Robert Posted January 5, 2016 Author Posted January 5, 2016 8 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said: For example, regarding the statement, "because God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter," this is the type of statement where she is the final word, given that she is not misrepresenting her role." No sir! She is not the final word on anything. The Bible, and the Bible alone is the measuring stick of truth. "We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed." {1 Selected Messages, p. 37}. The question has been asked me, 'Do you think that the Lord has any more light for us as a people?' I answer that he has light that is new to us, and yet it is precious old light that is to shine forth from the word of truth. We have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light that is yet to come to us. We are not making the most of the light which the Lord has already given us, and thus we fail to receive the increased light; we do not walk in light already shed upon us." {RH, June 3, 1890 par. 2}
Robert Posted January 5, 2016 Author Posted January 5, 2016 18 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said: Regarding how the faith of one saves another, it makes sense if one views the role of the parent in terms of influence as opposed to legally. No, because salvation does not come by the parents. Salvation is in Christ alone. Influence does not equal faith. Faith is believing in Christ. You can't believe for another.
Robert Posted January 5, 2016 Author Posted January 5, 2016 21 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said: Your entire paradigm looks to be only legal. This is an area where our views differ greatly. I think the legal issues (by which I mean "forensic") are incidental, not essential. Wow! To me that statement is heretical. The gospel is how Christ legally justified mankind while remaining true to His law that justly condemns mankind. That is a legal issue. When you sin and Satan accuses you before Christ, Satan says: "You have no right to allow this sinner pnattmbtc into heaven!" And Christ will respond to the accuser and say, "Yes, pnattmbtc is a sinner, but his faith is in Me and in Me pnattmbtc is a 'new creation' and hence My law is completely satisfied."
Robert Posted January 5, 2016 Author Posted January 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, Robert said: Wow! To me that statement is heretical. The gospel is how Christ legally justified mankind while remaining true to His law that justly condemns mankind. That is a legal issue. When you sin and Satan accuses you before Christ, Satan says: "You have no right to allow this sinner pnattmbtc into heaven!" And Christ will respond to the accuser and say, "Yes, pnattmbtc is a sinner, but his faith is in Me and in Me pnattmbtc is a 'new creation' and hence My law is completely satisfied." The tempter stands by to accuse them, as he stood by to resist Joshua. He points to their filthy garments, their defective characters. He presents their weakness and folly, their sins of ingratitude, their unlikeness to Christ, which has dishonored their Redeemer. He endeavors to affright them with the thought that their case is hopeless, that the stain of their defilement will never be washed away. He hopes so to destroy their faith that they will yield to his temptations, and turn from their allegiance to God. Satan has an accurate knowledge of the sins that he has tempted God's people to commit, and he urges his accusations against them, declaring, that by their sins they have forfeited divine protection, and claiming that he has the right to destroy them. He pronounces them just as deserving as himself of exclusion from the favor of God. "Are these," he says, "the people who are to take my place in heaven, and the place of the angels who united with me? They profess to obey the law of God; but have they kept its precepts? Have they not been lovers of self more than lovers of God? Have they not placed their own interests above His service? Have they not loved the things of the world? Look at the sins that have marked their lives. Behold their selfishness, their malice, their hatred of one another. Will God banish me and my angels from His presence, and yet reward those who have been guilty of the same sins? Thou canst not do this, O Lord, in justice. Justice demands that sentence be pronounced against them." But while the followers of Christ have sinned, they have not given themselves up to be controlled by the satanic agencies. They have repented of their sins and have sought the Lord in humility and contrition, and the divine Advocate pleads in their behalf. He who has been most abused by their ingratitude, who knows their sin and also their penitence, declares: "The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan. I gave My life for these souls. They are graven upon the palms of My hands. They may have imperfections of character; they may have failed in their endeavors; but they have repented, and I have forgiven and accepted them." [P&K 588] Perfection through our own good works we can never attain. The soul who sees Jesus by faith, repudiates his own righteousness. He sees himself as incomplete, his repentance insufficient, his strongest faith but feebleness, his most costly sacrifice as meager, and he sinks in humility at the foot of the cross. But a voice speaks to him from the oracles of God's word. In amazement he hears the message, "Ye are complete in him". Now all is at rest in his soul. No longer must he strive to find some worthiness in himself, some meritorious deed by which to gain the favor of God. "They are graven upon the palms of My hands" is the same as "Ye are complete in him".
8thdaypriest Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 13 hours ago, Robert said: Here's the difference between your view and my view:. Your view comes from a highly symbolic book. My view comes from straight from the Apostle Paul. One is symbolic and needs interpreting; the other is clear and needs no interpretation. What is "clear" to you - that is - your understanding of Paul's words, is not clear to me. I "see" something different. These things have been debated for almost 2000 years. I've been reading the latest issue of "Christian History" magazine. It reviews the 20 most influential writings of Christian history. Several writers addressed the "why" of Christ's incarnation and death, reaching different conclusions. I'm interested in these things. I want to know the essentials for a human being to be given eternal life. I do NOT believe a person is given immortality when he is born. I do NOT believe all persons were given immortality before "the foundation of the world". JoeMo 1 8thdaypriest
pnattmbtc Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 1 hour ago, pnattmbtc said: Can you show this as being the case from any of the Gospels? Quote Robert: The gospels, primarily, gives us an account of Christ's life. Paul was chosen by God the Father and Christ to explain the mechanics of the gospel. So why not stay with Paul? What I'm hearing you say is to set aside the words of Jesus Christ, and stay with Paul. Paul conceived of his work as being a continuation of Jesus' works, and that he (Paul) was doing nothing other than re-articulate in his own words the teachings of Jesus Christ. It cannot be right to make a wedge between Jesus Christ and Paul. 8thdaypriest 1 Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
pnattmbtc Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 1 hour ago, pnattmbtc said: For example, regarding the statement, "because God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter," this is the type of statement where she is the final word, given that she is not misrepresenting her role." Quote Robert: No sir! She is not the final word on anything. The Bible, and the Bible alone is the measuring stick of truth. When she says something like "God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter", I'm understanding this as a statement in her role as a prophetess. She stated the following: Quote I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision--the precious rays of light shining from the throne. (51 67) Now if we're talking about something like an interpretation of a scripture text, which is inspired by the infinite mind of God, yes, there is room for further study and more light. But when she makes a declarative statement like "God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter," I don't understand how you could get around this. Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
pnattmbtc Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Regarding how the faith of one saves another, it makes sense if one views the role of the parent in terms of influence as opposed to legally. Quote Robert: No, because salvation does not come by the parents. Salvation is in Christ alone. You'll have to explain your thinking here. I don't see where you're seeing a contradiction between the idea that parents influence their children spiritually and salvation is in Christ alone. Quote Influence does not equal faith. Faith is believing in Christ. You can't believe for another. I didn't say anything about someone believing for another. Where are you getting this idea from? Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
pnattmbtc Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Quote me:Your entire paradigm looks to be only legal. This is an area where our views differ greatly. I think the legal issues (by which I mean "forensic") are incidental, not essential. Robert: Wow! To me that statement is heretical. The gospel is how Christ legally justified mankind while remaining true to His law that justly condemns mankind. That is a legal issue. The Gospel is, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Even if you took the law out of the question, this would still be true. The law has become a focal point because of how Satan has chosen to attack God's character. So the law is involved in the Great Controvesy, but in an incidental way, because this is the way Satan has chosen to attack God. But the essential issues have not to do with the law, but with God. Even if you take the law away, these same issues would still be there; the same problem, and the same solution. Since the law has been brought up as a subject (I mean, by Satan), God has taken pains to make clear that Satan's accusations are false, that the everything that He has done is in harmony with the law, but the important thing is that Jesus Christ, in His person (His life and character), has refuted Satan's accuastions, and made clear who God really is. This is the theme of the book of John, and the writings of Paul (actually the whole Bible, but these are two especially clear sources). To limit the Gospel to only Jesus Christ solving a legal problem is to miss a lot, and to miss the most important thing, which has to do with the character of God. Quote Christ did not yield up His life till He had accomplished the work which He came to do, and with His parting breath He exclaimed, "It is finished." John 19:30. The battle had been won. His right hand and His holy arm had gotten Him the victory. As a Conqueror He planted His banner on the eternal heights. Was there not joy among the angels? All heaven triumphed in the Saviour's victory. Satan was defeated, and knew that his kingdom was lost. To the angels and the unfallen worlds the cry, "It is finished," had a deep significance. It was for them as well as for us that the great work of redemption had been accomplished. They with us share the fruits of Christ's victory. (DA 758) If the Gospel is limited to solving a forensic issue, this statement makes no sense. On the other hand, if the Gospel has to do with clarifying issuses regarding God's character which have been raised by the enemy, then it does. The same Gospel which saves us as individuals, if we choose to believe in Christ, secures the entire universe, because the same issues are involved for both humans and other created beings, which center around the character of God. When you sin and Satan accuses you before Christ, Satan says: "You have no right to allow this sinner pnattmbtc into heaven!" And Christ will respond to the accuser and say, "Yes, pnattmbtc is a sinner, but his faith is in Me and in Me pnattmbtc is a 'new creation' and hence My law is completely satisfied." I don't think the problem is the law. The following has helped my understanding of things: Quote The Lord bears long with their perversity; but the decisive hour will come at last, when their destiny is to be decided. Will He then chain these rebels to His side? Will He force them to do His will? Those who have chosen Satan as their leader and have been controlled by his power are not prepared to enter the presence of God. Pride, deception, licentiousness, cruelty, have become fixed in their characters. Can they enter heaven to dwell forever with those whom they despised and hated on earth? ... What source of enjoyment could heaven offer to those who are wholly absorbed in earthly and selfish interests? ... 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 is why we need to be born again, so that the purity, holiness and peace will not be torture for us. Do you think that unconverted persons would be happy in heaven? JoeMo 1 Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Robert Posted January 6, 2016 Author Posted January 6, 2016 8 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said: I do NOT believe a person is given immortality when he is born I never said we are immortal at birth....
Robert Posted January 6, 2016 Author Posted January 6, 2016 8 hours ago, pnattmbtc said: What I'm hearing you say is to set aside the words of Jesus Christ, and stay with Paul. Jesus doesn't have a chapter. The whole of the Bible is under inspiration, but Paul was set aside for the gospel. Rom 1:1 Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God
Robert Posted January 6, 2016 Author Posted January 6, 2016 8 hours ago, pnattmbtc said: But when she makes a declarative statement like "God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter," I don't understand how you could get around this. You know, you are making Ellen White the Pope of Adventism. You are setting her on the same level as Scripture. I reject this....
Robert Posted January 6, 2016 Author Posted January 6, 2016 7 hours ago, pnattmbtc said: The Gospel is, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." No! That's justification by faith. Justification is what Christ did....We receive Christ's justification of us through faith when we reach the age of unacceptability. Quote Do you think that unconverted persons would be happy in heaven? A person who has persistently hardened his against the good news would not be happy in heaven.
pnattmbtc Posted January 6, 2016 Posted January 6, 2016 6 minutes ago, Robert said: me: But when she makes a declarative statement like "God has not made known His purpose in regard to this matter," I don't understand how you could get around this. Quote Robert: You know, you are making Ellen White the Pope of Adventism. You are setting her on the same level as Scripture. I reject this... What are you rejecting? That Ellen White was inspired? Or my understanding of her inspiration? (which is hers; I'm just quoting her). So it appears you are rejecting her claim of being inspired. Either that, or you think I'm not representing her inspiration correctly, that she understand her inspiration differently than I do. Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Robert Posted January 6, 2016 Author Posted January 6, 2016 4 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said: What are you rejecting? That Ellen White was inspired? Or my understanding of her inspiration? (which is hers; I'm just quoting her). So it appears you are rejecting her claim of being inspired. Either that, or you think I'm not representing her inspiration correctly, that she understand her inspiration differently than I do. I am rejecting that she is on the same level as Scripture. The Bible is the infallible word of God....Those are her words. She is not infallible, Those too are her words.
pnattmbtc Posted January 6, 2016 Posted January 6, 2016 Quote Robert: The gospels, primarily, gives us an account of Christ's life. Paul was chosen by God the Father and Christ to explain the mechanics of the gospel. So why not stay with Paul? Me: What I'm hearing you say is to set aside the words of Jesus Christ, and stay with Paul. Paul conceived of his work as being a continuation of Jesus' works, and that he (Paul) was doing nothing other than re-articulate in his own words the teachings of Jesus Christ. It cannot be right to make a wedge between Jesus Christ and Paul. Robert: Jesus doesn't have a chapter. The whole of the Bible is under inspiration, but Paul was set aside for the gospel. Rom 1:1 Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God. "Jesus doesn't have a chapter." What does this mean? "The whole of the Bible is under inspiration, but Paul was set aside for the gospel." So we should set aside Jesus when studying the gospel, but stick with Paul, because Paul was set aside for the gospel (and, apparently, Jesus wasn't). I can't imagine anyone disagreeing with you more than Paul. It's very clear that Paul conceived of himself as continuing the teachings of Jesus Christ, not as originating new teachings not taught by Jesus Himself. To consider just one thing which comes to mind, in Galatians 1 Paul says anyone who preached any other gospel than the one he was preaching should be accursed. This would include Jesus Himself. So either Jesus was preaching the same gospel as Paul, or Jesus should be accursed, or Jesus didn't preach the gospel. But we know Jesus did preach the gospel, because He Himself said so. So it must be the case that Jesus preached the same gospel Paul did. Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Robert Posted January 6, 2016 Author Posted January 6, 2016 1 minute ago, pnattmbtc said: "So we should set aside Jesus when studying the gospel, but stick with Paul, because Paul was set aside for the gospel (and, apparently, Jesus wasn't)." Jesus and God the Father chose Paul to expound upon the gospel.
pnattmbtc Posted January 6, 2016 Posted January 6, 2016 6 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said: What are you rejecting? That Ellen White was inspired? Or my understanding of her inspiration? (which is hers; I'm just quoting her). So it appears you are rejecting her claim of being inspired. Either that, or you think I'm not representing her inspiration correctly, that she understand her inspiration differently than I do. Quote Robert: I am rejecting that she is on the same level as Scripture. The Bible is the infallible word of God....Those are her words. She is not infallible, Those too are her words. She said that God has not revealed His purpose in regards to the children of unbelievers. She claims to have said this under inspiration. Regardless of what level she is (whatever this means), her statements regarding whether she is speaking under inspiration, and regarding the purpose of God in regards to the children of unbelievers, are either true or they aren't. So to disagree with what she said, you must be asserting that what she said is false, either in regards to her inspiration, or in regards to God's purpose regarding these children. Again: Quote I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision--the precious rays of light shining from the throne. (RH 9/6/06) phkrause 1 Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
pnattmbtc Posted January 6, 2016 Posted January 6, 2016 9 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said: "So we should set aside Jesus when studying the gospel, but stick with Paul, because Paul was set aside for the gospel (and, apparently, Jesus wasn't)." Quote Jesus and God the Father chose Paul to expound upon the gospel. Jesus also preached the gospel! Who chose Jesus? Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Robert Posted January 6, 2016 Author Posted January 6, 2016 15 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said: Jesus also preached the gospel! Who chose Jesus? Where did Jesus, in the gospels, give the details that He delivered unto Paul on how He legally saved the fallen race in Himself?
pnattmbtc Posted January 6, 2016 Posted January 6, 2016 9 minutes ago, Robert said: Where did Jesus, in the gospels, give the details that He delivered unto Paul on how He legally saved the fallen race in Himself? Exactly the point! Jesus preached the gospel, but He didn't present the idea you are suggesting (the forensic idea you are suggesting). However, Jesus DID present the ideas I have been suggesting. We have the following: 1.Jesus preached the gospel. 2.Jesus preached the same gospel Paul did. 3.Jesus did NOT present the idea you are suggesting. Therefore, the idea you are presenting is not the gospel. Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Robert Posted January 6, 2016 Author Posted January 6, 2016 16 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said: Therefore, the idea you are presenting is not the gospel. What idea is that?
pnattmbtc Posted January 6, 2016 Posted January 6, 2016 6 minutes ago, Robert said: What idea is that? "He delivered unto Paul on how He legally saved the fallen race in Himself" Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Robert Posted January 6, 2016 Author Posted January 6, 2016 4 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said: "He delivered unto Paul on how He legally saved the fallen race in Himself" Okay, where does Christ, in the gospels, state that our old life from Adam was crucified with Him and therefore the law is satisfied?
Recommended Posts