Tom do you believe that Jesus already justified all your sins at the cross, even those you haven't committed yet, those of tomorrow? What ever you do, is not going to change that truth?

The only thing required of you is to stay in the "faith" and grace of God? Salvation is totally a free gift. Depends 100% on Jesus

This is the Gospel message that didn't prevail after 1888.

Thanks again for the energetic response, Elle. Wish at the moment I were more capable of doing the same, actually.

I'm not too sure 1888 was about forensic-only justification as the means of salvation. Did 1888 even discuss justification as a legal umbrella covering future sins? Oh, well. Having just finished the Quall's article, I'm only certain that Adventism and Evangelicalism have little in common.

Feeling poetically provocative today on at least one point. So you, Arnold and Rosengela must of course graciously pardon my poor alliteration and cack-handed unoriginality.

As a genuine admirer of large-framed paintings in contrast to small photographs, carefully looking at Christ's humanity from several feet away in order to appreciate every nuance, makes more sense to me than repeatedly smudging a processing Polaroid in my moistened hand.

So forgive me for seeming cautious or even sounding contrarian.

But as I see it, the postlapsarian masterpiece called The Sinful-Flesh Seed hanging upon Adventism's wall is historically fixed through biblical promise. But the prelapsarian snapshot of The Sinless-Flesh Seed hanging upon Evangelicalism's wall is historically falling through biblical prophecy.

So why sweat the small stuff when the big stuff dries the sweat?

William

When you say "1888" I'm thinking of the message which Jones and Waggoner brought. But when I read what you write, it doesn't seem like you agree with their message. So I'm trying to ask why you're mentioning 1888. Would you explain that please?

Jesus doesn't justify sins, whether past, present, or future. He justifies sinners. He pardons sins. "Pardon" can be understood in different ways, depending on the context. In the context of your question, Jesus, or God, pardons all sins, whether past, present or future (but this applies to all, not just believers). We don't receive pardon until we believe. We can't receive pardon for sins we haven't committed yet, because pardon involves the recognition of having sinned. From the standpoint of being willing to forgive, however (which is the spirit of your question), God is forgiveness personified, and forgives us even before we ask.

It wasn't at all. Here's an excerpt from "Christ and His Righteousness" which, according to Froom, was based on the messages Waggoner presented at the 1888 General Conference.

Sister White did not say that our prayers and praise are sinful. God does not expect us to repent of our prayers and praise. Just because they require the perfume of Christ’s propitiation to be wholly and entirely acceptable to God it does not mean we are sinful or guilty of sinning.

Do you agree?

I can see why you think I’m contradicting myself. Sorry for the confusion. I’ll clarify what I mean. The “affections and lusts” which tempt us from within do not constitute sin and do not require repentance or pardon. They do not corrupt or contaminate us. God does not count us guilty of sinning because they war against us and the Holy Spirit who dwells within us. However, if we cherish them or act them out in word or deed, we are guilty of sinning and repentance is required to restore and retain our justification and salvation.


I agree. Our appetites and passions begin as innocent and legitimate needs. However, they pass through our sinful flesh and we become consciously aware of them as temptations. For example, the need to eat shows up as a temptation to indulge appetite without reference to truth or temperance. But, by the grace of God, we can translate it to mean - Eat to the praise and glory of God. As such we are not corrupted or contaminated or considered guilty of sinning in the sight of God.


I agree Jesus was tempted to do the right thing at the wrong time or for the wrong reasons. However, I also believe He was tempted to do things that were wrong in and of themselves because He was tempted in all points like we are. Nevertheless, Jesus summarily resisted all temptations as hateful and hideous.

Since Jesus was tempted in all points like we are it is difficult for me to accept the idea that He wasn’t tempted to think, say, or do evil things. I find it difficult for the simple reason all of us are tempted in these ways. Either Jesus was tempted like we are or He wasn’t. If He wasn’t then I am forced to believe Paul was mistaken when he said so.


Do you think “pass away” in the passage above means dead and gone? Or, do you agree with me that they remain and continue to tempt us from within to indulge our innocent and legitimate needs in sinful ways? “He who strives to serve God will encounter a strong undercurrent of wrong.”


I agree that in Christ, and like Jesus, we can recognize and resist temptations and resolve to translate them into holy and righteous thoughts and ideas and satisfy them accordingly. But I was asking something else in my question above. I’ll approach it from a different angle.

I believe all temptations, whether inherently good or evil, begin as unholy thoughts and feelings. That is, the feeling to indulge it is part of the temptation. The urge to sin is strong. However, like you said, we can find the thought and the feeling repulsive and resist them unto the honor and glory of God.

But I hear you saying Jesus did not experience this like we do. You seem to think Jesus never felt the urge to think, say, or do something inherently wrong the same as we do, thus He never had to resist it like we do. Is this what you believe?


Thank you answering my question. I was pretty sure this is what you believe. I must say, though, that I couldn’t disagree with you more. It means you believe people are guilty of sinning on an ongoing basis by virtue of the fact they were born with hereditary sinful propensities. I believe people incur guilt when they sin willfully. I cannot imagine our loving heavenly Father counting people guilty of sinning before they choose to sin. That borders on believing God counts me guilty of the sins my dad commits. Do you believe this way, too?


In what sense does it appeal to you?


You wrote, “Absolute and unbroken victory over every sin means perfect absence of sin in the life.” Can people who reach this state be tempted to think, say, or do something inherently evil?


Do you think you were guilty of sinning even though you sincerely renounced watching soap operas? That is, were you guilty of sinning when you were successful at resisting your internal urge to watch soap operas?


What are we guilty of? What will we answer for in judgment?


What do you mean by “overcome”? Do you mean eliminated or controlled? And, do you think some of the 144,000 will have sinful propensities they are unaware of? If so, does that mean they are guilty of sinning in the sight of God? Will they be translated alive? If so, will Jesus simply give them a new form and flesh without sinful propensities? If Jesus can do that then why doesn’t He simply end the GC now and do it for everyone or at least for everyone who is worthy? Why let the GC continue?

Your just being too nice

William, to tell you the truth, I read some stuff regarding 1888 and to be frank, I didn't understand much. I would like to have someone that I can trust can tell the basic outline or point me to a good book that is as objective as possible because I rather study my Bible than read those intellectual slanted opinions that often goes way above my head.

I think I understand a little bit, what you're saying. Could you elaborate on the sinful-Flesh Seed? Do you think Jesus inherited the same brain as us, with a sinful bent? What's the actual promises do you see? You don't beleive the gospel message is important when you say "sinless-Flesh...Evangelicalism"? If you believe in the gospel message, tell me the outline. I think the Gospel messge that Paul preached is the power that the world needs.

I think I understand this one with my application in mind

Salut Tom, I'm not an intellectual/theological player. My understanding about 1888 is small. So I'm no match for you. However, the only thing I want to hold on is the Gospel -- to believe it and to live it.


rm 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life.

Yes we can, if we walk in the spirit of Christ, then we have that assurance.


Our biggest sin is not believing in Christ's death and ressurection. If that's is not in place, then there's no hope even if you recognize all your resulting sins due to your lack of faith. Christ is looking for faith, and not fpr strong willed "righteous" individuals.

I think, we're out of the topic.

"Objective" is rather subjective, isn't it? I think it may mean "someone who sees things the way I do." (not just picking on you; we all do this).

The most objective source would be from the messengers themselves! http://www.crcbermuda.com/bible/righteousness-by-faith/ has quite a lot (go to "Bible" then "Righteousness by Faith").

"Christ and His Righteousness" is a good book to start with. "The Glad Tidings" is also a great book to read, which you can find easily enough by googling "Waggoner Glad Tidings" (not in quotes).

That's great to hear! You know, Ellen White endorsed Jones and Waggoner zillions of times (well, over a thousand). That's the place to go for a better understanding of the Gospel. The Lord gave them a special gift (she even said Waggoner could teach righteousness by faith better than she could!)

The previous posts gives a couple of suggestions to start with.

"Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled."