You're reaction of simply stating I was wrong, when I pointed out that this argument is built on SILENCE, did not in the least convince me that it is therefore an established fact that no sacrifice was required for God to reinstate Lucifer.

Christ stood as surety for all His created beings.

Also we must ask at what point did Lucifer descend into sin. We know many of the sinless angels also had some doubts, they were confused by Lucifer's talk (God allowing the Controversy to run it's course was to remove all doubt), yet they were still "sinless". So simply having questions was not sin. It's the point where a decision is made to go against God.

From GC 494 we find that Christ reasoned with Lucifer talking about the justice, goodness and greatness of God. Warning him that he was heading into sin. Sin was an unknown thing at that point, Lucifer himself didn't understand whereto he was drifting. Thus before "condemnation" could be in place, the conditions were established.
What all did Christ say to Lucifer -- we don't know.

Ellen White does mention Lucifer twisted what Christ told him, "accusing the Son of God of a design to humiliate him before the inhabitants of Heaven." GC 496

So this argument (which by the way is very popular amongst the moral influence Adventist) really doesn't prove the point they wish it to prove.
First because there is a point where questions are not yet sin
Secondly because nobody knows all the facts.



Your statements raise questions --

the only way it could be considered true, is that the Israelites had lost sight of the meaning of the sacrifices, and indeed were trying to earn their merit before God by going through strenous rituals.

Have you studied the sacrifices?
The Passover
The Day of Atonement

Lev. 4:17 And the priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood, ....
4:20 And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them.

Lev. 4:25 And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering with his finger,...
4:26 ...and the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.

4:35 ...and the priest shall burn them upon the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the LORD: and the priest shall make an atonement for his sin that he hath committed, and it shall be forgiven him.

Lev. 5:6 And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the LORD for his sin which he hath sinned, a female from the flock, a lamb or a kid of the goats, for a sin offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his sin.

Lev. 5:9 And he shall sprinkle of the blood of the sin offering upon the side of the altar; and the rest of the blood shall be wrung out at the bottom of the altar: it [is] a sin offering.
5:10 And he shall offer the second for a burnt offering, according to the manner: and the priest shall make an atonement for him for his sin which he hath sinned, and it shall be forgiven him.
I could go on -- but that should illustrate the meaning of the sacrifices.

Paul isn't giving a meaning of the sacrifice of Christ in Romans 12:1 Nor is he now speaking of "justification" or what was need to justify us, he is telling us what our response to Christ should be. BECAUSE OF GOD'S GRACE and salvation which was elogantly laid out in the earlier chapters of Romans, our reasonable service is to present ourselves to God as living sacrifices. This is the life of sanctification.

Our knowledge doesn't save us, but our response to the Holy Spirit's pleading can result in our salvation. Surely anyone with any sense would ascribe the credit for our salvation to God, though. If you need money, and someone gives you a million dollars, you'd be pretty nutty to give yourself credit for accepting the money you were given.

I've quoted the following many times (I think on this thread) as I think it describes the process of salvation wonderfully:



How, then, are we saved? Let's examine!

1."As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness," so the Son of man has been lifted up, and everyone who has been deceived and bitten by the serpent may look and live. (Look and live is the key).

2.The light shining from the cross reveals the love of God.

3.If we do not resist this drawing, we shall be led to the foot of the cross in repentance for the sins that have crucified the Saviour.

4.Then the Spirit of God through faith produces a new life in the soul. (Then follows more things God does in the process of giving us life.)

So what is our part? To believe! If we do not repent, we *will* be led to repentance, and believe in Christ, resulting in our salvation, the cross being instrumental in this process. The credit, from beginning to end, belongs to God.

I didn't do this. I explained why the argument was not one of silence. It was based on a quote from the SOP:



Here's another one:





He had already headed into sin.



This is sin.



It doesn't matter for the point that was made. Satan sinned, and was offered pardon, again and again. He was given the opportunity to confess his sin. Had he repented and submitted, he would have been restored to his position as archangel. God doesn't need blood to forgive. We need the blood!



Since Lucifer understood the character of God, and His goodness, the sacrifice of Christ would have done nothing for him. So he was simply offered pardon on condition of repentance and submission. However, simply offering us such pardon would have done us no good, because we didn't know the love and character of God. We needed Christ to reveal it to us. By beholding His character we might be drawn back to God.

As Fifield so succinctly and eloquently put it:





I've never seen this argument presented by anyone but me. If you could provide me with a link to someone else presenting it, I'd certainly like to see it.

The argument does really prove the point. God offered Lucifer pardon without blood; that's clear for anyone to see.



It doesn't matter when Lucifer sinned to establish the point. He was offered pardon. He couldn't have been offered pardon unless he had sinned. He was given the opportunity to confess his sin. He couldn't have confessed his sin unless he had sinned.

We don't know all the facts about anything relating to God. Using this logic, one could reject any argument whatsoever.

We don't need to know all the facts; just enough relevant ones to establish truth.



You're assuming your conclusion. This isn't the only way it could be considered true. It could also be considered true if your assumption is incorrect that the meaning of the sacrifices is such as Anslem explained.

The Eastern Orthodox church does not understand the sacrifices the way you are laying out. Why not? Because they split from the Roman Catholic church before Anselm.

Before you were trying to say I was making an argument from silence (when I wasn't, since I presented evidence by way of quotes to support my position) but now you really are presenting an argument of silence. You are arguing that if the Jews understand the sacrifices the way that Paul laid out in Romans 12:1, this could only be possible if they had forgotten their true meaning.

Present any evidence at all that the Jews *ever* had the understanding of the sacrifices that Anselm had. Or anyone else for that matter. This way of understanding sacrifices simply didn't exist in the time of Paul, anywhere in the world.



What Paul is setting out in Romans 12:1 is simply the meaning of sacrifice that everyone already understood. This can be established by simply seeing how contemporary cultures, including the Jews, in Paul's time understood sacrifice. The offering of a sacrifice was a sign of dedication. God, in giving us Christ, gave us His all. We, by giving of ourselves, give all we have in return. God sacrificed for us, and we, if we respond to the Holy Spirit, sacrifice ourselves back to Him, in loving service to Him and our fellows.

Yes, we NEED to die to sin, but

We don't just die to sin by "appreciation".
It takes more than that.
We need to accept the fact that Christ credits His death to our sin as our death to sin, or we will never experience "living in newness of life" with Him.


Your version seems to see us doing all the doing.
When we get to heaven we go up to Christ and say, "thanks for the great demonstration, it helped me to die to sin and make myself fully presentable to enter your kingdom.

But Paul says

Romans 3:26 To declare, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

And Paul explains it so beautifully in Romans 6
Go back to page one of this thread )

We are NOT to think that once we've overcome all sin then we can finally count ourself dead to sin. If we think that way we'll see the whole process as a hopeless struggle (or turn into Pharisees).


NO! When we accept Christ and His DEATH in our behalf, we, by uniting ourselves with Him, count ourselves dead to sin.
His death to our sins, is counted as OUR DEATH to sin. And, as Paul says, Reckon, or count yourselves as dead to sin.

Do you understand the difference.

The first view starts the Christian walk focused on all the sins he has to overcome before he can be counted as dead to sin and accepted in Christ.

The second starts the Christian walk praising God that he can count himself dead to sin, because Christ took upon Himself our "old man" and died in our place. The "old man" is to be considered DEAD!

"When we accept Christ and join Him in baptism, we die inwardly to this sinful kingdom. Yet that death depends entirely on Christ's sacrificial death upon the cross as Christ takes upon Himself our "old man of sin" and it is nailed on the cross with Him.

Our connection to Christ and His sacrifice is so real that it carries "our old man" to the very cross of Christ in a spiritual crucifixion that kills our old selfish self and we are BORN AGAIN, raised to newness of life WITH CHRIST!

And now -- instead of working to earn our justification, we walk in humble obedience with God.

Through our union with Christ in His death we are delivered from the dominion of sin. But we still find sin struggling to come back to life. Romans 7 depicts this struggle. The mind now delights to do God's will but the ingrained sinful tendencies work against this desire.

Now, can we still believe we are dead to sin? Yes, it is imperitive to believe it. Through Christ's sacrifice we are dead to sin, therefore DON'T LET SIN REIGN IN YOUR MEMBERS.
We are bought with a price, we are God's sons and daughters, thus we come at this struggle with A POSITIVE outlook that we are accepted in Christ, and want to glorify HIM! Not bring shame to His name.

If we forget that it is in Christ that death to sin is reckoned, or credited to us, we will sink in the swamp of discouragement depicted in the latter part of Romans 7.

But Romans 8 tells us that "therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

Just walk with Christ in humble obediences, don't focus on striving to overcome sin, just WALK IN HUMBLE OBEDIENCE with Christ, studying His Word, listening to His Holy Spirit, and "through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body,".

When we do this there will be REAL overcoming, not because we've focused on it, but because we walked in obedience with Christ on a daily, hourly basis.



Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
8:15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ;

But you still leave out the fact that we are CREDITED with Christ's dying to our sins, and giving us His righteousness.

None of those quotes say there would have been no need for an atonement. All it says is that Lucifer was not immediately cast out, that he was given space to repent. It's still an argument built on silence.





That is built upon your concept that the wages of sin is not death. That death can be averted simply by turning away from sin at some point. I don't agree.



I'm really not that interested in Fifield.

He is in conflict with scripture and EGW.



It was first presented to me when I was a student in an Adventist University, quite a few years back, by a professor who required us to read G. Maxwell's book and another book by some guy whose book I found anything BUT edifying (can't remember his name, which is probably a good thing) -- this isn't the first time I've been exposed to this reasoning -- it's being taught in our higher Educational systems.



When a person builds a whole theology upon a certain premise that premise should rest on KNOWN facts not on SILENCE.


I have no idea who Anslem even is.
My beliefs don't come from any "Anslem".
I gave you SCRIPTURE that clearly point out the meaning of the scrificial system, you skipped over them as if they were written by Anslem??????

QUOTE:
In the sacrificial offering, offered by the Jews, was seen a symbol of Christ, whose blood was to be shed for the salvation of the world. In the sacrificial system the truth of the atonement was to be impressed upon the world, that all might know that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. Many have wondered why it was that God appointed so many sacrifices in the old dispensation; but it was to teach the world in ever-bleeding sacrifices concerning Christ, the victim of man's transgressions. The offering for sin was a most solemn, sacred offering, and was placed upon the altar with impressive ceremony, and every detail was explained by the priest to the people, that they might understand that the Son of God was to be made an offering for their sins. This is the central truth of the plan of salvation, and it should be often repeated in the hearing of both believers and unbelievers. {ST, August 28, 1893 par. 8}.

There's no way this can be true. I'll demonstrate this a couple of different ways. First of all, let's look again at the DA statement:



This talks about the light shining from the cross revealing the love of God, and how the love draws us to Himself. Here's the other DA quote I mentioned:



The talks about there being "hope in a knowledge of God's love." "By beholding His character he might be drawn back to God."

Paul says that the goodness of God leads us to repentance.

Nowhere does Scripture, or any other inspired statement, say that "We need to accept the fact that Christ credits His death to our sin as our death to sin, or we will never experience 'living in newness of life' with Him."

Here's another way of seeing this can't possibly be true. This formulation of things (i.e. Christ crediting His death to our sin as our death to sin) is a relatively recent theological formulation; even Anselm didn't have this. Certainly no Old Testament saint thought in terms in any way resembling this. Yet they were saved.

How were they saved? Exactly in the way the DA quote points out. They were drawn to repentance by the love of God revealed through Christ.

I find it ironic that you expressed dismay at what you characterized as an expression on my part that we were saved by knowledge that we have, and here you say that we must "accept the fact that Christ credits His death to our sin as our death to sin" in order to experience newness of life with Him. Just comprehending the concept you are talking about is not easy, and is certainly beyond the ability of many who are children of God.

Tom, why do you appear to be ignoring Rom 6:4, not forgetting its context?


You speak of learning the truth of God's love and being drawn to him by his self-revelation of agape, but that's all you say. this Bible text is crystal clear that we aren't saved by knowledge of divine revelation alone, but by participating in Christ's death to sin by faith in him so we thereby attain newness of life in the Spirit.

Unless we are baptised into Christ's death there is no newness of life from God for us. If you agree, then why your last post?

No, this isn't the case. I'd suggest considering what I've been quoting more carefully. Again, from the Desire of Ages:



1.The light shining from the cross reveals the love of God. His love is drawing us to Himself.
2.If we do not resist this drawing, we shall be led to the foot of the cross in repentance for the sins that have crucified the Saviour.
3.Then the Spirit of God through faith produces a new life in the soul.
4.The heart, the mind, are created anew in the image of Him who works in us to subdue all things to Himself.
5.Then the law of God is written in the mind and heart.

1, 3, 4, and 5 are all God's doing, and even 2 (repentance) is a gift of God. (Acts 5:31). So those in heaven can say to God, "Thank you for giving Me your Son. Thank you for revealing me your love, for drawing me to yourself. Thank you for creating a new life in my soul. Thank you for creating anew my heart and mind in your image. Thank you for writing your law in my mind and heart. Thank you for the gift of repentance."



I haven't said anything like this. This is a straw man.



Of course. Do you understand I haven't written anything like what you're arguing against?



I've never said this.



I don't know what you mean by this, but what I would mean, if I said this, is that the love of God constrains us to live for Him who died for us because if one died for all, then all were dead. This is also Paul, of course. If you have this in mind, I agree.



The whole concept of working to earn justification is based on a false view of God's character. When we recognize the truth about God, we will have no desire to try to earn His favor.



Out of curiosity, do you see Romans 7 as dealing with one's experience before being born again, or after? (or both/either).



I think what causes us to sink into discouragement is not understanding what God is like.



I think real overcoming follows from believing the truth about God, that He really is like Jesus Christ.

The power of sin and Satan is in deception. Satan gained his power by causing people to think things about God which are not true. Sin has the same effect. In order to be set free, we need to understand and believe the truth.