Rethinking, the whole besetting sin issue

[Robert]

I think I can say everyone has besetting sins?  By that I mean sins of repetition; sins of habit. Well, I'm tired of being a slave to certain besetting sins. Oh sure, sometimes I get the bear before it gets me, but most of the time the bear gets me.  Resisting temptation doesn't take a rocket science degree, or does it?

I remember back in the late nineties talking with Robert Wieland on this very issue.  During one of our phone conversations he seemed a bit impatient.  He basically told me to "just say no".  That struck me as rather odd at the time, and really, until today I haven't given it much thought.  I dismissed it because it sounded like the man who  taught against legalism was giving me legalistic advice. This advice sounded too much like the TV commercials against drug use back in the eighties - you know, "just say no". Well, if it's that easy to resist why do we have a drug epidemic?

The man Romans chapter 7 found out that just saying "no" to besetting sin didn't work either (see Romans 7:19,20).  I must occur with his appraisal because I've experienced the same, but then today the "just say no" phrase popped into my head while I was walking.  Not only this but my favorite NT writer, the Apostle Paul, states the same.  It's found in Titus 2:11-13

11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men 12 It teaches us (believers) to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope (the second coming of Christ).

Well, how?  I think I have the answer to my own question, but I've been down this road before I've had many flats. Could it be this easy?

I'll be back....

 

[Robert]

The man of Romans 7 has a problem.  It's not that his heart isn't right with God.  This is self-evident since he desires to do good and he delights in God's law according to the converted man (see Romans 7:19,22), yet like me (and probably you guys) when the rubber meets the road, well it doesn't turn out so great.

If you look at Romans chapter 7 there are three laws at work:

"the law of God" Rom 7:22

According to Gal 3:21 the law of God is incapable of producing righteousness in fallen men.  So the law can't help us when it comes to sin and temptation.  All it can do is demand righteousness!

"the law of my mind" Rom 7:23

In Romans 7:19 the man of Romans 7 wants to do good. He delights in the law of God according to the converted man.  The problem is that his converted will power is no match for "the law of sin" inside his members. 

 "the law of sin" Rom 7:23

What is this force, this law of sin?  

Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. 19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do...

And again,  Romans 7:22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man (the converted man). 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 

The man of Romans 7 wills to do good using his converted will ("the law of my mind"), but when the rubber meets the road "the law of sin" takes control and brings him into captivity.  That's a besetting issue.

Conclusion:

"The law of my mind", that is, my converted, born again "will power" is no match for the desires of my flesh or "the law of sin." I can try to defeat it, and even for a season do okay, but it's going to get its way.  That's slavery and I'm tired of being a slave to certain besetting sins.

Is there any good news?

Yes...at least I believe so....

 

.

 

[Robert]

1 hour ago, Robert said:

"The law of my mind", that is, my converted, born again "will power" is no match for the desires of my flesh or "the law of sin." I can try to defeat it, and even for a season do okay, but it's going to get its way.  That's slavery and I'm tired of being a slave to certain besetting sins.

Is there any good news?

Yes...at least I believe so....

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

Well, that's very good news.  When "the law of sin" overrides my will ("the law of my mind") and brings under its desires and lust there's no condemnation for my failure.  Why?

Verse 2 For the law of the Spirit of life that was in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and of death (the law's demand for justice),

That's good news.  In fact that's the gospel.  My old life, assumed by Christ's Divinity, was under the full control of a fourth law, "the law of the Spirit of life" or the power of the Holy Spirit.  That's how Christ legally saved me "in Himself" and therefore, even when "the law of sin" drags me off and causes me to sin there's still no condemnation because my faith is in His doing & dying, not my goodness.

Well, that's good news, but I'm tired of being dominated by "the law of sin" in my body.  Is there more good news?

 

 

.

[Robert]

51 minutes ago, Robert said:

Well, that's good news, but I'm tired of being dominated by "the law of sin" in my body.  Is there more good news?.

Rom 8:3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do (it can't demand righteousness from sinners): by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and to deal with sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.... 

So in Christ "the law of the Spirit of life" defeated and condemned "sin", where? "in the flesh"!

Because Christ, by the Spirit of God, defeated "sin in the flesh" or "the law of sin" in His members, then so can I! That's what Paul is saying....

How?  Well, this is a new idea I've come up with.  Maybe I'm crazy and my besetting sins will keep on dragging me off, or maybe this time I'm right.  Time will tell.  I'll tell you my thoughts momentarily. I would also like some feedback to my idea.

Robert

[Robert]

"Without Christ we cannot subdue a single sin nor resist the slightest temptation. It is connection with a power that is almighty which will make us overcomers." [ST AUG.10,1891 E. White]

Basically (tell me if this is egotistical) I have within me, not only my human nature, but the Divine nature of God.  Therefore when "the law of sin" (my fallen nature) tempts my mind I can say "Greater is He that is in me (i.e., Divinity), than he (Satan)  that is in the world" 1 John 4:4

In other words, what I think I'm correctly stating is, I have the actual life & power of God dwelling in my spirit and when "the law of sin" comes to drag me off I can say "No" because I am connected to "the law of the Spirit of life" and that power can defeat my fallen nature.

So when tempted with besetting sins I'm going to say "No" because I  have in me the Divine life of Christ in the form of God's Spirit.  

What do you think...have I lost it?

 

[Robert]

18 hours ago, Robert said:

"Without Christ we cannot subdue a single sin nor resist the slightest temptation. It is connection with a power that is almighty which will make us overcomers." [ST AUG.10,1891 E. White]

Basically (tell me if this is egotistical) I have within me, not only my human nature, but the Divine nature of God.  Therefore when "the law of sin" (my fallen nature) tempts my mind I can say "Greater is He that is in me (i.e., Divinity), than he (Satan)  that is in the world" 1 John 4:4

In other words, what I think I'm correctly stating is, I have the actual life & power of God dwelling in my spirit and when "the law of sin" comes to drag me off I can say "No" because I am connected to "the law of the Spirit of life" and that power can defeat my fallen nature.

So when tempted with besetting sins I'm going to say "No" because I  have in me the Divine life of Christ in the form of God's Spirit.  

What do you think...have I lost it?

 

I'm very surprised that I've received no feedback.  After all my main arguments on CA have really centered on the gospel and justification by faith.  Now that I'm writing on sanctification (not that it adds to our justification) all is quiet.  This puzzles me to no end....

[phkrause]

Why? No one to argue with???

[Robert]

2 hours ago, phkrause said:

Why? No one to argue with???

Actually, on my posts,  I'm not looking for an argument as long as one works within the parameter of what I stated that sanctification does not add to our justification in Christ.

What I'm asking is how does one gain victory over besetting sins?  I gave my answer.  Is my conclusion plausible?

[Robert]

5 hours ago, jackson said:

You cannot separate justification from sanctification for they are on a continuum . As long as you separate the two you will get an argument.

Justification has been defined, mainly by traditionally Adventists that present an Arminian gospel, as only the forgiveness of past sins. But since forgiveness of sins, wonderful as this may be, is negative, i.e., it only cancels a bad debt, this in itself does not make us righteous and, therefore, cannot save us. Hence, justification has to be accompanied by sanctification or holy living if one is to make it to heaven. Consequently  justification plus sanctification is what will ultimately qualify us for heaven.

However, we all know that sanctification is an on going process which, unfortunately, is accompanied by failure. What do we do with the new sins we have committed, since justification is only the forgiveness of past sins? Our response has been that every time we commit a new sin we go back to condemnation until we repent and confess that sin. As a result, the Christian experience of most Adventists has been like a yo-yo, between justification and condemnation. This, to say the least, is very frustrating.

It is this view of justification and sanctification that is to a large degree responsible for robbing God’s people of the assurance of salvation and driving them out of the church. Tell me, who wants to remain in a church that offers no real peace with God and is constantly putting you on a guilt trip?

This confused idea of salvation is what led E. G. White to correct the pastors at Battle Creek in 1890. Here is the essence of what she said:

“The danger has been presented to me again and again of entertaining, as a people, false ideas of justification by faith. I have been shown for years that Satan would work in a special manner to confuse the mind on this point.... I have been shown that many have been kept from the faith because of the mixed, confused ideas of salvation, because the ministers have worked in a wrong manner to reach hearts. The point that has been urged upon my mind for years is the imputed (not imparted) righteousness of Christ.” (FW, 18).

Unfortunately, this mixed, confused idea of salvation is still being taught by those who defend historic Adventism. Justification or imputed righteousness is still defined by them as only the forgiveness of past sins. When asked to defend this view of justification from Scripture, the typical answer given are two texts, both of which are taken out of context. The two texts are 1 John 1:9 and Romans 3:25. Let us examine them in context.

Nowhere in all of Scripture do we find justification defined as only the forgiveness of past sins. Furthermore, no where in all of the Bible do we find that justification plus sanctification is what qualifies us for heaven.

Yes, the Bible clearly teaches that genuine justification by faith always results in sanctification or good works. But these good works are the evidence of salvation, they witness true justification by faith, but do not contribute one iota towards our ticket to heaven. 

Note: Most of the above are J. Sequeira's words mixed with my own thoughts.

[Robert]

3 hours ago, jackson said:

Robert Wieland gave you the right answer. You say no in the strength of Christ. You purpose in your heart as did Daniel and David (Psm 17:3 and Dan 1:8)

As Paul said " I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me" Phil 4:13. "All things" includes besetting sins, does it not?

Okay, then here we are in agreement....

[Robert]

I've sent an email to my friend, Jack Sequeira, concerning at least one of you EGW statements, i.e., "in order for man to retain justification, there must be continual obedience".

I'll share it with all:

Quote

 

Pastor Jack,

I have more questions as you have time to respond. This time on some EGW statements.  Here are two of them:

1] “God requires the entire surrender of the heart, before justification can take place; and in order for man to retain justification, there must be continual obedience, through active, living faith that works by love and purifies the soul” (1SM 366).  

 2] “[Christ’s] righteousness only is imputed to the obedient” (RH 9/21/1886).

Now, I have read your views on justification and sanctification (see http://www.jacksequeira.org/issues06.htm ) and I agree wholeheartedly! But...I have a very difficult time reconciling EGW's quotes with my understanding of the writings of Paul.

I Googled Ellen's first statement looking for an answer.  I came up with what I consider two extremes: one from Dennis Priebe and the other from Sabbatismos Ministires.  

Dennis takes the SDA historical position while the latter concludes that "Ellen White is a false prophetess" (see http://www.sabbatismos.com/reviews-of-sda-publications/the-heartbeat-of-adventism-by-herbert-douglass/#sthash.6rwIUa76.421Bpnf4.dpbs )

The reason I stop short of labeling her as "a false prophetess" is because she had very good insights on the humanity of Christ.  Statements like "Humanity died; divinity did not die", etc. But, at the same time, I disagree her quotes above.  

I cannot, in all good conscience, make her the final word or the measuring stick of truth, as do some Adventist.  After all, she does have her other statements such as "We (she includes herself) have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light that is yet to come".  This indicates to me she wasn't the final source of truth.  Besides she stated many times that she wasn't "infallible".

Help,

Robert ********

 

 

[phkrause]

But it looks like your making JS the final word?? I'll be interested in his reply.

[Robert]

27 minutes ago, phkrause said:

But it looks like your making JS the final word??

On Ellen White?  No, but I believe Jack, being a retired SDA Pastor and one who believes in her writings, might be able shed some light on some of her hard to understand statements.

For me personally I use her writings when I, from my study of the Bible, see that she harmonizes with my conclusions.  If not I ignore her. Why?  She doesn't have the final word.  Even she stated the Bible was the  measuring stick of truth.

[Robert]

According to Mrs. Sequeira Jack recently had surgery.  She didn't specify, but she asked me to remember him in my prayers.  I ask all those on this forum to do the same.

Robert

[phkrause]

Will definitely be praying!

[Robert]

5 hours ago, jackson said:

NRSV Romans 3:25 ²⁵ whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement^[a] by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed

Context is everything:

21 But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26 he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

The sins committed before Christ shed His blood, God in His forbearance left unpunished. Everyone in the OT, i.e., before Christ came and died, were forgiven by a promise..

27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. Because of what law? The law that requires works? No, because of the law that requires faith. 28 For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. 

Col 1:21 He (Jesus) has reconciled (you) 22 in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight— 23 if indeed you continue in the faith

To be just is to stand before God's law in Christ by faith.  This has nothing to do with your law performance. Therefore every time you sin you do not come under the condemnation of the law. As long as your faith remains you are complete in Christ.

[Robert]

9 hours ago, jackson said:

No one who truly loves and fears God will continue to transgress the law in any particular.

First and foremost the Bible is the standard of truth, not Ellen White.  I know she would agree.  Neither would she state that her writings were infallible.

Now I'll try to tackle her statement. Her first sentence I agree with.

Here it is again: "No one who truly loves and fears God will continue to transgress the law in any particular."

Here she is speaking of the believer.  Now, let's compare against the Bible. 

1 John 3:9 No one who is born of God (i.e., has the divine nature, through God's Spirit, in him) practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot practice sin, because he is born of God.

To practice sin means to live like you were before conversion.  Before conversion I liked to fight (martial arts).  Before conversion I had casual sex.  Before conversion I liked porn, etc.  I think  you get the idea.  

After conversion my mind (what Paul calls "the law of my mind") had taken a u-turn.  Now it delighted in the law of God.  Now it was in harmony with God's agape, but my fallen nature still loved what my mind/heart use to love.  .

Now here's the big question:  When I sin (and I do) what do I do?  

a]  Do I justify my sin (which is the same as saying what I did wasn't sin)

or 

b] Do I acknowledge my sin before Christ and seek, through His Divine nature, to overcome its power?

If "a" I am headed in a direction that will ultimately take me out of Christ.  I am headed to a place that will neutralize the power the gospel.  I am heading towards a place of apostasy because of a hardened heart.

You see if sin is not sin then ultimately I do not need Christ's imputed righteousness.  If I don't need Christ then I'm a goner. I'm food for worms - I"m lost and back under the curse of the law.

 

 

[Robert]

9 hours ago, jackson said:

No one who truly loves and fears God will continue to transgress the law in any particular. When man transgresses he is under the condemnation of the law, and it becomes to him a yoke of bondage. Whatever his profession may be he is not justified, which means pardoned.  {ML 250.3} 

Now to the second sentence.

We have already concluded that one who practices sin as a lifestyle doesn't truly love God and hence God's Spirit is not in him.  Therefore the second sentence is a continuation of this thought.  The one who practices sin is under the condemnation of the law because he has apostatized, i.e., he  is lost.

 

   

 

[Robert]

22 hours ago, Robert said:

 Even she stated the Bible was the  measuring stick of truth.

“The words of the Bible, and the Bible alone, should be heard from the pulpit.” p. 626. PBORWEW 1.4

"God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms,"  (The Great Controversy, p. 595).