|
Forums118
Topics9,223
Posts196,070
Members1,325
| |
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
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14972
07/14/05 03:21 AM
07/14/05 03:21 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
MM: Tom, I do not believe the "Christ risked all" insight implies Jesus could have sinned and died eternally. God cannot die. It's impossible. Tom: You're correct that God cannot die. However, there's a statement in the Spirit of Prophesy that had Christ sinned then He would have remained behind the stone of tomb forever (C'mon Phil! Come up with this one please, O master of the EGW lookup) God would have lost His Son in some meaningful way, because she writes , "God sent His Son at the risk of failure and eternal loss." "Loss" means to lose, to be without. So while God cannot die, it is nevertheless true that God risked losing Christ. MM: The way I read it, she's saying that all of creation stood to lose if Jesus refused to finish drinking the cup. Tom: That's not in the least what she's saying. Here are the quotes: quote:
Never can the cost of our redemption be realized until the redeemed shall stand with the Redeemer before the throne of God. Then as the glories of the eternal home burst upon our enraptured senses we shall remember that Jesus left all this for us, that He not only became an exile from the heavenly courts, but for us took the risk of failure and eternal loss. (DA 131)
quote:
Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss. {DA 49.1}
The heart of the human father yearns over his son. He looks into the face of his little child, and trembles at the thought of life's peril. He longs to shield his dear one from Satan's power, to hold him back from temptation and conflict. To meet a bitterer conflict and a more fearful risk, God gave His only-begotten Son, that the path of life might be made sure for our little ones. (DA 49)
The thought is that the risk was taken of losing Christ. There's nothing said here regarding Christ's creation being lost, only of Christ being lost.
MM: If Christ had quit then God would have been forced to destroy all FMAs. Why? Because God would have lost the great controversy.
Tom: This makes no sense at all. Why would God have to destroy sinless angels because Christ abandoned the plan to save man? The angels never sinned. It is sin that results in death. Without sin, there's no death.
MM: The security of the universe depends on God refuting Satan's accusations. If Christ had failed to prove that God is holy, just, and good, then the unfallen beings would have had no recourse but to fear God. And fear leads to rebellion.
Tom: Oh, this is your line of thought:
1) God loses GC
2) Unfallen beings would be forced to fear God
3) Which would lead to their rebellion
4) So God would be forced to destroy them
That's an odd way of putting it, but at least I can follow the logic. It misses the point, however, that God swore by Himself to Abraham, so He put His own self on the line as well, so the consequences of failure would have involved even more than what you have suggested.
I think I should add as well that it is sin which leads to death, not God.
quote:
This is not an act of arbitrary power on the part of God. The rejecters of His mercy reap that which they have sown. God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life. He is "alienated from the life of God." Christ says, "All they that hate Me love death." Eph. 4:18; Prov. 8:36. (DA 764)
Well, regardless of these thoughts, it doesn't address the issue that God risked Himself, and Christ risked Himself, for our redemption.
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14973
07/14/05 03:48 AM
07/14/05 03:48 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
MM: The idea that Sister White's insight regarding risk requires us to believe God does not know the end from the beginning, like a rerun, is, I believe, misapplying her intent.
Tom: Why? She says that risk was involved in Christ's coming here. She calls it a "fearful" risk, and a "bitterer" risk than what earthly father's face with their children.
"Risk" implies the possibility of loss. That's what the word means. If the future were like a T.V. rerun, then the possibility of loss would be impossible (that's got a nice ring to it). Hence to suggest that what she wrote implies that the future is not like a T.V. rerun is not misapplying her intent, but simply carrying what she wrote to its logical conclusion.
"Risk" and "T.V. rerun future" are imcompatible ideas.
MM: The prophecies make it clear that Jesus would not fail, or fail to save us.
Tom: They make clear what would happen if Christ were faithful. But you're assuming your conclusion. Certainly God believed in His Son, and the prophesies bear out that God knew what the outcome would be if Christ were faithful. But the fact that God was able to predict an outcome based on the assumption of faithfulness on the part of His Son in no way implies that this predicted future was inevitable.
The Spirit of Prophesy emphasizes dozens of times that Christ really could have sinned. Your theory would make this impossible.
MM: Therefore, whatever she meant when she wrote about risk, one thing is certain, it cannot contradict the facts. Where else, in the Bible, do you find support for the idea that God was unsure if Jesus would succeed or not when He began drinking the cup? BTW, I'm not evading your question. I need more information. I find it hard to believe that God didn't know if Jesus would sin and die eternally or not.
Tom: The clearest statements about the risk taken in Christ's coming are from the Spirit of Prophesy. I don't know of any direct statements from Scripture which bear this out.
This conclusion can be inferred from Scripture from the fact that Christ was a free moral agent, and His coming as a man involved the possibility of sin, which would lead to eternal loss.
Although there is no direct statement regarding the risk of Christ that I am aware of, the Scripture is full of statements which demonstrate that the future is not like a T.V. rerun. John has already pointed out one of these several times, to which, I don't think, you have responded, so I think I'll put off for now listing others, but there are dozens.
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14974
07/14/05 05:23 AM
07/14/05 05:23 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tom, I meant that God would have been forced to destroy unfallen FMAs to prevent them from experiencing the inevitable - fear and rebellion. Not that He would have destroyed them after they rebelled.
You are correct, there are no biblical passages that suggest Jesus could have failed or refused to save man. The prophecies do not say what Jesus will do IF He chooses to be faithful, rather they clearly say He WILL be faithful. You cannot twist Sister White's comments about risk to contradict the plainly worded prophecies.
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14975
07/14/05 01:24 PM
07/14/05 01:24 PM
|
OP
Very Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,664
Plowing
|
|
Is this the one, Tom?
Does this sound like Christ knew of 're-runs'? If He was trully like us, He couldn't have 'seen' the outcome beforehand, or faith would have been a sham on His part, right?
Was He just pretending, play acting His doubts, His inability to see, His hopeless feelings,His fears of abandonment and rejection by His Father? He knew He had no sin of His own, therefore wouldn't it be the vileness of our sins that He absorbed, and since that had never been done before, He was reduced to absolute faith in the Love of God for Him and us?
"Even doubts assailed the dying Son of God. He could not see through the portals of the tomb. Bright hope did not present to him his coming forth from the tomb a conqueror, and his Father's acceptance of his sacrifice. The sin of the world with all its terribleness was felt to the utmost by the Son of God. The displeasure of the Father for sin, and its penalty which was death, were all that he could realize through this amazing darkness. He was tempted to fear that sin was so offensive in the sight of his Father that he could not be reconciled to his Son. The fierce temptation that his own Father had forever left him, caused that piercing cry from the cross, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" "- {ST, August 21, 1879 par. 18}
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14976
07/14/05 02:42 PM
07/14/05 02:42 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Phil, please notice that this insight in no way says Jesus doubted the outcome of His ordeal. He was tempted to doubt His Father's approval, but He successfully resisted it. Nor does this quote say the Father did not know the outcome. And, Jesus did not enter the tomb not knowing if He would come forth. Though He was sorely tempted to doubt it, by faith He knew it all along. Not once did Jesus doubt the promises or prophecies of God regarding the outcome.
DA 756
Amid the awful darkness, apparently forsaken of God, Christ had drained the last dregs in the cup of human woe. In those dreadful hours He had relied upon the evidence of His Father's acceptance heretofore given Him. He was acquainted with the character of His Father; He understood His justice, His mercy, and His great love. By faith He rested in Him whom it had ever been His joy to obey. And as in submission He committed Himself to God, the sense of the loss of His Father's favor was withdrawn. By faith, Christ was victor. {DA 756.3}
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14977
07/14/05 09:35 PM
07/14/05 09:35 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
MM:Tom, I meant that God would have been forced to destroy unfallen FMAs to prevent them from experiencing the inevitable - fear and rebellion. Not that He would have destroyed them after they rebelled. You are correct, there are no biblical passages that suggest Jesus could have failed or refused to save man. The prophecies do not say what Jesus will do IF He chooses to be faithful, rather they clearly say He WILL be faithful. You cannot twist Sister White's comments about risk to contradict the plainly worded prophecies. Tom: My goodness! It sounds like you completely misunderstood what I wrote. I wrote that there were no *direct* statements that I was aware of that were as clear about it as Sister White's statements were. Now as one who rarely quotes Scripture, but often quotes reams of Sister White quotes, I was thinking Sister White quotes would be appropriate. And they were certainly clear quotes. Now you are suggesting that I am "twisting" her quotes to counteract Scripture, which is not in the least what I was saying. If you want Scripture quotes on the subject, here are a few: Gen. 2:19 | Gen. 6:5–6 | Gen. 22:12 | Exod. 3:18–4:9 | Exod. 4:10–16 | Exod. 13:17 | Exod. 16:4 | Exod. 32:14 | Exod. 32:33 | Exod. 33:1–3, 14 | Num. 11:1–2 | Num. 14:11 | Num. 14:12–20 | Num. 16:20–35 | Num. 16:41–48 | Deut. 8:2 | Deut. 9:13–14, 18–20, 25 | Deut. 13:1–3 | Deut. 30:19 | Judg. 2:20–3:5 | Judg. 10:13–15 | 1 Sam. 2:27–31 | 1 Sam. 13:13–14 | 1 Sam. 15:10 | 1 Sam. 15:35 | 1 Sam. 23:9–13 | 2 Sam. 24:12–16 | 2 Sam. 24:17–25 | 1 Kings 21:27–29 | 2 Kings 13:3–5 | 2 Kings 20:1–7 | 1 Chron. 21:7–13 | 1 Chron. 21:15 | 2 Chron. 7:12–14 | 2 Chron. 12:5–8 | 2 Chron. 32:31 | Psalm 106:23 | Isa. 5:3–7 | Isa. 38:1–5 | Jer. 3:6–7 | Jer. 3:19–20 | Jer. 7:5–7 | Jer. 18:7–11 | Jer. 19:5 | Jer. 26:2–3 | Jer. 26:19 | Jer. 32:35 | Jer. 38:17–18, 20–21, 23 | Ezek. 12:1–3 | Ezek. 20:5–22 | Ezek. 22:29–31 | Ezek. 33:13–15 | Hosea 8:5 | Hosea 11:8–9 | Joel 2:13–14 | Amos 7:1–6 | Jonah 1:2; 3:2, 4–10; 4:2 | Matt. 25:41 | Matt. 26:39 | Acts 15:7 | Acts 21:10–12 | 2 Pet. 3:9–12 | Rev. 3:5 | Rev. 22:18 What these texts have in common is they all present a view of the future which is open, similar to the one which John quoted. For example, here is the Jer. 18 quote: quote:
7 At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; 8 If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. 9 And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; 10 If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them. (Jer. 18:7-10)
God was not controlling the future in any way. He wanted to bless, and He would bless, if there is a response by the ones to whom the prophesy is presented. OTOH, if those to whom God had prophesied blessings turned away from God, then those prophesies would no longer be valid.
Returning to Sister White a moment we have:
quote:
Satan in heaven had hated Christ for His position in the courts of God. He hated Him the more when he himself was dethroned. He hated Him who pledged Himself to redeem a race of sinners. Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss. {DA 49.1}
The heart of the human father yearns over his son. He looks into the face of his little child, and trembles at the thought of life's peril. He longs to shield his dear one from Satan's power, to hold him back from temptation and conflict. To meet a bitterer conflict and a more fearful risk, God gave His only-begotten Son, that the path of life might be made sure for our little ones. "Herein is love." Wonder, O heavens! and be astonished, O earth! {DA 49.2}
There are two things to note here:
1) God took a risk.
2) The risk was losing His Son.
These statements are as clear as sunlight, and there are in no way "twisted" but match perfectly the Scriptural record presented above.
The fact that God saw fit to present further light on a subject which can be inferred from Scripture, although directly presented by her, does not mean her witness should not be heard. If you believe this way, then you should never cite anything from Sister White again, but limit yourself to Scripture.
I'm happy to discuss the subject any way you like, but it seems a bit disingenuous of me for you to almost exclusively quote yourself from the Spirit of Prophesy but then complain if someone else does.
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14978
07/14/05 11:20 PM
07/14/05 11:20 PM
|
OP
Very Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,664
Plowing
|
|
Thank you Tom!
MM Does one need faith if one has absolute control over everything and everybody, Satan and rebels included? Did you miss what I ended my last post with?
"He knew He had no sin of His own, therefore wouldn't it be the vileness of our sins that He absorbed, and since that had never been done before, He was reduced to absolute faith in the Love of God for Him and us?"
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14979
07/15/05 02:54 PM
07/15/05 02:54 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tom, it looks as though we are both misunderstanding each other. I did not mean to imply that you cannot use the SOP to establish a point. More power to you. However, both of us must ensure that our interpretation of the SOP does not contradict the Bible. Whatever she meant by referring to risk and Christ, in the context of the cross, one thing is certain, it cannot be construed to mean Jesus and the Father were not absolutely sure Jesus would succeed in saving us. None of the scriptures you listed imply, even in the slightest way, that Jesus might not succeed in saving mankind or winning the great controversy against sin and Satan. Yes, some prophecies are conditional, and different outcomes are possible, but there is nothing conditional about Jesus and the cross or the outcome of the great controversy. The expression, “at the risk of failure and eternal loss”, does not unequivocally mean that it was possible for the Son of God to fail and die eternally. First of all, according to the prophecies, Jesus would not fail or lose. There is no hint in the Bible that He might not succeed. Secondly, the word “loss” does not necessarily mean Jesus Himself would die eternally. It could mean something else. If Jesus failed to drink the cup, who or what did He stand to lose eternally? To me, the answer is obvious. The eternal security of fallen and unfallen beings alike depends upon a successful outcome of the great controversy. Jesus risked losing everything if He failed to drink the cup, everything, that is, but His own life. God cannot die. Saying Jesus risked everything is a hyperbole, not a possibility. It’s a figure of speech, not a statement of fact. quote:
Can the lamblike beast choose not to make an image to the first beast? Can it choose not to enforce the mark of the beast?
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14980
07/16/05 03:04 AM
07/16/05 03:04 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Phil, when Jesus became a human being He place self-imposed restrictions upon Himself, namely, He set aside His personal divinity and partook of His Father's divine nature in exactly the same way born again believer may and must do. Yes, there were times when He acted in the capacity of His own divinity, but never in order to resist temptation or to lessen His load as sin-bearer. As such, Jesus exercised faith in His Father and Scripture promises like a born again believer.
He somehow divested Himself of the knowledge He possessed before His incarnation, and lived His life as a man. He was not born with the knowledge of God. He had to learn the truth in the same way we can and must. Therefore, Jesus based His faith and knowledge concerning the future on what He read in the Bible, and on whatever else God shared with Him in prayer.
As God, before and after His incarnation, Jesus does not rely of faith to know the future. He knows the end from the beginning, like watching a rerun. As God, He also knows the exact day and hour He will return to redeem mankind. As man, while here on earth, He did not possess this particular piece of information. If, as you say, God does not know the future, like a rerun, how is it, then, that He knows the exact day and hour of the second coming?
|
|
|
Re: How "free" are we after all?
#14981
07/17/05 01:54 AM
07/17/05 01:54 AM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
quote:
“at the risk of failure and eternal loss”
MM, this expression has to do with the issue where the "control factor" is.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
