SDAs, The Trinity & Christ Sinning

[Gustave]

51 minutes ago, Challenger said:

Gustave, In my statement above due too your latter response I realized I used the words, "fallen nature", when I meant "unfallen nature."

I would have thought you would have called me out on flip flopping as in all previous post I was adamant on this issue.

So I will rephrase the question. Do you believe that Christ was given the "unfallen nature, as Adam? 

 

Jesus was born without sin and that includes original sin. Christ did not lust or yearn for sin. Christ Human nature was unfallen pertaining to sin. 

I generally don't worry about flip flopping - I've had countless Adventists affirm the Trinity and in the same post repudiate the Trinity Doctrine. 

[Challenger]

10 hours ago, Gustave said:

The Trinity also said that the Christ would be born of a Virgin, would make the blind see, the lame walk, etc. What percentage possibility in your mind that the Christ didn't fulfill any of these things? Please answer this question. 

I find it confusing that you say, "that the Christ ," when most would say, "that Christ." What is your reasoning?

Too, what does, "the Trinity said," imply?

To answer your trick question, the Holy Spirit performed all these miracles through Christ. Why, because Jesus was not permitted to use His divinity while on earth. He had the unfallen nature like Adam, and Adam was not deity. 

 

10 hours ago, Gustave said:

Jesus said He eternally did the will of the Father so if you believe what you just told us here the Father's foreknowledge removed the possibility of Christ sinning. In any event Jesus is God no differently than the Father & Holy Spirit are God and God does not sin or fail. You're using Arian reasoning that Jesus isn't God. Remember, Trinitarian 101 is that God became man WITHOUT ceasing to be God. Jesus had two natures (a Divine and a Human) these two natures were NOT mixed or blended. 

Gustave, The Father foreknew the lives of you and I at the foundation of creation. Has his foreknowledge affected our freedom of choice? Please answer the question. 

The Father foreknew, that Adam would fall. Did that stop Him from creating him? The Father does not control His creation based on His foreknowledge, that is not love. 

True, the three separate Gods do not sin. Jesus having the unfallen nature, putting His divinity aside, according to the Fathers will, was obedient to the Father in all things, thus in the same nature of Adam did not sin. 

I have never claimed Jesus isn't God. Jesus had two natures (a Divine and a Human nature as Adam before his fall) these two natures were NOT mixed or blended.  He was only permitted to use Him human nature here on earth. 

 

10 hours ago, Gustave said:

Quote

challenger said: Does the Fathers fore knowledge of the names written in the book of life before the foundation of the world, take away the freedom of choice of those who names are written therein? No

This is Arianism. 

Is God's name written in the Book of Life? You've just proved the point I and every Trinitarian throughout Christian history has ever made. 

Are you meaning is Jesus name written in the book of Life? 

In what way have a proved the point? No clue to what you mean. 

[Challenger]

13 minutes ago, Gustave said:

Jesus was born without sin and that includes original sin. Christ did not lust or yearn for sin. Christ Human nature was unfallen pertaining to sin. 

I generally don't worry about flip flopping - I've had countless Adventists affirm the Trinity and in the same post repudiate the Trinity Doctrine. 

To be clear, in your mind, what is the Trinity Doctrine?

[Gustave]

12 minutes ago, Challenger said:

To be clear, in your mind, what is the Trinity Doctrine?

The Historic Trinity Doctrine formulated by the early Church that that all Christians adhered to up to and through the Protestant Reformation. Obviously, Arius rejected the Trinity as do those who agree with him that Christ could have sinned. 

God is a single Divine Substance WITHOUT BODY OR PARTS.

If you are a historic Adventist you would not be a Trinitarian. There are however some Adventists who reject the possibility that Christ could have sinned that agree that God is without body and parts and I'd say are Trinitarian. 

[Gustave]

Quote

challenger said: I find it confusing that you say, "that the Christ ," when most would say, "that Christ." What is your reasoning?

Matthew 16, 16

Matthew 16, 20

Matthew 26, 63

Mark 8, 29

Mark 14, 61

Luke 3, 15, etc. 

Quote

challenger said: To answer your trick question, the Holy Spirit performed all these miracles through Christ. Why, because Jesus was not permitted to use His divinity while on earth. He had the unfallen nature like Adam, and Adam was not deity

Does another SDA want to confirm challenger is articulating SDA belief when he says that Jesus was not permitted to use His divinity while on earth??? 

Quote

challenger said: Gustave, The Father foreknew the lives of you and I at the foundation of creation. Has his foreknowledge affected our freedom of choice? Please answer the question. 

No humans have free will, like Lucifer and other angels. 

God does not have free will to not be God and this is where you depart from Scripture, Apostolic Teaching and the Reformers. You are in-line with Arius and restorationist groups however. 

Quote

challenger said: True, the three separate Gods do not sin. Jesus having the unfallen nature, putting His divinity aside, according to the Fathers will, was obedient to the Father in all things, thus in the same nature of Adam did not sin. 

Well, that's a WRAP. You could have just owned up to the fact you are not Trinitarian. 

[Challenger]

29 minutes ago, Gustave said:

The Historic Trinity Doctrine formulated by the early Church that that all Christians adhered to up to and through the Protestant Reformation. Obviously, Arius rejected the Trinity as do those who agree with him that Christ could have sinned. 

God is a single Divine Substance WITHOUT BODY OR PARTS.

Explain that last statement in terms that a child could understand.

[Gustave]

17 minutes ago, Challenger said:

Explain that last statement in terms that a child could understand.

 

[Challenger]

2 hours ago, Gustave said:

Matthew 16, 16

Matthew 16, 20

Matthew 26, 63

Mark 8, 29

Mark 14, 61

Luke 3, 15, etc. 

Does another SDA want to confirm challenger is articulating SDA belief when he says that Jesus was not permitted to use His divinity while on earth??? 

No humans have free will, like Lucifer and other angels. 

God does not have free will to not be God and this is where you depart from Scripture, Apostolic Teaching and the Reformers. You are in-line with Arius and restorationist groups however. 

Well, that's a WRAP. You could have just owned up to the fact you are not Trinitarian. 

Two thoughts before you go.  First I appreciate you making me aware that "Christ" is not a name as I assumed, but rather a title, meaning "the anointed." Therefore, "the Christ" makes sense to me. 

Second, I thought I made myself clear on how I understood the Trinity, and if that does't fit the  Trinitarian mold, you should have understood without me having to inform you.

[Gustave]

7 hours ago, Challenger said:

Two thoughts before you go.  First I appreciate you making me aware that "Christ" is not a name as I assumed, but rather a title, meaning "the anointed." Therefore, "the Christ" makes sense to me. 

No problem, glad to be of service. 

Quote

challenger said: Second, I thought I made myself clear on how I understood the Trinity, and if that does't fit the  Trinitarian mold, you should have understood without me having to inform you.

What you're articulating isn't the Trinity, it would be far better (and forthright) to just say you are an anti-Trinitarian. It's not like people are going to attack you for it - they will, just like me, not spend time discussing it with you. 

You're hardly alone in this view, there are scores of SDA's who share your views on this matter. 

[phkrause]

On 9/3/2024 at 5:58 PM, Challenger said:

Phkrause, was meaning to ask a little about you earlier. Are you Adventist, if so tell me how that went down. I'm not apposed to questions either.

Yes, have been one for 60+yrs now! I actually really enjoyed listening to his lectures.

[Challenger]

22 hours ago, phkrause said:

Yes, have been one for 60+yrs now! I actually really enjoyed listening to his lectures.

Did you study into the faith, or are you a 2nd or 3rd, generation Adventist?

I first posted on this thread, 30 & 31, material, taken from L. W. 

Do you believe that Christ was given the same nature of Adam, therefore, subject to sin? 

Do you believe, if He had sinned, He would have suffered the 2nd death, just like the rest of mankind, having no savior?

However, since He did not, His righteous life, and the 2nd death He suffered, paid the price required by the law, therefore, by faith in Him, we can receive His salvation?

[phkrause]

7 hours ago, Challenger said:

Did you study into the faith, or are you a 2nd or 3rd, generation Adventist?

I didn't really study into the faith like a young person, or older person, I was about 12/13 when baptized!! Was born in Germany and we moved here to the US in the early 50s. My Mom was a Lutherian and my Father was Jewish and had spent about 5 yrs in 3 different Concentration camps. So he at the time was not interested in God etc. My Mom wanted to get back to going to church and I guess she met a bible worker who happen to a SDA and started doing bible studies. So we started going to church. Than my Mom wanted to find a church in our area in the Bronx, NY. She found a Jewish SDA Church and my Father started going with us.In a sense really didn't know what I was getting into. So in a sense I grew into the faith! Didn't really do a lot of reading, didn't like the KJV of the bible at all, also didn't really like EGW writings, but when I started reading the Great Controversy, I loved it a lot, because I loved history and having studied in school, I found things pretty much lining up. Since have read more of her books!!

7 hours ago, Challenger said:

Do you believe that Christ was given the same nature of Adam, therefore, subject to sin? 

Yes I do believe that Jesus was subject to sin, otherwise how could he represent us??

7 hours ago, Challenger said:

Do you believe, if He had sinned, He would have suffered the 2nd death, just like the rest of mankind, having no savior?

Yes the human part but obviously not the divine!! But thank God he didn't otherwise no could be saved!

7 hours ago, Challenger said:

However, since He did not, His righteous life, and the 2nd death He suffered, paid the price required by the law, therefore, by faith in Him, we can receive His salvation?

Amen!!

[Challenger]

17 hours ago, phkrause said:

On 9/9/2024 at 1:10 PM, Challenger said:

Do you believe that Christ was given the same nature of Adam, therefore, subject to sin? 

Yes I do believe that Jesus was subject to sin, otherwise how could he represent us??

Do you believe, if He had sinned, He would have suffered the 2nd death, just like the rest of mankind, having no savior?

Yes the human part but obviously not the divine!! But thank God he didn't otherwise no could be saved!

On 9/9/2024 at 1:10 PM, Challenger said:

In response to my second question, you state, "Yes the human part but obviously not the divine!!" (Double exclamation, meaning by no means the divine)

Consider the following. When God had asked Abraham to offer his only son Isaac, was Abraham under any illusion that God would resurrect Isaac?  Scripture does confirm that he was. Therefore, by faith in God, Abraham was wiling to sacrifice his son, knowing he would remain dead.

Within the sanctuary service, the "Daily" service at the altar of incense required a perfect lamb to be sacrificed, and remaining dead!

However, for those who believe as you, that only the human part/side of Christ could die, but not the divine, then that would imply that God was asking Abraham to sacrifice more that what He was willing to sacrifice, since He knew Jesus couldn't die. 

Another way to view your perspective is that the Father and Jesus didn't have much skin in the game, because if Jesus sinned or not He was going to live.

I believe because, "God so loved the world, that He gave is one and only son..." means more than what you think. The verse implies, He (the Father) gave (offered His son as a perfect sacrifice knowing He might not get Jesus back if Jesus should sin). As L. W. states in my earlier quotes "deity died," not the human part/side. Had He sinned He would have remained dead. But because Jesus didn't sin, the Father was justified in raising Him up. 

Your thoughts? 

[Gregory Matthews]

  ". . .the three separate Gods . . ."  Well, that comment was a clear and definitive denial of the Trinity.   It could not be more clear.

[Challenger]

15 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

 

 

15 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

  ". . .the three separate Gods . . ."  Well, that comment was a clear and definitive denial of the Trinity.   It could not be more clear.

Gregory, Is this your statement, or are you quoting someone else? Its not making any sense to me. 

[Gregory Matthews]

The words "Three separate Gods" came with quotation marks around them, as they were taken from a post.  The rest of the post was my words.  IOW, I stated that the words "three separate Gods," is a clear denial of the doctrine of the Trinity.

[Gregory Matthews]

The phrase, "three separate Gods," presents the person who wrote it as a polytheist.  In saying that, I leave open the idea that the person could also be a henotheist.  An example of such are followers of the Hindu religion.   They can choose a god to worship from a slate of some 36-million recognized gods and goddesses.

[Challenger]

On 1/28/2024 at 11:34 AM, Gustave said:

Postulating that God the Son could have sinned, lost His salvation and eternally ceased to exist definitely shows a dearth of strong biblical preaching. 

I don't believe there is anybody who understands the Godhead more than Satan. If you agree, and agree with the above statement, then why did Satan try to tempt Christ three times in the wilderness if it were impossible for Christ to sin?

[Gustave]

On 9/12/2024 at 1:56 PM, Challenger said:

I don't believe there is anybody who understands the Godhead more than Satan. If you agree, and agree with the above statement, then why did Satan try to tempt Christ three times in the wilderness if it were impossible for Christ to sin?

Zero doubt that Satan understands, better than any human, that Christ Jesus is God Almighty. 

Satan fulfilled prophecy by being forced to tempt Christ - as you recall Christ was "driven" into the wilderness to be tempted of or by the Devil. Jesus had to fulfill EVERY prophetic word spoken of Him - and that would include being sinless and "saving". I realize that Ellen White said Christ could have soiled the bed so to speak and messed up with this is only what came from the fleshy mind of Ellen White - Scripture is totally against it. 

There isn't much point discussing this anyway given that you are a historic SDA  / anti-Trinitarian. 

[Challenger]

7 hours ago, Gustave said:

Zero doubt that Satan understands, better than any human, that Christ Jesus is God Almighty. 

Satan fulfilled prophecy by being forced to tempt Christ - as you recall Christ was "driven" into the wilderness to be tempted of or by the Devil. Jesus had to fulfill EVERY prophetic word spoken of Him - and that would include being sinless and "saving". I realize that Ellen White said Christ could have soiled the bed so to speak and messed up with this is only what came from the fleshy mind of Ellen White - Scripture is totally against it. 

There isn't much point discussing this anyway given that you are a historic SDA  / anti-Trinitarian. 

Gustave, 

I don’t believe God forces anyone too do anything, which would take away anyones right to choose, which is contrary to a God of love. 

However, you claim: “Satan fulfilled prophecy by being forced to tempt Christ - as you recall Christ was "driven" into the wilderness to be tempted of or by the Devil.” 

Please show me the prophecy (s) which support such a claim?

All the translations I considered read, “That the Holy Spirit led Christ into the wilderness,” not that He was “driven” by what I understand you to suggest, was the devil. 

My understanding of this event, is that The Father required Jesus to go into the dessert too undergo a sever test of His faith. After completing a forty day fast at Christ weakest point, the Father then permitted Satan to tempt Jesus into disobedience to His will. (This is far different than the Father forcing Satan to tempt Jesus.)  In the end Jesus, prevailed and was victorious, holding steadfast too His Father’s will.

You need not bring up E.G. White with me, as my faith is in the Bible only. 

I am not a Historic SDA, I do not consider the Historic method of interpretation to be correct. 

Yes, I am anti-Trinitarian, but nonetheless I understand there are three separate Gods, united in purpose and plans.

 

[Gustave]

Quote

Challenger said: I don’t believe God forces anyone too do anything, which would take away anyones right to choose, which is contrary to a God of love.

I certainly don't disagree with you on that - I agree, God doesn't force anyone / remove an individual's right to choose. But that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about "GOD", and that according to Sacred Scripture Salvation was / is a work of GOD. 

Quote

Challenger said: However, you claim: “Satan fulfilled prophecy by being forced to tempt Christ - as you recall Christ was "driven" into the wilderness to be tempted of or by the Devil.” 

Yes, Christ being sinless was one of the many things said about the Christ - for Jesus to be THE CHRIST He HAD TO FULFILL all those things. Christ was driven into the desert to be tempted by or of Satan to fulfill that aspect of the prophecies. Challenger, ask yourself WHAT percent of possibility would there be that The Christ would be born of a Roman Prostitute? The right answer is zero. 

Jesus was tempted by the Father of Lies to PROVE He fulfilled that element which The Christ was said to fulfill. 

Quote

Challenger said: Please show me the prophecy (s) which support such a claim?

Fairly stunned at your question here. 

Isaiah 35,4 - 10

Psalm 22 (the whole Chapter)

and literally 160 other explicit texts. 

What would be better for you is to produce something from Scripture that even remotely implies that God, in any way, is conditional. 

Quote

challenger said: All the translations I considered read, “That the Holy Spirit led Christ into the wilderness,” not that He was “driven” by what I understand you to suggest, was the devil. 

I'm not suggesting the Devil drove Jesus into the wilderness - The Holy Spirit did that.

Quote

Mark 1, 12: And immediately the spirit driveth him into the wilderness.

Quote

Mark 1, 12 DR: And immediately the Spirit drove him out into the desert.

Lucifer isn't a shot caller here, God is the shot caller. Jesus wasn't led or driven into the wilderness to see if He would sin but to prove / show He wouldn't. 

 

Quote

challenger said: My understanding of this event, is that The Father required Jesus to go into the dessert too undergo a sever test of His faith. After completing a forty day fast at Christ weakest point, the Father then permitted Satan to tempt Jesus into disobedience to His will. (This is far different than the Father forcing Satan to tempt Jesus.)  In the end Jesus, prevailed and was victorious, holding steadfast too His Father’s will.

This was never a "test" - it was PROOF that Jesus was the one spoken about by the Prophets. This teaching about Christ being a "creature" who was on probation and only had ultimate power because He didn't screw up and obeyed the Father is heretical. It is a demonic teaching. 

Quote

challenger said: You need not bring up E.G. White with me, as my faith is in the Bible only. 

You seriously don't expect me to believe that, do you? 

Quote

challenger said: I am not a Historic SDA, I do not consider the Historic method of interpretation to be correct. 

What you are promulgating as far as Christ's possibility of sinning is straight out of the Arian / Historic SDA playbook. 

Quote

challenger said: Yes, I am anti-Trinitarian, but nonetheless I understand there are three separate Gods, united in purpose and plans.

I'll grant you that what you describe as a belief in 3 separate God's is not SDA teaching (from my understanding) as Historic or Traditional SDA's believe that there is only 1 God, the Father. 

[Gustave]

I may have spoken to soon about your stated belief. I remembered something I had written down. 

Quote

Ellen White in the Sabbath Herald, September 4, 1900 said: As a member of the human family he was mortal, but as a God he was the fountain of life to the world. 

Another well-known contemporary of Ellen White confirmed (at least) the two God concept and intimated that's what the spirit of prophecy taught - i.e. that Jesus could have rotted in the tomb to never again rise leaving the Father as the only God in the universe. It appears you consider the Holy Spirit to be "a god" - which I guess is a step in the right direction compared to Historic Adventist belief. I'm fairly certain the majority of modern SDA's would be horrified at the way you are describing your doctrine of 3 gods. I'll see if an SDA jumps in here and has something to say about the 3 god concept you are holding.  Appreciate this conversation challenger, it may be interesting after-all. 

[Gregory Matthews]

There was a time in the early history of the SDA Church when certain of those early leaders, believed that only God the Father was fully God.  In addition, certain, such as James White, other early leaders came from the background of the so-called Christian denomination.  That group rejected what is now the orthodox position on the Trinity.

[Gregory Matthews]

Gustave:  I have previously jumped in and stated my reaction to his 3-gods.

[Challenger]

On 9/14/2024 at 2:08 AM, Gustave said:

Zero doubt that Satan understands, better than any human, that Christ Jesus is God Almighty. 

Since you agree totally with the statement I posted earlier, why don't you answer the question. 

Then why did Satan try to tempt Christ three times in the wilderness if it were impossible for Christ to sin?