Here's what Ellen White wrote about it (notice she doesn't say unrepentant sinners are barred from heaven based on the unholy clamorings of their fallen flesh nature):


Again, she says, "When any have sins remaining upon the books of record, unrepented of and unforgiven, their names will be blotted out of the book of life ..." Nothing is mentioned about the unholy clamorings of sinful flesh nature, nothing about hidden selfishness residing untapped and unknown within them. They are condemned based on the "unrepented of and unforgiven" "sins remaining upon the books of record" and not on the sins they might have committed because selfishness resided in them.

Do you agree?

I've not heard this idea expressed in these terms. I think this is an interesting way of putting it. Especially the "reinterpret" idea.

Tom, it's something that occurred to me years ago. It came to me as I was reading the SOP about the clamorings of fallen flesh. Seems to me our basic needs begin innocent but we become aware of them as unholy suggestions. Makes sense to me to assume it is sinful flesh that converts them into temptations. Ellen White wrote:

"You are of that age when the will, the appetite, and the passions clamor for indulgence. God has implanted these in your nature for high and holy purposes. It is not necessary that they should become a curse to you by being debased. They will become this only when you refuse to submit to the control of reason and conscience. (3T 84)

"[Our natural inclinations and appetites] were divinely appointed, and when given to man, were pure and holy. It was God’s design that reason should rule the appetites, and that they should minister to our happiness. And when they are regulated and controlled by a sanctified reason, they are holiness unto the Lord. (14 MR 294)

I think this means that our body produces innocent and legitimate needs (appetites and passions). However, seems to me sinful flesh nature intercepts and perverts them and communicates them in the form of unholy "lusts and affections" which we must, in Christ, reinterpret as innocent and legitimate needs and then satisfy them unto the honor and glory of God.

Again, I believe this the experience that Jesus had while here in sinful flesh. What do you think?

Inherited sinful tendencies are just defective traits of character we are born with. They aren't in our body, but in the mind. And they can be taken away.

Rosangela, your view implies we can reach a point in this lifetime where our fallen flesh nature no longer tempts us to be unlike Jesus. Is this what you believe?

As I said before, the idea of "reinterpreting" the desires we feel sounds interesting to me. Since it's a new thought, I'll have to think about it some more, but it's appealing to me. For example, if you feel a craving for some unhealthful food, you "reinterpret" that as simply hunger, and choose to transfer that hunger to something healthful, which would glorify the Lord. This is as opposed to simply rejecting the desire altogether as something wicked, as the desire is based on hunger, which is not an evil desire, but a neutral one. This is what I'm hearing you say. I think this makes sense. The enemy, in the case, becomes sinful flesh, which perverts the neutral desire, as opposed to the neutral desire.

A difficulty I see in Rosangela's idea is that if one believes that as one is sanctified, one will no longer be tempted from within, that could lead one to misinterpret these internal temptations as not being bad (since a sanctified person wouldn't be tempted from within). However, I suppose an "escape hatch" would be that one could always "reinterpret" these temptations as being suggestions from Satan as opposed to being tempted from within.

Tom, I like how you are looking at it. Thank you. People who sense, who realize, who recognize that their fallen flesh nature is tempting them to satisfy an innocent and legitimate need (hunger, thirst, happiness, etc) in a sinful way, will not mistakenly assume they are guilty of sinning simply because they are being tempted from within to be unlike Jesus. Instead, they will tag it as the voice of sin, self, and Satan and trust in Jesus to resist it unto the honor and glory of God our Father. More than this, though, they will reinterpret the unholy suggestions that come into mind and satisfy their basic needs in ways that testify to the fact Jesus is the Son and Savior of mankind.

Again, this is what Jesus experienced while here in the flesh. And, yes, Rosangela's views seem to fall short of explaining why born again believers, who are abiding in Jesus like Jesus abode in the Father, must fight the good fight of faith daily resisting and subduing the fallen flesh clamorings and sinful suggestions generated and communicated to their conscious minds. Blaming it on the evil angels does not account for all the temptations that come into mind.

No, this is not what I hear him to be saying. If I understand Mike correctly, what he is saying is that a legitimate desire, like hunger, is "reinterpreted" by the "sinful flesh nature" as a craving for some unhealthful food.

Mike,

Ellen White says our wicked traits of character can be taken away:

He works mightily with every one who is in earnest. He will give strength and victory. All the mean and wicked traits of character can be taken away by the One who has purchased you as His property. . . . {HP 19.4}

I think this includes the ones we are born with. What do you think?

Anyway, although the traits/tendencies themselves can be taken away, the memories of their manifestations in the past can’t, and this poses a continual threat to us.

either way they both seem very good thoughts.