|
Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,205
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
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48205
03/20/06 06:01 PM
03/20/06 06:01 PM
|
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,154
Brazil
|
|
quote:
Is there no temptation to smoke the first cigarette, to have a first inapropriate look at the beauty next door, to join the first conversation on gossip and rumors or to act out on the lust or rage for a first time?
Yes, Thomas, but Tom, because he believes the temptations to repeat a sin are stronger than the temptations to commit a sin for the first time, holds that Christ was tempted, like us, with the temptations to repeat a sin.
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48206
03/20/06 07:37 PM
03/20/06 07:37 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
We know that Hoseah 11:1 is a messianic text because Matthew told us so.
Assuming Hosea 11:1 is a mssianic text, his telling us it is doesn't make it so. That is to so, whether Hosea 11:1 is a messianic text is independent of Matthew.
Same with 2 Sam. 7:14. Paul applied the first half of the verse messianically, but the second half could hardly be applied in this way.
That doesn't mean one has to be Paul to know the first half is messianic and not the second, assuming this to be the case.
The Holy Spirit helps us discover the application of the biblical text to our lives, but the interpretation of the Bible is reserved for prophets.
If this were true, how could we understand prophetic books, like Daniel and Revelation? Surely God intended for us to study and understand these books, which are not simply applications to our lives.
Where did you get the idea that the interpretation of the Bible is reserved for prophets? That sounds like a variation of Catholicism.
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48207
03/20/06 07:41 PM
03/20/06 07:41 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
Yes, Thomas, but Tom, because he believes the temptations to repeat a sin are stronger than the temptations to commit a sin for the first time, holds that Christ was tempted, like us, with the temptations to repeat a sin.
This isn't quite accurate. While I do agree that temptations to repeat a sin are stronger than temptations to commit a sin for the first time (isn't this self-evident?), that's not the reason I believe that Christ was tempted by inclinations both cultivated and hereditary. The reason I believe this is because the Scriptures tell us that He was tempted in all points as we are. I've also been inflenced by Jones and Waggoner's teaching on this (in addition to EGW). Jones is especially clear that this is the case.
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48208
03/20/06 08:02 PM
03/20/06 08:02 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
What do you think of Ps. 22? Are only the verses mentioned by someone in the New Testament referring to Christ? What are the other verses applying to? There's no known episode in David's life that this psalm can apply to.
You're suggesting jumping and skipping around a psalm, not applying it to Christ, unless some Scripture writer did this. To use your word, I think this is absurd. Anyone studying the psalms, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, could know they were testifying of Christ. That was there whole purpose. The purpose of all Scripture is to testify of Christ. It did that before Matthew, Luke, Paul, etc. made their applications to Christ. The truth was always there. Their writing the things they did did not cause truth to be invented or created. They simply revealed the truth that was always there.
How do you think Christ knew the things He did? It was by studying the Scriptures. He knew these things were testifying of Him.
By the way, the hermeneutic you are suggesting is the first I've ever heard this. Can you point to someone or something that suggests this? (the hermeneutic being that the Holy Spirit only helps us to understand texts to apply to our personal lives, but for the actual meanings we are dependent upon prophets -- if I've misstated your meaning, please fix what I wrote, but this seems accurate to me based on what you wrote in your post)
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48209
03/20/06 10:26 PM
03/20/06 10:26 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,636
California, USA
|
|
I want to continue with Pastor MM's line of inquiry. Here's where it started: quote:
You are of that age when the will, the appetite, and the passions clamor for indulgence. God has implanted these in your nature for high and holy purposes. It is not necessary that they should become a curse to you by being debased. They will become this only when you refuse to submit to the control of reason and conscience. {3T 84.1}
I stated (and Sis Tammy agreed) that Jesus had these, as did Adam at his creation. Here is a statement that verifies that, and sheds light on what happened at the fall.
quote:
In creating man, God gave him noble qualities. He endowed him with a well-balanced mind, and made every power of his being harmonious. After the fall there was not given to man another set of faculties. The powers given him before sin entered the world through Adam were high, and their aims holy; all in perfect harmony with the divine mind. The fall did not create in man new faculties, energies, and passions; for this would have been a reflection upon God. It was through disobedience to God's requirements that these powers were perverted; the affections were misplaced, and turned from the high and holy purpose to a lower aim and to meet a lower standard. {RH, March 1, 1887 par. 1}
The "faculties, energies, and passions" which were given for "high and holy purposes" were not changed by the fall. Rather, the "affections were misplaced" and perverted the use of these God-given faculties. So, the faculties remained unchanged, but the moral agent employing those faculties had been corrupted.
The crux of the problem is not in our muscles and bones. It is not even in our genes or neurons. Though the physical and intellectual natures strongly affect the spiritual, the central issue is character - thoughts and feelings. Therefore, the solution lies in the same area:
quote:
The natural inclinations are softened and subdued. New thoughts, new feelings, new motives, are implanted. A new standard of character is set up--the life of Christ. The mind is changed; the faculties are roused to action in new lines. Man is not endowed with new faculties, but the faculties he has are sanctified. The conscience is awakened. We are endowed with traits of character that enable us to do service for God. {COL 98.3}
Note again that the faculties remain unchanged. Conversion is a matter of inclinations, thoughts, feelings, motives, mind, conscience - character.
Getting back to the issue of temptation, where does temptation lie? Are we tempted in our biceps? How about our lungs? Perhaps the stomach? Let's see...
quote:
Few have moral stamina to resist temptation, especially of the appetite, and to practice self-denial. To some it is a temptation too strong to be resisted to see others eat the third meal; and they imagine they are hungry, when the feeling is not a call of the stomach for food, but a desire of the mind that has not been fortified with firm principle and disciplined to self-denial. {4T 574.1} (emphasis mine)
Temptation is a powerful influence to do wrong. (3SM 132.3) As we saw above, the way to fight this is through "control of reason and conscience." Thus can the faculties be sanctified. Therefore, the issue is not in the faculties themselves, but in the mind that controls those faculties.
Did Christ have the same mind as fallen, sinful, carnal man? Not even A.T. Jones accepted that. That's why Paul said, "Let this mind be in you." We need to let it be there because it is not naturally there.
I will end this post with two more quotes. As you read, think of these: What kind of passions did Christ have? What kind of passions does lost humanity have? Are they the same?
quote:
As His representatives among men, God does not choose angels who have never fallen, but human beings, men of like passions with those they seek to save. Christ took humanity that He might reach humanity. {AA 134.2}
He is a brother in our infirmities, but not in possessing like passions. As the sinless One, His nature recoiled from evil. {2T 201.2}
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48210
03/22/06 03:08 AM
03/22/06 03:08 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Rosangela - Mike, our internal foes may be either inherited or acquired. Since the latter option is excluded in Jesus' case, only the first option is left. Now I'm curious about something. Since Adam and Eve didn't possess inherited internal foes, if they obtained complete victory over sin could they, in your opinion, have achieved holy flesh?
Mike - After the Fall they were not capable of restoring sinless flesh. Sister White wrote that we will not have sinless flesh until after Jesus rewards us with it when He returns. I suspect this was true of our First Parents too as evidenced by the fact their descendants were born with sinful flesh. Neither do I believe Jesus was born with sinless flesh. Do you?
Arnold - I believe Jesus was born with the same appetites and passions that God implanted in us for high and holy purposes. I also believe that Adam was created with the same appetites and passions. We have the same faculties, but by default, they are not under the control of reason and conscience. In Jesus and unfallen Adam, reason and conscience were always in control. That's the big difference between Jesus and the rest of us.
MM (aka Mike) - I agree completely. I also believe that when we are abiding in Jesus we are in the same state as was Jesus, that is, our appetites and passions are under the control of sanctified reason and conscience.
Tammy - I'm glad we agree. Do you believe Jesus was born with sinless flesh?
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48211
03/22/06 03:16 AM
03/22/06 03:16 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Arnold, your last post was awesome. Thanx. Just because Jesus was tempted from within like we are it does not mean He is guilty of sinning. He never manifested the sins of His flesh, therefore, He never cultivated sinful traits of character. He never displayed an appetite or passion in an unholy way.
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48212
03/22/06 03:24 AM
03/22/06 03:24 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
Did Christ have the same mind as fallen, sinful, carnal man? Not even A.T. Jones accepted that.
I'm curious, what's the "not even" there for?
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48213
03/22/06 10:14 AM
03/22/06 10:14 AM
|
|
|
MM Said: quote:
Tammy - I'm glad we agree.
MM, I do not believe we do agree….I do not believe Jesus was “tempted from within”. SOP tells us that temptation comes from two places…”from Satan” (without) “ from the evil of our own hearts”. (within). Jesus was tempted from without, constantly by Satan….but there was no evilness in Him to tempt Him from within. That is why He could always tell Satan – “The prince of this world cometh and hath NOTHING in me.”
quote:
Temptation is enticement to sin, and this does not proceed from God, but from Satan and from the evil of our own hearts. "God cannot be tempted with evil, and He Himself tempteth no man." James 1:13, R.V. {MB 116.2}
And, NO, I do not believe Jesus was born with sinless flesh. The Bible says He was born in the likeness of “sinful flesh”.
|
|
|
Re: Understanding Temptation
#48214
03/23/06 03:53 AM
03/23/06 03:53 AM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Tammy, how do you define "sinless flesh"?
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
