APL,

Perhaps one day you will learn to listen instead of argue. Perhaps one day you will open your mind to the concept that others may have insights you could learn and benefit from, and it is worth hearing what they have to say before opposing it.

In your post above, you again oppose something that was never stated. That is, as I understand, the epitome of a "straw man" argument, and parallels your opposition to my earlier post in which you said "Having no reason for the existence of sin does not mean we do not know what sin is. Those are two very different things." Of course, you imply that your response has something to do with what I said, but I said nothing at all about sin's definition in that post, nor that we cannot know what it is. The opposite is true--I posted earlier in this thread, as did others, that "sin is the transgression of the law" and that this was the Biblical definition. Again, in your post above, you have made a statement that perhaps no one here would oppose, but you state it as though it does in fact disagree with what others have posted. It does not.

Please be informed: A "legal religion" is not the same as a "legal salvation." Period.

"Pure religion, and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world" (see James chapter 1). This may be the only verse in the Bible directly mentioning religion--and it ties it with an attitude of selfless service to others. Nothing in that verse mentions the law, although in doing those kind acts of service, would a person not be keeping the law? Is not the law a law of love?

All sin transgresses the law. If the law is love, any form of selfishness, which is love's opposite, is sin. Love IS legal, because, simply put, "legal" means "according to the law," and the highest law in the universe is love.

Keeping God's commandments for any reason does not produce a rebel. Rebels are those who do NOT keep the commandments, (either in the letter or the spirit)!

But let's look at something precious...


According to the above, "legal religion" means "repentance from sin." Again, Mrs. White uses the term "mere" to refer to this repentance. Just as Gary pointed out, it means "only." If you, by this statement, reject the need of repentance as necessary for your salvation, you will with it reject part of the Bible which tells you to repent. And repentance is the legal religion that we need to have. Mrs. White is pointing out that merely repenting according to the law is not enough--we need Christ's help, and cannot do it alone.

". . . and heaven can never be gained by an imperfect obedience . . ." --Ellen White.

green - you teach English, you should then understand the idiom "mere" can mean more than only. And taken in context, a "mere skillful way" is not speaking positively about the "skillful way" but actually denying it. Reading the rest of the quote gives you the truth, which you only consider a fraction, and that is salvation is a DIVINE REMEDY for the CURE of transgression. And yes, I think I read you correctly, for you treat "transgression of the law" as a LEGAL event, and can't conceive that is may be something actually real, and thus you discredit what I have written as ignorant, not listening, etc. Are you and Gary cut from the same cloth?

Sin causes death. Sin causes cancer and disease of all kinds. This is all caused by transgression of the law. Not transgression in a legal sense, but in a physical sense that causes all the degradation and death. And a death which is not an execution by God, but by sin.

God's law is written on every nerve, muscle and fiber of our being. It is written, and there is a writing media which contains the law, which can't be broken or else the system dies. Jesus shared our heredity to take on our sorrows and temptations, and solve the problem, providing a divine remedy. And it is Satan constant effort to misrepresent the nature of sin. Are you sure you have not fallen into the trap?

With you, APL, everything revolves around word definitions. You misunderstand the word usage and meaning, and consequently jump to unwarranted conclusions. Yes, I teach English. Perhaps I can do so here as well.

Let's take a look at the definition for "mere" that Ellen White would have in mind.



Which of the above do you believe Ellen White meant? To help make it more clear, perhaps seeing some excerpts from her own pen using the word might help.



That's the first five off the CD (sorry, I'm not interested in trying to randomly sample all 1,165 hits for the word "mere").

I have yet to see Mrs. White use the term as you have interpreted it to mean. If you want to be honest with yourself and others, it is important to start at the definitions level. If we are honest with ourselves, we realize that the devil has done much to change the very definitions of words over time to confuse and obscure longstanding truths. The sense of "mere" which you use seems not to have existed in Mrs. White's day, and we should consider her words to have a clear meaning, supported by the dictionary of her day, as borne out in a study of her own usage of the term.

It is true that "sin causes death." The difficulty with you is your definition of "cause." We are right back to square one with definitions, word usages, expressions, and senses. For example, one might truly say something like "The loud noise caused the driver to jerk the wheel, thus causing the accident." But did the noise push the driver's hands? Or did the noise "persuade" the driver to make a decision to move those hands?

Again, we could look at Mrs. White's usage of the word "cause." But it would appear it is a "lost cause," so I will not take more valuable time or space here for it.

Actually green, we have been around this before. Taking the statement as a whole, her use of the term "mere skillful way" not holding in the though in high esteem, and the second half of the statement tells us the truth.

I can see your "cause" again points to God as the "cause". Would you say, "sin caused God to kill the sinner?" SMH.

Consider the following very carefully:

The whole spiritual life is molded by our conceptions of God; and if we cherish erroneous views of His character, our souls will sustain injury. {RH Jan 14, 1890}


Multitudes have a wrong conception of God and His attributes, and are as truly serving a false god as were the worshipers of Baal. {PK 177}

The truth that we are to proclaim is that„ God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. This truth is to be developed in the closing scenes of this earth's history. {Ms53-1905}


Perish does not imply execution. Sin causes death because it literally destroys the sinner. Don't be lost by a wrong perception of our LOVING Heavenly Father.

Let ministers and people remember that gospel truth ruins if it does not save. The soul that refuses to listen to the invitations of mercy from day to day can soon listen to the most urgent appeals without an emotion stirring his soul. {5T 134.1}

Perhaps there is a confusion between the understanding of two sides? --

Why is it that when a person presents the "legal side" in conjunction with the very real aspects of sin, the response will often come rather forcibly to imply that anyone who sees the legal side must therefore have reject the very real conditions that result when one transgresses God's law.



Of course transgressing God's law brings very real results. Sin has very serious negative effects on our physical as well as spiritual health. It can ruin our emotional health, it makes our society often an unsafe place to live, it results in strife, wars, sickness, and death, etc. etc.

But this understanding is different from your premise which seems to say that the very real "results" of sin, are what constitutes the sin.
Thus if we, through Christ, can just fix the results of sin, obtain physical (DNA) healing and get rid of the negative effects, have the damaged DNA or whatever within our cell structures repaired or healed; we have gained salvation.



But scripture presents a different view.

God did not simply set aside his law and forgive the human race at creation.

Christ became SURETY for the human race at Creation.

What does that mean?
The Bible gives an example in Genesis 43:9 when Joseph demanded his brothers bring Benjamin to Egypt. Father Jacob was fearful. Judah told his father that he would be "surety" for Benjamin.

Gen 43:9 I will be surety for him; of my hand shalt thou require him: if I bring him not unto thee, and set him before thee, then let me bear the blame for ever:

In the same manner, Christ became "surety" for the human race at creation. If humans would sin, Jesus would bear the blame.
(See Heb. 7:22)
The immutability of the law is upheld..

"Ye are not your own, for ye are bought with a price." [1 Corinthians 6:19, 20.] And what a price! Not "with corruptible things, as silver and gold, . . . but with the precious blood of Christ." [1 Peter 1:18, 19.] When man was lost, the Son of God said, I will redeem him, I will become his surety and substitute." CE 119

APL, you are the one who acknowledges a law that is not of God in this universe. Of whom you think it is, I know not. In my understanding, God is the Author of the Law, the only law of the universe, and it is His law that requires the death of every sinner. As King of the universe, He it is who sees to it that His law is enforced--the devil is not an enforcer of God's law, nor is any "transgression of the law" able to enforce the law (sin = transgression of the law).



Did "sin" require the death of the offender? Or was it the "law"? Is the law equal to sin? Is it sinful? No, no! Anyone who seeks to lessen the claims of God's law is in error and in sin, deceived and a deceiver.

Salvation through Christ depends on His having fulfilled God's Holy Law, in love, by yielding His own life, undeservedly dying the death required by sin so that He could equally undeservedly offer life in place of death to sinners. Salvation cannot take place apart from this law--which, significantly, means no person can save himself or herself apart from Christ. This is a legal requirement as well as a healing process.

Remember the children of Israel being told to look at the bronze serpent to be saved of their deadly snake bites? They had to LOOK to be saved. Looking was the legal part. It fulfilled the command they had been given, demonstrating their faith. Healing came secondary to the look. Salvation involves faith and action, law and healing.

And by the way, what makes you think that legal things aren't real?

True -- God is love!

But how is love defined?
Do we define God by our earthly definition of love?
Or is the magnitude of God's love understood only if we also understand his awesome, glorious holiness?

The word "love" is a very subjective word.
How is it that the Christianized New Age movement declares that "the work of pouring out the principle of love and of lifting the consciousness of the masses to the point where they can understand and welcome that love principle is the main work of the new age" according to Alice Bailey who received her message from demonic "masters"? The new age movement is also deep into "healing" aspects.

So we have to be very careful that we actually understand what we are talking about when we speak of God's love, for the world is being programed in a wrong concept of "love".

God's love is combined with His absolute holiness. Unless we grasp God’s holiness, we will no longer be “amazed” at his amazing grace. Do we take God’s grace for granted? It is by reflecting on God’s holiness that we are amazed and overwhelmed in gratitude by His love and grace. But the trend now is to lower his love and grace to our sentimental subjective level, and not link it to His absolute holiness which absolutely abhors sin.

It forgets that God could easily reverse any "health" problems that sin causes, and enable sinners to live forever in good health, if it was only earthly defined "love" that was at issue. But God's holiness totally abhors sin. Yet, in tender, longing love, He seeks to lift us out of sin before erasing it from His universe.

Hm - as an Adventist, you should understand the Great Controversy. Satan sought to change the law of God, to amend the law. And the universe is witnessing the effects of that change. Paul can write that he delights in the law of God, but sees ANOTHER law in him members working against the law of God, the law of sin and death, Romans 7:22-23. Paul recognizes that this law of sin brings death, Romans 7:5. Satan's rebellion is a lesson book to ALL a testimony to the nature and results of sin. Sin brings death, not God. Satan is the author of sin and all its results. The inevitable results of sin is death. Part of the Controversy is how God is involved in that death.

Transgression of the law causes death, sin pays is wage, sin when it is finishes brings death, Romans 6:23, James 1:15, Romans 7:5. Satan is not an enforcer, nor is God an enforcer. The exercise of force is contrary to the principles of God's government. Transgression of the law inherently has its consequences, death. God hates sin because it destroys. As EGW says in DA Chapter 79, if Satan had been left to reap the consequences of his sin, he would have perished, but the on looking universe would not have understood that this was the inevitable consequences of sin. No so at the end. When God lets people go, they will die, and ALL will understand why and how they died.
Did Christ die to pay the penalty of sin? For sure, Christ paid an infinite price for our salvation, but not to appease an angry God, not as a penal substitution, which is against all logic.

Looking at Nehustan was a "legal" requirement? That like saying it is a legal requirement to have faith? But without Christ, we would not any faith. It was WHO the brazen serpent represented that was of value. But thanks for bring up the brazen serpent because that shows again that salvation is healing, not legal finagaling. The people knew there was no virtual in the brazen serpent itself.

"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness," even so was "the Son of man lifted up: that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life" John 3:14, 15. If you are conscious of your sins, do not devote all your powers to mourning over them, but look and live. Jesus is our only Saviour; and although millions who need to be healed will reject His offered mercy, not one who trusts in His merits will be left to perish. [huh - it is not legal, it is healing, and it is not execution, but being left to the consequences] While we realize our helpless condition without Christ, we must not be discouraged; we must rely upon a crucified and risen Saviour. Poor, sin-sick, discouraged soul, look and live. Jesus has pledged His word; He will save all who come unto Him. {CCh 48.3}

The lifting up of the brazen serpent was to teach Israel an important lesson. [so it was a teaching lesson, a lesson in legality? no.] They could not save themselves from the fatal effect of the poison in their wounds. God alone was able to heal them. [oh, there it is again - healing. should it not say legally get them off the hook? No] Yet they were required [legal requirement? no, trust is what is required] to show their faith in the provision which He had made. They must look in order to live. It was their faith that was acceptable with God, and by looking upon the serpent their faith was shown. They knew that there was no virtue in the serpent itself, but it was a symbol of Christ; and the necessity of faith in His merits was thus presented to their minds. Heretofore many had brought their offerings to God, and had felt that in so doing they made ample atonement for their sins. They did not rely upon the Redeemer to come, of whom these offerings were only a type. The Lord would now teach them that their sacrifices, in themselves, had no more power or virtue than the serpent of brass, but were, like that, to lead their minds to Christ, the great sin offering. {PP 430.3}

"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness," even so was the Son of man "lifted up: that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life." John 3:14, 15. [sin will cause you to perish - not to cause God to enforce upon you execution] All who have ever lived upon the earth have felt the deadly sting of "that old serpent, called the devil, and Satan." Revelation 12:9. The fatal effects of sin can be removed only by the provision that God has made. [sin is fatal. the consequences of sin is not execution] The Israelites saved their lives by looking upon the uplifted serpent. That look implied faith. They lived because they believed God's word, and trusted in the means provided for their recovery. So the sinner may look to Christ, and live. He receives pardon through faith in the atoning sacrifice. Unlike the inert and lifeless symbol, Christ has power and virtue in Himself to heal the repenting sinner. {PP 431.1}

God's love is totally others center, self-sacrificial love. Yet He will not force you to love Him in return, and He will not kill you if you don't love Him. Transgression of the law, the design template brings all sickness, disease, aging and death. THAT is why sin is so offensive to our LOVING Heavenly FATHER. No, God can't cure "health effect" as you say and yet let the sinner because that would come right back on the sinner. Sin, when it is full brings death. The law requires righteousness, and perfect character. This man has not to give, but comes to us as a gift should we accept it. Christ can save us from our sin, not in our sin, and can restore, heal us, in to perfect harmony of the law, the design template of all life.

I have been doing word studies on the word intrinsic and its synonyms by searching the EGW Estate database.

I have not yet found an instance where Ellen White refers to God's moral law by any of these terms. She does use the synonym "natural" in describing the laws of the natural world, but she always disassociates that from God's moral law. She makes it clear that natural laws created by God that govern physical life and God's moral law that governs spiritual life are distinct entities.









Notice that in every instance Ellen White distinguishes, natural, or in other words, intrinsic, law from spiritual law. Violation of natural law affects our ability to keep God's spiritual law, but they are not the same thing. Ellen White keeps them distinctly separate.

A continual transgression of nature’s laws is a continual transgression of the law of God.

...every transgression of the laws of physical life is a transgression of the laws of God. {SpM 40.2}

But you misunderstand the application of intrinsic. The punishment that comes from transgression of God's laws is intrinsic. That is the very essence of transgression brings pain, suffering, disease, and death. The consequences are intrinsic verses imposed.