| Author | Message | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2129 Registered: 3-2004  |
I was lurking at the R/S site and found this. It is the first sentence that bothers me particularly. "Christ overcame in sinful flesh: physical, mental, and moral worth, by partaking of the diving nature" It sound so much like the truth. The Holy Spirit really has to be there to teach 24/7 so we will not be pulled into that quagmire. This was written by SDAZeal. "The truth is that Christ overcame in sinful flesh: physical , mental, and moral worth, by partaking of the divine nature,just as we can if we join ourselves with Him. We cannot do this without first receiving Him as our Saviour and sacrifice. Without Christ, a Savior, we cannot partake of the divine nature in order to overcome. So yes, even in fallen sinful flesh, Christ could overcome and be our example, sacrifical lamb, high priest , intercessor and empowering agent of grace. The fallen nature view does not discount a single thing Jesus did (nor does any historic say he was EXACTLY like us, that's a straw man used against historics). The unfallen view, however, means that God had the deck stacked, and as such Jesus cannot be our example of how to overcome or a high priest touched by our spiritual infirmities. To say that overcoming makes Christ of no effect and means we "don't need a Savior", is the ultimate false gospel. Christ does not want us to continually crucify Him afresh, for to do that would lay Him to an open shame, counting the blood of the Son of God a common thing. The whole point of the gospel is the complete restoration of man to a prefallen condition, in our human flesh, right here on earth. Not just the forensic justification of man IN his sins. It is a lie of the highest order to say that man's perfection denies Christ as savior. No, sir, it verifies Christ as Savior." Diana | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2131 Registered: 3-2004 |
This was written by Newbie at the R/S site. "This addresses the martyrs. It just goes to reason that God wants to "KNOW" that we are faithful by our demonstration of proof. Everyone that has ever made it to heaven or will make it to heaven will have to demonstrate their faith and "prove" to all of heaven that we are worthy." I have a hard time believing I believed all this stuff. God does not know if we are worthy so we have to prove to all heaven that we are. What Blasphemy. I noticed, after I put these two on here that there is an R/S thread these could have gone on. Diana | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 825 Registered: 7-2004 |
Diana, I was just reading the thread you have referenced, and I'm liking Guibox more and more. He thinks with his head, not what was written in SOP. They are discussing whether or not Christ had a fallen nature. He did not. He didn't have to have a fallen nature to gain victory for us. Adam fell while in a perfect state. Christ was our second Adam. He didn't have to be burdened with the genetic and mental infirmities of the thousands of years of sin. He was born of a virgin, which is an impossibility. He was God incarate, another seeming impossibility. Why do we have to pull Jesus down to our level in order to accept his intervention? Jesus knows what is in our hearts, and the conditions for salvation are simple--Accept the fact that Jesus died to ransom us, and confess that he is our Savior. Heart and confession, that is it. And the confession isn't about confessing every sin, it is about confessing Jesus as Savior. | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 58 Registered: 7-2005 |
Diana, we all believed this stuff because we walked by sight, not by faith in the work of Christ. We needed something which can confirm us that we are indeed His children. Simply, we didn't trust His love, His sacrifice in behalf of us wasn't sufficient proof, and consequently have looked after a confirmation in ourselves. His word wasn't sufficient, something remains to be proved. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3107 Registered: 12-2003  |
Jackob, so well said. We believed all this stuff because we trusted our own efforts more than the eternal work of Jesus which we can't see and can't control. We hate feeling out of control, so we find ways to convince ourselves that what we do is important. We delude ourselves with our own sense of significance and remain blind to the fact that ultimately, we are not in control whether we think we are or not. God is sovereign; just because we think we're managing our own salvation doesn't make it so. I am so very thankful for Jesus. Colleen | ||
| Jorgfe Registered user Username: Jorgfe Post Number: 13 Registered: 11-2005 |
Colleen, That last post is so beautiful. Thank you so much! I am currently studying everything that I can about the role of the Holy Spirit throughout the Bible. The thing that really amazes me about Adventism (and the way I was taught) is that there is very little recognition of the importance of the New Testament role of the Holy Spirit in our salvation. For all pratical purposes this extremely important Person of the GodHead, the Comforter, is ignored (or in the case of the Seal of God -- even replaced!), and instead the focus is on how we need to try, try, try to be perfect. I can personally attest to the fact that once I recognized the rightful role of the Holy Spirit a peace came over me such as that described in Romans 14:7. My 10-year-old son described it well last night when he said "Daddy, It is like someone who has car keys in their pocket with which to open their car door, but they deny that they will work for that." Like you said, we want so much to be in control. Gilbert | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2139 Registered: 3-2004 |
Gilbert, It is amazing how easy it is to understand the gospel. Even your 10 year old son understands it. There is truth in the comment "out of the mouths of babes...". Diana | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 534 Registered: 4-2000  |
Last week, December 23, 2005, marked the 200th birthday of Joseph Smith, founder and seer of Mormonism. A 40-ton granite monument and visitor's center marks his birthplace at Dairy Hill, Vermont or just "the hill." The monument rises 38.5 ft. high (one foot for every year that Smith lived). The visitor's center drew 50,000 visitors this past year--mostly Mormons on tour or on vacation. In preparation for this celebration last Friday, many area motels stocked the Book of Mormon in guest rooms to make the faithful feel more at home. Gordon B. Hinckley, the 94-year-old president and prophet of the LDS Church, arrived in Vermont on a private plane. A special news conference was called in Salt Lake City and the speech by Hinckley was beamed by satellite around the globe. This spectacular event reminds me of the big event that Adventists held at the William Miller farm in upstate New York a few years ago. While many devout Millerites sacrificially sold their homes and farms to be ready for the predicted return of Christ on October 22, 1844, Miller himself was smart enough and selfish enough not to donate his farm to the Millerite movement. Obviously, his devotion was not of the same caliber as many of his fanatical followers. After the so-called Great Disappointment, William Miller still had an estate to enjoy--unlike many of his disillusioned followers. Interestingly, this important fact was never presented to the nostalgic SDA crowd at the Miller farm celebration. The editor of the Adventist Review reported that he never even heard one negative comment at that event (smile). Obviously, these contemporary SDA pilgrims were brainwashed with the Miller heresy as well. Not only did Miller later admit his error, but his lone surviving descendant, featured at the Miller farm celebration, was not an Adventist. Dennis J. Fischer | ||
| Bb Registered user Username: Bb Post Number: 114 Registered: 7-2004 |
Yes, Miller had nothing to do with the adventists and the sabbath. I have pictures of myself as a little girl standing on those rocks where they waited for Jesus to come. I guess my parents took us to visit. I don't remember much about it. It was an historical site to visit if you were an adventist! Bb | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1129 Registered: 3-2005 |
That is the big difference Dennis, William Miller admitted his error, and went back to being an orthodox Christian pastor and never joining the fanatical Adventists, whereas Joseph Smith taught the doctrine of the demon called the angel Moroni, of which Mormonism was so derived. There are many parallels in the development Adventism and Mormonism. Stan | ||
| Heretic Registered user Username: Heretic Post Number: 230 Registered: 2-2005 |
Diana, I've read through the thread referenced on R/S in the original post regarding Christ's fallen nature. I may be wrong but it seems that many of Adventism's claims about Christ (ie, He's the archangel Michael, He has a fallen nature, His being Example exalted over being our Savior) makes a whole lotta sense if you espouse the Arian view of Christ, as well, the position of the founding church fathers at the time other key doctrines were formed. When the Trinity was adopted into the church in the 1940's and 50's it then left them in the position of defending doctrines that sometimes are incompatible with this new view. Heretic | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2146 Registered: 3-2004 |
Heretic, I do not remember the SDA doctrine I learned in school, 1st grade through LLU graduation. I can only say that you are probably right. When I quit going to church, I quit studying the SS lesson and only read individual verses of the Bible when I did read it. God had to clear out a lot of SDA mush from my brain and He has done a fantastic job. I did not remember a bit of the doctrine when He showed me about EGW two years ago Jan. It was so easy to accept God and forget EGW for me. Thank you God. Diana | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3112 Registered: 12-2003 |
Heretic, I agree with you. The great irony is that they do try to defend those Arian doctrines. Actually, it's probably not an irony. It's more likely that Adventists are confused about the true identity of Jesus and rationalize Ellen's contradictory statements about Him. While they SAY He is God, I remember how limited that God-ness seemed to me as an Adventist. I never thought of Jesus as truly Lord of all, worthy of all worship. I knew the words and the titles, but I didn't experience Him that way. The still-existing confusion about his nature (did he inherit Mary's sin or not?!) inside the church continues to keep people from acknowledging Him as all-powerful. Colleen | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 835 Registered: 7-2004 |
I was at Barnes & Nobles today and I decided to pick up a volume that is a compilation of all the Apocrypha and the gnostic gospels, just because I'm curious by nature. In leafing through I came across this from "The Gospel of Philip," -- "Adam came into being from two virgins, from the Spirit and from the virgin earth. Christ, therefore, was born from a virgin to rectify the Fall which occurred in the beginning." Now, I know that The Gospel of Philip is considered a gnostic gospel and therefore does not have as much weight as the gospels found in our approved editions. However, as I understand the need for Mary to be a virgin when she conceived the Christ Child, the explanation found in the Gospel of Philip states it very well. | ||
| Jtree Registered user Username: Jtree Post Number: 211 Registered: 5-2000 |
you said Guibox? I have ran into him on http://www.christianforums.net I have him on IGNORE |
