Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,219
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
|
|
7 registered members (Karen Y, Daryl, dedication, daylily, TheophilusOne, 2 invisible),
2,469
guests, and 13
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#147319
11/22/12 02:33 PM
11/22/12 02:33 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
"Satan Cannot Enter the Mind Without Our Consent—We should present before the people the fact that God has provided that we shall not be tempted above what we are able to bear, but that with every temptation He will make a way of escape. If we live wholly for God, we shall not allow the mind to indulge in selfish imaginings. {AH 402.1} If there is any way by which Satan can gain access to the mind, he will sow his tares and cause them to grow until they will yield an abundant harvest. In no case can Satan obtain dominion over the thoughts, words, and actions, unless we voluntarily open the door and invite him to enter. He will then come in and, by catching away the good seed sown in the heart, make of none effect the truth.7 {AH 402.2}
How does this fit with your understanding APL? It doesn't. James - if fits perfectly what how I see things. John 8:34 Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin. This is why me, coming from a family of alcoholics, will not try alcohol. Opening that door would be a disaster.
Last edited by APL; 11/22/12 02:39 PM. Reason: added more to the reply.
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: Green Cochoa]
#147321
11/22/12 04:23 PM
11/22/12 04:23 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
GC, a child can survive outside the womb very early on in life. True, in some cases it may require machines, but they are, nonetheless, very much alive and very much human. Thus, the biblical description of sinners applies to them. So, since it applies to them outside the womb, wouldn't it apply to them inside the womb? Mike, I believe that at some point, every sinner has to have his or her first sin. Doesn't that seem reasonable? For every baby to be a sinner at birth requires that he or she has sinned already by that point. I believe the primary sins that a fetus could commit center around the emotions. Selfishness is early experienced, and early imitated. These first sins are sins of ignorance, certainly, but nonetheless sinful. These sins are inherited from the parents. No blastocyst or zygote could ever hope to survive outside the womb. The early stages of pregnancy develop the brain and spinal cord. Without a mind, no choice is made. Without a choice, sin is not committed. But the mind begins its development long before the internal organs are developed enough to sustain life outside the womb. By the time life can be sustained apart from the mother, even the earliest of premies will have participated in selfishness. As the wise man said, "foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child." When a baby takes its first breath, its own independent life officially begins. Even the Bible speaks of infants being circumcised on the eighth day, something that would be impossible if one tried to enter the womb to do this on the eighth day after conception. So the baby's age is counted by God as beginning at his or her birth. Excellent points. Thank you.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Johann]
#147322
11/22/12 04:30 PM
11/22/12 04:30 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
I have often thought how interesting it is that in 1888 the message of righteousness by faith was introduced to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and yet we still forget all about that doctrine - especially in our definition of sin. The truth about justification by faith is essential to our salvation - especially to our peace of mind. Jesus must justify pardoning and saving penitent sinners. Why? Because law and justice demand death for sin.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Mountain Man]
#147323
11/22/12 04:39 PM
11/22/12 04:39 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
DNA determines how people turn out - what they look like, their gifts and talents, personality, tendencies, predispositions, etc. The fact all of us are conceived and born predisposed to sinning is evidence our DNA is faulty and at fault. People sin because they are born predisposed. They sin by default. They cannot not sin. Rebirth is necessary to cease sinning. Rebirth, however, does not eliminate or eradicate the sinful tendencies we were born with and cultivated. Sinful flesh remains to tempt us from within to sin. It is not a sin to be tempted. We are not guilty of sinning because we have sinful tendencies or because our sinful flesh tempts us to be unlike Jesus.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: APL]
#147324
11/22/12 04:43 PM
11/22/12 04:43 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2021
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,003
The Orient
|
|
APL,
We may not be able to agree. You believe that there is a "character DNA." I don't. You may even believe that there is a "soul DNA."
Your rigidity in understanding Mrs. White contributes to your view. When she says we "inherit" the sins of the fathers, you see only one possibility. I don't.
Let's, see...suppose my father were filthy rich, and I inherited his money. Would that make the money to be "sin?" So there are many ways of "inheriting" things.
Here's another one: suppose my father had brown eyes, and I inherited brown eyes, would that make my brown eyes to be "sin?"
(I'm not saying that you are saying these things, I'm only asking these questions to get the thought processes going.)
Here's another one: Suppose my father owned a tavern which I inherited. Would that mean the tavern was encoded in my DNA?
Here's another: Suppose my mother enjoyed listening to rock music during her pregnancy with me...and I inherited a taste for that music. Would that mean that the music were encoded in my DNA? When she bequeaths me her rock albums, will those join my DNA?
All of these questions are to help illustrate the point that there are ways to "inherit" that have nothing to do with DNA. Even "sin" can be inherited in myriad ways, none of them involving the DNA.
Regarding thoughts and actions, let me ask a question: Is "guarding" an action?
Blessings,
Green Cochoa.
We can receive of heaven's light only as we are willing to be emptied of self. We can discern the character of God, and accept Christ by faith, only as we consent to the bringing into captivity of every thought to the obedience of Christ. And to all who do this, the Holy Spirit is given without measure. In Christ "dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in Him." [Colossians 2:9, 10.] {GW 57.1} -- Ellen White.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Green Cochoa]
#147326
11/22/12 06:13 PM
11/22/12 06:13 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
APL,
We may not be able to agree. You believe that there is a "character DNA." I don't. You may even believe that there is a "soul DNA."
We chose, this is enforced by the DNA. Epigenetic changes occur which feeds back and encourages our behavior. "Soul DNA" - now you are being inflammatory.
Your rigidity in understanding Mrs. White contributes to your view. When she says we "inherit" the sins of the fathers, you see only one possibility. I don't.
Actually, I think I'm the one that is being more open and less rigid. You deny genetic inheritance. I acknowledge culture. As she says, "inherited and cultivated tendancies to evil".
Let's, see...suppose my father were filthy rich, and I inherited his money. Would that make the money to be "sin?" So there are many ways of "inheriting" things.
You are speaking culture here, not biology.
Here's another one: suppose my father had brown eyes, and I inherited brown eyes, would that make my brown eyes to be "sin?"
Bad logic. Are you doing this intentionally?
(I'm not saying that you are saying these things, I'm only asking these questions to get the thought processes going.)
After all that has said, it is clear that we are not going to get anything going. You are closed to the ideas I see.
Here's another one: Suppose my father owned a tavern which I inherited. Would that mean the tavern was encoded in my DNA?
Bad logic and again in flammatory.
Here's another: Suppose my mother enjoyed listening to rock music during her pregnancy with me...and I inherited a taste for that music. Would that mean that the music were encoded in my DNA? When she bequeaths me her rock albums, will those join my DNA?
Now how would this trait be passed on. For indeed, the character of the mother is reflected in the character of child, if you believe EGW. Can you give me a biological reason why this happens? I can, but can you?
All of these questions are to help illustrate the point that there are ways to "inherit" that have nothing to do with DNA. Even "sin" can be inherited in myriad ways, none of them involving the DNA.
See - I acknowledge culture. You deny DNA inheritance. And you call me the rigid one. :-)
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: Mountain Man]
#147327
11/22/12 06:25 PM
11/22/12 06:25 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
DNA determines how people turn out - what they look like, their gifts and talents, personality, tendencies, predispositions, etc. The fact all of us are conceived and born predisposed to sinning is evidence our DNA is faulty and at fault. People sin because they are born predisposed. They sin by default. They cannot not sin. Rebirth is necessary to cease sinning. Rebirth, however, does not eliminate or eradicate the sinful tendencies we were born with and cultivated. Sinful flesh remains to tempt us from within to sin. It is not a sin to be tempted. We are not guilty of sinning because we have sinful tendencies or because our sinful flesh tempts us to be unlike Jesus. I agree with you to the point where you say the rebirth does not eliminate sinful tendencies. 1 John 3:8-9 He who commits sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God commits sin; for God's nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God. This does not mean the sinful flesh is gone, that will not happen until the second coming. But the tendencies to sin can be silenced. Jesus before the cross had silenced all the temptations the devil could throw at him. John 14:30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world comes, and has nothing in me. David's prayer was for this. Psalms 51:10 Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. The New Covenant is this: Jeremiah 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, said the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. Yes, the more I read the Bible, the more I take it literally. It is a fantastic science book. That claim will get scoffs from many, even good SDAs. God will write His laws on our inward parts.
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]
#147328
11/22/12 06:36 PM
11/22/12 06:36 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
If before the birth of her child she is self-indulgent, if she is selfish, impatient, and exacting, these traits will be reflected in the disposition of the child. Thus many children have received as a birthright almost unconquerable tendencies to evil.{MH 372.4} This is not culture alone. This is real, and biological. And yes, it is encoded in the DNA's epigenome.
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]
#147329
11/22/12 07:37 PM
11/22/12 07:37 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
I agree with you to the point where you say the rebirth does not eliminate sinful tendencies. . . This does not mean the sinful flesh is gone, that will not happen until the second coming. But the tendencies to sin can be silenced. Jesus before the cross had silenced all the temptations the devil could throw at him. Adam and Eve were tempted in Eden. They were sinless. Jesus was tempted on the cross. Evil angels will tempt the 144,000 after probation closes. It is not a sin to be tempted. Sinful flesh tempting us from within is no different than everything that temps us from without. While abiding in Jesus all temptations are hideous and hateful and are resisted unto the honor and glory of God our Father.
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Mountain Man]
#147330
11/22/12 07:59 PM
11/22/12 07:59 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2014 Retired Pastor
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,014
Iceland
|
|
I have often thought how interesting it is that in 1888 the message of righteousness by faith was introduced to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and yet we still forget all about that doctrine - especially in our definition of sin. The truth about justification by faith is essential to our salvation - especially to our peace of mind. Jesus must justify pardoning and saving penitent sinners. Why? Because law and justice demand death for sin. And I find it enlightening to read your personal experience as you have registered it in your book, Mike.
"Here is a last piece of advice. If you believe in goodness and if you value the approval of God, fix your minds on the things which are holy and right and pure and beautiful and good. Model your conduct on what you have learned from me, on what I have told you and shown you, and you will find the God of peace will be with you."
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|