John writes > No one in this
discussion believes that Christ sinned, Dean.
cd responds >
Respectfully- If one states that Christ had a fallen nature sinful
nature that is what one is saying John.
No, Dean, it is not.
Rather, it is what you hear us saying. Your hearing,
however, is influenced by your view of sin. That John and I and
Debbie and Lance, and even David on this one, are coming from a
different vantage point than you, is a given. Why assume then that you can
see well enough from your perch to identify things from ours? I began
my previous post with an assurance that none of us view Jesus as
a sinner; John did the same with his; yet you continue to speak
only from a limited view, rather than budge just a little, that you
might see him more completely. There must be some reason why we can see
Jesus as fully representative of humankind in sinful flesh, and yet uphold
the truth that he did not sin while in that flesh. Why must conclude
therefore that he must have been a sinner? Why not give us the benefit of
the doubt, if for just a peak, and try to see things from our perspective?
cd: Wow tough response Bill-I hope my
response to David concerning didn't influence you to do likewise as the
topic are different-I am suppose to give my life- if God put me
in that position- for the brethren. I can also assume one can
defend those same brethren from looking like fools. Let's not carry
our conversation to that same order of battle-okay? I have not read
anything on Debbie belief of this issue to support you stance-I would like
to read them. When we first started this debate most of the group stated
Christ to be as "common man"-I objected to that and tried to show He was
not common-but rather more than common as man went to a state of sin that
Christ did not go too.Bill -this is a very significant difference. If you
have changed you view or make a mistake in your earlier statement by
claiming Christ the same as "common man" then say so and we move on.
Believe it or not I am not focused on proving you wro ng as I am impressed
by you and want to learn what God has given you but on this matter it
would seem that God gave knowledge to me-but at your level there is
much I can learn from you.Can the foot say to the hand:" Hey stop
walking and start clapping !". Concerning David M. there is a lot of
truth with him and He has a lot to offer us but I cannot find a place of
trust for Him (may God show me error if it exists). If my belief is
limited I can only hope it is limited to the bible.
You have a Christ
who was born perfected from the womb, yet the writer to the Hebrews
clearly states that Christ "learned obedience through suffering" and that
it was only after "having been perfected" -- that is, after his
resurrection even -- that he became the Author of
salvation.
cd: Bill as I have shown before.
Suffering for a Christian in this world comes from resisting sin and
therefore becoming opposed by people that sin.If I am not resisting I
am not suffering because I am giving into sin and have
no opposition to suffer from. There is also a suffering of the flesh
that comes from that flesh wanting sin and our instructed to bring that
flesh into subjection to the spirit-but as both Wesley and
I believe-there is a place where on can put the flesh under so much
subjection that it breaks completely leaving one free from the drawing of
the flesh towards sin or even the thoughts of sin this is called "Total
sanctification"-I believe Jesus put His flesh under total control. With us
it is still possible to fall back into that sin after the second(or deeper
level of) sanctification-yet unlikely- but for Christ as it was
not possible as He made that falling into sin not possible for Himself
through Godly fear.Hope this make sense to you as it works for
me.
You have a Christ
who was born fully sanctified, yet Jesus himself says, "I sanctify myself
(present continuous) that they too might be sanctified by the
truth."
cd: Our difference in the area of
sanctification has to do with the definition of sanctification and how one
applies that term. I believe this to mean:" I keep myself Holy for God to
do His work so that you too can become Holy for God because of me and by
the truth I live and speak. This meaning does not conflict with what I am
stating Bill. Christ kept Himself from sin to help us-no common man ever
came close to doing this-so what is being missed in the majority of
this group thought?
y
SANC'TIFY, v.t. [Low L. sanctifico; from
sanctus, holy, and facio, to make.]
1. In a general sense, to cleanse, purify or make holy.
2. To separate, set apart or appoint to a holy, sacred or religious
use.
God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it.
You have a Christ
who did not experience the temptations of a fallen man, yet Paul writes
that he came in the likeness of our sinful flesh, because of sin, that he
might condemn sin in the flesh.
cd: I believe Christ put on a flesh
(covering) like ours but did not conform to this world which follows Satan
as we have as "common men" therefore He was not as we were but as
we now are- because of Him ( speaking of course of a mature
Christian). Satan had to be giving his chance to lose or hold the world so
Christ came in the state Satan controlled (the flesh)-and had claim
too in order to take that claim away. He came to the strong man house to
bind the strong man in his own house.He defeated the strong man by staying
pure and proved He was stronger than the strong man through resistance to
impurity.
You have a Christ
who did not share in our humanity, yet Luke assures us that he was born of
the fruit of David's genitals according to the flesh, and the writer to
the Hebrews that as much as we "share in flesh and blood, He Himself
likewise also partook of the same," ... that he might assume the
nature of Abraham's offspring.
cd:Bill - you misunderstand me in
this area-Christ did share in our humanity-even in flesh and blood as
David and Abraham's offspring.
Indeed their is
enough here to warrant a second look, Dean. But if you will not budge,
then I must respectfully request that you please keep silent about things
you cannot see.
cd: Sorry Bill I chose not to remain
silent as that would mean not to offer a different view and I encourage
you to also not keep silent by answering my last post to you on
this issue or simple go on to another issue.Here's one that John brought
to the table:Can Children sin and be accountable for sin-your thoughts? By
the way be nice:-) Thanks bro.
Bill