SDA Sabbath School Lesson 11--4th Quarter 2016--Out of the Whirlwind

[colporteur]

We must not equate inheriting a fallen nature with transgressing God's law.

I was not, cp. I was merely pointing out that when one separates from God, he has no power to do anything but sin.

We do believe in original sin.

I thought original sin was a Roman Catholic teaching having to do with Mary being holy so Jesus could be holy. What has that to do with the fallen nature of man? The Bible teaches we come into the world separated from God with a fallen nature incapable of doing any good thing until converted. Then, we must remain partakers of God's divine nature in order to keep from sinning. It is Christ that has power to not sin, not man. We must be born of His Spirit or we will sin.

Original sin has nothing to do with Mary or Jesus. It is the belief that we are born guilty of Adam's sin. Thus the view is we are guilty of Adam's original sin. There is a radical difference between suffering the consequences of Adam's sin and being guilty of eating the forbidden fruit. No person in their right mind would say that I am guilty for the sin of my great, great grandfather that I never met.

You are confusing original sin with the immaculate conception, the belief that Mary was conceived through immaculate conception and therefore sinless.

[colporteur]

It never ceases to amaze me how some of our people take such a clear Inspired statement from the SOP and add a "but to it. The prophet said that the ONLY Biblical definition for sin is "the transgression of the law". How can one then say, it is ONE of the definitions. The prophet did not say that sin being the transgression of the law is one of the definitions of sin. I agree that transgressing the law begins in the heart but not in the genes.  Some even go so far as to believe that a baby in the womb after being one day old, not even able to conceive a thought, is guilty of sin because of his genes and because of Adam's sin.

A question for you both. Will the 144,000 still have fallen natures to content with even though they will not be sinning ?

[Ulicia]

I believe it's obvious that Elihu is not a Patriarch in this story. Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar are, otherwise the Lord would not be asking them to make sacrifice for themselves. And if Elihu was truly the person Elihu thought himself to be, then the Lord would have used Elihu as the intercessor and exalted him to be a Patriarch. As it is, God but barely acknowledged his existence by saying 38:2 Who is this (Elihu) that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge.

You are probably correct that elihu was not a Patriarch.
He was a young man, who deferred first speech to the elders.
The Patriarch's were the Priests over their families or tribe prior to the institution of the Levitical system .
It was the priest's duty to perform the sacrifices and intercede for the people.
Job is seen taking the role of the priesthood several times in the book.
He offered sacrifice for his children and prayed for forgiveness incase they had sinned.
He offered sacrifice for his three friends and interceded for them as well.   
Job held a priesthood position.

Elihu was not a patriarch or priest, thus of course he would not be asked to perform sacrifices or intercede.
However, there are other positions of work for God's spokespeople.

I believe Elihu was a prophet of God -- sent with a message from God.
A prophet does not need to be a patriarch, or even be a man.  Even women were chosen to be prophets.

[Ulicia]

It never ceases to amaze me how some of our people take such a clear Inspired statement from the SOP and add a "but to it. The prophet said that the ONLY Biblical definition for sin is "the transgression of the law". How can one then say, it is ONE of the definitions. The prophet did not say that sin being the transgression of the law is one of the definitions of sin. I agree that transgressing the law begins in the heart but not in the genes.  Some even go so far as to believe that a baby in the womb after being one day old, not even able to conceive a thought, is guilty of sin because of his genes and because of Adam's sin.

A question for you both. Will the 144,000 still have fallen natures to content with even though they will not be sinning ?

Read those quotes in context.   EGW is writing on evidence to know is something is truth or not -- if the message leads to the disregard of God's law, there is no truth in it, for the transgression of the law is sin.  This is the EVIDENCE we can use to determine truth from error.   We cannot judge the heart, but we can judge outright disregard for God's law.

Yes, the natural man transgresses God's law because it is in his genes,  it is in the flesh.  The only way a person can escape the bondage of the flesh is through the power of the Holy Spirit (see Romans 7 and 8 )   And yes, all, even those still in womb would have no hope of eternal life were it not for Christ's great sacrifice opening the door of death and offering the human race a second chance to believe in Him and have life eternal.

A person can fool others and himself that he is righteous because he is not actually doing acts of disobeying God's law.  But EGW also confirms:
"Faith is essential in order to the keeping of the law of God; for “without faith it is impossible to please him.” And “whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” [Hebrews 11:6; Romans 14:23.]  {GC88 435.2}

Thus the most important aspect we, (not in evaluating others but in seeking God as our Redeemer) need to place as top priority is our relationship with God -- the fruit of which leads to lawkeeping, not the other way around  --

The 144,000 will be so in love with their Redeemer, that they would rather die than bring dishonor to His name. 
That will be their motive and highest desire.

[Ulicia]

By beholding we become changed.

Do you CP believe that those in Christ are a "new creation"?

[colporteur]

By beholding we become changed.

Do you CP believe that those in Christ are a "new creation"?

Yes, but not in every respect. They still have fallen flesh. Now a question for you. Do you believe that the 144,000 who do not sin will still have a fallen nature that seeks to rise up ?

 

[colporteur]

To have fallen flesh does not equate with sinning. The urge to overeat is not a sin. It is the overeating that is a sin.

[Ulicia]

By beholding we become changed.

Do you CP believe that those in Christ are a "new creation"?

Yes, but not in every respect. They still have fallen flesh. Now a question for you. Do you believe that the 144,000 who do not sin will still have a fallen nature that seeks to rise up ?

So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! 2 Corinthians 5:17, NRSV.

As we come to Christ and accept His justification -- full forgiveness, and acceptance as sons and daughters of God, Christ implants the seeds of His kingdom within us.   These grow as we walk with Christ in faith.   Godly characteristics crowd out sinful characteristics, and there is a miraculous change!   
True -- the carnal nature does not want to die, and will try to push out the godly characteristics, the battle wages, and the outcome is entirely dependent on whether we walk with Christ daily, or depend upon our own strength and desires.

As long as the 144.000 stay focused on the Lamb and follow Him where ever He leads, the "fallen nature" will not have any power over them.

One of the greatest hindrances to becoming a "new creature" is focusing on self. 

The proud heart strives to earn salvation; but both our title to heaven and our fitness for it are found in the righteousness of Christ. The Lord can do nothing toward the recovery of man until, convinced of his own weakness, and stripped of all self-sufficiency, he yields himself to the control of God. Then he can receive the gift that God is waiting to bestow. From the soul that feels his need, nothing is withheld. He has unrestricted access to Him in whom all fullness dwells.  {FLB 136.5} 
     The only reason why we may not have remission of sins that are past is that we are not willing to humble our proud hearts and comply with the conditions.  {FLB 136.6}

Pride and self-love resist the Spirit of God; every natural inclination of the soul opposes the change from self-importance and pride to the meekness and lowliness of Christ. But if we would travel in the pathway to eternal life, we must not listen to the whispering of self. In humility and contrition we must beseech our heavenly Father, "Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me." Psalm 51:10. As we receive divine light, and cooperate with the heavenly intelligences, we are "born again," freed from the defilement of sin by the power of Christ.  {FLB 137.4}
     The mighty power of the Holy Spirit works an entire transformation in the character of the human agent, making him a new creature in Christ Jesus.  {FLB 137.5} 
     

[Richard Myers]

cp, I know you do not countenance sin. That is good. Do you believe Jesus when He said
"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.  Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.  John 3:3,5-7.

Was Jesus speaking of all who have a fallen nature, or just Nicodemus? What was He trying to teach us?

[Wally]

We do believe in original sin.

I thought original sin was a Roman Catholic teaching having to do with Mary being holy so Jesus could be holy.

It is.  I don't think cp meant it that way.  Original sin makes character perfection impossible.  That's why we say that man is born with a sinful nature, but is not guilty until he chooses to sin.  Otherwise we'd have to baptize babies like the RCC does.

[colporteur]

We do believe in original sin.

I thought original sin was a Roman Catholic teaching having to do with Mary being holy so Jesus could be holy.

It is.  I don't think cp meant it that way.  Original sin makes character perfection impossible.  That's why we say that man is born with a sinful nature, but is not guilty until he chooses to sin.  Otherwise we'd have to baptize babies like the RCC does.

Yes, It is Roman Catholic however when you hone in on the subject  the issue has to do with Adam and us. The part about Jesus and Mary is simply how they deal with the supposed original sin problem. One error necessitates the creating of another. The RCC believes that Adam passed the guilt down to us as though we ate of the forbidden fruit. That we are guilty of something in which we had not a thing to do with. People are guilty of their own wrong doing not that of another's wrong doing. If a baby's father is a drug dealer and the family is banished from the country because of it, no one thinks the baby is guilty of dealing drugs. The baby suffers from the sin of the father but he is not guilty. It is important not to confuse the difference.  We must be born again. We must be born again because we sin, transgressed the law, either mentally and or mentally and physically. Is a week old baby born again ? Jesus needs to save Him in that should the baby live on he will choose to sin, ignorantly and then intentionally. Should the baby die he needs immortal uncorrupted flesh to live in heaven. In my mind this boils down to what constitutes guilt and what constitutes sin. Unless I'm mistaken the 144,000 will still have to subdue the fallen nature even thought they do not sin and do not have a mediator when probation closes. Do we therefore believe that they are guilty of present sin because they still have fallen flesh and the fallen nature, howbeit under subjection to the higher nature ?

[colporteur]

By beholding we become changed.

Do you CP believe that those in Christ are a "new creation"?

Yes, but not in every respect. They still have fallen flesh. Now a question for you. Do you believe that the 144,000 who do not sin will still have a fallen nature that seeks to rise up ?

So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! 2 Corinthians 5:17, NRSV.

As we come to Christ and accept His justification -- full forgiveness, and acceptance as sons and daughters of God, Christ implants the seeds of His kingdom within us.   These grow as we walk with Christ in faith.   Godly characteristics crowd out sinful characteristics, and there is a miraculous change!   
True -- the carnal nature does not want to die, and will try to push out the godly characteristics, the battle wages, and the outcome is entirely dependent on whether we walk with Christ daily, or depend upon our own strength and desires.

As long as the 144.000 stay focused on the Lamb and follow Him where ever He leads, the "fallen nature" will not have any power over them.

One of the greatest hindrances to becoming a "new creature" is focusing on self. 

The proud heart strives to earn salvation; but both our title to heaven and our fitness for it are found in the righteousness of Christ. The Lord can do nothing toward the recovery of man until, convinced of his own weakness, and stripped of all self-sufficiency, he yields himself to the control of God. Then he can receive the gift that God is waiting to bestow. From the soul that feels his need, nothing is withheld. He has unrestricted access to Him in whom all fullness dwells.  {FLB 136.5} 
     The only reason why we may not have remission of sins that are past is that we are not willing to humble our proud hearts and comply with the conditions.  {FLB 136.6}

Pride and self-love resist the Spirit of God; every natural inclination of the soul opposes the change from self-importance and pride to the meekness and lowliness of Christ. But if we would travel in the pathway to eternal life, we must not listen to the whispering of self. In humility and contrition we must beseech our heavenly Father, "Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me." Psalm 51:10. As we receive divine light, and cooperate with the heavenly intelligences, we are "born again," freed from the defilement of sin by the power of Christ.  {FLB 137.4}
     The mighty power of the Holy Spirit works an entire transformation in the character of the human agent, making him a new creature in Christ Jesus.  {FLB 137.5} 
     

You talked about context earlier. Whatmi9s then context of "Everything?"   Has the fallen nature been entirely removed from our being ? Do we have a new body when we are born again ? Do we have unfallen, immortal flesh ?  You know that we do not. We have the promise but it is not fulfilled until Jesus comes. This is talking about "everything" in regard to our characters and the choices that lead to that kind of character.

 You agree that the 144,000 still have fallen natures but that nature has no power over them as they do not choose to entertain the thoughts and actions of the fallen nature. ( By God's grace and power) That means that merely having the fallen nature does not constitute "sin."  A baby a day after conception has not chosen to entertain and act up evil thoughts.

If we are not comparing our life with that of the life of Jesus then we will automatically compare our life to that of others. We must evaluate our lives in light of the law of God. If you consider that focusing on self then there must be a degree of focus there. WE are to take close interspection of our lives or else sin will have dominion and we will not even know it.

[Richard Myers]

We do believe in original sin.

I thought original sin was a Roman Catholic teaching having to do with Mary being holy so Jesus could be holy.

It is.  I don't think cp meant it that way.  Original sin makes character perfection impossible.  That's why we say that man is born with a sinful nature, but is not guilty until he chooses to sin.  Otherwise we'd have to baptize babies like the RCC does.

Yes, It is Roman Catholic however when you hone in on the subject  the issue has to do with Adam and us.

Cp, let's hone in on the subject, in the context of Job's sin, and why he sinned.  The term "original sin" has been brought into God's church where it does not belong. It is a false teaching in the Roman Church. There is no such terminology in Scripture or in the Bible. As we study the matter of the fallen nature, let's stick to what we know from the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. It will make communications much easier.

What is Jesus teaching in John chapter three? "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." Does it have anything to do with man's fallen nature? Does any human escape what Jesus is teaching, the need to be born again of the Spirit? 

Can one who is born again sin? Job sinned, was he born again of the Spirit?

[ejclark]

God did give his three friends an opportunity to repent.

Really...where are the verses that say that? No one repented of anything until God spoke to Job.

You say that Elihu rebuked Job's three friends and they did not repent. He also rebuked Job, and he didn't repent either. It wasn't until God spoke to Job did Job repent. And when you look at his confession it's a confession of being ignorant, not a confession of saying anything wrong.

As Job was the patriarch of his family, the only way God would accept Job's confession and repentance for sin would be for Job to do so over the head of a sacrificial animal, as He required of Job's friends. To let Job confess and repent only through prayer and then to make his friends confess and repent through sacrifice is inconsistent. If Job was able to confess and repent purely through prayer, then God would be accepting of Job's righteousness as covering his own sins because the Lamb which taketh away the sins of the world had not yet been slain. If Job truly sinned God can't let him off the hook purely because he prayed, confessed and repented. Praise the Lord we can today, but not back then.

You say that the Lord exposed Job's sin of self righteousness in chapter 40:8
"Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?"

Where in the preceding verses did Job do that?

In Job 19:25 Job confesses his salvation in his redeemer.
In Job 23:3-10 Job confesses that he knows his trial is for his purification, yet he is looking for the Lord to give him more detailed answers to his questions.

When you read 40:8-14 in its context you see that God is asking Job "Will you disannul my judgment? will you condemn Me and make yourself righteous? Do you have an arm like I have, or a voice that thunders as I have? Is your clothing(clothing in the Bible represents character) as majestic and excellent with glory and beauty as Mine? Can you proclaim your rage of your wrath against the proud and abase him and bring him low and put the wicked in their place? Verse 14 If you can do these things then I will confess unto thee that your own righteousness and strength can save thee."

The Lord is asking Job, "When I answer your questions and show you why you are suffering, will you truly listen to Me and believe Me? Or will you trust in your own judgment and understanding?"
And Job's response in chap. 42:5 I hear You, Lord, and I understand and believe You.

[JimB]

When Elihu said God does not afflict, in context I take that to mean God does not afflict the innocent. Chastising does not punish the innocent.     What are your thoughts, Jim?

Richard, what you say makes sense to me for the most part. No need to punish someone who hasn't done anything wrong. I get that. But obviously Job still had a couple of rough spots to work out. This is why God allowed satan to harass Job. I'm thinking out loud now so don't hold me too exact to my words but this sounds similar to the time of Jacob's Trouble that the 144,000 go through. The difference being that they don't blame God.  For me personally I'd rather have God "harass" me where I still need some polishing rather than satan, as God is fair where satan is anything but just and fair.

God's ways are above my ways and His thoughts above my thoughts. It's just in my tiny human brain there is a fine line between directly punishing and allowing you to be punished by someone or something else. It seems to border on the principle of sin punishing sin.

[Ulicia]

You talked about context earlier. Whatmi9s then context of "Everything?"   Has the fallen nature been entirely removed from our being ? Do we have a new body when we are born again ? Do we have unfallen, immortal flesh ?  You know that we do not. We have the promise but it is not fulfilled until Jesus comes. This is talking about "everything" in regard to our characters and the choices that lead to that kind of character.

 You agree that the 144,000 still have fallen natures but that nature has no power over them as they do not choose to entertain the thoughts and actions of the fallen nature. ( By God's grace and power) That means that merely having the fallen nature does not constitute "sin."  A baby a day after conception has not chosen to entertain and act up evil thoughts.

If we are not comparing our life with that of the life of Jesus then we will automatically compare our life to that of others. We must evaluate our lives in light of the law of God. If you consider that focusing on self then there must be a degree of focus there. WE are to take close interspection of our lives or else sin will have dominion and we will not even know it.

The context of the "everything"
1 Cor.5:17-18   Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.  And all things are of God, who has reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ. 

This is speaking of being born again in Christ.  In Romans six, Paul explains that baptism is focused upon Christ and His death upon the cross --" baptized into Jesus Christ  baptized into his death." (romans 6:4)  Jesus died bearing our sins.  "He was made sin for us,  who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.  (2 Cor 5:21)   "We are buried with him by baptism into death (Romans 6:5)".   Therefore we are to count ourselves dead to sin. Romans 6:11. 

Christ rose from the dead. Likewise we rise to newness of life.
"As Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." Romans 6:4

We don't dwell nearly enough on Justification by faith.   Yet, without justification by faith preceding the "walk of sanctification" it's all vanity.

To be born again is a radical change -- a change of citizenship, and family name.   We become citizens of the New Jerusalem, sons and daughters of the heavenly king. Jesus has reconciled us back to God -- we are accepted of God and can boldly come before His throne with our praise and supplications.
It's not something we have done, but something God has done for us!   Yet, we need to believe!

To be born again in Christ, is to be spiritually alive, accepted by God.   Forgiven, clothed with Christ's righteousness.
Now what?
Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 
 6:2   God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? 

If we really believe this, we will be praising God for His wonderful gift of salvation.
This understanding wells up the fountains love for God, why would we want to soil ourselves again and grieve our Redeemer?

We must be born again in Christ.  Justified by His grace, A beloved son or daughter of the Creator of the universe!


Our major battle after this is to  keep that connection with Christ vibrant and continuous.
Interspection, is not the best thing to do,. a lot of spiritualistic problems can arise.
However, when  prompted by the Holy Spirit (which He does regularly-- often daily) we need to listen -- he convicts of sin and righteousness.


We must be born again-- Justified by what God did, Reconciled by what Christ did.
As God's sons and daughters, we are admonished to tell the world.

 


   

[colporteur]

UT;

My point was that all things becoming new does not mean that the fallen nature is gone but rather than it is under subjection. If having a fallen nature in an of itself, even when it is under subjection equates with being a sinner then the 144,000 would need a mediator after probation closes.

All things new does not mean that fallen flesh is made new or that the fallen nature has been removed.  Having a fallen nature that is not exercised does not make one a sinner whether it be a baby that was conceived 5 minutes ago or that it be the 144,000 when the plagues are falling.

[Richard Myers]

Communications is difficult at the best of times when we are seeking to give Glory to God.

cp, explain your concern. What happens if what you say is not understood? Do sinners get to go to heaven, or are the righteous kept out when what you perceive as error is taught?

[Richard Myers]

God did give his three friends an opportunity to repent.

Really...where are the verses that say that? No one repented of anything until God spoke to Job.

Good morning, ej.  God reproved them through Elihu, but they did not repent. God held His wrath from them, did He not? Is that not giving them an opportunity to repent? Then He gave them another opportunity to repent when He told them to make sacrifice.

[colporteur]

Communications is difficult at the best of times when we are seeking to give Glory to God.

cp, explain your concern. What happens if what you say is not understood? Do sinners get to go to heaven, or are the righteous kept out when what you perceive as error is taught?

My concern leads to the idea that one way or another we are saved while continuing in sin. There are different aspects of this subject  (more than one) that when the subject is misunderstood  lead to this conclusion. One of them is that if we believe that being a sinner ( as in currently sinning) is because of what we are or what we contain ( a fallen nature) then it is easy to conclude that the 144,000 are sinners not just because of the past or because of any present choice but rather because Adam  sinned and because of the nature they inherited. If they are still in sin because of these things then people may conclude that we are saved IN sin and therefore let sin abound. Of course this subject is a very slippery slope. This is why I do not bring it up. You brought this into the lesson study.