Comments on a Review Article on the 50th Anniversary Conference on QOD


“He took upon Him our sinful nature.” EGW, RH, 12/15/96

Click to go to our Home Page


Dear Reader, 

In reference to this article about the 50th Anniversary Conference on the book Questions on Doctrines, I make the following observations:


Everything one believes religious-wise clusters around his/her concept of the nature of Christ. This issue is so important that God says that those who do not believe that His Son came in the likeness of human flesh are antichrist. Ellen White says that Christ came in the nature of Adam AFTER the fall to prove that man need not have sinned and that man can overcome sin by the same means Jesus did.


Here is an excerpt from the article:  "“I cannot imagine them arguing about whether His human nature was pre-lapsarian or post-lapsarian,” Rodriguez said, smiling. “I [can] only imagine the shepherds possessed by wonder, by joy. No speeches, no analysis, just the Child and them, possessed by wonder.”


The above statement is a totally "dumb-dog" (Isa. 56:10-12) statement! Why? Because the entire Great Controversy between Christ and Satan is whether or not God's law was fair and just and could be kept. Christ came in our nature to prove that it need not have been broken by man--because HIS HUMANITY KEPT THE LAW WITH ALL THE SINS OF EVERY MAN EVER COMMITTED LAID UPON HIM! That is evidence of how where sin abounds grace much more abounds to keep from sinning!


Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?


Rom 1:5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:

1Pe 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.


My observation: If Christ did not have the nature of Adam AFTER the fall, the Great Controversy between Christ and Satan would not exist, because Christ would not thus have proven that man need not have fallen. '


True or False Righteousness by Faith an Inherent Part of the Issue: If Christ did not take our fallen sinful nature, as Ellen White said He did, then Righteousness by faith would involve only imputed salvation. If Christ did indeed take our sinful fallen nature, then true Righteousness by Faith would involve the IMPUTED and IMPARTED Righteousness of Christ. By the latter we overcome. By the former we could not overcome and Christ would have been only our substitute and not our example. He is both.


This issue is rife with salvific implications, and only the “cheap-grace” foolish virgins will subscribe to the pre-lapsarian position which Questions on Doctrines extolled. They do not believe that we can overcome sin in this life because of that pre-lapsarian position. That is antichrist, and that is why foolish virgins will not be saved. All these implications are what the "dumb-dog" leaders (Isaiah 56:10-12) cannot understand.


Spin-off doctrinal abominations linked to the adoption of the pre-lapsarian view in 1957, included the Augustinian Error of Original Sin, as taught by Rome. If the church believes that we are born sinners, then they should do as the Romans do: baptize infants!


Then there was the New Theology which is a natural, logical progression from the adoption of the pre-lapsarian view—that we cannot overcome sin this side of glorification, because Jesus was not our example, but only our substitute; that He did not prove that we can overcome—He did it all for us, rather than in and through us by the indwelling of His Divine Nature Holy Spirit. And the way was paved for that error in 1930, when the church adopted the Trinity Doctrine, which denies the PRE-CROSS Incarnation sacrifice of “highest good, crowning sacrifice that heaven could bestow,” the Incarnation sacrifice of the Son of God, of His Divine Nature ONLY existence, in order to give that Nature to us as a free grace give for the purpose of regeneration by overcoming sin.


Further, in reference to the Great Controversy between Christ and Satan:


The reason there would be no Great Controversy between Christ and Satan if Christ came in the pre-lapsarian nature of Adam and thus did not prove that man can keep His Law, is because Satan and the angel's who mutinied with him could not have kept the law either! The Great Controversy between Christ and Satan would thus not exist! Satan and company would have to be pardoned if they chose to repent at any point.


This issue will never die and nor should it! Young men and woman of God, never betray Christ by letting this issue die! You would thereby become antichrist, as are all who embrace and teach the pre-lapsarian view of this critical issue. 


In 1957, Ministry magazine, edited by Leroy Froom, said flat out that Jesus took the nature of Adam before the fall! That antichrist view was eventually sent out to over 450,000 non-SDA ministers as a testament as to what SDA’s believe. That is when Christ was removed by the new movement, 1SM 205, because of the antichrist nature of that belief which has never been repented of by way of notifying the non-SDA pastors who were sent that abominable, antichrist lie.


All this betrayal of Christ and the truth was made in an effort to keep Walter Martin from condemning the SDA church as being a cult! Jesus was called a devil, but SDA dumb-dogs and their sheep followers could not be called a cult!


M.L. Andreasen was right! Don’t ever let his name and what he stood for be forgotten! He was one of the last stalwart men before the “dumb-dogs” took over and form a new movement that has removed God, 1SM 204-5, and which we were never to join. Those who disparage Andreasen are teaching an anti-christ position. They are teaching against Andreasen’s Last Generation Theology, whereby he and Ellen White taught that we are in the antitypical Day of Atonement since 1844, and that sin must be cleansed from the camp, as was the case in the Sanctuary Service.


All who oppose Scripture, Ellen White and Andreasen on this the human nature of Christ issue are indeed antichrist and teaching against the antitypical Day of Atonement. They teach that it is impossible to cleanse the camp of sin, as was required under the Sanctuary Service. This is why a thorough knowledge of the Sanctuary Service is so crucial. It puts the finger on all error that would cause us to lose salvation and lightens the pathway as to the true conditions for being saved.


The 24 papers delivered at the conference will begin appearing at this link in January, and all who argue the pre-lapsarian position and/or try to distinguish between the differences between Christ and us, are anti-christs. He did not appropriate ONE of the differences to aid Him in overcoming sin! And if he did, Satan could justly cry foul. In addition, He gave us His Divine Nature Holy Spirit to level the playing field that we may overcome as He did and by the same means. We have the advantage, because we do not have every sin that was ever committed laid upon us! That is how Christ was tempted by all temptations known to man. That will be better understood in heaven.


God bless,