bump for me.

It's hard to answer a question like this, because you're coming at this from an angle the authors weren't writing from. That is, you're trying to retrofit back a question that they weren't addressing, so it doesn't work well. They were giving a description of those who are not born again. The idea wasn't if a person did such and such, then he wasn't born again, but that these are the characteristics of people who aren't converted. Do you see the difference?

Also, the idea of the authors, it seems clear to me, was specifically of sins which were done intentionally. So while some sin may be possible to do ignorantly, but such a person sinning ignorantly wouldn't be being considered by the author, so the question is moot, or, better, ill-conceived.

I think this answers all the questions about the list.



Ok, let me ask the question this way.

Why would the death of Christ be taken for granted? That makes no sense. You're saying the death of Christ was taken for granted for almost 2,000 years, never clearly explained by an inspired author until Ellen White. You don't see the problem with this?



I think you're confused about what I'm saying! I didn't write the angels were "confused" or "not secure" in an unqualified by, but qualified what I said. For you to take what I carefully qualified, and then write that down in an unqualified way is as best sloppy. Please be more careful! (unless you're genuinely confused).

If you're genuinely confused, I'll try to clarify what I'm saying (although I've said this so many times, I would have thought it would be clear by now).



So when I say there were "certain elements they were confused about" this is specifically what I have in mind. I don't think the way I wrote this is unfair. If holy beings had "not understood his principles," if they had "not clearly seen the nature of his rebellion," then there were certain elements they were confused about.

Regarding eternal security, the SOP tells us that before the cross the universe was not eternally secure. Do you disagree with this? For example:







So from these quotes we see that the cross effected security, even for angels. They are "not secure" (<= please note) *except by looking to the sufferings of the Son of God.*



Romans 1 tells us:



What does it say is condemned here? "All the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness." This is all inclusive, isn't it? It's not condemning some of the godlessness and wickedness of men, but all of it. Why? Because God has revealed Himself to all men, revealing not only Himself, but something of His character, for example, that He is the Creator, and that they should give thanks and glory to Him, as the next verse makes clear:





Yes it is, unless you didn't mean what you said. You said people can live ignorantly in sin. This is just what you said. Do you disagree with what you said earlier? Perhaps so, since you're now saying they cannot live together without a sense of shame.



It's not the revelation of sin that can result in rebirth, but the revelation of God's character.



The "light shining from the cross" is the key.



We've spoken about this. I've said I disagreed, and that I think you have a superficial view of what constitutes sin, because you think it's something which can be covered by the SDA fundamental beliefs. By the way, these beliefs have changed over time. Also, the SOP tells us not all of what we believe is necessarily without error.



I'm mentioning this because if you're basing your idea of what it means to sin on the basis of our fundamental beliefs, that's shaky ground.



I thought you said drinking and smoking were included on the list. Is this not right?

Not as you express things, no. (because of your equating "everything Jesus commanded" with a list of denominational doctrinal beliefs).



I don't understand why you're asking this. Have you not been reading what I've been writing the last 5 years or more, over hundreds of posts with you?



This question is a bit difficult to parse. It doesn't look to be something I've been addressing. Here's what I would say. The cross reveals to people their sin. However, people continue to learn more and more about the sinfulness of sin as their knowledge of the cross progresses.

(More later)

I think a person can do this ignorantly.



Please refer to my earlier comments about this list.



Things like drinking, going to XXX movies would be on the very gross side. Sins of behavior, in general, would fall on the grosser side. Sins of thought, involving judging others, for example, would be subtler.



Weren't we talking about people being converted?



I couldn't find the second group. I think the definition you have in mind involves knowing the SDA doctrines (although you use the phrase "keeping all things which Jesus commanded," which is not what I think this phrase has in mind). Given that this is what it means, yes, I think they are also ignorantly practicing unknown sins (sorry for the extra redundancy there).



Doesn't this bring back the question of Luther, whom you agreed should not be included here? Or did I misunderstand you.



No, not in the least. I think her wording is fine. I think anyone applying a little common sense would realize she didn't have in mind sins of which one is unaware, or else we'd have to come to the conclusion that people like Luther and William Miller weren't converted.



Wasn't this from Steps to Christ? This wasn't a book for SDA's. She couldn't have had your second group in mind, even using your definition of "all things which Jesus commanded" as "doctrines of the SDA church."

Of the 45 sins blacklisted above where do you see smoking and drinking fitting in?


Do you view his obstinacy as one of his more offensive sins? And, do you view his uncharitable views of some as one of his more offensive sins? Also, do you think his drinking was one of the 45 sins blacklisted above? If so, which one?


I’m not comfortable adding to the word of God. Do you know of an inspired passage that inserts the words like “deliberately” in contexts like this, that is, a context in which specific sins are said to make people worthy of death and ineligible to inherit the kingdom of God?


Of the 45 sins blacklisted above which ones are smoking and drinking?


Do you agree with me that seeing their sins for the first time in light of the cross makes a huge difference in how they view their sins? If so, what do think accounts for it?

I hear you saying some of the sins blacklisted above can indeed be ignorantly practiced by certain born again believers, and that this is inherently implied by Jesus and Paul. If so, then please post the passages where this idea is clearly explained in the Bible or the SOP.

Also, which sins blacklisted above do you believe born again believers can practice without realizing they are sinning?


I believe the oral tradition regarding why Jesus had to die was written down here and there since the death of Jesus (can’t name anyone off the top of my head). Ellen also wrote it down.


You seemed to have overlooked this point.


Yes, I know. I agree the angels didn’t understand all the reasons why Satan’s side of the GC are wrong. But by faith they were/are perfectly happy believing he is wrong on all accounts. They have been ready since A&E sinned in Eden to wipe out the evil angels. No doubts, no questions, no regrets!


I disagree with your idea that the loyal angels were somehow, someway, not secure until AD 31. They were/are 100% certain that God is good and forever worthy of praise. They have never doubted it. They have always been secure in their love and adoration and trust of God. They also know eternity is safeguarded against another rebellion because by faith they believe redeemed humans will never choose to sin. This faith will be confirmed during the 7 last plagues and Jacob’s time of trouble.


No, I do not agree with you that Paul was addressing every human being born on this planet. He was talking about people who once understood the truth about God and then turned their back on Him. He was definitely not talking about “heathens” or “savages” who have never heard name of God.


People can sin in ignorance, but only in relation to the first four commandments. I have never said two people can live in sin (i.e. living and sleeping together unlawfully) without feeling uncomfortable about it. Yes, they can harden their heart and not feel shame.


“The first step in reconciliation to God is the conviction of sin. . . The sinner must be made to feel that he is a transgressor.” You cannot bypass the first step and hope to experience genuine rebirth. Nevertheless, one cannot experience rebirth without embracing the love of God. Both are necessary. Both happen at the cross.


Do you *suspect* one or more of our fundamental beliefs are in error and are the source of SDAs sinning ignorantly? Also, do you think certain subtle sins are overlooked by our fundamental beliefs? If so, please name them. Thank you.


Do you think smoking and drinking are included on the blacklisted sins named above? And, do you think this proves neither Paul nor Jesus meant born again believers cannot ignorantly practice some of the sins they blacklisted, that indeed it can and does happen?

Personally, I believe they meant precisely what they said, namely, that anyone who practices the sins they blacklisted will not be admitted to heaven. So, yes, I do not believe smoking and drinking are included or any other sin believers can commit in ignorance. None of the sins blacklisted above can be ignorantly committed by believers in either one of the two groups I described above.

You seem to be suggesting that SDAs who are living in perfect harmony with our fundamental beliefs come short of the glory of God. In what way?


Is this a cryptic way of saying, Yes, you agree with me?


Do you think seeing their cultivated sinful habits in light of the cross for the first time is shallow compared to what they will know about it 5 years later? Here’s a description of someone seeing their sins in light of the cross for first time:


This is the experience I’m talking about. Does this sound shallow to you?


Please provide an illustration. For example, finish the following story in a way that reflects how you see it playing out, how you see someone committing a subtle sin of the heart without realizing it.

“Jim entered the office and was surprised when everyone broke out singing, For he’s a jolly good fellow. His heart was …. This is an example of a subtle sin of the heart.”


Your comment does not address my question. I understand that you believe the list merely identifies some of the sins unconverted people commit intentionally. Nevertheless, does the list include the sins involving the “more subtle matters of the heart”?


Do you think a person is born again first and then learns how to crucify the “grosser sins”? Also, at what point do you think believers cease to sin in thought?


1. When do you think “obedience is fulfilled”?
2. When do you think “bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” happens?


Oh yes, I am very aware of my weakness and imperfections. Do you think being aware of ones weaknesses and imperfections means they are guilty of sinning? Also, what do you mean by, “Are you aware of any sin in your life”? Are you asking if I am willfully cultivating a particular sinful habit? Or, are you asking if I am willfully indulging some subtle form of selfishness like pride of opinion?

Let me say this - “Whosever abideth in him sinneth not.” When I am actively and aggressively abiding in Jesus, the Bible says that I am pure “even as he is pure,” that I am “righteous even as He is righteous”. It also says, “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.” It goes on to say, “We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.”

Do these descriptions of believers abiding in Jesus obviously imply that they are ignorantly practicing some of the sins they cultivated prior to rebirth? I don’t think so. Do you?


Do you agree?


We’re talking about the people described in SD 300. Do you think she is talking about believers who continue to ignorantly practice some of the sinful habits they cultivated prior to experiencing rebirth? Or, do you agree with me that she is saying all of them must be confessed and crucified when they experience rebirth?


Here are the two groups:


“I think they are also ignorantly practicing unknown sins.” I hear you saying, yes, the second group ignorantly practices some of the sinful habits they cultivated prior to rebirth. If so, please name a sin someone who is imitating Jesus’ sinless example can commit without realizing they are sinning.


Luther is not included in the group of believers she describes in SD 300. This is not to say Luther is, therefore, lost. Do you agree? If so, then please post a passage where she is obviously describing born again believers who continue to ignorantly practice some of the sinful habits they cultivated prior to experiencing rebirth. By “obviously” I mean a passage that does not require the fanciful art of logical deduction based on implied inferences.


Not necessarily. Since the passage does not say what you believe it implies, it is more logical, in my mind, to take SD 300 at face value and conclude she was describing a specific group of believers, which happens to exclude believers like Luther who were born again ignorantly practicing some of the sinful habits they cultivated prior to rebirth. The onus is upon you to post a passage that describes believers like Luther, a passage that does not require the fanciful art of logical deduction based on implied inferences.


No, we’re discussing SD 300.

The fundamental beliefs are doctrines. A person can agree to believe and do certain things without even being converted. The Pharisees are examples of this.



It's more like a straight-forward way of questioning why you're asking this. You're asking me if I'm agreeing with something I've asserted dozens of times over a number of years. Why?



It's shallower. Presumably one would learn something in 5 years.



I never said anything about the experience being shallow. Why are you asking this?



I think she's talking about the ordinary experience of being converted, which applies for any person at any time. She doesn't have some special group in mind.



You've lost me.



No, this isn't what I said. I said it's a list of some general characteristics of those who are unconverted.



The list is dealing with people who aren't even converted, so this is a superset of what you're asking for, and not something the authors were even discussing.



I think my thoughts are the same as yours for this for your "first group" regarding sins done in ignorance. Regarding ceasing to sin in thought, that would make one perfect, wouldn't it? As a man thinks in his heart, so is he. So whenever one becomes perfect.



You could interpret these in different ways, depending on the context. That is, as applying either to justification or sanctification.



No. I see no evidence of two groups who experience conversion differently. I believe that all people experience conversion in the same, which is by faith in Christ, and that all, when converted, have sins of ignorance to yet meet.



You're the one with the unique idea here. If you have an idea which disagrees with how everyone else sees thing, it's incumbent upon to you to present a good reason why.

What evidence do you have that she even conceived of such a class of people?



Oh.

You didn’t answer my question. How can a born again converted person live in perfect harmony with our beliefs and come short of the glory of God?


Do you agree with me?


Please post an inspired passage to support the idea that following experience involves a shallow view of sin:

One ray of the glory of God, one gleam of the purity of Christ, penetrating the soul, makes every spot of defilement painfully distinct, and lays bare the deformity and defects of the human character. It makes apparent the unhallowed desires, the infidelity of the heart, the impurity of the lips. The sinner's acts of disloyalty in making void the law of God, are exposed to his sight, and his spirit is stricken and afflicted under the searching influence of the Spirit of God. He loathes himself as he views the pure, spotless character of Christ. {SC 29.1}


Do you think she expected us to assume some of them would continue to ignorantly practice some of the sinful habits they cultivated prior to experiencing rebirth? Here’s the passage again:


“The sins that were practiced before conversion are to be put off with the old man.” Why do you think this sentence must be interpreted to mean some people will continue to ignorantly practice some of the sinful habits they cultivated prior to experiencing rebirth? She didn’t qualify it as you do. Please post something she wrote that plainly agrees with your assertion.


Please provide an example of a born again converted person committing a subtle sin of the heart without realizing they are sinning. In the unfinished example above I assumed you would have inserted something like – “His heart filled up with pride. This is an example of a subtle sin of the heart born again converted believers can commit without realizing they are sinning.”


Do you think the list includes sins unconverted people commit? If so, do you think the list includes sins involving the “more subtle matters of the heart” (your words)? If not, why not? Please elaborate.


You didn’t answer my question.


Do you think someone in the first group can commit sins of ignorance in the area of thoughts? And, do you think the people in the second group have reached the point where, like Jesus, they no longer sin in thought? Here’s the description of the two groups:


Do you think people in the second group can sin in thought or word or deed without realizing they are sinning? If so, please explain (use inspired quotes).


You didn’t answer my questions.


Do you think it is possible for someone to experience rebirth and conversion at the same time, that is, 1) confess and crucify all of the sinful habits they cultivated prior to rebirth, and 2) live in perfect harmony with Jesus’ sinless example?


Please post an inspired passage that clearly describes Luther’s state the moment he experienced rebirth, that is, a passage that describes born again believers who ignorantly practice some of the sins they cultivated prior to rebirth. Since you seem to believe it is such a common belief you should have no problem honoring my request for you to support your assertion. I am not the one saying so, thus the onus is upon you.


The evidence is as follows:


You seem to think the state of sinlessness described above can be reached only after years of sinning less and less until sinning ceases altogether. If so, please post inspired passages to support such an assertion.

Tom, please respond to 109794 and 109797. Thank you.