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
|
|
8 registered members (Karen Y, Daryl, dedication, daylily, TheophilusOne, 3 invisible),
2,481
guests, and 13
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Mountain Man]
#147594
11/27/12 07:58 PM
11/27/12 07:58 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
Since Jesus didn't die on the cross until years later, how did it help them regenerate? Did they need the cross to be saved?
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]
#147596
11/27/12 08:54 PM
11/27/12 08:54 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,639
California, USA
|
|
I asked for yes or no, and you give a long answer that gave neither yes nor no. Don't be surprised if you are misunderstood, since you seem to go out of your way to be opaque.
Let me try again: Did Enoch need Christ's death in order to be regenerated? Enoch, Moses and Elijah needed Christ's death and life. Good. We agree that Enoch needed Christ's death. But that was not quite my question. Did Enoch need Christ's death in order to be regenerated? IOW, if Jesus lived His perfect life, then while hanging on the cross, just before dying, He decided to just go back to heaven, could Enoch have been regenerated?
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: APL]
#147597
11/27/12 11:17 PM
11/27/12 11:17 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Since Jesus didn't die on the cross until years later, how did it help them regenerate? Did they need the cross to be saved? "Enoch, Moses and Elijah needed Christ's death and life." How did it help them regenerate?
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Mountain Man]
#147599
11/27/12 11:37 PM
11/27/12 11:37 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,639
California, USA
|
|
So sin is not only an act, but it is a state of mind. We cut ourselves off from righteousness in order to sin in our hearts, and once the seed has taken root it leads to open rebellion. Wholly agree. Are you sure you guys are in agreement? Arnold, you believe we are guilty and condemned because "our fallen nature" tempts us from within to be unlike Jesus - even if we abide in Jesus and refuse to cherish or act them out. James, you believe we are guiltless if we abide in Jesus and refuse to cherish or act them out. The difference has to do with 1) Sin as a state of mind (guilty because we cherish sin), and 2) Sin as a state of being (guilty because our fallen nature tempts us from within). We are guilty and condemned, not because our nature is fallen, but because our nature is depraved. That depraved nature cannot be controlled by human power. Only in Christ can we hope to control it. But when a person is in Christ, does that mean that his nature is no longer depraved? It is very likely to still be depraved. Does that mean that his depraved nature is no longer condemned? God still condemns it. Does that mean a person in Christ is condemned by God? No, it does not. How? Because when a person is in Christ, God looks at Christ's holiness, not the person's depravity. So is that person guilty for being depraved? Yes. But in Christ, he is covered by Christ's holiness. What does the mind have to do with it? What if we choose to not be depraved? What if we decide very strongly that we are no longer depraved? What if we choose to think we are no longer depraved? Does that cause the depravity to go away?
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]
#147602
11/28/12 12:16 AM
11/28/12 12:16 AM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
We are guilty and condemned, not because our nature is fallen, but because our nature is depraved. That depraved nature cannot be controlled by human power. Only in Christ can we hope to control it. Do we incur guilt and condemnation because our nature is fallen and depraved even while we are abiding in Jesus and controlling it? But when a person is in Christ, does that mean that his nature is no longer depraved? It is very likely to still be depraved. Does that mean that his depraved nature is no longer condemned? God still condemns it. Does that mean a person in Christ is condemned by God? No, it does not. How? Because when a person is in Christ, God looks at Christ's holiness, not the person's depravity. So is that person guilty for being depraved? Yes. But in Christ, he is covered by Christ's holiness. What does the mind have to do with it? What if we choose to not be depraved? What if we decide very strongly that we are no longer depraved? What if we choose to think we are no longer depraved? Does that cause the depravity to go away? Does the depravity go away when the Father chooses not to see it? Does our fallen nature cease being depraved when the Father chooses to ignore it?
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: Mountain Man]
#147609
11/28/12 12:52 AM
11/28/12 12:52 AM
|
Banned SDA Active Member 2015
3500+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,613
USA
|
|
This is the wonderful power of the WORD.
Have you seen Jesus die on the cross in person? No. but you know it existed.
The same "faith" in the life of Jesus saved those who believed God's word before He came from heaven.
Adam was saved by belief in sacrificing according to the guidelines told him through angels and imagining the future fulfillment. It was revealed through the word of God.
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]
#147613
11/28/12 01:36 AM
11/28/12 01:36 AM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,639
California, USA
|
|
We are guilty and condemned, not because our nature is fallen, but because our nature is depraved. That depraved nature cannot be controlled by human power. Only in Christ can we hope to control it. Do we incur guilt and condemnation because our nature is fallen and depraved even while we are abiding in Jesus and controlling it? There is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus. Even the vilest sinner is not condemned if he is in Christ Jesus. I'll say again what I said last time: Because when a person is in Christ, God looks at Christ's holiness, not the person's depravity. So, no, one abiding in Jesus is not condemned. But it is not because he is holy, but because Jesus is holy. The depravity still brings guilt and condemnation, but Jesus takes it all away.
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: Mountain Man]
#147614
11/28/12 01:38 AM
11/28/12 01:38 AM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,639
California, USA
|
|
But when a person is in Christ, does that mean that his nature is no longer depraved? It is very likely to still be depraved. Does that mean that his depraved nature is no longer condemned? God still condemns it. Does that mean a person in Christ is condemned by God? No, it does not. How? Because when a person is in Christ, God looks at Christ's holiness, not the person's depravity. So is that person guilty for being depraved? Yes. But in Christ, he is covered by Christ's holiness. What does the mind have to do with it? What if we choose to not be depraved? What if we decide very strongly that we are no longer depraved? What if we choose to think we are no longer depraved? Does that cause the depravity to go away? Does the depravity go away when the Father chooses not to see it? Does our fallen nature cease being depraved when the Father chooses to ignore it? It's still there, but it is rendered powerless by Christ's righteousness. We are not to worry about what God thinks of us, but what He thinks of Christ.
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]
#147639
11/28/12 02:45 PM
11/28/12 02:45 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
There is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus. Even the vilest sinner is not condemned if he is in Christ Jesus. I'll say again what I said last time: Because when a person is in Christ, God looks at Christ's holiness, not the person's depravity. So, no, one abiding in Jesus is not condemned. But it is not because he is holy, but because Jesus is holy. The depravity still brings guilt and condemnation, but Jesus takes it all away. It's still there, but it is rendered powerless by Christ's righteousness. We are not to worry about what God thinks of us, but what He thinks of Christ. Just to be clear - so, because we have a fallen, depraved nature we are guilty and condemned, even if we do not cherish it or act it out; if we are abiding in Jesus the Father ignores our guilt and condemnation. What effect does our ignored depravity, guilt, and condemnation have on the fruits of the Spirit we experience while abiding in Jesus? Does it stain them with sin and selfishness? Or, do they flow from us pure and holy and undefiled? Is "righteousness and true holiness" real or forensic, imparted or imputed?
|
|
|
Re: Moral Influence Theory versus Penal Substitution.
[Re: asygo]
#147644
11/28/12 03:10 PM
11/28/12 03:10 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
I asked for yes or no, and you give a long answer that gave neither yes nor no. Don't be surprised if you are misunderstood, since you seem to go out of your way to be opaque.
Let me try again: Did Enoch need Christ's death in order to be regenerated? Enoch, Moses and Elijah needed Christ's death and life. Good. We agree that Enoch needed Christ's death. But that was not quite my question. Did Enoch need Christ's death in order to be regenerated? IOW, if Jesus lived His perfect life, then while hanging on the cross, just before dying, He decided to just go back to heaven, could Enoch have been regenerated? What do you mean by "regenerated". You and MM are the ones that have used the term, applying it to me. But looking back through this thread, I do not that I used it. What I have been talking about is salvation. Most here is appears that salvation is a legal issue. I don't. I see salvation as a real issue, sin as a real problem.
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|