Post your assignments below. All further comments and discussions should be posted under the thread entitled: "Comments on Assigments."
127 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Doctrine of Salvation September 3rd, 09 We, as Christians, are divided on issues that should unite us. We fight on salvation whose author is our maker. Salvation is from the Lord as well as perfection. Christ’s perfect sacrifice is sufficient to bind all believers in perfect unity in diversity. It is difficult, in my understanding, to receive Salvation without being sanctified. Once one is sanctified that individual is automatically perfect. That state of perfection implies the person is also justified. Does it mean that soul is sinless? Not at all! Just like unity is a sign of perfection. The latter is a sign of justification. Yes, without perfection justification is impossible. Saying a just is not perfect is like saying a just lives without faith. A righteous person cannot live without faith. That’s her/his life! Faith is the essence of the existence of the just. Furthermore, Salvation has to do with not only sanctification, righteousness, and glorification; it has something to do with deliverance. In II Chronicles 20:17, the messenger of the Lord said “You will not need to fight in this battle. Position yourselves, stand still and see the salvation of the Lord, who is with you, O Judah and Jerusalem! Do not fear or be dismayed; tomorrow go out against them, for the LORD is with.” See, the LORD delivers His people by saving them from themselves and their enemies. As long as God is with us we are saved. As long as we abide in Him and He abides in us we are safe and saved. Salvation is secured as we walk with our redeemer, sanctifier, and glorifier hand in hand. God saves us from the enemies of our soul day by day and momentarily. Salvation has been, is, and will be available to everyone who is hungry and thirsty of God’s justice, mercy, and grace. Therefore I can safely say that I have been saved; I am being saved; I will be saved. In other words, I was sanctified, I am justified, and I will be glorified. Consequently Salvation comes from the LORD at every step of the Christian path way. “We must never forget that it was our God who initiated our rescue, who reached out to us. "All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself" (2 Cor. 5:18). And He continues to reach out to us today. When we accept His merciful invitation, we walk in the certainty of salvation guaranteed by His death and resurrection.” (http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents.htm#salvation) God initiated the whole plan of Salvation and maintains it all the way to eternity. God saves us via the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son. Paul became a slave of that Gospel of God in Holy Scriptures. In Romans 1:9 Paul says “God sees that I serve Him in the Gospel of His Son”. He has no shame of the Gospel because it is the power of God to salvation. I want to bluntly say that the Gospel, the Good News, is Jesus who has been making, is making, and will be making salvation possible to humanity. Salvation has been around since eternity and will be throughout ceaseless ages. God is the author and finisher of our salvation. If that is the case, why it is that some souls will be lost while some will be saved? Is not God partial by initiating salvation in the hearts of some and watching others going to hell forever?
Report on "Ellen White on Salvation" Chapter 1 (Section 1)
W. W. Whidden’s first chapter dealing with Ellen White’s journey in her understanding of Sanctification and also her experience of conversion has helped me better understand her emotional struggle during the time of her conversion. However I wonder if the author seems to suggest that she later moved to an understanding where conversion is not accompanied by a joyous feeling of being saved or that the feeling of total peace and joy with Christ will be felt only when glorification occurs?
It seems clear that Ellen White did experience instantaneous joy and peace (this is after the incident where she finally prays in public after having talked to Stockman). She feels her burdens/agony of soul removed and God’s blessing descend. The author writes that Ellen White later steered away from an emphasis on the public testimony of a salvation experience. This due to fanatics who claimed to experience it while denying it in practice.
However, her experience can be one we may also experience. The reason for Ellen White moving away from this emphasis, as the author admits, was because she was concerned by counterfeit claims to this experience. In my opinion, she had no issue with the genuine (since she herself experienced it). Therefore an emphasis solely on an intellectual exercise of accepting the gift of Salvation or the gift of forgiveness may well be accompanied by a genuine yearning for and an expression of a feeling of peace and joy which surpasses human understanding. This may serve as a testimony to an assurance of salvation for past, present and future.
Personally, I would like to see if my Christian Salvation experience can be helped by a little joy.
I just read Psalm 14:7 it reads: “Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.”
Any further reactions to/thoughts on this are welcome!
In this reflection, I will seek to further explore the meaning of “From faith to faith” axiom (Rom. 1:17), or as discussed/stated in class “passive faith to salvation to active faith.” In the present work, I’m interested more precisely in the passive faith, its: origin, passive nature, and as it relates to the active faith.
General definition
Faith is “expecting the word of God to do the thing which that word speaks and depending upon the word only to accomplish the thing which that word speaks.” (RH Jan. 24, 1899). Faith then is a wholeheartedly belief in the word of God. It is a belief in the description and prescription of Scripture regarding humankind (That is, Christ is the only solution to man’s fundamental problem—sin). Faith then is nothing but implicit trust in the merits of Christ as articulated in Scripture.
The origin of faith
Scripture tells us that faith comes “from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ” (Rom 8:17 NASB). The origin of faith must originate from Scripture; it is a “gift of God” (Eph. 2:8). God’s goodness that moves us toward repentance provides us with this gift of faith. Therefore, (passive) faith does not originate with man, but comes from God. It is a human response to God’s self-disclosure!
The nature of passive faith
Passive faith is an inward human response to divine revelation. It is an opening of one’s heart to the voice of God. Does this inward response deserve merit? No! Otherwise, the “Creator [would be] under obligation to the creature”{FW 19.3}. God orchestrates the whole enterprise of salvation, and therefore, salvation is wholly a gift to be received by (passive) faith first.
The relationship between passive and active faith
While passive faith is an inward response to God’s revelation, active faith is an outward response (See Gen 12:1-2; 22). Active faith is a result of passive faith. Faith without works is dead, and if we’re in Christ (the Word), there must me a change commencing within (James 2:20; 1 Cor. 5:17). Faith without transformation is merely information!
For further reflection on this axiom, “From faith to faith” (Romans 1:17), see “Salvation by Faith” by Jan Paulsen. http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents/Salvation%20by%20Faith.htm
Throughout our discussions in class, we have heard one theme being stressed. That in order to come up with a more accurate view or picture of salvation, it needs to be a larger and more inclusive picture. Our experience and readings thus far seems to show that as long as a particular view of salvation is Biblically based, in that no contradiction for such a view can be found in the Bible, such a view may be acceptable. This is because like a gem, salvation is multi-faceted. Additionally, each of us view salvation through the lens of our experience. Thus, although what we say may be Biblically sound, it is still very possible for us not to be saying the same thing. We find that our individual views, only become error when we hold them exclusively, discounting the possibility that what another theologian is saying may be correct as well. In his article “Adventist Theology: The Wesleyan Connection”, Dr. Woodrow Whidden points to the fact that beyond some “mere theological quibbles” Ellen White and John Wesley had the same view of the process of salvation. Although I do not discount instances in which deep misunderstandings exist at a foundational level between the doctrines and beliefs of certain groups, by and large many disagreements amount to “mere theological quibbles”. For instance, concerning the topic of Christian perfection in the Adventist church, many disagree as to whether a state of perfection can be attained in this life. While there is a fundamental difference in one belief which would affirm the possibility and another which denies it, generally some people choose sides without truly discerning the issue at hand. Some faithful Christians affirm the possibility of perfection because they take seriously the command of Jesus to “Be ye perfect, even as your father in heaven is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). Similarly, there are also faithful Christians who deny that a state of perfection is possible because they feel it is too akin to an antinomian philosophy; that one does not need to strive to obey the law because they have attained a state of perfection. Both camps have a Biblically sound view that they strive to defend. However, because they hold to their view at the expense of the other, they both end up denying things that the Bible clearly teaches. There is a greater danger however, than those which already exist from the inability of a group to come together and hear another's idea's. There are those who come behind the group, seeking to understand salvation in the context of their life experience. A young person, earnestly seeking to be a good Christian may be taught that Christian perfection is impossible. This could cause them to feel that since it is impossible, no serious effort should be given to overcoming sin. “Since it will always be present”, they may reason “my resistance towards it should be more passive than active.” Although this was not the intended deduction of those who would initially deny that Christian perfection is possible , this could be deduced from a believer, young in the faith. Conversely someone may arrive at the same conclusion thinking that they have already attained a state of perfection. I think, as was demonstrated in our class discussions, that a refined yet more concrete definition of perfection is in order, rather than tuning out the “other group”. When I think of the possibility of a young sincere Christian, who may be influenced by either group, whose grave error was only that they refused to hear and consider the ideas posed by the other , I reflect on the struggle of Ellen White when she was younger. The formation of her understanding was still a rough time in her life. How much more challenging would it have been to come to a correct knowledge, had she been influenced by people who held a limited view of justification and sanctification. I believe that it was in God's purpose to use someone brought up in the understanding of a primarily Wesleyan tradition.
David often states that is his Salvation. And looking at Romans 2:4 which says “do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads us to repentance?”, it becomes more evident to me that God is the one initiating salvation. I personally grateful for such a great sacrifice Jesus made for me in dying to save me when I had no clue. God had always known that human race needs salvation before the human family realizes it. Yeah, we did not understand how low we had fallen into sin. God saw our state and came to our rescue. We have been resisting his offer. However, He is slow to anger and rich in faithfulness and goodness. As a result, God, in His longsuffering, bears with us to slow bring us to repentance. Romans 2:11contrasts, in my thinking, the idea that God has been slowly leading humankind to repentance. Reason being, it says “There is no partiality in God”. My question is why would He lead me to repentance and bypass my next door neighbor? How much my personal choice is important in that process of salvation? In a sense, I understand that God loves the whole in that He sent His only begotten Son to die and save it. Is there not such a thing like a propensity in certain individual DNA to accept Christ or the idea that God can save and will save us while others do not have that tendency? I am looking the idea of partiality. There is no question in my mind that salvation has been available to every living soul. At what point do we say that we want to receive it by faith for it to grow from faith to faith? When I first surrendered my life to the Lord I did not see anything else that I could have done. I have never been sorry for the fact I said “yes” to Jesus. I have young people with whom I grew up and some of them actually have passed away without giving their life over to God. At times, I am afraid that I will not meet them in heaven. I guest there are questions that we, human beings, can only reason upon, but we can not do anything about them. We just have to leave them for God to answer. The encouraging news is that the same Paul says ‘those who die with the law will judge with the law and those who die without the law will judge with the law’. Praise God for salvation! It takes nothing of our part, a submissive and a receiving attitude. “Jesus loves to have us come to Him just as we are – sinful, helpless, dependent. We are eligible for salvation not by who we are, what we are able to do, or our behavior. He works with us and through to bring His work into completion. Jesus makes us perfect or eligible for His salvation that has had for us since the foundation of the world. It seems those who are not going to take hold of that precious gift are going to be those who will say in their hearts that they do not need it. As long as they breathe the gift will have been extending to them. I have learned that it is a struggle. However, while struggling one can be assure that Christ is able to save to the utmost those who humbly come to Him in faith. What those who do not come to Him? Would He go to them? Montes Estinphil
The chapter three of the book of Romans is very depressing as well as appealing. It seems that whether one is circumcised or uncircumcised does not matter in the sight of God. It says and I paraphrase: “will the wicked ones make God faithfulness of no effect.” The author answers: certainly not. Even though we are not faithful, we serve a faithful God. His blessings to us are based on what we do or say. As a matter of fact, Jesus’ primary mission was to seek and save the unfaithful ones or the lost. As I read this passage once more, it dawned on me that we all stand in need of the Savior. Since have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God then it implies that we were all lost in our trespasses. “There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understand.” Is the author saying I have been my Bible for that long and I have been there where I truly say I am good enough? One can pretender being just, but in reality no one is. Christ is the only reason one can bold say that righteousness is possible. That is why, I believe, Paul states ‘let him who glories himself do so on the basis that they know Christ.” Yeah, it saddens my heart to realize that I can not and will not be able to do any good without Christ. I almost feel like asking God for the purpose He created human beings. We are from the hands of such a great mighty God and still we cannot do anything good on our own. Where is the ability God has created us with in the first place? For what futility has He created us. There is none who does good, no, not one! When did we start being so bad to the point that we become so corrupt God disowns us? Would Adam and Eve’s disobedience lead that deep into the abyss? My goodness! If sin has left us in that great despair and hopelessness then God is right the fact that He never wants us anything good on our own strength. Maybe too much humanity will show off. As a result, God will have no glory for His creation. If our deeds are constantly evil and God’s deeds are constantly good then we are doomed to need God. We have to depend on His power and strength. This is good News, on the other hand. Those who give their lives over to God are never alone. After all, does He promise to be with us even to the end of the age? It is encouraging because we, Christians, are not and will never be alone for “The angel of the LORD encamps all around those who fear Him and delivers them.” ‘Blessed is the man or woman who puts their trust in Him’ (Ps 34:7, 8). We cannot anything good. Neither can the keeping of law make righteous because the deeds of the law are able to justify the sinner. The law only points to our sins and the Savior, the justifier and purifier of our sins. Since we do not see God we exercise faith actively trusting that His righteousness and His alone can make us just and qualify us for anything work and heaven. Otherwise, too much boasting would be going on here on earth among doers of good works. Praise God! We are all equal at the feet of the cross. God has ultimately the last word both just and unjust. He knows which one was really purified in the blood of the Lamb and which was not. Christ is our benefactor. He is our shield and our righteous judge. He does everything possible to qualify us for Salvation. He is our perfection, justification, sanctification, protection, glorification and many more. Montes Estinphil
Conversion, “Sanctification,” and Early Ministry by Ellen White on Salvation by Woodrow W. Whidden II
One of the three critical passages that were particularly important in the development of Ellen White’s understanding of salvation is her own conversion experience. Her struggle was that she was caught between two worlds of passionate revivals, Methodism and Millerism that sets up her salvation experience.
As she was preparing for her death after being struck in the face with a stone, “she diligently sought the Lord to prepare her for death. She strongly desired to become a Christian and prayed earnestly for the forgiveness of her sins.” As she recalled there was peace in her mind with a “deep desire that all should love Jesus and have their sins forgiven.” But she found it difficult to be assured of acceptance. She felt that she “could never become worthy to be called a child of God.” She felt that it was very hard to surrender fully to God. She seemed to be confused until she attended a camp meeting where she determined to seek the Lord for pardoning of her sin. As a result she realized that “she had been indulging in ‘self-dependence.’” Consequently she recognized “that only by connecting with Jesus through faith can the sinner become a hopeful, believing child of God.”
She consistently seeks the forgiveness of God sensing her helplessness, as a result, she felt her burden been lifted, experiencing Jesus’ blessing upon her and her sins being “pardoned.” She was baptized by immersion afterward. You see, this is her salvation experience. I don’t know whether you will agree with this or not, but let me quote from the Biblical Research Institute article – “Dynamics of Salvation” p. 2 http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents/Dynamics%20of%20Salvation.htm “Before we can accept the good news, we must recognize our desperate need. We must see that we can do nothing to restore ourselves to God, or to improve our evil nature: our condition is hopeless. To such poverty-mental, physical, spiritual - God’s salvation comes.” This is what Ellen White experienced as salvation only comes from Christ by firstly recognizing her desperate need to be restored to God.
Later she developed, “a longing ‘to be sanctified to God.’” But encountered two problems: (1) she couldn’t understand what “sanctification” means, and (2) she felt she lacks the holiness needed to meet Jesus at His second coming. She was confused and depressed but was impressed to pray openly. She was assured by Elder Stockman that, “hardened sinners would not be experiencing such deep convictions.” And the “love of God,” is longing to draw sinners to Himself in “simple faith and trust.” Accordingly she lifts her voice in prayer and the result was the “burden and agony of soul that she had so long endured left her.” Then she experiences “the blessing of the Lord descended” upon her “like the gentle dew.” She confessed that “a great change had taken place” in her mind, and her “heart was full of happiness.”
What we see here is her early experience of personal salvation and the significance of her own conversion. As the author states that her experience contributes to her later doctrinal development giving great emphasis to the importance of sanctification and perfection. In later years her ministry progresses to stress that sanctification is a work of a lifetime and not of a moment. Dr Hanna, states that “sanctification is a progress and a process in perfection, perfection while on the way, growing in grace perfecting in every stage. We are struggling and growing upward and not arriving in a place until glorification when our sinful nature is removed.” Whidden states: “Perfection was not to be claimed as some sinless accomplishment, but rather sought as a way of life that would see believers grow in grace until they received the finishing touch of sinlessness at glorification.” I believe that her experience gives us the foundation of salvation, justification, sanctification and glorification.
I want to comments on Montes Estinphil suggestions that “Romans 2:11contrasts, in my thinking, the idea that God has been slowly leading humankind to repentance. Reason being, it says “There is no partiality in God”. My question is why would He lead me to repentance and bypass my next door neighbor? How much my personal choice is important in that process of salvation?”, According to my understanding, the Bible also said, "God loved Jacob, but hated Esau" Rom 9.13 , and Exodus 10:1 has a curious statement: “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his officials, so that I may perform miraculous signs of mine among them.’” What the Bible really said is that, if the Lord called you and you are working in His way that your heart is softened by Holy Ghost, but if you are refusing when is knocking then your heart is hardened day by day. In a sense, I’m completely agree with you on that statement, “Paul says those who die with the law will judge with the law and those who die without the law will judge with the law.” However, we as people need to know there is no sin if you don’t know.
I am not sure about the idea of groupings as all of us have been referred to, me included however we have the idea that some individuals denied perfection but could not reconcile Matthew 5:48 “Be ye perfect, even as your father in heaven is perfect” as Pohlmarc stated. And at the same time we have those Christians that totally believe that faith and divine grace bring salvation and that it is therefore not necessary to accept established moral laws (antinomians).
I agree with what Pohlmarc emphasized, both sides fall into denying things that the Bible teaches. It seems then that these people forget that the Bible interprets itself and the Bible reconciles itself. In addition to what Pohlmarc stated that in our class lecture there is a more refined and concrete definition of “perfection,” that should be taught so that both sides review their ideas according to the word of the Bible.
I think Pohlmarc has added a very important idea that conflict between these two groups on “perfection” may have some elements of truth in it but some genuine new converts will be affected as they make choices without consulting God’s words on their own. So the foundation is that, if they do not speaking according to the Word then there’s no light in them. There’s no conflict in God’s Word.
James Whites suggested the Review Readers to preach Christ more. The message had a lot to do with Christ’s character and His willingness to bring salvation to His people. Some of his spectators noticed he spent a great of time dealing faith in Christ and the love of God. Unless we have the Spirit and the power of the living God we will do terribly bad cause harm to others and the spread of the Gospel. From what I read in statements Ellen White made, it seems it occurs to me that she has never claimed any superiority over anybody else. In other words, she errs just like anybody else; she made mistake just like anyone. No one is perfect in their own doings. Human’s perfection comes from the righteousness of the perfect Lamb of God. The fact that someone is trying to be something does not means that person is that thing. But it is good to try to be like Christ and I think that is where strength and help come from. When Christ sees that we want and try to be like him, I believe, He comes to our rescue and help us out. In all circumstances God’s great transforming power to sanctify and justify stands strong. “God’s moral government and His grace are inseparable”. Our obedience cannot guarantee our perfection though it is important for perfection and salvation. We may obey all the laws of the God since we were youths up to our current stage, unless we find the acceptance of the just and loving God, everything we do will be worthless. We will always need Christ righteousness to justify. Now, the challenge may be when probation closes. What will happen then? Can we ever stand on our own without the help from above? How long can a being survive without Christ when the probation closes? It is said “what is impossible with humans are possible with God”. For a sinner, who constantly needs God’s help, to remain alive without a mediator, is intriguing. Wherever there is sin there is sinner; wherever there is sinner sin exists. Therefore the closing of probation apparently will come to freeze both sin and sinner. Or, is it because God is going to seal His children for good and so we will not have the desire to repeat certain sins we are accustomed to practice. Consequently we will get to a point where sin will have no dominion over us. At that moment, we will be no longer slaves to sins. We will have the mind and character of Christ to wrestle against flesh and blood and against principalities in the high and heavenly places. Should we wait for a specific day or month or year or moment for that transforming occurrence to place? Or is it a step by step process where the Christians can truly say that as long as Christ lives within them sin has no more dominion over them? We are perfect at every stage of the journey. The victory over sin is won by the receiving of Christ as Lord and Savior. ‘Christ in me, the hope of glory’. If we all had to wait for a specific time to stop sinning for probation to close then what will have been the fate of those who have gone ahead and are sleeping in the grave? I am convinced that Jesus stops mediating when the soul stops breathing. If one wants to call that moment probation, go ahead. I have not yet fathomed Christ living the living soul alone. We are constantly under His watch care and His loving arms. He is who we are. We are who he makes us to be and we are not yet who ought to be. For this reason, we look to the time when we will put off our dirty robe to put on Christ’s, but until then we are perfect in every breath we take in Him. Montes Estinphil
Reflection Paper: Salvation and Justification! We have two ways to look at everything in human eyes- the left and the right, the good and the bad and the right and the wrong for God are Justification and Sanctification. They like two friends; therefore, one can’t work or live without the other. My views on Justification and Sanctification is as follow: Justification is the first thing a sinner received from God that is God saved us from the penalty of the Law. Christ died for us while we were sinners, He took the death that was us, and He gave us the life that was His. The Bible said, “He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our grieves, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.” Sanctification is the process to glorification that God is giving to believers that is those who already received Justification. For Judaizers, they believe that they can get salvation through circumcision and the Law of Moses; however, we need to think more than a jewry, there is nothing we can do to get the merit or favor of God by our works. The only thing we have to do, it is to accept and believe on the sacrifice and merit of Christ on the cross and Jesus will said, Come unto me, all ye that labour and heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Reflection on Chapter two of Woodrow W. Whidden II and Romains Chapter 2 Conversion, “Sanctification,” and Early Ministry First of all, it is obvious that Ellen Gould Harmond’s experience of salvation followed after the doctrinal teachings she was conscious of, which was the Wesleyan Methodist faith. Consequently, the language she used to describe her conversion experience was tainted with the terminology which came from this doctrine. The question now is to debate how much she has been cured from that influence? Although she later realized and enunciated that “Sanctification is not the work of a moment but of a lifetime”; she seemed to have placed a heavy emphasis on sanctification in many of her writings. In fact, Whidden is not denying that fact. He clearly stated: “Though there were significant modification of the details of the Holiness experience, her teachings would always give great accent to the importance of sanctification and perfection.” It is relevant to state here, I believe, that Ellen White did later get it right when it comes to the meaning of sanctification and perfection. I only have to cite her comment on the book Christ objects lessons page 65 as a perfect example of a mature statement on what sanctification or perfection is. In this statement she was comparing Christian’s growth with the development of a tree and wrote: “At every stage of development our life may be perfect; yet if God's purpose for us is fulfilled, there will be continual advancement. Sanctification is the work of a lifetime. As our opportunities multiply, our experience will enlarge, and our knowledge increase.” This comment was very similar to our class discussion as it was clearly demonstrated that perfection was reached at every stage even though we still continue to grow spiritually. The thief on the cross was an awesome example to make that point. In this chapter, not enough time was spent in unraveling the time at which her views or rather her understanding began to mature to the level of the statement we just mentioned. However, part of Whidden comment expressed her frustrations with perfectionists who themselves were living immoral lives. This is not too far from Paul’s rebuke in Romains chapter two the first verse. What a rebuke of those who judge and yet are guilty of the same things they condemn others for. Paul’s plea to these perfectionists, as it were, could apply to those in White’s days: “but is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter;” The greatest challenge with perfectionist was always to get them to be who they really say they are. The more I read Romans chapter two, the more I find that it is addressing the frustrations and doctrinal confusion Ellen White faced in her early conversion process. The Jews, in Paul’s days were to the Gentiles what the perfectionists were in White’s days. Paul really spent a great deal of time dealing with this issue. He never really called them hypocrites, but if you follow his logic, you can see the hypocritical attitude he condemned in the whole chapter, especially from verse 17 to 20. Fortunately for us, God used Ellen White’s frustration to lead her to a more perfect understanding of the truth. Thus, we are left with a valuable transformation and clarification of an important doctrinal issue.
Reflection Paper 2! Salvation is not an afterthought! The Bible said, God created us at His image according His likeness. If we look at it very close and go deeper to the creation history in the Bible, God did not created the animals, the fish of the sea, and the birds at His image and His likeness. God created those animals according to their likeness or species that means some places some where in the other galaxies or world those things -species (animals, birds and fish) have already existed or known before our creation; as of man, there was no species like that before the creation of this world; even though, there was other worlds where intelligent being is living before us that God had been create, none of them was create at the image of almighty God. The only way, God could die for us because we were creating at His image. If the other worlds were sins, God could not come, and would not come to die for them; this is one of the reasons, Christ did not come to die for the fallen angels, and that does will not make any sense because they were in heaven in the presence of God day and night. God knew for sure He had to die billions of years before Adam and Eve creation. There was no surprise on the part of God that He never took off guard. As human, when we did some thing, it could be by chance or accident or inheritance or others for God is released thing when the time has comes. The Bible said when the fullness of time has come; God had sent forth His Son. We can get some good news from all of these mysterious things, who may not be in our level of knowledge to understand; even thought, God knew for sure man is going to cause His death, He took anyway the dust of the earth to make them and blow in their noses – He made them (male and female) in a level – at His image- that He can come; when they became sinners He will come down to that level to die for them; if man was lower than that – an animal, He – God could not come to rescue them. We can take some comfort from all of this that His Grace is enduring forever!
Reflection on Chapter three of Woodrow W. Whidden II and Romains Chapter 3, and Biblical Research reading Article from Manuel Rodriguez Justification in Romans 3: 21-24 “The Decade Before 1888” Several issues arose in my mind as I completed my reading today. First of all it is hard to ignore the call from those at odd with the “penal substitution” view of salvation. One of the arguments they make is that our translation of the book of Romans incorrectly renders the Greek word “dikaioo” in all its forms. Most translations use to justify; whereas, they contend it should have been translated “to make right”. In their view that would have made it difficult to view the work of Christ on behalf of sinners as a judicial transaction. A God of love need not to pay any penalty to saved those he loves. The reading of Romans chapter three really intersected well with my other materials. The chapter from Whidden also briefly touches on the question of whether a man is saved by the law or justify by grace in Christ Jesus. In fact, Whidden firmly believes that Ellen G. White properly addressed this question as she counseled a certain Elder Brown who accused her of promoting salvation through the works of the law. I find his conclusion of white’s position on the issue very telling of her understanding of the relationship of law and grace. He cites the magazine Signs of the Times, July 18 1878 issue: “She declared that we are justified by faith in the merits of Christ, but such faith will never excuse transgression.” I truly support this statement and I would agree with Whidden that she was unequivocal in propagating a righteousness which only comes by faith. The same chapter of Romains prompted Angel Manuel Rodriguez to refute the notion that the sins we are justified of are those in Adam. He really doesn’t think that Adam should ever be introduced in this context. For him, simple exegesis will demonstrates that personal responsibility for, in his words, “defacing the image of God” must be borne by every individual who have sinned. He places a heavy emphasis on the word “all have sins”; therefore, all need to be justified and restored to the image of Christ. In this regard, salvation’s role is redemptive and restorative. Lastly, much can be said regarding the timing of the discussion on righteousness by faith. I, did not realize that Ellen White was already establishing the foundation of the righteousness by faith theological footprints even before the Minneapolis conference in 1988. Whidden views it as strength to present her evolution in the understanding and maturity of Biblical doctrines.
Refection Paper #3 As we all know, God created man at His image and His likeness. When we said His image and likeness, sometimes we used collectively- human race; however, Adam and Eve were the only two people who were create at the image and the likeness of God. When Adam had his children, they were not creating at the image of God. Each generation there after were not create at the image of God, not only we are inheriting Adam sins, but we are producing or cultivating our own sins. A lot of sins, we are doing right now were not even come from Adam and Eve or Satan: we born sinners, we grew up with sins, we have propensity to do badly, and we keep add sins naturally; sometimes, we are not even thinking that we are swimming in every kind sins. As human being – created with dust of the earth, we all should lose and deserve to be lost! But God who surpasses all intelligence would not let that happen. When Adam and Eve were sins, they ran away that they did not want to see God, and also if a sinner saw God that sinner would die anyway. God in His love for His creature that He made them at His image could not let them run away easily that would be eternal separation. Like the professor said in the book, God was existed before us that mean He can live without us. God choose different path instead God was the one who took the initiative in looking for the fallen pair in the Garden of Eden and saying, “Adam where are you or look at what you were become!” What we can take from all of these, theologically - it might take Adam and Eve less than a year after the creation to sin. The professor said the good thing about it; even though we sinned, but God was the only one who had to come to save us from the curse of the Law that should be very important to take into account.
In the article, “Adam and the Human Race in the Writings of Ellen White,” Angel Manuel Rodriguez summarizes the fall of Adam and what it caused. There were immediate results from the fall, but some of the judgments were immediate delayed because Christ stepped in as our mediator. Our first parents did not immediately face judgment because of that mediation, and it is because of that mediation that we too have an opportunity of reconciliation. I really like how the judgment is explained by using the example of our first parents. The Bible tells us that we will all be judged according to our works, but that seems to contradict justification by faith. However, if we understand it in context of what happened to Adam and Eve then it makes perfect sense. After they sinned, Adam and Eve were shown the way back to God through Christ and it was their choice to accept or reject Him. In the end they will be judged according to their choice to accept Christ or reject Him and their works will reflect that choice. The same is true of us today, if we have accepted Christ our life will reflect that choice, it will be evident whether or not we have made Him our salvation and for all who choose Him the perfect record of the Son is placed over ours. Another point was made concerning how humanity fell in Adam. It’s not that we were mystically in Adam when he committed the sin, but that we inherited the propensity that he inherited when he fell. When he fell, we fell. Through the one transgression we all became transgressor because Adam was our representative. This fact is beautiful because of what follows. In Romans 5:19 Paul says that through Adam we all fell, but in Christ we were all made righteous. We all believe that we are sinners because of the singular act of Adam in the Garden of Eden. Why do we believe this? Because the Scripture is clear on this topic. It would seem a bit unfair that we inherited this fallen nature, guilt and destruction through one man, even though we were not there. However, salvation occurs the same way. Therefore, we need to begin to place our faith in Christ rather than Adam. As Adam was our representative, so now Christ has became our representative. This is a wonderful truth, because it teaches the simplicity of the Gospel. Choose Christ and everything and become and inherit what He has provided rather than Adam and what resulted from his fall, it’s a choice; a no-brainer.
Reflection Paper #4 Could Jesus be our example? The Jury is still out there; for me, I don’t think so – it is a mere of speculation! As we are talking in the class today, some of us were asking is the model of Jesus life and its example is for us to follow. When I’m examining, the birth of Christ, the early life, His Baptism, Jesus ministry, His death, His resurrection, and ascension I said to myself it is good that I have a Savior but not a role model. If He was a role model, I would not follow Him; basically, He would be a phantom, a legend or a fictional character, and His virgin birth would be a joke. As of now, we dying in a situation with a sinful nature where we can’t take ourselves out that means we need a Savior. When we died, we can ensure we will be resurrected, we know for sure He will change our corrupt body to incorruptibility and our mortal body to immortality. But if we are looking on Jesus to follow or our model to live, we will be disappointed. Even Jesus was a babe, but He was God – Immanuel. His father sent billions of angels to protect Him as baby, and people has seen His Star; some people came very far away to save Him – the wise men. When he grew up, the Evil one can’t even approach Him. He had no propensity that means he could not sin; he never gives up as God who had created the heaven and the earth. John the Baptist had seen the sign that He is God. In his ministry, He had made a lot of miracles: feed people, heal them and raised the dead. The only time Christ may have been without the guardian angels; except, in His 40 days and 40 nights fasting. The only reason, He was hungry because God tried to prepare Him before He undertaken the sins of the world and he did not want to use His power – that set. After the fasting was over, God sent angels to praise and worship Him. We should be happy that we have a savior who understands our need. He was not a good human being or an angel; He was the Son of the living God, and who seat right now at the right hand of God in heaven.
Post #2- Just thinking: theoretical thought and theological water
Water is a chemical substance comprised of hydrogen and Oxygen. Water cannot be water without either oxygen or hydrogen. Hydrogen by itself cannot make up water, and neither can oxygen. They are each necessary elements for water!
At the risk of redundancy, let me illustrate this principle further using a photon example. A photon can behave both as a particle or a wave. Without this property—wave and particle—a photon is not a photon. Both physical properties must co-exist and are not mutually exclusive!.
For centuries now, theologians, philosophers, scientists have debated from both sides of isles; one side seeking to emphasize one portion of truth at the expense of the other. Perhaps an example of these ongoing debates will help clarify the point: original sin vs. actual sins; penal substitution vs. moral influence; prelapsarian vs. postlapsarian; transcendence vs. immanence; Bultmannism vs. Barthianism; science vs. faith, appearance vs. reality; objectivism vs. subjectivism; and etc
For the purpose of this discussion, suppose water is truth, hydrogen and oxygen, the so-called two diametrical poles. We can only arrive at truth if and only if we consider both poles in the debate! Water can aid us understand these divisions within our theology, thoughts, and practice.
Tensions within these disciplines seem to stem from a presupposition that two ideas are always mutually exclusive. However, as illustrated by the above water and photon analogies, I’m saying for water to be water, it cannot say I don’t need hydrogen or I don’t need oxygen. Both elements are essential and necessary for water to exist. Therefore, both sides in most controversial dialogues are needed not only for a healthy debate, but also to arrive to some nearness of truth! Mutual exclusivity only widens the gaps and thus pushes us far from truth!
As I continued to reflect more on the nature of sin from our last class, the more I realized our tendency to emphasize one side while negating the other in our pursuit for truth. However, without any restrictions of “either/or approach” in our theological, scientific, and philosophical enterprises, I hope this transcending principle can help us reflect further and freely!
Reflection Paper #5 Christ is the end of the law for our Justification! The Law was there before the creation of the world, but God was giving it for a last time on Mount Sinai; by that, no one would have any excuse to say,” I did not know.” When people transgressed the Law in the Old Testament, they were stoning because they transgression of the Law is death. Everything in the Law: the sacrificial system- the sacrifice of animal, the priestly ministry- Pharaoh Priesthood, the Old Testament and the Ten Commandments, all of these directed to Christ as the culmination. The Law had never been there to save anyone even the scapegoat’s rituals, it was there to show them their incapability that they need a savior that was the reason they had to do it over and over –every year. In the New Testament, Christ said there will be no iota – a small letter would not take away from the Law until the earth and the heaven passed away. What Christ really meant God want perfect obedience to its Law, no human being can be perfect according to the law, and the sins must be paid off. The only solution God had for the human race to rescue in this planet that He had to come. God said to Himself – Father, Son and Holy Spirit, let me send my Son, if He observes the law without sin, His sacrifice will go for everyone, and the human race would get back to Him. That is the only reason right now when we sinned we do not get killed, He died for our sins. We do not follow the letter of the Law to be saved, but we saved by the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. If the Law could save us, there would be no reason for Christ to come. We are going to church, we do what is right an observe the Ten Commandments because we save 2000 years ago by what Christ had already done for us on the cross.
Reflection Paper #6 As we all know by now, once upon a time, science did not believe in religion and religion didn’t believe in science; as the debate continues since Darwinian evolution, it seems they become closer more than ever. Now, there is no one in their right mind thinks the earth, the heaven, the sun, the moon and the water were part of the six days creation. The Bible said, “God created everything!” I believe it, which is true. But when the earth was create is another history, because the science said the earth had been around for billions of years that’s could be true too. The creation account in Genesis did say the earth was there, it was formless and void, but darkness was upon the earth- that’s could be Evil or satanic power on earth. That is the reason too, the Bible gave us two different days the lights were create, may be the first mention of lights could be God intervention. For human being, it is clear that we are not come from apes; we were new into the creation most likely we were the last creation of God. Ellen White called that the crown or jewel of all creation. The point is, whatever the creation may be, it is not that important. With all due respect for the God of creation, I believe the God of redemption is where we need to focus. We cannot go higher or lower than the cross, but we have to go to the cross to save. Most of the times, we are talking about small things “how we were here, who is the father of God or how sin come to this world” then now we need to talk about the science of life, we are not here by accident, but we were create at the image of God that we should give Him glory and praise always.
Reaction to Chapters 3 and 4 – Woodrow W. Whidden’s EGW on Salvation:
The Third and Fourth Chapters in W.W.Whidden’s book throw light on Ellen White’s personal views of perfection both of her own Christian experience and that of a normal Christian.
Ellen White’s acknowledgment of her own imperfections communicate to us either that she was being modest or that she was being real. It is quite possible that she was being realistic about her imperfections. The author cites as an example of this, the disagreement between James and Ellen White on a certain issue. It is my opinion that a disagreement between Ellen and James White on certain issues does not necessarily imply that they were sinning by disagreeing. That does not seem to be a good example to show the failings/imperfections of Ellen White or James White.
She consistently laid emphasis on the fact that Christ’s grace was the only way salvation was made possible to us. She was equally consistent in teaching that a life of faith that is evidenced by one’s actions is a condition for salvation. However, as illustrated by the author in the case of Edith Andrews, Ellen White shows how the deficiencies that are a part of all human, “repenting, humble”, believers is mercifully covered by Christ.
Ellen White held this view even before the great denominational emphasis on justification by faith in 1888. It may be that she had not emphasized this view as much as she did after 1883. The author is of the opinion that, among other things, James White’s death influenced her to carry on his burden during his sunset years (this emphasis on Christ’s grace rather than the merits of Law-keeping) for God’s people after his passing. Since others (A.T. Jones and EJW) arrived at the same conclusions independently. This may also have been God’s plan and time for this aspect of the message.
The author writes that the growing emphasis on keeping of the Law and Obedience was withholding many from experiencing the assurance of salvation is particularly interesting because it has great significance for present day Adventist-Christians. This lack of assurance still haunts many believers (and ministers). I find this chapter useful in appreciating Ellen White’s confidence in the gift of Salvation and her determination to press on to perfection; not out of fear or dread of being lost. She seems to have done so, propelled by the love of/for Jesus that she experienced.
This harmonizes with discussions in class regarding the holistic view of Salvation and Perfection. Ellen White does not at anytime (before 1893 or after) express the view that the Christian life ‘plateau’s’ at any stage. There seems to be a steady theme of growth and upward movement into the likeness of Christ. This is further supplemented by her teaching that Christ’s grace deals with the imperfections of our lives when our course on earth is done. Which is good news to every tired, sin-battling Christian.
In reading Romans 4:7 which Go as follow: “Blessed are whose lawless deeds are forgiven and whose sins are covered, I remember we had a discussion in class about two world view: one sees God or have faith with no evidence while the other looks for evidence to have faith in God. This passage seems to imply that who have sinned without the law the Lord forgives their sins. I find that it is ridiculous for us to sin with the law in our hands. In that case, we are not going to be forgiven. There are those who sin with the law those who sin without the law. The latter ones do not know better. So, they speak, go around, and live according to the light they have. Apparently the person who is ignorant is the one who sin. No society can progress without law. There would be chaos and upheavals day after day; week after week and all the time. The whole universe, I believe, is lawful. In other words, there is a law for everything in the existing world. I cannot imagine a society without it. Everything may and will go away, but the law of God will remain forever. When sins and sinners are no longer existed there will still be law by which the then society will function. Ellen sees kinds of sins: one kind is in our sinful nature and other is our propensities to sin. For the lack of better words let me take it directly from ‘Ellen White on Salvation’ which defines as “acts of transgressing God’s will and a condition of depravity that involves inherited sinful inclinations within us.” Yes, we can respond to God’s redemptive initiative. We have the power of choice. We have the five senses to respond in one way or another. The Calvinistic view turns us into robots. We are not that bad. However, when the Holy Spirit is constantly calling us and we don’t yield to the voice of God Calvin may have a partial reason. The more we resist God’s calling the harder it is for us to actually say “yes” to Jesus. So, the individuals may do whatever they want while they are traveling where in signal zone for there will be a time when they will turn their telephone on and, to their surprise, there will be no signal. No more pleading! No more interceding! No means of responding! There is no signal in this area. It is a sin to not responding to God. It is a sin against the Holy Spirit. That is what many of our scientists do. Every time God knocks on the door of their hearts, hey, they block Him out to do their scientific experiments. Guess what? Their hearts become harder and harder to the point that they make room for God. So, they become gods. They choose to deny the existence of the God. They rather become deists or pantheists, or even pan-en-theists, or atheist instead of surrendering their lives to the Almighty, God the Creator. I am persuaded that we are all good worshippers whether we worship heavenly creator or earthly creatures. Worship is in our DNA! We cannot not worship. If a living being declares to not give adoration to God I know for fact that that person worships other things or him/herself. “Even the Spirit-inspired works of charity and obedience have no saving merit?” We deserve nothing base who we are or what we do. It is all about Christ’s righteousness.
In the first chapter of Romans Paul speaks of salvation as Gods free gift "...to every one that believeth (1:16). In class we discussed active faith in the classical sense that a person who ascepts Gods free gift of salvation will demonstrate that he/she have already exprienced it through a life of sanctification. To my mind it is that experience that leds the believer towards living a life of active faith. Again Paul says with "...mouth confession is made unto salvation..." (10:10). It is this active faith that declares that a person "is saved". Salvation must preceed faith sence it(salvation) is given to us. Faith is what we produce and that faith is seen through our good works meaning a life of "sanctification". In this reference to salvation Paul also points to the "gospel" as a saving instrument. If we are admonished to believe, it is therefore the gospel of Jesus that provides that assurance unto salvation. The gospel becomes an instrument which God uses to provide salvation to man. He says "it is the power of God unto salvation to every one who believes" (1:16).We generate faith in Gods provision of salvation by ascepting the gospel. "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing of the word of God" A life of obedience is a life of salvation as is seen through the lense of sanctification. Sanctification therefore becomes the life of the one who is saved and walks in that unique experience.
Justification in Romans 3:21-24 by Angel Manuel Rodriguez
My Reflection
21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
Rodriquez’s breakdown of Romans 3:21-24 is no doubt unambiguous and plain to those that still question the perception that Paul is talking about Adam sinned and therefore all human sinned and so justification is for all. Instead Paul is very clear as well as the author about “now,” God reveal a new way of salvation. What Rodriguez is emphasizing here is that “the righteous of God by faith in Jesus Christ.” What astonishing is that it does not end there as many believed. The statement continues as in verse 22 “This righteous from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ ‘to all who believe.” Basically what Paul is saying that the righteousness from God through faith only to those who believe. In other words, if you don’t believe you don’t get God righteousness.
This is even more startling to me only, how Rodriquez interpreted the “all sinned” phrase and its relation to the rest of the text. I agree with what he’s saying that “all sinned,” ‘should not be interpreted in terms of sinning in Adam but in terms of the context in which the phrase is used.’” I cannot put it better. He said, “There’s no reference in the context to Adam and there is no need to introduce him here.” He continued, “Secondly, nowhere in Romans does Paul use the phrase “in Adam,” and we have no basis to introduce it in the epistle. When Paul says “all sinned” he is simply summarizing what he has being arguing in the previous chapters.”
Howeve the SDABC vol. 6 says “all have sinned,” “Literally, “all sinned.” Adam’s sin marred the divine image in man and ever since man’s fall, all of Adam’s descendants have continued to fall short and be destitute of the image and glory of God. Paul is urging Jews and Gentiles alike to recognize the vital fact that all the evidence of experience and history clearly proves that fallen man, with his depraved nature, is wholly incapable of fulfilling the requirements of God’s law and of establishing his own righteousness.”
The author pointed out that Paul is referring to his “previous discussion of the actual condition of rebellion and sin of the human race and not on a primeval event that took place in Adam.” However the SDABC is kind of referring to Adam’s sin so which one I agree with? I agree with Rodriguez interpretation, why? Because the verse says, “But now, a righteousness from God,” this tells me that this is a new righteousness that only applies to those that have faith in Christ and believe in Him. So if that is so then why referring to Adam and says, “all have sinned,” this will means that God’s righteousness will apply to all or everyone whether you believe or not.
My reflection deals with chapter three in the book Ellen White on Salvation. It is really amazing how times have not really changed a whole lot. It seems as if Ellen White in her days was dealing with the same issues that we are still dealing with today. That issue is the issue of Holiness and legalism. The irony of this entire issue is that only God is holy and yet when we look at his patience throughout the eternity even in situations where he has had to act and there was a need for blood to be shed. We must admit that in his holiness he has still demonstrated that He is loving. People often are misguided into thinking that being a law keeper gives the right for judgment. Many think that by keeping the law that this is a demonstration that we are ready for translation. However, it has been my experience in ministry as a pastor that many of the individuals that claim to be avid law keepers. They often are not that loving at all. I guess the point that I am making is that being a law keeper and being holy should both have an outward expression of Love. Please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that the law should be dusted over because it does not save you. However, in a universe that is dependant and interdependent on relationships, there has to be a connection that the law brings to all who claim to be believers. Can you imagine there are some that believe that they have perfected keeping the law so much so that they no longer need even the persuasive power of the Holy Sprit? The last time I checked in the 1 epistle of John. The bible says that there is a need for all to admit that they sin. And if they claim that they do not sin they are liars and the truth is not in them. I did find it amusing that the Whites suggested that the man that was a little extreme should consider going to the hospital for some medical help. But the point must be taken seriously that those that are on the edge of fanaticism should be very careful as to how they present what may seem to be present truth. Those that they may be speaking to may not know about the truth that they present so legalistically and or they really are not in a space of their lives where they are ready to receive this information. Further to add to this we must remember that it is work of the Holy Spirit that convicts the individual and changes lives from the inside out. Now I know people may get the wrong idea that I am not advocating for the law and for the need to be morally accountable. However I have met enough people to know that until you are in relationship with them, many will not consider anything that you have to say. However, if they can look at your life and see the indwelling of the Spirit, led by the word of God. Long before you would have told them of the Sabbath, holiness and technical terms like sanctification. They would have felt the love and perhaps consider their need just as much as yours for the savior.
What better a way to influence lives than through your personal testimony. Imagine the Whites with such a powerful ministry lives being changed and transformed into the image of Christ for the sake of others. Yet, James White’s testimony in the weaning years of his life was that He had not spent enough time preaching about the exalted character of Christ, as well as His willingness and power to save. It was clear that James wanted this church to preach more Christ. It does sound easier said than done especially, in this post modern culture where personal needs have been exalted higher than the Messiah himself. James White, implored his wife that she should continue on in this order of truth. I like what she says to her son that they had made some mistakes in being so eager to speak that it might have been better that they spent more time putting to pen the issues that were more pressing to the church. James says that,” Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath: “James 1:19. How much more successful would we as ministers of the gospel be, if we would refuse more speaking engagements and ponder the true needs of the church under the direction of the Holy Spirit. I personally do not think that Jesus is being preached enough. Yes many of the contemporary messages do sound good and yes the Lord is blessing the efforts of his servants, but yet we could be much more Christocentric in our messages, especially as this earths history is coming to a soon close. After her husband had passed Mrs. White had to admit that while she may have preached many sermons and done much work for the Lord, she still desired to be more perfect and never claimed to be infallible. How humble is that? The prophet to this remnant church admitting that she was not yet perfect and how she hoped that she was never a stumbling block for anyone. What does this have to do with us here today? In a world that is becoming more and more haughty of heart with less fruit to demonstrate true connection to the good shepherd. We need to take this example as a learning experience that we too have yet to have arrived. And when we get to where we think we are going, it is still Gods grace that will have kept us. While Ellen White was not claiming to be a hypocrite by preaching and living a different life, no! All she was trying to say was that no matter how much we may be committed to Jesus. We need him more and we need to preach him more. Just as the prayer says gives us our daily bread, we need Jesus each and every day. We can never preach or teach too much Jesus. “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” It is only through this Jesus that john was writing about that we will be able to overcome. We might as well get used to giving him all the honor and praise because he alone is worthy to be praised. Whenever we feel as though we have arrived may we remember that it was Jesus’ body that hung on Calvary’s cross for our sins so that whosoever believes on him, should not perish, but have everlasting life.
I want to share my thought about the reading of the articles of the BRI. First of all, I have found the articles relevant for my learning. They cover the subject of salvation with depth and clarity. This tool can be very helpful for church members. Latter I will talk about the use of internet and their effect on the doctrine of salvation.
Even though there are a lot of materials in the BRI, the article that I want to share some thought now is the one about Original Sin by Gehard Pfandl. Not all the issue but the topic about infant babies. Sometimes members of the church come up with the inquire: When a baby dies, will he be in heaven when Jesus comes? What would you answer?
I have thought about it and still thinking, because my sister died 1 hour after my mother delivered her. I want to met her, but after I read this paper I am half convinced that maybe I will not have that opportunity. Because babies will not be taken to heaven.
But is it truth? Let us consider the datas from the article itself. On page 18 the column on the left informations are important consider. First, after sin, Adam and Eve started to be shaped after Satan’s image (Desire of Ages p.114). But they still have the image of God (Step to Christ chapter 1,2). Babies bare both images, evil and good. So Heppenstall then argue that “babies die, not because they have actually sinned or are punished by God, but because they are now part of this alienation from the source of life. All men are born self-centred, not God-centred.”
Now it is logical to think biblically that sinner have to die (Rom.6:23). And since every baby is sinner (sinful nature; Ps.51:5), they should die also. And this is actually what happen. But this raises a lot of questions. I will state just two of them that came up in my mind: Where does it comes the opportunity of receiving eternal life for babies? Second, is sin inherited, and inherited punished?
This I will read a little more and think a little more, because I still don’t have a definite answer. I have some thoughts that I will share with you tomorrow (29th). But what I would like to conclude is that this is not a easy issue for me and I need some help. Please comment on that to clarify my ideas.
Sin in Nature and Choice Sin isn’t pretty. It seems that we see its evidences everywhere in our world, and if we take a thoughtful moment of reflecting on ourselves, we can see that it has internal dimensions just as much as external. In the exploration of sin both in the classroom and in our studies, I have found that the nature of sin in an individual holds two elements: nature and choice. In the beginning chapters of Genesis we find there what is known theologically as ‘the fall’. In Angel Manuel Rodriguez’s “Adam and the Human Race”, he looks at the theology of Ellen White in reference to what the effects of the fall are upon humanity. What is concluded is that ‘Adam had united with the disloyal forces, and self-will took the field." Human nature became so corrupted that it was impossible for human beings by themselves to do good. It is the very "nature of sin to spread and increase. Since the first sin of Adam, from generation to generation it has spread like a contagious disease"’ Also as Whidden points out, she reveals the nature of this corruption by saying “selfishness is inwrought in our very being.” and “It has come to us as an inheritance”(42). This isn’t exactly good news. In Romans chapter 1 we see that there are people in this world and in the worlds history that are so fully surrendered to sin and darkness that “God gave them up to a debased mind...” But what Paul also points out is that these people know the truth about God. And in knowing the truth, we are given a choice as to whether we follow that corrupt nature, or as Peter says, we can become “partakers of the divine nature.” I think of what we went over regarding the incarnation. That Christ who was pre-existent with the Father, stepped down from glory while mysteriously taking on humanity. His life was fully dependent on the Father and He provided to us and example of righteousness. Unlike Adam who chose to do things according to his own feelings and desires. Adam’s fault was that his desires were not aligned with God’s will. Jesus surrendered himself to the will of the Father–just as we can. Jesus was dependent on the word of God and the Father as a source of truth–just as we can be. The beauty and hope is revealed in Jesus through this: that he chose to live a righteous life for the sake of God’s glory, and mankind’s redemption. Rather than dying because of a sinful life, Christ lived a righteous life and died for the sake of sinful humanity. This I believe is why the Bible reveals Christ as being the “firstfruits”. His life was the first life in all of history, which produced the fruit that was originally intended to come from Adam and Eve. Coming back to Romans chapter 1, Paul says this “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes...for in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written– the righteous shall live by faith”. We see Paul make the statement in Romans 14:23 “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” What a strong statement. Each and every moment in our lives we are given choices. A choice to choose life–in Christ the one and only Righteous one, or to choose death–by aligning our feelings and desires with Adam, taking on that sinful disposition. Each and every one of us are handed a choice. We can choose righteousness by faith in Jesus Christ, or we can choose to go about life without intention and without conviction, following our desires and feelings while succumbing to sin. Although we have a sinful disposition, we have power to overcome through Faith in Jesus Christ. - Nathan Hellman
Gospel is Bigger than the Cross Paul is eager to preach the Gospel of God because the Gospel is the “power of God for Salvation”. All remember with what hatred, destructive passion with which he fought against those who preach the same Gospel. He gave his approval for murders; one of the most glaring is that of Stephen, he imprisoned Christians, persecuting them with all the energy he could muster. He was obviously in ignorance, but the vehemence with which he insisted later with his followers to preach the same Good News that he had fought testifies in favour of his new conviction. Gospel is not a word by itself it is power. It is not just a theory, a passive theory, it is a power to save. Paul helps Bible's readers to understand the relationship between faith and salvation; moreover, he clearly explains in Romans 4: 24-25 that salvation comes from faith in the power of Gospel; and, for those who have faith, they receive salvation..
The Good News preached by Paul knows neither time nor limit, because the Good News affects everyone. Likewise, Jesus was adaptable to everyone and His Good News is available to anyone. He knows when to preach, or when to just have a conversation; besides, no matter how the conversation begins its conclusions lead to salvation.
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach Good News to the poor.” According to Luke 7:16, anointed by the Holy Spirit, Jesus speaks of a Gospel that is at the same time Good News spiritually, socially, emotionally and physically. Jesus was touched by the misery and suffering of those most poor, destitute, and deprived human beings. Paul shows that the same Spirit who anointed Jesus is the same who took hold of him to continue what Jesus has started few years before. His acts of compassion and mercy went hand-in-hand with the Good News of the kingdom that he has been chosen to preach. Paul, as Jesus, lived what he preached and preached what he lived. It is why he was able to call and invite everyone to follow his example as he did to Christ.
Gospel is truly a miracle of God. It is not necessary to fully understand, if you try to understand everything, you can lose yourself. So, as future or already ministers we should not make it difficult for others. Even Peter said what Paul has written about salvation is difficult to understand. The Gospel is a miracle. It is a powerful miracle for salvation. The “Doctrine of Salvation” implies Christ pre-incarnate, Christ who died, and Christ resurrected. This is what Paul was about to say in the first chapter of the book of Romans.
Finally, the purpose of the Gospel is “obedience by faith” because faith is the reception of God’s action. The Gospel preached by Paul is bigger than the cross. It is important to understand that Paul's preaching of the Gospel for the salvation of human kind should not be seen partially, but must be received in its entirety. The Gospel should be considered holistically not only at the cross.
I was especially impressed by Ellen White’s balanced view of justification by faith as discussed in chapters 9 and 10 of Ellen White on Salvation. Salvation is the result of God clothing us with the perfect robe of righteousness. We cannot earn this robe, nor do we ever become worthy of it based on our own performance. It is ours by faith, forever. Ellen White was clear on this five years before the 1888 experience, which says a lot about her accuracy. The scary thing is the conditions listed as to why the justification by faith movement was probably rejected; that of the brethren seeing the need of emphasizing the law in lue of the believed fulfillment of last-day prophecy. We need to be careful that the same thing does not happen to us today. We know the importance of the Sabbath, but we must not overemphasize the law over the Cross. Honestly, I believe that we have done that in practice, although we believe in justification by faith alone in theory. On Sabbath, we speak more about the fact that we keep the entire law than we do about the all-sufficient merits of Christ. I like the analogy given in chapter 9 about the gymnast who needs a perfect 10 but knows that he/she cannot get it because of an injury. We give our best effort, but understand that in the end we can never get that perfect 10; thanks be to God through Jesus Christ we have that 10.
This blog is about one of our class discussions on faith and how it works. I really can not see how one may think faith is passive, when clearly it is a word associated with activity. I have met people who think they can not go to the doctor when they are ill, and claim that they are relying solely upon their faith.
I am in no way claiming that God can not heal people like He did when he walked this earth. I am however saying that God has blessed people with the knowledge of medicine and so we should be able to go to the knowing that God can and will work through them. So what does this have to do with salvation?
People often think that their salvation is something that requires nothing but belief. But that is not accurate. Our salvation has to be more than just raw belief. God has done so much even before Adam first sinned, but we also have a part to play, even if it is a small one.
The first dimension of faith has to come from God Himself. (Faith Salvation Faith) Faith comes from God and is an attribute of His character. He gives us faith, we accept salvation, and thus we live by faith. So salvation is from faith to faith. The intriguing dimension is the second element of faith. It is one that requires an active component to it. We must live out our faith not just sit on it.
Active faith is an obedient faith. 2 Corinthians 5:7 says we “we walk by faith and not by sight”. The walk here implies that we are in a constant state of movement, not stationary. Therefore we must grow daily, in our faith walk with God.
I grew up in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. As a child and in my early teen years, I had the concept that I needed to be perfect and sinless in order to get to Heaven. Many times I try to pray and read the Bible, however I failed time after time. Therefore, I stopped praying and reading the Bible. How can in anyway be perfect and not sin, I used to question myself. I continued in this dilemma until my mid-teen years where I read a book titled “To Know Jesus is Everything” which was published in Spanish. I realized trying does not work at all. A relationship with Jesus is what I need to be perfect. Out there, there many, like me when I was kid, who have a confusion about perfection and salvation. There is a division between those who think they have to keep the law to be saved and perfect, and there are those who are against keeping the law. Those who talk about perfection and keeping the law use the writings of Ellen White to based their beliefs.
The author of the book “Ellen White on Salvation” on chapter three brings relevant insights on this situation. Mrs. White had “essential balance between justification and perfection.” On her time, she had to deal with fanaticism. Mrs. White states that the law does not have power in itself to save. This was a comment to the group of we are saved by the law, and we need to be sinless. She also said to the other group who were against the law, that once we are saved we cannot continue in transgressions. In summary, Mrs. White said that salvation could not be possible with the law and neither without it. Many confused obedience to the law as signal of perfection. Nevertheless, this is a misunderstanding of perfection.
In class was said that “we are perfect in justification and in every stage of sanctification.” Jesus said in John 15:4 “Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.” The key for perfection is in abiding constantly in communion with Christ. Without a relationship with the Lord Jesus I cannot be perfect neither be obedient to the law. He is the vine, the source of perfection because He is perfect. A little branch might not look the same as full grown branch. However, this does not mean that little branch and the big one are the different. The two of them are branches. I am perfect when I am connected to Christ, in every step of the way. As a result of the communion with Him I will bear fruits that will come naturally because of the I love the Lord with all my heart, strength, and might.
As a kid, I just understood that I needed to obey to be saved. Many in the church struggle with this concept that they have please God with works. The opportunity I have to study about the Doctrine of Salvation is not only to keep the good news to myself but to share it with others.
Salvation is much bigger of what we think., is the main theme in class of Doctrine of Salvation. It’s not just about the cross, justification, sanctification, but about many aspects. I could star asking why do we need to talk so much about the Doctrine of Salvation? The reality is that we immerse in a big problem called sin, which has brought misery to humanity. I would like to comment about the article in the Biblical Research Institute which deals with “Adam and the Human Race in the Writings of Ellen White.” Salvation came as solution to the problem of sin that Adam introduced. Angel Manuel Rodriguez says in this article the fall of Adam is the biggest catastrophe. The results of sin can be seen all around the world. Sin caused separation between God and human beings. It also caused terrible things to nature. Humanity became slaves to sin with no hope of good future, just death. When we talk about thinking big salvation, we are talking about analyzing how God has been working from the beginning to restore us. It was there in Eden, where the Lord promised to Adam and Eve a solution for the problem of sin and death. He was the one who started to seek for His children. God as our creator loves us so much that looks for us even though we hide behind trees. Salvation and love are very well connected. They are huge. God shows His love in demonstrating that He will fight for Adam, Eve, and their descendants until the end. He is saying that He will not easily let us go to be destroyed by the enemy. However, to accept His salvation requires that we accept it with all the heart. Here comes another wonderful virtue of our God. His love is so big that He does not want to forces to be saved. For Adam sin entered into the world, now by Christ we can be saved. A question comes to my mind: Should we blame Adam and Eve for the sufferings we through? They introduced sin into the world, however I am alone responsible for my decisions and actions. This makes me remember what I have heard sometimes. I have this bad character because my dad, granddad had it. You could have inherited sinful tendencies, but it is not an excuse to continue behaving that way. The same thing is about focusing about how depressing life is. There are some Christians thst everything looks negative. Jesus came to bring hope. There is s much better tomorrow. We have a reason to have joy. A reason to get deep in the study of the gift of salvation which will continue for all eternity. We have a huge hope of Salvation in Jesus.
After losing the happiness of heaven, the human race found itself on the planet earth surrounded by temptations, sin, disease, despair and finally death. This table shows the sad reality of man since Adam and Eve. But, as the Creator's had planned, one day, He appointed His Son Jesus, the Christ, to be the bearer of good news. He came to tell the human race that the gates of paradise can be once more re-opened. This looks like more of a fairy tale for children in the evening, than good news to change the vision of humanity in relation to life. God the Father lives in glory and no one can see his face and live. To see Him would be to enter in His glory. Christ came to prepare the way for the whole human race and especially to those who agree to follow Him. His contemporaries, the people of his nation, did not believe in him and have not received him. Not only did he not been received, those who agreed to follow have experienced persecution, torture, stoning, and death. Interestingly, one of the greatest persecutors, of those who had accepted the Son of God as the one who would reopen the door of the lost paradise, lived the experience of the Glory of the Creator. This brave man, having fallen from his horse, while he pursued the followers of Christ, under the effect of a light, as a lightning strike, exclaimed: "Lord, what wilt thou have me do?"
He has been chosen and set aside to carry, wherever he went, the good news of salvation which he fought. He will accomplish this task faithfully until his death. He will be himself beaten, persecuted, imprisoned and finally executed. But the big question that more than one arises is: if Christ has decided on its own to justify the human race in order to give him back the lost paradise, why the human race should make the effort to live a sanctified life to access it?
Christianity is divided on this point with relation to salvation. Some denominations preach justification by faith as Paul presents it in his letter to the Romans; “Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Rm 5:1. Others believe that justification is necessary but not sufficient; it is necessary not only to accept the justification, but also persevere in holiness to the ultimate point which is the glorification. This is what believe and preach the Seventh-Day Adventists; this is part of the doctrine of salvation.
Indeed, one might say, logically, if it is the will of Christ to offer him as a ransom in place of humanity, no one therefore needs to do anything to find the lost paradise. The apostle Paul believed it was possible because he has experienced it. He has experienced it so brutally but he did not resist the vision. What is interesting about the experience of Paul was that he was surrounded by soldiers, but he was the only one to hear the voices and see the light. He immediately realized that the power of this light put his life in danger and the first question he asked was: Lord, what wilt thou have me do? The preaching of Paul, formerly Saul, took shape from his personal experience with Christ. Whatever the force with which the Gospel is announced to an individual, without a personal experience, a personal knowledge, an intimate relationship with Christ, a real commitment to serving the Lord, the glorification remains and will remain a distant illusion.
Perfectionism is a problem that is plaguing most churches today. And the text I hear quoted most times is Matt 5:48, “But be perfect even as your Heavenly father is perfect”. This notion of perfectionism is something that is not new to the church today. But rather it has been around even from E.G. Whites day and even before that. But where did we go wrong in our understanding? Does being perfect mean we are to be sinless? And if we are to be sinless does it make the blood and sacrifice of Christ a worthless cause? My thoughts on these questions are no.
Firstly I found it intriguing the notion in class that we should take back the word perfect. Because we are to be perfect but not the way some of us have distorted the word. Our perfection should be a growing one. So at every stage in our faith walk with God we are perfect.
Secondly as you read the text in its context you find that Christ is not talking about a perfection that is strictly meeting the churches standards and condemning those who may not reach there yet. But rather He is talking about having “Perfect Love”. The perfection is wrapped in the context of love. How we treat one another, how we love and pray for our enemies, how we deal with those whom are indebted to us is the litmus test of our perfection. Our perfection is to be comparable to that of our Heavenly Father. Our God manifests great love towards us even though we sin and fall daily. His perfect love is unconditional.
Lastly people who claim to have reached a state of perfection forget that they too are in need of salvation. This may sound cynical but, if some of us are so perfect then why are we not yet in heaven? Could it be that we are all perfect sinners in need of a perfect savior, who will make us perfect as we grow in Him? I believe that we all need to be perfect as we progress in our daily walk with God.
I am responding to chapters 5 and 6 in Whidden’s book, specifically, regarding the balance/tension of God’s characteristics of Justice/Mercy given our sinful condition.
Before the fall, God’s nature was Just, and his character was Love. And there was no tension between the two. God was entirely just and entirely loving, and that was all that was needed. His government was founded on justice and love for one another. And so it continued for millennia.
When Lucifer began to question God’s character and government, God was for the first time put in an apparently paradoxical position. Lucifer, having acted unjustly and unlovingly, did not deserve continued existence, and God could have justly annihilated him. But God knew that such a cold demonstration of Justice would forever mar the twin principle of Love, which was the foundation of his government. Justice with intolerance would be a way to run a government, but God saw it as not the greatest good. Similarly, a government based on love without justice (if it is possible to conceive of such a thing) may have been possible, but by no means would satisfy for a “perfect” system.
Thus, a new characteristic of God, previously unseen, came to the forefront: that of his Merciful character. Up until this point, mercy had not been necessary, (indeed, would not have even made sense under a perfect existence). God decided not to destroy Lucifer, but rather let him continue his existence outside of heaven, with the purpose of demonstrating the truth of the twin principles of Justice and Love which his government was based on. This was done with the effort of letting the self-destructive principles of sin play themselves out for the universe to observe, and understand that any government apart from God’s was doomed to self-destruction. In His wisdom, God knew that this would be the only way to balance the principles of love and justice (now in a tension against each other for the first time in the universe).
God had a similar decision to make when our earthly parents failed the test of obedience and fell into sin. God could have (justifiably) erased the slate and started over, but that would have ended the principle of willed, self-volunteered love in the universe (and would have set up an alternative ‘love me or die’ system).
But, in order to remain just, God needed to provide a means for redemption if he was going to let the earth continue. Because neither is it just for a being to be born into a situation of suffering and pain , when no remedy or resolution is possible.
Thus, we see that God’s mercy is an extension of his Justice, under a very specific circumstance. In our situation, God must provide mercy in order to be just in letting this world continue. Many people see mercy and justice as opposite ends of the spectrum, but in this case, the former flows out of the latter, in that we are victims of the sinful condition we are born into. I agree with Ellen White, we are rightly called guilty for the sinful acts we commit, and we need to be responsible in how we act. But we are not at fault for having been born into a condition of which we have no power to resist.
Had God not provided the plan of salvation, but had let this earth continue, he would have soundly been declared unjust by the heavenly jury, in permitting sin and suffering to continue unabated for no reason. I have probably not explained myself as fully as I would have liked. But I will say this: in light of seeing the situation in this way, I actually feel really bad for God, being put in such a pickle, when he only had good intentions. This truly seemed like a paradoxical predicament. But I am thankful, and awed that the solution of salvation through Jesus Christ’s atoning sacrifice was come to by the Godhead. Not only does it resolve the paradox, it gives all of us a chance to achieve our originally intended purpose in the end. The fate of the universe depends on it, the name of God’s character depends on it, and our very lives depend on it.
I am responding to Wallin's comment posted today on perfectionism. I agree with him that perfection should be a process. A life time process. Can you imagine being sinful one day and then being perfect another day? What about the process of depending on Jesus the author and finisher of faith. What about the other issues of being so called perfect while the rest of us struggle to be over-comers of sin. How fair would God be? I like being imperfect and growing because it helps me to realize daily how much I need the savior as well as how much further I need to be while trusting and growing in grace in Jesus Christ. People that claim perfection now, normally are extremely judgmental and often have not the compassion of the savior that has drawn us with Chords of love. Thank God he is still working on all of us. It gives us a testimony that always points us back the incarnate God who lived, died and rose and is coming back again.
I am responding to the blog posted earlier this month by Valmey. This was also a topic that we spoke to in class. I think that there are always going to be different dimensions to the issue of faith. We need a past tense faith to help us believe that there is a God that exists in what we know as the past. We also need a present tense faith that will help us to live lives as Christians who are able to always speak in the present tense of what it is that God is doing for us. We also need to have a future tense faith that helps us to remember that where we are planning on going by faith only God can get us there. By incorporating each component of faith, it will help us to be stable balanced Christians that can look back yesterday, today and tomorrow and admit that God has been there every step of the way. However, I do believe that when we look at our faith in the past it should take us more often to recent past and not past past (in the Greek it might be the imperfect tense) because if we cannot see how God is working in our lives often, we may have trouble getting out of the bed and dealing with the dynamics of a sinful world that throws more negative moments at times than positives. This is why it is good to have a faith that is in God and not just what he has done for us. When we learn how to praise God as much as thank God and yes there is a difference our faith will not just grow based on what He does, but it will grow based on who He is.
You have selected a very challenging subject that never crossed my mind. This theme requires a lot of thoughts and will evolve into a very interesting debate. Many questions come to mind; for example, can babies who pass away be really considered as sinners when they never had the opportunity to express themselves or act wrongfully towards another human being? Do we know, after death, where the baby’s body goes to, in other words, where it is sent to? Does his short passage on earth symbolize something? I will meditate on the two key questions that you wish to answer. Should an idea comes up I will share it with you. Let me conclude with this last question which had crossed my mind; how significant would have eternity for a baby who lived only one hour?
This is a very interesting analogy where scientific facts are presented to understand the importance of dialogue. You mentioned that in order to have water a few elements are required: hydrogen and oxygen. Should one be missing it would not give us the blue gold. As water is a vital element to life, the expression of thought is also a vital element for theologians and other thinkers. This reflection clearly states the necessity of a debate. I agree with the fact that in order to discover the truth, different views must be gathered; however, Jesus claimed, “I am the way and the truth and the life.” (14:6). Before Pilate He defined His mission as “the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.” (18:37). In His dialog with the Jews, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (8:31,32). Later, he charges, “Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! … If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.” (8:45-47). Finally, Jesus prayed, “Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth.” (17:17)
But the claims of Jesus cannot be categorized as simple verifiable facts. The claim engages realities beyond the observable. Truth is an ontological reality that not only encompasses all of reality, both the seen and the unseen, but which also gives meaning to that reality. Thus Jesus is presented as the a priori truth, the meaning maker. Therefore, the spiritual truths “about” salvation or truths “about” judgment, etc., can be understood only in relation to the revelation of Jesus, and only have meaning in His incarnation. And metaphysical truth can be understood only in relation to Jesus as Creator and Redeemer. Even the everyday mundane facts are given a meaningful context in relation to the person of Jesus. The connection between experience and truth is the act of knowing. Truth sanctifies and transforms reality.
Today in class we grappled with the many dimensions of atonement and the theories of atonement. In seeking after a greater model, I was impacted by the idea of a model of both substitutionary and moral influence theory of atonement. I believe our professor made the point that Christ’s substitution influences me to live a different life. Looking to Romans, we see that Christ was both ‘just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus (Romans 3:26). Yet what is this faith? Is is active, or is it passive? Does it mean mere belief, or living in a manner which reflects that God truly has done something in the life of the sinner? Every time I think of Justification in relation to Sanctification, I think of 1 John chapter 1 verse 7. It reads “...if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.” I don’t know about you, but this looks like active faith to me! John is pointing out that mere belief alone cannot do a cleansing work in our lives. Jesus’ sacrifice justifies us, yet it is in walking in the light that His blood cleanses us from all sin. Back to Paul’s statement in Romans, we see that Christ is just. He is considered just because of His faith and fulfillment of the law in His life. His life was one of perfect obedience and fellowship with God the Father, for He walked in the light. He came not to abolish but to fulfill. When I look at my life, I notice that I fall helplessly short of obedience and righteousness. And rightly so for “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” But if I use my imperfection and sinful disposition as an excuse to not pursue obedience through faith in Christ, then I fall into the danger-zone, because then I would not be ‘walking in the light’. John points out that in walking in the light, Jesus’ blood cleanses me from all sin. By actively applying my faith in Christ as being the one who justifies me, and faithfully abiding in Him, God performs a miracle. He actively cleanses me as I actively obey. This I believe is sanctification. To believe in the merits of Jesus Christ as having atoning power, and to cooperate with God by obeying Him and letting Him cleanse me. I know that there are many Christians that fall to either side of the road. One group says ‘Jesus loves me, so I can do whatever I want just as long as I love people.’ The other says(in action) ‘if I do everything the law requires I am perfect before God, it doesn’t matter if I am loving or not.’ One group reflects lawlessness, and the other group reflects legalism. Yet the true path is not one or the other, it’s BOTH AND. We love God and others by faith and obedience. ‘if we walk in the light...the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin.’ Sanctification is walking in the light of the cross, trusting in the merits of the just one who is also our justifier. AMEN.
Reflection on Whidden, Woodrow W. Ellen White on Salvation
It was encouraging to read that Ellen White went through a time of deep searching in regard to Salvation, Sanctification, Justification and Perfection. I really identified with what Ellen White faced in her earlier years. What a struggle to have a balance in understanding perfection. It brought me comfort knowing that she also dealt with both sides of the gamut in relation to grace and the law. In the short duration of our class I have been impacted by the fact that there really are no easy one-line answers when it comes to understand these deep things of God.
I really enjoyed a quote that Woodrow brought out from Ellen White’s writings: “Unity is the sure result of Christian perfection” (SL 85). When I contemplate the meaning of this sentence I am reminded of the experiences that I have had in ministry. Probably, at one time or another, all of us have had well-meaning folks in our congregations that believe it is their responsibility to “fix” the church. They then proceed to pick out other members which they believe need to grow and start to “fix” them. Of course this brings about the exact opposite of unity. I believe that most of this “fix it” mentality comes from the idea that they have reached a higher plan than the others. With this mind-set they take on the burden of “their blood will be on my hands” idea. This means that they are responsible to God for the erring ones salvation. Most of the time this correction manifests itself in outward conformity to what the one who is doing the correcting deems as appropriate behavior. The problem with this is there is no change of heart in the one that is receiving the correction. This mentality totally bypasses what the Lord truly desires – the whole heart. God is not interested in outward conformity. He said to the Scribes and Pharisees “you are like whitewashed tombs.”
There comes to mind a deeper meaning of perfection. A perfection that is internal. Perfection that focuses inward rather than outward. An experience that is between you and God alone but also one that spills over into your everyday life. Not something that you have to advertise but something that is recognized because of what God is doing in your life. A perfection that is not complete but is in the process of being completed.
That is the life that I desire. A life that will bring honor and glory to God.
Why We Wrestle with Universal Reconciliation; a theology by Karl Barth
My readings and understanding of the class discussions these past weeks continue to point me to a more inclusive understanding of the atonement. However, I am increasingly aware of why some who oppose change in this regard do. Although we strive for inclusiveness and the development of broader paradigm of salvation and the atonement, there is an ever present concern that we remain faithful and true to the scriptures. We don't want to include something that may be incompatible with the actual message of the scriptures. One theme in my reading and our class discussions that seemed to draw my attention was the Universal reconciliation model of the atonement presented by theologian Karl Barth. I have heard the model used before entering this class, with special emphasis placed on I Corinthians 15:22 “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.” The position I've heard is that it is a Biblically sound to say that the reason we suffer the effects of the sin of Adam, is that we were “IN” Adam when he sinned. Support was drawn for this by referencing Genesis 25:23, when the Lord said to Rebbecca “two nations are in your womb”. Support was also drawn using Hebrews 7:9 in reference to the tithe Abraham paid to Melchizedek: “One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham,”. I had reserved feelings when I first heard this, not because of it's novelty, but because I'm always careful of how I apply literally Biblical imagery. I recently read a paper on the S.D.A. Biblical Research Institute page entitled “Adam and the Human Race in the Writings of E. G. White” by: Ángel Manuel Rodríguez. The paper had some things to say regarding how the writings of Ellen White intersect the theology of Karl Barth. Rodriguez writes: “There are no traces in the writings of E. G. White of the idea that the human race was present "in Adam" and that when he sinned every one of us sinned because we were in some realistic way present in him. Neither do we find in her writings the idea that the sin of Adam was imputed to the human race.”He draws the conclusion that Adam's sin was his own and although we cannot escape the effects of the magnitude of that sin, the merits were not imputed to us. My personal quandary regarding Karl Bath's model is the role our God given freedom of choice played in taking part in Adam's sin. Freedom of choice is definitely held intact, at great pains in the solution to the sin problem. It would only make sense to me that the integrity of that freedom be observed in coming up with an accurate representation of the fall as well. Notwithstanding I do understand that the model is not an end all explanation, but a model. I don't believe it was designed to answer the question I raised but rather to communicate the idea of the magnitude of Adam's sin and it's universal effect on the entire human race. I do however, appreciate very much Dr. Hanna's emphasis in class that in addition to moving to a more encompassing model of salvation and the atonement, we should also strive to increase the precision of our language. -Pohlmarc Lawrence
Today we discussed the atonement in class. Here in Romans Paul describes the atonement like this: “if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him….” Paul calls us to die to sin but be alive to Christ. He makes the point that if we are baptized into Christ we become partakers of His death and resurrection. And if we were “in” Christ when He died on the cross then we were also raised with Him to a new life. Dead to sin means that, figuratively speaking, we allow our sinful nature to be put to death in Christ on the cross. If our sinful nature is dead then we no longer have to be slaves to it. This grants us freedom to be alive in Christ – meaning that we can now become slaves of righteousness.
Paul shares that we are no longer tied down by our sinful nature if we accept that we have been crucified with Christ (put our sinful nature to death). We can, in fact, present ourselves as “slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification.”
If we take upon ourselves the wages of sin without accepting the free gift of God (His death on the cross as a payment for our sins) we will die. Christ freely extends to us His saving grace that will change us into His likeness. This grace does not give us freedom to live a life of sin but enables us to live according to His will and purpose.
I want to be a slave of Righteousness. I am tired of this hopeless sin cycle.
Romans 5:14 For sin shall not be master over you…”
I really enjoyed the comment posted by Pohlmark and especially the paragraph concerning the dangers behind the perfection debate. Like with many debates in the church, whenever two extreme views are debated in such an unforgiving manner as this topic, more harm than good is done. It is true that each person views salvation “through the lens of their own experience”. I also don’t think that there will be any consensus concerning this issue. I would however disagree that it is a “mere theological quivel”. As Pohlmark rightly observes some young, both of age and “young in faith”, can be affected and follow any of the radical explanations given to them. The example of the formation of Ellen White’s understanding can be applied to many young “growing up in the church.” And regretfully, many find themselves under the influence of one of the two groups instead of being presented with a larger view of salvation. David Polok
In my response to Andrew I want to just say how grateful I am that Jesus stepped in as our mediator right when humanity fell into sin. He was the Mediator for humanity even before the Cross. And it’s very rightly said that the choice is ours and our choice reflects in our works. The issue of propensity to sin that we inherited is often confused with so-called original sin. Rather, instead of choosing to believe in original sin we can accept that through Adam all of humanity fell, but we have a new inheritance and a new past in Christ’s perfect life.
From Ellen White on Salvation, Ch. 8: The Nature of Christ and Salvation
Since I have heard much debate in Adventism on the nature of Christ, I was glad to read this chapter, and appreciated the way in which the author integrated Ellen White’s comments in addressing the issue.
Aiming to emphasize Christ’s divinity, Ellen White says: “Christ could have done nothing during His earthly ministry in saving fallen man if the divine had not been blended with the human.” (idem). He had to be divine and possess a sinless humanity in order to accomplish His role of justifying Savior. Exposing thoughts on His humanity, she wrote: “He was affected by sin but not infected with it.” (QOD 653). “He took a sinful nature, but only in the sense of a lessened capacity because of the principle of physical inheritance.” (5BC 1129). Whidden argues that this lessened capacity did not involve inclination to corruption, or an evil propensity. Although Christ was not entirely like us, humans beings, He was enough like us to identify Himself with our infirmities.
Attempting to explain how Christ can still identify with us, despite of the fact that He was not entirely like us, he further remarks: “He did not need to be born with either a bent to sin or have a history of sinning to feel the power of temptation. The basis of His temptations was not a corrupt nature, but the possibility of using His own inherent full deity to resist the wiles of the devil. The key temptation for Christ was the same as it is for all humans – the desire to depend upon self rather than divinely imparted power from above.” (p. 63)
This makes sense to me, because Lucifer’s case proves that the basis for temptation are not always a corrupt nature. Being tempted by himself, He sinned without having a sinful nature, without having a propensity for evil. Neither did Adam and Eve have a sinful nature when they broke the law. Therefore, Christ’s sinlessness needs not be proven only in the context of a corrupt nature.
Whidden concludes by exposing Ellen White’s balanced understanding of Christ’s nature: “When it came to Christ as a fully sinless, sacrificial substituted, she was “pre-Fall,” but when she spoke of His ability to sustain in times of temptation, she stressed His identity and spoke largely in “post-Fall” terms.
From Ellen White on Salvation, Ch. 9: Justification by Faith – Before 1888
In reference to the concept of “salvation by faith alone”, Whidden mentions the main temptation humans can fall into – that of taking sin lightly, and diminishing the importance of obedience to the law.
On the same note, it was interesting for me to understand in what way Ellen White perceived the Calvinistic assurance of salvation (“once saved, always saved”) as dangerous, and how she addressed it. “She felt, along with Wesley, that the doctrine was an invitation to presumptuous sinning, causing sinners to think that they were beyond reach of temptation.”(p. 71). She stated: “Those who accept Christ, and in their first confidence say, I am saved, are in danger of trusting to themselves.” (COL 155). This reminded me of the concept of plateau perfection, which should never characterize a Christian’s understanding of salvation.
I admire Ellen White’s sense of balance in dealing with complex and often controversial theological concepts. In trying to balance the role of faith and works in salvation, she often used the expression “salvation from sin, not in it”, which I find very adequate in explaining how both grace and works fit into the intricate and biblical model of salvation.
She also proves to be balanced when talking about justification based not only on Christ’s death, but also on His obedient life. “Ellen White taught that our acceptance with Christ is based totally on the merits of His life and death, which are legally, judicially accounted to us. It is not based on His death only accounted to us for forgiveness and His life imparted to us that we can make our own contribution to justification. It is both His life and death that justify the penitent believer.” (p. 77)
In this she differs from John Wesley, who “was always reluctant to declare Christ’s life as accounted to believers, fearful that such a legal accounting might endanger the doctrine of sanctification. He feared that this would open the gates to presumptuous sinning.” (p. 77)
Chapter 2 Conversion,"Sanctification", and Early Ministry : In the first chapter Woodrow W. Whidden describes Ellen White’s struggle to experience Salvation. Although sincerely looking for it she couldn’t feel accepted and saved. What’s worth mentioning is that her struggle involved erroneous understanding of so called “second blessing” which was present among Methodist at that time. What she needed at this point of her life was to hear some words of encouragement and acceptance. God provided encouragement for her in the words of elder Levi Stockman. From that time on She was holding fast in her belief concerning her own salvation. As Whidden describes it: there were no more serious ups and downs in her experience of salvation.” Interestingly Whidden comes to the conclusion that Ellen White was longing more for feeling that she is accepted then real conversion experience which already took place in her life. Her longings came because of serious misunderstanding and fear that soon she will find herself in judgment before the throne of God. In other words Ellen White was looking for instant perfection. It’s interesting that even though such proclamers of “second blessing” (like Phoebe Palmer) are mostly gone, influence of such understanding is still evident in Seventh-Day Adventist Church. Ellen White understanding as Whidden notes, grew and she moved toward an understanding that sanctification is the work of the lifetime instead of a moment, but still today many point their finger at Her, trying to prove from her writings perfectionist views. This kind of mistake produces often discouragement among members who are trying to find in themselves feelings which will prove that they are accepted and their sins are forgiven. Every mistake on the way throws them into despair and many often give up on the on Christian way of life altogether. On the other hand as we discussed in the class so called “perfectionist views” will narrow our view of salvation and will cause some to try to impose their own views on others. I think that we can be most helpful to such souls by showing them how wide and high is salvation found in Jesus Christ!
I found it very challenging to read and comprehend Romans 3:21-31 in which Paul focuses his attention on “Justification by faith,” and chapter 4:1-25 he discusses the evidence of justification by faith in the Old Testament and lastly chapter 5:1-21, he talks about the result of justification.. Here Paul emphasizes justification and according to the SDABC, vol. 6, justification is God’s act of acquitting “a man who has been guilty of wrongdoing . . . meaning the cancellation of charges standing against the believer in the heavenly court.” Ellen White supports this in Steps to Christ p. 62, “If you give yourself to Him, and accept Him as your Savior, then, sinful as your life may have been, for His sake you are accounted righteous.”
What is problematic in these texts is that some people interpret that through the redemption that came with Christ Jesus we are all justified by His free grace. So all you have to do is believe it and you don’t do anything else. My question is this: Do I have a part to play or not? And if I do, will that be work? Is faith itself can be regarded as work? Now, if we really focus heavily on Paul’s emphasis on justification by faith ending in itself then why do we have to keep the commandments of God? If we are justified, then the human race must be already saved and always saved. Again, if we are justified already as some people believe then it must be acceptable to sin willingly for we have been justified and we should not play any role at all or we end up being accused of trying to be justified through our work.
I am wondering if Paul’s theology should have been laid out in a much more simpler and uncomplicated approach so that people would clearly distinguish his central theme, because sinners can exercise this as an excuse to continue to sin, believing that Jesus have died for their sins and no matter how much sins they committed without confession and forgiveness, their sins have always been forgiven and they are justified in the presence of God. Nonetheless, according to Dr Hanna’s lecture on Wednesday 9/30, shed so much light on the righteousness of God that justified the sinner. And believing Jesus Christ as a result the Holy Spirit is poured down and influence the sinner to respond according to the will of God. As Dr Hanna mentioned, that we should look at the models of Atonement in a holistic approach and that applies to justification also so that we don’t interpret only what we embrace but look at the whole concept.
It is truth that there are people who always focus on the bad side of life. And always have someone to blame, even we the fault is theirs. Adam and Eve did that on paradise, Satan do this all the time, accusing us (Rv.12:9). But Jesus has a different attitude. Instead of criticizing He defend us (IJo.1:9,2:1). And what contrast in this attitude is that Satan, and sometimes we have motives to complain. But Jesus does not have any “reason” to defend us. And despite of our sinful character He loves us. This shows that even tough we are on sin because of Adam and Eve and ultimately Satan, we need to focus on our responsibility to accept Jesus and present salvation to others. The other side is this, Adam and Eve is not responsible for my decision but their have responsibility, including Satan, of our bad situation. Like professor Hanna always says, it is not one or another, is both.
I was attracted by your thought about “holy zeal”. The tentative of leaders to “fix” the people. It is truth the sometimes leaders try to force changes in people, shaping the members of the church into their image. EGW in MS 29, 1911 says “Any man, be he minister or layman, who seeks to compel or control the reason of any other man, becomes an agent of Satan, to do this work, and in the sight of the heavenly universe he bears the mark of Caim”. We should be careful about this. But on the other hand, we should not allow members of the body of Christ to enter into the Church of God with strange fire. False doctrine and habits never brings unity. So misconception of unity is ecumenism, accepting all even when disagreeing with the word of God. Unity is always brought by conformity to the Scripture (Jo.17). And like Paul if necessary we should deliver the sinner to Satan so he may repent.
Second assignemtn for september (sorry professor, I am late...heheh)
INHERITED SIN AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
I have try to meditate upon the questions that I have raised about the death of babies, but have not arrived to any solid conclusions. Just some ideas of how to solve some problems related to this topic. About the question that I raised in my last posting about the inheritance of sin I have some thoughts to share. In Romans 5 Paul state that Adam brought sin and death to all man. Reading the book The edge of evolution of Michael Behe, I have learned something about genetics and sharing of genes. That sons share characteristics of father it is proved by science and appointed by the Bible. Just a example is found in Genesis. Adam inherited God’s image, and Seth inherited Adam and God’s image (Gn.5:1-3). But after sin, the sin of Adam went to every descendant. But what was new for me is Behe argument that mutation and sharing of genes have limits. Apply this to the Bible, I think we can see in Exodus 20:5,6 that God consider genetics for judgment. But He consider in the limits that He established. The wicked father will influence his son, and will genetically pass his wicked propensities to his son. God will punish both for their sins. But as Behe punctuated in his book, genetics has limits. And the limits that God set in His word is in Is.55:7. Even though there is “genetic sinful nature” we can overcome than. And this victory is free (v.1). So there is no reason for the remaining in habitual sin, for God already provided the ransom and power to deliver from the inherited evil propensities. And the blessing also is genetic. A healthy parents will give his children healthy lifestyle and more likely he will live longer, as attested by research with SDA population. Going back to the issue of babies…if cursing and blessing can be part of genetics, is sin inherited punished according to Exodus 20? I do not think revelation contradict itself. I think the better interpretation of this issue according to the text of Exodus is that sinful practices have their lasting influence, and sons of sin is in worse condition that their father. But where sin abound grace much more abound. And the babies ? If some sins are inherited acquired, but their sin actions are personal decisions, the cases of babies death appoint to somethings: 1 – They die because of nature of sin = death. 2 – it was not their fault for the eternal consequences of sin is individual. 3 – individual sins have corporate consequences So what ? the other question that I raised still unanswered in my mind still. Where does it comes the opportunity of receiving eternal life for babies? I will continue doing some thinking to come up with a Biblical solution. Please help me out in this issue…
I have always thought that Jesus once for all and as result paid the price once for all and atonement took place once and that is all. That mindset gives birth to a way of thinking and believing that sinners have to keep on accepting Christ’s atonement. However, it is becoming more evident that as long as we remain in Him and He lives in our hearts we are being atoned for. The author of “Ellen White on Salvation”, in page 48, says “Atonement involved not only Christ’s death on the cross, but also Christ’s intercession, which makes His life available to repentant, trusting believers. Such trusting belief not only receives God’s acceptance, but is also powerfully motivated to imitate Christ’s life. So the atonement has implications for the sanctification experience of believers, not just their experience of forgiveness and acceptance.” Christ’s sacrificial death keeps influencing believers from generation to generation the kingdom comes. It is very encouraging to know that, as we put our trust in our Savior Jesus Christ, He keeps atoning on our behalf till He takes home. God, in all His justice, has sent His Son so that, in believing in Him, by His grace, we might be saved. That hope of the second coming and salvation impacts the life of the believers and gives each one a reason to live. That reason to live is also a reason to die. It is a reason to humble ourselves before the almighty knowing that without Him we are just a pile of clay. The fact that Christ died our second death must create a sense of owe. I mean, He actually took our place! Once one begins to understand that substitutionary aspect of Christ’s atoning blood, one cannot help be influence. Now that influence has been affecting so lives and the question remains why has not the same blood of Jesus influenced all? Is it strong enough? Does God leave it up to anyone can believe to do on their own. Maybe the issue is a matter of choice. Everyone has been given the same opportunity at creation or at the cross. Was it not a matter of choice one would have wondered why is it that some people will make it to heaven due to them breaking the law while Jesus gave Himself as the ultimate price through his blood at Calvary? Why would not God be satisfied with Jesus’ Substitution? Anyhow, the power of choice given to human beings left on its own, triggers God’s wrath. Just like faith is both passive and active, the wrath of God is passive as well as active. The interesting thing is that God allowed the human mess and He took upon Himself to clean it up based on human’s permission. Yeah, unless we allow God to take our place He will not force us. We have the right to let Him in and He will come and sup with us. God takes responsibility of what happens in universe. Unfortunately when facing life with so much suffering one tends to wonder why would a just God remain silent in front of human destruction via catastrophes and disaster sweeping lives in this globe? Sin is the main excuse that has ever been used. A Moral God created Moral agents to stay in connection with the divine. That is why, I think, that Jesus had two natures: divine and human so he could meet us where we are. Christ’s righteousness sanctifies us, justifies us, gives us peace, and influences us to influence others. Christ was both God and human and the sinner is just a sinner. Is it fair to say that Christ had the same nature we now have? Is there not a big gap between the sinner and his Savior? Montes Estinphil
Ellen G White on Salvation. Whidden II. Chapter Five: “Salvation, the Great Controversy Theme, Closing Events, and the Law”
What is inspiring to me on this reading is how Ellen White ties in together other doctrines to her teachings about salvation, such as: The great controversy theme, the closing events, the law, sin, the atonement and the nature of Christ. So this is evident that the doctrine of Salvation is not isolated to be by itself but it connects to the rest of Scriptures. It is very interesting when she reconcile law and grace in the setting of the great controversy theme. Satan is attempting to prove that God cannot have mercy and justice at the same time. He blamed God as arbitrary and unforgiving in requiring man to obey a law that cannot be obeyed. In addition, Satan charges that God’s mercy destroyed justice, with the result that Christ’s death abrogated the Father’s law. As pointed out by Whidden of how Ellen G White concisely sums up in the Desire of Ages. p.447:
“Through Jesus, God’s mercy was manifested to men; but mercy does not set aside justice. . . .The law requires righteousness, - a righteous life. . . . Thus the very righteousness of the law is fulfilled in the believer in Christ. God can “be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus,” Rom. 3:26. God’s love has been expressed in His justice no less than in His mercy. . . .It has been Satan’s purpose to divorce mercy from truth and justice. He sought to prove that the righteousness of God’s law is an enemy to peace. But Christ shows that in God’s plan they are indissoluble joined together; the one cannot exist without the other. “Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other.” Ps. 85:10.
Throughout Scripture, God is declared as a God of love, a God of mercy and a God of justice. The question people ask: How could a just God can have mercy? It seems that Satan is right and people take that. Another familiar question is: If God is a God of love why so many suffer? If God is a God of justice why have mercy on sinners that continue to sin against His commandments? Ellen White’s answer which I agree with: “God has answered these charges with the incarnation of Jesus and His subsequent heavenly intercession, second coming, the millennium, the last judgment, and the final vindication of the faithful.”
God’s character is revealed through the gospel of Jesus Christ that He’s both just and merciful. The cross proves that God is a just and listen to this, she said: “. . . whose mercy [God’s] is unbounded to penitent souls. But His mercy is extended only on the basis of holy justice.” We see here that God is a loving God and still a God of justice. The question here: Did God deliberately established His law knowingly that no human can obey it? In order to justify that, Christ came to live with us and died on the cross so that grace takes the place of the law. So grace, justice and mercy remain God’s character. He’s the same yesterday, today and forever. We must continue as Christians to trust that God is just, God is love and God have mercy.
Since my recent visit to the village of Anabaptists in Shipshewana, Indiana, I cannot stop my flow of thoughts on their lifestyle. These people, who have been living together for generations, have an extraordinary biblical interpretation of brotherly love. “Good fences may or may not make for good neighbors but they are essentials for good community.” Here is a good way of thinking to promote a long-term healthy living within a community. The tour, of the Anabaptists village emerged ideas, which resulted into the analysis of a sentence that continues to preoccupy my mind. What does it really mean? To get a better sense of its context, let us start by an historical overview of the Anabaptists. When the Reformation started, people began to read the Bible and realized that human beings are saved by faith through God’s grace not by penance or deeds. They also advocated that infant baptism was not biblical; William Sattler, a former monk, goes to war against a certain practice of the church. Then in Zurich, Switzerland, the first re-baptism of adults took place. Sattler and other reformers fought against the church traditions despite the torture, burnings, and drowning of women that took place In 1693, 168 years after its founding, Jacob Ammann, one of the reformers including other members of the group decided to split to form another cluster, the Amish. “Ammann and his Swiss followers believed that fellow Mennonites were losing spiritual discipline and becoming too much like the world around them”. The Mennonites and Amish live together on same grounds; however, both groups evolve differently. The Mennonites have adapted themselves to the world around them, to the new technologies; while the Amish continue to live their faith, that is to say, in all simplicity. Is there a lesson to be learned? It is for you to be the judge. The Seventh-day Adventist Church, despite its specificity and its mandate, is directed by humans. Even though its members claimed, according to its specificity, the church is entrusted to the noblest task for the last days, mistakes and misunderstandings are not to be neglected on behalf of prides. Sometimes I wonder whether the trust that should be placed in God to find wisdom and direction are not reduced to the point where leaders believe that they are the only ones to make decisions for all peoples, nations, languages, and tribes of the earth. Unless few leaders choose to close their eyes to see nothing and ears to hear nothing, all are aware that the church is facing difficulties. Actually, many people considered that the Church is undergoing a period of crisis that continues to intensify itself. Many are no longer able to identify themselves with the church that is being set aside and been considered as the Church of Rest. Can we live apart while remaining brothers of the same faith, as the Anabaptists? So far I do not have the answer but I am trying to think bigger. I see this as a great opportunity to reflect profoundly on this topic. I truly and firmly believe that salvation resides in Christ not in the institution even though that I still believe that the Church remains necessary. Roger Saint-Fleur
The Assurance of Salvation Everyone would like to go to heaven but that is not enough you must obtain the right. This right is not automatic, it is imputed to all those who received the Word because He gave them the right to become children of God. John 1: 12. That said, does this mean that all those who have received He will have salvation? Can one be sure of his salvation? This question is not new; Martin Luther raises this question over a long period of his life. Once joined the church, and received baptism, the member of the church lives in full confidence of his salvation and is ready to make sacrifice for heaven but as time passes, he realizes that his eternal life, his salvation becomes a heavy burden to bear because of sin. This was the struggle of Luther, sin. This fight is not just that of Luther but of all human beings seeking a better life than the sinner. When finally, Luther discovered that he could do nothing for himself, that his salvation is not based on good works or penance, he was relieved and he will continue to fight but on another front to help those who were in the same position as him. In reality, everyone is not Luther. Everyone must do a personal struggle for his life but the dilemma is huge between the free salvation offered on the cross and the personal efforts of individuals to keep their salvation afloat. Nobody will be saved by works of law or by works of the flesh. If then salvation is based entirely on Christ's sacrifice on Calvary, all who accept his sacrifice, his atoning work are expected to live their life happily without worrying about the rest knowing that their salvation is assured in Christ, which is partly true. There is the part of man and the part God. The part of God is accomplished on the cross about 2000 years ago and the part of man, every man, what is his limit? So how can one contribute to his salvation without crossing the border of salvation by works? How to be sure they are doing enough, just enough to expect to receive this free salvation offered by Christ's death? All that remains is faith. Without faith, a firm assurance in the promise of Christ that salvation is freely given by the blood of Jesus, it is impossible to live a flourished Christian life. The assurance of salvation is totally dependent on trust in God and an uninterrupted relationship with Christ. When Luther got to the evidence that salvation depended wholly on Christ, he presents Christianity as « believing assurance of the living God, who reveals himself and opens His heart in Christ to sinners. » He became “instrumental in releasing the sixteenth-century church from a systematic denial of salvation’s certainty and directed it toward the freedom of justification by gracious fait alone.” The assurance of salvation, once understood, becomes a source of joy and motivation to all those who get it. They find meaning in their life and do everything they can, like Luther, to help others enjoy the grace of salvation. The assurance of salvation is also a source of love for someone who has volunteered to redeem sinners and all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Salvation is available to all, what's missing sometimes is the assurance that it is a reality and a free gift of God. Roger Saint-Fleur
Nature of Christ and Salvation Whidden In reading chapter 8 on the nature of Christ and Ellen White, one thing seems to be clear to me. That is, if more people would study Ellen white for them selves they would see that her theology is extremely Christocentric and foundational to all of her writings. The more that I read Ellen White is the more I have come to the conclusion that she was much more balanced in her approach to understanding scripture than she is often presented. In this chapter Whidden looks at the deity of Christ putting him rightfully in the Godhead and yet also placing Christ as the individual in the Godhead responsible for dying for our sins. Christ is God. There is to be no misunderstanding that because He was fully man, He was unable to become also be fully God simultaneously. This is one of those issues that we must believe by faith. The implication is therefore that because He is God and He died for our sins He has the prerogative and the investment in sinful humanity to be at the centre of the cosmic controversy. (I am sure Dr. Hanna is smiling) This was a conclusion that Mrs. White struggled with on her own, because her husband James White, unfortunately because of his Arian background did not accept this truth. If we are able to reconcile the issue of Christ and His deity, then, we will struggle to receive the full atonement that He brings and gives freely. Christ is all and He has given His life for our life. I often wonder if all of the theological gymnastics on this issue isn’t because people do not want to make Him God and perfect and yet taking on our sinful nature because the accountability that we would have as Christians would have to go way up on the spiritual thermostat. Many do not believe that Christ identifies with the sinner and this is not true. If He did not identify with us then why bother redeeming us. This is a question that all must answer sooner or later because the bible says that every knee will have to bow and confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. If we accept him as savior then we should trust him as Lord!
Comment on “Christ Saved the Human Race”, by Ángel Manuel Rodríguez
What I found particularly interesting in this article were the explanations offered in reference to the phrase “Christ saved the world”, employed by Ellen White.
Growing up as an Adventist, the phrase has never raised questions for me. I’ve always thought it to mean that Christ “potentially” saved the entire world, in the sense that his sacrifice made redemption available to anyone, provided that they accept his gift.
But it was interesting to see how the expression could be taken to mean something else – that, objectively, the entire human race was legally saved at the cross, regardless of our personal choice.
Being one-sided and denying God’s justice, while stressing only his love, could prevent some to understand the conditional character of salvation. They may see God’s love in forgiving our sins unconditionally. The idea of “unconditional salvation” is not supported by the Bible though, nor by Ellen White. What Christ did objectively on the cross for us does not automatically result in our liberation.
The salvation offered by Christ is conditional. He made it available to anyone, but we have to accept it. Should we choose to discard it, we cannot be partakers of this gift.
The idea of “unconditional salvation” cheapens salvation and endorses continued sin. “The theory of a universal legal justification teaches precisely that Christ's justice covers the wickedness and indulgence of sin of individuals who are still living in their sins and wickedness, in rebellion against God,” states Angel Rodriguez. In the same line of thought, Ellen White writes: “You can come in all your need, and plead the merits of a crucified and risen Savior; but you cannot come expecting that Christ will cover your wickedness, your daily indulgence in sin, with his robe of righteousness." (The Poor in Spirit, Bible Echo, May 15, 1892, par. 8).
I see the idea of unconditional salvation as dangerous as sinless perfectionism. They are both indifferent to sin, one in teaching that it does not matter whether we sin or not, we have been saved anyways, and the other in the sense that we have completely overcome sin. Neither of these concepts is biblical. Instead, the Bible teaches that salvation is available to anyone, but conditional, depending on our acceptance in a sincere desire to not sin anymore. .
Comments on the "In Adam/In Christ" Motifs, by Ángel Manuel Rodríguez
This article brought up a few misunderstandings (which I had not thought of before) of the phrases “in Adam”, and “in Christ”, with the subsequent risks they involve.
“in Adam”:
(1) Taken literally, the idea of our presence in Adam indicates some sort of pre-existence of our body or soul, which is contrary to the Biblical teaching, but rather conforms to the Greek anthropological dualism. Our presence in Adam is to be defined as trans-physical.
(2) the imputation theory states that, because of the solidarity between Adam and his descendants, his sin is imputed to everyone before they are even conceived, and based on this imputed sin they are sentenced to death. The imputation theory is foreign to the Bible. Adam is responsible for his own sin, while his descendants receive the fatal result of his transgression.
"In Christ":
(1) universal legal justification holds that Christ’s death provided unconditional legal salvation and justification for everyone. This denies the Biblical teaching that the sinner is saved only if he chooses to receive the gift of salvation, offered impartially to everyone. “'In Christ' is to be understood more in terms of a marriage relationship than of a legal status arising from the decision of a law court, even God's court,” argues Angel Rodriguez.
(2) The imputation theory implies that, if we were in Christ when he died paying the penalty for our sins, then we died in him. This cancels out Christ’s substitution: he did not die for me, but rather I died for myself, in him. The implicit thought is that I was not saved through Jesus, but instead I saved myself through Jesus. This view opposes the Biblical understanding of Christ dying as a substitute for our sins, so that we don’t have to suffer the penalty of death – the direct consequence of sin.
One of the challenges that we often face as Christians is our inability to do right, when wrong seems to be the healthy alternative. Even Paul the prolific writer says this even after being called to be one of the most influential leaders in the early church. He states that the good that He wants to do that He does not do, and yet the evil that He knows that He should not do, it is this that He is more inclined to do. So then what next, should we give up or should we continue to struggle. That’s just option A and B, but there is a third option to this multiple choice and the answer to C is Christ. What if we struggle with sin and then we ask for forgiveness but we find ourselves going back to our old ways, then what?. While this is a complexed question, that needs to have a complicated answer. Here’s what I do know. That according to Whidden post Minneapolis, Ellen White used a powerful quote from scripture taken from 1John 2:1. When we sin we have an advocate with the father, Jesus Christ. This is crucial because we have someone who wants to and is able to speak on behalf of us, because when He speaks on our behalf, the father has no choice but to listen to his son who still bears the scars that are an indicator that He died to set man free from sin. According to Ellen White even when we do good, our good still needs the incense of Jesus’ intercession to make even our very prayers acceptable before the thrown of grace, which by the way we have full access to because of Jesus the Christ. This is justification at its climax, my sins and prayers never go through without first being touched by the one who has saved me from my sins. This depiction further deepens my impression of Jesus still being a personal and up close God from a distance. I know it’s an oxymoron, but it makes sense. He wants to save me, so when I go to him with repentance; He wants me to come to him because He can’t fail, because it is not in His nature. In times like these where there is so much happening where love is conditional and often not good even. Jesus always makes the difference, even when we do not deserve it. Even more powerful is that even though Satan is a defeated foe He continues to accuse us of being sinners and all we have to do is admit that this is true and yet we still have a way out, through Jesus.
In closing, we do not have to do it ourselves; we cannot do it our selves. We all need Jesus. He is our bailout package with interest. He has paid the debt for us already and yet when he paid it all at Calvary it still covers the cost for us even today and that is just based on the interest from His grace. All have sinned, however all are justified through the blood of our Savior and Lord.
Response to The Nature of Christ and Salvation, by Dr. Whidden
The argument regarding the nature of Christ was one of the first "deep adventist debates" I encountered as a Freshman theology student at Andrews University. I've had some time to wrestle with it and although in some respects I'm closer to an understanding I also feel farther then ever from what is truly a mystery. However, after reading Dr. Whidden's summation on Ellen White's views of Christ's nature I can say I have a little more understanding of how to organize the knowns of the mystery. When People argue for whether Christ's humanity was like Adam before the Fall or like us After the fall they are essentially asking two separate but related questions. Those who answer that he was like us before the fall want to be assured of and guard the message that Christ was an acceptable sacrifice for our sins and not tainted by sin himself. And those who argue that he was like us after the fall want to be assured of the message that Christ is able to identify with our infirmities. I don't mean in any way by my simplification to make light of the issue but I feel as though the situation is akin to if someone asked was Christ more like a man or a woman in identifying with our humanity. For one camp to say he was only like a man would be to make women feel that Christ could not fully identify with their struggles. And to say Christ was only like a woman would be to deny some clearly evident texts that he was a man. This is why one of the most powerful sentences in Dr. Whidden's chapter is found near the end. "Having natural tendencies to sin is not essential to being tempted." He explains that for those who want to ensure that Christ could identify with them, Christs nature did not have to be solely post fall in order that he would be able to identify with us. Similarly, Dr. Whidden points out the known fact that the mysterious blend was indeed a mystery. Because Christ, although very unlike us, was to some degree affected by the problem of sin. But as Dr. Whidden put, he was infected by it. The fact that this is a mystery for our study but never to be placed in one box or another is clearly illustrated by two very biblical positions. 2 Corinthians 5:21 states that "God made Christ to be sin for us, who knew no sin..." yet at the same time I John 3:5 states that in Him ( Christ ) was NO SIN . The two cannot exist as concrete facts and yet they do. They are a paradox and a mystery which we are blessed and honored to study.
Response to In Class discussion on "Open / Closed View of Time"
This discussion reminds me of an interesting take I heard on the text Revelation 10:6 & 7. " (6) And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: (7) But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets. The position taken was that God alloted time to work out the salvation of man and through doing this reveal His character of Love to the universe. Exactly how God was going to do this was explained to be the mystery of God. The position was taken then that after the mystery of God was complete there would be no more time (or delay as some translations put it). Although the argument was a good theory, it didn't explain or answer all the questions about What God has in store for us. However, seeing that we are simply discussing model's to help us understand I'll continue. Similar to (but not exactly alike) the question with regards to whether time is a closed box or an open box or a closed box was will there be a need to time after sin has been eradicated? Since eternity will go on forever, what ruler or clock is there to measure forever? Although the implications of these questions are a great deal to answer the connection point of both discussions is for what purpose did God predetermine this period of time? Even that question is loaded, in some respects because if God predetermined the period of time to accomplish his purpose what else did he pre-determine? Did he pre-determine how the purpose should be accomplished? What I appreciated the most from class was the insight that both models [closed and open view] seek to stand for the sovereignty of God in some way. The closed box view clearly defines that God must have known and ordered everything. However, the open view of time requires a BIGGER GOD in order to reconcile things even if they are reconciled outside of our limited understanding. God is indeed Sovereign. Yet if we have choice, in order for Him to still be sovereign, He has to be a bigger God, far greater than our understanding. Nonetheless there is still an issue to be wrestled with. I believe I agree with the fact that the implications of a closed system (That God purposed sin to take place) distorts the character of God. Although this creates a bigger mystery of how do we then understand this Bigger God, I believe it is faith that will bring the greatest reward. Not a faith that says "I won't question you Lord" but one that says I will ask the questions knowing that you have an answer that is in agreement with your already revealed character. Our faith is faith in God that He is not a liar.
Comments by Daniel Vega – Lescano on “The Atonement” (Ellen White on Salvation – chapter Seven) According to the research done by Woodrow W. Whidden II, Ellen White implies the atonement the theme of the great controversy. For Ellen White the atonement is linked to the justice and mercy of God. She taught that the atonement is an expression “…all the Trinity has done, is doing, and will do to reconcile sinners.” What I see from these statements is that Ellen White thought big about salvation, and that the atonement includes what Jesus is doing in the sanctuary and His sacrifice on the cross. We need to think big about every aspect of salvation. All the parts like the atonement, justification, sanctification, glorification, substitution, are connected with each other and they form part of the big picture of salvation. It might appear that the study of the Doctrine of Salvation and all its parts are overwhelming. I have to confess that many times I have had to shake my head to clear my mind when the information becomes overwhelming. Salvation in its whole context is simple to understand, however, it includes aspects we do not understand clearly nowadays. We are going to study about this subject for all eternity. I am glad that today I am able to understand that God loves me and He has prepared a solution for the problem of sin. The atonement is an important part in the plan of salvation, and it is really wonderful to reflect what we can learn about God and His character. Ellen White’s focus on the atonement was on the basis of penalty, substitution, and satisfaction. The law of God declares that one who sins has to die. Sin goes against the character of God. Therefore, there could not be a harmony between a sinner and God. The sinner has to die. There is penalty that needs to be paid, because it is required by the law. God shows His great love and mercy in providing a substitution, Jesus Christ who is our atonement. In other words the One who reconcile us with God. Jesus also satisfies the wrath of God. There was a penalty to be paid. Jesus is the one who paid that penalty and satisfy God’s wrath. This means, that those who follow Jesus could not be destroy forever, because they have Jesus as their atonement and substitution. Nevertheless, God’s wrath will be manifested upon the wicked. God’s law says that they have to perish. Since, they do not Jesus as their substitution, they will pay the penalty with eternal death. I marvel on God and His infinite mercy that He is giving us an opportunity to be saved. God is love, and He wants His children back with Him.
Comments on Asnel's reflection on Chapter three of Woodrow W. Whidden II and Romains Chapter 3, and Biblical Research reading Article from Manuel Rodriguez Justification in Romans 3: 21-24 “The Decade Before 1888”
Asnel makes great points on his reading of Romans 3, Woodrow Whidden, and Manuel Rodriguez article on Romans 3. What I found very helpful was the Ellen White quote he used, “we are justified by faith in the merits of Christ, but such faith will never excuse transgression.” The relationship between law and grace are well described here. In no way was Ellen White intending to promote a works based salvation, but she did believe grace was not an excuse to ignore sin. Asnel also pointed out that we all have sinned and that all of us are justified for our sins, not those in Adam. Justification is extremely powerful when we consider that each of us has been responsible for sins we’ve done. We cannot blame our sins on someone else, but we can be justified by someone else, Jesus. Overall, I enjoyed reading his comments and was blessed by reading it.
Comments by Daniel Vega – Lescano on Jan Paulsen’s article: “Salvation by Faith” I think the “Salvation by Faith” by Jan Paulsen is a great article, because it analyzes faith in all the aspects of salvation. Jan Paulsen begins presenting his article mentioning that for the apostle Paul the whole experience of salvation “starts and ends in faith.” Faith is basis for our salvation. However, how can faith be defined? According to the Old Testament, faith really means faithfulness. Paulsen adds that for Ellen White “faith includes not only belief but trust.” Using Ellen White statement on faith, Paulsen thinks that faith has an objective and subjective dimension. The objective of faith is expressed when a person recognizes that Jesus raised from the dead and He is Lord. In the subjective dimension, the person who has faith in Jesus, believes in Him, and proceeds to put his trust on Him. We are saved by faith. However, faith is not just a proclamation: Yes, I believe, I am saved. I got salvation, now I can continue with the regular rhythm of my life. Paulsen adds that faith is not itself what saved us; faith is the instrument by which we receive the gift of salvation. Ellen White says that we need to believe in Jesus, to hold on Him as a personal savior. What happens after a person accepts Christ? Is salvation just to recognize that Jesus died for us? Faith is action, and I agree with Paulsen in the fact that faith involves obedience to Jesus. In John 14:15 Jesus says to His followers: “if you love me, keep my commandments.” The apostle Paul also adds in 2 Corinthians 5:17 “ So that anyone is in Christ, that one is a new creature; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” As new creatures, as disciples of Jesus, we need to obey His commandments. How will the world know that we belong to Jesus? It is not only by words, but by the fruits of the Spirit. It has to be clear that obeying the commandments we are not saved. We as Jesus followers need to be faithful to Him in all aspects of what He requires. With faith in Jesus we have to surrender everything and do His will. By faith is that we follow Jesus, and by faith we are waiting to live with Him. “The just shall live by faith” says Habakkuk 2:4. Everything is the Christian journey needs to be done with faith and trust in Jesus Christ. “He is the author and the finisher of our faith,” says Acts 11. Yes, the faith that He is who save us. He is the One who can strengthen our faith. Only Him there is victory over sin. There is no one else who can change our lives. To have faith in Jesus is to walk with Him everyday of our lives, and to do His will because we are His disciples.
Comments by Daniel Vega – Lescano on Jan Paulsen’s article: “Salvation by Faith” I think the “Salvation by Faith” by Jan Paulsen is a great article, because it analyzes faith in all the aspects of salvation. Jan Paulsen begins presenting his article mentioning that for the apostle Paul the whole experience of salvation “starts and ends in faith.” Faith is basis for our salvation. However, how can faith be defined? According to the Old Testament, faith really means faithfulness. Paulsen adds that for Ellen White “faith includes not only belief but trust.” Using Ellen White statement on faith, Paulsen thinks that faith has an objective and subjective dimension. The objective of faith is expressed when a person recognizes that Jesus raised from the dead and He is Lord. In the subjective dimension, the person who has faith in Jesus, believes in Him, and proceeds to put his trust on Him. We are saved by faith. However, faith is not just a proclamation: Yes, I believe, I am saved. I got salvation, now I can continue with the regular rhythm of my life. Paulsen adds that faith is not itself what saved us; faith is the instrument by which we receive the gift of salvation. Ellen White says that we need to believe in Jesus, to hold on Him as a personal savior. What happens after a person accepts Christ? Is salvation just to recognize that Jesus died for us? Faith is action, and I agree with Paulsen in the fact that faith involves obedience to Jesus. In John 14:15 Jesus says to His followers: “if you love me, keep my commandments.” The apostle Paul also adds in 2 Corinthians 5:17 “ So that anyone is in Christ, that one is a new creature; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” As new creatures, as disciples of Jesus, we need to obey His commandments. How will the world know that we belong to Jesus? It is not only by words, but by the fruits of the Spirit. It has to be clear that obeying the commandments we are not saved. We as Jesus followers need to be faithful to Him in all aspects of what He requires. With faith in Jesus we have to surrender everything and do His will. By faith is that we follow Jesus, and by faith we are waiting to live with Him. “The just shall live by faith” says Habakkuk 2:4. Everything is the Christian journey needs to be done with faith and trust in Jesus Christ. “He is the author and the finisher of our faith,” says Acts 11. Yes, the faith that He is who save us. He is the One who can strengthen our faith. Only Him there is victory over sin. There is no one else who can change our lives. To have faith in Jesus is to walk with Him everyday of our lives, and to do His will because we are His disciples.
Enoch Brownell - Reflection on Romans 1:5 – As we looked deeper, in class, at Romans 1:5 (“Through Him we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for His name,”) it became clear to me why faith is so important. I really appreciated learning in class about the different aspects of faith. Many times I have heard faith used as a tool to gain Salvation or something that we can exercise in order to earn salvation. However when I heard about the different aspects of faith my understanding has opened up to how it all fits together. The purpose of the gospel brings is to bring us to a saving relationship with the Lord and to obey Him through the exercising of our faith. Now there are two forms of faith at play here and it is important to understand each one clearly. The best example of passive faith at work is found in Exodus 14:14, “The Lord will fight for you, you need only to be still.” Passive faith—at first glance—seems lifeless, uninvolved and lethargic. However, passive faith should be combined with active faith and takes on a complete picture of what God desires His followers to exercise in their daily experiences. Active faith sounds very familiar as well. The Bible says to “love one another”, to “pray without ceasing”, to “serve wholeheartedly”, and to “go and make disciples”. So it is clear that we must exercise both active and passive faith. It is important to note here that faith does not equal salvation – faith does not save us it is the means to receive the salvation that our Lord has already accomplished.
We “…are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished.” Many times we see justification as happening (past tense) on the cross alone – Cross = Justification. But here we see that faith also plays an important role in experiencing justification. Faith in what was accomplished on the cross brings justification – which in tern brings faith – much like a circle effect. Justification works with faith to be in a continual realization of what has been accomplished at the cross. This text also helps to clarify the importance of both penal substitution and moral influence. Many times in the Christian world there are arguments over which of these views is correct. But as I learned in class they are both important aspects of what Christ accomplished through His death on the cross. We can experience both penal substitution and moral influence through Christ’s sacrifice.
I have read Steps to Christ but I am reading again to follow with the class of salvation. Specially because this book was written after 1888. And it has been helpful to me to understand her concepts about salvation. Since this book is all about the issue, it is worthwhile to look closer to its content.
Its message is always fresh and challenging to me. Even the structure of the book tells me how to study adequately the theme of salvation. The book starts with the declaration that God is love. This is the central theme of Ellen G. White. From the beginning of the conflict series to the its end, God’s is love. And the book Steps to Christ is about this love and how it affects humankind.
Love in her view is not only a mere feeling, but it involves the whole being. It is about life-style. Salvation for her is not feelings alone, nor mere oral beliefs, but godly-life. And since humans are lost of this lifestyle of love since Eden disobedience, God’s love reached further in trying to renewing them to Himself.
This is the subject of the whole book: how to restore God’s love in human lifestyle. First of all, in her explanation, humans need to recognize the simple thing that God is love and that we all are lost. This love can be recognized in nature, in relationship with other creature, and especially in the Bible. And this last object of revelation is the most important one, because it gives the portray of Jesus, the sum of all revelation of God’s love.
The second chapter is about the necessity of sinner for God. She goes the humanistic-evolutionist trend of human self development. For her “The idea that it is necessary only to develop the good that exists in man by nature, is a fatal deception.” Only by the power of God can man be restore to the right state with God and heavenly beings. During the book she will discuss how to do this.
The first chapter remind me of how much human being lost and still loose when we separate ourselves from God. Many times I struggle to follow what God said, like in diet and sleeping, but I forget that it is better to go with Him. Even tough the appearances seem to point the other direction.
As I realize that it is Satan who makes us believe that God is austere and bad, I see how our world have been infected by Satan’s lies. Many people thing that there is hope in going to school, in avoid drug, in doing “good” things, but we sometimes do not realize that without the right perspective about God no true change can be made.
The second chapter helped me to realize how the presuppositions we have affect our relationship with the divine. Our worldview affects our lifestyle. The lifestyle of God is taken as granted and as unreal by postmodern mind. Ellen G. White invites the reader (me) to consider that humanistic and evolutionist worldview as false and Bible’s portray of reality as right. This involves criticizing as Christians all we read, we watch, we do, our priorities in life. I have been rethinking in my priorities to focus, like she did in the first chapter, in the love of God. Because is by “beholding that we become changed”.
When most Christians think about salvation they think about the fact that Christ died on the cross for our sin, and His atoning blood. But there is more to it than that. Romans 1:4 speak about Christ that rose from the dead. The implication behind this text suggests that if he was dead and risen he had to of lived before he died. All too often we do not think about the life Christ lived in order to save us. Had Christ sinned as a man we would all be lost and His death would be of no value, and subsequently no resurrection from the dead. Please do not get me wrong I am in no way suggesting that the resurrection has little to no significance to Christ’s life. I am merely saying that Christ’s life is left in the shadow of the cross when I believe that these are just a part of the whole picture of salvation. Another aspect that we do not think about is the life that is to come. The fact that Christ is risen is power and proof that He will come again. The salvation of man will not be complete while we are on this side of heaven. As eluded to in class glorification is a part of our salvation. We look forward to Christ second coming when we will be glorified with him. This is what we call the blessed hope. I long for that day.
This is a response Adelina due to a statement Ellen White made on the nature of Christ. It goes like this: Christ could have done nothing during His earthly if the divinity was not in his humanity.” My reaction to it is actually a question. Was divinity in Jesus all the time during all His teenage year in Nazareth? Being a carpenter with His earthly father, how do we know that He did nothing without His heavenly father’s presence? I think it is wise to be wise in making statements that will heat up discussions. Furthermore, some people may say if Jesus was always having God in Him that was the reason he never fell into sin. Others many support the same view to say that they are not Jesus. Therefore they cannot be perfect as Jesus was perfect since they experience ups and downs. Well, Jesus did experience ups and downs too. So, what is the excuse? We are not doing miracles today. I don’t if it is because we don’t want to reduce Christ to a simple human or we have gotten all the facts, we are always fearful in talking of Christ’s hidden life such His teenage year. There are about fifteen years of the life of Jesus that we do not know much about and Ellen does not seem bring those years up either. I am inclined to think that there is more than what we have been saying. Montes Estinphil
Chapter 3 and 4 of our textbook "Ellen White on Salvation" brings interesting perspective on Ellen White's growing understanding of christian perfection. In chapter three author describes the shift towards more Lutheran understanding, salvation by faith alone. This emphasize was growing and was visible during 1883 general conference, present in her ministry in Europe and then during famous 1888 general conference in Minneapolis. Together with James White they felt that this message should be preached and the delay in focusing on it was a mistake. It really stands out against those who would like to accuse Ellen White of being legalist. She opposed people who tried to accuse her of this such a narrow understanding of salvation. Our mission is not to sets the standrds that we ourselves cannot meet but in her words we should have a spirit of: "uplifting and not a spirit of crashing down".
Lenora D. Muse Doctrine of Salvation Reflection #3 Christ and Salvation As I reflect the question asked by Angel Manuel Rodriguez in this article about if those who never hear about Jesus if they will be saved. I don’t agree that the text given prove an exclusivist answer such as John 17:3, it just tells us that those that have the chance to know the name of Jesus and I don’t mean know of, but know in a personal relationship way will have eternal life. This to me is like the predestination theory that the ones who have a personal relationship with Jesus are predestined to receive eternal life. That doesn’t exclude anyone the people will have to exclude themselves by not wanting a relationship with Jesus. The author goes on to say that Pete reaffirmed the conviction in Acts 4:12 that states “Salvation is found in no one else,” and I believe that as well but it doesn’t meant some are chosen to believe and some are not. Jesus is the only one that can save us. Some that will be saved in my belief will not be guided by anyone telling them about Jesus sacrifice for them but through only God’s ability through nature and the Holy Spirit revealing there is salvation in God many will be save without the Gospel Presentation ever being given to them. The author quoted the perfect scripture of 1 Tim 2:4 that tells us God “wants all men to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth.” The story in the Bible about Cornelius is excellent to show how God knows the heart of humankind that is seeking for a better life and someone that is out there listening to their questions and looking for answers. I know through my own experience with the Seventh-day Adventist Church message God showed me about the reformation through an old set of Britannica encyclopedias and I learned of the Sabbath reform, so when I heard the message I knew how to research it for myself to confirm. I agree with the author that the scriptures say, “God has not left Himself without witnesses among the nations” as Numbers 24:2 and in Romans 1:19, 20 we studied in class that “God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.”
Second section of the book deals with important issues concerning Ellen White's udnerstanding of God's requirments. On the one hand we read passages when she clearly talks that God's acceptance will be extended only to those are "spotless" on the other hand she talks about God's mercy extended in the same measure as His justice. But how do we put those two together? How do we see mercy in justice and justice in His mercy? First we need to establish that she understands that our depravity is so great that we will need God's strenght throughout our whole walk with Him. Then his forgiveness has to become a moral influence for us which will inspire us to develop a Christlike characters. We have to understand the price of our salvation, which subequently will convince the sinner that salvation is not only grace but also a solemn responsibility on his/her part. Sinner be forgiven have to accept the fact that forgiveness cam with very high price on God's part and even though it's free to him/her it is absolutely not free. After reading this section of the book we come to the conclusion that Ellen White is an example of balance understanding of relation between judgment and forgiveness.
As a read Steps to Christ to find out an answer about the first question I raised issue I about human freedom and salvation of babies. The facts that I have found out and already argue, in my 2 postings in September, is that babies inherit sin of their parents therefore are condemned to death.
When I started to read Steps to Christ I realize one aspect important to shed some light in the subject of babies’s death. It is the topic of freedom. For her, salvation is about choosing Jesus and the gift of life that He offers. In chapter 5 (Consecration) she teaches that only when man choose to change his/her lifestyle from sinful life to godly life, can the Holy Spirit operates in his/her salvation. Man can not do by its own.
This decision is made possible because the will/conscience still have the ability to differentiate evil from good. But how about babies who did not have the ability choose anything? She makes it clear that forced decision can not be accepted by God, and only when man willfully decide for God’s transformation can Jesus shape sinful man to God likeness.
God likeness is the goal of salvation. Since babies did not had opportunity to choose how are their cases decided? In the end of the chapter she affirm that God is not willing that anyone should suffer and perish but this is the will of Satan. Is this implying that God will save every baby then? This can be thought, but since salvation is only possible by human decision, and not arbitrarily decided by God this argument can also be wrong.
In chapter 6 she do not shed light in this subject, in my opinion, since she talks about faith and acceptance of Jesus sacrifice. Both are actions of the will, she emphasizes again, and thus can not be done by babies. Then chapter 7 (the test of discipleship) she mention something worthy to be noticed. Salvation is a process that transforms the character. And “The character is revealed, not by occasional good deeds and occasional misdeeds, but by the tendency of the habitual words and acts.” {SC 57.2}
Tendencies of works and acts are evidences for all that God’s decision is the best one in saving or not the person. It is truth that babies do not have developed a life spam to measure one’s character. But someone could argue, and rightly so, that God knows the future and could know consequently the tendency of one specific baby. And based on that, and only that, God could save him or her. But this for us would still be arbitrary, right?!
From my readings so far until chapter 7 in Steps to Christ some inferences can be made: 1- Salvation is only from God’s power, man can not do it. 2- Salvation is God’s modification of human sinful character to godliness 3- This transformation depends on the will/conscientious decision of man 4- Babies do not exercise will or power of decision 5- Salvation is determined by the tendencies of character not specific actions 6- God would know the tendencies of babies
I think that no clear cut declaration can be made about the salvation of babies from this part of the book. Even tough there is possibilities, the inferences for yes or no are still vague. God can save based on His foreknowledge, but God’s foreknowledge does not annul man’s free will. Since death babies did not developed the power of choice, how can the decision be made? I still don’t know. I will still read the rest of the book and search for other references to shed more light in the subject.
Lenora D. Muse Doctrine of Salvation Reflection #4
How Perfect is Perfect” or Is Christian Perfection Possible? Yes, I believe as Edward Heppenstall does that Christians are perfect. Now I am in the number with countless others that at one point in my Christian journey I was trying to reach the perfection I read in the scriptures by my own works. Unfortunate or fortunate the more sins I recognized God delivered me from the more issues in my life and sins I could see the need for more deliverance. Constantly, I was struggling to be what I thought at that time the scriptures were talking about, “For we all stumble in many things. If anyone does not stumble in word, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle the whole body.” James 3:2 Of, course I know this is talking about the untamed tongue now, but earlier in my Christian journey I thought it was saying I should be able to tame it when it says “if anyone does not stumble in word,” sounds like I can control the tongue with some effort. Reading further I thought it was telling me I could even control my whole body. Another verse says, “Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.” Matt. 5: 48 This is a verse I heard as a youth and young adult recited many times and I can remember going to the Holiness Churches in the South and they taught perfection and it cause a lot of stress on the believers that couldn’t seem to reach that perfect in their own efforts. Reading this article help me see the need to make sure I teach on the subject of perfection during my evangelistic meetings and to my one on one Bible Study interest. I believe some will still not accept it because it seems too easy to take on Christ’s perfection as we overcome known sins, but there will be some like myself that feels relief from thinking my perfection is all about what I have to do or not do. This is a true statement “One of the hindrances to living the Christian life successfully is failure to understand what the bible teaches on the nature of sin and perfection. A grave misapprehension lies at the root of much of the false teaching on this subject. The Bible, in applying the term “perfection” to believers, never means “sinlessness.” The author spoke of one truth every believer needs to learn, but in this article I could count at least seven and many more. Just to list a few that I could see the benefit in teaching along with a lesson on the topic sin: look fully to Christ for your perfection, only through the Holy Spirit’s presence and given victory over sin can we reach perfection, give warning that it is fatal for the believer to think he/she can surrender to Christ and the nature of sin is eradicated, but the surrender to Christ does mean it is possible to overcome known sin. Heppenstall says “surrender to Christ must be maintained day by day,” but I am incline to believe it takes a minute by minute in this world for surrendering to Christ. The author brought out a thought that 1 John 1:8-10, “If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not I us,” is a warning against the doctrine of sinless perfection in this life. Well, I believe most people will admit they have sinned but those I have been around that claim perfect talk as if they have overcome all of their sinful ways, so this scripture wouldn’t prove anything to them against the doctrine of sinless perfection in this life.
Lenora D. Muse My response to Rodrigo Topic: Will babies be eternally lost?
There is a very touchy subject for me as well Rodrigo. I lost a baby that never took breathe in this world and I had to search for any word from the Lord to give me comfort. I feel God directed me to Selected Messages II page 257, “The Bereaved” and there are two paragraphs I would like to share with you that give me hope that I will see my baby again. “Remember the prophecy, “Thus saith the Lord; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted. . . Thus said the Lord; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, said the Lord, that thy children shall come again to their own border” (Jer. 31: 15-17) p.259 “As the little infants come forth immortal from their dusty beds, they immediately wing their way to their mother’s arm. They meet again nevermore to part. But many of the little ones have no mother there. We listen in vain for the rapturous song of triumph from the mother. The angels receive the motherless infants and conduct them to the tree of life. Jesus places the golden ring of light, the crown upon their little heads. God grant that the dear mother of “Eva” may be there, that her little winds may be folded upon the glad bosom of her mother.” p. 260 Rodrigo for me this gives me the desire the more to make heaven my goal so the angels won’t have to look for me and they can place my baby in my arms to raise in heaven on those wonderful streets of gold and I will not have to worry about sickness or pain or death taking my baby again from me. I hope this reading in Selected Messages II can give you hope along with the hope you have in Jesus coming back for you. May God grant you peace.
Lenora D. Muse My commit to Montes Estinphil Romans 3 Montes I can agree with you on the point that Roman 3 gives you mixed emotions, and especially 9-20 does make you feel low in spirit to know your true condition. “Yeah, it saddens my heart to realize that I can not and will not be able to do any good without Christ.” I am sure it would sadden my heart if I look at it in this matter as well, but I choose to interpret it to mean that I can’t even come to God on my own. It takes God to draw us because of our sin nature we would continue to be God’s enemy if not for the mercy of God. If we are going to put on Christ righteousness that lets us know we don’t have a garment good enough to desire to keep wearing after giving our life to Christ. Later in Romans 3: 21-26 you and I “can receive hope even though we have sinned and fallen short of his glory.” When the scripture tells that God sent Jesus as our propitiation as we learned in class is meaning our substitution and covering and for us and it works inside of us as a moral influence. Praise the Lord! See Montes if I thought I could do anything for myself or that I was good enough just a little I would fool myself that I could be good enough in my own strength. Yes, I agree with you it is encouraging to know that the Angels of the Lord are with me throughout the ages and I can depend on it.
Divine foreknowledge, Human freewill, and Legal Universal Justification Part I
How does God KNOW what is yet to be? How does He KNOW all the infinite possible choices of free willed beings? The issue of divine foreknowledge and human freewill has been with us for centuries now. And its ripple effects are felt as far as soteriology is concerned. In this short refection, I shall endeavor to briefly discuss the roots of this seemingly paradoxical question between divine foreknowledge and human freewill.
Traditionally, classical theology believed God to be both timeless and spaceless; the idea that finds its roots in platonic philosophy. Many early Christian thinkers such Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine adopted this platonic dualism in their theological enterprises. In turn, these influenced many protestant theologians such John Calvin and others.
Because in classical theology God is removed from our temporal world, his divine acts and will exist outside of time, and as result, God is not involved in our time and space. This view of God is what births the idea that divine activities have decreed what will happen in the future. This notion makes all future possible choices by free will beings not really free. Why? A timeless God decided timelessly what will occur and we cannot human beings have a choice, but to accept what God already decided.
The above thinking makes the future closed, that is, God already determined our choices. This view raises serious questions such as:
1. Where is Human freedom? 2. Is God love or coercive?
In attempt to answer questions such as the ones above, classical theologians opted for “compatibility.” A term used to mean that our freedom is compatible with God’s foreknowledge. Also, when taken to its logical end, classical view of the foreknowledge of God breeds into “once saved always saved,” “double predestination” by Calvin, universal legal justification[1] , and etc. --
1. Looking at Ángel Manuel Rodríguez’s point #2 in the article, “Some Problems with Legal Universal Justification,” the presupposition of this view of justification seems to be interrelated with divine foreknowledge and human will.
Romans 9 In this chapter it definitely seems like Calvin was right regarding predestination. Paul uses some pretty strong language that seems to say God chooses whom to bless and whom to curse and that we are simply the recipients of which ever decision He makes towards us. However, I think that in this chapter we must “read between the lines” as Dr. Hanna has said. We need to keep the big picture in mind. If we consider the plan of salvation then it will become easier to make sense of this chapter. Let’s focus on Paul’s comments regarding Pharaoh. God sent Moses to deliver the Israelites from bondage by sending a message to Pharaoh; “Let my people go.” Pharaoh had two choices; submit or rebel. God was intervening in human affairs. Whenever God intervenes in history and humans are aware of it then humans are also left with a choice. They can submit to God’s plan or reject it. If they submit then it will lead to salvation. In Pharaoh’s case, I’m sure that Egypt’s history would be different if they would have gladly accepted God’s will and allowed Israel to leave, maybe even forming a friendly alliance with them. Eventually, God would have reached out to Egypt and would have gladly accepted them in. We have evidence of God’s plan for Egypt in Isaiah 19 where he looks forward to the day that Egypt would accept God. However, since Pharaoh rejected God’s will things as history states. If God were never to intervene then there would be no choice to make. Since God does intervene then there is a choice to make, and it is His intervention that makes Him ultimately responsible for blessing or cursing. The same can be said of Ishmael and Isaac; and Jacob and Esau. The cursed brothers could have accepted God’s will that the covenant blessings rested on their younger brothers and not on them, but they didn’t. They both refused to submit. Although Jacob and Esau had somewhat of a relationship, Esau never served Jacob. Therefore, the curse or blessing depends on how we respond to God’s intervention/call; will we reject it or accept it.
Analysis of the Doctrine of Universal "Legal" Justification
Larry J. Kane
We have to admit that it is pretty messed up that we are under wrath because of Adam’s choice. Our initial response to this truth is “I wasn’t there, why do I have to suffer for Adam’s mistake.” I could see why many people would believe in Universal “Legal” Justification. I would agree with Kane that we must look at the passage in context to discover what Paul is really saying in these passages. Is there any truth in what the Universal “Justifiers” believe? I have to admit, it is hard for me to accept that because of what Adam did I have to suffer. It’s true; I would have done the same thing if I were Adam, which is why we are all under sin. But there is one big difference between Adam and myself. Adam lived on the other side of sin and I live on this side. When we consider the unfallen worlds and even the angels, they were able to make a choice in their perfect state. However, we have to make our choice in a world that has been polluted with sin and with natures that are bent towards sin (not even Christ had a propensity towards sin). I hate to play the devil’s advocate, but I think it’s necessary in order for us to understand why some believe in Universal Justification. They cannot see it any other way because they feel it is entirely unfair for God to require so much from us given our depraved condition. Looking to Romans 5:19-21 offers a solution. Two destinies have been laid out by God; one through the first Adam and one through the second Adam. Both are accepted by faith. Both require a decision on our part; a decision. We must choose to accept Christ or reject Him. Once we accept Him then everything is taken care of. It all boils down to a decision. Recognition of what Adam has done and the ramifications of that decision and then accepting what Christ has done and the ramifications of that decision. Salvation is by grace through faith, but we have to accept it and hold on to it. Dare I say that it would be unfair if it were any other way? Yes, I would.
The issues arising from classical theology because of its views on divine foreknowledge and human freewill have not gone unnoticed! As Richard Rice points out, “…classic view of divine foreknowledge requires a definitive or closed view of reality.”[1] Obviously, Rice is reacting to how classical view defines divine foreknowledge from texts such as Mal. 3:6, Hebrews 13:8, and James 1:17. [2]
It is clear that the fundamental challenge of classical view is a departure from scripture and a hermeneutical one. Why? In classical view, God is viewed as timeless or changeless. Rice and “open view of God” theologians react on this false view of God and propose a God who is changing to adopt to new stimuli.
While Richard Rice and other evangelical theologians clearly affirm an open future, they clearly negate the foreknowledge of God. Here is how Rice negates the foreknowledge of God:
One way to express the basic difference between the usual view of God’s relation to the world and the alternative this book proposes is to say that they involve contrasting concepts of the future. The customary view states that God knows the future in all its detail. It implies that the future itself is there to be known – fixed and changeless in every respect. We have seen that such a concept excludes creaturely freedom because genuine freedom requires that part of the future be indefinite until decided by free personal agents. In order to affirm creaturely freedom, the open view of God maintains that certain aspects of the future are as yet indefinite. Therefore they are unknowable. And this means that God’s knowledge of the future cannot be exhaustive. [3]
The challenge with this view is that it overlooks substantial Biblical evidence pointing to the foreknowledge of God. For example, the majority of the Book of Daniel and Revelation would have to be interpreted differently if we are to hold the open view of God as true!
I agree with Rice that the future is open to us. However, I disagree with him when he denies the foreknowledge of God by citing its violation of human freedom. Because we don’t know the full nature of God, we cannot reduce Him to our finite mind and concept of time and reality. In addition, given that we don’t know “how” God knows, we must be honest and consistent with Biblical data. God’s ability to predict infinite possible choices of free willed beings is the ultimate test of foreknowledge!
-- 1 Richard Rice, The Openness of God: The relationship of divine foreknowledge and Human Free Will (Washington, MD: Review & Herald , 1980). 18. 2 Ibid., p. 12, 21. 3 Ibid., p. 45
i am commenting on Enoch's pertaining to the cross and its atoning properties for the sinner. i agree that we often look at the cross and maximize what the cross has meant in the past. And yet i am not sure that the emphasis placed here is sufficient enough. I know that :Paul has spent an enormous amount of time preaching the cross and Christ crucified and yet i believe that If Paul were here today. He would be preaching the second coming as much as He preached the cross in the past. Jesus wants us to look forward to His return, just as He wanted the Jews to look for ward to him the first time he came. I already am clear how wrong i am, but what gives me hope is knowing that regardless who I am, He still came and died for my sins. Rom. 5:7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— I know that we want to keep punishing our selves for the wrong that we have done, but in that we should remember that jesus came at the darkest hour of earths history to bring the light of his love and now He is allowing the poison of life to continue so that He can refine us for the future. Lets look up with great anticipation while we wait for our deliverer to come.
I am commenting on Andrews Blog Two destinies have been laid out by God; one through the first Adam and one through the second Adam. Both are accepted by faith. Both require a decision on our part; a decision. We must choose to accept Christ or reject Him. Once we accept Him then everything is taken care of. It all boils down to a decision. Recognition of what Adam has done and the ramifications of that decision and then accepting what Christ has done and the ramifications of that decision. Salvation is by grace through faith, but we have to accept it and hold on to it. Dare I say that it would be unfair if it were any other way? Yes, I would.
What we must understand is that life really is not fair. And God who knows it all has created an environment so that no one cannot say that He is not loving. He allows it to rain on the just and the unjust. Here is where the beauty of the gospel lies. People that do not deserve to be saved and even those that do not want to be saved, God is trying to love them into the kingdom so that that if they refuse they will have no one to blame but themselves. Through the first Adam we all die, through jesus we live. it seems as though there are so many contradictions to Gods love, but if you look at the pre fall and the post fall. god has always asked for obedience and trust. We need to come to a place where we understand that God wants His people to be saved even though the devil does not like it or want it to happen. We should know that the penalty for sin isn't for us it is ultimately for Satan. If we choose not to accept this we will receive a penalty that only Satan deserves. This is why the gift of God and from God is eternal life.Satan give nothing, His motives are ultimately always to cause us to be separated from the ultimate gift giver.
Lenora D. Muse Reflection #5 Elected by Angel Manuel Rodriguez
I do understand the author of this article is not writing on the connection between free-will and election, but through his discussion I can see where free-will can be understood. I agree with the author that by reading the first and third verse help you interpret that Ephesians 1:4 is talking about the saints or the faithful believers of Christ and not the whole world. Meanwhile, in John 3: 16 17, 18“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath no believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” We can say that God has provided salvation through His son Jesus for the world. At the same time the “Whosoever believe shows how the term “Elected” come into play. Those elected would be those whosoever believers and those that choose not to will not have to feel forced against their will.
When I look at the call of a Pastor I see it as an “Election” in the way the author talks about the theological way it is used in the New Testament where it refers to those that believe in Christ and has accept Him as their saviour and is set aside to preach the gospel message as a particular purpose. We do know that all believers are to minister to others and share the gospel as well.
I do understand the concept “Pretemporal Election in Christ,” that election was from God without any connection with our choice before the world was created, I have to admit that was the first time I saw pretemporal used with election. This shows me a caring God but a fair God that still gave me the opportunity to choice if I want to receive this wonderful gift of salvation just in case I turn away from Him. Yes, I do agree the work of God through Jesus is a mystery. A powerful twist mentioned in the article was that it was not just for salvation but to a holy life. As we think of Christ and how he lived in sinful flesh, as it was called, yet without sin he showed us how a holy life could be attain by staying connected with his Father.
I agree with the author in Ephesians 1: 4 there is nothing that provides proof that god has predestine those that are saved and those that are lost by name, but only by the choice each person makes will determine that. Paul is assuring those that believe in Jesus that through Him they would be holy and blameless in God’s sight.
Lenora D. Muse Reflection #6 The Wesleyan Connection By Woodrow W. Whidden
This article draws attention to the Wesleyan doctrine and its impact on Adventist theological formation. I really believe that the average layperson in the church do not fully comprehend the parts that came together to make us the body that we are. I am still learning myself.
“Prevenient grace” was one of the hallmarks of Wesley’s beliefs. He maintained that God impressed upon humankind, both his love and the necessity of His gothic love, whose redemptive powers helps to overcomes the abyss caused by sin. The authors’ teaching focus on the concept that we are either comfortable or unaware of the role sin plays in destroying our lives. God aggressively seek us out to educate and reattach us to His kingdom.
He strokes the fires that advocate justification by grace is more than a proposal, but is what the Christian experience is all about. He explores the interrelation between justification and sanctification that leads to salvation. What Wesley did have a problem with, was the belief by Protestants, that Jesus’’ role on earth alone, and His ultimate sacrifice, was enough to guarantee us eternal life. His perspective dwells into our actions, which include a conscience decision to confess, repent and following the teachings of Jesus, which are important aspect of salvation.
Wesley strongly espoused that believing along, was not sufficient to receive the full blessings of the Lord. He taught that Christianity was an actionable noun. This caused his detractors to fervently oppose him. Even today, many who claim the mantle of being “saved,” feel that they only have to attend worship services and pay tithes and they are a shoo-in for Heavens’ gates.
Randy Maddox, a theologian, expresses it best, by stating that the way to salvation is a series of steps and actions, more then a leap into glory.
Wesley preached that sanctification was a result of recognizing that it is growth process. It involved both the body and the soul. He expressed that sin was a cause and effect situation. “Sin affected the body, but originated in the soul.” His labeling sin as improper and proper is definitely food for thought. Proper sin is intentionally going against God’s law. Improper sin is the stumbles we make, as we follow the pathway of righteousness. It is also called “mortal versus venial sins.”
Sister Ellen White also advocated that sanctification involved more then listening and accepting the teachings of Christ. She maintained that we had to grow in Christ to live in eternality with the Lord. She wanted the saints to know that sin could not be destroyed, but could be overcome. I feel that their arguments on the subject of sin and salvation should be taught on a regular basis from both the pulpit, as well as in laypersons workshops.
Wesley’s thoughts on the investigative judgment process further raised a few eyebrows. He shows the synergy between the Latin West and the Eastern traditions of the juridical process that encompass investigate judgment. He leads into that by insisting that final justification disputes the arguments that merits and works get you to heaven. He places the importance of faith and God’s judgment as primary to the end result. Reading this article alone may not convince you of his views, careful study and research might.
Blog on Chapter 3 Understanding Scripture: Presuppositions in the interpretation of scripture It is interesting understanding why and the affect of presuppositions in the interpretation of scripture. As with any other thing people, food, even movies, people have a predetermined expectation or bias before they open God’s word. Now this isn’t always bad just as expecting the correct flavor for Morningstar grillers so it is with the presupposition of God’s word when a person believes that it is “in an indivisible, indistinguishable union of the divine and the human.” However it is when presuppositions prevent us from hearing the Word of God and or being moved by the Holy Spirit there becomes an issue. Creation is an excellent parallel to this thought. In creation the Word of God spoke and made things stand in their place. In addition, even before that the Holy Spirit moved upon the face of the earth. Both were needed for the earth to have new things, and improvements. It is the same way in our life. The transforming power of God’s Holy Spirit is needed before we hear God’s Word, so that we don’t impede the new things God has in store for us. And again even as creation has being hurt by sin so has our interpretation of the bible. However again just as we can still see and enjoy God thru creation so we can still see and enjoy God’s messages to us in His holy word if we only open, honest, faithful, obedient, loving, and prayerful.
Blog on Chapter 4 Understanding Scripture: Revelation and Inspiration “Theopneustos” The greek work for God breathed. I had never considered the following question until it was raised by the author. What exactly does it mean when it says the scriptures were God breathed? It’s a very interesting statement. There are so many angles you could look at it. Are the scriptures God breathed in the same way that the stars in heavens breathed out by our Creator at the beginning of time created for the same purpose: to give us Light that can guide us in the darkness after the son had left. Did God breathed also refer to the Holy Spirit being a part of the DNA of scripture? So many thought arise even as we attempt to interpret this metaphorically. Even more interesting how do the bible writers fit within the scheme of “theopneustos”? As stated in class even when Paul wrote that he wasn’t referring to the New Testament. Even if you say that that is was a manifestation of God’s thoughts and actions you still cannot fully explain the method to receiving and communicating God’s thoughts and actions in a human being. Examining verbal inspiration and thought inspiration still leads to more questions no matter which view or even hybrid view you decide.
This comment is on Montes writing about what “James Whites suggested the Review Readers to preach Christ more.” Montes your reflection excited me to think what my belief in this whole matter is. I agree we need to preach and teach more about the character of Christ and I take the scripture at face value that says, “By beholding you become changed.” At the trial before Caiapas Ellen White says, “For a moment the divinity of Christ flashed through His guise of humanity. The High Priest felt the Saviour’s eye penetrate as if he was reading the hidden thoughts, and burn into his heart. Never in afterlife did he forget this moment.” DA 707 I believe as we look into the character of Jesus as to look in His eyes we become changed inwardly first and those sins that were once appealing to us are no longer appealing we began to hate sin. Praise God for sealing us. I believe we still have an active role by having the desire to be like the character of Christ. Finally, I believe the moment of transformation starts, when I give my life to God and each day is another moment of transformation until our glorification at Jesus return. As for my dirty robe I have chosen to take Christ robe of righteousness so mine will be hid behind His. Truly, I am learning how important it is to lean fully on Christ as I have watched myself fail to many times as I try to do it alone.
My comment is for Valmy Stephen Karemera on Divine foreknowledge and Human freewill Part II I believe as we discussed in class that God does have foreknowledge and I believe the future is open and not closed that our fate is predestined that we can’t have freewill to choose our own destiny. Like we discussed about Judas having the opportunity to repent but it would not have stopped the turn of events that were prophesied. God has allowed prophetic messages to be conditional where the person or people can make change in their lives that cause them to turn back to God. And serve Him. I looked up the text Mal. 3:6, Hebrews 13:8, and James 1:17 and I only saw that the text was saying God never change and I believe His character never change, but it is His chose to change whatever He choices. I don’t see foreknowledge open or close in those texts. I am interested in knowing why the Book of Daniel and Revelation has to be interpreted if the open view of God is true? I have faith that events can happen the way Jesus as set, even if personal choices are made.
While reading Lenora’s reaction the following statement caught my attention. Here it is: As for my dirty robe I have chosen to take Christ robe of righteousness so mine will be hid behind His. The thought that came to mind was there is no salvation without forgiveness. And three people make forgiveness possible and those individuals also join in for salvation to become a reality. Whether it is forgiveness or Salvation God, the offender, and the offended play a crucial role. The idea I want to convey is that if our robe is dirty and we come to the realization that we need to wear clean clothes then we do not just take the robe of Christ because it is clean and put it on. It makes more sense to take off our dirty garment, while being naked we feel ashamed, and cling to Christ for Him to give his robe. When it comes to salvation, no matter how often we wash our clothes are always dirty. Christ’s robe is pure and clean and fits us well enough for the kingdom. No need to go back and pick up our former clothes. It is not clean anyway! We may as well keep on us His robe. There is a tendency to think that Christ’s robe covers ours or hides behind His as it seems to be indicated in statement my colleague mentioned above. That idea is not conducive and is questionable. When Christ dresses us up we don’t have our clothes on. Our robe is not hiding behind Jesus’. We take on His righteousness and that is good enough. Christ does not cover our sins. He removes our sins and throws them in the depth of the sea or the abyss and now, with Christ’s robe on, we stand as though we had never sinned. Let’s face it! If we hide anything sooner or later somebody somehow will go to look for it and will find it. I am saying we cannot keep our clothes on while at the same time we have Christ’s is on us. It is His robe or mine.
What Christ does He does it wholeheartedly and wholly. Whenever we approach Him with our dirty cloak He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse from all unrighteousness. He does not do half job. When Christ for us He does a though job. When He forgives us our debts He sets us free and if the Son of man sets you free, my friend, you are free indeed. This message of liberation, deliverance, and freedom has been given to the church, the body of Christ on earth. Whatever the church binds on earth has been bound in heaven and whatever the church looses on earth has been loosed in heaven. If heaven emptied itself and forgave humanity without any reservation how much more should the followers of Christ do the same? We are called to forgive as Christ has forgiven us; we are called to set others free as Christ has set us free; we are called to cancel the debts of others as God has canceled ours in Christ Jesus. Even though we did not have enough time to expound on many issues like forgiveness relating to salvation in the doctrine of Salvation, still forgiveness, in my mind, is so crucial that I don’t see how one can be saved without forgiving and having been forgiven. It is the belief of some people that the church has certain restrictions on forgiveness; however, I feel that should not be the case. Yeah, some professors and students are in agreement that there are sins which only God can forgive. What do you think? As for me, if Christ forgives people who am I to keep them in bondage? In my understanding, sin always involves three people: God, the sinner, and the victim. The victim may be singular or plural. If I sin against you ask you for forgiveness by refraining granting me forgiveness you hold on to my salvation. One thing God always does is forgiving whoever asks for forgiveness. This is a given once one asks. Without forgiveness there is no calling, justification, sanctification, and glorification. Therefore there is no salvation. See, Jesus forgives us to save us. The church should forgive people neither three times nor seven times nor seventy seven times seven, but as long as human’s breath lasts.
The doctrine of salvation Hand in Hand with Evangelism During this semester, we've all been exposed to the larger dimension of the Doctrine of Salvation. Many have been surprised by their ignorance about salvation. Together, we learned and unlearned some stereotypes that we dragged after us for years in the Church. Personally, I allowed myself to go further in my questions. It is important to listen to what others say and read what those who are recognized as experts and masters have written in their respective fields. Sometimes we must implement and follow word by word what the masters say or write. However, I remain convinced that God gives intelligence to his Church, namely to the members of his church, in order to continue their research in the understanding of what He wants for their life, and especially how to tell others who live in ignorance of such a great salvation. Having said that, I realize that as minister of the gospel in training, we are obliged to put our knowledge in simple word, accessible to others and communicated through evangelism. While we are deepening in its knowledge, we find that the doctrine of salvation is a well expanded field. How to sum up everything that is said? The triangle of the doctrine of salvation is constructed on justification, sanctification and glorification. However, in the sphere of reflection on salvation, we believe it is important to integrate evangelism. Ellen G. White wrote, “This is God’s plan that men and women who are partakers of this great salvation through Jesus Christ, should be his missionaries, bodies of light throughout the world.” The doctrine of salvation, once out of the seminary walls, must join the others through evangelism. While reading the papers of my colleagues, I have highlighted some reasons why evangelism must be integrated into the doctrine of salvation: 1. Human beings are important in the eyes of God. The importance that we have in the eyes of God is manifested in that he gave what he holds most dear as a ransom in place of fallen humanity.
2. Human beings are lost because of sin. Today, sin is trivialized to the point where we must define what is meant by sin. As such, many strongly believe that grace is sufficient to receive salvation without realizing that grace is obtained in Jesus by confessing and acknowledging that God's law has been violated and it continues to be violated with no regrets.
3. Humans need Christ. Without Christ in our life, the intellectual knowledge of the doctrine of salvation is a concept among others. We have learned to clearly illustrate it in chart but it is necessary to impress it upon people's mind through evangelism.
4. The salvation's message is universal. According to statistics on religions around the world, there are more than 30 thousand denominations only within Christianity. Knowing that the Seventh Day Adventist Church is the last one with a message addressed to all peoples, all languages, all nations, evangelism is therefore more important in order to make the doctrine of salvation available to all who are interested in their eternal salvation.
The “Primacy of the Gospel Committee – Report” was very interesting. I was never aware that the church was accused of not preaching the full Gospel. I do believe that the 1888 message of justification by faith needs further study. There was a specific reason why God was leading His people to that message and I do not believe that we have grasped His intent as of yet. I would also agree that the beliefs of the Church agree with the 1888 message. However, I believe that in practice we do not always display that belief. Adventists have been successful in creating a stigma among the Christian community as legalists. In my undergraduate studies I was taught they as a pastor I should never throw out a criticism just because I don’t agree with it. I believe that as a church we must do the same thing. Are we truly presenting the Gospel as it is in practice? Most times Adventists feel it important to persuade convert others on the Sabbath truth before introducing them to Jesus. Our evangelistic endeavors are often focused on doctrines and prophecies rather than on Jesus. Again, I do believe that on paper our Church believes in the Gospel, but we need the Gospel to be practical.
The fact that Ellen White stood alone on her views of justification by faith before 1888 is alarming. It speaks to the truth that Adventists are somewhat predisposed to a legalistic view of salvation. She stood alone in her defense of Jones and Waggoner. In the four years that followed 1888 she wrote most of her work on the topic of justification by faith and many continued to have a problem with her writings. It seems that they feared that the law would be done away with, thus threatening the Sabbath in SDA eschatology. Has justification by faith truly been accepted by SDA’s today, or are we still cherishing the law in order to protect the fourth commandment? Although Ellen White spent a lot of time speaking about justification by faith, she also spoke of the necessity of the law. It seems that the tension between faith and works has been around since the birth of Christianity. Ellen White makes sure to touch both aspects (faith and works) in order to present a balanced approach to salvation. Christ’s righteousness is always needed because a human’s good works are tainted with sin. The works are produced by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but even these works prompted by God have to be mingled with the blood of Jesus. Everything that we do must be splashed by the blood. If the blood is not applied, then nothing that we do will be accepted by God.
This is a short reflection on Ivan T. Blazen's excellent article "Justification by Faith and Judgment According to Works". (BRI) I won't discuss whole article but focus on parts which for me were especially interesting. In discussion of Assurance Blazen points out to the "how much more" concept of Romans 5. If we as believers are justified now, how much more we will be saved in the judgment at the end. And later if through Adam we have been affected with sin how much more through Christ we are affected with grace, righteousness, and life. I think this might be an interesting point in our discussion about larger view of salvation. I also like how Blazen summarizes a necessity of how we receive salvation. He says that Paul's righteousness is by faith, and not righteousness by fate. I think in a light of what we studied we couldn't agree more. It's interesting to point out how Abraham was saved, he was saved by the promise. God's promise became reality for him, in a sense God created the reality of Salvation for Abraham, and Abraham chose to believe it. It's also in faith that we can be "directly and personally involved with the promise of God." Later Blazen points out that Jesus said that doing works of God is to believe in Christ. Apostle Paul later builds on Christs statement that doing works of God is believe in Him (John 6:28,29) in Romans 10:3 and 10:16. I really like also how the author describes new life in conformity to God, in paraphrase he is saying that God's mercy is given and effective in us only if it bears fruit. Life received from God has to has to be the life lived for God. After reviewing some key texts from Apostle Paul letters author come to a conclusion that scripture and specifically Paul in his writing leave no place for two extreme and etremely mistaken positions one being "Never quite saved at all, no matter what Christ has done," or "Once saved, always saved, no matter what I may do." It's important that author mentions the fact of "more and more" principle (1 Thess 4:1,9,10). Clearly Paul teaches that the standard of perfection is always ahead of the Christian and we can never say that we fully reached it, and this is because "the gift of Christ is so infinite that His claim must be infinite as well." (bigger view of salvation) I think that Blazen gives also the best explanation to waht is judgment according to our works: "The judgment according to works teaches that the cross, as a saving event, puts us under the lordship, or reign, of Christ." In conclusion the author makes his point very well in the article that neither justification nor assurance of salvation come as a result of our works or even faith and works. Both justification and assurance come through the work of Christ as our Savior.
Response to Valmy Stephen Karemera’s Comments on Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freewill The comments made were more against the open view of God than in defense of the Classical Theology which promotes the problem of a closed future. While many will agree that an open future is helpful and more consistent with freewill, there are others who go as far as to say God does not know all the details of the future. This does not mean that the open view does not believe God is ignorant about what will and can happen in the future. The point that claimed the open view of God is wrong because we would have to have different interpretations of Revelation and Daniel that God has its value. However, should we hold on to our presuppositions despite seeing problems with the a closed future of God? Furthermore, it would be helpful and fair to have mentioned how the open view of God explains prophecy in Scripture. I also agree that we must not reduce God because we do not understand fully, but would it be fair to make claims about God that do not make sense?
In our doctrine of salvation class we discussed a faith versus works. When most Christians think of faith they refer to Paul’s version of faith found in that was classified as the Pauline writings. The others would look at James version of faith versus works and how your faith cannot be true unless it works. And so we have a classic confrontation between Christians who believe in faith only and Christians who believe it works. Throughout the semester we have been challenged to think bigger to think a larger scale than our original model of thinking, and if that is to happen then we need to re-examine the faith works principle. I will first think that we need to do when looking at this issue between faith and works is to examine the audience that both Paul and James were dressing. When we do this we will find that maybe Paul and James were not contradicting each other or rather speaking of the same thing to two groups of people with different mindsets. Paul outlined in Romans eight verse three “for what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh God sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit”. So Paul is saying here that the law is limited in what it can do. That limitation is not a compilation the task which Jesus Christ has set out to do by dying for sinful human beings to reconcile them to God. Paul is speaking to us so that we might have faith in what Christ has done as our sacrifice and what he has done to make salvation readily available to us. Paul is not saying however that all a Christian needs is faith, he is emphasizing that works alone cannot save you. James however says and James chapter 2 verse 14 “what is a prophet my brethren though a man say he has faith and have not works can faith save him if a brother or sister be naked and destitute of daily bread and one of these is onto him depart in peace and be warmed and filled notwithstanding that you give him not those things which are needful to the body what does it profit even so faith if it has not works is dead being alone”. It has been argued that James is an advocate for works alone clearly in this text it is seen that James is simply saying that if one believes that you can have faith and faith only menu were equally as wrong as someone who believes that you can have works and works only to achieve salvation. There has to be a harmony and a blending of both. That’s why your faith without works is dead. And your works without faith is equally dead. I personally believe that both James and Paul were speaking of the same thing and are not in contradiction but are rather in harmony with each other. Faith can have a passive side or an active side, and with regards to the arguments both are required and necessary for to the faith. The passiveness of our faith is that which we receive from God, were the Bible speaks of every man being given a measure of faith. The activeness however is the expression of our faith through works which make it active.
This is a short summary of the article by Ángel Manuel Rodríguez "Christ Saved the Human Race" (BRI) Rodriguez points out that Ellen White affirms that Salvation is provided for us but we need to accept it to be as he writes "legally saved". Christ made salvation possible to us by becoming a bridge between God and sinful humanity. He made this possible by his life of obedience and sacrificial death on the Cross. Secondly he explains that based on Ellen White quotations we may say that every human being that comes to the world already belongs to Christ, that is because the price of their salvation is paid. But life of obedience to God demonstrate our consent to become His children from our own will. But not only we belong to him because of salvation but also because he is our Creator. Without salvation though belonging to Him only because of the fact of creation would bring us death. Ellen White affirms that salvation is big enough that everybody who needs it can be saved, but she emphatically denies that those who live in their sins daily can expect their sins to be covered by Christ in the end. Satan claims that sinners certainly belong to him, but Ellen White points out that he has no right to such a claim. We belong to Christ now even more then at creation, but only if we will choose this reality. Christ made it possible and we can claim it and live free from the power of Satan.
In reading the article by,” George W. Reid, the former director for the biblical research institute, I must admit that he writes something that is true and also something that I have always known. However, this article has caused me to reflect yet again on the love of Christ. In this article Reid writes that it is not us who reached out to Jesus, rather it is Jesus that reached out to us; while we were yet sinners. What is the point of this article? It serves as a reminder that if we believe that we have been bought with a price, then there should be a response to this love that God has shown us to others. Another human being did not ransom us; God himself ransomed himself for us. Now I know that we have been talking about moral influence, in that what Christ shed blood has done for us should cause us to live our lives in a manner that is indicative of who has bought us. When he bought us he paid for us using the highest cost, his blood and his life. However for this blog, I would like to go further by saying that Christ death for sinners should give us a better sense of what value is, in the eyes of God. Perhaps when we start seeing the cross of cavalry as the place where Christ died for all who do not believe, those that have believed believe and will believe, and then perhaps it would inform how we do ministry. Perhaps then it would help us to focus and point our time and efforts in the creases and dark corners of this earth where” worst” case scenarios dwell. While I agree that love is a principle and not an emotion, love is not always defined or exhibited in feel good moments or with bells and whistles. Sometimes true love costs. This evening while I was relaxing watching my favorite show. There was a dilemma, the dilemma was that someone was going to die and only the doctor that happened to be the patient’s friend could help the sick man from dying. The patient needed a liver transplant. The doctor in an unprecedented move decided to give the man a piece of his liver, so that he might be able to be restored and reconciled with his sick family. Now I know that this show is fictional but there is a point to be drawn here. After the surgery, the man that was hours before on his deathbed had a new lease on life and on the road to recovery. The doctor risked his life to save his patient and friend. When the doctor came to check on him to see how he was. The room was empty his family that was there before crying and supporting him was gone. When the doctor asked what had happened he explained that when he thought he was going to die he needed his family, but now that it looked like he was going to live he no longer needed them. Even though he was not fully recovered yet he had already made up his mind to go back to his old lifestyle. Here's the point, even though we have been on our death beds spiritually, emotionally and physically Jesus has willingly donated his life for us already even though he knows that many of us will dump him for the pleasures of this world. The difference in this story is that the doctor in this show is not real and He probably would not have donated his liver if he knew that his patient and friend would have dumped the family. Jesus is real and He knows what all of us will do after he has given his life for us and yet, while we were yet sinners Christ, God himself died for the ungodly.
I was asked the question Do we have any contribution as human beings towards our salvation .At first this seemed to be a very simple and easy question to answer, but the more I think about it some more that I know it’s not. On one hand we know that Christ came he was born as a human while yet still being fully God lived a perfect life and died a perfect sacrifice and rose on the third day. And all this was necessary and essential for humanity to be saved We remember as Christ was praying in the garden he prayed to the father and asked “if it is possible take this cup from me nevertheless not my will but thy will be done”. It is clear that Christ needed to die to pay the ransom for humanity. A little his death was important his resurrection was equally as important as was the life that he lived. While Christ was fully divine is also fully human. Now we use regular human beings human beings today cannot claim to divinity of Christ yet because of his dependence on the father we too can live a righteous life as he did. However our contribution to our salvation is not measured by the works in which we attain but rather the faith that we apply. John 3:16 says” for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life”. In order for a human being to attain salvation that individual must leave that Jesus Christ the son of God came to save them. So our contribution to salvation is the active faith that we exemplify in our lives.
The Dynamics of Salvation (article on the BRI website)
As discussed in this class this semester, salvation is much bigger than we have even began to think about it. What Christ has done in comparison to what he has asked for us to do just doesn’t seem to be fair.. Our faces are turned away from Him and we lack even the desire to return. Our will is so weakened that we continually choose only evil (Jer. 13:23). We have to admit that even in coming to God without God we would not have the desire to come to him and receive that free gift of salvation. The problem lies in the fact that many of us reject the gift because of our dullness of understanding that God not only saves us, but He has also guaranteed us a new identity in him. This is key because when we think about it. God not only cleans us up, changes our blood stained sin filled bodies, but he also gives us a new identity. What makes this so powerful is that he puts us into a witness protection spiritual program whereby the enemy cannot find us, unless we disclose through a life again of sin where he can find us. Like the prodigal son who came home once he came to himself, the father covers a multitude of our sins with and through his grace. The secret of salvation is that it just does not make sense through the eyes of sinners. We have been adopted by God, so that we might be apart of the eternal family. We have been adapted by our creator, so that when others may turn their backs on us. The God head is ever watching and making sure that we are never without help especially in times of trouble. Salvation is not a concept, rather it is Gods ultimate expression of His love for us. Salvations love does make sense through our eyes, but it does through the eyes of an all knowing and loving God who chooses to give us that which we do not deserve because for many it is the only way that we will truly get a glimpse of the untapped love that God has for his creation. The question then becomes why do so many reject the free gift of salvation that Jesus has given? The answer ids this, when people that claim to have been transformed live transparent lives that reflect the glory and relentless unconditional love that Jesus is trying to show the world through us that exists in Jesus. The dynamic of salvation is this. When we live what we preach, then people will see who God is! Salvation can be summed up in one text. For God so loved the world…… you finish the rest of the verse and claim what Christ has done for you. The dynamic of salvation is that Christ did all that we needed him to do and is still through his Spirit working in our lives, therefore we live now with hope of one day being in Hid presence.
Some Problems with Legal Universal Justification Angel Manuel Rodriguez
It seems that generally Christians are misinterpreting what Rodriguez is presenting here in regards to Justification. Some people hold on to the misleading idea that the death of Christ on the cross is the final stage for the justification of all human. If that is so then there is no need to obey anything that God commanded for all are justified. However Paul is teaching that the sinner must have faith in that death on the cross. Can the sinner have faith and not responding to anything Christ commanded and still be saved? The death of Christ on the cross is for all human. It is a legal universal justification but the one that receives and accepts it by faith will be justified. Rodriguez is very clear in his definition: “Legal universal justification is a totally objective act that does not make any difference in the life of the individual until he or she is justified by faith, that is to say, when the person decides not to reject the gift of justification that is already his or hers.”
The entire human race is legally justified by the death of Christ and that does not meant that both of those that have faith and those that have not got faith will be saved. The difference will be the acceptance of justification by faith. There are people who choose not to accept that gift. If the cross justifies all then there’s no need for those who are not yet born to receive and accept justification by faith for they are already justified. The declaration of justification is followed by the reception of the Spirit and the new birth. The life of the sinner will be change in response to the love of God through His grace.
Another problem in the teaching of legal universal justification is the misusing of the phrase “in Christ.” As Rodriguez mentions that nowhere in the New Testament does it refer to the totality of the “human race as being present in Christ at the cross however it was exclusively used for those who by faith have been incorporated into Christ and His body, the Church.” If the whole human race were in Christ as we were in Adam then we are contributing to our salvation.
Universal legal justification view on faith can be a problem as it almost perceives faith as a meritorious act that plays no role on the justification of the sinner. And this is the justification that comes through grace alone and not through faith. So the role of faith is in question. God offers His grace to be received by faith and that does not mean that the sinner is justified already by just knowing that there’s grace, he has to have faith to receive the grace. Grace alone justification is a misunderstanding of what faith and grace is. Faith will prompt the believer to act and receive the grace from God to be justified so the misuse of universal legal justification portrays a lot of problems as Rodriguez presented.
Romans 8:29, 30. 29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.
These two verses are subject to lengthy discussions on the meaning of “foreknew” and “predestined” attracted attentions and has changes a lot of views about how God’s foresee the future. However according to discussions in class the theme of chapter 8 is “Freedom” and the center of discussion is the “Calling”. The order or stages of salvation are: Foreknowledge, Predestination, Calling, Justification and then Glorification. Paul confirms this: “For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another” (Gal 5:13). Paul here confirms the calling for freedom.
The context of Rom 8 is a discussion of “freedom” and Galatia associates “calling” with “freedom”. It means, for the good of those who are calling to freedom. The one thing people don’t understand is that God has predestined us to be “free”. This is the one thing we cannot get out of. But still we exercise our freedom to choose to love God or to hate God. We must understand also that God is omniscient and He foreknows the future, there’s no doubt about that. He knows everything and the Bible validates this: “Declaring the end from the beginning” (Isa 46:10). “Says the Lord, who makes these things known from long ago” (Acts 15:18). God knows the past, the present and the future.
Some believe that before the beginning of the world, God chose certain people to receive His gift of salvation. “Also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will” (Eph 1:11). God’s purpose is to offer salvation to the world as he planned to do long ago. God’s purpose to save is something we cannot prevent no matter what the devil do. What is clear is that God’s purpose for people was not an afterthought; it was settled before the foundation of the world. So God foreseen and predestined us to be free. The action of the devil was foreseen by God and made provision to meet that emergency. The question is: Does God’s foreknowledge of the future influence any event that He’s foreseen? Things do not happen because they are foreseen by God but foreseen because they will happen.
Here’s what the SDABC says: “God predestinated those whom He foreknew. . . . as God foresaw, and thus foreknew . . . . He coupled immediately with His foreknowledge the decision to predestinate them all to be saved. God never had any other purpose than salvation for the members of the human family. . . Salvation is offered freely to all. But not all accept the gospel invitation. Salvation is not forced upon us against our will. If we choose to oppose and resist God’s purpose, we shall be lost. Divine foreknowledge and divine predestination in no way exclude human liberty. Nowhere does Paul, or any other Bible writer, suggest that God has predestined certain men to be saved and certain others to be lost, regardless of their own choice in the matter” (Nichol, Francis D.: The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Volume 6. Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1978; 2002, S. 574).
It is clear here that our freedom is maintained. God calls us to be saved and it is up to the individual to choose a future life with God or a future of evil with Satan.
I want to share some ideas of my research paper as a reflection. History has given evidence that as the manner of communication changed (media), the perception of reality also changed (message), including man perception of a plan of salvation. In the Middle Ages the Catholic Church emphasized the use of iconography without the use of the Bible text to communicate salvation. This emphasis made God very transcendent and they appeal to the emotions and fear of the people to accept salvation. But with the Reformation the Bible was translated, spread and used to communicate salvation to the people. Worship and the communication of truth became more immanent and closer to the believer, using some cognitive process to interpret the writing revelation, not images. Salvation becomes more personalized than in the previous period. But this individualism is exaggerated in capitalism and illuminism. Max Weber in his work The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism explain that the principles of salvation of the Reformation made a shift in western culture. People become more individualistic. And with the Calvinistic major influence of predestination, capitalism as we know today rises. In the postmodern era the same connection between capitalism, self and religion rises. But now with the use of mass communication to proclaim the gospel. Mass media according to social studies, was made to magnify self, to please self and to sell products. So contemporary media function as the “church of the cult of the individual while the self is one of the sacred objects of media content” (ROTHENBUHLER, Eric. W. “The self as a sacred object in media” IN: LUNDBY, Knut. SALOKANGAS, Raimo. SUMILA-SEPPÄNEN, Johanna. Implications of the sacred in (post) modern media. Kungälv, Sweden: Nordicom, Göteborg University, 2006. p.31). My reflection is: How have Adventism dealt with this trend in Christianity to make very individualistic the gospel? Since mass media have a tendency to appeal to the individual emotion and not to the reason of man? I hope to research more about this here at Andrews. Because I have seem and felt the effect of mass media in the gospel commission. The message of salvation is “losing its power” in the mind of the media age because they can not recognize the transformation process of the biblical gospel, which involves humbleness and service. This is contrasted with the main characteristics of the media era which is individualism.
In your posting HOW DEEP IS YOUR LOVE you mention one thing that caught my attention: "Christ death for sinners should give us a better sense of what value is". After Lael Cesars sermon this morning I have being thinking about human values, unite and prejudice. Human beings because of sin makes value judgment wrongly, based on selfish pleasure and proximity. But the judgment of God is based on His love and grace. I am reading the DESIRE OF AGES again and is incredible the description of God's character in chapter 1. Service and love for the enemies, for those who does not deserve is the law of heaven. Sharing with other and giving what we have is the character of a godly person. But I have asked myself, Am I giving as Jesus gave Himself to me? Here at Andrews I have felt the gospel in action in my life. I receive food donation from PMC. This is a wonderful project that have shown me what is the impact of God’s salvation. But one thing still bothering me. Why we see lots of different nationalities to receive food but not together at worship and sharing? Why so many separation of black, white, asian, Spanish, Africans? I understand that language brings us together. I am part of a brazilian group. But I thing I have being separated from my brothers and sisters in Christ by a cultural wall that the gospel should destroy. Just some heart concerning…
Response to Andrew Pileggi: In your second post on the 11-29 you mention about the threat of soteriology in seventh-day eschatology. Today when people mention this threat existing in the 1888 era is the same we have today. But I want to alert that this is not the only problem we face as Adventists. I have been interested in the phenomenon of media and religion in my country. I want I have notice through research is the opposite emphasis of what happen in 1888. The love of Jesus without prophecy, judgment and law is so emphasized in sermons that the sweet name of Jesus have given birth to a new kind of Christians: diabetic Christians, as my theology professor in Brazil would name them. This new kind of Christianity is one of the reasons youth does not stay on the church also. Dudley’s research have shown that here in America Adventism is facing the same problem as in Brazil but in a bigger proportion. People are forgetting the prophetic roots of adventism and youth are rootless. And while mass media gives a humanistic, postmodern kind of Christianity, no compromise with the law of God is seen in lots of Adventist today. What I want to say is that Satan have put both problems to harass us as remnant. Legalism (saved by works), and apparently on the other side liberalism (saved without works). And we know from Scriptures that both are misrepresentation of the gospel and actually both are human independence of God. Let us be more holistically in our preaching (as Dr. Hanna beautifully puts on class)and be the kind of Adventist God expect from us.
ESCHATOLOGY, SALVATION AND APOSTLE PREACHING IN THE BOOK OF ACTS
As continuation of my reflections about salvation and existentialism, I want to reflect about the preaching of the Apostle in the book of Acts. Some have said that the problem of Adventism and Christianity is the preaching about a Jesus who judges and will give future deliverance. And that for Christianity to become more attractive to the postmodern the message should tell about the cross, Jesus love and present transformation only. But how was the preaching of the Christians in their beginning? The first discourse is of Peter in Pentecostes. He mention prophecy, Jesus death, resurrection, exaltation, final judgment and finishes with a call to repentance. Specially emphasis is given in the resurrection. The second preaching discourse is found in Acts 3 also by Peter. He starts with the God of Abraham represented in Jesus, resurrection of the Messiah, prophetic foretelling of Christ, call to repentance and promise of gift of the Holy Spirit. Resurrection is the element repeated in the end of the sermon. The third discourse is in Acts 4. Again Peter mention rejection of Jesus by Israel leaders. Jesus is the one crucified and resurrected. Only in Jesus there is salvation. Peter will continue in Acts 5 to talk about resurrection, exaltation and Israel rejection. But he mentions also obedience to God rather than man. Steven brings the next evangelistic sermon. Recounting the history of Israel and how Israel rejects the prophets of God, Stephens discourse is abruptly interrupted. It emphasize God’s judgment upon Israel rejection of the Messiah. It is mention that Philip and Paul announced Jesus to the people no detail is given more about their preaching in Acts 8 and 9. But in Peter’s sermon to Cornelius’ house again the content is revealed. The gospel is about Jesus who lived godly, died, was resurrected and is Judge of living and dead as foretold by prophecy. Paul’s sermon in Antioquia mention prophecies about Jesus ministry, Jesus death, and 3 times resurrection. He end with repentance and justification, not achieved by the law of Moses, which brings deliverance from judgment. In Acts 15 and the controversy about circumcision is inferred that to be a Christian involve change of lifestyle and obedience. In Athens to pagans Paul talks about creation, vanity of idols, repentance and eschatological judgment. The last point of Paul, about future hope of resurrection is the one who brought scandal to Greek lifestyle (Act.17:32). The gospel of Paul involved a change of lifestyle for both Jews and Gentiles, repentance to avoid future judgment, (Atc.20:21) and judgment and resurrection for the righteous dead (Act.23:6;24:15,25). This gospel message was given to Paul by Jesus Himself (Acts 26:14). Conversion, sanctification, obedience, resurrection from the dead are all indissoluble parts of the Gospel in Acts. And it is demonstrated also in the letters of the Apostles and in the Prophetic book of John. So to preach only Jesus crucified, His love to bring present positive feelings is not the gospel preached by the Apostles in Acts. Gospel involves repentance by reflecting in Jesus death, conversion from the gift of the Spirit in obedience to God, so people are ready to go through the future judgment. All this because there will be a future eternal recompense to those who believed and are transformed. But to those who life only to the present earth will be judged by Jesus and consumed by His coming.
in response to Rodrigo, i would like to say that i too see major challenges in the way that we organize ourselves under the guise of religion and church. it is really a shame that when we talk about value it is very isolated and in a vacuum most times.The only reason that we should assemble in different spaces should be on the basis of language assuming that all are in agreement on what our faith is.If Christ died to save the world then there must be an intentionality to reach anyone who needs to be reached. Regional conferences segregated churches, upper class elitist, contemporary songs versus hymnals youth days versus deacon and deaconess day. Really i think that our attention is misguided and we are misrepresenting the creator who died for sinners. THAT's everyone. When we get to a place where we seek the lost there will be a revival in our lives and in our churches. Rodrigo, you are on the right track we need to be intentional in eliminating the walls that separate, and head back to the cross. We might be surprised at the faces that will be there in need of the same unbiased savior.
i am responding to a portion of Andrews blog on November 25, 2009 ....Most times Adventists feel it important to persuade convert others on the Sabbath truth before introducing them to Jesus. i completely agree with him in that we often spend so much time trying to win people over to religion and doctrine and criteria to be saved. the people that are barely even able to look themselves in the mirror are driven further underground because they just don't have the fight in them. When are we going to get the point that jesus while he is king of kings and Lord of Lords, He did make a choice to come from heaven to save to the uttermost. Furthermore, why would people want to accept truth that is presented so harshly that it goes down so abrasively like a can of battery acid. I know that people need to understand what we believe and it should be clear as to what they are signing up for when they say that they want to be christians that join this church. However, you don't give a baby meat and then milk when their digestive system is not equipped to digest the richness of the meal. As students of the word, let us treat the broken hearted as a doctor does a sensitive surgery and watch them come to jesus saying what must i do to be saved.
The Doctrine of Salvation's intersection with Spiritual Formation
Lately I've noticed many similarities between our discussions on salvation and the experience of Spiritual Formation. Just as we cannot earn our salvation, we cannot transform ourselves in the process of spiritual formation. Similarly, we are still called to “work out our own salvation with trembling and fear” (Philippians 2:12), as well as called to disciplines in our spirituality. Disciplines like fasting, prayer, solitude, and contemplation of scripture. The premise behind our work in salvation is that none of the things we do can ever earn the grace God freely gives which saves us from sin. Similarly the premise behind Spiritual Formations is that there is nothing we can ever do to transform ourselves into the image of Christ. These are both processes which we are called to go through and work through even though there is no possible way we can work through them alone. They are both in fact the working of God in our lives to save us. Both from the penalty of sin and the effects of sin. I suppose the reason there is so much similarity between the two is that they are very connected. I believe we are sanctified through our relationship with Christ. This relationship is what constitutes Spiritual formation. Thus, as much as we (as theologians) can argue and contend about what exactly the experience of salvation entails, we all have the opportunity to witness a very visible and real framework in which salvation is daily taking place. We don't have to theorize about it, just live it. This is not to say that theorizing is bad, it is good for us to reflectively study the process of salvation, even when it is ever present with us. However, my realization is concerning the reasoning behind seeking a “bigger model”. We don't need to argue about what salvation entails and what it does not entail. Along with scripture we have experiential evidence through the process of spiritual formation. There is one caution concerning this though. I do not put our everyday experience on the same tier with scripture. Our experience, although very valuable and even vital for us to draw experiences from, still stand in subjection to the normative word of God. Our faith and the Bible affirms that in God's word, Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. In our experience, although we have the same Holy ghost available, we can be more sure when we compare our experiences to a common, authoritative source. Notwithstanding our sanctification is still inseparably bound up in the experience of Spiritual Formation. Under this premise, our experience helps us understand some things that we can only understand empirically. This is concerning the transition point between justification and sanctification. The transition point is so immediate, it would almost be fair to say that there is no separation. There is no point at which a person is justified yet not being sanctified. This is because if we truly view sanctification as an experience (as we do spiritual formations) we begin to see that part of the process was God's initiation precluding our response. God initiates and we respond. Once we respond to God, the processes, both of immediate justification and lifelong sanctification begin. Thus like two lines of a triangle begin simultaneously at one point. So the experience of justification and sanctification can be connected at a similarly convergent point. However, as far as images are concerned, I was careful not to say that sanctification begins at this point. I believe our sanctification, being properly viewed as beginning with God's initiation, begins before we even respond to God. Our response is just one point on the continuum of sanctification that happens to be connected with justification.
Follow up on Communication of Salvation I've been thinking about how to best follow up on my paper. To do so effectively would require more time than I have, however, I did feel burdened to reflectively think on one portion of follow up on my paper. That is particularly, which models of salvation are more appealing to the different stages of moral development. I realized that all models can communicate in some way to people in different stages of their moral development. However, different people will encounter different challenges depending on where they are in their moral development. For example, when it comes to the moral influence model, people in Kohlberg's preconventional stage of development are more likely to view God as unjust if they subscribe solely to the moral influence model. this is because their concept of right and wrong are based on a punishment and reward system. They have not yet comprehended such abstract ideas as social contracts. Thus they will have a harder time accepting the justice in Jesus being punished for what ever reason. They may also come to the erroneous conclusion that Jesus must have done something wrong. Similar challenges also exist with those in a preconventional stage of development in terms of the substitution model. They are more likely to subscribe to the victory model, the ransom model, and the satisfaction model. People in the conventional stage of moral reasoning, I believe, would encounter challenges in accepting the satisfaction model and the ransom model. They would be more apt to consider that the ransom was payed to the devil. This is because they view morality in terms of right and wrong based on relationships. Although this seems good at face value, deep down it leads them to ask questions about why God could not simply change His law to maintain the relationship. I want to note that none of these questions are "bad" questions. And all of them have come up before in the context of Bible studies and relationships in those seeking to learn the truth. We might however be able to anticipate these challenges depending on which level of moral development our seeking friend is currently operating in. As far as those in post conventional stages of development, they tend to develop abstract concepts of their own on what morality is based on. These concepts of theirs are usually based on life experience especially as they have passed through the other stages. The greatest challenge with them is helping them understand universal reconciliation in its proper framework. We don't believe the Bible teaches that everyone will be saved in the end, however, their abstract reasoning and view of social contracts might lead them to subscribe to this view point.
I imagine for those people who haven’t been exposed to Christianity and it’s doctrines, the cross must be a peculiar thing. I remember before I knew Christ and anything about Christianity, I heard this common statement of salvation: ‘Jesus died for our sins’. At that time I didn’t grasp the impact of what that meant. Why would someone die for someone’s sins? Why would that be necessary? Later in my journey I came to know the savior. I came to know that God gave up His son that whoever believes would not perish but have everlasting life. In accepting Jesus Christ I was ransomed to God. And boy was I! Even though my life took a huge turn for the better, I still didn’t grasp the implications of the atonement. What did it mean for me? What did it mean for God? I know that this meant a reconciliation between myself and God. Christ’s tremendous gift to humanity was the giving up of Himself- the righteous one, so that we could be with God forever. This is love. But I have come to learn that it does not just stop there. Surely His death was to ransom and reconcile, but what else? Christ is righteous, blameless, and pure. He died, but what for exactly? In George W. Reid’s ‘Why Did Jesus Die? How God Saves Us’, he points out the fact that this was not to appease God. The Father isn’t some grim and stern tyrant of the universe to whom Jesus came to achieve His favor. Jesus already had the Father’s favor, and because of the universe’s sin, He experienced the withdrawal of God’s presence only at the cross (Matthew 27). As Reid says, ‘He went to the place we really belong’- that place being utter separation from God. I really appreciate another notion Reid brings out in that the cross wasn’t a response to God’s demand, it was done at His initiative. This was of course because of His love (Jn 3:16), and because of something else. With the universe as witness, He took our place in order for us to be in heaven. God cannot just usher willful sinners into heaven, his law prohibits that. And for God to uphold His righteousness, His name, a cost for that forgiveness and pardon must be made. This is where Christ comes in. If we were arbitrarily granted admission to heaven, that would mean that God’s law was done away with and all the demands that He made were nullified. But Christ is the only one who could come before the planet and the universe to die in order that God’s love and justice remain intact. “Now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it...” (Romans 3:21). The cross is where heaven and earth, love and justice, God and humanity meet.
I am reacting to Chapter 6 in Woodrow Whidden’s book “Ellen White on Salvation”. It has to do with Ellen White’s views on our human nature, the level to which we have fallen, thoughts on human ‘depravity’, etc. I found myself agreeing with most everything that was stated (not surprising, since I was brought up in the SDA church), but have always been fascinated at the range of belief on this topic. The Bible is pretty silent about what exactly happened to our race at the fall, in fact, most of the ‘curses’ of the 2nd half of Genesis three seem to be dealing with physical realities more than theoretical states. Of course, we do have a few verses that help us out. Isaiah 64:6 states that our righteousness is as filthy rags to God, and Ecclesiastes 7:20 says that no-one has lived a righteous life. I also know there is a place in the New Testament Epistles that say that even our desire to repent comes from God (though I can’t seem to find it at the moment). Because of verses like these, some have come up with a doctrine of total depravity, and thus the entire work of salvation being provided by God. Consequences to this belief are conclusions such as dual predestination or universalism. But this seems to me to be a bit too far off the deep end. All through the scripture, we do see passages that indicate that our very real choice is involved in deciding whether to do right or wrong. Cain was given the choice to either master his sin or let it dominate him; Israel was given the choice to follow and obey God purely, or prostitute itself to other nations; And I am reminded of all the exhortations of the apostles in their epistles for church members to remain faithful to God and one another: would these exhortations be necessary if there was indeed no free will? I agree that Ellen White had a strong, positive view of our free will. All of the steps of the process of salvation need to be soaked with the Grace of Christ, but we are able, with God’s help, to make a real difference. Tied in with this doctrine is the issue of perfection. Perfectionism is something that I have never been comfortable with (this side of glory, anyway). But Whidden makes a remarkable statement on page 44, that I had never considered before. He says that Ellen White “spoke of character perfection (which is carefully defined), but never of nature perfection this side of glorification” (emphasis in the original). I really didn’t know what to make of this. It made me question how our characters are separate from our natures. This took some chewing on for me to come to a conclusion. I guess I would agree that we all share a similar nature, but it would be far from the truth to say that we all share a similar character. Some are shy, some are rambunctious, some are gentle, some are extroverts, some introverts. So if our characters can become perfected, while our natures will not be, this side of glory… hm. Of course, paired up with belief in perfectionism doctrine is the famous phrase that those who have achieved character perfection will not be aware of it. Whidden mentions this fact further down the same page. And, while on the one hand, I’m glad that that’s true (there go the claims of those who claim to have reached perfection) seemed kind of counter-intuitive to me. For example, when someone is sinful, it is perfectly normal for them to not be aware of their sin, and to feel like things are just fine. A self-righteous attitude would be impossible without this factor. But on the other hand, someone who has become perfect in their character, yet still feels sinful? What would they have to base it on? Do they not trust enough in God’s forgiveness from beforehand, before they had gotten to this stage? Perhaps they still see their sinful nature (to use Whidden’s/Ellen White’s distinction), and still so desire to be changed on that level. This section gave me a good amount to think about, and I am glad to have read it. It affirmed several things that I kind of already thought; gave me a ‘reason to believe’ what I already believed, and was
The definition of universalism, according to the Miriam-Webster dictionary, is the “theological doctrine that all human beings will eventually be saved”. While this topic is far from the center of the beliefs of most Christians, it is nonetheless a philosophy that is alive and well today in many circles. Many scholars in many high theological positions affirm this doctrine, and one can see the occasional Unitarian church in many towns and cities across our nation. In short, this philosophy claims that God will ultimately save everyone, that heaven will be a collective home for all of us, regardless of factors which divide/define us in this lifetime. People from every faith tradition, social class, moral grounding, and attitude toward God, will ultimately be delivered to live in paradise with Him. This doctrine carries with it a fundamental belief that the nature of the sin that divides us today, that causes us to be sinful (some heinously so), and that fosters many belief systems, is essentially a sin of ignorance. Satan is the great deceiver, and has thus misled us to believe that the things we see as being best in life (in our short-sightedness) are actually for the best. Any misunderstanding will be cleared-up when the Lord reveals Himself, and educates us all to the true nature of his existence and goodness. The belief continues to purport that once all have seen God’s majesty and goodness, they will all affirm his Lordship, and assent to be purified, and to live in heaven eternally with him (and each other). This doctrine does have theological strengths, and verses from scripture which can be cited, seeming to support a universalist viewpoint. Firstly, it asserts that human nature is essentially good. It also affirms positive aspects of God’s character, such as ultimate wisdom, ultimate goodness, ultimate majesty, and complete in grace and forgiveness. Verses that support a viewpoint like this would be Romans 8:38, 39 (nothing can separate us from the Love of God), 2 Peter 3:9 (God does not want anyone to be lost), and 1 John 2:2 (Christ’s death on the cross atoned for the sins of the whole world). In essence this philosophy is very positive, affirming, and non-judgmental in its position. These verses, as well as the philosophies which tie this doctrine together, will be explored more fully. On the down-side, however, this doctrine is not in line with many other passages in scripture, including many clear statements which God Himself is purported to have said about Himself. Essentially, one cannot hold up the whole scripture as entirely true as is evident from a basic reading. At this place, the universalist would probably claim that overarching principles (for example: “God is Love”) must take a higher place than individual statements that appear to be to the contrary (such as the wicked being thrown into the lake of fire/suffering the second death in the book of Revelation). These individual statements must be read through the principles traced above. If pressed about statements Jesus made about the lost (i.e. Matthew 13:42), I am assuming that the Universalist would fall back on a position that we do not have the original manuscripts, it is possible that the early church / ecumenical counsels changed the scripture to reflect an “in vs. out” model as to salvation. This being said, the one who holds to high scriptural authority and the universalist are now at an impasse. The one who claims the full scripture can point to the broad number and accuracy of early scriptures that we have, but will probably not “dent the armor” of the philosophy that the universalist has set up. After all, this viewpoint has so many “benefits”, that it is not worth losing it for the sake of what the scripture actually says. I believe that this would, in the end, cause both parties to have a “wait and see” approach to how this all plays out. That is probably the only way this debate will be settled.
It is clear from many portions of scripture that many aspects/symbols/rites of the Old Testament pointed forward to Jesus as a fulfillment of the symbol. This is a basic type/antitype system which exists on several levels. One of the greatest symbols for Seventh-day Adventists is that of the day of atonement, described in detail in chapter 16 of Leviticus. In this festival, which was to occur once per year in Israel, we see instructions for the high priest (Aaron) to perform many duties and acts of ritual purification: A sacrifice is made, the most holy place is entered, and the sins of the people are placed upon a ‘scapegoat’ which is led out in the wilderness to die. In many ways, this is the culmination of the sacrificial system of the Jews. For the whole year, people have been bringing their offerings of sacrifice, in order to purify themselves of their sin. But these sins have been building up in the temple for that entire year. On the day of atonement, the temple is purified of its sin, and the camp of Israel is truly made clean. We believe that this has strong symbolism, which points to Jesus atoning our sin in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary. From John’s first cry “Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world!”, to the descriptions in the book of Hebrews of Jesus as our High Priest, we see many connections between the two services. In fact, we believe that the prior service had no true effect except to keep in the peoples’ minds the true atonement which takes place in heaven, working out our salvation. All of Christianity believes in the forgiveness of sin. Verses like 1 John 1:9 talks about how God is willing to forgive if we confess our sins. This is surely good news, and we surely affirm this, but to leave it at simply this level is to oversimplify the matter. If forgiveness were simply a matter of God saying “Oh… that’s okay”, then the very necessity of Jesus’ death on the cross comes into question. All Christians claim that Christ took our sin on the Cross, and all claim that God can forgive us because of his perfect sacrifice. But is that the whole procedure? We affirm that the processes of forgiveness/salvation are mysterious and we don’t know the end from the beginning, but shouldn’t we endeavor to understand the fullness of what the Lord has revealed to us about the process of salvation? Seventh-day Adventists believe that on October 22, 1844, Christ entered the Most Holy Place to begin the work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary. He is currently presenting his own blood as the purification of the heavenly temple (interestingly, Jesus takes on the role of both the sacrifice, and of the High Priest in this model), purifying our sins so that we can be declared forgiven, pure, and righteous. There are many elements of the Day of Atonement which point to the process that is taking place in the Heavenly Sanctuary today, by which our sins our forgiven. There are also various passages (many in the book of Hebrews) which make the link between the Old Testament high-priest, and Jesus Christ who is our High Priest, interceding for us, and atoning for our sins. This is a doctrine that is not shared by the general Christian community, but I am convinced that it is a model which, properly understood, brings a new level of understanding, conviction, and love for God in terms of the process and work of forgiveness/salvation. It helps me appreciate God more, Jesus’ sacrifice more, and helps me to understand the true, staining, nature of sin. It cannot simply be waved away by God’s whim. It is a process, a transaction, that is crucial for forgiveness, and therefore, for our salvation. As God mentioned in Genesis 3, we can’t have sinners living immortally! Harmony in the universe would never be resolved without this process.
Throughout this semester, we have been, among other things, reading through the book of Romans on our own. Romans is full of dense theology, rich illustrations, overarching principles, and practical instruction. In thinking more deeply about Romans, I have realized that even within the one book, it seems to espouse many theologies, which, at first sight, would be mutually exclusive to each other. Based on this, I have constructed an imaginary conversation I had with Paul, with him answering based on passages of Romans. “Hey Paul, what’s your book about?” “Chapter 1: sinfulness is evil, and destruction will come from it.” “Okay, I’ll be good then” “Nope! Chapter 2: being good won’t help either.” “So, I don’t have to be good?” “Of course you do! 3:31, 6:1,15”. “Okay… but it won’t really help me?” “Nope. You’re wretched anyway. 3:9-18.” “Oh, so there’s no hope?” “Of course there is! Only God can save you. 3:21-22. He did it for all humanity, who was against him 5:6-10” “Okay. But what about those who are still against Him?” “Oh, they’re bound for destruction. Remember chapter 1? And in fact God designed it to be that way Ch. 9:1-29.” “Oh, so Israel will be punished for being bad?” “No, for being good, but in the wrong way. 9:31,32”. “Oh, so they will die?” “No, they will be saved. 11:25,26”. “Oh. I’m starting to get a headache. But I am appreciative of God for doing all this. What should I do about it?” “Act righteously! Ch. 12” “Okay, will I be able to do it?” “Not really. 7:14-25.” “Hm. So does it matter when I sin?” “Yes… And no… And yes.” “What about those who choose to act righteously in a different way than I do?” “Don’t worry about it. Ch. 14A” So can I do it like them, since it’s easier? “No. For you it’s a sin. 14:14,23.” “So he gets to do it, but I don’t?” “Yes, but don’t think of it that way. It can make you lose your thankfulness. Just try to get along. 14:17-19, 15:7” “Alright, thanks. I’ll try to do that.” … though all this, I think I can begin to see why Festus shouted out what he did in Acts 26:24. And also why Peter said what he did about him in 2 Peter 3:16. But overall, if you take all these things, and hold them in the proper tension, that I believe Paul wanted his readers to, it all holds together rather well. If I could summarize Paul’s Thesis, I think it would be: “God has saved you from certain destruction (but only if you believe he has). Be thankful for it, and act righteously in response to it. But don’t look down on any others who aren’t where you are, or you may lose it. You never even deserved to have it anyway, so don’t get cocky. Your only response should be thankfulness, acted out in goodness to others. But resting on anything else gets you nowhere. Not even the goodness. Especially not the goodness. Now, go with God. Yes, you’ll stumble, but don’t get tripped up about it. But don’t not get tripped up about it! If you start stumbling because of the grace that you know is there, you already lost it.” This has been pretty fun. I probably shouldn’t have so much fun on a class assignment. The whole thing makes me thankful. I really see the beauty in it. And Paul’s illustrations, which I didn’t really even get to touch here, are really masterful. I love the grafting one in chapter 11b. Salvation is a mystery. And Paul really does an exercise here trying to work a lot of it out. You can tell he has so many things going on in his mind: he knows he’s writing to a mixed audience, he knows that certain questions will come up based on what he’s saying, and he tries to anticipate it and respond to it: he knows that if people follow his last paragraph too strictly, they’ll fall off one side of the trail, so he counters it with the next paragraph, and then again tries to come back to the middle… oh, it’s fascinating, and it’s wonderful. And it’s engaging. Paul just feels alive to me in Romans. Not dead for 1900+ years. Those who think religion is boring don’t know what they’re talking about. I feel sorry for them, really. Maybe like Paul in 9:2!
From Ellen White on Salvation, Ch. 12: Justification After Minneapolis – From Late 1888 to 1892
As I read this chapter and reflected on it, I came to realize that, in some way, the reference to “works” makes me connect this aspect of salvation with nuances of moral influence.
For example, the first subtitle, “Faith and works never separated” suggests in itself that works are an extension/result of faith; we cannot accomplish good works through our own powers, but as we exercise faith, they will follow naturally. This is in line with Ellen White’s frequently used expression “salvation from sin, not in sin”, which also implicitly speaks of moral influence.
On page 105 of this book, she is quoted as follows: “We have nothing in ourselves of which to boast. Our only ground of hope is in the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and in that wrought by His Spirit working in and through us.” Clearly she points to the both penal substitution (“the righteousness of Christ imputed to us”), and moral influence (“His Spirit working in and through us”).
Also, “what God does in believers can, based on a clear experience of Christ’s imputed righteousness, produce the same spirit and do the same good works – works of righteousness, obedience.” Again, the two models of salvation are present in this one clear statement. So it almost seems to me at this moment that the relation between faith and works mirrors the relation between penal substitution and moral influence, where, in each case, both aspects are critical for our salvation, and show the need of collaboration between divinity and humanity (God and men) for this purpose.
In light of this, here is one last statement of Ellen White: “justified by His grace, good works will follow as the blossoms and fruit of faith.”
Blog #6 From Ellen White on Salvation, Ch. 14: Perfection Before 1888
The concept of obedience has been in my mind for a few weeks now, with a special focus on the aspect of its eternal necessity. Woodrow Whidden says: “Christ’s example became the key exhibit that she [Ellen White] used to combat the challenge of her opponents that it is impossible for sinners to obey God’s law perfectly. She saw this as one of Satan’s great lies, and she clearly stated that Christ’s sinless life is the answer to Satan’s deceptive lie that perfect obedience is impossible.”
Of course, Satan’s constant attack was on the law, because from the beginning of sin he claimed the necessity to change God’s law. His constant desire was to prove to the universe that he was right in his initial claims, and, as a consequence, to incite to more rebellion across the cosmic realm of God. But Jesus proved that obedience was possible; and it is also possible to us, through the moral influence that God is constantly exercising upon us.
What I realized lately though, was this critical aspect of obedience: obedience was always necessary, and will always be necessary. We are used to think of it most often in the context of our planet, and of sin. I, at least, until recently, saw obedience mostly in the context of salvation.
But as I thought more of obedience, and placed it in a larger context, I’ve come to understand that obedience is more than a part of the plan of salvation. Obedience was necessary before sin, (in fact, its lack WAS sin), and will be necessary after Jesus’ second coming, after glorification.
The reason why this was important to me was that, as I understood this, obedience does not seem to me a burden anymore, as it used to at times, but I see how this is the very foundation of our relationship with God, and will be forever and ever. Obedience is no more a “requirement” unto salvation, but it is a delight that we will cherish for eternity.
After glorification, obedience will probably come more naturally, as now there is enmity both between God and us, as well as Satan and us. However, glorification will not turn us into robots. We will still have free will to obey or not, just like Lucifer had. And my point is that, salvation from sin, which will take us to our original sinless state, does not implicitly mean that obedience will be inherent. It will still be a choice, just as Lucifer had the same free will and choice when he was sinless.
Understanding this has made me value more obedience, and cherish it as a beautiful part of my relationship with God, that is to continue in eternity.
The text of Romans 8 was for me very relevant. I believed that God knew everything before, that we had freedom, because the Bible teaches that, but the way was taught in class made it more clear for me. I now understand more how the foreknowledge of God works for the good of those who are called. In the past I really did not struggled much with this passage, and maybe this is why I did not stop to think all the implications of foreknowledge related to the plan of salvation. But reading Romans 8 I recall my favorite Psalm. The relation of Psalm 139 and Rom.8 is evident for me. The Psalm starts with God searching the inner man (Rom.8:27). Both passages talk about God knowing before it happen (Psalm 139:4; Rom.8:29), God protecting His elect, God’s infinite action unfathomable, the inability of man to hide from God (Psl.139:7-12; Rom.8:35,38,39), and other points. The attributes of God in creation and salvation makes man wonder how great God is. And the conclusion of both is nothing compares to loving actions of God. David understand that the foreknowledge of God is a security against evil. Because “all things work together for good to Him that love the Lord”. And no matter depth, hell, heaven angels, the Love action of God always works in our behalf. This is the same conclusion that Paul reaches. Another element that both passages show is the part of freedom. There is only two ways of life. The evil and the good, or life or death. David named the way of God the “wicked way” or “way of pain/grief” (v.24). Paul describe it as the way of the flesh (v.4,5,13). The other way for David is the “everlasting way” and for Paul is the way of the Spirit (v.4,5,9,13,14). Both David and Paul desire this way (Ps.139:24;Rom.7:24-8:1) because the wicked will be destroyed (Psal.139:19-22;Rom.8:13). This is important because they exercise will desiring to be saved. Freedom not only the mean by the goal of salvation (Rom.8:2 see contrast with Rom.7). In this discussion the person of the Spirit is the central in this process of salvation. The knowledge of God about man is the way in which God saves justly all those who are call and chosen by God (Ps.139:16; Rom.8:29). And this is done by the Spirit in both passages (Ps. 139:7; Rom.8:15,23,26,27).
In our days the Spirit is very evident in this process of salvation in the charismatic and ecumenical movement (see KÄRKKÄINEN, Veli-Matti Pneumatology – the Holy Spirit in ecumenical, international, and contextual prospective). And what is evident in the historical perspective that the author traces is the relation between Holy Spirit, creation and salvation. In both passages creation is the focus of the Spirit search and wonder or expectation of David and Paul (Ps.139:13-18;Rom.8:19-22). The place of the Holy Spirit in the ecumenical movement of salvation is emphasized by Kärkkäinen as he traces the main theologians who works this Spiritual ecumenical movement. Jürgen Moltmann is one example that see salvation, or the contact of man with the divine, intermediated by the Spirit. “Moltmann’s basic thesis is that wherever there is passion for the life there the Spirit of God is operating: life over against death, liberation over against oppression” (p.126). And in this liberation or freedom ecumenical movement, ecological theology plays a very important part. Even though this sees to look like Romans 8, this is an postmodern interpretation that sees creation as the only environment for the correct contact between the Spirit and man. Actually, from Augustinian and Hegelian roots, Spirit is self-consciousness in creation. Religion is God in man and man knowing God in creation relationship. This ECOmenical movement is maybe going on right now as some news in the web describes the UN meeting in Copenhagen about the weather as the place where the future of the world will be decided. A salvation language is adopted by the secular world backed up by the ecumenical movement of Catholics and Charismatic Protestants. And one of the positions that have been talked in the media is the enforcement of state laws that obligate people to respect nature. Freedom is abolish in the name of the care of nature. This reminds me Kellogg and the heresy of pantheism. No wonder that Ellen G. White mention that in the end times the omega apostasy would make the elect deceived and not distinguishing the salvation process adequately. The heresy makes people without discernment or in other words, in bondage to sin. This apostasy could rightly be the panetheism in ECOmenical movement, where people see the divine in nature and in man. No far from the classical model of Biblical interpretation of the timeless soul inside us. What Romans 8 warns us, is that the glorious liberty of nature is in the future coming of Jesus. And not here on earth. After the calling is justification, but the glorification culminates the process with the appearance of Jesus in the air. No glorification of nature here on earth through Ecological movements. but the “glorious liberty of the children of God…[and] the redemption of our body”. This is our future hope. Hope that is brought to the present era making the kingdom of the Spirit earthly. Meanwhile Paul and David warns that those who are called by God walk not after the flesh (creation) but after the Spirit. And the fruits of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance. Not the pseudo-care of nature while many people suffer from hunger, war, sickness and those who talk about ECOmenism are doing nothing. The most important lesson I learned from this process of salvation is that God called me to be conform the image of the Son, Jesus Christ. His life was one of humbleness and service, of love and self-denial. The whole goal of His was the benefit of others. I should thrive to be like Him, groaning with the Spirit to impart to me those fruits of character building till I see Him with mine own eyes.
In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul speaks of the Gospel as being a mysterious thing. While taking this class we have spoken of looking at a greater model regarding salvation, which also is deemed the everlasting Gospel. The thread which runs through the entirety of the doctrine of salvation in Jesus Christ. Without Him we would have no model to begin with, let alone a large one. As we examine the Savior, we are struck by another mystery– the incarnate God as being fully human, and fully divine. Throughout the centuries subsequent to Christ’s birth, death, and resurrection, this question of His nature has been one that humankind has wrestled with, and has also produced an adequate amount of speculations and heresies. Some groups have denied his divinity, and painted His humanity as being an illusion. Others have emphasized His humanity to the point of claiming He is not part of the trinity. In our class we have wrestled through this a little bit, and were referred to an important text in Colossians 2:9-10– “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.” The statement by Paul is quite clear about His divinity for sure. But if Jesus was fully divine and nothing else, how could anything that He did here on Earth to overcome be done by us? And how can His perfection as a human really atone for our sins as taking the place for us? The questions and speculations increase if the human element is misplaced. If he was fully human alone, then how could he be a perfect sacrifice if fully tainted by sin? In Ellen White on Salvation, Woodrow Whidden points out Ellen White’s position and sums it up by saying ‘He was affected by sin but not infected with it’. He did not participate in sin, but was acquainted by it’s temptations and lures. Our lecture referred to the SDA commentary, and it was said in paraphrase that Christ did not exchange his divinity for humanity, but he veiled his divinity with humanity. He covered his divinity with the garb of humanity. He was untainted by corruption, yet surrounded by it. And the mystery does not lessen by this fact! In John 5 Jesus speaks of doing nothing of His own, but doing everything in seeking the Father. Though Christ was human, His trust in His Father, and in the goodness of His word helped Him to overcome the wiles and temptations of the Devil. This gives hope to the weak human. That Jesus overcame the world through submission rather than dominion shows that our strength lies ‘not by might, nor by power, but by the Spirit of God (Zech 4:6). To say that Christ was free of temptation would deny that He needed the Lord’s prayer, or that he needed to trust in the Father. Yet Christ was tempted to use his divinity for selfish gain. Just as we are tempted to aspire to powerful positions, or to operate selfishly rather than lovingly. In studying Christology– namely the nature of Christ, we find another opportunity to abandon the either/or mentality in place of the both/and mentality. In studying this mystery, we can apply it to our lives by aspiring to live self-denying lives and partake of the divine nature. This means seeking to allow God to dwell in our hearts and to work through us as Christ demonstrated.
One aspect of salvation that we do not speak of often is our glorification. We tend to focus on Christ’s death and resurrection. We focus on what god has done for us and what we must do as our part in the process of Salvation. But rarely have I heard of conversations about the glorification that we have and that we will receive when we get to our home made new. Romans 8 says” 29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.” Glorification is an important part of our salvation process, and when we do mention it is mostly in regards to what we will receive when Christ returns. But in this text Paul is saying that we do receive to some extent glorification now. John 17:22-23 says “The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.” when we accept Christ as our savior he gives us glory. The catch is that the glory is not something for us or a selfish type of glory. But rather it is a glory that comes from God to us as we unite in Him. It is impossible to attain this glory on our own or without Christ. There is also implication that as we are in unity together we will receive this glory. And when we as a people achieve this, others will see the origin of the glory, God Himself, and not us. There is no such thing a lone ranger Christian, we need each other as we long for the day when we will go home together and receive together Gods full Glorification.
Through out the book of Romans, Paul uses “but now” six times. “But now” serves as a transition or an indication that Paul is switching gears. We shall look at only 4 of these “but now.”
1. As Ángel Manuel Rodríguez points out in “Justification in Romans 3:21-24,” Paul employs “but now” to shift from a previous exposition to a newer and better way of salvation. Prior to 3:21, Paul’s discussion heavily centered on the condemnation of both Jews and Gentiles under the law, “but now,” those who believe are no longer under such condemnation, but are freely justified by the righteousness of God (vv. 24, cf. 1:16-17).
2. Chapter 6 of the Romans, Paul discusses our bondage to sin: “Shall we continue in sin” vv. 1; “the body of sin” vv. 6; “we should not serve sin” vv. 6; “let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body” vv. 12; “yield not your members…unto sin” vv. 13; “sin to have not dominion over us” vv. 14; “shall we continue to sin” vv. 15; “[we] were servants of sin” vv. 17, 20 ; “made free from sin” vv. 18; “servants to uncleanness” vv. 19. BUT NOW, in Christ we are “made free from sin, become servants to God” vv. 22.
3. In Chapter 7, Paul employs the anology of a married woman. For her to remarry, her husband must die or divorce her. Why? Legally, she is bound to the man of her marriage. BUT NOW that the man is dead, she is free to marry! “BUT NOW that we are delivered from the law…we should serve in the newness of spirit” vv. 6
4. In chapter 16, the mystery of the Gospel that “was kept in secret since the world begun” is BUT NOW made known through Christ – the word incarnate – and the Scriptures (OT).
In conclusion, BUT NOW in the book of Romans serves as another window to look into this great treatise on Salvation.
After reading most of Ángel Manuel Rodríguez’s articles off BRIs website, many of the confusions we have in understanding salvation often center on exact meaning of words. This can be seen in how Dr. Rodriguez deals with 1 Tim. 4:10. Clearly, there was an inherent contradiction in the text. However, upon further research, it was proven that actually the word carries more meanings than originally anticipated!
What shall we to make of this? This is a poignant reminder that as Bible students we need:
1. To avoid rushing to conclusion at the precise meaning of the text 2. Be mindful of multiple meanings of the words and their usages 3. To avoid restricting the text to one interpretation 4. To understand a particular text in light of immediate context and broader context, i.e., entire Bible.
127 comments:
Doctrine of Salvation September 3rd, 09
We, as Christians, are divided on issues that should unite us. We fight on salvation whose author is our maker. Salvation is from the Lord as well as perfection. Christ’s perfect sacrifice is sufficient to bind all believers in perfect unity in diversity. It is difficult, in my understanding, to receive Salvation without being sanctified. Once one is sanctified that individual is automatically perfect. That state of perfection implies the person is also justified. Does it mean that soul is sinless? Not at all! Just like unity is a sign of perfection. The latter is a sign of justification. Yes, without perfection justification is impossible. Saying a just is not perfect is like saying a just lives without faith. A righteous person cannot live without faith. That’s her/his life! Faith is the essence of the existence of the just. Furthermore, Salvation has to do with not only sanctification, righteousness, and glorification; it has something to do with deliverance. In II Chronicles 20:17, the messenger of the Lord said “You will not need to fight in this battle. Position yourselves, stand still and see the salvation of the Lord, who is with you, O Judah and Jerusalem! Do not fear or be dismayed; tomorrow go out against them, for the LORD is with.” See, the LORD delivers His people by saving them from themselves and their enemies. As long as God is with us we are saved. As long as we abide in Him and He abides in us we are safe and saved. Salvation is secured as we walk with our redeemer, sanctifier, and glorifier hand in hand. God saves us from the enemies of our soul day by day and momentarily. Salvation has been, is, and will be available to everyone who is hungry and thirsty of God’s justice, mercy, and grace. Therefore I can safely say that I have been saved; I am being saved; I will be saved. In other words, I was sanctified, I am justified, and I will be glorified. Consequently Salvation comes from the LORD at every step of the Christian path way. “We must never forget that it was our God who initiated our rescue, who reached out to us. "All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself" (2 Cor. 5:18). And He continues to reach out to us today. When we accept His merciful invitation, we walk in the certainty of salvation guaranteed by His death and resurrection.” (http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents.htm#salvation)
God initiated the whole plan of Salvation and maintains it all the way to eternity. God saves us via the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son. Paul became a slave of that Gospel of God in Holy Scriptures. In Romans 1:9 Paul says “God sees that I serve Him in the Gospel of His Son”. He has no shame of the Gospel because it is the power of God to salvation. I want to bluntly say that the Gospel, the Good News, is Jesus who has been making, is making, and will be making salvation possible to humanity. Salvation has been around since eternity and will be throughout ceaseless ages. God is the author and finisher of our salvation. If that is the case, why it is that some souls will be lost while some will be saved? Is not God partial by initiating salvation in the hearts of some and watching others going to hell forever?
Montes Estinphil
Report on "Ellen White on Salvation" Chapter 1 (Section 1)
W. W. Whidden’s first chapter dealing with Ellen White’s journey in her understanding of Sanctification and also her experience of conversion has helped me better understand her emotional struggle during the time of her conversion. However I wonder if the author seems to suggest that she later moved to an understanding where conversion is not accompanied by a joyous feeling of being saved or that the feeling of total peace and joy with Christ will be felt only when glorification occurs?
It seems clear that Ellen White did experience instantaneous joy and peace (this is after the incident where she finally prays in public after having talked to Stockman). She feels her burdens/agony of soul removed and God’s blessing descend. The author writes that Ellen White later steered away from an emphasis on the public testimony of a salvation experience. This due to fanatics who claimed to experience it while denying it in practice.
However, her experience can be one we may also experience. The reason for Ellen White moving away from this emphasis, as the author admits, was because she was concerned by counterfeit claims to this experience. In my opinion, she had no issue with the genuine (since she herself experienced it). Therefore an emphasis solely on an intellectual exercise of accepting the gift of Salvation or the gift of forgiveness may well be accompanied by a genuine yearning for and an expression of a feeling of peace and joy which surpasses human understanding. This may serve as a testimony to an assurance of salvation for past, present and future.
Personally, I would like to see if my Christian Salvation experience can be helped by a little joy.
I just read Psalm 14:7 it reads: “Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.”
Any further reactions to/thoughts on this are welcome!
Faith to Salvation to Faith
In this reflection, I will seek to further explore the meaning of “From faith to faith” axiom (Rom. 1:17), or as discussed/stated in class “passive faith to salvation to active faith.” In the present work, I’m interested more precisely in the passive faith, its: origin, passive nature, and as it relates to the active faith.
General definition
Faith is “expecting the word of God to do the thing which that word speaks and depending upon the word only to accomplish the thing which that word speaks.” (RH Jan. 24, 1899). Faith then is a wholeheartedly belief in the word of God. It is a belief in the description and prescription of Scripture regarding humankind (That is, Christ is the only solution to man’s fundamental problem—sin). Faith then is nothing but implicit trust in the merits of Christ as articulated in Scripture.
The origin of faith
Scripture tells us that faith comes “from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ” (Rom 8:17 NASB). The origin of faith must originate from Scripture; it is a “gift of God” (Eph. 2:8). God’s goodness that moves us toward repentance provides us with this gift of faith. Therefore, (passive) faith does not originate with man, but comes from God. It is a human response to God’s self-disclosure!
The nature of passive faith
Passive faith is an inward human response to divine revelation. It is an opening of one’s heart to the voice of God. Does this inward response deserve merit? No! Otherwise, the “Creator [would be] under obligation to the creature”{FW 19.3}. God orchestrates the whole enterprise of salvation, and therefore, salvation is wholly a gift to be received by (passive) faith first.
The relationship between passive and active faith
While passive faith is an inward response to God’s revelation, active faith is an outward response (See Gen 12:1-2; 22). Active faith is a result of passive faith. Faith without works is dead, and if we’re in Christ (the Word), there must me a change commencing within (James 2:20; 1 Cor. 5:17). Faith without transformation is merely information!
For further reflection on this axiom, “From faith to faith” (Romans 1:17), see “Salvation by Faith” by Jan Paulsen.
http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents/Salvation%20by%20Faith.htm
Valmy Stephen Karemera
Throughout our discussions in class, we have heard one theme being stressed. That in order to come up with a more accurate view or picture of salvation, it needs to be a larger and more inclusive picture. Our experience and readings thus far seems to show that as long as a particular view of salvation is Biblically based, in that no contradiction for such a view can be found in the Bible, such a view may be acceptable. This is because like a gem, salvation is multi-faceted. Additionally, each of us view salvation through the lens of our experience. Thus, although what we say may be Biblically sound, it is still very possible for us not to be saying the same thing. We find that our individual views, only become error when we hold them exclusively, discounting the possibility that what another theologian is saying may be correct as well.
In his article “Adventist Theology: The Wesleyan Connection”, Dr. Woodrow Whidden points to the fact that beyond some “mere theological quibbles” Ellen White and John Wesley had the same view of the process of salvation. Although I do not discount instances in which deep misunderstandings exist at a foundational level between the doctrines and beliefs of certain groups, by and large many disagreements amount to “mere theological quibbles”. For instance, concerning the topic of Christian perfection in the Adventist church, many disagree as to whether a state of perfection can be attained in this life. While there is a fundamental difference in one belief which would affirm the possibility and another which denies it, generally some people choose sides without truly discerning the issue at hand. Some faithful Christians affirm the possibility of perfection because they take seriously the command of Jesus to “Be ye perfect, even as your father in heaven is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). Similarly, there are also faithful Christians who deny that a state of perfection is possible because they feel it is too akin to an antinomian philosophy; that one does not need to strive to obey the law because they have attained a state of perfection. Both camps have a Biblically sound view that they strive to defend. However, because they hold to their view at the expense of the other, they both end up denying things that the Bible clearly teaches.
There is a greater danger however, than those which already exist from the inability of a group to come together and hear another's idea's. There are those who come behind the group, seeking to understand salvation in the context of their life experience. A young person, earnestly seeking to be a good Christian may be taught that Christian perfection is impossible. This could cause them to feel that since it is impossible, no serious effort should be given to overcoming sin. “Since it will always be present”, they may reason “my resistance towards it should be more passive than active.” Although this was not the intended deduction of those who would initially deny that Christian perfection is possible , this could be deduced from a believer, young in the faith. Conversely someone may arrive at the same conclusion thinking that they have already attained a state of perfection. I think, as was demonstrated in our class discussions, that a refined yet more concrete definition of perfection is in order, rather than tuning out the “other group”.
When I think of the possibility of a young sincere Christian, who may be influenced by either group, whose grave error was only that they refused to hear and consider the ideas posed by the other , I reflect on the struggle of Ellen White when she was younger. The formation of her understanding was still a rough time in her life. How much more challenging would it have been to come to a correct knowledge, had she been influenced by people who held a limited view of justification and sanctification. I believe that it was in God's purpose to use someone brought up in the understanding of a primarily Wesleyan tradition.
David often states that is his Salvation. And looking at Romans 2:4 which says “do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads us to repentance?”, it becomes more evident to me that God is the one initiating salvation. I personally grateful for such a great sacrifice Jesus made for me in dying to save me when I had no clue. God had always known that human race needs salvation before the human family realizes it. Yeah, we did not understand how low we had fallen into sin. God saw our state and came to our rescue. We have been resisting his offer. However, He is slow to anger and rich in faithfulness and goodness. As a result, God, in His longsuffering, bears with us to slow bring us to repentance.
Romans 2:11contrasts, in my thinking, the idea that God has been slowly leading humankind to repentance. Reason being, it says “There is no partiality in God”. My question is why would He lead me to repentance and bypass my next door neighbor? How much my personal choice is important in that process of salvation? In a sense, I understand that God loves the whole in that He sent His only begotten Son to die and save it. Is there not such a thing like a propensity in certain individual DNA to accept Christ or the idea that God can save and will save us while others do not have that tendency? I am looking the idea of partiality. There is no question in my mind that salvation has been available to every living soul. At what point do we say that we want to receive it by faith for it to grow from faith to faith? When I first surrendered my life to the Lord I did not see anything else that I could have done. I have never been sorry for the fact I said “yes” to Jesus. I have young people with whom I grew up and some of them actually have passed away without giving their life over to God. At times, I am afraid that I will not meet them in heaven. I guest there are questions that we, human beings, can only reason upon, but we can not do anything about them. We just have to leave them for God to answer. The encouraging news is that the same Paul says ‘those who die with the law will judge with the law and those who die without the law will judge with the law’.
Praise God for salvation! It takes nothing of our part, a submissive and a receiving attitude. “Jesus loves to have us come to Him just as we are – sinful, helpless, dependent. We are eligible for salvation not by who we are, what we are able to do, or our behavior. He works with us and through to bring His work into completion. Jesus makes us perfect or eligible for His salvation that has had for us since the foundation of the world. It seems those who are not going to take hold of that precious gift are going to be those who will say in their hearts that they do not need it. As long as they breathe the gift will have been extending to them. I have learned that it is a struggle. However, while struggling one can be assure that Christ is able to save to the utmost those who humbly come to Him in faith. What those who do not come to Him? Would He go to them?
Montes Estinphil
The chapter three of the book of Romans is very depressing as well as appealing. It seems that whether one is circumcised or uncircumcised does not matter in the sight of God. It says and I paraphrase: “will the wicked ones make God faithfulness of no effect.” The author answers: certainly not. Even though we are not faithful, we serve a faithful God. His blessings to us are based on what we do or say. As a matter of fact, Jesus’ primary mission was to seek and save the unfaithful ones or the lost. As I read this passage once more, it dawned on me that we all stand in need of the Savior. Since have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God then it implies that we were all lost in our trespasses. “There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understand.” Is the author saying I have been my Bible for that long and I have been there where I truly say I am good enough? One can pretender being just, but in reality no one is. Christ is the only reason one can bold say that righteousness is possible. That is why, I believe, Paul states ‘let him who glories himself do so on the basis that they know Christ.” Yeah, it saddens my heart to realize that I can not and will not be able to do any good without Christ. I almost feel like asking God for the purpose He created human beings. We are from the hands of such a great mighty God and still we cannot do anything good on our own. Where is the ability God has created us with in the first place? For what futility has He created us. There is none who does good, no, not one! When did we start being so bad to the point that we become so corrupt God disowns us? Would Adam and Eve’s disobedience lead that deep into the abyss? My goodness!
If sin has left us in that great despair and hopelessness then God is right the fact that He never wants us anything good on our own strength. Maybe too much humanity will show off. As a result, God will have no glory for His creation. If our deeds are constantly evil and God’s deeds are constantly good then we are doomed to need God. We have to depend on His power and strength. This is good News, on the other hand. Those who give their lives over to God are never alone. After all, does He promise to be with us even to the end of the age? It is encouraging because we, Christians, are not and will never be alone for “The angel of the LORD encamps all around those who fear Him and delivers them.” ‘Blessed is the man or woman who puts their trust in Him’ (Ps 34:7, 8).
We cannot anything good. Neither can the keeping of law make righteous because the deeds of the law are able to justify the sinner. The law only points to our sins and the Savior, the justifier and purifier of our sins. Since we do not see God we exercise faith actively trusting that His righteousness and His alone can make us just and qualify us for anything work and heaven. Otherwise, too much boasting would be going on here on earth among doers of good works. Praise God! We are all equal at the feet of the cross. God has ultimately the last word both just and unjust. He knows which one was really purified in the blood of the Lamb and which was not. Christ is our benefactor. He is our shield and our righteous judge. He does everything possible to qualify us for Salvation. He is our perfection, justification, sanctification, protection, glorification and many more.
Montes Estinphil
Conversion, “Sanctification,” and Early Ministry
by
Ellen White on Salvation by Woodrow W. Whidden II
One of the three critical passages that were particularly important in the development of Ellen White’s understanding of salvation is her own conversion experience. Her struggle was that she was caught between two worlds of passionate revivals, Methodism and Millerism that sets up her salvation experience.
As she was preparing for her death after being struck in the face with a stone, “she diligently sought the Lord to prepare her for death. She strongly desired to become a Christian and prayed earnestly for the forgiveness of her sins.” As she recalled there was peace in her mind with a “deep desire that all should love Jesus and have their sins forgiven.” But she found it difficult to be assured of acceptance. She felt that she “could never become worthy to be called a child of God.” She felt that it was very hard to surrender fully to God. She seemed to be confused until she attended a camp meeting where she determined to seek the Lord for pardoning of her sin. As a result she realized that “she had been indulging in ‘self-dependence.’” Consequently she recognized “that only by connecting with Jesus through faith can the sinner become a hopeful, believing child of God.”
She consistently seeks the forgiveness of God sensing her helplessness, as a result, she felt her burden been lifted, experiencing Jesus’ blessing upon her and her sins being “pardoned.” She was baptized by immersion afterward. You see, this is her salvation experience. I don’t know whether you will agree with this or not, but let me quote from the Biblical Research Institute article – “Dynamics of Salvation” p. 2 http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents/Dynamics%20of%20Salvation.htm
“Before we can accept the good news, we must recognize our desperate need. We must see that we can do nothing to restore ourselves to God, or to improve our evil nature: our condition is hopeless. To such poverty-mental, physical, spiritual - God’s salvation comes.” This is what Ellen White experienced as salvation only comes from Christ by firstly recognizing her desperate need to be restored to God.
Later she developed, “a longing ‘to be sanctified to God.’” But encountered two problems: (1) she couldn’t understand what “sanctification” means, and (2) she felt she lacks the holiness needed to meet Jesus at His second coming. She was confused and depressed but was impressed to pray openly. She was assured by Elder Stockman that, “hardened sinners would not be experiencing such deep convictions.” And the “love of God,” is longing to draw sinners to Himself in “simple faith and trust.” Accordingly she lifts her voice in prayer and the result was the “burden and agony of soul that she had so long endured left her.” Then she experiences “the blessing of the Lord descended” upon her “like the gentle dew.” She confessed that “a great change had taken place” in her mind, and her “heart was full of happiness.”
What we see here is her early experience of personal salvation and the significance of her own conversion. As the author states that her experience contributes to her later doctrinal development giving great emphasis to the importance of sanctification and perfection. In later years her ministry progresses to stress that sanctification is a work of a lifetime and not of a moment. Dr Hanna, states that “sanctification is a progress and a process in perfection, perfection while on the way, growing in grace perfecting in every stage. We are struggling and growing upward and not arriving in a place until glorification when our sinful nature is removed.” Whidden states: “Perfection was not to be claimed as some sinless accomplishment, but rather sought as a way of life that would see believers grow in grace until they received the finishing touch of sinlessness at glorification.” I believe that her experience gives us the foundation of salvation, justification, sanctification and glorification.
I want to comments on Montes Estinphil suggestions that
“Romans 2:11contrasts, in my thinking, the idea that God has been slowly leading humankind to repentance. Reason being, it says “There is no partiality in God”. My question is why would He lead me to repentance and bypass my next door neighbor? How much my personal choice is important in that process of salvation?”, According to my understanding, the Bible also said, "God loved Jacob, but hated Esau" Rom 9.13 , and Exodus 10:1 has a curious statement: “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his officials, so that I may perform miraculous signs of mine among them.’” What the Bible really said is that, if the Lord called you and you are working in His way that your heart is softened by Holy Ghost, but if you are refusing when is knocking then your heart is hardened day by day. In a sense, I’m completely agree with you on that statement, “Paul says those who die with the law will judge with the law and those who die without the law will judge with the law.” However, we as people need to know there is no sin if you don’t know.
My response to Pohlmarc’s comment.
I am not sure about the idea of groupings as all of us have been referred to, me included however we have the idea that some individuals denied perfection but could not reconcile Matthew 5:48 “Be ye perfect, even as your father in heaven is perfect” as Pohlmarc stated. And at the same time we have those Christians that totally believe that faith and divine grace bring salvation and that it is therefore not necessary to accept established moral laws (antinomians).
I agree with what Pohlmarc emphasized, both sides fall into denying things that the Bible teaches. It seems then that these people forget that the Bible interprets itself and the Bible reconciles itself. In addition to what Pohlmarc stated that in our class lecture there is a more refined and concrete definition of “perfection,” that should be taught so that both sides review their ideas according to the word of the Bible.
I think Pohlmarc has added a very important idea that conflict between these two groups on “perfection” may have some elements of truth in it but some genuine new converts will be affected as they make choices without consulting God’s words on their own. So the foundation is that, if they do not speaking according to the Word then there’s no light in them. There’s no conflict in God’s Word.
James Whites suggested the Review Readers to preach Christ more. The message had a lot to do with Christ’s character and His willingness to bring salvation to His people. Some of his spectators noticed he spent a great of time dealing faith in Christ and the love of God.
Unless we have the Spirit and the power of the living God we will do terribly bad cause harm to others and the spread of the Gospel. From what I read in statements Ellen White made, it seems it occurs to me that she has never claimed any superiority over anybody else. In other words, she errs just like anybody else; she made mistake just like anyone. No one is perfect in their own doings. Human’s perfection comes from the righteousness of the perfect Lamb of God. The fact that someone is trying to be something does not means that person is that thing. But it is good to try to be like Christ and I think that is where strength and help come from. When Christ sees that we want and try to be like him, I believe, He comes to our rescue and help us out. In all circumstances God’s great transforming power to sanctify and justify stands strong. “God’s moral government and His grace are inseparable”. Our obedience cannot guarantee our perfection though it is important for perfection and salvation. We may obey all the laws of the God since we were youths up to our current stage, unless we find the acceptance of the just and loving God, everything we do will be worthless. We will always need Christ righteousness to justify. Now, the challenge may be when probation closes. What will happen then? Can we ever stand on our own without the help from above? How long can a being survive without Christ when the probation closes? It is said “what is impossible with humans are possible with God”. For a sinner, who constantly needs God’s help, to remain alive without a mediator, is intriguing. Wherever there is sin there is sinner; wherever there is sinner sin exists. Therefore the closing of probation apparently will come to freeze both sin and sinner. Or, is it because God is going to seal His children for good and so we will not have the desire to repeat certain sins we are accustomed to practice. Consequently we will get to a point where sin will have no dominion over us. At that moment, we will be no longer slaves to sins. We will have the mind and character of Christ to wrestle against flesh and blood and against principalities in the high and heavenly places. Should we wait for a specific day or month or year or moment for that transforming occurrence to place? Or is it a step by step process where the Christians can truly say that as long as Christ lives within them sin has no more dominion over them? We are perfect at every stage of the journey. The victory over sin is won by the receiving of Christ as Lord and Savior. ‘Christ in me, the hope of glory’. If we all had to wait for a specific time to stop sinning for probation to close then what will have been the fate of those who have gone ahead and are sleeping in the grave? I am convinced that Jesus stops mediating when the soul stops breathing. If one wants to call that moment probation, go ahead. I have not yet fathomed Christ living the living soul alone. We are constantly under His watch care and His loving arms. He is who we are. We are who he makes us to be and we are not yet who ought to be. For this reason, we look to the time when we will put off our dirty robe to put on Christ’s, but until then we are perfect in every breath we take in Him.
Montes Estinphil
Reflection Paper: Salvation and Justification!
We have two ways to look at everything in human eyes- the left and the right, the good and the bad and the right and the wrong for God are Justification and Sanctification. They like two friends; therefore, one can’t work or live without the other. My views on Justification and Sanctification is as follow:
Justification is the first thing a sinner received from God that is God saved us from the penalty of the Law. Christ died for us while we were sinners, He took the death that was us, and He gave us the life that was His.
The Bible said, “He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our grieves, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.”
Sanctification is the process to glorification that God is giving to believers that is those who already received Justification. For Judaizers, they believe that they can get salvation through circumcision and the Law of Moses; however, we need to think more than a jewry, there is nothing we can do to get the merit or favor of God by our works. The only thing we have to do, it is to accept and believe on the sacrifice and merit of Christ on the cross and Jesus will said, Come unto me, all ye that labour and heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Reflection on Chapter two of Woodrow W. Whidden II and Romains Chapter 2
Conversion, “Sanctification,” and Early Ministry
First of all, it is obvious that Ellen Gould Harmond’s experience of salvation followed after the doctrinal teachings she was conscious of, which was the Wesleyan Methodist faith. Consequently, the language she used to describe her conversion experience was tainted with the terminology which came from this doctrine. The question now is to debate how much she has been cured from that influence? Although she later realized and enunciated that “Sanctification is not the work of a moment but of a lifetime”; she seemed to have placed a heavy emphasis on sanctification in many of her writings. In fact, Whidden is not denying that fact. He clearly stated: “Though there were significant modification of the details of the Holiness experience, her teachings would always give great accent to the importance of sanctification and perfection.”
It is relevant to state here, I believe, that Ellen White did later get it right when it comes to the meaning of sanctification and perfection. I only have to cite her comment on the book Christ objects lessons page 65 as a perfect example of a mature statement on what sanctification or perfection is. In this statement she was comparing Christian’s growth with the development of a tree and wrote: “At every stage of development our life may be perfect; yet if God's purpose for us is fulfilled, there will be continual advancement. Sanctification is the work of a lifetime. As our opportunities multiply, our experience will enlarge, and our knowledge increase.” This comment was very similar to our class discussion as it was clearly demonstrated that perfection was reached at every stage even though we still continue to grow spiritually. The thief on the cross was an awesome example to make that point.
In this chapter, not enough time was spent in unraveling the time at which her views or rather her understanding began to mature to the level of the statement we just mentioned. However, part of Whidden comment expressed her frustrations with perfectionists who themselves were living immoral lives. This is not too far from Paul’s rebuke in Romains chapter two the first verse. What a rebuke of those who judge and yet are guilty of the same things they condemn others for. Paul’s plea to these perfectionists, as it were, could apply to those in White’s days: “but is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter;” The greatest challenge with perfectionist was always to get them to be who they really say they are.
The more I read Romans chapter two, the more I find that it is addressing the frustrations and doctrinal confusion Ellen White faced in her early conversion process. The Jews, in Paul’s days were to the Gentiles what the perfectionists were in White’s days. Paul really spent a great deal of time dealing with this issue. He never really called them hypocrites, but if you follow his logic, you can see the hypocritical attitude he condemned in the whole chapter, especially from verse 17 to 20. Fortunately for us, God used Ellen White’s frustration to lead her to a more perfect understanding of the truth. Thus, we are left with a valuable transformation and clarification of an important doctrinal issue.
Reflection Paper 2!
Salvation is not an afterthought! The Bible said, God created us at His image according His likeness. If we look at it very close and go deeper to the creation history in the Bible, God did not created the animals, the fish of the sea, and the birds at His image and His likeness. God created those animals according to their likeness or species that means some places some where in the other galaxies or world those things -species (animals, birds and fish) have already existed or known before our creation; as of man, there was no species like that before the creation of this world; even though, there was other worlds where intelligent being is living before us that God had been create, none of them was create at the image of almighty God.
The only way, God could die for us because we were creating at His image. If the other worlds were sins, God could not come, and would not come to die for them; this is one of the reasons, Christ did not come to die for the fallen angels, and that does will not make any sense because they were in heaven in the presence of God day and night.
God knew for sure He had to die billions of years before Adam and Eve creation. There was no surprise on the part of God that He never took off guard. As human, when we did some thing, it could be by chance or accident or inheritance or others for God is released thing when the time has comes. The Bible said when the fullness of time has come; God had sent forth His Son.
We can get some good news from all of these mysterious things, who may not be in our level of knowledge to understand; even thought, God knew for sure man is going to cause His death, He took anyway the dust of the earth to make them and blow in their noses – He made them (male and female) in a level – at His image- that He can come; when they became sinners He will come down to that level to die for them; if man was lower than that – an animal, He – God could not come to rescue them.
We can take some comfort from all of this that His Grace is enduring forever!
Reflection on Chapter three of Woodrow W. Whidden II and Romains Chapter 3, and Biblical Research reading Article from Manuel Rodriguez Justification in Romans 3: 21-24
“The Decade Before 1888”
Several issues arose in my mind as I completed my reading today. First of all it is hard to ignore the call from those at odd with the “penal substitution” view of salvation. One of the arguments they make is that our translation of the book of Romans incorrectly renders the Greek word “dikaioo” in all its forms. Most translations use to justify; whereas, they contend it should have been translated “to make right”. In their view that would have made it difficult to view the work of Christ on behalf of sinners as a judicial transaction. A God of love need not to pay any penalty to saved those he loves.
The reading of Romans chapter three really intersected well with my other materials. The chapter from Whidden also briefly touches on the question of whether a man is saved by the law or justify by grace in Christ Jesus. In fact, Whidden firmly believes that Ellen G. White properly addressed this question as she counseled a certain Elder Brown who accused her of promoting salvation through the works of the law. I find his conclusion of white’s position on the issue very telling of her understanding of the relationship of law and grace. He cites the magazine Signs of the Times, July 18 1878 issue: “She declared that we are justified by faith in the merits of Christ, but such faith will never excuse transgression.” I truly support this statement and I would agree with Whidden that she was unequivocal in propagating a righteousness which only comes by faith.
The same chapter of Romains prompted Angel Manuel Rodriguez to refute the notion that the sins we are justified of are those in Adam. He really doesn’t think that Adam should ever be introduced in this context. For him, simple exegesis will demonstrates that personal responsibility for, in his words, “defacing the image of God” must be borne by every individual who have sinned. He places a heavy emphasis on the word “all have sins”; therefore, all need to be justified and restored to the image of Christ. In this regard, salvation’s role is redemptive and restorative.
Lastly, much can be said regarding the timing of the discussion on righteousness by faith. I, did not realize that Ellen White was already establishing the foundation of the righteousness by faith theological footprints even before the Minneapolis conference in 1988. Whidden views it as strength to present her evolution in the understanding and maturity of Biblical doctrines.
Refection Paper #3
As we all know, God created man at His image and His likeness. When we said His image and likeness, sometimes we used collectively- human race; however, Adam and Eve were the only two people who were create at the image and the likeness of God.
When Adam had his children, they were not creating at the image of God. Each generation there after were not create at the image of God, not only we are inheriting Adam sins, but we are producing or cultivating our own sins. A lot of sins, we are doing right now were not even come from Adam and Eve or Satan: we born sinners, we grew up with sins, we have propensity to do badly, and we keep add sins naturally; sometimes, we are not even thinking that we are swimming in every kind sins.
As human being – created with dust of the earth, we all should lose and deserve to be lost! But God who surpasses all intelligence would not let that happen. When Adam and Eve were sins, they ran away that they did not want to see God, and also if a sinner saw God that sinner would die anyway. God in His love for His creature that He made them at His image could not let them run away easily that would be eternal separation. Like the professor said in the book, God was existed before us that mean He can live without us. God choose different path instead God was the one who took the initiative in looking for the fallen pair in the Garden of Eden and saying, “Adam where are you or look at what you were become!”
What we can take from all of these, theologically - it might take Adam and Eve less than a year after the creation to sin. The professor said the good thing about it; even though we sinned, but God was the only one who had to come to save us from the curse of the Law that should be very important to take into account.
In the article, “Adam and the Human Race in the Writings of Ellen White,” Angel Manuel Rodriguez summarizes the fall of Adam and what it caused. There were immediate results from the fall, but some of the judgments were immediate delayed because Christ stepped in as our mediator. Our first parents did not immediately face judgment because of that mediation, and it is because of that mediation that we too have an opportunity of reconciliation. I really like how the judgment is explained by using the example of our first parents. The Bible tells us that we will all be judged according to our works, but that seems to contradict justification by faith. However, if we understand it in context of what happened to Adam and Eve then it makes perfect sense. After they sinned, Adam and Eve were shown the way back to God through Christ and it was their choice to accept or reject Him. In the end they will be judged according to their choice to accept Christ or reject Him and their works will reflect that choice. The same is true of us today, if we have accepted Christ our life will reflect that choice, it will be evident whether or not we have made Him our salvation and for all who choose Him the perfect record of the Son is placed over ours.
Another point was made concerning how humanity fell in Adam. It’s not that we were mystically in Adam when he committed the sin, but that we inherited the propensity that he inherited when he fell. When he fell, we fell. Through the one transgression we all became transgressor because Adam was our representative. This fact is beautiful because of what follows. In Romans 5:19 Paul says that through Adam we all fell, but in Christ we were all made righteous. We all believe that we are sinners because of the singular act of Adam in the Garden of Eden. Why do we believe this? Because the Scripture is clear on this topic. It would seem a bit unfair that we inherited this fallen nature, guilt and destruction through one man, even though we were not there. However, salvation occurs the same way. Therefore, we need to begin to place our faith in Christ rather than Adam. As Adam was our representative, so now Christ has became our representative. This is a wonderful truth, because it teaches the simplicity of the Gospel. Choose Christ and everything and become and inherit what He has provided rather than Adam and what resulted from his fall, it’s a choice; a no-brainer.
Reflection Paper #4
Could Jesus be our example? The Jury is still out there; for me, I don’t think so – it is a mere of speculation! As we are talking in the class today, some of us were asking is the model of Jesus life and its example is for us to follow. When I’m examining, the birth of Christ, the early life, His Baptism, Jesus ministry, His death, His resurrection, and ascension I said to myself it is good that I have a Savior but not a role model. If He was a role model, I would not follow Him; basically, He would be a phantom, a legend or a fictional character, and His virgin birth would be a joke. As of now, we dying in a situation with a sinful nature where we can’t take ourselves out that means we need a Savior. When we died, we can ensure we will be resurrected, we know for sure He will change our corrupt body to incorruptibility and our mortal body to immortality.
But if we are looking on Jesus to follow or our model to live, we will be disappointed. Even Jesus was a babe, but He was God – Immanuel. His father sent billions of angels to protect Him as baby, and people has seen His Star; some people came very far away to save Him – the wise men. When he grew up, the Evil one can’t even approach Him. He had no propensity that means he could not sin; he never gives up as God who had created the heaven and the earth. John the Baptist had seen the sign that He is God. In his ministry, He had made a lot of miracles: feed people, heal them and raised the dead.
The only time Christ may have been without the guardian angels; except, in His 40 days and 40 nights fasting. The only reason, He was hungry because God tried to prepare Him before He undertaken the sins of the world and he did not want to use His power – that set. After the fasting was over, God sent angels to praise and worship Him.
We should be happy that we have a savior who understands our need. He was not a good human being or an angel; He was the Son of the living God, and who seat right now at the right hand of God in heaven.
Post #2-
Just thinking: theoretical thought and theological water
Water is a chemical substance comprised of hydrogen and Oxygen. Water cannot be water without either oxygen or hydrogen. Hydrogen by itself cannot make up water, and neither can oxygen. They are each necessary elements for water!
At the risk of redundancy, let me illustrate this principle further using a photon example. A photon can behave both as a particle or a wave. Without this property—wave and particle—a photon is not a photon. Both physical properties must co-exist and are not mutually exclusive!.
For centuries now, theologians, philosophers, scientists have debated from both sides of isles; one side seeking to emphasize one portion of truth at the expense of the other. Perhaps an example of these ongoing debates will help clarify the point: original sin vs. actual sins; penal substitution vs. moral influence; prelapsarian vs. postlapsarian; transcendence vs. immanence; Bultmannism vs. Barthianism; science vs. faith, appearance vs. reality; objectivism vs. subjectivism; and etc
For the purpose of this discussion, suppose water is truth, hydrogen and oxygen, the so-called two diametrical poles. We can only arrive at truth if and only if we consider both poles in the debate! Water can aid us understand these divisions within our theology, thoughts, and practice.
Tensions within these disciplines seem to stem from a presupposition that two ideas are always mutually exclusive. However, as illustrated by the above water and photon analogies, I’m saying for water to be water, it cannot say I don’t need hydrogen or I don’t need oxygen. Both elements are essential and necessary for water to exist. Therefore, both sides in most controversial dialogues are needed not only for a healthy debate, but also to arrive to some nearness of truth! Mutual exclusivity only widens the gaps and thus pushes us far from truth!
As I continued to reflect more on the nature of sin from our last class, the more I realized our tendency to emphasize one side while negating the other in our pursuit for truth. However, without any restrictions of “either/or approach” in our theological, scientific, and philosophical enterprises, I hope this transcending principle can help us reflect further and freely!
Valmy.
Reflection Paper #5
Christ is the end of the law for our Justification!
The Law was there before the creation of the world, but God was giving it for a last time on Mount Sinai; by that, no one would have any excuse to say,” I did not know.” When people transgressed the Law in the Old Testament, they were stoning because they transgression of the Law is death.
Everything in the Law: the sacrificial system- the sacrifice of animal, the priestly ministry- Pharaoh Priesthood, the Old Testament and the Ten Commandments, all of these directed to Christ as the culmination. The Law had never been there to save anyone even the scapegoat’s rituals, it was there to show them their incapability that they need a savior that was the reason they had to do it over and over –every year.
In the New Testament, Christ said there will be no iota – a small letter would not take away from the Law until the earth and the heaven passed away. What Christ really meant God want perfect obedience to its Law, no human being can be perfect according to the law, and the sins must be paid off. The only solution God had for the human race to rescue in this planet that He had to come. God said to Himself – Father, Son and Holy Spirit, let me send my Son, if He observes the law without sin, His sacrifice will go for everyone, and the human race would get back to Him.
That is the only reason right now when we sinned we do not get killed, He died for our sins. We do not follow the letter of the Law to be saved, but we saved by the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. If the Law could save us, there would be no reason for Christ to come. We are going to church, we do what is right an observe the Ten Commandments because we save 2000 years ago by what Christ had already done for us on the cross.
Reflection Paper #6
As we all know by now, once upon a time, science did not believe in religion and religion didn’t believe in science; as the debate continues since Darwinian evolution, it seems they become closer more than ever. Now, there is no one in their right mind thinks the earth, the heaven, the sun, the moon and the water were part of the six days creation. The Bible said, “God created everything!” I believe it, which is true. But when the earth was create is another history, because the science said the earth had been around for billions of years that’s could be true too.
The creation account in Genesis did say the earth was there, it was formless and void, but darkness was upon the earth- that’s could be Evil or satanic power on earth. That is the reason too, the Bible gave us two different days the lights were create, may be the first mention of lights could be God intervention.
For human being, it is clear that we are not come from apes; we were new into the creation most likely we were the last creation of God. Ellen White called that the crown or jewel of all creation.
The point is, whatever the creation may be, it is not that important. With all due respect for the God of creation, I believe the God of redemption is where we need to focus. We cannot go higher or lower than the cross, but we have to go to the cross to save. Most of the times, we are talking about small things “how we were here, who is the father of God or how sin come to this world” then now we need to talk about the science of life, we are not here by accident, but we were create at the image of God that we should give Him glory and praise always.
Reaction to Chapters 3 and 4 – Woodrow W. Whidden’s EGW on Salvation:
The Third and Fourth Chapters in W.W.Whidden’s book throw light on Ellen White’s personal views of perfection both of her own Christian experience and that of a normal Christian.
Ellen White’s acknowledgment of her own imperfections communicate to us either that she was being modest or that she was being real. It is quite possible that she was being realistic about her imperfections. The author cites as an example of this, the disagreement between James and Ellen White on a certain issue. It is my opinion that a disagreement between Ellen and James White on certain issues does not necessarily imply that they were sinning by disagreeing. That does not seem to be a good example to show the failings/imperfections of Ellen White or James White.
She consistently laid emphasis on the fact that Christ’s grace was the only way salvation was made possible to us. She was equally consistent in teaching that a life of faith that is evidenced by one’s actions is a condition for salvation. However, as illustrated by the author in the case of Edith Andrews, Ellen White shows how the deficiencies that are a part of all human, “repenting, humble”, believers is mercifully covered by Christ.
Ellen White held this view even before the great denominational emphasis on justification by faith in 1888. It may be that she had not emphasized this view as much as she did after 1883. The author is of the opinion that, among other things, James White’s death influenced her to carry on his burden during his sunset years (this emphasis on Christ’s grace rather than the merits of Law-keeping) for God’s people after his passing. Since others (A.T. Jones and EJW) arrived at the same conclusions independently. This may also have been God’s plan and time for this aspect of the message.
The author writes that the growing emphasis on keeping of the Law and Obedience was withholding many from experiencing the assurance of salvation is particularly interesting because it has great significance for present day Adventist-Christians. This lack of assurance still haunts many believers (and ministers). I find this chapter useful in appreciating Ellen White’s confidence in the gift of Salvation and her determination to press on to perfection; not out of fear or dread of being lost. She seems to have done so, propelled by the love of/for Jesus that she experienced.
This harmonizes with discussions in class regarding the holistic view of Salvation and Perfection. Ellen White does not at anytime (before 1893 or after) express the view that the Christian life ‘plateau’s’ at any stage. There seems to be a steady theme of growth and upward movement into the likeness of Christ. This is further supplemented by her teaching that Christ’s grace deals with the imperfections of our lives when our course on earth is done. Which is good news to every tired, sin-battling Christian.
In reading Romans 4:7 which Go as follow: “Blessed are whose lawless deeds are forgiven and whose sins are covered, I remember we had a discussion in class about two world view: one sees God or have faith with no evidence while the other looks for evidence to have faith in God. This passage seems to imply that who have sinned without the law the Lord forgives their sins. I find that it is ridiculous for us to sin with the law in our hands. In that case, we are not going to be forgiven. There are those who sin with the law those who sin without the law. The latter ones do not know better. So, they speak, go around, and live according to the light they have. Apparently the person who is ignorant is the one who sin.
No society can progress without law. There would be chaos and upheavals day after day; week after week and all the time. The whole universe, I believe, is lawful. In other words, there is a law for everything in the existing world. I cannot imagine a society without it. Everything may and will go away, but the law of God will remain forever. When sins and sinners are no longer existed there will still be law by which the then society will function. Ellen sees kinds of sins: one kind is in our sinful nature and other is our propensities to sin. For the lack of better words let me take it directly from ‘Ellen White on Salvation’ which defines as “acts of transgressing God’s will and a condition of depravity that involves inherited sinful inclinations within us.” Yes, we can respond to God’s redemptive initiative. We have the power of choice. We have the five senses to respond in one way or another. The Calvinistic view turns us into robots. We are not that bad. However, when the Holy Spirit is constantly calling us and we don’t yield to the voice of God Calvin may have a partial reason. The more we resist God’s calling the harder it is for us to actually say “yes” to Jesus. So, the individuals may do whatever they want while they are traveling where in signal zone for there will be a time when they will turn their telephone on and, to their surprise, there will be no signal. No more pleading! No more interceding! No means of responding! There is no signal in this area. It is a sin to not responding to God. It is a sin against the Holy Spirit. That is what many of our scientists do. Every time God knocks on the door of their hearts, hey, they block Him out to do their scientific experiments. Guess what? Their hearts become harder and harder to the point that they make room for God. So, they become gods. They choose to deny the existence of the God. They rather become deists or pantheists, or even pan-en-theists, or atheist instead of surrendering their lives to the Almighty, God the Creator. I am persuaded that we are all good worshippers whether we worship heavenly creator or earthly creatures. Worship is in our DNA! We cannot not worship. If a living being declares to not give adoration to God I know for fact that that person worships other things or him/herself.
“Even the Spirit-inspired works of charity and obedience have no saving merit?” We deserve nothing base who we are or what we do. It is all about Christ’s righteousness.
In the first chapter of Romans Paul speaks of salvation as Gods free gift "...to every one that believeth (1:16). In class we discussed active faith in the classical sense that a person who ascepts Gods free gift of salvation will demonstrate that he/she have already exprienced it through a life of sanctification. To my mind it is that experience that leds the believer towards living a life of active faith. Again Paul says with "...mouth confession is made unto salvation..." (10:10). It is this active faith that declares that a person "is saved". Salvation must preceed faith sence it(salvation) is given to us. Faith is what we produce and that faith is seen through our good works meaning a life of "sanctification". In this reference to salvation Paul also points to the "gospel" as a saving instrument. If we are admonished to believe, it is therefore the gospel of Jesus that provides that assurance unto salvation. The gospel becomes an instrument which God uses to provide salvation to man. He says "it is the power of God unto salvation to every one who believes" (1:16).We generate faith in Gods provision of salvation by ascepting the gospel. "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing of the word of God" A life of obedience is a life of salvation as is seen through the lense of sanctification. Sanctification therefore becomes the life of the one who is saved and walks in that unique experience.
Justification in Romans 3:21-24
by Angel Manuel Rodriguez
My Reflection
21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
Rodriquez’s breakdown of Romans 3:21-24 is no doubt unambiguous and plain to those that still question the perception that Paul is talking about Adam sinned and therefore all human sinned and so justification is for all. Instead Paul is very clear as well as the author about “now,” God reveal a new way of salvation. What Rodriguez is emphasizing here is that “the righteous of God by faith in Jesus Christ.” What astonishing is that it does not end there as many believed. The statement continues as in verse 22 “This righteous from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ ‘to all who believe.” Basically what Paul is saying that the righteousness from God through faith only to those who believe. In other words, if you don’t believe you don’t get God righteousness.
This is even more startling to me only, how Rodriquez interpreted the “all sinned” phrase and its relation to the rest of the text. I agree with what he’s saying that “all sinned,” ‘should not be interpreted in terms of sinning in Adam but in terms of the context in which the phrase is used.’” I cannot put it better. He said, “There’s no reference in the context to Adam and there is no need to introduce him here.” He continued, “Secondly, nowhere in Romans does Paul use the phrase “in Adam,” and we have no basis to introduce it in the epistle. When Paul says “all sinned” he is simply summarizing what he has being arguing in the previous chapters.”
Howeve the SDABC vol. 6 says “all have sinned,” “Literally, “all sinned.” Adam’s sin marred the divine image in man and ever since man’s fall, all of Adam’s descendants have continued to fall short and be destitute of the image and glory of God. Paul is urging Jews and Gentiles alike to recognize the vital fact that all the evidence of experience and history clearly proves that fallen man, with his depraved nature, is wholly incapable of fulfilling the requirements of God’s law and of establishing his own righteousness.”
The author pointed out that Paul is referring to his “previous discussion of the actual condition of rebellion and sin of the human race and not on a primeval event that took place in Adam.” However the SDABC is kind of referring to Adam’s sin so which one I agree with? I agree with Rodriguez interpretation, why? Because the verse says, “But now, a righteousness from God,” this tells me that this is a new righteousness that only applies to those that have faith in Christ and believe in Him. So if that is so then why referring to Adam and says, “all have sinned,” this will means that God’s righteousness will apply to all or everyone whether you believe or not.
My reflection deals with chapter three in the book Ellen White on Salvation. It is really amazing how times have not really changed a whole lot. It seems as if Ellen White in her days was dealing with the same issues that we are still dealing with today. That issue is the issue of Holiness and legalism. The irony of this entire issue is that only God is holy and yet when we look at his patience throughout the eternity even in situations where he has had to act and there was a need for blood to be shed. We must admit that in his holiness he has still demonstrated that He is loving.
People often are misguided into thinking that being a law keeper gives the right for judgment. Many think that by keeping the law that this is a demonstration that we are ready for translation. However, it has been my experience in ministry as a pastor that many of the individuals that claim to be avid law keepers. They often are not that loving at all. I guess the point that I am making is that being a law keeper and being holy should both have an outward expression of Love.
Please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that the law should be dusted over because it does not save you. However, in a universe that is dependant and interdependent on relationships, there has to be a connection that the law brings to all who claim to be believers. Can you imagine there are some that believe that they have perfected keeping the law so much so that they no longer need even the persuasive power of the Holy Sprit? The last time I checked in the 1 epistle of John. The bible says that there is a need for all to admit that they sin. And if they claim that they do not sin they are liars and the truth is not in them.
I did find it amusing that the Whites suggested that the man that was a little extreme should consider going to the hospital for some medical help. But the point must be taken seriously that those that are on the edge of fanaticism should be very careful as to how they present what may seem to be present truth. Those that they may be speaking to may not know about the truth that they present so legalistically and or they really are not in a space of their lives where they are ready to receive this information. Further to add to this we must remember that it is work of the Holy Spirit that convicts the individual and changes lives from the inside out.
Now I know people may get the wrong idea that I am not advocating for the law and for the need to be morally accountable. However I have met enough people to know that until you are in relationship with them, many will not consider anything that you have to say. However, if they can look at your life and see the indwelling of the Spirit, led by the word of God. Long before you would have told them of the Sabbath, holiness and technical terms like sanctification. They would have felt the love and perhaps consider their need just as much as yours for the savior.
Andre Anderson
…The rest of the story
Chapter 4 – Woodrow W. Whidden II
What better a way to influence lives than through your personal testimony. Imagine the Whites with such a powerful ministry lives being changed and transformed into the image of Christ for the sake of others. Yet, James White’s testimony in the weaning years of his life was that He had not spent enough time preaching about the exalted character of Christ, as well as His willingness and power to save. It was clear that James wanted this church to preach more Christ. It does sound easier said than done especially, in this post modern culture where personal needs have been exalted higher than the Messiah himself. James White, implored his wife that she should continue on in this order of truth.
I like what she says to her son that they had made some mistakes in being so eager to speak that it might have been better that they spent more time putting to pen the issues that were more pressing to the church. James says that,” Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath: “James 1:19. How much more successful would we as ministers of the gospel be, if we would refuse more speaking engagements and ponder the true needs of the church under the direction of the Holy Spirit. I personally do not think that Jesus is being preached enough. Yes many of the contemporary messages do sound good and yes the Lord is blessing the efforts of his servants, but yet we could be much more Christocentric in our messages, especially as this earths history is coming to a soon close.
After her husband had passed Mrs. White had to admit that while she may have preached many sermons and done much work for the Lord, she still desired to be more perfect and never claimed to be infallible. How humble is that? The prophet to this remnant church admitting that she was not yet perfect and how she hoped that she was never a stumbling block for anyone.
What does this have to do with us here today? In a world that is becoming more and more haughty of heart with less fruit to demonstrate true connection to the good shepherd. We need to take this example as a learning experience that we too have yet to have arrived. And when we get to where we think we are going, it is still Gods grace that will have kept us. While Ellen White was not claiming to be a hypocrite by preaching and living a different life, no! All she was trying to say was that no matter how much we may be committed to Jesus. We need him more and we need to preach him more. Just as the prayer says gives us our daily bread, we need Jesus each and every day. We can never preach or teach too much Jesus. “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” It is only through this Jesus that john was writing about that we will be able to overcome. We might as well get used to giving him all the honor and praise because he alone is worthy to be praised. Whenever we feel as though we have arrived may we remember that it was Jesus’ body that hung on Calvary’s cross for our sins so that whosoever believes on him, should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Andre Anderson
Will babies be eternally lost?
I want to share my thought about the reading of the articles of the BRI. First of all, I have found the articles relevant for my learning. They cover the subject of salvation with depth and clarity. This tool can be very helpful for church members. Latter I will talk about the use of internet and their effect on the doctrine of salvation.
Even though there are a lot of materials in the BRI, the article that I want to share some thought now is the one about Original Sin by Gehard Pfandl. Not all the issue but the topic about infant babies. Sometimes members of the church come up with the inquire: When a baby dies, will he be in heaven when Jesus comes? What would you answer?
I have thought about it and still thinking, because my sister died 1 hour after my mother delivered her. I want to met her, but after I read this paper I am half convinced that maybe I will not have that opportunity. Because babies will not be taken to heaven.
But is it truth? Let us consider the datas from the article itself. On page 18 the column on the left informations are important consider. First, after sin, Adam and Eve started to be shaped after Satan’s image (Desire of Ages p.114). But they still have the image of God (Step to Christ chapter 1,2). Babies bare both images, evil and good. So Heppenstall then argue that “babies die, not because they have actually sinned or are punished by God, but because they are now part of this alienation from the source of life. All men are born self-centred, not God-centred.”
Now it is logical to think biblically that sinner have to die (Rom.6:23). And since every baby is sinner (sinful nature; Ps.51:5), they should die also. And this is actually what happen. But this raises a lot of questions. I will state just two of them that came up in my mind: Where does it comes the opportunity of receiving eternal life for babies? Second, is sin inherited, and inherited punished?
This I will read a little more and think a little more, because I still don’t have a definite answer. I have some thoughts that I will share with you tomorrow (29th). But what I would like to conclude is that this is not a easy issue for me and I need some help. Please comment on that to clarify my ideas.
Sin in Nature and Choice
Sin isn’t pretty. It seems that we see its evidences everywhere in our world, and if we take a thoughtful moment of reflecting on ourselves, we can see that it has internal dimensions just as much as external. In the exploration of sin both in the classroom and in our studies, I have found that the nature of sin in an individual holds two elements: nature and choice.
In the beginning chapters of Genesis we find there what is known theologically as ‘the fall’. In Angel Manuel Rodriguez’s “Adam and the Human Race”, he looks at the theology of Ellen White in reference to what the effects of the fall are upon humanity. What is concluded is that ‘Adam had united with the disloyal forces, and self-will took the field." Human nature became so corrupted that it was impossible for human beings by themselves to do good. It is the very "nature of sin to spread and increase. Since the first sin of Adam, from generation to generation it has spread like a contagious disease"’ Also as Whidden points out, she reveals the nature of this corruption by saying “selfishness is inwrought in our very being.” and “It has come to us as an inheritance”(42). This isn’t exactly good news.
In Romans chapter 1 we see that there are people in this world and in the worlds history that are so fully surrendered to sin and darkness that “God gave them up to a debased mind...” But what Paul also points out is that these people know the truth about God. And in knowing the truth, we are given a choice as to whether we follow that corrupt nature, or as Peter says, we can become “partakers of the divine nature.”
I think of what we went over regarding the incarnation. That Christ who was pre-existent with the Father, stepped down from glory while mysteriously taking on humanity. His life was fully dependent on the Father and He provided to us and example of righteousness. Unlike Adam who chose to do things according to his own feelings and desires. Adam’s fault was that his desires were not aligned with God’s will.
Jesus surrendered himself to the will of the Father–just as we can. Jesus was dependent on the word of God and the Father as a source of truth–just as we can be. The beauty and hope is revealed in Jesus through this: that he chose to live a righteous life for the sake of God’s glory, and mankind’s redemption. Rather than dying because of a sinful life, Christ lived a righteous life and died for the sake of sinful humanity. This I believe is why the Bible reveals Christ as being the “firstfruits”. His life was the first life in all of history, which produced the fruit that was originally intended to come from Adam and Eve.
Coming back to Romans chapter 1, Paul says this “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes...for in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written– the righteous shall live by faith”. We see Paul make the statement in Romans 14:23 “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” What a strong statement. Each and every moment in our lives we are given choices. A choice to choose life–in Christ the one and only Righteous one, or to choose death–by aligning our feelings and desires with Adam, taking on that sinful disposition. Each and every one of us are handed a choice. We can choose righteousness by faith in Jesus Christ, or we can choose to go about life without intention and without conviction, following our desires and feelings while succumbing to sin.
Although we have a sinful disposition, we have power to overcome through Faith in Jesus Christ.
- Nathan Hellman
Gospel is Bigger than the Cross
Paul is eager to preach the Gospel of God because the Gospel is the “power of God for Salvation”. All remember with what hatred, destructive passion with which he fought against those who preach the same Gospel. He gave his approval for murders; one of the most glaring is that of Stephen, he imprisoned Christians, persecuting them with all the energy he could muster. He was obviously in ignorance, but the vehemence with which he insisted later with his followers to preach the same Good News that he had fought testifies in favour of his new conviction. Gospel is not a word by itself it is power. It is not just a theory, a passive theory, it is a power to save. Paul helps Bible's readers to understand the relationship between faith and salvation; moreover, he clearly explains in Romans 4: 24-25 that salvation comes from faith in the power of Gospel; and, for those who have faith, they receive salvation..
The Good News preached by Paul knows neither time nor limit, because the Good News affects everyone. Likewise, Jesus was adaptable to everyone and His Good News is available to anyone. He knows when to preach, or when to just have a conversation; besides, no matter how the conversation begins its conclusions lead to salvation.
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach Good News to the poor.” According to Luke 7:16, anointed by the Holy Spirit, Jesus speaks of a Gospel that is at the same time Good News spiritually, socially, emotionally and physically. Jesus was touched by the misery and suffering of those most poor, destitute, and deprived human beings. Paul shows that the same Spirit who anointed Jesus is the same who took hold of him to continue what Jesus has started few years before. His acts of compassion and mercy went hand-in-hand with the Good News of the kingdom that he has been chosen to preach. Paul, as Jesus, lived what he preached and preached what he lived. It is why he was able to call and invite everyone to follow his example as he did to Christ.
Gospel is truly a miracle of God. It is not necessary to fully understand, if you try to understand everything, you can lose yourself. So, as future or already ministers we should not make it difficult for others. Even Peter said what Paul has written about salvation is difficult to understand. The Gospel is a miracle. It is a powerful miracle for salvation. The “Doctrine of Salvation” implies Christ pre-incarnate, Christ who died, and Christ resurrected. This is what Paul was about to say in the first chapter of the book of Romans.
Finally, the purpose of the Gospel is “obedience by faith” because faith is the reception of God’s action. The Gospel preached by Paul is bigger than the cross. It is important to understand that Paul's preaching of the Gospel for the salvation of human kind should not be seen partially, but must be received in its entirety. The Gospel should be considered holistically not only at the cross.
Roger Saint-Fleur
I was especially impressed by Ellen White’s balanced view of justification by faith as discussed in chapters 9 and 10 of Ellen White on Salvation. Salvation is the result of God clothing us with the perfect robe of righteousness. We cannot earn this robe, nor do we ever become worthy of it based on our own performance. It is ours by faith, forever. Ellen White was clear on this five years before the 1888 experience, which says a lot about her accuracy.
The scary thing is the conditions listed as to why the justification by faith movement was probably rejected; that of the brethren seeing the need of emphasizing the law in lue of the believed fulfillment of last-day prophecy. We need to be careful that the same thing does not happen to us today. We know the importance of the Sabbath, but we must not overemphasize the law over the Cross. Honestly, I believe that we have done that in practice, although we believe in justification by faith alone in theory. On Sabbath, we speak more about the fact that we keep the entire law than we do about the all-sufficient merits of Christ. I like the analogy given in chapter 9 about the gymnast who needs a perfect 10 but knows that he/she cannot get it because of an injury. We give our best effort, but understand that in the end we can never get that perfect 10; thanks be to God through Jesus Christ we have that 10.
Doctrine of Salvation
By Wallin O’Connor
Class discussion
This blog is about one of our class discussions on faith and how it works. I really can not see how one may think faith is passive, when clearly it is a word associated with activity. I have met people who think they can not go to the doctor when they are ill, and claim that they are relying solely upon their faith.
I am in no way claiming that God can not heal people like He did when he walked this earth. I am however saying that God has blessed people with the knowledge of medicine and so we should be able to go to the knowing that God can and will work through them. So what does this have to do with salvation?
People often think that their salvation is something that requires nothing but belief. But that is not accurate. Our salvation has to be more than just raw belief. God has done so much even before Adam first sinned, but we also have a part to play, even if it is a small one.
The first dimension of faith has to come from God Himself. (Faith Salvation Faith) Faith comes from God and is an attribute of His character. He gives us faith, we accept salvation, and thus we live by faith. So salvation is from faith to faith. The intriguing dimension is the second element of faith. It is one that requires an active component to it. We must live out our faith not just sit on it.
Active faith is an obedient faith. 2 Corinthians 5:7 says we “we walk by faith and not by sight”. The walk here implies that we are in a constant state of movement, not stationary. Therefore we must grow daily, in our faith walk with God.
Comments by Daniel Vega – Lescano
I grew up in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. As a child and in my early teen years, I had the concept that I needed to be perfect and sinless in order to get to Heaven. Many times I try to pray and read the Bible, however I failed time after time. Therefore, I stopped praying and reading the Bible. How can in anyway be perfect and not sin, I used to question myself. I continued in this dilemma until my mid-teen years where I read a book titled “To Know Jesus is Everything” which was published in Spanish. I realized trying does not work at all. A relationship with Jesus is what I need to be perfect. Out there, there many, like me when I was kid, who have a confusion about perfection and salvation. There is a division between those who think they have to keep the law to be saved and perfect, and there are those who are against keeping the law. Those who talk about perfection and keeping the law use the writings of Ellen White to based their beliefs.
The author of the book “Ellen White on Salvation” on chapter three brings relevant insights on this situation. Mrs. White had “essential balance between justification and perfection.” On her time, she had to deal with fanaticism. Mrs. White states that the law does not have power in itself to save. This was a comment to the group of we are saved by the law, and we need to be sinless. She also said to the other group who were against the law, that once we are saved we cannot continue in transgressions. In summary, Mrs. White said that salvation could not be possible with the law and neither without it.
Many confused obedience to the law as signal of perfection. Nevertheless, this is a misunderstanding of perfection.
In class was said that “we are perfect in justification and in every stage of sanctification.” Jesus said in John 15:4 “Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.” The key for perfection is in abiding constantly in communion with Christ. Without a relationship with the Lord Jesus I cannot be perfect neither be obedient to the law. He is the vine, the source of perfection because He is perfect. A little branch might not look the same as full grown branch. However, this does not mean that little branch and the big one are the different. The two of them are branches. I am perfect when I am connected to Christ, in every step of the way. As a result of the communion with Him I will bear fruits that will come naturally because of the I love the Lord with all my heart, strength, and might.
As a kid, I just understood that I needed to obey to be saved. Many in the church struggle with this concept that they have please God with works. The opportunity I have to study about the Doctrine of Salvation is not only to keep the good news to myself but to share it with others.
Salvation is much bigger of what we think., is the main theme in class of Doctrine of Salvation. It’s not just about the cross, justification, sanctification, but about many aspects. I could star asking why do we need to talk so much about the Doctrine of Salvation? The reality is that we immerse in a big problem called sin, which has brought misery to humanity. I would like to comment about the article in the Biblical Research Institute which deals with “Adam and the Human Race in the Writings of Ellen White.” Salvation came as solution to the problem of sin that Adam introduced. Angel Manuel Rodriguez says in this article the fall of Adam is the biggest catastrophe. The results of sin can be seen all around the world.
Sin caused separation between God and human beings. It also caused terrible things to nature. Humanity became slaves to sin with no hope of good future, just death. When we talk about thinking big salvation, we are talking about analyzing how God has been working from the beginning to restore us. It was there in Eden, where the Lord promised to Adam and Eve a solution for the problem of sin and death. He was the one who started to seek for His children. God as our creator loves us so much that looks for us even though we hide behind trees. Salvation and love are very well connected. They are huge. God shows His love in demonstrating that He will fight for Adam, Eve, and their descendants until the end. He is saying that He will not easily let us go to be destroyed by the enemy. However, to accept His salvation requires that we accept it with all the heart.
Here comes another wonderful virtue of our God. His love is so big that He does not want to forces to be saved. For Adam sin entered into the world, now by Christ we can be saved. A question comes to my mind: Should we blame Adam and Eve for the sufferings we through? They introduced sin into the world, however I am alone responsible for my decisions and actions. This makes me remember what I have heard sometimes. I have this bad character because my dad, granddad had it. You could have inherited sinful tendencies, but it is not an excuse to continue behaving that way. The same thing is about focusing about how depressing life is. There are some Christians thst everything looks negative. Jesus came to bring hope. There is s much better tomorrow. We have a reason to have joy. A reason to get deep in the study of the gift of salvation which will continue for all eternity. We have a huge hope of Salvation in Jesus.
In the Way for Glorification
After losing the happiness of heaven, the human race found itself on the planet earth surrounded by temptations, sin, disease, despair and finally death. This table shows the sad reality of man since Adam and Eve. But, as the Creator's had planned, one day, He appointed His Son Jesus, the Christ, to be the bearer of good news. He came to tell the human race that the gates of paradise can be once more re-opened. This looks like more of a fairy tale for children in the evening, than good news to change the vision of humanity in relation to life.
God the Father lives in glory and no one can see his face and live. To see Him would be to enter in His glory. Christ came to prepare the way for the whole human race and especially to those who agree to follow Him. His contemporaries, the people of his nation, did not believe in him and have not received him. Not only did he not been received, those who agreed to follow have experienced persecution, torture, stoning, and death. Interestingly, one of the greatest persecutors, of those who had accepted the Son of God as the one who would reopen the door of the lost paradise, lived the experience of the Glory of the Creator. This brave man, having fallen from his horse, while he pursued the followers of Christ, under the effect of a light, as a lightning strike, exclaimed: "Lord, what wilt thou have me do?"
He has been chosen and set aside to carry, wherever he went, the good news of salvation which he fought. He will accomplish this task faithfully until his death. He will be himself beaten, persecuted, imprisoned and finally executed. But the big question that more than one arises is: if Christ has decided on its own to justify the human race in order to give him back the lost paradise, why the human race should make the effort to live a sanctified life to access it?
Christianity is divided on this point with relation to salvation. Some denominations preach justification by faith as Paul presents it in his letter to the Romans; “Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Rm 5:1. Others believe that justification is necessary but not sufficient; it is necessary not only to accept the justification, but also persevere in holiness to the ultimate point which is the glorification. This is what believe and preach the Seventh-Day Adventists; this is part of the doctrine of salvation.
Indeed, one might say, logically, if it is the will of Christ to offer him as a ransom in place of humanity, no one therefore needs to do anything to find the lost paradise. The apostle Paul believed it was possible because he has experienced it. He has experienced it so brutally but he did not resist the vision. What is interesting about the experience of Paul was that he was surrounded by soldiers, but he was the only one to hear the voices and see the light. He immediately realized that the power of this light put his life in danger and the first question he asked was: Lord, what wilt thou have me do? The preaching of Paul, formerly Saul, took shape from his personal experience with Christ. Whatever the force with which the Gospel is announced to an individual, without a personal experience, a personal knowledge, an intimate relationship with Christ, a real commitment to serving the Lord, the glorification remains and will remain a distant illusion.
Roger Saint-Fleur
Perfectionism is a problem that is plaguing most churches today. And the text I hear quoted most times is Matt 5:48, “But be perfect even as your Heavenly father is perfect”. This notion of perfectionism is something that is not new to the church today. But rather it has been around even from E.G. Whites day and even before that. But where did we go wrong in our understanding? Does being perfect mean we are to be sinless? And if we are to be sinless does it make the blood and sacrifice of Christ a worthless cause?
My thoughts on these questions are no.
Firstly I found it intriguing the notion in class that we should take back the word perfect. Because we are to be perfect but not the way some of us have distorted the word. Our perfection should be a growing one. So at every stage in our faith walk with God we are perfect.
Secondly as you read the text in its context you find that Christ is not talking about a perfection that is strictly meeting the churches standards and condemning those who may not reach there yet. But rather He is talking about having “Perfect Love”. The perfection is wrapped in the context of love.
How we treat one another, how we love and pray for our enemies, how we deal with those whom are indebted to us is the litmus test of our perfection.
Our perfection is to be comparable to that of our Heavenly Father. Our God manifests great love towards us even though we sin and fall daily. His perfect love is unconditional.
Lastly people who claim to have reached a state of perfection forget that they too are in need of salvation. This may sound cynical but, if some of us are so perfect then why are we not yet in heaven? Could it be that we are all perfect sinners in need of a perfect savior, who will make us perfect as we grow in Him? I believe that we all need to be perfect as we progress in our daily walk with God.
I am responding to chapters 5 and 6 in Whidden’s book, specifically, regarding the balance/tension of God’s characteristics of Justice/Mercy given our sinful condition.
Before the fall, God’s nature was Just, and his character was Love. And there was no tension between the two. God was entirely just and entirely loving, and that was all that was needed. His government was founded on justice and love for one another. And so it continued for millennia.
When Lucifer began to question God’s character and government, God was for the first time put in an apparently paradoxical position. Lucifer, having acted unjustly and unlovingly, did not deserve continued existence, and God could have justly annihilated him. But God knew that such a cold demonstration of Justice would forever mar the twin principle of Love, which was the foundation of his government. Justice with intolerance would be a way to run a government, but God saw it as not the greatest good. Similarly, a government based on love without justice (if it is possible to conceive of such a thing) may have been possible, but by no means would satisfy for a “perfect” system.
Thus, a new characteristic of God, previously unseen, came to the forefront: that of his Merciful character. Up until this point, mercy had not been necessary, (indeed, would not have even made sense under a perfect existence). God decided not to destroy Lucifer, but rather let him continue his existence outside of heaven, with the purpose of demonstrating the truth of the twin principles of Justice and Love which his government was based on. This was done with the effort of letting the self-destructive principles of sin play themselves out for the universe to observe, and understand that any government apart from God’s was doomed to self-destruction. In His wisdom, God knew that this would be the only way to balance the principles of love and justice (now in a tension against each other for the first time in the universe).
God had a similar decision to make when our earthly parents failed the test of obedience and fell into sin. God could have (justifiably) erased the slate and started over, but that would have ended the principle of willed, self-volunteered love in the universe (and would have set up an alternative ‘love me or die’ system).
But, in order to remain just, God needed to provide a means for redemption if he was going to let the earth continue. Because neither is it just for a being to be born into a situation of suffering and pain , when no remedy or resolution is possible.
Thus, we see that God’s mercy is an extension of his Justice, under a very specific circumstance. In our situation, God must provide mercy in order to be just in letting this world continue. Many people see mercy and justice as opposite ends of the spectrum, but in this case, the former flows out of the latter, in that we are victims of the sinful condition we are born into. I agree with Ellen White, we are rightly called guilty for the sinful acts we commit, and we need to be responsible in how we act. But we are not at fault for having been born into a condition of which we have no power to resist.
Had God not provided the plan of salvation, but had let this earth continue, he would have soundly been declared unjust by the heavenly jury, in permitting sin and suffering to continue unabated for no reason.
I have probably not explained myself as fully as I would have liked. But I will say this: in light of seeing the situation in this way, I actually feel really bad for God, being put in such a pickle, when he only had good intentions. This truly seemed like a paradoxical predicament. But I am thankful, and awed that the solution of salvation through Jesus Christ’s atoning sacrifice was come to by the Godhead. Not only does it resolve the paradox, it gives all of us a chance to achieve our originally intended purpose in the end. The fate of the universe depends on it, the name of God’s character depends on it, and our very lives depend on it.
I am responding to Wallin's comment posted today on perfectionism. I agree with him that perfection should be a process. A life time process. Can you imagine being sinful one day and then being perfect another day? What about the process of depending on Jesus the author and finisher of faith. What about the other issues of being so called perfect while the rest of us struggle to be over-comers of sin. How fair would God be? I like being imperfect and growing because it helps me to realize daily how much I need the savior as well as how much further I need to be while trusting and growing in grace in Jesus Christ. People that claim perfection now, normally are extremely judgmental and often have not the compassion of the savior that has drawn us with Chords of love. Thank God he is still working on all of us. It gives us a testimony that always points us back the incarnate God who lived, died and rose and is coming back again.
Andre Anderson
I am responding to the blog posted earlier this month by Valmey. This was also a topic that we spoke to in class. I think that there are always going to be different dimensions to the issue of faith. We need a past tense faith to help us believe that there is a God that exists in what we know as the past. We also need a present tense faith that will help us to live lives as Christians who are able to always speak in the present tense of what it is that God is doing for us. We also need to have a future tense faith that helps us to remember that where we are planning on going by faith only God can get us there. By incorporating each component of faith, it will help us to be stable balanced Christians that can look back yesterday, today and tomorrow and admit that God has been there every step of the way. However, I do believe that when we look at our faith in the past it should take us more often to recent past and not past past (in the Greek it might be the imperfect tense) because if we cannot see how God is working in our lives often, we may have trouble getting out of the bed and dealing with the dynamics of a sinful world that throws more negative moments at times than positives. This is why it is good to have a faith that is in God and not just what he has done for us. When we learn how to praise God as much as thank God and yes there is a difference our faith will not just grow based on what He does, but it will grow based on who He is.
andre anderson
My comment on Rodrigo Baby born died.
You have selected a very challenging subject that never crossed my mind. This theme requires a lot of thoughts and will evolve into a very interesting debate. Many questions come to mind; for example, can babies who pass away be really considered as sinners when they never had the opportunity to express themselves or act wrongfully towards another human being? Do we know, after death, where the baby’s body goes to, in other words, where it is sent to? Does his short passage on earth symbolize something? I will meditate on the two key questions that you wish to answer. Should an idea comes up I will share it with you. Let me conclude with this last question which had crossed my mind; how significant would have eternity for a baby who lived only one hour?
My comment on Valmir text: Theology water
This is a very interesting analogy where scientific facts are presented to understand the importance of dialogue. You mentioned that in order to have water a few elements are required: hydrogen and oxygen. Should one be missing it would not give us the blue gold. As water is a vital element to life, the expression of thought is also a vital element for theologians and other thinkers. This reflection clearly states the necessity of a debate. I agree with the fact that in order to discover the truth, different views must be gathered; however, Jesus claimed, “I am the way and the truth and the life.” (14:6). Before Pilate He defined His mission as “the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.” (18:37). In His dialog with the Jews, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (8:31,32). Later, he charges, “Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! … If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.” (8:45-47). Finally, Jesus prayed, “Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth.” (17:17)
But the claims of Jesus cannot be categorized as simple verifiable facts. The claim engages realities beyond the observable. Truth is an ontological reality that not only encompasses all of reality, both the seen and the unseen, but which also gives meaning to that reality. Thus Jesus is presented as the a priori truth, the meaning maker. Therefore, the spiritual truths “about” salvation or truths “about” judgment, etc., can be understood only in relation to the revelation of Jesus, and only have meaning in His incarnation. And metaphysical truth can be understood only in relation to Jesus as Creator and Redeemer. Even the everyday mundane facts are given a meaningful context in relation to the person of Jesus. The connection between experience and truth is the act of knowing. Truth sanctifies and transforms reality.
Roger Saint-Fleur
Justification and Sanctification
Today in class we grappled with the many dimensions of atonement and the theories of atonement. In seeking after a greater model, I was impacted by the idea of a model of both substitutionary and moral influence theory of atonement. I believe our professor made the point that Christ’s substitution influences me to live a different life. Looking to Romans, we see that Christ was both ‘just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus (Romans 3:26). Yet what is this faith? Is is active, or is it passive? Does it mean mere belief, or living in a manner which reflects that God truly has done something in the life of the sinner?
Every time I think of Justification in relation to Sanctification, I think of 1 John chapter 1 verse 7. It reads “...if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.” I don’t know about you, but this looks like active faith to me! John is pointing out that mere belief alone cannot do a cleansing work in our lives. Jesus’ sacrifice justifies us, yet it is in walking in the light that His blood cleanses us from all sin.
Back to Paul’s statement in Romans, we see that Christ is just. He is considered just because of His faith and fulfillment of the law in His life. His life was one of perfect obedience and fellowship with God the Father, for He walked in the light. He came not to abolish but to fulfill. When I look at my life, I notice that I fall helplessly short of obedience and righteousness. And rightly so for “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
But if I use my imperfection and sinful disposition as an excuse to not pursue obedience through faith in Christ, then I fall into the danger-zone, because then I would not be ‘walking in the light’. John points out that in walking in the light, Jesus’ blood cleanses me from all sin. By actively applying my faith in Christ as being the one who justifies me, and faithfully abiding in Him, God performs a miracle. He actively cleanses me as I actively obey. This I believe is sanctification. To believe in the merits of Jesus Christ as having atoning power, and to cooperate with God by obeying Him and letting Him cleanse me.
I know that there are many Christians that fall to either side of the road. One group says ‘Jesus loves me, so I can do whatever I want just as long as I love people.’ The other says(in action) ‘if I do everything the law requires I am perfect before God, it doesn’t matter if I am loving or not.’ One group reflects lawlessness, and the other group reflects legalism. Yet the true path is not one or the other, it’s BOTH AND. We love God and others by faith and obedience. ‘if we walk in the light...the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin.’ Sanctification is walking in the light of the cross, trusting in the merits of the just one who is also our justifier. AMEN.
-Nathan Hellman
Reflection on Whidden, Woodrow W. Ellen White on Salvation
It was encouraging to read that Ellen White went through a time of deep searching in regard to Salvation, Sanctification, Justification and Perfection. I really identified with what Ellen White faced in her earlier years. What a struggle to have a balance in understanding perfection. It brought me comfort knowing that she also dealt with both sides of the gamut in relation to grace and the law. In the short duration of our class I have been impacted by the fact that there really are no easy one-line answers when it comes to understand these deep things of God.
I really enjoyed a quote that Woodrow brought out from Ellen White’s writings: “Unity is the sure result of Christian perfection” (SL 85). When I contemplate the meaning of this sentence I am reminded of the experiences that I have had in ministry. Probably, at one time or another, all of us have had well-meaning folks in our congregations that believe it is their responsibility to “fix” the church. They then proceed to pick out other members which they believe need to grow and start to “fix” them. Of course this brings about the exact opposite of unity. I believe that most of this “fix it” mentality comes from the idea that they have reached a higher plan than the others. With this mind-set they take on the burden of “their blood will be on my hands” idea. This means that they are responsible to God for the erring ones salvation. Most of the time this correction manifests itself in outward conformity to what the one who is doing the correcting deems as appropriate behavior. The problem with this is there is no change of heart in the one that is receiving the correction. This mentality totally bypasses what the Lord truly desires – the whole heart. God is not interested in outward conformity. He said to the Scribes and Pharisees “you are like whitewashed tombs.”
There comes to mind a deeper meaning of perfection. A perfection that is internal. Perfection that focuses inward rather than outward. An experience that is between you and God alone but also one that spills over into your everyday life. Not something that you have to advertise but something that is recognized because of what God is doing in your life. A perfection that is not complete but is in the process of being completed.
That is the life that I desire. A life that will bring honor and glory to God.
Why We Wrestle with Universal Reconciliation; a theology by Karl Barth
My readings and understanding of the class discussions these past weeks continue to point me to a more inclusive understanding of the atonement. However, I am increasingly aware of why some who oppose change in this regard do. Although we strive for inclusiveness and the development of broader paradigm of salvation and the atonement, there is an ever present concern that we remain faithful and true to the scriptures. We don't want to include something that may be incompatible with the actual message of the scriptures.
One theme in my reading and our class discussions that seemed to draw my attention was the Universal reconciliation model of the atonement presented by theologian Karl Barth. I have heard the model used before entering this class, with special emphasis placed on I Corinthians 15:22 “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.” The position I've heard is that it is a Biblically sound to say that the reason we suffer the effects of the sin of Adam, is that we were “IN” Adam when he sinned. Support was drawn for this by referencing Genesis 25:23, when the Lord said to Rebbecca “two nations are in your womb”. Support was also drawn using Hebrews 7:9 in reference to the tithe Abraham paid to Melchizedek: “One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham,”. I had reserved feelings when I first heard this, not because of it's novelty, but because I'm always careful of how I apply literally Biblical imagery.
I recently read a paper on the S.D.A. Biblical Research Institute page entitled “Adam and the Human Race in the Writings of E. G. White” by: Ángel Manuel Rodríguez. The paper had some things to say regarding how the writings of Ellen White intersect the theology of Karl Barth. Rodriguez writes: “There are no traces in the writings of E. G. White of the idea that the human race was present "in Adam" and that when he sinned every one of us sinned because we were in some realistic way present in him. Neither do we find in her writings the idea that the sin of Adam was imputed to the human race.”He draws the conclusion that Adam's sin was his own and although we cannot escape the effects of the magnitude of that sin, the merits were not imputed to us.
My personal quandary regarding Karl Bath's model is the role our God given freedom of choice played in taking part in Adam's sin. Freedom of choice is definitely held intact, at great pains in the solution to the sin problem. It would only make sense to me that the integrity of that freedom be observed in coming up with an accurate representation of the fall as well. Notwithstanding I do understand that the model is not an end all explanation, but a model. I don't believe it was designed to answer the question I raised but rather to communicate the idea of the magnitude of Adam's sin and it's universal effect on the entire human race. I do however, appreciate very much Dr. Hanna's emphasis in class that in addition to moving to a more encompassing model of salvation and the atonement, we should also strive to increase the precision of our language.
-Pohlmarc Lawrence
Reflection on Romans Chapter 5
How can we become dead men walking?
Today we discussed the atonement in class. Here in Romans Paul describes the atonement like this: “if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him….” Paul calls us to die to sin but be alive to Christ. He makes the point that if we are baptized into Christ we become partakers of His death and resurrection. And if we were “in” Christ when He died on the cross then we were also raised with Him to a new life. Dead to sin means that, figuratively speaking, we allow our sinful nature to be put to death in Christ on the cross. If our sinful nature is dead then we no longer have to be slaves to it. This grants us freedom to be alive in Christ – meaning that we can now become slaves of righteousness.
Paul shares that we are no longer tied down by our sinful nature if we accept that we have been crucified with Christ (put our sinful nature to death). We can, in fact, present ourselves as “slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification.”
If we take upon ourselves the wages of sin without accepting the free gift of God (His death on the cross as a payment for our sins) we will die. Christ freely extends to us His saving grace that will change us into His likeness. This grace does not give us freedom to live a life of sin but enables us to live according to His will and purpose.
I want to be a slave of Righteousness. I am tired of this hopeless sin cycle.
Romans 5:14 For sin shall not be master over you…”
I really enjoyed the comment posted by Pohlmark and especially the paragraph concerning the dangers behind the perfection debate. Like with many debates in the church, whenever two extreme views are debated in such an unforgiving manner as this topic, more harm than good is done. It is true that each person views salvation “through the lens of their own experience”. I also don’t think that there will be any consensus concerning this issue. I would however disagree that it is a “mere theological quivel”. As Pohlmark rightly observes some young, both of age and “young in faith”, can be affected and follow any of the radical explanations given to them. The example of the formation of Ellen White’s understanding can be applied to many young “growing up in the church.” And regretfully, many find themselves under the influence of one of the two groups instead of being presented with a larger view of salvation.
David Polok
In my response to Andrew I want to just say how grateful I am that Jesus stepped in as our mediator right when humanity fell into sin. He was the Mediator for humanity even before the Cross. And it’s very rightly said that the choice is ours and our choice reflects in our works. The issue of propensity to sin that we inherited is often confused with so-called original sin. Rather, instead of choosing to believe in original sin we can accept that through Adam all of humanity fell, but we have a new inheritance and a new past in Christ’s perfect life.
From Ellen White on Salvation, Ch. 8: The Nature of Christ and Salvation
Since I have heard much debate in Adventism on the nature of Christ, I was glad to read this chapter, and appreciated the way in which the author integrated Ellen White’s comments in addressing the issue.
Aiming to emphasize Christ’s divinity, Ellen White says: “Christ could have done nothing during His earthly ministry in saving fallen man if the divine had not been blended with the human.” (idem). He had to be divine and possess a sinless humanity in order to accomplish His role of justifying Savior.
Exposing thoughts on His humanity, she wrote: “He was affected by sin but not infected with it.” (QOD 653). “He took a sinful nature, but only in the sense of a lessened capacity because of the principle of physical inheritance.” (5BC 1129). Whidden argues that this lessened capacity did not involve inclination to corruption, or an evil propensity. Although Christ was not entirely like us, humans beings, He was enough like us to identify Himself with our infirmities.
Attempting to explain how Christ can still identify with us, despite of the fact that He was not entirely like us, he further remarks: “He did not need to be born with either a bent to sin or have a history of sinning to feel the power of temptation. The basis of His temptations was not a corrupt nature, but the possibility of using His own inherent full deity to resist the wiles of the devil. The key temptation for Christ was the same as it is for all humans – the desire to depend upon self rather than divinely imparted power from above.” (p. 63)
This makes sense to me, because Lucifer’s case proves that the basis for temptation are not always a corrupt nature. Being tempted by himself, He sinned without having a sinful nature, without having a propensity for evil. Neither did Adam and Eve have a sinful nature when they broke the law. Therefore, Christ’s sinlessness needs not be proven only in the context of a corrupt nature.
Whidden concludes by exposing Ellen White’s balanced understanding of Christ’s nature: “When it came to Christ as a fully sinless, sacrificial substituted, she was “pre-Fall,” but when she spoke of His ability to sustain in times of temptation, she stressed His identity and spoke largely in “post-Fall” terms.
From Ellen White on Salvation, Ch. 9: Justification by Faith – Before 1888
In reference to the concept of “salvation by faith alone”, Whidden mentions the main temptation humans can fall into – that of taking sin lightly, and diminishing the importance of obedience to the law.
On the same note, it was interesting for me to understand in what way Ellen White perceived the Calvinistic assurance of salvation (“once saved, always saved”) as dangerous, and how she addressed it. “She felt, along with Wesley, that the doctrine was an invitation to presumptuous sinning, causing sinners to think that they were beyond reach of temptation.”(p. 71). She stated: “Those who accept Christ, and in their first confidence say, I am saved, are in danger of trusting to themselves.” (COL 155). This reminded me of the concept of plateau perfection, which should never characterize a Christian’s understanding of salvation.
I admire Ellen White’s sense of balance in dealing with complex and often controversial theological concepts. In trying to balance the role of faith and works in salvation, she often used the expression “salvation from sin, not in it”, which I find very adequate in explaining how both grace and works fit into the intricate and biblical model of salvation.
She also proves to be balanced when talking about justification based not only on Christ’s death, but also on His obedient life. “Ellen White taught that our acceptance with Christ is based totally on the merits of His life and death, which are legally, judicially accounted to us. It is not based on His death only accounted to us for forgiveness and His life imparted to us that we can make our own contribution to justification. It is both His life and death that justify the penitent believer.” (p. 77)
In this she differs from John Wesley, who “was always reluctant to declare Christ’s life as accounted to believers, fearful that such a legal accounting might endanger the doctrine of sanctification. He feared that this would open the gates to presumptuous sinning.” (p. 77)
Chapter 2 Conversion,"Sanctification", and Early Ministry :
In the first chapter Woodrow W. Whidden describes Ellen White’s struggle to experience Salvation. Although sincerely looking for it she couldn’t feel accepted and saved. What’s worth mentioning is that her struggle involved erroneous understanding of so called “second blessing” which was present among Methodist at that time. What she needed at this point of her life was to hear some words of encouragement and acceptance. God provided encouragement for her in the words of elder Levi Stockman. From that time on She was holding fast in her belief concerning her own salvation. As Whidden describes it: there were no more serious ups and downs in her experience of salvation.” Interestingly Whidden comes to the conclusion that Ellen White was longing more for feeling that she is accepted then real conversion experience which already took place in her life. Her longings came because of serious misunderstanding and fear that soon she will find herself in judgment before the throne of God. In other words Ellen White was looking for instant perfection. It’s interesting that even though such proclamers of “second blessing” (like Phoebe Palmer) are mostly gone, influence of such understanding is still evident in Seventh-Day Adventist Church. Ellen White understanding as Whidden notes, grew and she moved toward an understanding that sanctification is the work of the lifetime instead of a moment, but still today many point their finger at Her, trying to prove from her writings perfectionist views. This kind of mistake produces often discouragement among members who are trying to find in themselves feelings which will prove that they are accepted and their sins are forgiven. Every mistake on the way throws them into despair and many often give up on the on Christian way of life altogether. On the other hand as we discussed in the class so called “perfectionist views” will narrow our view of salvation and will cause some to try to impose their own views on others. I think that we can be most helpful to such souls by showing them how wide and high is salvation found in Jesus Christ!
Maka Ta'ufo'ou
Romans 3, 4 & 5: Justification by faith.
I found it very challenging to read and comprehend Romans 3:21-31 in which Paul focuses his attention on “Justification by faith,” and chapter 4:1-25 he discusses the evidence of justification by faith in the Old Testament and lastly chapter 5:1-21, he talks about the result of justification.. Here Paul emphasizes justification and according to the SDABC, vol. 6, justification is God’s act of acquitting “a man who has been guilty of wrongdoing . . . meaning the cancellation of charges standing against the believer in the heavenly court.” Ellen White supports this in Steps to Christ p. 62, “If you give yourself to Him, and accept Him as your Savior, then, sinful as your life may have been, for His sake you are accounted righteous.”
What is problematic in these texts is that some people interpret that through the redemption that came with Christ Jesus we are all justified by His free grace. So all you have to do is believe it and you don’t do anything else. My question is this: Do I have a part to play or not? And if I do, will that be work? Is faith itself can be regarded as work? Now, if we really focus heavily on Paul’s emphasis on justification by faith ending in itself then why do we have to keep the commandments of God? If we are justified, then the human race must be already saved and always saved. Again, if we are justified already as some people believe then it must be acceptable to sin willingly for we have been justified and we should not play any role at all or we end up being accused of trying to be justified through our work.
I am wondering if Paul’s theology should have been laid out in a much more simpler and uncomplicated approach so that people would clearly distinguish his central theme, because sinners can exercise this as an excuse to continue to sin, believing that Jesus have died for their sins and no matter how much sins they committed without confession and forgiveness, their sins have always been forgiven and they are justified in the presence of God. Nonetheless, according to Dr Hanna’s lecture on Wednesday 9/30, shed so much light on the righteousness of God that justified the sinner. And believing Jesus Christ as a result the Holy Spirit is poured down and influence the sinner to respond according to the will of God. As Dr Hanna mentioned, that we should look at the models of Atonement in a holistic approach and that applies to justification also so that we don’t interpret only what we embrace but look at the whole concept.
Comment to Daniel Vega,
It is truth that there are people who always focus on the bad side of life. And always have someone to blame, even we the fault is theirs. Adam and Eve did that on paradise, Satan do this all the time, accusing us (Rv.12:9). But Jesus has a different attitude. Instead of criticizing He defend us (IJo.1:9,2:1). And what contrast in this attitude is that Satan, and sometimes we have motives to complain. But Jesus does not have any “reason” to defend us. And despite of our sinful character He loves us. This shows that even tough we are on sin because of Adam and Eve and ultimately Satan, we need to focus on our responsibility to accept Jesus and present salvation to others.
The other side is this, Adam and Eve is not responsible for my decision but their have responsibility, including Satan, of our bad situation. Like professor Hanna always says, it is not one or another, is both.
Respond to Enoch
I was attracted by your thought about “holy zeal”. The tentative of leaders to “fix” the people. It is truth the sometimes leaders try to force changes in people, shaping the members of the church into their image. EGW in MS 29, 1911 says “Any man, be he minister or layman, who seeks to compel or control the reason of any other man, becomes an agent of Satan, to do this work, and in the sight of the heavenly universe he bears the mark of Caim”. We should be careful about this.
But on the other hand, we should not allow members of the body of Christ to enter into the Church of God with strange fire. False doctrine and habits never brings unity. So misconception of unity is ecumenism, accepting all even when disagreeing with the word of God. Unity is always brought by conformity to the Scripture (Jo.17). And like Paul if necessary we should deliver the sinner to Satan so he may repent.
Second assignemtn for september (sorry professor, I am late...heheh)
INHERITED SIN AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
I have try to meditate upon the questions that I have raised about the death of babies, but have not arrived to any solid conclusions. Just some ideas of how to solve some problems related to this topic.
About the question that I raised in my last posting about the inheritance of sin I have some thoughts to share. In Romans 5 Paul state that Adam brought sin and death to all man. Reading the book The edge of evolution of Michael Behe, I have learned something about genetics and sharing of genes. That sons share characteristics of father it is proved by science and appointed by the Bible. Just a example is found in Genesis. Adam inherited God’s image, and Seth inherited Adam and God’s image (Gn.5:1-3). But after sin, the sin of Adam went to every descendant. But what was new for me is Behe argument that mutation and sharing of genes have limits.
Apply this to the Bible, I think we can see in Exodus 20:5,6 that God consider genetics for judgment. But He consider in the limits that He established. The wicked father will influence his son, and will genetically pass his wicked propensities to his son. God will punish both for their sins. But as Behe punctuated in his book, genetics has limits. And the limits that God set in His word is in Is.55:7. Even though there is “genetic sinful nature” we can overcome than. And this victory is free (v.1).
So there is no reason for the remaining in habitual sin, for God already provided the ransom and power to deliver from the inherited evil propensities. And the blessing also is genetic. A healthy parents will give his children healthy lifestyle and more likely he will live longer, as attested by research with SDA population. Going back to the issue of babies…if cursing and blessing can be part of genetics, is sin inherited punished according to Exodus 20? I do not think revelation contradict itself. I think the better interpretation of this issue according to the text of Exodus is that sinful practices have their lasting influence, and sons of sin is in worse condition that their father. But where sin abound grace much more abound.
And the babies ? If some sins are inherited acquired, but their sin actions are personal decisions, the cases of babies death appoint to somethings:
1 – They die because of nature of sin = death.
2 – it was not their fault for the eternal consequences of sin is individual.
3 – individual sins have corporate consequences
So what ? the other question that I raised still unanswered in my mind still. Where does it comes the opportunity of receiving eternal life for babies? I will continue doing some thinking to come up with a Biblical solution. Please help me out in this issue…
I have always thought that Jesus once for all and as result paid the price once for all and atonement took place once and that is all. That mindset gives birth to a way of thinking and believing that sinners have to keep on accepting Christ’s atonement. However, it is becoming more evident that as long as we remain in Him and He lives in our hearts we are being atoned for. The author of “Ellen White on Salvation”, in page 48, says “Atonement involved not only Christ’s death on the cross, but also Christ’s intercession, which makes His life available to repentant, trusting believers. Such trusting belief not only receives God’s acceptance, but is also powerfully motivated to imitate Christ’s life. So the atonement has implications for the sanctification experience of believers, not just their experience of forgiveness and acceptance.” Christ’s sacrificial death keeps influencing believers from generation to generation the kingdom comes. It is very encouraging to know that, as we put our trust in our Savior Jesus Christ, He keeps atoning on our behalf till He takes home. God, in all His justice, has sent His Son so that, in believing in Him, by His grace, we might be saved. That hope of the second coming and salvation impacts the life of the believers and gives each one a reason to live. That reason to live is also a reason to die. It is a reason to humble ourselves before the almighty knowing that without Him we are just a pile of clay. The fact that Christ died our second death must create a sense of owe. I mean, He actually took our place! Once one begins to understand that substitutionary aspect of Christ’s atoning blood, one cannot help be influence. Now that influence has been affecting so lives and the question remains why has not the same blood of Jesus influenced all? Is it strong enough? Does God leave it up to anyone can believe to do on their own. Maybe the issue is a matter of choice. Everyone has been given the same opportunity at creation or at the cross. Was it not a matter of choice one would have wondered why is it that some people will make it to heaven due to them breaking the law while Jesus gave Himself as the ultimate price through his blood at Calvary? Why would not God be satisfied with Jesus’ Substitution? Anyhow, the power of choice given to human beings left on its own, triggers God’s wrath. Just like faith is both passive and active, the wrath of God is passive as well as active. The interesting thing is that God allowed the human mess and He took upon Himself to clean it up based on human’s permission. Yeah, unless we allow God to take our place He will not force us. We have the right to let Him in and He will come and sup with us. God takes responsibility of what happens in universe. Unfortunately when facing life with so much suffering one tends to wonder why would a just God remain silent in front of human destruction via catastrophes and disaster sweeping lives in this globe? Sin is the main excuse that has ever been used. A Moral God created Moral agents to stay in connection with the divine. That is why, I think, that Jesus had two natures: divine and human so he could meet us where we are. Christ’s righteousness sanctifies us, justifies us, gives us peace, and influences us to influence others. Christ was both God and human and the sinner is just a sinner. Is it fair to say that Christ had the same nature we now have? Is there not a big gap between the sinner and his Savior?
Montes Estinphil
Maka Ta'ufo'ou
Ellen G White on Salvation.
Whidden II.
Chapter Five: “Salvation, the Great Controversy Theme, Closing Events, and the Law”
What is inspiring to me on this reading is how Ellen White ties in together other doctrines to her teachings about salvation, such as: The great controversy theme, the closing events, the law, sin, the atonement and the nature of Christ. So this is evident that the doctrine of Salvation is not isolated to be by itself but it connects to the rest of Scriptures. It is very interesting when she reconcile law and grace in the setting of the great controversy theme. Satan is attempting to prove that God cannot have mercy and justice at the same time. He blamed God as arbitrary and unforgiving in requiring man to obey a law that cannot be obeyed. In addition, Satan charges that God’s mercy destroyed justice, with the result that Christ’s death abrogated the Father’s law. As pointed out by Whidden of how Ellen G White concisely sums up in the Desire of Ages. p.447:
“Through Jesus, God’s mercy was manifested to men; but mercy does not set aside justice. . . .The law requires righteousness, - a righteous life. . . . Thus the very righteousness of the law is fulfilled in the believer in Christ. God can “be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus,” Rom. 3:26. God’s love has been expressed in His justice no less than in His mercy. . . .It has been Satan’s purpose to divorce mercy from truth and justice. He sought to prove that the righteousness of God’s law is an enemy to peace. But Christ shows that in God’s plan they are indissoluble joined together; the one cannot exist without the other. “Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other.” Ps. 85:10.
Throughout Scripture, God is declared as a God of love, a God of mercy and a God of justice. The question people ask: How could a just God can have mercy? It seems that Satan is right and people take that. Another familiar question is: If God is a God of love why so many suffer? If God is a God of justice why have mercy on sinners that continue to sin against His commandments? Ellen White’s answer which I agree with: “God has answered these charges with the incarnation of Jesus and His subsequent heavenly intercession, second coming, the millennium, the last judgment, and the final vindication of the faithful.”
God’s character is revealed through the gospel of Jesus Christ that He’s both just and merciful. The cross proves that God is a just and listen to this, she said: “. . . whose mercy [God’s] is unbounded to penitent souls. But His mercy is extended only on the basis of holy justice.” We see here that God is a loving God and still a God of justice. The question here: Did God deliberately established His law knowingly that no human can obey it? In order to justify that, Christ came to live with us and died on the cross so that grace takes the place of the law. So grace, justice and mercy remain God’s character. He’s the same yesterday, today and forever. We must continue as Christians to trust that God is just, God is love and God have mercy.
Keep thinking bigger!
Since my recent visit to the village of Anabaptists in Shipshewana, Indiana, I cannot stop my flow of thoughts on their lifestyle. These people, who have been living together for generations, have an extraordinary biblical interpretation of brotherly love. “Good fences may or may not make for good neighbors but they are essentials for good community.” Here is a good way of thinking to promote a long-term healthy living within a community.
The tour, of the Anabaptists village emerged ideas, which resulted into the analysis of a sentence that continues to preoccupy my mind. What does it really mean? To get a better sense of its context, let us start by an historical overview of the Anabaptists. When the Reformation started, people began to read the Bible and realized that human beings are saved by faith through God’s grace not by penance or deeds. They also advocated that infant baptism was not biblical; William Sattler, a former monk, goes to war against a certain practice of the church. Then in Zurich, Switzerland, the first re-baptism of adults took place. Sattler and other reformers fought against the church traditions despite the torture, burnings, and drowning of women that took place
In 1693, 168 years after its founding, Jacob Ammann, one of the reformers including other members of the group decided to split to form another cluster, the Amish. “Ammann and his Swiss followers believed that fellow Mennonites were losing spiritual discipline and becoming too much like the world around them”.
The Mennonites and Amish live together on same grounds; however, both groups evolve differently. The Mennonites have adapted themselves to the world around them, to the new technologies; while the Amish continue to live their faith, that is to say, in all simplicity. Is there a lesson to be learned? It is for you to be the judge.
The Seventh-day Adventist Church, despite its specificity and its mandate, is directed by humans. Even though its members claimed, according to its specificity, the church is entrusted to the noblest task for the last days, mistakes and misunderstandings are not to be neglected on behalf of prides. Sometimes I wonder whether the trust that should be placed in God to find wisdom and direction are not reduced to the point where leaders believe that they are the only ones to make decisions for all peoples, nations, languages, and tribes of the earth. Unless few leaders choose to close their eyes to see nothing and ears to hear nothing, all are aware that the church is facing difficulties.
Actually, many people considered that the Church is undergoing a period of crisis that continues to intensify itself. Many are no longer able to identify themselves with the church that is being set aside and been considered as the Church of Rest.
Can we live apart while remaining brothers of the same faith, as the Anabaptists? So far I do not have the answer but I am trying to think bigger. I see this as a great opportunity to reflect profoundly on this topic. I truly and firmly believe that salvation resides in Christ not in the institution even though that I still believe that the Church remains necessary.
Roger Saint-Fleur
The Assurance of Salvation
Everyone would like to go to heaven but that is not enough you must obtain the right. This right is not automatic, it is imputed to all those who received the Word because He gave them the right to become children of God. John 1: 12. That said, does this mean that all those who have received He will have salvation? Can one be sure of his salvation? This question is not new; Martin Luther raises this question over a long period of his life. Once joined the church, and received baptism, the member of the church lives in full confidence of his salvation and is ready to make sacrifice for heaven but as time passes, he realizes that his eternal life, his salvation becomes a heavy burden to bear because of sin. This was the struggle of Luther, sin. This fight is not just that of Luther but of all human beings seeking a better life than the sinner. When finally, Luther discovered that he could do nothing for himself, that his salvation is not based on good works or penance, he was relieved and he will continue to fight but on another front to help those who were in the same position as him.
In reality, everyone is not Luther. Everyone must do a personal struggle for his life but the dilemma is huge between the free salvation offered on the cross and the personal efforts of individuals to keep their salvation afloat. Nobody will be saved by works of law or by works of the flesh. If then salvation is based entirely on Christ's sacrifice on Calvary, all who accept his sacrifice, his atoning work are expected to live their life happily without worrying about the rest knowing that their salvation is assured in Christ, which is partly true. There is the part of man and the part God. The part of God is accomplished on the cross about 2000 years ago and the part of man, every man, what is his limit? So how can one contribute to his salvation without crossing the border of salvation by works? How to be sure they are doing enough, just enough to expect to receive this free salvation offered by Christ's death? All that remains is faith. Without faith, a firm assurance in the promise of Christ that salvation is freely given by the blood of Jesus, it is impossible to live a flourished Christian life.
The assurance of salvation is totally dependent on trust in God and an uninterrupted relationship with Christ. When Luther got to the evidence that salvation depended wholly on Christ, he presents Christianity as « believing assurance of the living God, who reveals himself and opens His heart in Christ to sinners. » He became “instrumental in releasing the sixteenth-century church from a systematic denial of salvation’s certainty and directed it toward the freedom of justification by gracious fait alone.”
The assurance of salvation, once understood, becomes a source of joy and motivation to all those who get it. They find meaning in their life and do everything they can, like Luther, to help others enjoy the grace of salvation. The assurance of salvation is also a source of love for someone who has volunteered to redeem sinners and all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Salvation is available to all, what's missing sometimes is the assurance that it is a reality and a free gift of God.
Roger Saint-Fleur
Nature of Christ and Salvation
Whidden
In reading chapter 8 on the nature of Christ and Ellen White, one thing seems to be clear to me. That is, if more people would study Ellen white for them selves they would see that her theology is extremely Christocentric and foundational to all of her writings. The more that I read Ellen White is the more I have come to the conclusion that she was much more balanced in her approach to understanding scripture than she is often presented.
In this chapter Whidden looks at the deity of Christ putting him rightfully in the Godhead and yet also placing Christ as the individual in the Godhead responsible for dying for our sins. Christ is God. There is to be no misunderstanding that because He was fully man, He was unable to become also be fully God simultaneously. This is one of those issues that we must believe by faith. The implication is therefore that because He is God and He died for our sins He has the prerogative and the investment in sinful humanity to be at the centre of the cosmic controversy. (I am sure Dr. Hanna is smiling) This was a conclusion that Mrs. White struggled with on her own, because her husband James White, unfortunately because of his Arian background did not accept this truth.
If we are able to reconcile the issue of Christ and His deity, then, we will struggle to receive the full atonement that He brings and gives freely. Christ is all and He has given His life for our life.
I often wonder if all of the theological gymnastics on this issue isn’t because people do not want to make Him God and perfect and yet taking on our sinful nature because the accountability that we would have as Christians would have to go way up on the spiritual thermostat. Many do not believe that Christ identifies with the sinner and this is not true. If He did not identify with us then why bother redeeming us. This is a question that all must answer sooner or later because the bible says that every knee will have to bow and confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. If we accept him as savior then we should trust him as Lord!
Andre Anderson
Comment on “Christ Saved the Human Race”, by Ángel Manuel Rodríguez
What I found particularly interesting in this article were the explanations offered in reference to the phrase “Christ saved the world”, employed by Ellen White.
Growing up as an Adventist, the phrase has never raised questions for me. I’ve always thought it to mean that Christ “potentially” saved the entire world, in the sense that his sacrifice made redemption available to anyone, provided that they accept his gift.
But it was interesting to see how the expression could be taken to mean something else – that, objectively, the entire human race was legally saved at the cross, regardless of our personal choice.
Being one-sided and denying God’s justice, while stressing only his love, could prevent some to understand the conditional character of salvation. They may see God’s love in forgiving our sins unconditionally. The idea of “unconditional salvation” is not supported by the Bible though, nor by Ellen White. What Christ did objectively on the cross for us does not automatically result in our liberation.
The salvation offered by Christ is conditional. He made it available to anyone, but we have to accept it. Should we choose to discard it, we cannot be partakers of this gift.
The idea of “unconditional salvation” cheapens salvation and endorses continued sin. “The theory of a universal legal justification teaches precisely that Christ's justice covers the wickedness and indulgence of sin of individuals who are still living in their sins and wickedness, in rebellion against God,” states Angel Rodriguez. In the same line of thought, Ellen White writes: “You can come in all your need, and plead the merits of a crucified and risen Savior; but you cannot come expecting that Christ will cover your wickedness, your daily indulgence in sin, with his robe of righteousness." (The Poor in Spirit, Bible Echo, May 15, 1892, par. 8).
I see the idea of unconditional salvation as dangerous as sinless perfectionism. They are both indifferent to sin, one in teaching that it does not matter whether we sin or not, we have been saved anyways, and the other in the sense that we have completely overcome sin. Neither of these concepts is biblical. Instead, the Bible teaches that salvation is available to anyone, but conditional, depending on our acceptance in a sincere desire to not sin anymore. .
Comments on the "In Adam/In Christ" Motifs, by Ángel Manuel Rodríguez
This article brought up a few misunderstandings (which I had not thought of before) of the phrases “in Adam”, and “in Christ”, with the subsequent risks they involve.
“in Adam”:
(1) Taken literally, the idea of our presence in Adam indicates some sort of pre-existence of our body or soul, which is contrary to the Biblical teaching, but rather conforms to the Greek anthropological dualism. Our presence in Adam is to be defined as trans-physical.
(2) the imputation theory states that, because of the solidarity between Adam and his descendants, his sin is imputed to everyone before they are even conceived, and based on this imputed sin they are sentenced to death. The imputation theory is foreign to the Bible. Adam is responsible for his own sin, while his descendants receive the fatal result of his transgression.
"In Christ":
(1) universal legal justification holds that Christ’s death provided unconditional legal salvation and justification for everyone. This denies the Biblical teaching that the sinner is saved only if he chooses to receive the gift of salvation, offered impartially to everyone. “'In Christ' is to be understood more in terms of a marriage relationship than of a legal status arising from the decision of a law court, even God's court,” argues Angel Rodriguez.
(2) The imputation theory implies that, if we were in Christ when he died paying the penalty for our sins, then we died in him. This cancels out Christ’s substitution: he did not die for me, but rather I died for myself, in him. The implicit thought is that I was not saved through Jesus, but instead I saved myself through Jesus. This view opposes the Biblical understanding of Christ dying as a substitute for our sins, so that we don’t have to suffer the penalty of death – the direct consequence of sin.
Chapter 12
That’s a good mixture
One of the challenges that we often face as Christians is our inability to do right, when wrong seems to be the healthy alternative. Even Paul the prolific writer says this even after being called to be one of the most influential leaders in the early church. He states that the good that He wants to do that He does not do, and yet the evil that He knows that He should not do, it is this that He is more inclined to do. So then what next, should we give up or should we continue to struggle. That’s just option A and B, but there is a third option to this multiple choice and the answer to C is Christ. What if we struggle with sin and then we ask for forgiveness but we find ourselves going back to our old ways, then what?. While this is a complexed question, that needs to have a complicated answer. Here’s what I do know. That according to Whidden post Minneapolis, Ellen White used a powerful quote from scripture taken from 1John 2:1. When we sin we have an advocate with the father, Jesus Christ. This is crucial because we have someone who wants to and is able to speak on behalf of us, because when He speaks on our behalf, the father has no choice but to listen to his son who still bears the scars that are an indicator that He died to set man free from sin.
According to Ellen White even when we do good, our good still needs the incense of Jesus’ intercession to make even our very prayers acceptable before the thrown of grace, which by the way we have full access to because of Jesus the Christ. This is justification at its climax, my sins and prayers never go through without first being touched by the one who has saved me from my sins. This depiction further deepens my impression of Jesus still being a personal and up close God from a distance. I know it’s an oxymoron, but it makes sense. He wants to save me, so when I go to him with repentance; He wants me to come to him because He can’t fail, because it is not in His nature. In times like these where there is so much happening where love is conditional and often not good even. Jesus always makes the difference, even when we do not deserve it.
Even more powerful is that even though Satan is a defeated foe He continues to accuse us of being sinners and all we have to do is admit that this is true and yet we still have a way out, through Jesus.
In closing, we do not have to do it ourselves; we cannot do it our selves. We all need Jesus. He is our bailout package with interest. He has paid the debt for us already and yet when he paid it all at Calvary it still covers the cost for us even today and that is just based on the interest from His grace. All have sinned, however all are justified through the blood of our Savior and Lord.
Andre Anderson
Response to The Nature of Christ and Salvation, by Dr. Whidden
The argument regarding the nature of Christ was one of the first "deep adventist debates" I encountered as a Freshman theology student at Andrews University. I've had some time to wrestle with it and although in some respects I'm closer to an understanding I also feel farther then ever from what is truly a mystery. However, after reading Dr. Whidden's summation on Ellen White's views of Christ's nature I can say I have a little more understanding of how to organize the knowns of the mystery.
When People argue for whether Christ's humanity was like Adam before the Fall or like us After the fall they are essentially asking two separate but related questions. Those who answer that he was like us before the fall want to be assured of and guard the message that Christ was an acceptable sacrifice for our sins and not tainted by sin himself. And those who argue that he was like us after the fall want to be assured of the message that Christ is able to identify with our infirmities.
I don't mean in any way by my simplification to make light of the issue but I feel as though the situation is akin to if someone asked was Christ more like a man or a woman in identifying with our humanity. For one camp to say he was only like a man would be to make women feel that Christ could not fully identify with their struggles. And to say Christ was only like a woman would be to deny some clearly evident texts that he was a man. This is why one of the most powerful sentences in Dr. Whidden's chapter is found near the end. "Having natural tendencies to sin is not essential to being tempted." He explains that for those who want to ensure that Christ could identify with them, Christs nature did not have to be solely post fall in order that he would be able to identify with us.
Similarly, Dr. Whidden points out the known fact that the mysterious blend was indeed a mystery. Because Christ, although very unlike us, was to some degree affected by the problem of sin. But as Dr. Whidden put, he was infected by it.
The fact that this is a mystery for our study but never to be placed in one box or another is clearly illustrated by two very biblical positions. 2 Corinthians 5:21 states that "God made Christ to be sin for us, who knew no sin..." yet at the same time I John 3:5 states that in Him ( Christ ) was NO SIN . The two cannot exist as concrete facts and yet they do. They are a paradox and a mystery which we are blessed and honored to study.
Response to In Class discussion on "Open / Closed View of Time"
This discussion reminds me of an interesting take I heard on the text Revelation 10:6 & 7. " (6) And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: (7) But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.
The position taken was that God alloted time to work out the salvation of man and through doing this reveal His character of Love to the universe. Exactly how God was going to do this was explained to be the mystery of God. The position was taken then that after the mystery of God was complete there would be no more time (or delay as some translations put it). Although the argument was a good theory, it didn't explain or answer all the questions about What God has in store for us. However, seeing that we are simply discussing model's to help us understand I'll continue.
Similar to (but not exactly alike) the question with regards to whether time is a closed box or an open box or a closed box was will there be a need to time after sin has been eradicated? Since eternity will go on forever, what ruler or clock is there to measure forever? Although the implications of these questions are a great deal to answer the connection point of both discussions is for what purpose did God predetermine this period of time? Even that question is loaded, in some respects because if God predetermined the period of time to accomplish his purpose what else did he pre-determine? Did he pre-determine how the purpose should be accomplished?
What I appreciated the most from class was the insight that both models [closed and open view] seek to stand for the sovereignty of God in some way. The closed box view clearly defines that God must have known and ordered everything. However, the open view of time requires a BIGGER GOD in order to reconcile things even if they are reconciled outside of our limited understanding. God is indeed Sovereign. Yet if we have choice, in order for Him to still be sovereign, He has to be a bigger God, far greater than our understanding.
Nonetheless there is still an issue to be wrestled with. I believe I agree with the fact that the implications of a closed system (That God purposed sin to take place) distorts the character of God. Although this creates a bigger mystery of how do we then understand this Bigger God, I believe it is faith that will bring the greatest reward. Not a faith that says "I won't question you Lord" but one that says I will ask the questions knowing that you have an answer that is in agreement with your already revealed character. Our faith is faith in God that He is not a liar.
Comments by Daniel Vega – Lescano on “The Atonement” (Ellen White on Salvation – chapter Seven)
According to the research done by Woodrow W. Whidden II, Ellen White implies the atonement the theme of the great controversy. For Ellen White the atonement is linked to the justice and mercy of God. She taught that the atonement is an expression “…all the Trinity has done, is doing, and will do to reconcile sinners.” What I see from these statements is that Ellen White thought big about salvation, and that the atonement includes what Jesus is doing in the sanctuary and His sacrifice on the cross.
We need to think big about every aspect of salvation. All the parts like the atonement, justification, sanctification, glorification, substitution, are connected with each other and they form part of the big picture of salvation. It might appear that the study of the Doctrine of Salvation and all its parts are overwhelming. I have to confess that many times I have had to shake my head to clear my mind when the information becomes overwhelming. Salvation in its whole context is simple to understand, however, it includes aspects we do not understand clearly nowadays. We are going to study about this subject for all eternity. I am glad that today I am able to understand that God loves me and He has prepared a solution for the problem of sin. The atonement is an important part in the plan of salvation, and it is really wonderful to reflect what we can learn about God and His character.
Ellen White’s focus on the atonement was on the basis of penalty, substitution, and satisfaction. The law of God declares that one who sins has to die. Sin goes against the character of God. Therefore, there could not be a harmony between a sinner and God. The sinner has to die. There is penalty that needs to be paid, because it is required by the law. God shows His great love and mercy in providing a substitution, Jesus Christ who is our atonement. In other words the One who reconcile us with God. Jesus also satisfies the wrath of God. There was a penalty to be paid. Jesus is the one who paid that penalty and satisfy God’s wrath. This means, that those who follow Jesus could not be destroy forever, because they have Jesus as their atonement and substitution. Nevertheless, God’s wrath will be manifested upon the wicked. God’s law says that they have to perish. Since, they do not Jesus as their substitution, they will pay the penalty with eternal death. I marvel on God and His infinite mercy that He is giving us an opportunity to be saved. God is love, and He wants His children back with Him.
Comments on Asnel's reflection on Chapter three of Woodrow W. Whidden II and Romains Chapter 3, and Biblical Research reading Article from Manuel Rodriguez Justification in Romans 3: 21-24
“The Decade Before 1888”
Asnel makes great points on his reading of Romans 3, Woodrow Whidden, and Manuel Rodriguez article on Romans 3. What I found very helpful was the Ellen White quote he used, “we are justified by faith in the merits of Christ, but such faith will never excuse transgression.” The relationship between law and grace are well described here. In no way was Ellen White intending to promote a works based salvation, but she did believe grace was not an excuse to ignore sin. Asnel also pointed out that we all have sinned and that all of us are justified for our sins, not those in Adam. Justification is extremely powerful when we consider that each of us has been responsible for sins we’ve done. We cannot blame our sins on someone else, but we can be justified by someone else, Jesus. Overall, I enjoyed reading his comments and was blessed by reading it.
Comments by Daniel Vega – Lescano on Jan Paulsen’s article: “Salvation by Faith”
I think the “Salvation by Faith” by Jan Paulsen is a great article, because it analyzes faith in all the aspects of salvation. Jan Paulsen begins presenting his article mentioning that for the apostle Paul the whole experience of salvation “starts and ends in faith.” Faith is basis for our salvation. However, how can faith be defined? According to the Old Testament, faith really means faithfulness. Paulsen adds that for Ellen White “faith includes not only belief but trust.” Using Ellen White statement on faith, Paulsen thinks that faith has an objective and subjective dimension. The objective of faith is expressed when a person recognizes that Jesus raised from the dead and He is Lord. In the subjective dimension, the person who has faith in Jesus, believes in Him, and proceeds to put his trust on Him.
We are saved by faith. However, faith is not just a proclamation: Yes, I believe, I am saved. I got salvation, now I can continue with the regular rhythm of my life. Paulsen adds that faith is not itself what saved us; faith is the instrument by which we receive the gift of salvation. Ellen White says that we need to believe in Jesus, to hold on Him as a personal savior. What happens after a person accepts Christ? Is salvation just to recognize that Jesus died for us? Faith is action, and I agree with Paulsen in the fact that faith involves obedience to Jesus. In John 14:15 Jesus says to His followers: “if you love me, keep my commandments.” The apostle Paul also adds in 2 Corinthians 5:17 “ So that anyone is in Christ, that one is a new creature; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” As new creatures, as disciples of Jesus, we need to obey His commandments. How will the world know that we belong to Jesus? It is not only by words, but by the fruits of the Spirit. It has to be clear that obeying the commandments we are not saved. We as Jesus followers need to be faithful to Him in all aspects of what He requires. With faith in Jesus we have to surrender everything and do His will. By faith is that we follow Jesus, and by faith we are waiting to live with Him.
“The just shall live by faith” says Habakkuk 2:4. Everything is the Christian journey needs to be done with faith and trust in Jesus Christ. “He is the author and the finisher of our faith,” says Acts 11. Yes, the faith that He is who save us. He is the One who can strengthen our faith. Only Him there is victory over sin. There is no one else who can change our lives. To have faith in Jesus is to walk with Him everyday of our lives, and to do His will because we are His disciples.
Comments by Daniel Vega – Lescano on Jan Paulsen’s article: “Salvation by Faith”
I think the “Salvation by Faith” by Jan Paulsen is a great article, because it analyzes faith in all the aspects of salvation. Jan Paulsen begins presenting his article mentioning that for the apostle Paul the whole experience of salvation “starts and ends in faith.” Faith is basis for our salvation. However, how can faith be defined? According to the Old Testament, faith really means faithfulness. Paulsen adds that for Ellen White “faith includes not only belief but trust.” Using Ellen White statement on faith, Paulsen thinks that faith has an objective and subjective dimension. The objective of faith is expressed when a person recognizes that Jesus raised from the dead and He is Lord. In the subjective dimension, the person who has faith in Jesus, believes in Him, and proceeds to put his trust on Him.
We are saved by faith. However, faith is not just a proclamation: Yes, I believe, I am saved. I got salvation, now I can continue with the regular rhythm of my life. Paulsen adds that faith is not itself what saved us; faith is the instrument by which we receive the gift of salvation. Ellen White says that we need to believe in Jesus, to hold on Him as a personal savior. What happens after a person accepts Christ? Is salvation just to recognize that Jesus died for us? Faith is action, and I agree with Paulsen in the fact that faith involves obedience to Jesus. In John 14:15 Jesus says to His followers: “if you love me, keep my commandments.” The apostle Paul also adds in 2 Corinthians 5:17 “ So that anyone is in Christ, that one is a new creature; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” As new creatures, as disciples of Jesus, we need to obey His commandments. How will the world know that we belong to Jesus? It is not only by words, but by the fruits of the Spirit. It has to be clear that obeying the commandments we are not saved. We as Jesus followers need to be faithful to Him in all aspects of what He requires. With faith in Jesus we have to surrender everything and do His will. By faith is that we follow Jesus, and by faith we are waiting to live with Him.
“The just shall live by faith” says Habakkuk 2:4. Everything is the Christian journey needs to be done with faith and trust in Jesus Christ. “He is the author and the finisher of our faith,” says Acts 11. Yes, the faith that He is who save us. He is the One who can strengthen our faith. Only Him there is victory over sin. There is no one else who can change our lives. To have faith in Jesus is to walk with Him everyday of our lives, and to do His will because we are His disciples.
Enoch Brownell - Reflection on Romans 1:5
– As we looked deeper, in class, at Romans 1:5 (“Through Him we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for His name,”) it became clear to me why faith is so important. I really appreciated learning in class about the different aspects of faith. Many times I have heard faith used as a tool to gain Salvation or something that we can exercise in order to earn salvation. However when I heard about the different aspects of faith my understanding has opened up to how it all fits together. The purpose of the gospel brings is to bring us to a saving relationship with the Lord and to obey Him through the exercising of our faith. Now there are two forms of faith at play here and it is important to understand each one clearly. The best example of passive faith at work is found in Exodus 14:14, “The Lord will fight for you, you need only to be still.” Passive faith—at first glance—seems lifeless, uninvolved and lethargic. However, passive faith should be combined with active faith and takes on a complete picture of what God desires His followers to exercise in their daily experiences. Active faith sounds very familiar as well. The Bible says to “love one another”, to “pray without ceasing”, to “serve wholeheartedly”, and to “go and make disciples”. So it is clear that we must exercise both active and passive faith. It is important to note here that faith does not equal salvation – faith does not save us it is the means to receive the salvation that our Lord has already accomplished.
Enoch Brownell
Enoch Brownell - Reflection on Romans 3:24, 25
We “…are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished.” Many times we see justification as happening (past tense) on the cross alone – Cross = Justification. But here we see that faith also plays an important role in experiencing justification. Faith in what was accomplished on the cross brings justification – which in tern brings faith – much like a circle effect. Justification works with faith to be in a continual realization of what has been accomplished at the cross. This text also helps to clarify the importance of both penal substitution and moral influence. Many times in the Christian world there are arguments over which of these views is correct. But as I learned in class they are both important aspects of what Christ accomplished through His death on the cross. We can experience both penal substitution and moral influence through Christ’s sacrifice.
Enoch Brownell
I have read Steps to Christ but I am reading again to follow with the class of salvation. Specially because this book was written after 1888. And it has been helpful to me to understand her concepts about salvation. Since this book is all about the issue, it is worthwhile to look closer to its content.
Its message is always fresh and challenging to me. Even the structure of the book tells me how to study adequately the theme of salvation. The book starts with the declaration that God is love. This is the central theme of Ellen G. White. From the beginning of the conflict series to the its end, God’s is love. And the book Steps to Christ is about this love and how it affects humankind.
Love in her view is not only a mere feeling, but it involves the whole being. It is about life-style. Salvation for her is not feelings alone, nor mere oral beliefs, but godly-life. And since humans are lost of this lifestyle of love since Eden disobedience, God’s love reached further in trying to renewing them to Himself.
This is the subject of the whole book: how to restore God’s love in human lifestyle. First of all, in her explanation, humans need to recognize the simple thing that God is love and that we all are lost. This love can be recognized in nature, in relationship with other creature, and especially in the Bible. And this last object of revelation is the most important one, because it gives the portray of Jesus, the sum of all revelation of God’s love.
The second chapter is about the necessity of sinner for God. She goes the humanistic-evolutionist trend of human self development. For her “The idea that it is necessary only to develop the good that exists in man by nature, is a fatal deception.” Only by the power of God can man be restore to the right state with God and heavenly beings. During the book she will discuss how to do this.
The first chapter remind me of how much human being lost and still loose when we separate ourselves from God. Many times I struggle to follow what God said, like in diet and sleeping, but I forget that it is better to go with Him. Even tough the appearances seem to point the other direction.
As I realize that it is Satan who makes us believe that God is austere and bad, I see how our world have been infected by Satan’s lies. Many people thing that there is hope in going to school, in avoid drug, in doing “good” things, but we sometimes do not realize that without the right perspective about God no true change can be made.
The second chapter helped me to realize how the presuppositions we have affect our relationship with the divine. Our worldview affects our lifestyle. The lifestyle of God is taken as granted and as unreal by postmodern mind. Ellen G. White invites the reader (me) to consider that humanistic and evolutionist worldview as false and Bible’s portray of reality as right. This involves criticizing as Christians all we read, we watch, we do, our priorities in life. I have been rethinking in my priorities to focus, like she did in the first chapter, in the love of God. Because is by “beholding that we become changed”.
When most Christians think about salvation they think about the fact that Christ died on the cross for our sin, and His atoning blood. But there is more to it than that.
Romans 1:4 speak about Christ that rose from the dead. The implication behind this text suggests that if he was dead and risen he had to of lived before he died.
All too often we do not think about the life Christ lived in order to save us. Had Christ sinned as a man we would all be lost and His death would be of no value, and subsequently no resurrection from the dead.
Please do not get me wrong I am in no way suggesting that the resurrection has little to no significance to Christ’s life. I am merely saying that Christ’s life is left in the shadow of the cross when I believe that these are just a part of the whole picture of salvation.
Another aspect that we do not think about is the life that is to come. The fact that Christ is risen is power and proof that He will come again. The salvation of man will not be complete while we are on this side of heaven. As eluded to in class glorification is a part of our salvation.
We look forward to Christ second coming when we will be glorified with him. This is what we call the blessed hope. I long for that day.
This is a response Adelina due to a statement Ellen White made on the nature of Christ. It goes like this: Christ could have done nothing during His earthly if the divinity was not in his humanity.” My reaction to it is actually a question. Was divinity in Jesus all the time during all His teenage year in Nazareth? Being a carpenter with His earthly father, how do we know that He did nothing without His heavenly father’s presence? I think it is wise to be wise in making statements that will heat up discussions. Furthermore, some people may say if Jesus was always having God in Him that was the reason he never fell into sin. Others many support the same view to say that they are not Jesus. Therefore they cannot be perfect as Jesus was perfect since they experience ups and downs. Well, Jesus did experience ups and downs too. So, what is the excuse? We are not doing miracles today. I don’t if it is because we don’t want to reduce Christ to a simple human or we have gotten all the facts, we are always fearful in talking of Christ’s hidden life such His teenage year. There are about fifteen years of the life of Jesus that we do not know much about and Ellen does not seem bring those years up either. I am inclined to think that there is more than what we have been saying.
Montes Estinphil
Chapter 3 and 4 of our textbook "Ellen White on Salvation" brings interesting perspective on Ellen White's growing understanding of christian perfection. In chapter three author describes the shift towards more Lutheran understanding, salvation by faith alone. This emphasize was growing and was visible during 1883 general conference, present in her ministry in Europe and then during famous 1888 general conference in Minneapolis. Together with James White they felt that this message should be preached and the delay in focusing on it was a mistake. It really stands out against those who would like to accuse Ellen White of being legalist. She opposed people who tried to accuse her of this such a narrow understanding of salvation. Our mission is not to sets the standrds that we ourselves cannot meet but in her words we should have a spirit of: "uplifting and not a spirit of crashing down".
Lenora D. Muse
Doctrine of Salvation
Reflection #3
Christ and Salvation
As I reflect the question asked by Angel Manuel Rodriguez in this article about if those who never hear about Jesus if they will be saved. I don’t agree that the text given prove an exclusivist answer such as John 17:3, it just tells us that those that have the chance to know the name of Jesus and I don’t mean know of, but know in a personal relationship way will have eternal life. This to me is like the predestination theory that the ones who have a personal relationship with Jesus are predestined to receive eternal life. That doesn’t exclude anyone the people will have to exclude themselves by not wanting a relationship with Jesus. The author goes on to say that Pete reaffirmed the conviction in Acts 4:12 that states “Salvation is found in no one else,” and I believe that as well but it doesn’t meant some are chosen to believe and some are not. Jesus is the only one that can save us.
Some that will be saved in my belief will not be guided by anyone telling them about Jesus sacrifice for them but through only God’s ability through nature and the Holy Spirit revealing there is salvation in God many will be save without the Gospel Presentation ever being given to them.
The author quoted the perfect scripture of 1 Tim 2:4 that tells us God “wants all men to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth.” The story in the Bible about Cornelius is excellent to show how God knows the heart of humankind that is seeking for a better life and someone that is out there listening to their questions and looking for answers. I know through my own experience with the Seventh-day Adventist Church message God showed me about the reformation through an old set of Britannica encyclopedias and I learned of the Sabbath reform, so when I heard the message I knew how to research it for myself to confirm.
I agree with the author that the scriptures say, “God has not left Himself without witnesses among the nations” as Numbers 24:2 and in Romans 1:19, 20 we studied in class that “God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.”
Second section of the book deals with important issues concerning Ellen White's udnerstanding of God's requirments. On the one hand we read passages when she clearly talks that God's acceptance will be extended only to those are "spotless" on the other hand she talks about God's mercy extended in the same measure as His justice. But how do we put those two together? How do we see mercy in justice and justice in His mercy? First we need to establish that she understands that our depravity is so great that we will need God's strenght throughout our whole walk with Him. Then his forgiveness has to become a moral influence for us which will inspire us to develop a Christlike characters. We have to understand the price of our salvation, which subequently will convince the sinner that salvation is not only grace but also a solemn responsibility on his/her part. Sinner be forgiven have to accept the fact that forgiveness cam with very high price on God's part and even though it's free to him/her it is absolutely not free. After reading this section of the book we come to the conclusion that Ellen White is an example of balance understanding of relation between judgment and forgiveness.
As a read Steps to Christ to find out an answer about the first question I raised issue I about human freedom and salvation of babies. The facts that I have found out and already argue, in my 2 postings in September, is that babies inherit sin of their parents therefore are condemned to death.
When I started to read Steps to Christ I realize one aspect important to shed some light in the subject of babies’s death. It is the topic of freedom. For her, salvation is about choosing Jesus and the gift of life that He offers. In chapter 5 (Consecration) she teaches that only when man choose to change his/her lifestyle from sinful life to godly life, can the Holy Spirit operates in his/her salvation. Man can not do by its own.
This decision is made possible because the will/conscience still have the ability to differentiate evil from good. But how about babies who did not have the ability choose anything? She makes it clear that forced decision can not be accepted by God, and only when man willfully decide for God’s transformation can Jesus shape sinful man to God likeness.
God likeness is the goal of salvation. Since babies did not had opportunity to choose how are their cases decided? In the end of the chapter she affirm that God is not willing that anyone should suffer and perish but this is the will of Satan. Is this implying that God will save every baby then? This can be thought, but since salvation is only possible by human decision, and not arbitrarily decided by God this argument can also be wrong.
In chapter 6 she do not shed light in this subject, in my opinion, since she talks about faith and acceptance of Jesus sacrifice. Both are actions of the will, she emphasizes again, and thus can not be done by babies. Then chapter 7 (the test of discipleship) she mention something worthy to be noticed. Salvation is a process that transforms the character. And “The character is revealed, not by occasional good deeds and occasional misdeeds, but by the tendency of the habitual words and acts.” {SC 57.2}
Tendencies of works and acts are evidences for all that God’s decision is the best one in saving or not the person. It is truth that babies do not have developed a life spam to measure one’s character. But someone could argue, and rightly so, that God knows the future and could know consequently the tendency of one specific baby. And based on that, and only that, God could save him or her. But this for us would still be arbitrary, right?!
From my readings so far until chapter 7 in Steps to Christ some inferences can be made:
1- Salvation is only from God’s power, man can not do it.
2- Salvation is God’s modification of human sinful character to godliness
3- This transformation depends on the will/conscientious decision of man
4- Babies do not exercise will or power of decision
5- Salvation is determined by the tendencies of character not specific actions
6- God would know the tendencies of babies
I think that no clear cut declaration can be made about the salvation of babies from this part of the book. Even tough there is possibilities, the inferences for yes or no are still vague. God can save based on His foreknowledge, but God’s foreknowledge does not annul man’s free will. Since death babies did not developed the power of choice, how can the decision be made? I still don’t know. I will still read the rest of the book and search for other references to shed more light in the subject.
Lenora D. Muse
Doctrine of Salvation
Reflection #4
How Perfect is Perfect” or Is Christian Perfection Possible?
Yes, I believe as Edward Heppenstall does that Christians are perfect. Now I am in the number with countless others that at one point in my Christian journey I was trying to reach the perfection I read in the scriptures by my own works. Unfortunate or fortunate the more sins I recognized God delivered me from the more issues in my life and sins I could see the need for more deliverance. Constantly, I was struggling to be what I thought at that time the scriptures were talking about, “For we all stumble in many things. If anyone does not stumble in word, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle the whole body.” James 3:2 Of, course I know this is talking about the untamed tongue now, but earlier in my Christian journey I thought it was saying I should be able to tame it when it says “if anyone does not stumble in word,” sounds like I can control the tongue with some effort. Reading further I thought it was telling me I could even control my whole body. Another verse says, “Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.” Matt. 5: 48 This is a verse I heard as a youth and young adult recited many times and I can remember going to the Holiness Churches in the South and they taught perfection and it cause a lot of stress on the believers that couldn’t seem to reach that perfect in their own efforts.
Reading this article help me see the need to make sure I teach on the subject of perfection during my evangelistic meetings and to my one on one Bible Study interest. I believe some will still not accept it because it seems too easy to take on Christ’s perfection as we overcome known sins, but there will be some like myself that feels relief from thinking my perfection is all about what I have to do or not do. This is a true statement “One of the hindrances to living the Christian life successfully is failure to understand what the bible teaches on the nature of sin and perfection. A grave misapprehension lies at the root of much of the false teaching on this subject. The Bible, in applying the term “perfection” to believers, never means “sinlessness.”
The author spoke of one truth every believer needs to learn, but in this article I could count at least seven and many more. Just to list a few that I could see the benefit in teaching along with a lesson on the topic sin: look fully to Christ for your perfection, only through the Holy Spirit’s presence and given victory over sin can we reach perfection, give warning that it is fatal for the believer to think he/she can surrender to Christ and the nature of sin is eradicated, but the surrender to Christ does mean it is possible to overcome known sin. Heppenstall says “surrender to Christ must be maintained day by day,” but I am incline to believe it takes a minute by minute in this world for surrendering to Christ.
The author brought out a thought that 1 John 1:8-10, “If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not I us,” is a warning against the doctrine of sinless perfection in this life. Well, I believe most people will admit they have sinned but those I have been around that claim perfect talk as if they have overcome all of their sinful ways, so this scripture wouldn’t prove anything to them against the doctrine of sinless perfection in this life.
Lenora D. Muse
My response to Rodrigo
Topic: Will babies be eternally lost?
There is a very touchy subject for me as well Rodrigo. I lost a baby that never took breathe in this world and I had to search for any word from the Lord to give me comfort. I feel God directed me to Selected Messages II page 257, “The Bereaved” and there are two paragraphs I would like to share with you that give me hope that I will see my baby again. “Remember the prophecy, “Thus saith the Lord; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted. . . Thus said the Lord; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, said the Lord, that thy children shall come again to their own border” (Jer. 31: 15-17) p.259
“As the little infants come forth immortal from their dusty beds, they immediately wing their way to their mother’s arm. They meet again nevermore to part. But many of the little ones have no mother there. We listen in vain for the rapturous song of triumph from the mother. The angels receive the motherless infants and conduct them to the tree of life. Jesus places the golden ring of light, the crown upon their little heads. God grant that the dear mother of “Eva” may be there, that her little winds may be folded upon the glad bosom of her mother.” p. 260
Rodrigo for me this gives me the desire the more to make heaven my goal so the angels won’t have to look for me and they can place my baby in my arms to raise in heaven on those wonderful streets of gold and I will not have to worry about sickness or pain or death taking my baby again from me. I hope this reading in Selected Messages II can give you hope along with the hope you have in Jesus coming back for you. May God grant you peace.
Lenora D. Muse
My commit to Montes Estinphil
Romans 3
Montes I can agree with you on the point that Roman 3 gives you mixed emotions, and especially 9-20 does make you feel low in spirit to know your true condition. “Yeah, it saddens my heart to realize that I can not and will not be able to do any good without Christ.” I am sure it would sadden my heart if I look at it in this matter as well, but I choose to interpret it to mean that I can’t even come to God on my own. It takes God to draw us because of our sin nature we would continue to be God’s enemy if not for the mercy of God. If we are going to put on Christ righteousness that lets us know we don’t have a garment good enough to desire to keep wearing after giving our life to Christ. Later in Romans 3: 21-26 you and I “can receive hope even though we have sinned and fallen short of his glory.” When the scripture tells that God sent Jesus as our propitiation as we learned in class is meaning our substitution and covering and for us and it works inside of us as a moral influence. Praise the Lord! See Montes if I thought I could do anything for myself or that I was good enough just a little I would fool myself that I could be good enough in my own strength. Yes, I agree with you it is encouraging to know that the Angels of the Lord are with me throughout the ages and I can depend on it.
Divine foreknowledge, Human freewill, and Legal Universal Justification Part I
How does God KNOW what is yet to be? How does He KNOW all the infinite possible choices of free willed beings? The issue of divine foreknowledge and human freewill has been with us for centuries now. And its ripple effects are felt as far as soteriology is concerned. In this short refection, I shall endeavor to briefly discuss the roots of this seemingly paradoxical question between divine foreknowledge and human freewill.
Traditionally, classical theology believed God to be both timeless and spaceless; the idea that finds its roots in platonic philosophy. Many early Christian thinkers such Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine adopted this platonic dualism in their theological enterprises. In turn, these influenced many protestant theologians such John Calvin and others.
Because in classical theology God is removed from our temporal world, his divine acts and will exist outside of time, and as result, God is not involved in our time and space. This view of God is what births the idea that divine activities have decreed what will happen in the future. This notion makes all future possible choices by free will beings not really free. Why? A timeless God decided timelessly what will occur and we cannot human beings have a choice, but to accept what God already decided.
The above thinking makes the future closed, that is, God already determined our choices. This view raises serious questions such as:
1. Where is Human freedom?
2. Is God love or coercive?
In attempt to answer questions such as the ones above, classical theologians opted for “compatibility.” A term used to mean that our freedom is compatible with God’s foreknowledge. Also, when taken to its logical end, classical view of the foreknowledge of God breeds into “once saved always saved,” “double predestination” by Calvin, universal legal justification[1] , and etc.
--
1. Looking at Ángel Manuel Rodríguez’s point #2 in the article, “Some Problems with Legal Universal Justification,” the presupposition of this view of justification seems to be interrelated with divine foreknowledge and human will.
Romans 9
In this chapter it definitely seems like Calvin was right regarding predestination. Paul uses some pretty strong language that seems to say God chooses whom to bless and whom to curse and that we are simply the recipients of which ever decision He makes towards us. However, I think that in this chapter we must “read between the lines” as Dr. Hanna has said. We need to keep the big picture in mind. If we consider the plan of salvation then it will become easier to make sense of this chapter. Let’s focus on Paul’s comments regarding Pharaoh. God sent Moses to deliver the Israelites from bondage by sending a message to Pharaoh; “Let my people go.” Pharaoh had two choices; submit or rebel. God was intervening in human affairs. Whenever God intervenes in history and humans are aware of it then humans are also left with a choice. They can submit to God’s plan or reject it. If they submit then it will lead to salvation. In Pharaoh’s case, I’m sure that Egypt’s history would be different if they would have gladly accepted God’s will and allowed Israel to leave, maybe even forming a friendly alliance with them. Eventually, God would have reached out to Egypt and would have gladly accepted them in. We have evidence of God’s plan for Egypt in Isaiah 19 where he looks forward to the day that Egypt would accept God. However, since Pharaoh rejected God’s will things as history states. If God were never to intervene then there would be no choice to make. Since God does intervene then there is a choice to make, and it is His intervention that makes Him ultimately responsible for blessing or cursing. The same can be said of Ishmael and Isaac; and Jacob and Esau. The cursed brothers could have accepted God’s will that the covenant blessings rested on their younger brothers and not on them, but they didn’t. They both refused to submit. Although Jacob and Esau had somewhat of a relationship, Esau never served Jacob. Therefore, the curse or blessing depends on how we respond to God’s intervention/call; will we reject it or accept it.
Analysis of the Doctrine of
Universal "Legal" Justification
Larry J. Kane
We have to admit that it is pretty messed up that we are under wrath because of Adam’s choice. Our initial response to this truth is “I wasn’t there, why do I have to suffer for Adam’s mistake.” I could see why many people would believe in Universal “Legal” Justification. I would agree with Kane that we must look at the passage in context to discover what Paul is really saying in these passages. Is there any truth in what the Universal “Justifiers” believe? I have to admit, it is hard for me to accept that because of what Adam did I have to suffer. It’s true; I would have done the same thing if I were Adam, which is why we are all under sin. But there is one big difference between Adam and myself. Adam lived on the other side of sin and I live on this side. When we consider the unfallen worlds and even the angels, they were able to make a choice in their perfect state. However, we have to make our choice in a world that has been polluted with sin and with natures that are bent towards sin (not even Christ had a propensity towards sin). I hate to play the devil’s advocate, but I think it’s necessary in order for us to understand why some believe in Universal Justification. They cannot see it any other way because they feel it is entirely unfair for God to require so much from us given our depraved condition. Looking to Romans 5:19-21 offers a solution. Two destinies have been laid out by God; one through the first Adam and one through the second Adam. Both are accepted by faith. Both require a decision on our part; a decision. We must choose to accept Christ or reject Him. Once we accept Him then everything is taken care of. It all boils down to a decision. Recognition of what Adam has done and the ramifications of that decision and then accepting what Christ has done and the ramifications of that decision. Salvation is by grace through faith, but we have to accept it and hold on to it. Dare I say that it would be unfair if it were any other way? Yes, I would.
Divine foreknowledge and Human freewill Part II
The issues arising from classical theology because of its views on divine foreknowledge and human freewill have not gone unnoticed! As Richard Rice points out, “…classic view of divine foreknowledge requires a definitive or closed view of reality.”[1] Obviously, Rice is reacting to how classical view defines divine foreknowledge from texts such as Mal. 3:6, Hebrews 13:8, and James 1:17. [2]
It is clear that the fundamental challenge of classical view is a departure from scripture and a hermeneutical one. Why? In classical view, God is viewed as timeless or changeless. Rice and “open view of God” theologians react on this false view of God and propose a God who is changing to adopt to new stimuli.
While Richard Rice and other evangelical theologians clearly affirm an open future, they clearly negate the foreknowledge of God. Here is how Rice negates the foreknowledge of God:
One way to express the basic difference between the usual view of God’s relation to the world and the alternative this book proposes is to say that they involve contrasting concepts of the future. The customary view states that God knows the future in all its detail. It implies that the future itself is there to be known – fixed and changeless in every respect. We have seen that such a concept excludes creaturely freedom because genuine freedom requires that part of the future be indefinite until decided by free personal agents. In order to affirm creaturely freedom, the open view of God maintains that certain aspects of the future are as yet indefinite. Therefore they are unknowable. And this means that God’s knowledge of the future cannot be exhaustive. [3]
The challenge with this view is that it overlooks substantial Biblical evidence pointing to the foreknowledge of God. For example, the majority of the Book of Daniel and Revelation would have to be interpreted differently if we are to hold the open view of God as true!
I agree with Rice that the future is open to us. However, I disagree with him when he denies the foreknowledge of God by citing its violation of human freedom. Because we don’t know the full nature of God, we cannot reduce Him to our finite mind and concept of time and reality. In addition, given that we don’t know “how” God knows, we must be honest and consistent with Biblical data. God’s ability to predict infinite possible choices of free willed beings is the ultimate test of foreknowledge!
--
1 Richard Rice, The Openness of God: The relationship of divine foreknowledge and Human Free Will (Washington, MD: Review & Herald , 1980). 18.
2 Ibid., p. 12, 21.
3 Ibid., p. 45
Enoch Brownell
i am commenting on Enoch's pertaining to the cross and its atoning properties for the sinner. i agree that we often look at the cross and maximize what the cross has meant in the past. And yet i am not sure that the emphasis placed here is sufficient enough. I know that :Paul has spent an enormous amount of time preaching the cross and Christ crucified and yet i believe that If Paul were here today. He would be preaching the second coming as much as He preached the cross in the past. Jesus wants us to look forward to His return, just as He wanted the Jews to look for ward to him the first time
he came. I already am clear how wrong i am, but what gives me hope is knowing that regardless who I am, He still came and died for my sins. Rom. 5:7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— I know that we want to keep punishing our selves for the wrong that we have done, but in that we should remember that jesus came at the darkest hour of earths history to bring the light of his love and now He is allowing the poison of life to continue so that He can refine us for the future. Lets look up with great anticipation while we wait for our deliverer to come.
I am commenting on Andrews Blog Two destinies have been laid out by God; one through the first Adam and one through the second Adam. Both are accepted by faith. Both require a decision on our part; a decision. We must choose to accept Christ or reject Him. Once we accept Him then everything is taken care of. It all boils down to a decision. Recognition of what Adam has done and the ramifications of that decision and then accepting what Christ has done and the ramifications of that decision. Salvation is by grace through faith, but we have to accept it and hold on to it. Dare I say that it would be unfair if it were any other way? Yes, I would.
What we must understand is that life really is not fair. And God who knows it all has created an environment so that no one cannot say that He is not loving. He allows it to rain on the just and the unjust. Here is where the beauty of the gospel lies. People that do not deserve to be saved and even those that do not want to be saved, God is trying to love them into the kingdom so that that if they refuse they will have no one to blame but themselves. Through the first Adam we all die, through jesus we live. it seems as though there are so many contradictions to Gods love, but if you look at the pre fall and the post fall. god has always asked for obedience and trust. We need to come to a place where we understand that God wants His people to be saved even though the devil does not like it or want it to happen. We should know that the penalty for sin isn't for us it is ultimately for Satan. If we choose not to accept this we will receive a penalty that only Satan deserves. This is why the gift of God and from God is eternal life.Satan give nothing, His motives are ultimately always to cause us to be separated from the ultimate gift giver.
Lenora D. Muse
Reflection #5
Elected by Angel Manuel Rodriguez
I do understand the author of this article is not writing on the connection between free-will and election, but through his discussion I can see where free-will can be understood. I agree with the author that by reading the first and third verse help you interpret that Ephesians 1:4 is talking about the saints or the faithful believers of Christ and not the whole world. Meanwhile, in John 3: 16 17, 18“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath no believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” We can say that God has provided salvation through His son Jesus for the world. At the same time the “Whosoever believe shows how the term “Elected” come into play. Those elected would be those whosoever believers and those that choose not to will not have to feel forced against their will.
When I look at the call of a Pastor I see it as an “Election” in the way the author talks about the theological way it is used in the New Testament where it refers to those that believe in Christ and has accept Him as their saviour and is set aside to preach the gospel message as a particular purpose. We do know that all believers are to minister to others and share the gospel as well.
I do understand the concept “Pretemporal Election in Christ,” that election was from God without any connection with our choice before the world was created, I have to admit that was the first time I saw pretemporal used with election. This shows me a caring God but a fair God that still gave me the opportunity to choice if I want to receive this wonderful gift of salvation just in case I turn away from Him. Yes, I do agree the work of God through Jesus is a mystery. A powerful twist mentioned in the article was that it was not just for salvation but to a holy life. As we think of Christ and how he lived in sinful flesh, as it was called, yet without sin he showed us how a holy life could be attain by staying connected with his Father.
I agree with the author in Ephesians 1: 4 there is nothing that provides proof that god has predestine those that are saved and those that are lost by name, but only by the choice each person makes will determine that. Paul is assuring those that believe in Jesus that through Him they would be holy and blameless in God’s sight.
Lenora D. Muse
Reflection #6
The Wesleyan Connection
By Woodrow W. Whidden
This article draws attention to the Wesleyan doctrine and its impact on Adventist theological formation. I really believe that the average layperson in the church do not fully comprehend the parts that came together to make us the body that we are. I am still learning myself.
“Prevenient grace” was one of the hallmarks of Wesley’s beliefs. He maintained that God impressed upon humankind, both his love and the necessity of His gothic love, whose redemptive powers helps to overcomes the abyss caused by sin. The authors’ teaching focus on the concept that we are either comfortable or unaware of the role sin plays in destroying our lives. God aggressively seek us out to educate and reattach us to His kingdom.
He strokes the fires that advocate justification by grace is more than a proposal, but is what the Christian experience is all about. He explores the interrelation between justification and sanctification that leads to salvation. What Wesley did have a problem with, was the belief by Protestants, that Jesus’’ role on earth alone, and His ultimate sacrifice, was enough to guarantee us eternal life. His perspective dwells into our actions, which include a conscience decision to confess, repent and following the teachings of Jesus, which are important aspect of salvation.
Wesley strongly espoused that believing along, was not sufficient to receive the full blessings of the Lord. He taught that Christianity was an actionable noun. This caused his detractors to fervently oppose him. Even today, many who claim the mantle of being “saved,” feel that they only have to attend worship services and pay tithes and they are a shoo-in for Heavens’ gates.
Randy Maddox, a theologian, expresses it best, by stating that the way to salvation is a series of steps and actions, more then a leap into glory.
Wesley preached that sanctification was a result of recognizing that it is growth process. It involved both the body and the soul. He expressed that sin was a cause and effect situation. “Sin affected the body, but originated in the soul.” His labeling sin as improper and proper is definitely food for thought. Proper sin is intentionally going against God’s law. Improper sin is the stumbles we make, as we follow the pathway of righteousness. It is also called “mortal versus venial sins.”
Sister Ellen White also advocated that sanctification involved more then listening and accepting the teachings of Christ. She maintained that we had to grow in Christ to live in eternality with the Lord. She wanted the saints to know that sin could not be destroyed, but could be overcome. I feel that their arguments on the subject of sin and salvation should be taught on a regular basis from both the pulpit, as well as in laypersons workshops.
Wesley’s thoughts on the investigative judgment process further raised a few eyebrows. He shows the synergy between the Latin West and the Eastern traditions of the juridical process that encompass investigate judgment. He leads into that by insisting that final justification disputes the arguments that merits and works get you to heaven. He places the importance of faith and God’s judgment as primary to the end result.
Reading this article alone may not convince you of his views, careful study and research might.
Blog on Chapter 3 Understanding Scripture: Presuppositions in the interpretation of scripture
It is interesting understanding why and the affect of presuppositions in the interpretation of scripture. As with any other thing people, food, even movies, people have a predetermined expectation or bias before they open God’s word. Now this isn’t always bad just as expecting the correct flavor for Morningstar grillers so it is with the presupposition of God’s word when a person believes that it is “in an indivisible, indistinguishable union of the divine and the human.” However it is when presuppositions prevent us from hearing the Word of God and or being moved by the Holy Spirit there becomes an issue. Creation is an excellent parallel to this thought. In creation the Word of God spoke and made things stand in their place. In addition, even before that the Holy Spirit moved upon the face of the earth. Both were needed for the earth to have new things, and improvements. It is the same way in our life. The transforming power of God’s Holy Spirit is needed before we hear God’s Word, so that we don’t impede the new things God has in store for us. And again even as creation has being hurt by sin so has our interpretation of the bible. However again just as we can still see and enjoy God thru creation so we can still see and enjoy God’s messages to us in His holy word if we only open, honest, faithful, obedient, loving, and prayerful.
Blog on Chapter 4 Understanding Scripture: Revelation and Inspiration
“Theopneustos” The greek work for God breathed. I had never considered the following question until it was raised by the author. What exactly does it mean when it says the scriptures were God breathed? It’s a very interesting statement. There are so many angles you could look at it. Are the scriptures God breathed in the same way that the stars in heavens breathed out by our Creator at the beginning of time created for the same purpose: to give us Light that can guide us in the darkness after the son had left. Did God breathed also refer to the Holy Spirit being a part of the DNA of scripture? So many thought arise even as we attempt to interpret this metaphorically. Even more interesting how do the bible writers fit within the scheme of “theopneustos”? As stated in class even when Paul wrote that he wasn’t referring to the New Testament. Even if you say that that is was a manifestation of God’s thoughts and actions you still cannot fully explain the method to receiving and communicating God’s thoughts and actions in a human being. Examining verbal inspiration and thought inspiration still leads to more questions no matter which view or even hybrid view you decide.
This comment is on Montes writing about what “James Whites suggested the Review Readers to preach Christ more.” Montes your reflection excited me to think what my belief in this whole matter is. I agree we need to preach and teach more about the character of Christ and I take the scripture at face value that says, “By beholding you become changed.” At the trial before Caiapas Ellen White says, “For a moment the divinity of Christ flashed through His guise of humanity. The High Priest felt the Saviour’s eye penetrate as if he was reading the hidden thoughts, and burn into his heart. Never in afterlife did he forget this moment.” DA 707 I believe as we look into the character of Jesus as to look in His eyes we become changed inwardly first and those sins that were once appealing to us are no longer appealing we began to hate sin.
Praise God for sealing us. I believe we still have an active role by having the desire to be like the character of Christ. Finally, I believe the moment of transformation starts, when I give my life to God and each day is another moment of transformation until our glorification at Jesus return. As for my dirty robe I have chosen to take Christ robe of righteousness so mine will be hid behind His. Truly, I am learning how important it is to lean fully on Christ as I have watched myself fail to many times as I try to do it alone.
My comment is for Valmy Stephen Karemera on Divine foreknowledge and Human freewill Part II
I believe as we discussed in class that God does have foreknowledge and I believe the future is open and not closed that our fate is predestined that we can’t have freewill to choose our own destiny. Like we discussed about Judas having the opportunity to repent but it would not have stopped the turn of events that were prophesied. God has allowed prophetic messages to be conditional where the person or people can make change in their lives that cause them to turn back to God. And serve Him.
I looked up the text Mal. 3:6, Hebrews 13:8, and James 1:17 and I only saw that the text was saying God never change and I believe His character never change, but it is His chose to change whatever He choices. I don’t see foreknowledge open or close in those texts.
I am interested in knowing why the Book of Daniel and Revelation has to be interpreted if the open view of God is true? I have faith that events can happen the way Jesus as set, even if personal choices are made.
While reading Lenora’s reaction the following statement caught my attention. Here it is: As for my dirty robe I have chosen to take Christ robe of righteousness so mine will be hid behind His. The thought that came to mind was there is no salvation without forgiveness. And three people make forgiveness possible and those individuals also join in for salvation to become a reality. Whether it is forgiveness or Salvation God, the offender, and the offended play a crucial role. The idea I want to convey is that if our robe is dirty and we come to the realization that we need to wear clean clothes then we do not just take the robe of Christ because it is clean and put it on. It makes more sense to take off our dirty garment, while being naked we feel ashamed, and cling to Christ for Him to give his robe. When it comes to salvation, no matter how often we wash our clothes are always dirty. Christ’s robe is pure and clean and fits us well enough for the kingdom. No need to go back and pick up our former clothes. It is not clean anyway! We may as well keep on us His robe. There is a tendency to think that Christ’s robe covers ours or hides behind His as it seems to be indicated in statement my colleague mentioned above. That idea is not conducive and is questionable. When Christ dresses us up we don’t have our clothes on. Our robe is not hiding behind Jesus’. We take on His righteousness and that is good enough. Christ does not cover our sins. He removes our sins and throws them in the depth of the sea or the abyss and now, with Christ’s robe on, we stand as though we had never sinned. Let’s face it! If we hide anything sooner or later somebody somehow will go to look for it and will find it. I am saying we cannot keep our clothes on while at the same time we have Christ’s is on us. It is His robe or mine.
What Christ does He does it wholeheartedly and wholly. Whenever we approach Him with our dirty cloak He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse from all unrighteousness. He does not do half job. When Christ for us He does a though job. When He forgives us our debts He sets us free and if the Son of man sets you free, my friend, you are free indeed. This message of liberation, deliverance, and freedom has been given to the church, the body of Christ on earth. Whatever the church binds on earth has been bound in heaven and whatever the church looses on earth has been loosed in heaven. If heaven emptied itself and forgave humanity without any reservation how much more should the followers of Christ do the same? We are called to forgive as Christ has forgiven us; we are called to set others free as Christ has set us free; we are called to cancel the debts of others as God has canceled ours in Christ Jesus. Even though we did not have enough time to expound on many issues like forgiveness relating to salvation in the doctrine of Salvation, still forgiveness, in my mind, is so crucial that I don’t see how one can be saved without forgiving and having been forgiven. It is the belief of some people that the church has certain restrictions on forgiveness; however, I feel that should not be the case. Yeah, some professors and students are in agreement that there are sins which only God can forgive. What do you think? As for me, if Christ forgives people who am I to keep them in bondage? In my understanding, sin always involves three people: God, the sinner, and the victim. The victim may be singular or plural. If I sin against you ask you for forgiveness by refraining granting me forgiveness you hold on to my salvation. One thing God always does is forgiving whoever asks for forgiveness. This is a given once one asks. Without forgiveness there is no calling, justification, sanctification, and glorification. Therefore there is no salvation. See, Jesus forgives us to save us. The church should forgive people neither three times nor seven times nor seventy seven times seven, but as long as human’s breath lasts.
The doctrine of salvation Hand in Hand with Evangelism
During this semester, we've all been exposed to the larger dimension of the Doctrine of Salvation. Many have been surprised by their ignorance about salvation. Together, we learned and unlearned some stereotypes that we dragged after us for years in the Church. Personally, I allowed myself to go further in my questions. It is important to listen to what others say and read what those who are recognized as experts and masters have written in their respective fields. Sometimes we must implement and follow word by word what the masters say or write.
However, I remain convinced that God gives intelligence to his Church, namely to the members of his church, in order to continue their research in the understanding of what He wants for their life, and especially how to tell others who live in ignorance of such a great salvation.
Having said that, I realize that as minister of the gospel in training, we are obliged to put our knowledge in simple word, accessible to others and communicated through evangelism. While we are deepening in its knowledge, we find that the doctrine of salvation is a well expanded field. How to sum up everything that is said? The triangle of the doctrine of salvation is constructed on justification, sanctification and glorification. However, in the sphere of reflection on salvation, we believe it is important to integrate evangelism.
Ellen G. White wrote, “This is God’s plan that men and women who are partakers of this great salvation through Jesus Christ, should be his missionaries, bodies of light throughout the world.” The doctrine of salvation, once out of the seminary walls, must join the others through evangelism. While reading the papers of my colleagues, I have highlighted some reasons why evangelism must be integrated into the doctrine of salvation:
1. Human beings are important in the eyes of God. The importance that we have in the eyes of God is manifested in that he gave what he holds most dear as a ransom in place of fallen humanity.
2. Human beings are lost because of sin. Today, sin is trivialized to the point where we must define what is meant by sin. As such, many strongly believe that grace is sufficient to receive salvation without realizing that grace is obtained in Jesus by confessing and acknowledging that God's law has been violated and it continues to be violated with no regrets.
3. Humans need Christ. Without Christ in our life, the intellectual knowledge of the doctrine of salvation is a concept among others. We have learned to clearly illustrate it in chart but it is necessary to impress it upon people's mind through evangelism.
4. The salvation's message is universal. According to statistics on religions around the world, there are more than 30 thousand denominations only within Christianity. Knowing that the Seventh Day Adventist Church is the last one with a message addressed to all peoples, all languages, all nations, evangelism is therefore more important in order to make the doctrine of salvation available to all who are interested in their eternal salvation.
Roger Saint-Fleur
The “Primacy of the Gospel Committee – Report” was very interesting. I was never aware that the church was accused of not preaching the full Gospel. I do believe that the 1888 message of justification by faith needs further study. There was a specific reason why God was leading His people to that message and I do not believe that we have grasped His intent as of yet. I would also agree that the beliefs of the Church agree with the 1888 message. However, I believe that in practice we do not always display that belief. Adventists have been successful in creating a stigma among the Christian community as legalists. In my undergraduate studies I was taught they as a pastor I should never throw out a criticism just because I don’t agree with it. I believe that as a church we must do the same thing. Are we truly presenting the Gospel as it is in practice? Most times Adventists feel it important to persuade convert others on the Sabbath truth before introducing them to Jesus. Our evangelistic endeavors are often focused on doctrines and prophecies rather than on Jesus. Again, I do believe that on paper our Church believes in the Gospel, but we need the Gospel to be practical.
The fact that Ellen White stood alone on her views of justification by faith before 1888 is alarming. It speaks to the truth that Adventists are somewhat predisposed to a legalistic view of salvation. She stood alone in her defense of Jones and Waggoner. In the four years that followed 1888 she wrote most of her work on the topic of justification by faith and many continued to have a problem with her writings. It seems that they feared that the law would be done away with, thus threatening the Sabbath in SDA eschatology. Has justification by faith truly been accepted by SDA’s today, or are we still cherishing the law in order to protect the fourth commandment?
Although Ellen White spent a lot of time speaking about justification by faith, she also spoke of the necessity of the law. It seems that the tension between faith and works has been around since the birth of Christianity. Ellen White makes sure to touch both aspects (faith and works) in order to present a balanced approach to salvation. Christ’s righteousness is always needed because a human’s good works are tainted with sin. The works are produced by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but even these works prompted by God have to be mingled with the blood of Jesus. Everything that we do must be splashed by the blood. If the blood is not applied, then nothing that we do will be accepted by God.
This is a short reflection on Ivan T. Blazen's excellent article "Justification by Faith and Judgment According to Works". (BRI)
I won't discuss whole article but focus on parts which for me were especially interesting. In discussion of Assurance
Blazen points out to the "how much more" concept of Romans 5. If we as believers are justified now, how much more
we will be saved in the judgment at the end. And later if through Adam we have been affected with sin how much more
through Christ we are affected with grace, righteousness, and life. I think this might be an interesting point in our
discussion about larger view of salvation. I also like how Blazen summarizes a necessity of how we receive salvation.
He says that Paul's righteousness is by faith, and not righteousness by fate. I think in a light of what we studied we
couldn't agree more. It's interesting to point out how Abraham was saved, he was saved by the promise. God's promise
became reality for him, in a sense God created the reality of Salvation for Abraham, and Abraham chose to believe it.
It's also in faith that we can be "directly and personally involved with the promise of God." Later Blazen points out that
Jesus said that doing works of God is to believe in Christ. Apostle Paul later builds on Christs statement that
doing works of God is believe in Him (John 6:28,29) in Romans 10:3 and 10:16. I really like also how the author
describes new life in conformity to God, in paraphrase he is saying that God's mercy is given and effective in us only
if it bears fruit. Life received from God has to has to be the life lived for God. After reviewing some key texts from
Apostle Paul letters author come to a conclusion that scripture and specifically Paul in his writing leave no place for
two extreme and etremely mistaken positions one being "Never quite saved at all, no matter what Christ has done,"
or "Once saved, always saved, no matter what I may do." It's important that author mentions the fact of "more and
more" principle (1 Thess 4:1,9,10). Clearly Paul teaches that the standard of perfection is always ahead of the Christian
and we can never say that we fully reached it, and this is because "the gift of Christ is so infinite that His claim must
be infinite as well." (bigger view of salvation) I think that Blazen gives also the best explanation to waht is judgment
according to our works: "The judgment according to works teaches that the cross, as a saving event, puts us under the
lordship, or reign, of Christ." In conclusion the author makes his point very well in the article that neither justification
nor assurance of salvation come as a result of our works or even faith and works. Both justification and assurance come
through the work of Christ as our Savior.
Response to Valmy Stephen Karemera’s Comments on Divine Foreknowledge and Human Freewill
The comments made were more against the open view of God than in defense of the Classical Theology which promotes the problem of a closed future. While many will agree that an open future is helpful and more consistent with freewill, there are others who go as far as to say God does not know all the details of the future. This does not mean that the open view does not believe God is ignorant about what will and can happen in the future.
The point that claimed the open view of God is wrong because we would have to have different interpretations of Revelation and Daniel that God has its value. However, should we hold on to our presuppositions despite seeing problems with the a closed future of God? Furthermore, it would be helpful and fair to have mentioned how the open view of God explains prophecy in Scripture.
I also agree that we must not reduce God because we do not understand fully, but would it be fair to make claims about God that do not make sense?
In our doctrine of salvation class we discussed a faith versus works. When most Christians think of faith they refer to Paul’s version of faith found in that was classified as the Pauline writings. The others would look at James version of faith versus works and how your faith cannot be true unless it works. And so we have a classic confrontation between Christians who believe in faith only and Christians who believe it works. Throughout the semester we have been challenged to think bigger to think a larger scale than our original model of thinking, and if that is to happen then we need to re-examine the faith works principle.
I will first think that we need to do when looking at this issue between faith and works is to examine the audience that both Paul and James were dressing. When we do this we will find that maybe Paul and James were not contradicting each other or rather speaking of the same thing to two groups of people with different mindsets.
Paul outlined in Romans eight verse three “for what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh God sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit”. So Paul is saying here that the law is limited in what it can do. That limitation is not a compilation the task which Jesus Christ has set out to do by dying for sinful human beings to reconcile them to God. Paul is speaking to us so that we might have faith in what Christ has done as our sacrifice and what he has done to make salvation readily available to us. Paul is not saying however that all a Christian needs is faith, he is emphasizing that works alone cannot save you.
James however says and James chapter 2 verse 14 “what is a prophet my brethren though a man say he has faith and have not works can faith save him if a brother or sister be naked and destitute of daily bread and one of these is onto him depart in peace and be warmed and filled notwithstanding that you give him not those things which are needful to the body what does it profit even so faith if it has not works is dead being alone”.
It has been argued that James is an advocate for works alone clearly in this text it is seen that James is simply saying that if one believes that you can have faith and faith only menu were equally as wrong as someone who believes that you can have works and works only to achieve salvation. There has to be a harmony and a blending of both. That’s why your faith without works is dead. And your works without faith is equally dead.
I personally believe that both James and Paul were speaking of the same thing and are not in contradiction but are rather in harmony with each other. Faith can have a passive side or an active side, and with regards to the arguments both are required and necessary for to the faith. The passiveness of our faith is that which we receive from God, were the Bible speaks of every man being given a measure of faith. The activeness however is the expression of our faith through works which make it active.
This is a short summary of the article by Ángel Manuel Rodríguez "Christ Saved the Human Race" (BRI)
Rodriguez points out that Ellen White affirms that Salvation is provided for us but we need to accept it to be as he writes "legally saved". Christ made salvation possible to us by becoming a bridge between God and sinful humanity. He made this possible by his life
of obedience and sacrificial death on the Cross. Secondly he explains that based on Ellen White quotations we may say that every human being that comes to the world already belongs to Christ, that is because the price of their salvation is paid. But life of obedience to God demonstrate our consent to become His children from our own will. But not only we belong to him because of salvation but also because he is our Creator. Without salvation though belonging to Him only
because of the fact of creation would bring us death. Ellen White affirms that salvation is big enough that everybody who needs it can be saved, but she emphatically denies that those who live in their sins daily can expect their sins to be covered by Christ in the end. Satan claims that sinners certainly belong to him, but Ellen White points out that he has no
right to such a claim. We belong to Christ now even more then at creation, but only if we will choose this reality. Christ made it possible and we can claim it and live free from the power of Satan.
How deep is your love
In reading the article by,” George W. Reid, the former director for the biblical research institute, I must admit that he writes something that is true and also something that I have always known. However, this article has caused me to reflect yet again on the love of Christ. In this article Reid writes that it is not us who reached out to Jesus, rather it is Jesus that reached out to us; while we were yet sinners. What is the point of this article? It serves as a reminder that if we believe that we have been bought with a price, then there should be a response to this love that God has shown us to others. Another human being did not ransom us; God himself ransomed himself for us. Now I know that we have been talking about moral influence, in that what Christ shed blood has done for us should cause us to live our lives in a manner that is indicative of who has bought us. When he bought us he paid for us using the highest cost, his blood and his life. However for this blog, I would like to go further by saying that Christ death for sinners should give us a better sense of what value is, in the eyes of God. Perhaps when we start seeing the cross of cavalry as the place where Christ died for all who do not believe, those that have believed believe and will believe, and then perhaps it would inform how we do ministry. Perhaps then it would help us to focus and point our time and efforts in the creases and dark corners of this earth where” worst” case scenarios dwell. While I agree that love is a principle and not an emotion, love is not always defined or exhibited in feel good moments or with bells and whistles. Sometimes true love costs. This evening while I was relaxing watching my favorite show. There was a dilemma, the dilemma was that someone was going to die and only the doctor that happened to be the patient’s friend could help the sick man from dying. The patient needed a liver transplant. The doctor in an unprecedented move decided to give the man a piece of his liver, so that he might be able to be restored and reconciled with his sick family. Now I know that this show is fictional but there is a point to be drawn here. After the surgery, the man that was hours before on his deathbed had a new lease on life and on the road to recovery. The doctor risked his life to save his patient and friend. When the doctor came to check on him to see how he was. The room was empty his family that was there before crying and supporting him was gone. When the doctor asked what had happened he explained that when he thought he was going to die he needed his family, but now that it looked like he was going to live he no longer needed them. Even though he was not fully recovered yet he had already made up his mind to go back to his old lifestyle. Here's the point, even though we have been on our death beds spiritually, emotionally and physically Jesus has willingly donated his life for us already even though he knows that many of us will dump him for the pleasures of this world. The difference in this story is that the doctor in this show is not real and He probably would not have donated his liver if he knew that his patient and friend would have dumped the family. Jesus is real and He knows what all of us will do after he has given his life for us and yet, while we were yet sinners Christ, God himself died for the ungodly.
I was asked the question Do we have any contribution as human beings towards our salvation .At first this seemed to be a very simple and easy question to answer, but the more I think about it some more that I know it’s not. On one hand we know that Christ came he was born as a human while yet still being fully God lived a perfect life and died a perfect sacrifice and rose on the third day. And all this was necessary and essential for humanity to be saved We remember as Christ was praying in the garden he prayed to the father and asked “if it is possible take this cup from me nevertheless not my will but thy will be done”. It is clear that Christ needed to die to pay the ransom for humanity. A little his death was important his resurrection was equally as important as was the life that he lived.
While Christ was fully divine is also fully human. Now we use regular human beings human beings today cannot claim to divinity of Christ yet because of his dependence on the father we too can live a righteous life as he did. However our contribution to our salvation is not measured by the works in which we attain but rather the faith that we apply.
John 3:16 says” for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life”. In order for a human being to attain salvation that individual must leave that Jesus Christ the son of God came to save them. So our contribution to salvation is the active faith that we exemplify in our lives.
The Dynamics of Salvation (article on the BRI website)
As discussed in this class this semester, salvation is much bigger than we have even began to think about it. What Christ has done in comparison to what he has asked for us to do just doesn’t seem to be fair.. Our faces are turned away from Him and we lack even the desire to return. Our will is so weakened that we continually choose only evil (Jer. 13:23). We have to admit that even in coming to God without God we would not have the desire to come to him and receive that free gift of salvation. The problem lies in the fact that many of us reject the gift because of our dullness of understanding that God not only saves us, but He has also guaranteed us a new identity in him. This is key because when we think about it. God not only cleans us up, changes our blood stained sin filled bodies, but he also gives us a new identity. What makes this so powerful is that he puts us into a witness protection spiritual program whereby the enemy cannot find us, unless we disclose through a life again of sin where he can find us. Like the prodigal son who came home once he came to himself, the father covers a multitude of our sins with and through his grace. The secret of salvation is that it just does not make sense through the eyes of sinners. We have been adopted by God, so that we might be apart of the eternal family. We have been adapted by our creator, so that when others may turn their backs on us. The God head is ever watching and making sure that we are never without help especially in times of trouble. Salvation is not a concept, rather it is Gods ultimate expression of His love for us. Salvations love does make sense through our eyes, but it does through the eyes of an all knowing and loving God who chooses to give us that which we do not deserve because for many it is the only way that we will truly get a glimpse of the untapped love that God has for his creation. The question then becomes why do so many reject the free gift of salvation that Jesus has given? The answer ids this, when people that claim to have been transformed live transparent lives that reflect the glory and relentless unconditional love that Jesus is trying to show the world through us that exists in Jesus. The dynamic of salvation is this. When we live what we preach, then people will see who God is! Salvation can be summed up in one text. For God so loved the world…… you finish the rest of the verse and claim what Christ has done for you. The dynamic of salvation is that Christ did all that we needed him to do and is still through his Spirit working in our lives, therefore we live now with hope of one day being in Hid presence.
Maka Ta’ufo’ou
Reflection: 6
Some Problems with Legal Universal Justification
Angel Manuel Rodriguez
It seems that generally Christians are misinterpreting what Rodriguez is presenting here in regards to Justification. Some people hold on to the misleading idea that the death of Christ on the cross is the final stage for the justification of all human. If that is so then there is no need to obey anything that God commanded for all are justified. However Paul is teaching that the sinner must have faith in that death on the cross. Can the sinner have faith and not responding to anything Christ commanded and still be saved? The death of Christ on the cross is for all human. It is a legal universal justification but the one that receives and accepts it by faith will be justified. Rodriguez is very clear in his definition: “Legal universal justification is a totally objective act that does not make any difference in the life of the individual until he or she is justified by faith, that is to say, when the person decides not to reject the gift of justification that is already his or hers.”
The entire human race is legally justified by the death of Christ and that does not meant that both of those that have faith and those that have not got faith will be saved. The difference will be the acceptance of justification by faith. There are people who choose not to accept that gift. If the cross justifies all then there’s no need for those who are not yet born to receive and accept justification by faith for they are already justified. The declaration of justification is followed by the reception of the Spirit and the new birth. The life of the sinner will be change in response to the love of God through His grace.
Another problem in the teaching of legal universal justification is the misusing of the phrase “in Christ.” As Rodriguez mentions that nowhere in the New Testament does it refer to the totality of the “human race as being present in Christ at the cross however it was exclusively used for those who by faith have been incorporated into Christ and His body, the Church.” If the whole human race were in Christ as we were in Adam then we are contributing to our salvation.
Universal legal justification view on faith can be a problem as it almost perceives faith as a meritorious act that plays no role on the justification of the sinner. And this is the justification that comes through grace alone and not through faith. So the role of faith is in question. God offers His grace to be received by faith and that does not mean that the sinner is justified already by just knowing that there’s grace, he has to have faith to receive the grace. Grace alone justification is a misunderstanding of what faith and grace is. Faith will prompt the believer to act and receive the grace from God to be justified so the misuse of universal legal justification portrays a lot of problems as Rodriguez presented.
Maka Ta’ufo’ou
Reflection: 5
Romans 8:29, 30.
29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.
These two verses are subject to lengthy discussions on the meaning of “foreknew” and “predestined” attracted attentions and has changes a lot of views about how God’s foresee the future. However according to discussions in class the theme of chapter 8 is “Freedom” and the center of discussion is the “Calling”. The order or stages of salvation are: Foreknowledge, Predestination, Calling, Justification and then Glorification. Paul confirms this: “For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another” (Gal 5:13). Paul here confirms the calling for freedom.
The context of Rom 8 is a discussion of “freedom” and Galatia associates “calling” with “freedom”. It means, for the good of those who are calling to freedom. The one thing people don’t understand is that God has predestined us to be “free”. This is the one thing we cannot get out of. But still we exercise our freedom to choose to love God or to hate God. We must understand also that God is omniscient and He foreknows the future, there’s no doubt about that. He knows everything and the Bible validates this: “Declaring the end from the beginning” (Isa 46:10). “Says the Lord, who makes these things known from long ago” (Acts 15:18). God knows the past, the present and the future.
Some believe that before the beginning of the world, God chose certain people to receive His gift of salvation. “Also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will” (Eph 1:11). God’s purpose is to offer salvation to the world as he planned to do long ago. God’s purpose to save is something we cannot prevent no matter what the devil do. What is clear is that God’s purpose for people was not an afterthought; it was settled before the foundation of the world. So God foreseen and predestined us to be free. The action of the devil was foreseen by God and made provision to meet that emergency. The question is: Does God’s foreknowledge of the future influence any event that He’s foreseen? Things do not happen because they are foreseen by God but foreseen because they will happen.
Here’s what the SDABC says: “God predestinated those whom He foreknew. . . . as God foresaw, and thus foreknew . . . . He coupled immediately with His foreknowledge the decision to predestinate them all to be saved. God never had any other purpose than salvation for the members of the human family. . . Salvation is offered freely to all. But not all accept the gospel invitation. Salvation is not forced upon us against our will. If we choose to oppose and resist God’s purpose, we shall be lost. Divine foreknowledge and divine predestination in no way exclude human liberty. Nowhere does Paul, or any other Bible writer, suggest that God has predestined certain men to be saved and certain others to be lost, regardless of their own choice in the matter” (Nichol, Francis D.: The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Volume 6. Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1978; 2002, S. 574).
It is clear here that our freedom is maintained. God calls us to be saved and it is up to the individual to choose a future life with God or a future of evil with Satan.
I want to share some ideas of my research paper as a reflection. History has given evidence that as the manner of communication changed (media), the perception of reality also changed (message), including man perception of a plan of salvation.
In the Middle Ages the Catholic Church emphasized the use of iconography without the use of the Bible text to communicate salvation. This emphasis made God very transcendent and they appeal to the emotions and fear of the people to accept salvation. But with the Reformation the Bible was translated, spread and used to communicate salvation to the people. Worship and the communication of truth became more immanent and closer to the believer, using some cognitive process to interpret the writing revelation, not images.
Salvation becomes more personalized than in the previous period. But this individualism is exaggerated in capitalism and illuminism. Max Weber in his work The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism explain that the principles of salvation of the Reformation made a shift in western culture. People become more individualistic. And with the Calvinistic major influence of predestination, capitalism as we know today rises.
In the postmodern era the same connection between capitalism, self and religion rises. But now with the use of mass communication to proclaim the gospel. Mass media according to social studies, was made to magnify self, to please self and to sell products. So contemporary media function as the “church of the cult of the individual while the self is one of the sacred objects of media content” (ROTHENBUHLER, Eric. W. “The self as a sacred object in media” IN: LUNDBY, Knut. SALOKANGAS, Raimo. SUMILA-SEPPÄNEN, Johanna. Implications of the sacred in (post) modern media. Kungälv, Sweden: Nordicom, Göteborg University, 2006. p.31).
My reflection is: How have Adventism dealt with this trend in Christianity to make very individualistic the gospel? Since mass media have a tendency to appeal to the individual emotion and not to the reason of man?
I hope to research more about this here at Andrews. Because I have seem and felt the effect of mass media in the gospel commission. The message of salvation is “losing its power” in the mind of the media age because they can not recognize the transformation process of the biblical gospel, which involves humbleness and service. This is contrasted with the main characteristics of the media era which is individualism.
Response to Andre Anderson:
In your posting HOW DEEP IS YOUR LOVE you mention one thing that caught my attention: "Christ death for sinners should give us a better sense of what value is".
After Lael Cesars sermon this morning I have being thinking about human values, unite and prejudice. Human beings because of sin makes value judgment wrongly, based on selfish pleasure and proximity. But the judgment of God is based on His love and grace. I am reading the DESIRE OF AGES again and is incredible the description of God's character in chapter 1.
Service and love for the enemies, for those who does not deserve is the law of heaven. Sharing with other and giving what we have is the character of a godly person. But I have asked myself, Am I giving as Jesus gave Himself to me? Here at Andrews I have felt the gospel in action in my life. I receive food donation from PMC. This is a wonderful project that have shown me what is the impact of God’s salvation.
But one thing still bothering me. Why we see lots of different nationalities to receive food but not together at worship and sharing? Why so many separation of black, white, asian, Spanish, Africans? I understand that language brings us together. I am part of a brazilian group. But I thing I have being separated from my brothers and sisters in Christ by a cultural wall that the gospel should destroy. Just some heart concerning…
Response to Andrew Pileggi:
In your second post on the 11-29 you mention about the threat of soteriology in seventh-day eschatology. Today when people mention this threat existing in the 1888 era is the same we have today. But I want to alert that this is not the only problem we face as Adventists.
I have been interested in the phenomenon of media and religion in my country. I want I have notice through research is the opposite emphasis of what happen in 1888. The love of Jesus without prophecy, judgment and law is so emphasized in sermons that the sweet name of Jesus have given birth to a new kind of Christians: diabetic Christians, as my theology professor in Brazil would name them.
This new kind of Christianity is one of the reasons youth does not stay on the church also. Dudley’s research have shown that here in America Adventism is facing the same problem as in Brazil but in a bigger proportion. People are forgetting the prophetic roots of adventism and youth are rootless. And while mass media gives a humanistic, postmodern kind of Christianity, no compromise with the law of God is seen in lots of Adventist today.
What I want to say is that Satan have put both problems to harass us as remnant. Legalism (saved by works), and apparently on the other side liberalism (saved without works). And we know from Scriptures that both are misrepresentation of the gospel and actually both are human independence of God. Let us be more holistically in our preaching (as Dr. Hanna beautifully puts on class)and be the kind of Adventist God expect from us.
ESCHATOLOGY, SALVATION AND APOSTLE PREACHING IN THE BOOK OF ACTS
As continuation of my reflections about salvation and existentialism, I want to reflect about the preaching of the Apostle in the book of Acts. Some have said that the problem of Adventism and Christianity is the preaching about a Jesus who judges and will give future deliverance. And that for Christianity to become more attractive to the postmodern the message should tell about the cross, Jesus love and present transformation only. But how was the preaching of the Christians in their beginning?
The first discourse is of Peter in Pentecostes. He mention prophecy, Jesus death, resurrection, exaltation, final judgment and finishes with a call to repentance. Specially emphasis is given in the resurrection.
The second preaching discourse is found in Acts 3 also by Peter. He starts with the God of Abraham represented in Jesus, resurrection of the Messiah, prophetic foretelling of Christ, call to repentance and promise of gift of the Holy Spirit. Resurrection is the element repeated in the end of the sermon.
The third discourse is in Acts 4. Again Peter mention rejection of Jesus by Israel leaders. Jesus is the one crucified and resurrected. Only in Jesus there is salvation. Peter will continue in Acts 5 to talk about resurrection, exaltation and Israel rejection. But he mentions also obedience to God rather than man.
Steven brings the next evangelistic sermon. Recounting the history of Israel and how Israel rejects the prophets of God, Stephens discourse is abruptly interrupted. It emphasize God’s judgment upon Israel rejection of the Messiah.
It is mention that Philip and Paul announced Jesus to the people no detail is given more about their preaching in Acts 8 and 9. But in Peter’s sermon to Cornelius’ house again the content is revealed. The gospel is about Jesus who lived godly, died, was resurrected and is Judge of living and dead as foretold by prophecy.
Paul’s sermon in Antioquia mention prophecies about Jesus ministry, Jesus death, and 3 times resurrection. He end with repentance and justification, not achieved by the law of Moses, which brings deliverance from judgment. In Acts 15 and the controversy about circumcision is inferred that to be a Christian involve change of lifestyle and obedience.
In Athens to pagans Paul talks about creation, vanity of idols, repentance and eschatological judgment. The last point of Paul, about future hope of resurrection is the one who brought scandal to Greek lifestyle (Act.17:32). The gospel of Paul involved a change of lifestyle for both Jews and Gentiles, repentance to avoid future judgment, (Atc.20:21) and judgment and resurrection for the righteous dead (Act.23:6;24:15,25).
This gospel message was given to Paul by Jesus Himself (Acts 26:14). Conversion, sanctification, obedience, resurrection from the dead are all indissoluble parts of the Gospel in Acts. And it is demonstrated also in the letters of the Apostles and in the Prophetic book of John.
So to preach only Jesus crucified, His love to bring present positive feelings is not the gospel preached by the Apostles in Acts. Gospel involves repentance by reflecting in Jesus death, conversion from the gift of the Spirit in obedience to God, so people are ready to go through the future judgment. All this because there will be a future eternal recompense to those who believed and are transformed. But to those who life only to the present earth will be judged by Jesus and consumed by His coming.
in response to Rodrigo, i would like to say that i too see major challenges in the way that we organize ourselves under the guise of religion and church. it is really a shame that when we talk about value it is very isolated and in a vacuum most times.The only reason that we should assemble in different spaces should be on the basis of language assuming that all are in agreement on what our faith is.If Christ died to save the world then there must be an intentionality to reach anyone who needs to be reached. Regional conferences segregated churches, upper class elitist, contemporary songs versus hymnals youth days versus deacon and deaconess day. Really i think that our attention is misguided and we are misrepresenting the creator who died for sinners. THAT's everyone. When we get to a place where we seek the lost there will be a revival in our lives and in our churches. Rodrigo, you are on the right track we need to be intentional in eliminating the walls that separate, and head back to the cross. We might be surprised at the faces that will be there in need of the same unbiased savior.
i am responding to a portion of Andrews blog on November 25, 2009 ....Most times Adventists feel it important to persuade convert others on the Sabbath truth before introducing them to Jesus. i completely agree with him in that we often spend so much time trying to win people over to religion and doctrine and criteria to be saved. the people that are barely even able to look themselves in the mirror are driven further underground because they just don't have the fight in them. When are we going to get the point that jesus while he is king of kings and Lord of Lords, He did make a choice to come from heaven to save to the uttermost. Furthermore, why would people want to accept truth that is presented so harshly that it goes down so abrasively like a can of battery acid. I know that people need to understand what we believe and it should be clear as to what they are signing up for when they say that they want to be christians that join this church. However, you don't give a baby meat and then milk when their digestive system is not equipped to digest the richness of the meal. As students of the word, let us treat the broken hearted as a doctor does a sensitive surgery and watch them come to jesus saying what must i do to be saved.
The Doctrine of Salvation's intersection with Spiritual Formation
Lately I've noticed many similarities between our discussions on salvation and the experience of Spiritual Formation. Just as we cannot earn our salvation, we cannot transform ourselves in the process of spiritual formation. Similarly, we are still called to “work out our own salvation with trembling and fear” (Philippians 2:12), as well as called to disciplines in our spirituality. Disciplines like fasting, prayer, solitude, and contemplation of scripture. The premise behind our work in salvation is that none of the things we do can ever earn the grace God freely gives which saves us from sin. Similarly the premise behind Spiritual Formations is that there is nothing we can ever do to transform ourselves into the image of Christ. These are both processes which we are called to go through and work through even though there is no possible way we can work through them alone. They are both in fact the working of God in our lives to save us. Both from the penalty of sin and the effects of sin.
I suppose the reason there is so much similarity between the two is that they are very connected. I believe we are sanctified through our relationship with Christ. This relationship is what constitutes Spiritual formation. Thus, as much as we (as theologians) can argue and contend about what exactly the experience of salvation entails, we all have the opportunity to witness a very visible and real framework in which salvation is daily taking place. We don't have to theorize about it, just live it. This is not to say that theorizing is bad, it is good for us to reflectively study the process of salvation, even when it is ever present with us. However, my realization is concerning the reasoning behind seeking a “bigger model”. We don't need to argue about what salvation entails and what it does not entail. Along with scripture we have experiential evidence through the process of spiritual formation.
There is one caution concerning this though. I do not put our everyday experience on the same tier with scripture. Our experience, although very valuable and even vital for us to draw experiences from, still stand in subjection to the normative word of God. Our faith and the Bible affirms that in God's word, Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. In our experience, although we have the same Holy ghost available, we can be more sure when we compare our experiences to a common, authoritative source. Notwithstanding our sanctification is still inseparably bound up in the experience of Spiritual Formation.
Under this premise, our experience helps us understand some things that we can only understand empirically. This is concerning the transition point between justification and sanctification. The transition point is so immediate, it would almost be fair to say that there is no separation. There is no point at which a person is justified yet not being sanctified. This is because if we truly view sanctification as an experience (as we do spiritual formations) we begin to see that part of the process was God's initiation precluding our response. God initiates and we respond. Once we respond to God, the processes, both of immediate justification and lifelong sanctification begin. Thus like two lines of a triangle begin simultaneously at one point. So the experience of justification and sanctification can be connected at a similarly convergent point. However, as far as images are concerned, I was careful not to say that sanctification begins at this point. I believe our sanctification, being properly viewed as beginning with God's initiation, begins before we even respond to God. Our response is just one point on the continuum of sanctification that happens to be connected with justification.
Follow up on Communication of Salvation
I've been thinking about how to best follow up on my paper. To do so effectively would require more time than I have, however, I did feel burdened to reflectively think on one portion of follow up on my paper. That is particularly, which models of salvation are more appealing to the different stages of moral development. I realized that all models can communicate in some way to people in different stages of their moral development. However, different people will encounter different challenges depending on where they are in their moral development. For example, when it comes to the moral influence model, people in Kohlberg's preconventional stage of development are more likely to view God as unjust if they subscribe solely to the moral influence model. this is because their concept of right and wrong are based on a punishment and reward system. They have not yet comprehended such abstract ideas as social contracts. Thus they will have a harder time accepting the justice in Jesus being punished for what ever reason. They may also come to the erroneous conclusion that Jesus must have done something wrong. Similar challenges also exist with those in a preconventional stage of development in terms of the substitution model. They are more likely to subscribe to the victory model, the ransom model, and the satisfaction model.
People in the conventional stage of moral reasoning, I believe, would encounter challenges in accepting the satisfaction model and the ransom model. They would be more apt to consider that the ransom was payed to the devil. This is because they view morality in terms of right and wrong based on relationships. Although this seems good at face value, deep down it leads them to ask questions about why God could not simply change His law to maintain the relationship. I want to note that none of these questions are "bad" questions. And all of them have come up before in the context of Bible studies and relationships in those seeking to learn the truth. We might however be able to anticipate these challenges depending on which level of moral development our seeking friend is currently operating in. As far as those in post conventional stages of development, they tend to develop abstract concepts of their own on what morality is based on. These concepts of theirs are usually based on life experience especially as they have passed through the other stages. The greatest challenge with them is helping them understand universal reconciliation in its proper framework. We don't believe the Bible teaches that everyone will be saved in the end, however, their abstract reasoning and view of social contracts might lead them to subscribe to this view point.
With the Universe as Witness
I imagine for those people who haven’t been exposed to Christianity and it’s doctrines, the cross must be a peculiar thing. I remember before I knew Christ and anything about Christianity, I heard this common statement of salvation: ‘Jesus died for our sins’. At that time I didn’t grasp the impact of what that meant. Why would someone die for someone’s sins? Why would that be necessary? Later in my journey I came to know the savior. I came to know that God gave up His son that whoever believes would not perish but have everlasting life. In accepting Jesus Christ I was ransomed to God. And boy was I!
Even though my life took a huge turn for the better, I still didn’t grasp the implications of the atonement. What did it mean for me? What did it mean for God? I know that this meant a reconciliation between myself and God. Christ’s tremendous gift to humanity was the giving up of Himself- the righteous one, so that we could be with God forever. This is love. But I have come to learn that it does not just stop there. Surely His death was to ransom and reconcile, but what else?
Christ is righteous, blameless, and pure. He died, but what for exactly? In George W. Reid’s ‘Why Did Jesus Die? How God Saves Us’, he points out the fact that this was not to appease God. The Father isn’t some grim and stern tyrant of the universe to whom Jesus came to achieve His favor. Jesus already had the Father’s favor, and because of the universe’s sin, He experienced the withdrawal of God’s presence only at the cross (Matthew 27). As Reid says, ‘He went to the place we really belong’- that place being utter separation from God.
I really appreciate another notion Reid brings out in that the cross wasn’t a response to God’s demand, it was done at His initiative. This was of course because of His love (Jn 3:16), and because of something else. With the universe as witness, He took our place in order for us to be in heaven. God cannot just usher willful sinners into heaven, his law prohibits that. And for God to uphold His righteousness, His name, a cost for that forgiveness and pardon must be made. This is where Christ comes in. If we were arbitrarily granted admission to heaven, that would mean that God’s law was done away with and all the demands that He made were nullified. But Christ is the only one who could come before the planet and the universe to die in order that God’s love and justice remain intact. “Now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it...” (Romans 3:21). The cross is where heaven and earth, love and justice, God and humanity meet.
-Nathan Hellman
I am reacting to Chapter 6 in Woodrow Whidden’s book “Ellen White on Salvation”. It has to do with Ellen White’s views on our human nature, the level to which we have fallen, thoughts on human ‘depravity’, etc.
I found myself agreeing with most everything that was stated (not surprising, since I was brought up in the SDA church), but have always been fascinated at the range of belief on this topic. The Bible is pretty silent about what exactly happened to our race at the fall, in fact, most of the ‘curses’ of the 2nd half of Genesis three seem to be dealing with physical realities more than theoretical states.
Of course, we do have a few verses that help us out. Isaiah 64:6 states that our righteousness is as filthy rags to God, and Ecclesiastes 7:20 says that no-one has lived a righteous life. I also know there is a place in the New Testament Epistles that say that even our desire to repent comes from God (though I can’t seem to find it at the moment). Because of verses like these, some have come up with a doctrine of total depravity, and thus the entire work of salvation being provided by God. Consequences to this belief are conclusions such as dual predestination or universalism.
But this seems to me to be a bit too far off the deep end. All through the scripture, we do see passages that indicate that our very real choice is involved in deciding whether to do right or wrong. Cain was given the choice to either master his sin or let it dominate him; Israel was given the choice to follow and obey God purely, or prostitute itself to other nations; And I am reminded of all the exhortations of the apostles in their epistles for church members to remain faithful to God and one another: would these exhortations be necessary if there was indeed no free will?
I agree that Ellen White had a strong, positive view of our free will. All of the steps of the process of salvation need to be soaked with the Grace of Christ, but we are able, with God’s help, to make a real difference.
Tied in with this doctrine is the issue of perfection. Perfectionism is something that I have never been comfortable with (this side of glory, anyway). But Whidden makes a remarkable statement on page 44, that I had never considered before. He says that Ellen White “spoke of character perfection (which is carefully defined), but never of nature perfection this side of glorification” (emphasis in the original). I really didn’t know what to make of this. It made me question how our characters are separate from our natures. This took some chewing on for me to come to a conclusion.
I guess I would agree that we all share a similar nature, but it would be far from the truth to say that we all share a similar character. Some are shy, some are rambunctious, some are gentle, some are extroverts, some introverts. So if our characters can become perfected, while our natures will not be, this side of glory… hm.
Of course, paired up with belief in perfectionism doctrine is the famous phrase that those who have achieved character perfection will not be aware of it. Whidden mentions this fact further down the same page. And, while on the one hand, I’m glad that that’s true (there go the claims of those who claim to have reached perfection) seemed kind of counter-intuitive to me. For example, when someone is sinful, it is perfectly normal for them to not be aware of their sin, and to feel like things are just fine. A self-righteous attitude would be impossible without this factor. But on the other hand, someone who has become perfect in their character, yet still feels sinful? What would they have to base it on? Do they not trust enough in God’s forgiveness from beforehand, before they had gotten to this stage? Perhaps they still see their sinful nature (to use Whidden’s/Ellen White’s distinction), and still so desire to be changed on that level.
This section gave me a good amount to think about, and I am glad to have read it. It affirmed several things that I kind of already thought; gave me a ‘reason to believe’ what I already believed, and was
The definition of universalism, according to the Miriam-Webster dictionary, is the “theological doctrine that all human beings will eventually be saved”. While this topic is far from the center of the beliefs of most Christians, it is nonetheless a philosophy that is alive and well today in many circles. Many scholars in many high theological positions affirm this doctrine, and one can see the occasional Unitarian church in many towns and cities across our nation.
In short, this philosophy claims that God will ultimately save everyone, that heaven will be a collective home for all of us, regardless of factors which divide/define us in this lifetime. People from every faith tradition, social class, moral grounding, and attitude toward God, will ultimately be delivered to live in paradise with Him. This doctrine carries with it a fundamental belief that the nature of the sin that divides us today, that causes us to be sinful (some heinously so), and that fosters many belief systems, is essentially a sin of ignorance. Satan is the great deceiver, and has thus misled us to believe that the things we see as being best in life (in our short-sightedness) are actually for the best. Any misunderstanding will be cleared-up when the Lord reveals Himself, and educates us all to the true nature of his existence and goodness. The belief continues to purport that once all have seen God’s majesty and goodness, they will all affirm his Lordship, and assent to be purified, and to live in heaven eternally with him (and each other).
This doctrine does have theological strengths, and verses from scripture which can be cited, seeming to support a universalist viewpoint. Firstly, it asserts that human nature is essentially good. It also affirms positive aspects of God’s character, such as ultimate wisdom, ultimate goodness, ultimate majesty, and complete in grace and forgiveness. Verses that support a viewpoint like this would be Romans 8:38, 39 (nothing can separate us from the Love of God), 2 Peter 3:9 (God does not want anyone to be lost), and 1 John 2:2 (Christ’s death on the cross atoned for the sins of the whole world). In essence this philosophy is very positive, affirming, and non-judgmental in its position. These verses, as well as the philosophies which tie this doctrine together, will be explored more fully.
On the down-side, however, this doctrine is not in line with many other passages in scripture, including many clear statements which God Himself is purported to have said about Himself. Essentially, one cannot hold up the whole scripture as entirely true as is evident from a basic reading. At this place, the universalist would probably claim that overarching principles (for example: “God is Love”) must take a higher place than individual statements that appear to be to the contrary (such as the wicked being thrown into the lake of fire/suffering the second death in the book of Revelation). These individual statements must be read through the principles traced above. If pressed about statements Jesus made about the lost (i.e. Matthew 13:42), I am assuming that the Universalist would fall back on a position that we do not have the original manuscripts, it is possible that the early church / ecumenical counsels changed the scripture to reflect an “in vs. out” model as to salvation.
This being said, the one who holds to high scriptural authority and the universalist are now at an impasse. The one who claims the full scripture can point to the broad number and accuracy of early scriptures that we have, but will probably not “dent the armor” of the philosophy that the universalist has set up. After all, this viewpoint has so many “benefits”, that it is not worth losing it for the sake of what the scripture actually says. I believe that this would, in the end, cause both parties to have a “wait and see” approach to how this all plays out. That is probably the only way this debate will be settled.
It is clear from many portions of scripture that many aspects/symbols/rites of the Old Testament pointed forward to Jesus as a fulfillment of the symbol. This is a basic type/antitype system which exists on several levels. One of the greatest symbols for Seventh-day Adventists is that of the day of atonement, described in detail in chapter 16 of Leviticus. In this festival, which was to occur once per year in Israel, we see instructions for the high priest (Aaron) to perform many duties and acts of ritual purification: A sacrifice is made, the most holy place is entered, and the sins of the people are placed upon a ‘scapegoat’ which is led out in the wilderness to die. In many ways, this is the culmination of the sacrificial system of the Jews. For the whole year, people have been bringing their offerings of sacrifice, in order to purify themselves of their sin. But these sins have been building up in the temple for that entire year. On the day of atonement, the temple is purified of its sin, and the camp of Israel is truly made clean.
We believe that this has strong symbolism, which points to Jesus atoning our sin in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary. From John’s first cry “Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world!”, to the descriptions in the book of Hebrews of Jesus as our High Priest, we see many connections between the two services. In fact, we believe that the prior service had no true effect except to keep in the peoples’ minds the true atonement which takes place in heaven, working out our salvation.
All of Christianity believes in the forgiveness of sin. Verses like 1 John 1:9 talks about how God is willing to forgive if we confess our sins. This is surely good news, and we surely affirm this, but to leave it at simply this level is to oversimplify the matter. If forgiveness were simply a matter of God saying “Oh… that’s okay”, then the very necessity of Jesus’ death on the cross comes into question. All Christians claim that Christ took our sin on the Cross, and all claim that God can forgive us because of his perfect sacrifice. But is that the whole procedure? We affirm that the processes of forgiveness/salvation are mysterious and we don’t know the end from the beginning, but shouldn’t we endeavor to understand the fullness of what the Lord has revealed to us about the process of salvation?
Seventh-day Adventists believe that on October 22, 1844, Christ entered the Most Holy Place to begin the work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary. He is currently presenting his own blood as the purification of the heavenly temple (interestingly, Jesus takes on the role of both the sacrifice, and of the High Priest in this model), purifying our sins so that we can be declared forgiven, pure, and righteous. There are many elements of the Day of Atonement which point to the process that is taking place in the Heavenly Sanctuary today, by which our sins our forgiven. There are also various passages (many in the book of Hebrews) which make the link between the Old Testament high-priest, and Jesus Christ who is our High Priest, interceding for us, and atoning for our sins.
This is a doctrine that is not shared by the general Christian community, but I am convinced that it is a model which, properly understood, brings a new level of understanding, conviction, and love for God in terms of the process and work of forgiveness/salvation. It helps me appreciate God more, Jesus’ sacrifice more, and helps me to understand the true, staining, nature of sin. It cannot simply be waved away by God’s whim. It is a process, a transaction, that is crucial for forgiveness, and therefore, for our salvation. As God mentioned in Genesis 3, we can’t have sinners living immortally! Harmony in the universe would never be resolved without this process.
Throughout this semester, we have been, among other things, reading through the book of Romans on our own. Romans is full of dense theology, rich illustrations, overarching principles, and practical instruction. In thinking more deeply about Romans, I have realized that even within the one book, it seems to espouse many theologies, which, at first sight, would be mutually exclusive to each other. Based on this, I have constructed an imaginary conversation I had with Paul, with him answering based on passages of Romans.
“Hey Paul, what’s your book about?” “Chapter 1: sinfulness is evil, and destruction will come from it.” “Okay, I’ll be good then” “Nope! Chapter 2: being good won’t help either.” “So, I don’t have to be good?” “Of course you do! 3:31, 6:1,15”. “Okay… but it won’t really help me?” “Nope. You’re wretched anyway. 3:9-18.” “Oh, so there’s no hope?” “Of course there is! Only God can save you. 3:21-22. He did it for all humanity, who was against him 5:6-10” “Okay. But what about those who are still against Him?” “Oh, they’re bound for destruction. Remember chapter 1? And in fact God designed it to be that way Ch. 9:1-29.” “Oh, so Israel will be punished for being bad?” “No, for being good, but in the wrong way. 9:31,32”. “Oh, so they will die?” “No, they will be saved. 11:25,26”. “Oh. I’m starting to get a headache. But I am appreciative of God for doing all this. What should I do about it?” “Act righteously! Ch. 12” “Okay, will I be able to do it?” “Not really. 7:14-25.” “Hm. So does it matter when I sin?” “Yes… And no… And yes.” “What about those who choose to act righteously in a different way than I do?” “Don’t worry about it. Ch. 14A” So can I do it like them, since it’s easier? “No. For you it’s a sin. 14:14,23.” “So he gets to do it, but I don’t?” “Yes, but don’t think of it that way. It can make you lose your thankfulness. Just try to get along. 14:17-19, 15:7” “Alright, thanks. I’ll try to do that.”
… though all this, I think I can begin to see why Festus shouted out what he did in Acts 26:24. And also why Peter said what he did about him in 2 Peter 3:16. But overall, if you take all these things, and hold them in the proper tension, that I believe Paul wanted his readers to, it all holds together rather well. If I could summarize Paul’s Thesis, I think it would be:
“God has saved you from certain destruction (but only if you believe he has). Be thankful for it, and act righteously in response to it. But don’t look down on any others who aren’t where you are, or you may lose it. You never even deserved to have it anyway, so don’t get cocky. Your only response should be thankfulness, acted out in goodness to others. But resting on anything else gets you nowhere. Not even the goodness. Especially not the goodness. Now, go with God. Yes, you’ll stumble, but don’t get tripped up about it. But don’t not get tripped up about it! If you start stumbling because of the grace that you know is there, you already lost it.”
This has been pretty fun. I probably shouldn’t have so much fun on a class assignment. The whole thing makes me thankful. I really see the beauty in it. And Paul’s illustrations, which I didn’t really even get to touch here, are really masterful. I love the grafting one in chapter 11b.
Salvation is a mystery. And Paul really does an exercise here trying to work a lot of it out. You can tell he has so many things going on in his mind: he knows he’s writing to a mixed audience, he knows that certain questions will come up based on what he’s saying, and he tries to anticipate it and respond to it: he knows that if people follow his last paragraph too strictly, they’ll fall off one side of the trail, so he counters it with the next paragraph, and then again tries to come back to the middle… oh, it’s fascinating, and it’s wonderful. And it’s engaging. Paul just feels alive to me in Romans. Not dead for 1900+ years. Those who think religion is boring don’t know what they’re talking about. I feel sorry for them, really. Maybe like Paul in 9:2!
Blog #5
From Ellen White on Salvation, Ch. 12: Justification After Minneapolis – From Late 1888 to 1892
As I read this chapter and reflected on it, I came to realize that, in some way, the reference to “works” makes me connect this aspect of salvation with nuances of moral influence.
For example, the first subtitle, “Faith and works never separated” suggests in itself that works are an extension/result of faith; we cannot accomplish good works through our own powers, but as we exercise faith, they will follow naturally. This is in line with Ellen White’s frequently used expression “salvation from sin, not in sin”, which also implicitly speaks of moral influence.
On page 105 of this book, she is quoted as follows: “We have nothing in ourselves of which to boast. Our only ground of hope is in the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and in that wrought by His Spirit working in and through us.” Clearly she points to the both penal substitution (“the righteousness of Christ imputed to us”), and moral influence (“His Spirit working in and through us”).
Also, “what God does in believers can, based on a clear experience of Christ’s imputed righteousness, produce the same spirit and do the same good works – works of righteousness, obedience.” Again, the two models of salvation are present in this one clear statement. So it almost seems to me at this moment that the relation between faith and works mirrors the relation between penal substitution and moral influence, where, in each case, both aspects are critical for our salvation, and show the need of collaboration between divinity and humanity (God and men) for this purpose.
In light of this, here is one last statement of Ellen White: “justified by His grace, good works will follow as the blossoms and fruit of faith.”
Blog #6
From Ellen White on Salvation, Ch. 14: Perfection Before 1888
The concept of obedience has been in my mind for a few weeks now, with a special focus on the aspect of its eternal necessity.
Woodrow Whidden says: “Christ’s example became the key exhibit that she [Ellen White] used to combat the challenge of her opponents that it is impossible for sinners to obey God’s law perfectly. She saw this as one of Satan’s great lies, and she clearly stated that Christ’s sinless life is the answer to Satan’s deceptive lie that perfect obedience is impossible.”
Of course, Satan’s constant attack was on the law, because from the beginning of sin he claimed the necessity to change God’s law. His constant desire was to prove to the universe that he was right in his initial claims, and, as a consequence, to incite to more rebellion across the cosmic realm of God. But Jesus proved that obedience was possible; and it is also possible to us, through the moral influence that God is constantly exercising upon us.
What I realized lately though, was this critical aspect of obedience: obedience was always necessary, and will always be necessary. We are used to think of it most often in the context of our planet, and of sin. I, at least, until recently, saw obedience mostly in the context of salvation.
But as I thought more of obedience, and placed it in a larger context, I’ve come to understand that obedience is more than a part of the plan of salvation. Obedience was necessary before sin, (in fact, its lack WAS sin), and will be necessary after Jesus’ second coming, after glorification.
The reason why this was important to me was that, as I understood this, obedience does not seem to me a burden anymore, as it used to at times, but I see how this is the very foundation of our relationship with God, and will be forever and ever. Obedience is no more a “requirement” unto salvation, but it is a delight that we will cherish for eternity.
After glorification, obedience will probably come more naturally, as now there is enmity both between God and us, as well as Satan and us. However, glorification will not turn us into robots. We will still have free will to obey or not, just like Lucifer had. And my point is that, salvation from sin, which will take us to our original sinless state, does not implicitly mean that obedience will be inherent. It will still be a choice, just as Lucifer had the same free will and choice when he was sinless.
Understanding this has made me value more obedience, and cherish it as a beautiful part of my relationship with God, that is to continue in eternity.
ECOMENICAL INTERPRETATION OF ROMANS 8
The text of Romans 8 was for me very relevant. I believed that God knew everything before, that we had freedom, because the Bible teaches that, but the way was taught in class made it more clear for me. I now understand more how the foreknowledge of God works for the good of those who are called. In the past I really did not struggled much with this passage, and maybe this is why I did not stop to think all the implications of foreknowledge related to the plan of salvation.
But reading Romans 8 I recall my favorite Psalm. The relation of Psalm 139 and Rom.8 is evident for me. The Psalm starts with God searching the inner man (Rom.8:27). Both passages talk about God knowing before it happen (Psalm 139:4; Rom.8:29), God protecting His elect, God’s infinite action unfathomable, the inability of man to hide from God (Psl.139:7-12; Rom.8:35,38,39), and other points. The attributes of God in creation and salvation makes man wonder how great God is. And the conclusion of both is nothing compares to loving actions of God.
David understand that the foreknowledge of God is a security against evil. Because “all things work together for good to Him that love the Lord”. And no matter depth, hell, heaven angels, the Love action of God always works in our behalf. This is the same conclusion that Paul reaches.
Another element that both passages show is the part of freedom. There is only two ways of life. The evil and the good, or life or death. David named the way of God the “wicked way” or “way of pain/grief” (v.24). Paul describe it as the way of the flesh (v.4,5,13). The other way for David is the “everlasting way” and for Paul is the way of the Spirit (v.4,5,9,13,14). Both David and Paul desire this way (Ps.139:24;Rom.7:24-8:1) because the wicked will be destroyed (Psal.139:19-22;Rom.8:13). This is important because they exercise will desiring to be saved. Freedom not only the mean by the goal of salvation (Rom.8:2 see contrast with Rom.7).
In this discussion the person of the Spirit is the central in this process of salvation. The knowledge of God about man is the way in which God saves justly all those who are call and chosen by God (Ps.139:16; Rom.8:29). And this is done by the Spirit in both passages (Ps. 139:7; Rom.8:15,23,26,27).
In our days the Spirit is very evident in this process of salvation in the charismatic and ecumenical movement (see KÄRKKÄINEN, Veli-Matti Pneumatology – the Holy Spirit in ecumenical, international, and contextual prospective). And what is evident in the historical perspective that the author traces is the relation between Holy Spirit, creation and salvation. In both passages creation is the focus of the Spirit search and wonder or expectation of David and Paul (Ps.139:13-18;Rom.8:19-22).
The place of the Holy Spirit in the ecumenical movement of salvation is emphasized by Kärkkäinen as he traces the main theologians who works this Spiritual ecumenical movement. Jürgen Moltmann is one example that see salvation, or the contact of man with the divine, intermediated by the Spirit. “Moltmann’s basic thesis is that wherever there is passion for the life there the Spirit of God is operating: life over against death, liberation over against oppression” (p.126).
And in this liberation or freedom ecumenical movement, ecological theology plays a very important part. Even though this sees to look like Romans 8, this is an postmodern interpretation that sees creation as the only environment for the correct contact between the Spirit and man. Actually, from Augustinian and Hegelian roots, Spirit is self-consciousness in creation. Religion is God in man and man knowing God in creation relationship.
This ECOmenical movement is maybe going on right now as some news in the web describes the UN meeting in Copenhagen about the weather as the place where the future of the world will be decided. A salvation language is adopted by the secular world backed up by the ecumenical movement of Catholics and Charismatic Protestants. And one of the positions that have been talked in the media is the enforcement of state laws that obligate people to respect nature. Freedom is abolish in the name of the care of nature.
This reminds me Kellogg and the heresy of pantheism. No wonder that Ellen G. White mention that in the end times the omega apostasy would make the elect deceived and not distinguishing the salvation process adequately. The heresy makes people without discernment or in other words, in bondage to sin. This apostasy could rightly be the panetheism in ECOmenical movement, where people see the divine in nature and in man. No far from the classical model of Biblical interpretation of the timeless soul inside us.
What Romans 8 warns us, is that the glorious liberty of nature is in the future coming of Jesus. And not here on earth. After the calling is justification, but the glorification culminates the process with the appearance of Jesus in the air. No glorification of nature here on earth through Ecological movements. but the “glorious liberty of the children of God…[and] the redemption of our body”. This is our future hope. Hope that is brought to the present era making the kingdom of the Spirit earthly.
Meanwhile Paul and David warns that those who are called by God walk not after the flesh (creation) but after the Spirit. And the fruits of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance. Not the pseudo-care of nature while many people suffer from hunger, war, sickness and those who talk about ECOmenism are doing nothing.
The most important lesson I learned from this process of salvation is that God called me to be conform the image of the Son, Jesus Christ. His life was one of humbleness and service, of love and self-denial. The whole goal of His was the benefit of others. I should thrive to be like Him, groaning with the Spirit to impart to me those fruits of character building till I see Him with mine own eyes.
The Complex Nature of the Incarnate God.
In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul speaks of the Gospel as being a mysterious thing. While taking this class we have spoken of looking at a greater model regarding salvation, which also is deemed the everlasting Gospel. The thread which runs through the entirety of the doctrine of salvation in Jesus Christ. Without Him we would have no model to begin with, let alone a large one. As we examine the Savior, we are struck by another mystery– the incarnate God as being fully human, and fully divine.
Throughout the centuries subsequent to Christ’s birth, death, and resurrection, this question of His nature has been one that humankind has wrestled with, and has also produced an adequate amount of speculations and heresies. Some groups have denied his divinity, and painted His humanity as being an illusion. Others have emphasized His humanity to the point of claiming He is not part of the trinity.
In our class we have wrestled through this a little bit, and were referred to an important text in Colossians 2:9-10– “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.” The statement by Paul is quite clear about His divinity for sure. But if Jesus was fully divine and nothing else, how could anything that He did here on Earth to overcome be done by us? And how can His perfection as a human really atone for our sins as taking the place for us? The questions and speculations increase if the human element is misplaced.
If he was fully human alone, then how could he be a perfect sacrifice if fully tainted by sin? In Ellen White on Salvation, Woodrow Whidden points out Ellen White’s position and sums it up by saying ‘He was affected by sin but not infected with it’. He did not participate in sin, but was acquainted by it’s temptations and lures. Our lecture referred to the SDA commentary, and it was said in paraphrase that Christ did not exchange his divinity for humanity, but he veiled his divinity with humanity. He covered his divinity with the garb of humanity. He was untainted by corruption, yet surrounded by it. And the mystery does not lessen by this fact!
In John 5 Jesus speaks of doing nothing of His own, but doing everything in seeking the Father. Though Christ was human, His trust in His Father, and in the goodness of His word helped Him to overcome the wiles and temptations of the Devil. This gives hope to the weak human. That Jesus overcame the world through submission rather than dominion shows that our strength lies ‘not by might, nor by power, but by the Spirit of God (Zech 4:6). To say that Christ was free of temptation would deny that He needed the Lord’s prayer, or that he needed to trust in the Father. Yet Christ was tempted to use his divinity for selfish gain. Just as we are tempted to aspire to powerful positions, or to operate selfishly rather than lovingly.
In studying Christology– namely the nature of Christ, we find another opportunity to abandon the either/or mentality in place of the both/and mentality. In studying this mystery, we can apply it to our lives by aspiring to live self-denying lives and partake of the divine nature. This means seeking to allow God to dwell in our hearts and to work through us as Christ demonstrated.
One aspect of salvation that we do not speak of often is our glorification. We tend to focus on Christ’s death and resurrection. We focus on what god has done for us and what we must do as our part in the process of Salvation. But rarely have I heard of conversations about the glorification that we have and that we will receive when we get to our home made new.
Romans 8 says” 29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.” Glorification is an important part of our salvation process, and when we do mention it is mostly in regards to what we will receive when Christ returns. But in this text Paul is saying that we do receive to some extent glorification now.
John 17:22-23 says “The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.” when we accept Christ as our savior he gives us glory. The catch is that the glory is not something for us or a selfish type of glory. But rather it is a glory that comes from God to us as we unite in Him. It is impossible to attain this glory on our own or without Christ.
There is also implication that as we are in unity together we will receive this glory. And when we as a people achieve this, others will see the origin of the glory, God Himself, and not us. There is no such thing a lone ranger Christian, we need each other as we long for the day when we will go home together and receive together Gods full Glorification.
The Book of Romans through the lens of “But Now”
Through out the book of Romans, Paul uses “but now” six times. “But now” serves as a transition or an indication that Paul is switching gears. We shall look at only 4 of these “but now.”
1. As Ángel Manuel Rodríguez points out in “Justification in Romans 3:21-24,” Paul employs “but now” to shift from a previous exposition to a newer and better way of salvation. Prior to 3:21, Paul’s discussion heavily centered on the condemnation of both Jews and Gentiles under the law, “but now,” those who believe are no longer under such condemnation, but are freely justified by the righteousness of God (vv. 24, cf. 1:16-17).
2. Chapter 6 of the Romans, Paul discusses our bondage to sin: “Shall we continue in sin” vv. 1; “the body of sin” vv. 6; “we should not serve sin” vv. 6; “let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body” vv. 12; “yield not your members…unto sin” vv. 13; “sin to have not dominion over us” vv. 14; “shall we continue to sin” vv. 15; “[we] were servants of sin” vv. 17, 20 ; “made free from sin” vv. 18; “servants to uncleanness” vv. 19. BUT NOW, in Christ we are “made free from sin, become servants to God” vv. 22.
3. In Chapter 7, Paul employs the anology of a married woman. For her to remarry, her husband must die or divorce her. Why? Legally, she is bound to the man of her marriage. BUT NOW that the man is dead, she is free to marry! “BUT NOW that we are delivered from the law…we should serve in the newness of spirit” vv. 6
4. In chapter 16, the mystery of the Gospel that “was kept in secret since the world begun” is BUT NOW made known through Christ – the word incarnate – and the Scriptures (OT).
In conclusion, BUT NOW in the book of Romans serves as another window to look into this great treatise on Salvation.
Terminology, Semantics, and Meaning
After reading most of Ángel Manuel Rodríguez’s articles off BRIs website, many of the confusions we have in understanding salvation often center on exact meaning of words. This can be seen in how Dr. Rodriguez deals with 1 Tim. 4:10. Clearly, there was an inherent contradiction in the text. However, upon further research, it was proven that actually the word carries more meanings than originally anticipated!
What shall we to make of this? This is a poignant reminder that as Bible students we need:
1. To avoid rushing to conclusion at the precise meaning of the text
2. Be mindful of multiple meanings of the words and their usages
3. To avoid restricting the text to one interpretation
4. To understand a particular text in light of immediate context and broader context, i.e., entire Bible.
Post a Comment