1) Does sinful flesh cease tempting believers from within when they experience conversion?

2) Was Jesus ever tempted to do something inherently evil?

Also, do you think having sinful flesh counts as sin and guilt - even if its sinful desires are not cherished or acted out? Is it evil if its sinful desires are resisted?

This discussion is nothing new in Adventism as whole churches have been divided over these issues.
I remember visiting one church where the whole Sabbath School Lesson erupted into a very heated debate over this subject. It ended with one woman literally screaming and racing out of the church shouting "If Christ wasn't exactly like me He can't be my Savior".
A gentleman muttered "If Christ was like you He definitely could not be anyone's Savior."
Let's just say, the spiritual blessing longed for when one attends church was totally missing from that mornings "worship".
It doesn't help the situation when people start attacking each others characters.


James, you may not be aware of this, but what Mt.Man is presenting is a fundamental belief of the far conservative side of Adventism. Groups like Ron Spear and his "Our Firm Foundation" and Joe Crews founder of "Amazing Facts", Kevin Paulson and Larry Kirkpatrick of the "Great Controversy.org" site, and several others, all teach much the same as Mt. Man is presenting (of course each has their own individual take on it, but the belief is the same)

These groups claim that Adventism has sorely apostatized for teaching what you are teaching, (which in this particular issue is closer to mainstream Adventism belief) for it supposedly undermines the concept that people, in their sinful human flesh can reach perfection (perfect sinlessness) in all their thoughts and actions-- since Christ as our example lived it in sinful flesh.

You are not just combating Mt. Man's ideas, you are combating a core belief of the far conservative side of Adventism.


As far as my opinion?
There are always two ditches to every high road of truth, too often to get into these arguments just ends up in driving people into one or the other of the two ditches.

He was tempted EXTERNALLY! From Satan standing on his ground and Christ on His. The devil did not get to enter Christ.

This is the flaw in your logic. You assume because Jesus became a man an endured the temptations OF THE DEVIL that He had to overcome sinful desires. That is not the case.

Let's consider a righteous man in Christ, Job. He offered sacrifice for his sins and the sins of His children. He resisted the devil to the point of being tested greater than any mortal man before him. But why did he have to offer sacrifice, Job resisted the devil. It is because he HAD sinned in the past that he had to fight internal temptation. Once we we sin the devil claims us. Remember the resurrection of Moses? One sin is all it took for Satan to say "he is mine".

Did Jesus offer sacrifice? Show me one place in scripture that says Jesus had to offer sacrifice? His mother and Joseph offered sacrifice but Jesus never did. Why did Job have to offer sacrifice and Jesus didn't? Because Jesus IS the sacrifice.

Hebrews 10 states;

"For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once (for the people, not for Himself), when he offered up himself.”
“After he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever,” he “sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.... Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; and having an high priest over the house of God; let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.... And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works.”{RH March 17, 1903, par. 4}

Once a man sins he is considered the devils property. Adam sinned and he gave that character to his children and they sinned before they could be taught of God. We are born selfish and learn sin from birth, some even say from the womb.

But Jesus broke that cycle. He was not born selfish, or self centered. He had the Spirit of God with Him from birth. That is how He was the second Adam. Adam could have and did fall. So too could Jesus, but He didn't not once ever in thought or action. No other man since Adam has ever been born without a sinful character to be overcome.

If for one moment Jesus ever had a sinful propensity He could not have been our sacrifice. If He ever thought to do evil for a second He could not have been our perfection.

He became us. At the end of His life He took OUR sins on Him. He experienced our shame to take it away. He lived without those thoughts so He could become those thoughts of ours for us. The torment of experiencing those things at the end of His life is what broke His heart and killed Jesus.

Christ was a witness to sin but He hated it. He never let the devil have the opportunity to say Jesus had an evil thought.

I hate to be graphic, but the devil knows when we get excited. Man and women have physical reactions to visual stimulation. I believe Jesus never got physically aroused in an evil way. He did not wake up thinking evil thoughts about women, then put those thoughts away.

He is our hiding place from those thoughts because of His perfect purity.

The way you propose the messiah takes away that purity. The thoughts of Jesus were purer than baby's breath.

It does basically come down to the question --
"What is sin?"

Basically the one side defines sin as choosing to do or think things that are sin.
They take texts like:
James 1:14,15 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust has conceived, it brings forth sin:
to prove their point that something does not become sin until one has consciously yielded to it and acted upon it.



The other side defines sin as part of ones very being. Something that needs transformation and renewal that requires a complete change by the power of God.

They will use texts such as:
Is. 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
In other words -- sin is not just an act, sin is part of the very core of our being that must be changed. The "acts" are just the surface symptoms of the deadly grip of sin in our being.


The first group TENDS to focus on outward perfection -- not doing the wrong thing, and asking God to help them not do the wrong things.

The second group realizes their utter helplessness and seeks God to change them from the inside out. To replace their hate and envy, with love and kindness, to replace their irritability with peace and calmness, to replace their selfishness with genuine concern for others, to replace their love for sin with abhorrence of sin, and to replace their boredom for God's Word, with a hunger for its truth, etc. etc.
The battle isn't so much on "sinful acts' as on depending on God, pleading with God, to change the attitudes, to give us a NEW HEART (attitudes). And only He can make that drastic change in our being.

When by spending many hours at the feet of Jesus, and contemplating His great love and sacrifice so we might be forgiven, and redeemed, our attitudes are changed; and when our attitudes are changed it will be revealed in our acts.



Jesus, in His humanity did not need
a new heart (new attitudes)
to be born again (changed from a carnal focus to spiritual focus)
to be forgiven and cleansed

He was sinless from the beginning to the end.

Very good post, dedication.

Dedication, I have read everything I can get my hands on this subject and for you to say Mt Man is presenting "a fundamental belief of the far conservative side of Adventism" seems to be an over generalization. It is a fringe belief on the outside of Adventism, like Ron Spears.

In the book "Christ's Human Nature" Joe Crews was addressing the 'Original Sin' doctrine. He, like me, believed that we, including Jesus, inherited Adam's fallen nature flesh but we do not inherit the guilt of Adam's sin. But he also believed like I do that Jesus did not entertain sin in His mind.

He said "(Jesus) was tempted in the same way we are, yet He never once yielded to or entertained sin."

We on the other hand grow up entertaining selfishness and sin every day of our lives until we are converted, Jesus did not because He was conceived converted. Joe Crews was not saying like Mt Man that Jesus had fallen thoughts roaming around His mind that He had to overcome. He said Jesus NEVER entertained sin.

James 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

What Mt Man is saying that you want to generalize and compare it to the beliefs of Joe Crews from Amazing Facts, is that Mt Man Says Jesus had "sin in HIS sinful flesh".

Mrs White said "Christ took our nature, fallen but not corrupted, and would not be corrupted unless He received the words of Satan in the place of the words of God." Did Jesus have lust in His heart for Satan to entice Him with? That is what the Holy Spirit is angered over in this conversation.

Jesus had Adam's fallen body and mind, but in spirit He was covered in the spotless white robe of Character. And Joe Crews supports this belief.

Quote from Joe Crews; "If Jesus actually inherited the compromised nature of Adam, then why didn't He sin like the rest of Adam's descendants? Because He was filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb and possessed a fully surrendered will and sanctified human nature. May we partake of that same power to keep us from sinning? Yes. Jesus, in living His life of victory over sin, did not utilize His divinity but confined Himself to the same power available to us through conversion and sanctification."

I fully agree with this and have said this exact same thing since my conversion. Jesus did not use any power not available to us for our salvation, but He also was born in the Spirit so He did not have to be converted.

This is exactly what I am saying yet others immediately jump to the conclusion that I am on the side of the road that advocates Original sin or that Jesus overcame sin by relying on his divine nature. Jesus had two natures. And I'll repeat it again "THE ONLY ADVANTAGE HE USED IN THIS LIFE WAS HAVING HIS FATHERS CHARACTER!" That is the power of the Holy Spirit, God in us. This is exactly what Joe Crews believed, but he stated it in a different way.

I don't completely agree with how Joe Crews presented his case, but the same general idea persists in his view and the view I have been given and the majority of what he said contradicts Mt Man. The main sentiment that he stated that seems to directly contradict what God has shown me is this...

"If Jesus had any advantage over other men it was simply that His inherent human nature was never further debilitated by personal indulgence in sin."

I totally agree with the general context Pastor Crews was presenting here, but
this quote seems to be at variance with his previous statement that Jesus had the advantage of being "filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb, and possessed a fully surrendered will and sanctified human nature".

I believe I would stand completely justified in saying that this is a huge advantage, the fact that Jesus was born with the Holy Spirit that we must acquire after birth. It is because of that wonderful advantage that gives us hope in following His divine example. We seek reconciliation with God in this heavenly advantage. The example strengthens us to be delivered from sin.

If Jesus refused to use His divine power AND was not born with the Holy Spirit from birth, He would not be able to remain without sin because all fallen men sin without the Spirit. Having the Holy Spirit from birth enabled Jesus to be able to overcome sin and not use His divine powers, and this gives us the ultimate proof that faith in the life of Christ through the Holy Spirit helps us to overcome sin.

Adam lost the white robe of Righteousness, and we are born without it because of his sin. This is what we inherit from him, not his guilt. But Jesus was born with the white robe of righteous character while still having the fallen 'nature' of man, in the "likeness" of sinful flesh.

"Christ could have done nothing during His earthly ministry in saving fallen man if the divine had not been blended with the human. The limited capacity of man cannot define this wonderful mystery—the blending of the two natures, the divine and the human. It can never be explained. Man must wonder and be silent. And yet man is privileged to be a partaker of the divine nature, and in this way he can to some degree enter into the mystery (Letter 5, 1889)."{7BC 904.5}

TWO NATURES. I can see that Joe Crews saw this, but the way he presented his case does not fully reflect this. Some of the things he advocated sounds more like what Mt Man is saying and some sounds more like what I believe, but the main emphasis of the message from Joe Crews was to not believe that Jesus came in unfallen nature. I do not believe that Jesus came in unfallen nature, but those who cannot fathom what I am trying to convey see what I'm saying as completely different than what I actually believe.

To say that Jesus had to suppress within Himself the same desires and lusts that we do is the point the Holy Spirit objects to. Jesus never allowed Satan in Him.

"Christ took our nature, fallen but not corrupted, and would not be corrupted unless He received the words of Satan in the place of the words of God."

Those sinful desires enter into us when we allow them in, Jesus didn't allow them in. He was tempted but did not entertain the thoughts which is letting them in. The devil comes to us and says "look at that woman's body", and if we do we are entertaining the thoughts that he is tempting us with. Satan came to Jesus and implied all sorts of things but the righteous mind of God (Holy Spirit) was strong in Him and without allowing the thought to take root He handed the correcting thought back to Satan.

In fact if you really think about it, what I am advocating is totally against 'Original Sin' theory. If Jesus did inherit the guilt of Adam then He would have been destroyed with sinners. But men do inherit Adam's fallen nature, and so did Jesus at birth as I have said all along. (Go back and look).

"To what heights we are permitted to rise if we will have respect unto the recompense of the reward! We are to receive power from God that human nature, under the divine working, may not always be perverted and not always be under the depraving, corrupting influence of sin. Human nature, through Jesus Christ, becomes allied to angels—yes, even to the great God.{OHC 170.2}

'Christ's human nature'; by Joe Crews

Very true and great points,

...but then there is the third class that say that they have inherited the sins of Adam's original sin. They say they can never be free of sin in the flesh in this life because Adam sinned. And this one comprehension derails every other doctrine attached to it. They hide their misconception in a cloak that claims to be more righteous than the second class you mentioned and fill their service with meaningless ceremony.

James, it would be helpful if you answered the questions posted above. Also, answer the question - Why did Jesus get baptized?

PS - You have not posted inspired passages supporting the idea Jesus was not tempted like born-again believers are tempted. Bear in mind all temptations begin as an unholy thought and feeling.

The context of Romans 6-8 clearly teaches Jesus condemned the sin in sinful flesh by refusing to cherish or act out its unholy lusts and affections. He bore our sins in sinful flesh in the same way priests bore sins in their sinful flesh when they ate portions of animal sacrifices.

Dedication, thank you for attempting to summarize two different schools of thought. The Bible clearly teaches Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh. He refused to cherish or act out its unholy lusts, desires, cravings, clamorings, appetites, and passions. In so doing, He remained pure and holy and undefiled. Born-again believers, while they are abiding in Jesus, do the same thing. They overcome in the same way Jesus overcame. Possessing sinful flesh does not count as sin or guilt, nor does it corrupt or contaminate. The fact Jesus possessed sinful flesh is proof. The fact the 144,000 will possess sinful flesh after probation closes is proof