- Nov 21, 2008
- 53,376
- 11,916
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
'
And yet his sin of tempting someone not of his kingdom incurs greater debt than his sin of tempting someone in his kingdom
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
'Your sin is your sin. It is not satan's sin. His sin of temptation is his sin.
In that statement I say the wicked chose Satan and the saints do not choose him. I don't see how that is some sort of argument against the saints having free will.
The point is that Satan is doing "worse" (has more to pay for ) when tempting the servants of Christ's kingdom to sin - than when tempting his own servants to sin since they already choose him.
The question is not "what are his servants guilty of " since they themselves are already doomed and paying for it - the question is "what additional guilt" belongs to Satan in that case - and the answer is that he is guilty for all that he does in causing people to sin - but he has greater guilt when tempting those not in his kingdom since that is a greater wrong. To know what that is exactly - would require first identifying those not in his kingdom.
tall73 said: ↑
Bob, do you think Jesus only removed some of the sins from the sanctuary, the ones satan CAUSED you to commit? Did he only place some of the sins on satan? .
Bob, do you have any sins that you committed that satan didn't make you do?
'
And yet his sin of tempting someone not of his kingdom incurs greater debt than his sin of tempting someone in his kingdom
your guilt calculus for satan is quite an endeavor.
of God's people were placed on satan. Your explanation of that so far has been to ignore that
Yes, we all have free will to think what we want, don't we?well you have free will and can think whatever you wish.
Lev 16 says it is about "The Day of Atonement" which is God's teaching on that subject in symbols and types just as the Passover is God's teaching about the cross of Christ in symbols and types. You are free to reject whatever you wish.
Jesus paid the debt of sin for all humans that have ever lived - see 1 John 2:2
But not all humans that have ever lived are availed of that payment since not all choose the gospel.
Satan is the originator of all sin - and has responsibility for his part in all of it. But his guilt is greater when he harasses those not in his kingdom than just when he tempts and harasses those in his kingdom.
Looks a lot like Luke 12 doesn't it?
Your efforts to assign "zero guilt" to someone tempted by satan - is your own work. Adventists don't believe in that - good luck though.
Since I have no way of getting inside of her head I can't say for sure.Are you defining that term in your own mind in the same way as she did or are you talking about apples and oranges only giving them the same name?
Until you read my post where even she says it is "his guilt - for what HE has caused". Each one is guilty of their own sins and sometime that sin includes the sin of tempting or training others to sin.
Your argument amounts to "I believe Adventists should be believing some odd thing about the future and the scapegoat that they don't believe .. and they won't agree with me". How is that helping you?
Satan as the first cause for sin - as the devil - has some measure of guilt for all sin. That is not the same thing as me saying "Satan made everyone sin and nobody has free will" -- not sure how you get there.
I don't think your post will tell me what LGW believes, though.There is an easy answer posted
True! And another thing that doesn't match up with the story in Revelation 20:1-3indeed - foxes lions, snakes etc all die over time.. but that does not make them a "sin offering", the "difference" matters because "details matter".
tall73 said: ↑
Jesus is the High Priest already and kills the Lord's goat
You are going to have to spell that out a bit more Bob.
Do you disagree the high priest represents Jesus?
Do you disagree the Lord's goat represents Jesus?
Do you disagree that Jesus laid down His own life?
That kind of sounds like what White believed. Is that what you believe?
here is an "easy" answer to understand the issue regarding satan's guilt and his debt owed -- #558
I like the fact that we can get to the easy part so quickly in our conversations together.
I don't think your post will tell me what LGW believes, though.
In your understanding of White's writings, does she believe that Satan pays the price for our sin when he is finally destroyed?
You are creating a story about Christ not paying for sin if someone else pays ... so then not paying for the wicked since they pay for their own debt of sin and then not paying for the righteous because in your view Satan pays a substitutionary atoning death for all the sins of all the saints instead of Christ in your spin of the Adventist doctrine.
NO! It leaves me saying you are correct Christ pays for the sins of all, and Ellen White's statement is blasphemous non-sense, so get rid of it!That leaves you with claiming that Adventist's think Christ pays for no sin at all - even though you have to start out admitting that Adventist's actually teach that Christ paid for all sin of all humans that have ever lived weather saints or not.
Satan is the originator of all sin - and has responsibility for his part in all of it. But his guilt is greater when he harasses those not in his kingdom than just when he tempts and harasses those in his kingdom.
True! And another thing that doesn't match up with the story in Revelation 20:1-3
White is considered always reliable, then?God gave Ellen White a number of messages for the church -- many volumes written on that as Tall73 points out with that picture he posts. Still the denomination has 28 statements of belief not thousands, in the same way that every sentence in the NT is not "another statement of belief" for any Christian denomination on planet Earth. Which is not a claim that all of the NT is a contradiction to those statements of belief. So this is not the part that is "new".
As for non-SDAs accepting Ellen White as a prophet - I don't think that happens very much. Usually they study SDA doctrine from the Bible - and if they accept then only later would they read the messages given to Ellen White to see if she was a prophet.
Jesus paid the debt of sin for all humans that have ever lived - see 1 John 2:2 (you and I both know that this is what Adventists teach)
You are creating a story about Christ not paying for sin if someone else pays ... so then not paying for the wicked since they pay for their own debt of sin and then not paying for the righteous because in your view Satan pays a substitutionary atoning death for all the sins of all the saints instead of Christ in your spin of the Adventist doctrine. That leaves you with claiming that Adventist's think Christ pays for no sin at all - even though you have to start out admitting that Adventist's actually teach that Christ paid for all sin of all humans that have ever lived weather saints or not.
You have a very confusing suggestion at that point.
We both believe Jesus paid for the sins of the whole world. And with both believe not all accept it.
And yes, we believe since the wicked don't accept it, they pay for their own sin.
And then I believe that since the righteous do accept it, Jesus paid for their sin. And you seem to be indicating that as well. Which is great.
Then you go on and say Ellen White is inspired, and she states the sins of God's people are placed on satan.
And that makes no sense with any of the above
"so Satan, bearing the guilt of all the sins which he has caused God’s people to commit, will be for a thousand years confined to the earth, which will then be desolate, without inhabitant, and he will at last suffer the full penalty of sin, in the fires that shall destroy all the wicked. Thus the great plan of redemption will reach its accomplishment in the final eradication of sin, and the deliverance of all who have been willing to renounce evil." {GC 485.3}
The Bible does not teach that the scapegoat is "the sin offering" rather only the Lord's goat in Lev 16 is "the sin offering" -- only it dies a substitutionary atoning death on behalf of others. Nor does the Bible teach that sins are removed from the Lord’s goat before it is slain – and placed on the scapegoat. (Nor does the 28 FB beliefs say that - nor do official SDA statements say it - no not even ones from Ellen White (your favorite source apparently) -- The scapegoat is not a sin offering.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?