Didn't you quote someone who said that (I paraphrase) though New Theologians might profess to be against sin, their theological system makes it impossible to actually overcome sin? And if "they" cannot overcome sin, "they" are condemned, right?


I know this much: If people excuse selfishness of any form, they don't know God; and if they don't know God, they cannot have eternal life.

The preacher quoted in your quote certainly did accept defeat, and was quite satisfied with it. But I have seen another form of defeat proudly proclaimed by some on the other side of the fence.

In a discussion a while back, I quoted a passage from Andreasen's Last Generation chapter where he said that true overcoming of sin includes coming to the point of hating it so much that the overcomer is no longer attracted to it. He expanded that concept, saying that the 144k will experience this kind of overcoming of sin on every point.

So what was Andreasen teaching? Sinful man can reach the point of hating sin so much that he will not even desire to sin! By the grace of God, beyond stopping ourselves from doing sins, we can come to the point of not even wanting to sin. As EGW said, we can be so converted that in obeying God's commands, we will be merely carrying out our own impulses. Can I get an Amen! my brothers and sisters?

Unfortunately, the Old Theology defender I pointed this out to, who is prominent among conservatives, responded this way: We must remember that while Andreasen had a lot of truth, he was not any more inspired than you or me.

How could he respond otherwise, when he has spent so much effort and energy teaching that the sinful lusts we are all familiar with were experienced by Jesus also? If the 144k, or any other sinful man, can be freed from this experience, then they are treading on ground that Jesus never did. I'm sure you see the problems this would cause the "Jesus was our example" crowd.

In the end, I have found that both sides of this theological fence have members who like the smell of garbage. Neither side has a monopoly on sanctification.

And if I'm right on my hunch regarding who wrote your quote, I'm guessing he wrote that over 3 years ago.

Jacob of old, when oppressed with the fear that his sin had cut him off from God, lay down to rest, and "he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven." —Foreward, Steps to Christ.

Strange, indeed. I would like to quickly address this seeming contradiction, since we know Steps to Christ broadly brushes the Savior as the divine-human Ladder. (See Kirkpatrick sermon.)

At least two of many postlapsarians at the time Steps to Christ was written in 1892, were irrevocably connected in 1893 through their congruous Christology. Like E.G. White, A.T. Jones (et al) believed Christ had come all the way down to earth, not on a "shock absorber-outfitted platform above the earth" (Qualls):

"We can have not the slightest doubt that Ellen White agreed with the 1888 reformers to the extent that Christ accepted fallen, sinful human nature at the incarnation" (Knight).

Moreover, one of the few principle books Jones extensively quoted from in his 1893 General Conference sermons was Steps to Christ, using it almost as a text-book while expounding his theology! The SDA historian corroborates:

"At the 1893 General Conference session he [Jones] used passages from her [White's] works as "texts" to base some of his sermons on."

Given then the obvious theological intimacy between the two, it is no wonder we find the newly-minted manuscript directly being quoted from at least 26 times in the 1893 General Conference Bulletin (GCB), where Elder Jones capably joined Ellen White's soteriology with his postfall Christology. Knight further extrapolates:

"By 1895 they [Jones, Waggoner and Prescott] had developed the concept that Christ was just like every other child of Adam—including the tendency to sin—into a central feature of their doctrine of Righteousness By Faith [or the plan of salvation]."

That White's renderings in Steps to Christ catapulted Jones' Christology—an undeniable impetus for his theology at the 1893 GC meetings (as we will shortly outline)—is documented history:

"The theology set forth by Jones, Waggoner and Prescott on the human nature of Christ evolved throughout the early 1890s. . . by 1893 it was becoming a more important part of their theology" (Knight).

Most significant of all, however, was that a divinely-sent prophet, from her comfortable but clairvoyant pew, was openly lauding Jones' synergistic sermons.

So with this backdrop in mind, below are six of Jones' 26 references from Steps to Christ. Each quotation is followed by a brief paragraph or two summarizing relevant context. Our limitations here should be obvious: This is by no means an exhaustive analysis of each sermon; time simply does not permit us a deeper study or wider scope. [Source: White Birch Printing, The Third Angel's Message. (Barronett, WI: Paradise View, 1993).]

1. Sermon No. 1 (p. 6): “Note the following from Steps to Christ, pp. 105, 129, 130.”

Four full paragraphs are quoted to express the need for prayer when conducting Bible study.

2. Sermon No. 10 (p. 76): “In Steps to Christ, p. 64: 'Obedience is not a mere outward compliance, but the service of love.'”

In bridging his Soteriology and Christology, Jones asks the question, “What is obedience?” His reply in essence is: Buy Christ's gold tried in the fire; connecting Rev. 14:12 with the mind of Christ (Rom. 7:25), in light of Christ's human flesh woven in the loom of heaven, that “flesh that is yours and mine, that Christ bore in this world.”

3. Sermon No. 12 (p. 87): “And, that you may have the two things—the truth of justification by faith and the falsity of it—side by side, will read what this says, and then what God says in Steps to Christ.”

Jones next mentions Rome's false forgiveness with Adventism's true forgiveness in contradistinction, then warns against the worship of the beast and his image, or the “devil's doctrine of justification by faith.” The rest of the sermon is replete with quotations from Steps to Christ, enabling him to conclude, “It is the will of God to cleanse us from sin” (White), but only through the third angel's message which points us to the true Eucharist or Living Seed, Christ Jesus, “that Teacher of Righteousness.”

4. Sermon No. 13 (p. 93): “Who will be fitted for the loud cry of the third angel? Those who have the presence of Jesus Christ. Those to whom the Laodicean message has brought by its working and its intent the presence of Jesus Christ. This means the personal presence too—not imaginary, a way off presence; it is not that at all. Let us read the explanation of it here in Steps to Christ, pages 82-85.”

This chapter strongly contends that in order for a salvific latter rain to fully fall, “the personal presence of Jesus” through the Spirit must be abiding in our hearts. This non-Catholic Jesus, the very mystery of God, already portrayed in prior chapters, is none other than that still-looming “flesh that is yours and mine.”

Sermon No. 13 closes with a synopsis from another quotation on faith from Steps to Christ (p. 79): “That is what real faith is. That is faith that will bring to you the outpouring of the latter rain. . . to prepare us for the loud cry and the carrying of the third angel's message in the only way in which it can be carried from this conference.”

5. Sermon No. 14 (p. 101): “You must rely wholly upon his saving grace” [White]. That is Christianity. That is the mind of Christ. There is no devilism about that at all; and it can't get in there, either. Why, you find it also in Steps to Christ. Not stated exactly as that. I will read a passage or two from Steps to Christ, beginning on page 67 and reading to page 71.”

Elder Jones next presents a treatment on the “perfect obedience to the law of God,” which by definition, proffers “eternal life.” His eloquent paraphrase of White's justification by faith? “Our only ground for hope is Christ's righteousness imputed to us and this righteousness wrought in us by the Holy Spirit is the works we do.”

Jones again quotes Steps to Christ (p. 71), warning against trusting in justification by works, but advising we look to the only solution for the carnal mind: The Word's white raiment (Rev. 3:18), “that garment “woven in the loom of heaven, [with] not one thread of human invention” in it.”

6. Sermon No. 15 (p. 104): “That is what the Testimonies and Steps to Christ are for; they are to lead us to see that it is in the Bible and to get it there. Now I shall avoid these purposely, not as though there was anything wrong in using them; but what we want, brethren, is to get at it in the Bible and know where it is there. And that is the Lord's own way as pointed out in the Testimonies. Let me read it here.”

Jones asks two compelling questions: “What is the latter rain?” and “What is the loud cry?” The “congregation” answers: “The message of the righteousness of Christ!” The messenger of the Lord quickly clarifies that this message cannot be manufactured by man; it comes only from above, and to reject it is to reject the One from above.

Jones then quotes Rom. 5:17, stating that there can be no human invention in the perfect robe of righteousness—which had been most ready to cover those at Minneapolis! Quoting from Rom. 1:17; 10:17, 20; 11:6; and 3:24, each revealing a nuance in the role of righteousness by faith in contrast to righteousness by works, Jones reconfirms the eternal truth found in the true Gospel.

To be continued. . .

William

Steps to Christ highlights the sinner's need of a change in mind and character. Jones claimed that Jesus did not have the same mind as the sinner. We don't need a bunch of quotes to establish that, do we? Where it matters most - the heart and mind - Jesus was radically different from the sinner. Moreover, the plan of salvation is to make the sinner radically different from what he naturally is - he becomes a NEW creature.

Jesus, when He came here, did not come as the OLD sinner. He came to take the place of the sinner, not to be one Himself. So that should also make it clear that the ladder came down, but not quite the same as the common sinner. We don't need Jesus to show us what we are, but what we should become.

For what it's worth, your comments read rather like generic platitudes and even sound distinctly like non-Adventist speak, nevertheless, none of it, in my opinion, seems to be the kind of solid argumentation that effectively refutes the facts of denominational history, or the obvious discrepancies still-existing between Ellen White's Christology and that of post-QOD's.

PS: I'll form a complete answer to your thoughts in a later post.

William

Agreed. I didn't understand LK's point. It's certainly possible for a person to have victory over sin to the point of being saved even though one has a prelapsarian theology. If he is talking about victory over sin in the sense of the 144,000 I might agree with him, if I knew what he was thinking.



Which is?

youve got my amen!

it was a pretty good post, too!

This is what Jones taught in the 1895 GCB sermons.



This doesn't make sense to me. What Andreasen wrote was simply what Jones taught. Jones taught that Christ took our sinful nature with its desires, per the quote I presented earlier. So there's no contradiction here. That is, there's no contradiction between Jesus having the same flesh we have with its hereditary tendencies and having no desire to sin.

If the fellow you're mentioning (still no quotes!!) is disagreeing with Jones, then I disagree with him and agree with Jones.



??? Why?

What Jones, Prescott, et all taught was that Jesus Christ prepared the way for humanity. Christ took our sinful flesh and by faith triumphed over the temptations of that sinful flesh, thus preparing the way for the rest of humanity to overcome as He did. So far from treading where Jesus did not tread, the treading is only possible because Jesus did so tread.

This is the difficulty I have with your position, as I understand it (you've never clearly described it, AFAIR) because you have the 144,000, or any of us, for that matter, experiencing victories that Jesus Christ never experienced.

I'm not really interested in refuting anything, or being an apologist for anything. I feel no need to reject or support our denominational history for the sake of history. All I'm interested in is learning and upholding the law and the testimony. If I can do that, I'll be safe.

On that note, I don't mind being generic or non-Adventist, as long as I am faithful to the truth. So if my assertion that Steps to Christ, and more importantly, the steps to Christ, involve a change of heart and mind, a conversion of character and spirit such that we become new creatures, sounds non-Adventist, then I will sound non-Adventist all day long, and not feel bad about it one bit.

In the end, God will not ask, "What do you think is the proper place of the Baker letter in the Christological debate?" or "Did the historical SDA position on Christ's flesh help you develop the correct eschatology?" or any such thing. The pertinent question will be, "Have you been saved from your corrupt heart and sinful mind?"

I must have confused you because that is exactly the position that I am rejecting, not upholding. We cannot have a spiritual experience superior to Christ's in any way.

Amen to that!