Posted anonymously by: Ane

New Mexico

I’m really at a loss on how to eloquently express my beliefs to you in regards to this Old/New Covenat/Law topic we’ve been discussing ... in some cases you seem to be interpreting my words and beliefs in ways I don’t intend for you to. I do regret that I’m not more able to adequately express them.

Hopefully Greg, Deacon, and Dwyane’s responses will help as they all seem to reflect my opinions on the topic.

I appreciate the attitude in which you’ve dialogued with me ... in that you don’t talk down to me our act like I’m an idiot!

I sense that you are every bit as sincere as I am in chasing down truth, honoring God and seeking His Word.

I’ve no doubt that if we keep our focus on Jesus He’ll continue to bring all of us into clear truth. Thank God He has given us a teacher and guide who won’t give up on either of us and will continue to lead us to the most highest understanding of truth in our spiritual journeys!

May God Bless Our Journeys.

Ane

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

Dear dwayne and all:

I have been out of town for awhile. My family and I are in the midst of some major changes that have occupied my time.

Upon my return to this string I see it ends with the mention of a passage of particular importance to our understanding of the Gospel.

The conundrum presented by Phil 2:12,13 is much like hat of James 2:24: “You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.” (NIV)

The understanding of these passages is quite simple if one has a correct understanding of the plan under which God has offered mankind eternal life. I think the problem comes in from an urge to contrast rather than compare the plan of God before and after sin.

It is helpful to recognize that from the beginning man was to be tested and that there was something for man to do. Adam and Eve were to obey positive and negative commands. But they did not by this merit or earn life. Yes, even before sin entered, it was by grace that they were given life through faith; and that not of themselves: it was the gift of God (compare Eph 2:8 KJV). Paul mentions this grace in the context of God’s pre-creation purpose in 2 Tim 1:9. He tells us that we are saved, “according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.” Notice notice notice that word, “grace.” God’s foresight required our creation in grace—He knew of our fall.

From our perspective not much has changed in God’s plan to give us unending life. But before we explore that, lest us recognize that on God’s side the story is quite different. A great change was required of God. Even though He saw it coming, our fall still called upon Him to make an enormous sacrifice. This we all understand, but let us not pass by it without giving Him the credit, honor and thankfulness His love deserves.

As I said from our perspective not much has changed. Our part has not changed from that which was expected of Adam and Eve. True, they were able to render faultless obedience, true they did not have inherent tendencies to sin. But God takes all this into account with His Son and, as we all acknowledge, does not require faultless sinlessness, and does not hold against us our tendencies to sin. Those who receive Christ as their Savior dwell in the tabernacle of God’s merciful grace. “For by grace are ye saved [given life] through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.” (Eph 2:8 KJV)

So, God maintained His plan through Jesus. And life is still given to us as a gift. We still don’t merit or earn life. Yet we are expected to obey positive and negative commands. This expectation still does not earn us even the smallest bit of merit. Then why does God expect obedience, why is it important? First, because obedience is a safeguard for life. My favorite example of this is a common one: The command to honor one’s parents—which promises long life. We both could come up with many examples of this. Obedience is good for us and good for society.

The second important thing we need to understand about obedience is that it fulfills an essential part of the plan which God instituted from the beginning. Life was given to Adam and Eve on a provisional probationary basis. However, God made their probationary test easy as possible. I think He would rather have not tested them, but the rebellion going on in heaven, so it seems, made this necessary. In any case, God’s Word is clear: Man was given something to do. And something not to do—Adam and Eve were tried. From here we note that we, who are believers, are still tested by God (I have give many many texts in this string to show that this is true). God tested the minds and the hearts of Adam and Eve and He still is testing their spiritual children. Why? Obviously from the beginning it has been a matter of a proof of loyalty, trust, and love for God. It is evident that the death of Jesus did not create a way to bypass human probation or testing and trial. And from this we learn that Jesus did not come to simply die for sin, but by His purchase of forgiveness to provide, equip, enable, and empower man for another (second) probation (those same texts mention above prove this to be true also.

So, now it is easy to understand the texts we began with Phil 2:12,13 and Jas 2:24. Paul and James are really coming at the matter of eternal life from the same fundamental perspective. Paul and James are not looking at justification before the law or salvation from the penalty of the law. Belief (faith) in Christ gives us complete justification and forgiveness for sin, it is the key that opens the way to life. So, obedience (especially in times of difficulty), the fruit of the Spirit seen in the life, and works of righteousness on the part of the believer are simply carrying out our salvation (Phil 2) in the same way Adam and Eve were asked to carry out life or living in Eden—it did not merit them life, earn them life. So, make sure you get this point: Living lives of faithfulness (carrying on with what God expects of us), esp. in the face of opposition, is fulfilling our part without adding to what Christ did for us.

And really, it seems to me, all God is asking for is a justification of our claim to have faith (the issue that James is focusing on in Jas 2). Once more we hasten to point out that this sort of working faith is not added to the merits of Christ. It is simply proof that an individual has been truly born again, is covered by the meritorious blood of Jesus Christ, loves God, appreciates and seeks to honor the sacrifice God has made for them—living their lives “in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ” (Phil 1:27 NIV; Cf. Eph 4:1). Living a life worthy of God (1Thess 2:12) is not adding to the righteousness of Jesus Christ, it is however the evidence God seeks to vindicate our profession of fath in the investigative judgment.

This is the view of the Gospel that is the most faithful to the Bible and is the view that makes it easy to understand Phil 2:12,13 and James 2:24 in light of the doctrine of righteousness by faith in Jesus. Other explanation are confusing and unsatisfying, since they are an incomplete view of the scriptures.

Dwayne, in the case of Phil 2:12,13 the passage does not actually say to “represent your salvation, express your salvation.” It really says to, “do work fully, i.e. accomplish; by implication, to finish”(Strong’s) your salvation.

I have not looked at anything on this string but the last few exchanges. Sorry, but I really have been quite busy.

Ane said:

I’m really at a loss on how to eloquently express my beliefs to you in regards to this Old/New Covenat/Law topic we’ve been discussing ... in some cases you seem to be interpreting my words and beliefs in ways I don’t intend for you to. I do regret that I’m not more able to adequately express them.

Ane, I thought you did a very good job and greatly enjoyed our discussion.  I hope I did as good a job in stating my opinions and also in conveying to you that I respect your ideas.  Because of differences in life experiences, people often view things somewhat differently.  I hope I didn’t misinterpret your words too badly.  I tried to avoid characterizing your position as much as possible and to try to limit my portion of the discussion to what I believe on the topic to avoid that trap.  Perhaps that gave the impression that I wasn’t understanding or responding appropriately to what you were saying.  For me, I was never sure whether we really disagreed or whether we were saying the same thing in differnet ways.  Either way, it really doesn’t really matter.  We don’t have to agree.  Anyway, for me the best discussions are with people who disagree with me, since that is how I learn.  Thank-you.

Greg said:

This said, we know that certain laws contained within the Old Testament are no longer in force for Christians. Many of the Mosaic laws were given by God for the specific purpose of separating Israel as a theocracy and to give them specific ceremonial observances that pointed forward to the Messiah. Reading the Old Testament in isolation, we can convince ourselves to observe all manner of laws and ceremonies that are no longer in force under the New Covenant, circumcision being an obvious example. Reading from the hermeneutic of “If Jesus did it, so must I”, we might conclude that not only should Christian males be circumcised, but Christians should also offer sacrifices, observe Passover, eat lamb and fish, and perform ritual purification rites.

I agree with you.  From other things you have said in the past, I suspect we agree on a great many things.  I was a little bit surprised by your comment since it appeared there may have been something I said with which you eiher disagree with or felt needed clarifying. 

My understanding is that Jesus lived the law perfecty, which means we can best understand the meaning of the law through Jesus’ life.  This has nothing to do with whether He kept passover, ate lamb and fish etc. and has everything to do with how He interpreted and lived the underlying moral principles which lay behind the specific instances in the law.  The key difficulty we all have to wrestle with is how to separate those things which are culturally derived from those deeper meanings which are genuire moral principles.  Jesus gave us an important clue when He stated the first great commandment and then the second, love to God and love to man.  He also made it clear that what matters is how we treat other people.  In that context, eating lamb, circumcision, etc. have only peripheral importance morality.

We can make the same mistakes in following the New Testament.  For instance, I just had a converstaion with my friend, the local Church of Christ pastor, who thinks baptism is necessary for salvation beyond a symbol of what has already occurred in our hearts.  In other words, we can’t be saved without baptism.  Although I support baptism, I pointed out the thief on the cross who was not baptized, and the pastor postulated hopefully that perhaps the thief had been baptized by John.  Along the same lines, the Catholics seem to think the wafer they serve at communion is actually the body of Christ rather than a symbol representing Him.  So we all seem to have difficulty at times separating the morally relevant portions of scripture from those which are culturally derived.

My friend the Church of Christ pastor has a question which he likes to pose to himself, “how right do we have to be?” The point he is making is that most of our disagreements aren’t significant to salvation.  In many ways it is easy for former SDAs to mirror the mother church by placing too much imphasis on the importance of doctrinal accuracy.  This exaggerated sense of the importance of doctrine is probably where the FAF stumbles.  What is not particularly important can easily become a matter of good and evil.

I have talked to the pastor of the Chruch of Christ about my oown relationship with the SDA church and when it becomes necessary to change fellowships.  There are many things I admire in the SDA church such as the schools and the dedication to sound scholarship which was evident up until Glacier View.  That Adventist church, pre-Glacier View, is the one I loved and still love, but the church has changed.  Since all churches have flaws, the issue becomes one of when do the flaws make continued membership unacceptable.  Beccause they aren’t centralized, the folks in the Church of Christ tell me they have to deal with some the same issues, only at the local level. The one issue they don’t have to deal with is the tendency of some to use an extra-Biblical authority.

Since it appears my portion of the discussion with Pastor Williams is over, I think I’ll discuss my understanding of Crosier and it’s implications for the Adventist sanctuary service if you guys don’t mind.

New Mexico

Obviously you are not only free but welcome to discuss Crosier. I am sure you realize that, bless his heart, Crosier was in the Corn Field with Hiram Edson on the morning of Oct. 23, 1844. Neither Crosier nor Edson were training in lower critizism of Scripture. Both were disappointed farmers. While we might be instructed in history and opinion by reading Crosier, we cannot be instructed in hermeneutics. It is interesting that G.C. does not mention either Edson or Crosier nor are they listed in the index, at least in my edition.

The Scripture is about the Centrality of the Cross--the Sanctuary was but a type to point toward the fulfillment in Jesus Christ. If one wants to understand Salvation one should study Paul not Crosier. 

Posted anonymously by: dwayne

[quote author="Pastor Williams"]Dwayne, in the case of Phil 2:12,13 the passage does not actually say to “represent your salvation, express your salvation.” It really says to, “do work fully, i.e. accomplish; by implication, to finish”(Strong’s) your salvation.

Welcome back. Obviously, you are not a person of few words (sometimes the opposite would help). Why am I not surprised that a sda pastor would have a problem with Phillipians 2:12,13.

In order to “represent your salvation, express your salvation” you have to believe and know that you have salvation. What I am seeing in your argument is that you have no salvation (yet) to express. That a person must “do work fully, i.e. accomplish; by implication, to finish”(Strong’s) your salvation” is a view of the Gospel that is the most unfaithful to the Bible.

Here are some attributes of Christian believers:

They are holy people.
They are saints.
They belong to Jesus Christ.
They spread the Good News about Jesus Christ from the first time they they hear it.
They continue to defend and confirm the Gospel even at the present time.
They are partakers of God’s grace.
Their love is growing in knowledge and in depth.
They are filled with the fruit of Christ righteousness.
They are always obeying.
They are in Christ.
They have fellowship in the Spirit.

For the above description of Christian believers, see the book of Philippians.

The Christian believers at Phillipi were all this, before Paul encouraged them to be like-minded, to be of one accord, to have the same love, and to think more highly of the others than of themselves and to “work out their own salvation with fear and trembling”.

Note this: They were already expressing their salvation. Paul was just encouraging them on!

By definition, Christain believers do work out (express) their own salvation for it is Christ who is doing it! 

[quote author="New Mexico"]
I agree with you. From other things you have said in the past, I suspect we agree on a great many things. I was a little bit surprised by your comment since it appeared there may have been something I said with which you eiher disagree with or felt needed clarifying.

New Mexico, after reading your explanation of how you understand the law through the life of Jesus, I can say I agree with you.  Where differences arise is over the interpretation of what is considered “moral” or “what would Jesus do?”.  In Adventism, this always circles back to the fourth commandment, but if I’m reading you correctly, you would even leave room for honest disagreement on the Sabbath.

[quote author="New Mexico"]
My friend the Church of Christ pastor has a question which he likes to pose to himself, “how right do we have to be?” The point he is making is that most of our disagreements aren’t significant to salvation. In many ways it is easy for former SDAs to mirror the mother church by placing too much imphasis on the importance of doctrinal accuracy. This exaggerated sense of the importance of doctrine is probably where the FAF stumbles. What is not particularly important can easily become a matter of good and evil.

This is well-said.  Christianity necessarily hangs upon a solid doctrinal foundation, but the doctrines upon which Christianity stands are precious few.  Where many Christians stumble is in magnifying specific “peripheral” doctrines to the degree where they obscure the main point–"majoring in the minors”.  Witness baptism in the Church of Christ or Baptist churches, the baptism of the Holy Spirit in Pentacostalism, and of course the fourth commandment in Adventism.  If Christians would just acknowledge that their salvation is solely the gift of Christ and it is only through Him that their sins are forgiven, they would also learn to trust the work of Christ to bring Christian brothers and sisters into His body.  Both Adventists and former Adventists have something to learn from this.

[quote author="New Mexico"]
Since it appears my portion of the discussion with Pastor Williams is over, I think I’ll discuss my understanding of Crosier and it’s implications for the Adventist sanctuary service if you guys don’t mind.

I still plan to post the documents you sent to me.  If I get a little time this weekend, I will post them as a jumping-off point for discussion.  And for The Deacon, I believe New Mexico understands Pauline theology, but he has found it valuable to go back in history to study how Crosier’s views were changed by James White to understand the doctrinal planks upon which Adventism was founded.  If nothing else, this study is of historical interest.

Greg

Dwayne, a big AMEN to everything you said!  How else can we understand Philippians but that it was written to those who had already received the salvation of Jesus?  And how much more powerful our understanding of Christ’s work in Paul’s words to the redeemed: “And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.” (Philippians 1:6 ESV).

The great promises of Scripture are utterly stripped of their power if salvation lies somewhere in the future and is uncertain until the day of judgment.

Greg

The point is Christian doctrine was formed after Calvary.
The Sanctuary is the shadow, Calvary is the reality. Jesus claimed every part of the Sanctuary: The Lamb, The Water of Life, The Bread of Life, The Light of the World, The embodiment of the Law, the advocate with the Father--the basis of Mercy and the foundation of Justice. The Sanctuary pointed to Christ.  Now that we have Christ let us study Him. The different understanding of Crosier and White can be only of historical interest. I thought that Pastor Williams burden was the centrality of the Sanctuary while the Reform position is the centrality of the Cross. Pastor Williams burden was the Sabbath and the Reform position is the Lord of the Sabbath. Of course, the Gospels and the Epistles make use of the Sanctuary illustratively. Jesus did call it His. But if we get caught up in furniture so as to lose sight of Christ of what gain have we made? 

Pastor Williams,

Thanks for your insights and challenges, but I must also issue a challenge with regard to this statement:

“The second important thing we need to understand about obedience is that it fulfills an essential part of the plan which God instituted from the beginning. Life was given to Adam and Eve on a provisional probationary basis. However, God made their probationary test easy as possible. I think He would rather have not tested them, but the rebellion going on in heaven, so it seems, made this necessary. In any case, God’s Word is clear: Man was given something to do. And something not to do—Adam and Eve were tried. From here we note that we, who are believers, are still tested by God (I have give many many texts in this string to show that this is true). God tested the minds and the hearts of Adam and Eve and He still is testing their spiritual children. Why? Obviously from the beginning it has been a matter of a proof of loyalty, trust, and love for God. It is evident that the death of Jesus did not create a way to bypass human probation or testing and trial. And from this we learn that Jesus did not come to simply die for sin, but by His purchase of forgiveness to provide, equip, enable, and empower man for another (second) probation (those same texts mention above prove this to be true also.”
-----------------------------------------------------

Adam and Eve’s probationary status was a lot different than the situation with regard to fallen sinners who have been redeemed. In Reformed theology, this is referred to as the Covenant of Works. Adam and Eve were created sinless, therefore they had no excuse for sinning, since they did not have to fight a sinful nature the way we do. This is comparing apples and oranges. After the fall, which was foreseen by God from eternity past, the provision for salvation of fallen sinful beings was made in Christ.

When God saves us by His sovereign will, and adopts us as sons and daughters, this act of adoption is final. When Ephesians 2:8,9 says:

8 “For by grace YOU HAVE BEEN SAVED through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”
-------------------------------------------------
The above statement is a statement in the tense of something that has already been accomplished. We HAVE BEEN SAVED!  We are not under probation. If we are under probation to prove ourselves after we have been saved, then this would not be salvation by grace, but would be of works. Grace is strictly unmerited favor. God gets ALL THE GLORY for salvation, and man gets none of the glory.

Jesus affirms this salvation as being a final accomplished past tense action in John 5:24:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me HAS eternal life. He does NOT come into judgment, but HAS PASSED from death to life.”
----------------------------------------------------

Now I know from long experience that Adventists think the above statement is too good to be true, but we must take Jesus’ words literally. It is only because folks are reading the Bible through the lenses of Ellen vision that we set aside the wonderful promises of Jesus. Notice, Jesus doesn’t place conditions on our crossing over to eternal life. How ETERNAL would this life be if we were then put on probation.

But Jesus goes on and on through the book of John emphasizing these points that somehow we don’t want to believe, as then the gospel would be too good of news!(smiley)

John 6:37-40:

ALL that) the Father gives me WILL come to me, and whoever comes to me I WILL NEVER cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39And) this is the WILL of him who sent me,that I should LOSE NOTHING of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the WILL of my Father, that EVERYONE who looks on the Son and(BB) believes in him(BC) SHOULD HAVE eternal life, and I WILL raise him up on the last day.”
---------------------------------------------------

This isn’t talking about some kind of probation. Jesus is saying that our salvation is an accomplished fact when He does the saving. And Jesus has more to say in John 10:27-30:

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 2) I GIVE them ETERNAL life, and they WILL NEVER PERISH and NO ONE will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has GIVEN them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”
-----------------------------------------------------

Why must we make salvation any more difficult than what the simple statements of Jesus so clearly state above? Where is there even one hint that we as His redeemed sons and daughters are under probation?? We have to come up with this idea, by taking texts from the Old Covenant such as in Ezekiel. We now have the very final words and authority of Jesus on the topic of salvation.

The reformers Luther and Calvin taught these great truths so forcefully during the reformation, but the Roman Catholic Church has influenced American evangelicalism into a works oriented salvation, instead of a salvation which is all of grace from start to finish. Of course the Roman church pronounced anathema on Luther and Calvin, and many in the SDA church as well as other Arminian churches have also ignored the great teachings of grace in order to bring back the emphasis on what man may do to help accomplish his salvation.

Soli Deo Gloria (To God alone be the glory)

Stan

Here is an excellent essay on Jesus’ teaching on how salvation is accomplished in John 6:

http://www.reformationtheology.com/2005/11/the_jesus_syllogism.php

Stan

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

This comment has been moved here.

Posted anonymously by: dwayne

This comment has been moved here.

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

This comment has been moved here.