Sabbath School subject discussion thread

[StormyOne]

Except for stormy no one has given me an answer. And Stormy's answer I don't think would satisfy even his own daughter because the almighty God would not have to die to rescue anyone, so the question I would have expected her to ask was why would death be necessary for the all powerful God who could have simply stopped the water or lifted the person he was rescuing from the water. So at best Stormy's answer is delaying the answer to the question.

you are right RC, it was a delay because of that very question.... why did God "have to" die... it is a question for which no one has really answered and I am not certain that he had to die to forgive.... as such the answer was delayed until my kids got older and we could discuss the various theories of atonement....

 

[StormyOne]

BFA don't be pulled into the discussion by a trick of RC. Remember now...he believes that the cross was just a moral aspect and not legal at all. The Moral Infuence Theory

AT

that theory is as viable as the others.... are you dismissing it?

 

[Adventtruth]

that theory is as viable as the others.... are you dismissing it?

I have no doubt that Gods love was displayed at the cross, and that thought is compelling... but if one rejects the vacarious death of Christ in the sinners stead, then I believe one departs from the teachings of the bible, having rejected substitution.

AT

 

[StormyOne]

I have no doubt that Gods love was displayed at the cross, and that thought is compelling... but if one rejects the vacarious death of Christ in the sinners stead, then I believe one departs from the teachings of the bible, having rejected substitution.

AT

who said that was how it had to have been? Especially given the fact that Jesus said long before the cross that he had finished the work he had come to do?

Why is the substitution theory the only viable theory in your opinion? The bible teaches nothing, people read the bible and extrapolate.... the theology they arrive at may or may not be "the truth."

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Stormy what bes your main objection to the idea of Christ bearing the ultimately result/consequences/penalty for sin in our place?
It has seen you object several times but it bes not acquainted with the nature of your objections to it. Could you elaborate please?

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Originally Posted by Adventtruth

BFA don't be pulled into the discussion by a trick of RC. Remember now...he believes that the cross was just a moral aspect and not legal at all. The Moral Infuence Theory
​

I admit the MIT answers the question better then any other, but that was not the question that the Lesson study guide and my post asked. The question was how do you explain to a child why Christ died. The Teachers Edition's comment asks the following:

Jesus died on the cross to save us. How can someone dying save anyone? How would you explain Jesus’ death and the purpose of His death to a tenyear- old? How would you explain it to someone who has never heard of Jesus Christ before? See 1 Peter 1:3–9.
http://www.absg.adventist.org/2008/2Q/TE/PDFs/ETQ208_10.pdf

It should not be a hard question. I am very pleased the Lesson quarterly asked it if only in the teacher comment sections. It is the core of Christianity yet Christians are afraid to or cannot answer the simple question. I looked online for some examples of how people taught it. I found one with a most unusual idea where the children are handed a contract that says if they sign the contract with the other children then if one child does something wrong he will not be punished but one of the other children will be who signed the agreement. I will post that on my blog later this week. They are trying to teach substitution but I can't see how any child would see that agreement as fair or something they would be willing to agree to. But at least they tried.
​

 

[Adventtruth]

who said that was how it had to have been? Especially given the fact that Jesus said long before the cross that he had finished the work he had come to do?

Why is the substitution theory the only viable theory in your opinion? The bible teaches nothing, people read the bible and extrapolate.... the theology they arrive at may or may not be "the truth."

OK Stormy....do you believe the bible teaches that Adams sin was the cause of his posterity's subjection to eternal death or penal destruction?

AT

 

[Adventtruth]

I admit the MIT answers the question better then any other, but that was not the question that the Lesson study guide and my post asked. The question was how do you explain to a child why Christ died. The Teachers Edition's comment asks the following:

The Moral Influence Theory, in my humble understanding of sin and death, and Christs life and blood, does not answer the questions at best of why Christ came and died. But you already know this seeing that you and I already had this discussion a few years ago.

It should not be a hard question. I am very pleased the Lesson quarterly asked it if only in the teacher comment sections. It is the core of Christianity yet Christians are afraid to or cannot answer the simple question. I looked online for some examples of how people taught it. I found one with a most unusual idea where the children are handed a contract that says if they sign the contract with the other children then if one child does something wrong he will not be punished but one of the other children will be who signed the agreement. I will post that on my blog later this week. They are trying to teach substitution but I can't see how any child would see that agreement as fair or something they would be willing to agree to. But at least they tried.
[/indent]

And I answered your question. You give the simple gospel of God first. Children are children...they are trusting. Thats all one has to do. The Holy Spirit always supports and attends the true teaching and preaching of the gospel to any who wants to understand it. When they begin to learn to read, let them read it for themsleves in a childrens bible. The Holy Spirit is there to teach them. God is the gospel, thats not to hard for children to understand. I suspect those who have a hard time explaining it to children make the gospel to complicated for children to understand thus they are left confused. The gospel is not about the sabbath, not about the law, not about me, not about you, but about one person....God. You teach them the gopel according to God, the Holy Spirit will do the rest.

AT

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

The Moral Influence Theory, in my humble understanding of sin and death, and Christs life and blood, does not answer the questions at best of why Christ came and died. But you already know this seeing that you and I already had this discussion a few years ago.

And I answered your question. You give the simple gospel of God first. Children are children...they are trusting. That's all one has to do. The Holy Spirit always supports and attends the true teaching and preaching of the gospel to any who wants to understand it. When they begin to learn to read, let them read it for themsleves in a childrens bible. The Holy Spirit is there to teach them. God is the gospel, thats not to hard for children to understand. I suspect those who have a hard time explaining it to children make the gospel to complicated for children to understand thus they are left confused. The gospel is not about the sabbath, not about the law, not about me, not about you, but about one person....God. You teach them the gopel according to God, the Holy Spirit will do the rest.

AT

I would expect anyone trying to answer the question to use whatever atonement theory they preferred. I don't think you answered the question at all. Saying I would teach them the gospel says nothing. It is like answering a question about the identical speed of two trains one leaving from point A and one from point B and asking where they intersect by saying I would teach my child the finer points of mathematics and the intricacies of word problems.

 

[Adventtruth]

I would expect anyone trying to answer the question to use whatever atonement theory they preferred. I don't think you answered the question at all. Saying I would teach them the gospel says nothing. It is like answering a question about the identical speed of two trains one leaving from point A and one from point B and asking where they intersect by saying I would teach my child the finer points of mathematics and the intricacies of word problems.

Teaching them the gospel says much! But you would rather teach them a story about a contract between friends and sacrificing for that friend rather than teach them the Gospel of God. The funny thing is while I was Adventist, I found the same type of resentment and ill will towards the gospel of God among the Adventist people...they did not think it was important enough. And now you display the same attitute. WOW!

So what are you looking for...some kinda magic formula? I saw your little story you found on the net about the contract, but for me those things always fall short. Just give the children Christ first without the little stories. Then when they undertand that, give them your little stories.

AT

 

[StormyOne]

Stormy what bes your main objection to the idea of Christ bearing the ultimately result/consequences/penalty for sin in our place?
It has seen you object several times but it bes not acquainted with the nature of your objections to it. Could you elaborate please?

I am dissecting/re-thinking the idea of Christ needing to die, how forgiveness occurs, etc in light of the fact that before Jesus went to the cross he said he had finished his work....

I am wondering if people attempting to understand how sinners are made right with God and then conveying that to others found the idea of Jesus paying the "ultimate" sacrifice the best explanation.

Could God forgive man of sin without death occurring? What is it that requires death when it seems that death was a part of the lifecycle of things from the very start....

So its not so much that I am objecting as much as I am asking why does it have to be the way it has been traditionally been taught? Given the fact that there have been multiple theories about how atonement occurred, but somewhere along the way one theory was chosen above all others...

 

[StormyOne]

OK Stormy....do you believe the bible teaches that Adams sin was the cause of his posterity's subjection to eternal death or penal destruction?

AT

huh? unpack that for me please, posterity's subjection to eternal death... what does that mean? Penal destruction? meaning what?

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Teaching them the gospel says much! But you would rather teach them a story about a contract between friends and sacrificing for that friend rather than teach them the Gospel of God.

AT

You are really amazing, I thought it was interesting that the TSDA's would not answer the question but I see that they are not alone in their lack of understanding. No wonder Christianity is in such decline, its adherents can't even express their philosophy coherently. I imagine if they did it would simply be some kind of theology speak about Jesus paid our penalty or He suffered the wrath of God in my place. But they also know that that would only stimulate a 10 year old to ask more questions about how is that fair or why does God have to punish instead of forgiving because their parents tell them to forgive why can't God forgive

so apparently it is easier to avoid answers because the answers don't really work that well, so just call the theospeak the gospel and that will solve everything.

 

[Adventtruth]

You are really amazing, I thought it was interesting that the TSDA's would not answer the question but I see that they are not alone in their lack of understanding.

Well I do know that Adventist have a lack of understanding in this area...And that I understand perfectly well. And perhaps your lack of understanding is due to your imbracing of the doctrines of Mr. Maxwell and Mr. N.T. Wright who has a many of refutable doctrines....All one has to do is read one of his many misleading books.

No wonder Christianity is in such decline, its adherents can't even express their philosophy coherently. I imagine if they did it would simply be some kind of theology speak about Jesus paid our penalty or He suffered the wrath of God in my place. But they also know that that would only stimulate a 10 year old to ask more questions about how is that fair or why does God have to punish instead of forgiving because their parents tell them to forgive why can't God forgive

I assure you Christianity is not in decline because people teach their children the gospel first. Boy its just down right disgraceful that you think teaching children the gospel is what has Christianity in decline. Every parent should know their own children and what level of communication they should use in expressing biblical truth. Its not that hard RC. And if they do decide to ask questions whats wrong with that? We spend all our lives asking questions...You act as if thats such a bad thing. Asking the right questions only lead to learning which is a good thing. And fair? God is more than fair...He saved you did He not? All it takes is the right perspective of God. You set out with the wrong persective, your whole out look is flawed. And how about this...God punished in Christ and He forgave in Christ, He punished out side of Chirst and let the unbelievers perished....do you believe that? Probably not.

so apparently it is easier to avoid answers because the answers don't really work that well, so just call the theospeak the gospel and that will solve everything.

I avoided nothing...and if you can't explain the simple truths of the Gospel to children and you are afraid to sit down and spend a little time explaining to them and answering their questions of how Christ died because of our sin that seperated us from the Father, and that He IMPUTES His righteousness to us that we can live, instead of trying to rap it up in a quick fix little cute story....then you have a problem with trusting that God will do what He promised He would do through the Spirit of God.


AT

 

[Adventtruth]

huh? unpack that for me please, posterity's subjection to eternal death... what does that mean? Penal destruction? meaning what?

Stormy...do you believe that all born into the world are born in a position of missing the mark with God and will suffer punishment for that position unless they trust Christ? Do you believe that it is because of the sin of Adam that all born into the world are in that position? (Please refrain from the baby argument...save that for another day)

AT

 

[StormyOne]

Stormy...do you believe that all born into the world are born in a position of missing the mark with God and will suffer punishment for that position unless they trust Christ?

No not necessarily... not everyone will hear about Christ, enter into a relationship with Christ so that they can trust Christ... I do not believe God will punish those who never knew who Christ was.....

Do you believe that it is because of the sin of Adam that all born into the world are in that position? (Please refrain from the baby argument...save that for another day)
AT

Humans may be born with the condition of sin, and out of harmony with the creator, however because of what God has done, they can be restored... you know the text: Rom 5:19 For just as through one man's disobedience many people were made sinners, so also through one man's obedience many people will be made righteous.

who is that one man? Christ....

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I wrote: No wonder Christianity is in such decline, its adherents can't even express their philosophy coherently.

You don't reply to what I said and restate it as:

I assure you Christianity is not in decline because people teach their children the gospel first. Boy its just down right disgraceful that you think teaching children the gospel is what has Christianity in decline. Its not that hard RC. And if they do decide to ask questions whats wrong with that? We spend all our lives asking questions...You act as if thats such a bad thing.

AT

I asked the question, I praised the lesson quarterly for asking the question and then you accuse me of acting as if asking questions is a bad thing. You equate people not being able to explain their beliefs coherently as people not teaching their children the gospel. The gospel you can't define because you can't present it coherently. Because you can't answer the simple question other then by saying "I teach my children the gospel".

Well I am pretty sure what you are teaching is not the gospel, but then how would anyone know because you can't even explain Jesus' death.

I assume this is what you think the explanation is:

I avoided nothing...and if you can't explain the simple truths of the Gospel to children and you are afraid to sit down and spend a little time explaining to them and answering their questions of how Christ died because of our sin that seperated us from the Father, and that He IMPUTES His righteousness to us that we can live, instead of trying to rap it up in a quick fix little cute story....then you have a problem with trusting that God will do what He promised He would do through the Spirit of God.

But I will use that explanation for the class as it is typical of the majority of Christianity who hide behind theology speak. Even when the question as in this case was to be answered for a child, they can't do it.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Stormy this is an interesting response to your request:

Originally Posted by StormyOne

huh? unpack that for me please, posterity's subjection to eternal death... what does that mean? Penal destruction? meaning what?
​

Stormy...do you believe that all born into the world are born in a position of missing the mark with God and will suffer punishment for that position unless they trust Christ? Do you believe that it is because of the sin of Adam that all born into the world are in that position? (Please refrain from the baby argument...save that for another day)

AT

to which no unpacking is done but a series of other questions is asked. Deflecting from the request you made. This is typical of many people who think they have all the answers, but of course they can't give us the answers.

Maxwell has the very apt statement called the "Fallacy of the assumed premise". The assumed premise is that God must punish sin, the natural consequence of sin...death to which we see abundant evidence is not the result of sin, the result only comes when God punishes sinners. The idea of healing the person from the broken relationship with the creator becomes God turning His wrath away from the supposed promised death penalty which is not the death that we all suffer but the death after that.

 

[Adventtruth]

No not necessarily... not everyone will hear about Christ, enter into a relationship with Christ so that they can trust Christ... I do not believe God will punish those who never knew who Christ was.....

Humans may be born with the condition of sin, and out of harmony with the creator, however because of what God has done, they can be restored... you know the text: Rom 5:19 For just as through one man's disobedience many people were made sinners, so also through one man's obedience many people will be made righteous.

who is that one man? Christ....

Stormy...your posting to me suggest that you believe that God will not punish those who have not had a chance to elect Christ as savour. IF that is so I can't find one single bible passage that suggest God saves some apart from trust in Christ Jesus. If you know of such a passage kindly show me, otherwise It is your own speculation. What I do find is passages as:

(Joh 3:16)"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
(Joh 3:17)For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
(Joh 3:18)Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
(Joh 3:19)And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.
(Joh 3:20)For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.
(Joh 3:21)But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God."


This is a very compelling passage in that verse 18 suggest that those who don't believe are alrerady condemned. That same condemnation is from being in Adam and not Christ. He is pointed out by the law of God as a sinner quilty before the judgment bar of God....and under the curse of the law, and nothing is there to rescue the unbeliever...even those who have not heard of Christ, from the curse of the law.

The bible even goes on to refute what you have just said above.

(Act 4:10) let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead--by him this man is standing before you well.
(Act 4:11) This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.
(Act 4:12) And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

As for the Romans 5:19 passage...in context its not about a universal salvation but salvation by faith in the life and blood of Christ.
(Rom 5:15) But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.
(Rom 5:16) And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification.
(Rom 5:17) For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
(Rom 5:18) Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.
(Rom 5:19) For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.


Clearly its not a universal salvation.

AT

 

[StormyOne]

thank you for sharing AT, I don't share your particular belief, and no I do not believe that God will punish those who have never heard of Christ. You did not address that issue at all... that being, for those who have never ever heard of Christ, you would have me believe that they will be punished.... Since you are not God, neither are you in the position to extend salvation, you cannot say if salvation is universal or not.... thanks for the dialog...