There is no reason to err regarding what is sin. Sin is clearly defined. It is "the transgression of the law."

The results of sin are not the same as the sin itself. Jesus, for example, came in human flesh that had declined in perfection as a result of 4000 years of sin. However, the result of sin did not equal sin, for Jesus had no sin in Him at all. He did not participate in our sin in the smallest degree, nor did He transgress the law of God at all.

Again, sin is "transgression." We are saved from our penalty for sin only by the penal substitution of Christ, and only as we accept it by faith and walk in obedience to His commandments out of love to Him.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

What?
1) The character of God.
2) The nature of sin.
3) the real issues at stake in the great controversy.

Jesus died for us, but not instead of us. If we follow Him, we are have to follow the lamb, and it will cost us our life as well. Jesus said for us to take up our cross and follow him. Matthew 16:24; Mark 8:34; Mark 10:21; Luke 9:23.

Green, you should really watch Tonstad's series...

If Jesus doesn't die for me, then I'll have to die the second death myself. I must choose to accept His atonement on my behalf.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Did you read what I wrote? "Jesus died for us." WE also are to take up our cross and follow Him. We must die to self, we must die for others.
John 15:13 Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
Mark 8:35 For whoever will save his life shall lose it; but whoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.

Tonstad, have you seen the first lecture yet? Its free! An easy way to get a graduate level religion course from one of our SDA Universities.

I have been discussing this topic on evangelical/calvinist etc forums for years offering the SDA perspective on salvation. Thier most common response to me contributions is 'legalist', after attempting to explain the significance of God's laws in the life of the Christian. Entering Adventist forums to me was like preaching to the converted. Yet out of curiosity I came here and what do I find? Precisely the same debate as everywhere else!
I haven't finished reading through this thread yet, but will do so later and comment further then. But I do wonder...if the remnant aren't clear on such basic issues as salvation, even with a prophet in their midst, what hope the Baptist, Pentecostal, Catholic etc?

I don't think anyone here questions the role of God's laws in the life of the Christian. The issues that come up here are of a different nature --
Like
1. We have contributors who argue that God will never end anyone's life. So the question -- Does sin itself destroy and God just turns away and lets it happen IN ALL CASES? Or are there times when God steps in and sends the flood in Noah's day, and the fire at the time of the end, etc, to put an end to sin's destructive nature in a more decisive manner?

2. Variations of the Moral Influence Theory come up quite often. So the questions there are -- did Christ take our punishment and was this necessary for salvation? Did God's law require the blood sacrifice of God's Son in order that forgiveness can be extended to the repentant sinner? Or was this just a grand demonstration of what sin does even to the point of killing God's Son and thus is a great motivation to turn from sin?
Or is it both?

of course there are many other ideas in circulation here -- but none that I know of depreciate God's law which defines sin.

brakelite,

I would agree with dedication's assessment. I don't believe anyone here is trying to teach that we need not keep God's law, nor that it has been abolished. Dedication has summed up the positions we more frequently see here fairly well.

Mrs. White's writings are often taken out of context to support things that she never supported. Some of her writings are ignored by certain members here in order to maintain their views. I find the major issue with doctrinal things here is one of having balance.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

brakelite - Green is right - there are people here who can not see the context of which EGW writes, and then accuses others of doing the very thing they do. Interesting, no? EGW write, "The very attributes that belonged to the character of Satan, the evil one represented as belonging to the character of God." {ST, January 20, 1890 par. 6} She continues, "Jesus came to teach men of the Father, to correctly represent him before the fallen children of earth." She also wrote, " All that man needs to know or can know of God has been revealed in the life and character of His Son." {8T 286.1} Therefore, our picture of God must fit with how Jesus has revealed Him to be. John 14:9 Jesus said to him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? he that has seen me has seen the Father; and how say you then, Show us the Father?

Hi everyone...sorry that my first post should engender such excitement...I did word it wrong and gave an incorrect impression. Although the law is so considered elsewhere as you would be fully aware, I wasn't suggesting antinomianism lies within these hallowed portals...God forbid!
No, it was simply the impression I got from the opening few pages of this thread re "what saves us" and the oft repeated arguments over works based/grace salvation. Appreciate the discussions among SDA's are more nuanced, usually.

As to the above points, interesting questions.
First, as a farmer I have discovered that life is very much treasured by both man and beast. It takes a great deal of effort to die. Life clings. So although death is certainly the end result of sin, sometimes it takes a great deal of time to happen, and in the meantime God's patience has run thin, His level of tolerance has its full measure, and He steps in to speed up the process. Often this to protect the innocent...aka Noah, Lot.

Second, an innocent life was necessary as a propitiation yes? In Jesus case I might suggest that the inevitableness of death as a result of the sin being upon the Son of God was what took His life, He surrendering Himself deliberately to it.In that sense no-one actually took His life (least of all His Father) for He laid down His life for us.

BTW, love what someone brought up earlier...that we are saved by His life...not by His death.
The OP should have asked "Who saved us", not what. Jesus in our justification; Jesus in our sanctification; Jesus in our glorification. A package deal.

What does the word "substitute" mean to you?

It was not enough that Jesus should die in order to meet the demands of the broken law; it was needful for Him to die a shameful death. He says through the prophet, "I hid not My face from shame and spitting." He stood as the substitute for man, who was under sentence as a traitor, a rebel. Hence Christ died as a malefactor, in the place of the traitors, with all their treasured sins upon His divine soul. He was numbered with the transgressors. {17MR 340.1}

Gál 3:13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is everyone having been hanged on a tree").