Sunday, May 5, 2019

The LORD said to my Lord


IS CHRIST A CREATED BEING?

Before passing to some of the practical lessons that are to be learned from these truths, we must dwell for a few moments upon an opinion that is honestly held by many who would not for any consideration willingly dishonor Christ, but who, through that opinion, do actually deny His Divinity. It is the idea that Christ is a created being, who,  [20]   through the good pleasure of God, was elevated to His present lofty position. No one who holds this view can possibly have any just conception of the exalted position which Christ really occupies.

The view in question is built upon a misconception of a single text, Rev. 3:14: "And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write: These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God." This is wrongly interpreted to mean that Christ is the first being that God created; that God's work of creation began with Him. But this view antagonizes the scripture which declares that Christ Himself created all things. To say that God began His work of creation by creating Christ is to leave Christ entirely out of the work of creation.

The word rendered "beginning" is arch , meaning, as well, "head" or "chief." It occurs in the name of the Greek ruler, Archon, in archbishop, and the word archangel. Take this last word. Christ is the Archangel. See Jude 9

Jud 1:9  Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. 

 1 Thess. 4:16;

1Th 4:16  For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first

John 5:28, 29;

Joh 5:28  Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 
Joh 5:29  And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. 

Dan. 10:21.

Dan 10:21  But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince. 

This does not mean that He is the first of the angels, for He is not an angel, but is above them. Heb. 1:4.

Heb 1:4  Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. 

It means that He is the chief or prince of the angels, just as an archbishop is the head of the bishops. Christ is the commander of the angels. See Rev. 19:9-14.

Rev 19:9  And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God. 
Rev 19:10  And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. 
Rev 19:11  And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 
Rev 19:12  His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 
Rev 19:13  And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 
Rev 19:14  And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. 

He created the angels. Col. 1:16.

Col 1:16  For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him

And so the statement that He is the beginning or head of the creation of God, means that in Him creation had  [21]  its beginning; that, as He Himself says, He is Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Rev. 21:6; 22:13.

Rev 21:6  And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. 

Rev 22:13  I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. 

He is the source whence all things have their origin.

Neither should we imagine that Christ is a creature, because Paul calls Him (Col. 1:15) "The First-born of every creature;" for the very next verses show Him to be Creator, and not a creature. "For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by Him, and for Him; and He is before all things, and by Him all things consist." Now if He created everything that was ever created, and existed before all created things, it is evident that He Himself is not among created things. He is above all creation and not a part of it.

The Scriptures declare that Christ is "the only begotten son of God." He is begotten, not created. As to when He was begotten, it is not for us to inquire, nor could our minds grasp it if we were told. The prophet Micah tells us all that we can know about it, in these words: "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from the days of eternity." Micah 5:2, margin. There was a time when Christ proceeded forth and came from God, from  [22]  the bosom of the Father (John 8:42; 1:18), but that time was so far back in the days of eternity that to finite comprehension it is practically without beginning.

Joh 8:42  Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. 

Joh 1:18  No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. 

But the point is that Christ is a begotten Son, and not a created subject. He has by inheritance a more excellent Name than the angels; He is "a Son over His own house." Heb. 1:4; 3:6.

Heb 1:4  Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. 

Heb 3:6  But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end. 

 And since He is the only-begotten Son of God, He is of the very substance and nature of God, and possesses by birth all the attributes of God; for the Father was pleased that His Son should be the express image of His Person, the brightness of His glory, and filled with all the fullness of the Godhead. So He has "life in Himself;" He possesses immortality in His own right, and can confer immortality upon others. Life inheres 4   (4 This means an attribute belonging to or existing in a thing.) in Him, so that it cannot be taken from Him; but, having voluntarily laid it down, He can take it again. His words are these: "Therefore doth My Father love Me, because I lay down My life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of My Father." John 10:17, 18.

If anyone springs the old cavil, how Christ could be immortal and yet die, we have only to say that we do not know. We make no pretensions of fathoming infinity. We cannot understand how Christ could be God in the beginning, sharing equal  [23]  glory with the Father, before the world was, and still be born a babe in Bethlehem. The mystery of the crucifixion and resurrection is but the mystery of the incarnation. We cannot understand how Christ could be God and still become man for our sake. We cannot understand how He could create the world from nothing, nor how He can raise the dead, nor yet how it is that He works by His Spirit in our own hearts; yet we believe and know these things. It should be sufficient for us to accept as true those things which God has revealed, without stumbling over things that the mind of an angel cannot fathom. So we delight in the infinite power and glory which the Scriptures declare belong to Christ, without worrying our finite minds in a vain attempt to explain the infinite.

Finally, we know the Divine unity of the Father and the Son from the fact that both have the same Spirit. Paul, after saying that they that are in the flesh cannot please God, continues: "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His." Rom. 8:9. Here we find that the Holy Spirit is both the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ. Christ "is in the bosom of the Father;" being by nature of the very substance of God, and having life in Himself, He is properly called Jehovah, the self-existent One, and is thus styled in Jer. 23:56, where it is said that the righteous Branch, who  [24]  shall execute judgment and justice in the earth, shall be known by the name of Jehovah-tsidekenu—THE LORD, OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS

Let no one, therefore, who honors Christ at all, give Him less honor than He gives the Father, for this would be to dishonor the Father by just so much; but let all, with the angels in heaven, worship the Son, having no fear that they are worshiping and serving the creature instead of the Creator.

And now, while the matter of Christ's Divinity is fresh in our minds, let us pause to consider the wonderful story of His humiliation.

Christ And His Righteousness. 

E.J. Waggoner

(Excerpt)

*******

Imputed-

  1. Extend quality to somebody else-
to regard a quality such as righteousness that applies to somebody as also applying to another person associated with him or her (Encarta Dictionary Online)

Imparted-

  1. Give a quality to something-
to give something a particular quality (Encarta Dictionary Online)

(Excerpt)

SANCTIFICATION -- TAILOR MADE --Part 1 

While Justification has been defined as our title to heaven; Sanctification has been explained as our fitness for heaven. One is imputed; the other imparted. It is thus stated: The righteousness by which we are justified is imputed; the righteousness by which we are sanctified is imparted. The first is our title to heaven, the second is our fitness for heaven.(1) The second - our fitness for heaven, or imparted righteousness - is the main emphasis of this thought paper. To understand the objective of sanctification, we must ask ourselves some questions:

1) To what is righteousness imparted - the flesh?
2) If it fits us for heaven, what do we take to heaven?
3) What is our real "self", and how is it expressed?

There are certain texts in the Bible which perhaps we have never perceived as pertaining to sanctification which need to be noted. Paul emphatically declared that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." (2)  Jesus indicated - "The flesh profiteth nothing." (3)

If righteousness were imparted to the flesh, what would one then have? Holy Flesh!

Noting the second question - what do I take to Heaven? We are plainly told: A character formed according to the divine likeness is the only treasure that we can take from this world to the next. Those who are under the instruction of Christ in this world will take every divine attainment with them to the heavenly mansions. And in heaven we are continually to improve. How important, then, is the development of character in this life. (4)

If we ever enter the kingdom of God, we must enter with perfect characters, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing. (5)

This character is referred to in the Spirit of Prophecy as "the spirit" that is returned to God at death, to be preserved until the resurrection. (6)  In this understanding, we find our true "self" defined, and also understand that a second major factor

p 2

of sanctification is the preservation of our individuality. What takes place concerning the dead at the resurrection, also involves the living who are translated. Paul associates both in the context that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. 

He writes with emphasis: Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold I show you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. (7)

All do not go through death - we shall not all sleep - to experience the physical transformation accompanying our entrance to Heaven at the Second Advent; but all are changed. The one, who saw corruption in the grave, puts on incorruption, and the living one who is translated sheds the mortal form for the immortal habitation of the character formed in this life.

Consider the Great Example - even Jesus Christ. In becoming a member of the human race, He took "flesh and blood." (8)  "A divine spirit dwelt in a temple of flesh." (9)  And what that "temple of flesh" was like we are not left in doubt. "He took upon Himself fallen, suffering human nature, degraded and defiled by sin. (9) But in this earthly life, Jesus demonstrated two things in regard to character. "In His human nature, He maintained the purity of His divine character." (10)  That which was His from all eternity remained undefiled, and in the humanity which He took, He developed a perfect human character. "Christ coming to earth as man, lived a holy life, and developed a perfect character." (11)  But the flesh and blood, He took in becoming a man, He did not take to heaven with Him after the resurrection. "In Joseph's tomb He wrapped Himself in the garment of immortality," (12)  and ascended to heaven, bearing a sanctified, holy humanity."(13)  Not until our Saviour returns will we be changed - exchanging "our vile body" for one "like unto His glorious body." (14)

If therefore, to the flesh or body righteousness is not imparted, what part does it play, if any, in the work of sanctification? Paul tells us:      I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.  (15)

This is one of the most misapplied Scriptures in the whole Bible. "Holy" has a ceremonial connotation which denotes dedication, as well as a moral significance when applied to character and acts of life. The text is definitely alluding to the sacrifices of the earthly sanctuary, and Paul is admonishing us to present our bodies in

p 3

the same way, but as a living sacrifice. While the animal was to be without blemish, in no way could it be construed to mean that animals so used in services of the sanctuary had a moral value. The "without blemish" could typify only "character" not the flesh or body of the antitype. Phillips, Moffatt, and the N. E. B. use either the word, dedicated, or consecrated, in place of "holy" in the translation of this text, while the Amplified adds to these, devoted.

The flesh which embraces the lower, corrupt nature cannot of itself act contrary to the will of God. (16)  But if it is not placed in continual sacrifice - daily crucified - it is impossible for the mind to exercise its proper function, and thus a character to be formed according to the will of God. "The body is the only medium through which the mind and the soul are developed for the up building of character. ...The tendencies of our physical nature, unless under the dominion of a higher power will surely work our ruin. The body is to be brought into subjection. The higher powers of the being are to rule. ... The kingly power of reason, sanctified by divine grace, is to bear sway in our lives." (17)  In fact the whole objective of Christ from Bethlehem to Calvary was that "He might restore to man the original mind which he lost in Eden through Satan's alluring temptation." (18)

If I, therefore, set the means to obtain the objective as an end in themselves, I am structuring a false plan of redemption - creating a salvation by works program - in the area of sanctification. While the following are absolute truths:      A diseased body and disordered intellect, because of continual indulgence in hurtful lusts, make sanctification of the body and spirit impossible. (19)
The diet has much to do with the disposition to enter into temptation and commit sin. (20)
The Spirit of God cannot come to our help, and assist us in perfecting Christian characters, while we are indulging our appetites to the injury of health, and while the pride of life controls. (21)
- yet if I make Health Reform an end in itself in an attempt to create a "holy" body so that this body will be translated, and seek to accrue merit by my vaunted devotion to the reform, I am only embedding myself more deeply into the Laodicean state so that even the Spirit of God will not be able to reach me. It is even possible that in my celebrated righteousness so that I can testify that I am not as other men are, I will commit the unpardonable sin. In my devotion to reforms, I may fall short of the weightier matters of the law. A devotee to reform is not synonymous with a sanctified person.

Health Reform - and this includes dress reform, Educational Reform, or any other Reform is a means to an end, and not an end in itself. This body - flesh and blood - does not inherit the kingdom of God. (22)  It is but the tabernacle in which I dwell. (23)  I but use it to serve in the development of the character which God requires for the

p 4

Heavenly Life. Let me illustrate. I know that Health Reform involves strict vegetarianism. But certain combinations, good in themselves, and certain vegetables alone distress me, as well as certain fruits, with the result that I can become very irritable. As noted above - "The diet has much to do with the disposition ... to commit sin." (2O)  Can I, therefore, even though practicing basic Health Reform, develop under such circumstances, a Christ-like character? The answer is - NO! This brings us to a very important aspect of sanctification. Sanctification is tailor made by the Holy Spirit to fit the individuality of each person. This we shall discuss in the next thought paper.


(1) Ellen G. White, Messages to Young People, p. 35
(2) 1 Corinthians 15:50
1Co 15:50  Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. 
(3) John 6:63
Joh 6:63  It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. 
(4) Ellen G. White Ibid, pp. 100-101
(5) Ibid, p. 105
(6) Ellen G. White, Ms., 76, 1900 (6BC:1093)

The Resurrection
Our personal identity is preserved in the resurrection, though not the same particles of matter or material substance as went into the grave. The wondrous works of God are a mystery to man. The spirit, the character of man is returned to God there to be preserved. In the resurrection every man will have his own character. God in His own time will call forth the dead, giving again the breath of life, and bidding the dry bones live. The same form will come forth, but it will be free from disease and every defect. It lives again bearing the same individuality of features, so that friend will recognize friend. There is no law of God in nature which shows that God gives back the same identical particles of matter which composed the body before death. God shall give the righteous dead a body that will please Him. Ms76-1900.10
Paul illustrates this subject by a kernel of grain sown in the field. The planted kernel decays, but there comes forth a new kernel. The natural substance in the grain that decays is never raised as before, but God giveth it a body as it hath pleased Him. A much finer material will compose the human body, for it is a new creation, a new birth. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. 
Ms 76, 1900 - 11
(7) 1 Corinthians 15:50-52
1Co 15:50  Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. 
1Co 15:51  Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 
1Co 15:52  In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 

(8) Hebrews 2:14
Heb 2:14  Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil

(9) Ellen G. White, Youth's Instructor, Dec. 20, 1900 (4BC:1147)
(10) Ibid., June 2, 1898
(11) Ellen G. White, Desire of Ages, p. 762
(12) Ellen G. White, "The Only True Mediator", Nov. 28, 1897 (M. L. Andreasen Collection #2)
(13) Ellen G. White, In Heavenly Places, p. 13
(14) Philippians 3:21
Php 3:21  Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself. 
(15) Romans 12:1-2
Rom 12:1  I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 
Rom 12:2  And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. 

(16) Ellen G. White, The Adventist Home, p. 127
(17) Ellen G. White, The Ministry of Healing, p. 130
(18) Ellen G. White, Letter 121, 1897 (7BC:926)
(19) Ellen G. White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 44 (#52)
(20) Ibid, p. 52 (#69)
(21) Ibid, p. 57 (#79)
(22) Some may question the emphasis in this paper on I Cor. 15:50 - "that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." One can recall that Jesus declared after His resurrection when the disciples thought they had seen a spirit - "a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have." Luke 24:39. A very careful reading of Ms. 76, 1900 (6BC:l093) will clarify the apparent contradiction, and also help us to better understand that the "flesh and blood" Jesus took in becoming a man was not the same "flesh and bones" of which He spoke in Luke 24:39.
(23) We need not believe in the immortality of the soul to accept what Paul says in II Cor. 5:1-4. This earthly tabernacle passes away. It returns again to dust, but a glorious body awaits us on the resurrection morning - "a house which is from heaven" - one of an heavenly origin. It will be then that the character formed in this life will find its eternal abode in a body "bearing the same individuality of features" but made of "much finer material" than the dust of the earth, for it is raised a spiritual body. See 6BC:1093 as cited above.

A CURIOUS REPORT

Now widely circulated -so it appears - is what is claimed to be an Objective Digest Report which purports to answer the question - "What Is Happening in Australia?" An introductory letter signed by a Jack D. Walker of Goodlettsville, Tenn., introduces the author of the report -Ray Martin -as "a fellow Adventist believer." He seeks to convey that Mr. Martin has prepared this report "soberly and deliberately." However, every reader needs to note that it comes from the Brinsmead press, and is thus slanted in favor of the heretics of Avondale College in Australia. Robert D. Brinsmead, himself, has clearly written in a "Thought Paper" which he did not wish to be circulated among church members that he was in wholehearted agreement with Dr. Ford, who is (or was) head of the Bible Department at Avondale College. (1)
Since it is claimed that this report was "deliberately prepared" [There are two meanings to the word -"deliberate"], we must ask why it did not adhere to the title given, and maintain an "objective" posture rather than being a propaganda sheet tarnished with deception. As one reads this report, there can be no doubt as to the author's negative response to the editorials appearing under the pen of the former associate editor of the Review, Dr. Herbert Douglass. These editorials upheld the historic position of the Church in regard to the incarnation, and presented the fact that God will have a people living in the last generation who will demonstrate His power to give victory over sin. These two points are anathema to Ford and Brinsmead.
p 5

Then this "objective" report quotes from a letter written by Dr. Douglass, and the supposed reaction which followed the disclosure that the letter had been written. The Report's analysis reads:      On March 11, 1975, Dr. Herbert Douglass wrote a letter on a Review letterhead to a lay church member in Australia (whom he had never met), saying, "I can imagine that the picture looks somewhat bleak 'down-under' when the prevailing winds seem to blow from a new and strange Ford-Brinsmead mateship ... Please keep me up-to-date regarding publications and whatever that reveal the outreach of the above mateship ..." Some Australian leaders were shocked to learn that a man in the Review office was prepared to go over their heads to oppose Ford and foment trouble Down-Under. The Division President protested strongly to the GC President, and Douglass was reprimanded for his letter. (2)

After reading this and other comments regarding Dr. Douglass, I decided to write to him, expecting that a heralded "objective" report would at least be basically honest. His response was positive and forthright. He stated:      No, Elder Pierson never "reprimanded" me for a letter I had written to a lay church member in Australia. Nor am I weaseling around any other word that means the same thing …

But no, again, Elder Pierson did not nor did any delegated officers "reprimand" me or even speak to me about this letter. The facts are that what I had said was well-known by others as well as myself and the observation has been completely validated by developing events. Both Bob Brinsmead and Des Ford have made no secret about their compatibilities. (3)

Thus by a clarification of Point #16 in a supposedly objective report, a shadow is cast on the veracity of the whole.

However, we must ask some questions in an area where a direct quote is used. Dr. Desmond Ford unequivocally stated in a meeting in Sydney, Australia that Elder Pierson confessed to him at the Palmdale meeting where certain basic truths were compromised for the sake of a precarious unity:       "Des, I am not a theologian. I am saying what I have been taught. I have been in the Sabbath-school classes as a student. That's all." (4)

Since Elder Pierson is not as open, direct, and forthright as Dr. Douglass, and will not answer letters which have been written to him on other occasions, there is no way that this writer can ascertain whether he said this or not. And unless Dr. Ford is an absolute liar, this confession remains on record as to how tragic the situation is in Takoma Park.

The Apostle Paul scorned the Jewish converts because at a time when they should have been teachers, they had "become such as have need of milk and not strong meat." He then concluded -"For everyone that useth milk hath no experience in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe."(5)  And my Bible and your Bible declares -"Woe to thee, 0 land, when thy king is a child." (6)  The church has been in a state of crisis since 1950, but tragic indeed, when we come to the crisis of crises over such basic doctrines as the incarnation and righteousness by faith, he who stands as the self claimed "first minister" of the church is a theological babe, and professes not to

p 6 -- have studied the truth for himself, but has merely parroted what others have told him. Either Elder Pierson needs to state without reservations or weaseling that he did not say what Dr. Ford said he said, or if he did, he needs to resign.

The so-called Objective Digest Report closes with an undocumented quote from a "Protestant clergyman" which stated - "There are other troubling evidences that a new SDAdventism aborning." If this be so, then the full responsibility must rest on the leadership of the church, who have betrayed the trust placed in them by the laity and have compromised the basic truths of Adventism.

(1) Robert D. Brinsmead, "The Current Righteousness by Faith Dialogue", p. 1
(2) Ray Martin, Objective Digest Report, p.4, #16
(3) Dr. Herbert Douglass, Letter to WWN, dated February 6, 1977
(4) Martin, op. cit., p. 6, #25
(5) Hebrews 5:12-13 margin
Heb 5:12  For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 
Heb 5:13  For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. 

(6) Ecclesiastes 10:16.
Ecc 10:16  Woe to thee, O land, when thy king is a child, and thy princes eat in the morning! 


APR. 1977 "Watchman, What of the Night? " Thought Paper.  Adventist Laymen's Foundation.  (Excerpt)

No comments: