has been changed.  Some would call this character.  

So all things have not been changed in the believer.  We are not yet in the image of God, Only in Christ, by faith, are we acceptable before God and His holy law.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

Paul's battle with himself is no different to Adam's battle before he ate ....

You are absolutely wrong!  Adam had no indwelling bent-to-self (iniquity).  Therefore his transgression was a mystery.  He no natural inclination to go against God's will.  He was in the image of God. But after the fall, his nature became perverted. 

 "Man was originally endowed with noble powers and a well-balanced mind. He was perfect in his being, and in harmony with God. His thoughts were pure, his aims holy. But through disobedience, his powers were perverted, and selfishness took the place of love (agape). His nature became so weakened through transgression that it was impossible for him, in his own strength, to resist the power of evil. ...

In his sinless state, man held joyful communion with Him "in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Colossians 2:3. But after his sin, he could no longer find joy in holiness, and he sought to hide from the presence of God. Such is still the condition of the unrenewed heart. It is not in harmony with God, and finds no joy in communion with Him. The sinner could not be happy in God's presence*; he would shrink from the companionship of holy beings. Could he be permitted to enter heaven, it would have no joy for him. The spirit of unselfish love that reigns there --every heart responding to the heart of Infinite Love --would touch no answering chord in his soul. His thoughts, his interests, his motives, would be alien to those that actuate the sinless dwellers there." SC

BTW, pnattmbtc, I see* where you get that saying about being happy in heaven. 

 

Edited September 27, 2015 by Robert

[Wingnut]

Yes, of course.  How else could it be passed from one generation to the next? 

Hi Pnattmbtc

So by logic alone (no science or chapter and verse) you ask "how else could it be passed from one generation to the next?"

My whole argument is that no sinful nature is passed from one generation to the next, so that solves it for me.

But to play your answer out a bit, when Lucifer "fell" did he pass his "fall" from himself to his fellow demons by a change of DNA?

Or did they each of their own free will "fall" simply by a change of mindset?

And when Lucifer "fell", at what stage did his DNA change?  There is no mention by the way of God changing Mankind's DNA anywhere in the Eden story.

And before Adam and Eve "fell" they were clearly conflicted over a very simple choice of to eat or not to eat.

Clearly their DNA had to be intact before the "fall" yet they "fell" anyway, with intact DNA.  They did not need DNA to "fall".

And neither do I need DNA to explain why all of us, Paul included and Christ (with pretty good DNA) are conflicted at times as to whether to do our own or the Father's will.

 

[Wingnut]

Why would you think this?  God is agape.  Agape's natural will is *not* to do its own will, which is made clear in many ways in Scripture.  For example, 1 Cor. 13 "Agape seeketh not its own".  The cross is a testament as to the natural state of agape. 

Why would God, in the form of Christ teach us to pray "thy (meaning God's) will be done on earth as it is done in heaven" if God does not want his will done (on earth as it is done in heaven)?

[Robert]

And when Lucifer "fell", at what stage did his DNA change?  There is no mention by the way of God changing Mankind's DNA anywhere in the Eden story.

What changed is the direction of agape.  Agape is a love that is not self-seeking.  God's agape is outgoing and not towards oneself. At the fall God's agape, indwelt in Adam's nature, became bent-back towards Adam.  The Bible calls this condition iniquity.  So iniquity, is agape, but bent-back to self.  Sin is a u-turn agape.

How did that happen?  The Bible doesn't explain.

 

Edited September 27, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

 At the fall God's agape, indwelt in Adam's nature, became bent-back towards Adam.  

Before the fall Adam loved Eve with only agape.  But after the fall he willfully threw Eve under the bus:

Gen 3:11....(The Lord to Adam) Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?" 12 The man (Adam) said, "The woman you put here with me--she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it."

This is self-love.  I love myself, it's the wife's fault.  

Edited September 27, 2015 by Robert

[Robert]

BTW, Wingnut, if all you have to do is do the Father's will, and there's no sin nature stopping you, I suggest that you do the following:

Luke 12:33 "Sell your possessions and give it to the poor"

Sell everything you have and live only for others.  That's agape....Live for them, not yourself.  Living for self is self-seeking.  Agape doesn't seek it's own.

Can you do it? 

No! 

Why not?

1] You'll make excuses and say God's law really doesn't demand this.

or

2] You'll admit you can't do it because you love yourself.  

This self-love is your sin nature.  

Jesus said if you want to be perfect "Sell your possessions and give it to the poor" Matt 19:21

And Paul said, "Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth." 1 Cor 10:24

And EGW said,  "In Heaven none will think of self, nor seek their own pleasure; but all, from pure, genuine love (agape), will seek the happiness of the heavenly beings around them." http://www.earlysda.com/testimony/testimony-16.html

Edited September 27, 2015 by Robert

[Wingnut]

What changed is the direction of agape.  Agape is a love that is not self-seeking.  God's agape is outgoing and not towards oneself. At the fall God's agape, indwelt in Adam's nature, became bent-back towards Adam.  The Bible calls this condition iniquity.  So iniquity, is agape, but bent-back to self.  Sin is a u-turn agape.

How did that happen?  The Bible doesn't explain.

 

Robert, when we show agape love, that act springs from our will (helped along by God who works in us both to WILL and to do).  Agape love does not originate in our genes any more than sin does.

Agape is not some sort of juice or essence that you have or do not have.  Agape is outgoing love which you consciously decide to express.  God cannot give you a pint of agape against your will.  Even agape is will related.

 

[Robert]

Robert, when we show agape love, that act springs from our will (helped along by God who works in us both to WILL and to do).  Agape love does not originate in our genes any more than sin does.

You don't have agape by birth.  You have only self-love.  You can't produce agape; you can only produce self-love.  All attempts, through the will, to produce self-love always ends up producing only self-righteousness. 

When others see agape from a believer, it's not his nature they see, but God's nature through him.  

Edited September 27, 2015 by Robert

[Wingnut]

BTW, Wingnut, if all you have to do is do the Father's will, and there's no sin nature stopping you, I suggest that you do the following:

Luke 12:33 "Sell your possessions and give it to the poor"

Sell everything you have and live only for others.  That's agape....Live for them, not yourself.  Living for self is self-seeking.  Agape doesn't seek it's own.

Can you do it? 

No! 

Why not?

First, because you have added "sell EVERYTHING" which is not in the verse.

Second, because, like you, I know that Christians are never told to sell all they have and have nothing left for themselves.  I bet you have not done what you suggest I do?  Or will you blame this on inherent fallen nature?

Third, because if I gave all away, I could not provide for my own and would be worse than an infidel.

Fourth, I believe in sustainable giving, not to give all and start from scratch with nothing.

Fifth, if I were to sell land and give it to the church as in early acts, then I would expect you to do the same and sustain me after I am destitute - which is what they were doing.

Sixth, that early Acts happening was one off, at Pentecost as the Church was being born.  In later Acts, socialism no longer existed - capitalism reigned.

Seventh, the call in Matt 18 to the young rich ruler to go sell all was a call to be the 13th apostle.  Apostles were expected to give up all since they would be on the move from hence.  None of this pertains today unless the Holy Spirit makes an exception to this rule for you.

Eighth - you introduced this giving as a total red herring to the original discussion