Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,224
Members1,326
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#146857
11/12/12 12:46 AM
11/12/12 12:46 AM
|
Banned SDA Active Member 2015
3500+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,613
USA
|
|
The thing that keeps coming into my mind is WHY? What was it about Jesus' death that makes it possible to us to be saved? Is it just a legal settlement that has been provided? Graham Maxwell was mentioned in the OP; his current replacement has a very legal, "forensic" model of salvation. Quite the opposite of Maxwell, who had a trust(faith)/healing model of salvation. The root words translated save or salvation, point to a healing, rescue. I found the perfect sermon that illustrates this from Joe Crews, the founder of Amazing Facts. From his sermon and booklet; "The High cost of the cross". " The question is; how does Christ's death make it possible for Him to forgive sin? This brings us to the crux of all we have learned so far. It was necessary for Jesus to suffer the second death in order to acquire the power to forgive. The germ of all forgiveness is rooted in an act of substitution. Whoever forgives another person must actually substitute himself for the one he forgives, and be willing to suffer the consequences of the wrong done... This illustration brings us very close to the heart of the atonement. The punishment for sin is not the first death, but the second death. That is why the protracted agony of Jesus on the cross was totally unlike any other death. Thousands of criminals were crucified in the same physical way that Christ was nailed to the cross, but they suffered only the bodily pain of the first death. He experienced the awful condemnation and separation from God that the vilest of sinners will feel in the lake of fire. His sensitive nature was traumatized by sharing vicariously the guilt of foul rapes, murders, and atrocities. He became sin in order to allow the full wrath of the law to fall upon Him in exactly the same way it would fall upon the lost. In no other way can we explain the mysterious anguish of spirit which surrounded our Savior in His closing hours of life. From the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus bore the accumulated sins of mankind on His breaking heart. Not one ray of light was permitted to penetrate the blanket of total alienation from His Father in heaven. In order to take the place of guilty sinners and to provide forgiveness there could be no difference in their penalty and His penalty. Let no one suggest that the Father did not suffer equally with His Son. The divine forbearance of God in allowing wicked men to torture His Son to death is the ultimate proof that He loves us with the same love that He loved Jesus." Love that guy.
Search me oh God and know my heart, test me and know my anxious thoughts, see if there is any offensive way in me and lead me to the way everlasting. Amen
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Mountain Man]
#146860
11/12/12 04:59 AM
11/12/12 04:59 AM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,640
California, USA
|
|
Too bad Tom has been MIA for a while. I'm sure he would have a few words on this topic.
By God's grace, Arnold
1 John 5:11-13 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: asygo]
#146861
11/12/12 05:09 AM
11/12/12 05:09 AM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,640
California, USA
|
|
I don't see why we have to choose one or the other. Both sides have truth.
But there are also errors. Christ's death was not optional, but neither was it the end of the Christian's experience.
By God's grace, Arnold
1 John 5:11-13 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: asygo]
#146865
11/12/12 02:35 PM
11/12/12 02:35 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
James - what is your definition of "forgive".
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#146869
11/12/12 03:25 PM
11/12/12 03:25 PM
|
Banned SDA Active Member 2015
3500+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,613
USA
|
|
APL; If you are asking me this to contend with what I wrote above, you will need to be more descriptive in your question.
Search me oh God and know my heart, test me and know my anxious thoughts, see if there is any offensive way in me and lead me to the way everlasting. Amen
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: jamesonofthunder]
#146878
11/12/12 08:02 PM
11/12/12 08:02 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
The thing that keeps coming into my mind is WHY? What was it about Jesus' death that makes it possible to us to be saved? Is it just a legal settlement that has been provided? Graham Maxwell was mentioned in the OP; his current replacement has a very legal, "forensic" model of salvation. Quite the opposite of Maxwell, who had a trust(faith)/healing model of salvation. The root words translated save or salvation, point to a healing, rescue. I found the perfect sermon that illustrates this from Joe Crews, the founder of Amazing Facts. From his sermon and booklet; "The High cost of the cross". " The question is; how does Christ's death make it possible for Him to forgive sin? This brings us to the crux of all we have learned so far. It was necessary for Jesus to suffer the second death in order to acquire the power to forgive. The germ of all forgiveness is rooted in an act of substitution. Whoever forgives another person must actually substitute himself for the one he forgives, and be willing to suffer the consequences of the wrong done... This illustration brings us very close to the heart of the atonement. The punishment for sin is not the first death, but the second death. That is why the protracted agony of Jesus on the cross was totally unlike any other death. Thousands of criminals were crucified in the same physical way that Christ was nailed to the cross, but they suffered only the bodily pain of the first death. He experienced the awful condemnation and separation from God that the vilest of sinners will feel in the lake of fire. His sensitive nature was traumatized by sharing vicariously the guilt of foul rapes, murders, and atrocities. He became sin in order to allow the full wrath of the law to fall upon Him in exactly the same way it would fall upon the lost. In no other way can we explain the mysterious anguish of spirit which surrounded our Savior in His closing hours of life. From the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus bore the accumulated sins of mankind on His breaking heart. Not one ray of light was permitted to penetrate the blanket of total alienation from His Father in heaven. In order to take the place of guilty sinners and to provide forgiveness there could be no difference in their penalty and His penalty. Let no one suggest that the Father did not suffer equally with His Son. The divine forbearance of God in allowing wicked men to torture His Son to death is the ultimate proof that He loves us with the same love that He loved Jesus." Love that guy. I have not heard Joe's lecture. If what you write above is the heart of the issue, the it seems that he have a very legal view of the atonement. I like very much what Moutainman quoted above from EGW in (3SM 154). To this I would add the following: The atonement of Christ is not a mere skillful way to have our sins pardoned; it is a divine remedy for the cure of transgression and the restoration of spiritual health. It is the Heaven-ordained means by which the righteousness of Christ may be not only upon us but in our hearts and characters (Letter 406, 1906). {6BC 1074.2} So the Cross, is not a skillful legal solution. The Cross is a divine remedy for sin, and cure of the transgression. We are back to the healing model, which penal substitution is blind to, and for which the moral influence theory can not explain. Mountainman quote: Mere forgiveness of sin is not the sole result of the death of Jesus[legal]. He made the infinite sacrifice not only that sin might be removed, but that human nature might be restored[healing], rebeautified, reconstructed[healing] from its ruins, and made fit for the presence of God. Thus, the atonement, as Graham Maxwell taught as a trust/healing model, not a legal, penal substitution model, or just a nice influence model. He taught that the healing arts was the closest model to salvation, and thus he taught at Loma Linda University. Graham's current replacement teaches a very legal model. Sin is not a legal problem. It is a real problem.
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#146879
11/12/12 08:11 PM
11/12/12 08:11 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
The opening paragraph of the book, The Ministry of Healing, describes Christ' mission. Our Lord Jesus Christ came to this world as the unwearied servant of man's necessity. He "took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses," that He might minister to every need of humanity. Matthew 8:17. The burden of disease and wretchedness and sin He came to remove. It was His mission to bring to men complete restoration; He came to give them health and peace and perfection of character. {MH 17.1} This is a HEALING model, not a legal model. Isaiah 53:3-4 nails it, as quoted by Matthew 8:17. Isaiah 53 also contains the Bible definition of Grace, in verse 11. (compare Isaiah 53:11 with Titus 3:5-7) Grace is not a legal pardon, but the healing of a knowledgeable physician. Isaiah 53:11 KJV He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
Titus 3:5-7 KJV Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; 6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; 7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#146882
11/12/12 10:16 PM
11/12/12 10:16 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,640
California, USA
|
|
APL,
According to the healing model, was Enoch healed? If he was, did Jesus have to die for him? If so, why?
By God's grace, Arnold
1 John 5:11-13 And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: jamesonofthunder]
#146886
11/12/12 10:55 PM
11/12/12 10:55 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
APL, what do you make of the following insights: Let the converting power of God be experienced in the heart of the individual [church] members, and then we shall see the deep moving of the Spirit of God. Mere forgiveness of sin is not the sole result of the death of Jesus. He made the infinite sacrifice not only that sin might be removed, but that human nature might be restored, rebeautified, reconstructed from its ruins, and made fit for the presence of God. (3SM 154) 1. Mere forgiveness of sin is not the sole result of the death of Jesus. 2. He made the infinite sacrifice not only that sin might be removed . . . 3. . . . but that human nature might be restored, rebeautified, reconstructed from its ruins, and made fit for the presence of God.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: asygo]
#146887
11/12/12 10:56 PM
11/12/12 10:56 PM
|
Banned SDA Active Member 2015
3500+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,613
USA
|
|
Dear APL, you do know that many SDA Theologians disagree with Graham Maxwell don't you?
Dr Samuel Bacchiocchi equated Maxwell's theory with the moral influence theory.
The law demands the death of the sinner, but grace allows the giver of the law to take the place of the sinner and this heals the sinner from sin. This much I would agree.
I do believe that the solution for sin 'cured' the sin problem, but we have to look at it from the foundation of the biblical images God gave in His sacrificial system. This system was instituted for the purpose of giving us a scene to watch to see His intent in the plan of salvation.
Was the man who took the sin offering called a doctor or a priest?
Did the lamb walk away healed or dead?
Was there blood involved? Was there death? Then it was an atonement for forgiveness, not a pill.
The death of the Lamb takes our place in the second resurrection.
Search me oh God and know my heart, test me and know my anxious thoughts, see if there is any offensive way in me and lead me to the way everlasting. Amen
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|