Re: [TruthTalk] Judy, Lance, Bill, John, David?

[knpraise]

I know this is too long  --  but please take the time.  I was having one of the moments in the Lord.  If  doesn't work for you, then it was just for me.  I can live with that !!

 

jd

 

-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Dean Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

cd: Bill I have condenses article written by Darby: Do you agree with it?If not why?

 

This shews us the Christ standing in the midst of those who are saved, whom God brings to glory, although at their head. It is this which our epistle sets before us — He who sanctifies (the Christ), and they who are sanctified (the remnant set apart for God by the Spirit) are all of one: an _expression_, the force of which is easily apprehended, but difficult to express, when one abandons the abstract nature of the phrase itself. Observe that it is only of sanctified persons that this is said. Christ and the sanctified ones are all one company, men together in the same position before God. But the idea goes a little farther.

It is not of one and the same Father; had it been so, it could not have been said, "He is not ashamed to call them brethren." He could not then do otherwise than call them brethren.

If we say "of the same mass" the _expression_ may be pushed too far, as though He and the others were of the same nature as children of Adam, sinners together. In this case He would have to call every man His brother; whereas it is only the children whom God has given Him, "sanctified" ones, that He calls so. I do not agree with this.   Dean, if Christ is not of the same nature as we,  well, what is left?  Do you know of more "natures" than the two  -  human and divine ??   If we allow for Christ to be human but refuse to think that He was of the same nature as we  --  what is the benefit?    I do not understand.     Why didn't He just come down, as God,  and assume a human body, one fashioned just for Him   --------    maybe King David's body, since it was available, and go with that. Christ could claim to be the fulfillment of all that David wrot e about in the Psalms.   Or, just make up your own scenario. 

Do you understand that the "sinful" nature IS the nature of man?   That it existed BEFORE the fall?   That it has two sides to it  --   a God side and a man side?   (Romans 7:14-25  is only an expansion of this reality.)

The really big difference between God and Man is this  --  God cannot   -- CANNOT  -- be tempted.   It is impossible for God to sin, as God.   God will never change because He cannot change.   He is fully free to be Himself.  He is not bound to choice, as we are.  

If God had made another God  (even impossible for God, by the way) there would have been no tree of knowledge.  It would have been wholly unnecessary.  There would not have been a serpent, for the same reason.  There would have been no need for redemption. And so on. 

But God made Man.   That "sinful" nature is not one which necessarily sins !! Why do you not see the need for children to receive blood offerings under the old Law?   There is no sacrifice for children's sins, right?   Becasue their sinful nature is not  that which receives or merits condemnation  !!!    There can be no other reason !!  So , simply having a sinful nature is not the issue of judgment.                         Choice is the critical difference between the two natures.   God has no choice and is , therefore, free to be who He is.  Man, on the other hand, does have choice and has had this choice from the very beginning!!  Correct? !!   God is not temptable, man is.  The tree of knowledge is just that, but more !!  It is also a testament to the fact that man was created with a choice  --  to eat or not to eat.   It is a testament that man's nature is not God's nature. 

What does it mean to be "temptable?"   We do have scripture on this and you know it as well as I.   James explains it to us.   The important issue in James is this  -- temptation appeals is to our human desires  (James calls this "lust").   In James, neither "lust" nor temptation is wrong  -  as he defines the workings of "sin."   And in that discussion by James , we have the description of the human nature.  It is temptable !! And that is why we call it a "sinful nature."   Not that we MUST  sin, but that we can sin.    When we say that Christ has a "sinful nature,"  we are  not saying that He was a sinner.   No.  But we are saying that He had the same desires as we.  When He was tempted by Satan  -- HE WAS TEMPTED.    But wait  !    We should not forget that Christ is both God and man.  One of Bill's most revealing comments, to me, is found in his belief that in Christ Jesus, we have a combining of natures that truly makes Him the Unique Son of God.   There is only ONE nature in Christ  (IMO).  And, it is wholly infinte and finite.   Because this is true,  Paul tells us that He has reconciled all things unto Himself IN THE BODY OF HIS FLESH.  In Christ,   God and man and man's predicatment are all brought together, in one person and in that circumstance,  we have true resolution.  And Paul uses "reconciliation" to speak of the resolution.  This is the fact of reconciliation.     The purpose of reconciliation is three fold and it is that we might be holy, blameless and above reproach.   This three-fold purpose is found only IN CHRIST.   Please take time to read from  several versions Col 1:19-23 and see if you do not find the message stated  imm ediately above in that passage. 

 

Something else ----- 

It is never that we have to sin  --  the sad truth is that we are willing participants when we do sin !!  And when left with enough time,  we will sin.   That is why Rom 5:12 is worded just as it is  "........... and death passed to all men because all have sinned.'   In Adam, we have the first sin AND proof that we are all sinners because, of course, we have all sinned...............its just a matter of time.    

 

If Christ has not assumed our nature,  He has done NOTHING for us.   WE ARE STILL SEPARATED FROM GOD, are we not?   I have finally realized, in this explaining,  the importance of Christ to me, personally.   IN HIM I have the conbining of my nature with God's very nature.   The Law, any law, does not accomplish this combining  -  nor does it even try.  Such is not the purpose of law or The Law.   And, so, under law,  man continues to be man and the blood of bulls and goats will always be needed.   But in Christ , we have a sacrifice delivered once and for all time !!!!!   Paul , in Gals 3:26,27 speaks of the need to put on Christ.   In this passage, Paul speaks of immersion into Christ and in that immerison, we are "putting on Christ."   In this "utting on" we have the reality of the reconciliation Christ secured on the cross and IN CHRIST we are truly blameless, holy and above reproach. 

All of this has occurred BEFORE we , individually, begin to be reconciled to Him   (II Cor 5: 20).   We are already considered to be holy, blameless and above reproach  --  ALREADY  --  before we even begin to seek to reconcil our way of living to the Presense within. 

And all of this is because Christ was wholly God and wholly man  so that we might be holy in Him !! 

God bless

jd

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But He and the sanctified ones are all as men in the same nature and position together before God. When I say "the same," it is not in the same state of sin, but the contrary, for they are the Sanctifier and the sanctified, but in the same truth of human position as it is before God as sanctified to Him; the same as far forth as man when He, as the sanctified one, is before God. On this account He is not ashamed to call the sanctified His brethren.

This position is entirely gained by resurrection; for although in principle, the children were given to Him before, yet He only called them His brethren when He had finished the work which enabled Him to present them with Himself before God. He said indeed "mother, sister, brother;" but He did not use the term "my brethren," until He said to Mary of Magdala, "Go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God an your God." Also in Psalm 22 it is when He had been heard from the horns of the unicorn, that He declared the name of a Deliverer-God to His brethren, and that He praised God in the midst of the assembly.

He spoke to them of the Father's name while on earth, but the link itself could not be formed; He could not introduce them to the Father, until the grain of wheat, falling into the ground, had died; until then He remained alone,