THE POWER OF THE WILL

[ColporteurK]

Dedication, you keep reading past my statements and I am not misusing the quotes from the SOP. I have made it very clear that all of the discipline that is called self is still coming from God and through the power of God but you refuse to except those statements as though they were not made. The self disciple that Mrs. White was talking about was not a mere form of discipline but the substance that comes with conversion. What I am trying to say but you do not get it is that profession minus fruit is just that. Tunnel vision will not let you look at any other aspect of this than the means to an end.

You are talking about the basis,means, and power by which salvation takes place. We have agreed on that. But you do not accept that which leads me to believe that you wish to debate. The other problem is that all of what you say means nothing if we do not see tangible evidence of justification, conversion, and sanctification. Rather than look at fruit and evidence you cannot get beyond the means of obedience. We cannot be certain we have the means right if we do not know how to examine the end. This is not that complicated as Listen brought out.
Self discipline cannot be divorced from sanctification. Morris Vendon used to say that to strive to obey God was legalism, period. That was a broad brush statement that was irresponsible. There will be no one saved who has not strived to obey God. That too is a part of our sanctification. It is an aspect of the process and God does not save us without our cooperation.  While this is only one aspect it cannot be divorced from the whole. James was pretty clear on that.

[ColporteurK]

Sanctification is walking with Christ, abiding in Him, placing our will under His will --" thy will be done, Lord, not my will -- how do You want me to serve you today?  How can I best glorify your name, today?" 
 It is much more than overcoming sin, it is a transformed life, living for Christ.
"can two walk together lest they agree"  If you are continually conscious of Christ's presence, filling your mind with His Word, communicating with Him in prayer, as you go through your day, will you be actively sinning?

What do you mean it ( sanctification) is much more than overcoming sin ? Sin cannot be overcome without a transformed life. It can be faked but only for a short time and that is not "overcoming sin." Sin begins in the mind. Once again you are separating overcoming sin with sanctification. That cannot be done.

If we are continually conscious of Christ's presence, filling our mind with His Word, communicating with Him in prayer, as we go through our day, we will not be sinning, period. What do you mean "actively sinning" ? Any time we sin in any knowledgeable way we have separated from one or more of the virtues you expressed.

[dedication]

Yes, and I've also been saying that profession without fruit is useless.
That's not the issue.

Where I think you find my posts a problem is that I also include a pious looking disciplined life as having potential of being fake sanctification --  as Paul writes:

Romans  10:1   Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. 
 10:2   For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 
 10:3   For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. 

Nor have I ever left "us" out of the equation.   I've simply been stressing the central mandate in sanctification is a firm resolution to place our wills under Christ's will.
Do you think doing our will in opposition to Christ's will, is placing our will under Christ's will?
I don't think so.

Placing our will under Christ's will does far more in overcoming sin, than us tackling a sin.  Tackling a sin gives one a sense of "I've arrived", while daily placing our will under Christ's will, asking Him to lead and show us His will, reveals things in our lives that we never even realized were sin before, but the Holy Spirit prompts us -- that's not the way -- this is the way, walk in it.

I do think it's important for us  to change the primary focus in living a sanctified life.  Away from looking at self in "overcoming sin" to looking to Jesus and seeking to "bring glory to God's name" by our love and obedience to Him.
The first method tends to work to elevate self in the eyes of God, while  the second works to elevate God and His saving power.
And the second does work miracles! 
 

Also the statement that sanctification--
" is much more than overcoming sin, it is a transformed life, living for Christ"
isn't separating "overcoming sin" and "sanctification, as you assumed.

The sentence is saying there is much more to sanctification -- it's a transformed life, living for Christ.

From what I've assumed, and maybe I'm wrong in my assumption,  you can correct me if that is the case, but I've assumed from reading some of the comments that you and some others made in which  sin was defined as "actions"  of transgressing of God's law.
So what do you mean by "a transformed life" -- transformed actions?

I believe sin is much deeper than actions, it is our very nature -- selfishness, pride, the desire to exalt self.

A transformed life is absolutely necessary for genuine overcoming of sin, I fully agree!!!
Our selfishness must be changed to selflessness
our pride to humility and dependence on Christ
our desire to exalt self to exalting our Savior and esteeming others before ourselves.
That kind of transformation comes only from a deep contemplation of the cross and the sacrifice made there by a God of love for our deliverance from the prison house of sin.  Nor is it a one time thing -- we are admonished to spend a thoughtful hour every day on the last scenes of Christ's life, death and resurrection.

If we are continually conscious of Christ's presence, filling our mind with His Word, communicating with Him in prayer, as we go through our day, we will not be actively sinning.  We will not be deliberately sinning or going against His will, but seeking to abide by His will. 
But we still realize there is more that needs changing in our lives.   The holy Spirit is constantly pointing out new areas in our lives that still need cleaning.
To say we are not sinning period, is pure presumption, and the biggest hindrance to sanctifying growth.
There is no stopping place -- Christ leads us higher and higher in the life of sanctification -- we still have a huge way to go before reaching the holiness of Christ.
We may slip and fall, but we immediately get up and confess and cling to Christ.  There will still be things in our lives that the  Holy Spirit needs to bring to our attention which needs cleaning out.  But we won't be deliberately sinning.

I'm finding out that there are lots of sins that are far more grievous in the sight of God than the standard recognized sins --
There are also sins of omission -- consider Matt. 25:41-46 what is that determines the character of sheep from goats?
Never are we to say, we have stopped sinning period.  That's like putting up a roadblock saying -- Holy Spirit, this is far enough,
 

[dedication]

Dedication, you keep reading past my statements

I'm sorry if I did. 
However, it seems you are also reading past my statements.
I've never said we are to base sanctification on feelings. NEVER.
I've repeatedly spoken of obedience.
We are to place our will UNDER (or on the side of)  Christ's will and walk with (abide with) Christ in obedience.

To place ones will under or on the side of Christ's will, is not basing anything on emotional feeling.
It's a definite resolution to follow Christ's will, no matter what the cost to ourselves.
The only "feeling" is our love for Christ, and that love is based on principle established as we view the cross, and what it cost Him to save us from sin,   that principle of love continues strong even without emotional feelings.
We do read in scripture that we are to love God with all our hearts, souls, and spirit.
And our neighbor as ourselves.   That love is based on principle.

Walking and abiding in Christ in obedience, --- does not translate to
 walking in disobedience against His will, it remains walking and abiding in Christ in obedience.
 

 

The self disciple that Mrs. White was talking about was not a mere form of discipline but the substance that comes with conversion.

Yet the quotes pertaining to the training of the child were not the same as sanctification, but only giving the child the tools which will make sanctification easier.
Reread the quote:

"The parent or teacher who by such instruction trains the child to self-control will be the most useful and permanently successful. To the superficial observer his work may not appear to the best advantage; it may not be valued so highly as that of the one who holds the mind and will of the child under absolute authority; but after years will show the result of the better method of training."

Why aren't the "fruits" obvious right away when a child is taught self-control?
Because he isn't converted,  -- he is only being given the "tools" that will make it easier to place his will under Christ's will?

Too often we want to see the "fruits" right away in others, and try to enforce them with our authority -- but those aren't true fruits.

You are talking about the basis, means, and power by which salvation takes place. We have agreed on that.

I'm talking about the basis, means and power by which sanctification takes place.
It is by abiding in Christ, in obedience to His will, through the leading of the Holy Spirit,

And it is not MERE profession, it is the living way.

Having been justified,
John 15:3   Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. 
 15:4   Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. 
 15:5   I am the vine, ye [are] the branches: He that abides in me, and I in him, the same brings forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
2 C0r 10:5   Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; ,,,
1 Peter 1:2 through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ:

[ColporteurK]

From what I've assumed, and maybe I'm wrong in my assumption,  you can correct me if that is the case, but I've assumed from reading some of the comments that you and some others made in which  sin was defined as "actions"  of transgressing of God's law.
So what do you mean by "a transformed life" -- transformed actions?


To say we are not sinning period, is pure presumption, and the biggest hindrance to sanctifying growth.
There is no stopping place -- Christ leads us higher and higher in the life of sanctification -- we still have a huge way to go before reaching the holiness of Christ.
We may slip and fall, but we immediately get up and confess and cling to Christ.  There will still be things in our lives that the  Holy Spirit needs to bring to our attention which needs cleaning out.  But we won't be deliberately sinning.

Yes, sin begins in the mind but it is reflected in the actions. If a person kills someone surely we agree that the action is sin. However, the thought that led to the action is the root of the sin. Both is sin. We cannot read the mind but we can often have a better idea by the actions/ fruit /behavior.

Regarding the second quote, you misquoted me slightly which changed the meaning. I did not say that we are to go around saying or assuming that we have stopped sinning.  That is the way you are presenting my statement. I said that if we are truly united with Christ we will stop sinning, period ( known sin). Any time someone has sinned they have stepped away from Christ, even if for just a moment and by a thought. This is why we need to be connected always. One lax moment even in thought is a dangerous thing. One CANNOT have consistently  transformed actions without a transformed life. It is impossible.

Lastly, you speak of "deliberate sin."  All known sin is deliberate. If a person is truly ignorant of sin it is not deliberate. However, accidental sin is still sin, as long as it is known. In other words, someone may not intend to lose their temper. A flash in the pan may not be premeditated. I suppose one could argue that it was still a split second premeditation but for the most part it was not planned. A child grabs a candy from another and runs. The child has an instant temper flair. It is an immediate reaction of selfish anger. That's still sin needed to be repented of, given the child is of the age of accountability. Perhaps you are talking about sins of ignorance.

When we are told that there is no stopping place that does not mean that all the work of sanctification is dealing with sin. There will be no stopping place in terms of sanctification in heaven either but sin will not continue. Not all growth in Christ is gaining victory over sin. There is a growth that is merely understanding the depth of the riches of God, the depth of His love and the purity if His character. That should not be confused with victory over selfish thoughts and actions. Sin ( in terms of any accountability) is defined as "the transgression of the law" even if only in the thoughts.

In terms of reaching the holiness of Christ I suppose that is a matter of perspective. I'm not sure that can happen without the knowledge and wisdom of God and that will never happen. An ingredient of holiness is understanding. True, we reflect the holiness of God. We are not holiness creators but holiness reflectors. Even that seems to me requires an understanding to reach depth and we will always fall short of the understanding of the Infinite. I guess this is getting a little philosophical.

[dedication]

That is where we differ.

Let's see if I get this right -- you say, sin is an action which begins when a person starts thinking about doing that sin?  That thought may have been pre-meditated over a length of time, or it may have been just a flash thought that explodes almost instantly into an action.

I believe sin is in our very nature, and we need to be transformed.
Selfishness is sin, pride is sin, hate is sin, even if we aren't planning any actions.
Selfishness is the very core of our natures which makes us carnal and incapable of living a righteous life.
We must be born again --

This is also why I cannot accept the view of the independent ministries, that Christ had a nature exactly like us.
When EGW says he took on humanities fallen nature,  yet without sin, I believe it was the PHYSICAL human body that was like any human body born at that time, but His mind, His spiritual nature was the "born again" "sanctified" nature, totally and completely without sin,  not the carnal nature with which we were born.

We must be "born again"  (John 3)
We need a "new heart" and a "new mind"
We need to be transformed, not just have a behavior modification.

Ezek.36:26   A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. 
 36:27   And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes,

Christ is standing at the door of His church with His voice pleading ---"If any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come in.... Revelation 3:20.   Why does Jesus picture Himself like this during the "last church" age?  Could it be that we, like Nicodemus, are still blinded by self?  We (through the whole ranks from the worldly liberal to the strict conservatives) the body of Adventists, have yet to see that Christians are born (born again)  not made by modifying our behavior yet retaining our nature.

By the way -- I agree with your thoughts that we are to "reflect" Christ's nature, we are not "little Christ's", no more than the moon is the sun, it reflects the suns brightness.   And throughout eternity as we behold His glory and reach a deeper understanding of the holiness of Christ, we continue to grow in holiness.

[Listen]

This is also why I cannot accept the view of the independent ministries, that Christ had a nature exactly like us.

Who do you mean by the independent ministries?  That is a rather broad brush. 

[Ed Sutton]

Christ came as like us as possible to do, yet without sinful propensities.  As the Old Testament symbols and types are studied that is what they teach. 

God called Job - perfect - 3 times, translated Enoch & Elijah, Scripture says Christ was tempted in ALL points like ever other human is, yet without sin.

To redeem a debt means to buy collect and resolve the debt, inorder to buy the human debt, He purchased the species by three ways, (1.) became the representative of them all as the second Adam, (2.) as the fulfiller of all the Sanctuary types and symbols, became the vicarious substitute - Gethsemene - Trial - Calvary - prisoner in the Tomb, by His & Father God's & Holy Ghost's - wrath, against sin, (3.) eternal perpetual humanity / taken into His GodHead.

A created species willed to sin ( they saw everything there was to see and know - nothing remained that could convert them - they were judged and assigned to Gehenna hell - Jesus could not redeem their debt and perfect them, so He did not so He did not go through the process for them, thus the 1/3 of the angels were lost forever.

A created species willed to sin - Jesus saw He could save some - in the fulness of time He got as close to them as possible - without sin, and lived their life, and continued His union with Father God & the Holy Spirit - creating a perfect sinless humanity to implant in them to replace their sinful spiritual and in due time at the second coming their physical nature .

[dedication]

Dedication wrote: This is also why I cannot accept the view of the independent ministries, that Christ had a nature exactly like us.

Who do you mean by the independent ministries?  That is a rather broad brush.

Probably not the best way to phrase it, as there are quite a number of independent ministries and they don't all follow the same thinking.  I don't wish to get into names here -- as this isn't a who's who, discussion, but a search for truth on sanctification.

 It's just that it is mainly some independent ministries and their followers that highly stress their belief that Christ had a nature full of sin just like us, that He had to overcome, which He did without ever letting it express itself in word or action.
It is that interpretation that I can't accept.

“Sinful” is the adjective of sin, and as the Dictionary states its meaning “tainted with, or full of sin.”
What do we understand when we read in scripture about “sinful men” (Num 32:14), “sinful nation” (Is 1:4), “sinful Kingdom” (Amos 9:8 ) or when Jesus used the term in phrases such as “in this adulterous and sinful generation” (Mark 8:38) and “the Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men” (Luke 24:7)?

Did you notice how scripture words it?

Romans 8:3 God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh,
Does "likeness of sinful flesh" mean the same as "sinful flesh" or similar to "sinful flesh"?
Is there a difference?  I believe there is.

Consider a person without HIV living among a group of HIV positive individuals. They look alike outwardly, they have the basic physical bodies, they all need to eat, sleep and tend to basic bodily needs. They communicate and make friends with each other. But there is one difference -- the  AIDS virus. The ones with HIV are dying.  The  healthy one without the AIDS virus is able to save and attend to the diseased one, but not vice versa.

And so Christ came in likeness of sinful human flesh, without the sin.
He had the same basic physical body as everyone else. But there was one difference -- the SIN virus. The ones with SIN are dying.  The ONE without SIN is able to save and  heal those diseased. 

I like Ed's sentence --
"Christ came as like us as possible to do, yet without sinful propensities...... He got as close to them as possible - without sin, and lived their life, and continued His union with Father God & the Holy Spirit - creating a perfect sinless humanity to implant in them to replace their sinful [nature]"




 

[ColporteurK]

I think the Bible has a better definition of sin than Webster's. "Sin is the transgression of the law."

[dedication]

I think the Bible has a better definition of sin than Webster's. "Sin is the transgression of the law."

The English translation seems to lend itself to the concept that "sin is an action contrary to God's law.
Yet in the Greek  the word "anomia" is used three times in that verse!!!
Anomia, means "lawlessness" often translated as "iniquity", it can mean "acting" against the law, or just being against the law.

There are other texts that define sin as well

Romans 14:23 for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Pr. 21:4   An high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing (or fallow ground, as in hard heart) of the wicked, is sin.

Pr.   24:9   The thought of foolishness is sin:

James 4:17   Therefore to him that knows to do good, and does not do it, to him it is sin.

1 John  5:17   All unrighteousness is sin: