| Author | Message | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11371 Registered: 12-2003  |
I posted a contrast on Facebook, and it's generated some interesting responses. I thought I'd post it here as well and see what y'all think--even though many of you are those who have responded! Study in contrasts: The gospel as defined by Paul in 1 Cor 15:1-4: Jesus Christ died for our sins, was buried, and was raised on the third day—according to Scripture. The gospel as defined by new Seventh-day Adventist president Ted Wilson: "The righteousness of Christ". One atones for sin; the other demonstrates how we can overcome sin. Which is "Good News"? or in other words, What is the gospel? Colleen | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 596 Registered: 11-2005 |
Wow, that's subtle... To me, the good news is that Jesus died for our sins, was buried, and raised on the third day. Of course the "righteousness of Christ" is part of that, but the difference isn't in the definition of the Gospel, but on how the Gospel becomes good news in one's life. According to the Bible, if you believe and have faith, you are saved... The Good News is now personally your good news. Along with that faith and belief, you are instantly covered in the righteousness of Christ. If the good news were JUST the righteousness of Christ, it is just a "noun". I can maybe try to mimic it or earn it, but it will never become more than just a "symbol" in my life. But the Bible says that through faith, that "righteousness of Christ" becomes a verb in our life. As a verb, it changes our lives from fallen and depraved to justified and eternally alive. That's how I see it... Grace (Message edited by snowboardingmom on July 07, 2010) | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 2039 Registered: 4-2000  |
Well stated, Grace! | ||
| Bobj Registered user Username: Bobj Post Number: 512 Registered: 1-2006  |
I think what makes me uncomfortable is this: when justification is subject to sanctification (no justification until we are "worthy" through diligent effort at sanctification, or when justification is necessarily linked to sanctification and one becomes the litmus test for the other (if you were justified you would show it by keeping the sabbath--perhaps not now, but for sure in the time of trouble, etc) Historic adventism is confused on both counts! From my simple viewpoint, we do not reach perfection in the flesh in this lifetime, so sanctification (the work of the Holy Spirit) is never complete. But the work of Jesus in bearing our sins on the cross is a done deal. We are fully justified from all sin--past, present, and future. See Acts 13:38,39 The problem arises when we insist that sanctification MUST be part of justification. Yes, they do travel together, but to but to preach that they MUST accompany each other crosses a subtle line into a false gospel. I think that's why some people regard the true gospel as so dangerous. It absolutely sets people free. Yes, we long to stop sinning. See Phil 1:6, the last verse in Heb 11, 1 John 1:8. The question is not IF God is to make us perfect, but WHEN. Phil 1:6 and the last verse in Heb 11 give strong hints as to when. If I understand correctly, our spirits are perfect now in Christ, but we still inhabit sinful flesh. The flesh is headed for the grave, but we will go to be with God who has given us new and everlasting life (birth) in His Spirit. Meanwhile, the new testament unmistakably calls us to holy living . . . "forgetting the past, looking ahead" etc. Yes, Dennis, Grace said it well. I'm thankful for the work of the Holy Spirit now, and for the completed work of the Lord on the cross. When I think of the "gospel" I prefer to think only of the completed work, since that is an objective reality. I can set my faith on it. It is concrete--not dependent on my ability to refrain from sin. I think much of the reformation was to clarify the separation of these issues, to recognize that we are saved by the work (and righteousness, if you will) of the Lord--not our own righteousness. Bob | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 142 Registered: 9-2006 |
Good comments, Bob. Colleen, Sharon showed me the FB discussion and I appreciate your distinction. The confusion for so many Adventists comes from blending what God has completed FOR us at the Cross and Resurrection, with what He does IN us now. That is why the GC likes to call their version of the Gospel, "the righteousness of Christ," because it blends God's declaring us righteous with His making us righteous. But what will finally be our assurance of life? Christ's finished, outside of us, once-and-for-all act, or, our law keeping? Adventist salvation theology can be summed up this way. We are, 1. Justified by faith (provisional and easily lost) 2. "Maintained" by keeping the 10 commandments 3. Saved, finally, if our characters are "fit" for Heaven. Justification for the SDA is just one of the many steps to Christ, and gives us no assurance of life. Maintaining our walk with God depends largely on our will power and character development. This whole process is called "Righteousness by Faith," which means that Christ's righteousness is ours, as long as we allow Him to "impart" it in us and we remain obedient. This is how they can say we are not saved by our righteousness, but Christ's, lived IN us. Very subtle, but a critical difference! The NT Gospel is all about what He has done (I Cor. 15:3,4). 1. Justified by faith, once and for all, adopted into His family, given eternal life. We are Sanctified by the Spirit by believing what we heard, not by works of the law (Gal. 5:2). The Spirit assures me that Christ was crucified for all my sins and I am His. He has already perfected us forever, He will do what He promised, to finally save us (Rom. 8:29,30). We are Glorified by confidence in the forgiveness at the Cross, not our fleshly will power. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11374 Registered: 12-2003 |
Grace, I love that difference you articulated between "noun" and "verb". Very good! Martin, you said that SO well...I have tried many times to articulate to people what Adventists mean by "righteousness by faith", and they have a VERY hard time actually understanding what I'm trying to say. The three-point SDA salvation theology is accurate. That deceptive explanation of being saved by "Christ's righteousness" when they actually mean He gives us the power to develop righteousness exactly like His because He is living it out IN us is so frustrating. It sounds right--but it is completely wrong. These confusions (as well as confusions that creep into mainstream Christianity) are why I believe we have to clearly know what the gospel is: it is Jesus crucified, died, and risen on the third day. The gospel is external from us, the completed work of Jesus. It has NOTHING to do at all with us. Our salvation occurs when we hear and believe the Gospel. But what happens to our status as "saved" or "not saved" is not part of the gospel. Salvation is the result of the gospel in our lives. But the righteousness of Christ is not the gospel. Rather, it is the reality that made the gospel possible. Moreover, His righteousness is what identifies us after we believe. We've GOT to have the gospel "straight", or we can be easily confused by false teaching. Colleen | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 1292 Registered: 7-2007 |
Adventists, if they are like I was when I was an Adventist, think that only their PAST sins are forgiven each time they ask forgiveness. So in effect, they think they're saved - lost - saved - lost - saved - lost - all dependent on whether or not they've just asked forgivness. Here's a verse that shows that believers' sins are forgiven - past, present and future. Otherwise the apostle John wouldn't have been able to write to those believers, telling them that their sins have been forgiven because by the time they got the letter, they would have sinned again! "I am writing to you, little children, because your sins have been forgiven you for His name's sake." 1 John 2:12 And then there are these verses by Paul in 2nd Timothy 1:9; Titus 3:5 and Ephesians 2:8,9 "...you HAVE BEEN saved..." Paul also could not have written that if future sins weren't forgiven. SDA doctrine messes Adventists up. When I was an Adventist, I couldn't completely accept Jesus sacrifice for me because Ellen White said a person shouldn't say they are saved. Because I couldn't completely accept His sacrifice for me, I was lost, lost, lost!!! The SDA church taught that the atonement wasn't finished and that part of the performing of it was up to us. No Adventist who believes that can completely accept Jesus' finished work and sacrifice. Therefore they and others with the same mind-set aren't saved. | ||
| Bobj Registered user Username: Bobj Post Number: 515 Registered: 1-2006 |
Asurprise That's exactly what I worry about. By rejecting Paul (the scripture) and accepting Ellen, I really fear for adventists. Who's really their savior? I don't think they know if Christ actually saved them or if they think that perhaps Christ just made it possible for them to save themselves. How can they possibly have faith in the Lord while holding such views? Bob |
