Chapter One: The Victory

This is the first installment of a 4 part series, explaining the primary differences in doctrine between us at the Creation Seventh Day Adventist (CSDA) church, and the General Conference (GC) of Seventh Day Adventists®. This first of the series will deal with, incidentally, the first in the list of importance in the life the Christian. We at the CSDA church are not a "Denomination," as such we have no creed outside of scripture. If you are a believer in, and liver of this teaching, you are a Creation Seventh Day Adventist already in spirit. All other things will simply fall into place, if self interest in reading scripture is dead.

Before I begin, I want to make sure we are in agreement on one simple thing: The bible does not contradict itself. As I am writing, or even were I speaking, I cannot simply blast into your mind every point at once - Therefore you will most likely begin reading this, and have an argument in mind that is answered later. For that reason I urge you to read on through the entire document. If you have a verse in mind that seems to contradict, but does not explain those put forth, you do not have an explanation, you simply have what on the surface is a contradiction. Therefore, one would be completely unjustified and leave the greater half of the job undone, if they simply spouted a 'contradictory' verse and walked off. What I intend to do here over the course of time, is not only prove why the scripture teaches freedom from all known sin in Christ, but also why it does not teach any other doctrine whatsoever. "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:8)

If you have a verse that is not addressed, as always, I urge you to contact me and I will both answer, and most likely ammend this article, depending on how valid the scripture is regarding the topic. Now that all has been said, let us begin.

After Adam sinned, we have record of something called a sin offering happening in scripture. Sin is the opposite of Yah, who is love and life, and therefore when sin is committed, death can be the only natural result. Yah, however, made a way around this: Sin would still bring death, but He would send His Son in order to suffer that death, so that all could have a way made free to redemption from their fallen, sinful state.

However He did not send His Son immediately; what He did do is give man a temporary substitute until He did. He gave us the commands for how to perform a sin offering - Transferring of the guilt of sin to another blameless creature, most often a lamb or a bullock.

These sacrifices were known as "Shadows," in that, they were pointing forward to a greater sacrifice, that of the lamb of God, Christ. Virtually every last precept of the sacrificial law pointed forward to Christ - The lamb was even bled on a cross, no bones broken therein. Now, these animal sacrifices did not have the power of the "image," or the thing casting the shadow - They had less power than did the cross, than did Christ, the perfect sacrifice.

The animal sacrifices were made year after year, as the people had no freedom from their sins. The animals were simply a transfer of guilt from the guilty party to the unguilty, an animal. As they had no healing, they had no freedom. As they had no freedom, the sacrifices needed to, as stated before, be made every, single, year.

Now, as these sacrifices were simply the shadow not the image, and thus had less power - It would stand to reason that the image itself would have more power. There was a reason that the animal sacrifices did not continue after the cross, and there is a reason that Christ only died on the cross once. There are many today who teach that the cross was merely an instrument of forgiveness, a transfer of blame from us to Christ whenever we sin. However, what power does this have over the shadow's power?

Think about it before answering. The entire reason the animals were sacrificed yearly was that the people could not cease sinning by their power, they could only transfer the guilt. The world today teaches that Christ was sacrificed once, yet we still cannot cease all known sin by His power, and that we can only transfer the guilt. What, then, is the greater power that Christ's sacrifice had? It would seem to me that the only real, comprehensible difference between the Son of God and a farm animal, according to the popular form of the doctrine of salvation, is that Christ only had to die once, whereas the animals were offered over and over.

Is this what Christ's sacrifice was? Making life more comfortable for us, in that we no longer have to sacrifice an animal yearly? If you can, according to that doctrine, show me one fundamental difference between the sacrifice of Christ and that of sheep, please contact me. If you cannot, then I truly hope that you realize the problem with this: Christ did not die for sheep.

What does scripture say in regard to the animal sacrifices?

"For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." (Heb. 10:1-4)

What does it say then, in regard to Christ's sacrifice?

"Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" (Heb. 9:12-14)

We see then that there is a fundamental difference between the sacrifice of Christ and that of animals, one that is not explainable to satisfaction by the concept of simply calling for forgiveness by Christ's blood instead of a lamb's every time we sin. What does it mean to be purged to dead works? What does it mean to be dead to self? Dead in Christ? Converted? Let us see what scripture has to say.

One of the first answers when someone is questioned regarding ceasing from known sin, is that they are "only human," or have a "fallen nature." Well, Christ was human, to combat the former quickly enough. For the latter, this one is answered in scripture as well: For what is it that changes at conversion, except that very nature?

"Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust." (2 Peter 1:4)

Not only do we die to our sinful nature, but we partake of a sinless nature, that of Christ. But, honestly, "Sinful nature" and "the flesh" are usually used interchangably - Sometimes "sinful nature" takes on another definition in some people's minds, so from now on, let's refer to it as "the flesh" to prevent confusion.

Baptism is the symbol of what? Our death to self, our burial with Christ, according to scripture. And what does scripture say regarding this death?

"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof." (Romans 6:3-12)

If then our old man, our sinful flesh, our 'self' is dead, how can we say that it will still cause us to sin, even from time to time?

"For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun. Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." (Ecc. 9:5-6,10)

Interestingly, the dead have not any more a reward it says. At conversion, justification (Being made just, literally) the old man dies, and so does its reward. No longer are we bound to sin because the flesh that made us sin we are dead to; no longer does the natural reward of the old man, death, lay claim on us, "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." (Romans 8:4)

If, then, we have suffered in the flesh, have been crucified with Christ, do we live? "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." (Galatians 2:20)

What then is the natural result of this?

"Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin; That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God." (1 Peter 4:1-2)

Yes, Peter did truly say, without any addition or editing of my own, that if we have suffered in the flesh we have ceased to sin. This so far covers, to a degree, being dead to the flesh, and the fact that the new nature does not at all last but dies before baptism should ever occur. This is one half of the equation - We know that those who are dead to self do not sin, what of the next step: What of those that are reborn?

"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." (1 John 3:9)

Rebirth, or conversion, is one of those controversial topics; at least, one of those topics we are in the process of making controversial. :) If you walk up to most professed Christians and ask them if they are born again, they will most likely respond with an enthusiastic "Yes!" If you then proceed to ask that same Christian if they are sinners, they will sheepishly smile and give the exact same answer. These things should not be so.

If one is born of God how can they sin? Has not God created them new, a new creation in Christ? If then, God has made the convert new, how can they be sinful, or corrupt? How can they be ever deemed with the title of "Sinner?"

Scripture, it is interesting to note, never once refers to a converted Christian as a sinner. Not once. It says all have sinned (Past tense), it says "such were some of you" (Past tense) but you do not hear a converted Christian being termed a sinner. Instead, we hear this:

"We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not." (1 John 5:18)

"Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin." (Romans 6:6-7)

"Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him." (1 John 3:6)

That last verse states something very unpleasant, and hard to accept for the average Christian we were discussing earlier, who proclaims happily they are born again, but sheepishly with a grin that they are a sinner. Many would site the case of Peter, who denied His Lord three times; Yet what does Christ say to Peter immediately before informing him about his soon betrayal?

"But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." (Luke 22:32)

Apparently, there truly is more to conversion than professing with the lips and believing with the heart, as Peter so obviously did. There is more, so much more in scripture on the point of rebirth - However this is primarily intended to show the difference and why it is perfectly scripturally sound; If you want to see several different perspectives on the topic, from several different sources in scripture, please browse the "Sermons & Articles" section.

Now we will move on to the next obvious question - What does "sin" mean? Well, we cannot claim a promise if we do not know what it means, so let us find out what the truth is about "sin."

"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." (1 John 3:4)

Now, this verse seems straightforward enough. There is a catch, however. The words "The transgression of the law" come from a single Greek word, 'Anomia.' It means lawlessness, rebellion, iniquity. This puts an entirely different light on it - For while in English it would seem to imply all transgression is a sin imputed, the original writing gives the meaning of sin as rebellion, an intentional transgression - Wilfull, or voluntary sin.

Sanctification (Being made holy, literally) is a process, and is one clearly narrated by Paul, as we will show in a moment. However this process does not consist of slowly working and earning towards putting known sins away, falling sometimes, and struggling on. Lest we forget, to be santified we must first be justified, and to be justified is to be dead to self. How then can self have a part of struggling towards sanctification? How can we fail in sanctification, even once in awhile, when those who are justified cannot sin?

"Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing." (Philippeans 3:14-16)

We find, then, that sanctification, growth in Christ (which can occur only after birth), "learning to do well," consists not of the struggle of self which is dead, but in the victory of Christ which is alive, over previously unknown sins as they are made known to us by His Spirit. We will be shown things we were in ignorance of, and repent of these things, pressing on towards the mark of the... Well, what Paul said. :) It is not however, by any means, slipping back into known sin "once in awhile." How can we? Self is dead.

Scripture tells us there is a "Sin not unto death," (1 John 5:16-17) a sin not imputed to us. These are those things made known to us by the Spirit, those things we learn of and put away, moving on in Christ's power. We will, however, never commit a knowing sin, to restate what scripture clearly teaches.

Now we will go into the section for those who "err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God." (Matt. 22:29) Of course I do not mean to cast blame on them - The entire world at this point has been corrupted by Satan's leaven to such a degree that even the thought of not sinning, somehow makes the thinker a blasphemer! As always, Satan has used scriptures out of their context and right place (Luke 4:10-11) to support his teachings. As such there are very very many who, as in the Reformer's time, are in bondage because of ignorance of the true way, and have those common 'proof-texts' in mind, as I myself did when coming to this message. So, let us take a moment to cover those verses that would seem to cast doubt on the power of Christ to keep us from sinning, for "I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me." (Philippeans 4:13)

"I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily." (1 Cor. 15:31)

This is one of those verses that is explained with simply the context - Paul is speaking of literal death, not to his flesh, as scripture shows:

"And why stand we in jeopardy every hour? I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die." (1 Cor. 15:30-32)

Here is yet another easily explained one, with context not even being needed: "My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." (1 John 2:1)

Many people use this verse to try and say there is always a "what if" regarding sin. However to do so, one has to entirely desecrate what the verse clearly says, both in Greek and English: The scripture says "And," not "But."

Further, the word "sin" here is in the Aorist, or past-perfect tense; used for a past, completed action. This is the same tense used for the verse "For all have sinned." Scripture, then, does not say lack of faith is natural from time to time since we may slip into sin; it does say however, "And" if any man [has sinned, is in his sin] sin, we have an advocate.

"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8)

This is, admittedly, a fairly good verse against the victory. It may debunk the whole idea, if it wasn't that same John, in that same epistle, who wrote "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God," (1 John 3:9) "Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him," (1 John 3:6) and "We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not." (1 John 5:18)

We find, then, that there must be an explanation to this apparent contradiction. I will, then, explain the meaning of 1 John 1:8; if you have an explanation to maintain the 'face meaning' of that same scripture while bringing the others, even just the ones in the same epistle, into line, please contact me. As for now, here is why 1 John 1:8 does not contradict the rest of scripture:

John has a method of writing where he would say something, rephrase it, say it again, echo it, and then remind you he said it to begin with. For example, John 1 verses 2 and 10 echo the same idea, as do verses 4,5,7,8, and 9. And this is just the first chapter of the gospel.

1 John we find is no exception; verses 1:6, 2:4, and yes, 1:8 all emphasize the same idea. He is not saying it is sin to say through Christ's power we are made sinless - He is speaking to those who are actually sinning, abiding in darkness, keeping not his commandments. To these he writes, if you say you have no sin you lie, and the truth is not in you. Further, the first epistle of John was written to Christians who were being influenced by the beliefs of a people known as Gnostics - Gnosticism, in part, taught that if you were 'saved,' everything you did, no matter how depraved it actually was, was considered above being called sin; those familiar with the neo-Gnostic belief of "once saved always saved" should recognize this immediately, and know that John hated Gnosticism with a passion - His entire gospel was centered around the full humanity while still full divinity of Christ, a rebuke to the Gnostic teaching of Christ being not a human at all, but soley divine, spirit.

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief." (1 Timothy 1:15)

Paul explains why he said this in verse 13: "Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief."

Paul did not say he was the 'chief of sinners' because of any sins he was still in - He stated he deserved the title due to the actions of his past, "in ignorance" and "unbelief."

And finally, Romans the 7th chapter.

I will not post this entire chapter here, but rest assured, if you have a blatently anti-victory verse in mind written by Paul, there is a very high liklihood it is from this chapter. There is a reason this chapter seems to be so anti-freedom from sin, and it fits in perfectly with why the chapter immediately before, Romans 6, is so completely pro-freedom from sin.

Keep in mind that Romans was written as a unit, not meant to be divided up into chapters and verses. If we start and stop at Romans 7, we only get a portion of the intended message. Paul had an interesting method of speaking Greek, one some use in English today; and it is certainly apparent of the truth of Peter's statement even today, " Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." (2 Peter 3:16)

Before we begin, please take a moment to look over this paragraph that follows, and find what is wrong with it. When you are finished, scroll down for the answer:

"Last week I'm sitting in my house with nothing to do. So, I get up and walk outside to look around. I look around, and see nothing happening, so I walk a couple of blocks down the road. I don't see anything interesting, so I turn around and walk back home."

Answer: Absolutely nothing. However, you will notice upon reading it, that I set the time frame as "last week," and then began to speak in present-tense. Paul did this exact same thing in the Greek language, and we see this clearly shown in Romans chapter 7. In Romans 7:5 he sets the tense with, "when we were in the flesh." He then goes on to give an account, switching to present tense quickly, of what it was like to be *in the flesh.*

He further brings us back to present, with Romans 8:1, saying "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

This covers, far as I can tell, every common verse used to refute the victory. Peter was explained earlier in section three, and so this leaves us with one last example that many turn to: King David.

David would, most apparently, have the same explanation as Peter. He was a "man after God's own heart" in that he did the best that he knew, but he also killed unnecessarily, pretended to be crazy to escape capture, and lied to the high priest, which later got the high priest and the entire priest's order killed by king Saul.

We find however that after the prophet Nathan pointed out David's sin, we do not see this behaviour again. In fact we read in Psalms something entirely different; please note the following list of verses in the 119th chapter:

Psalms 119:11 “Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.”

Psalms 119:55 “I have remembered thy name, O LORD, in the night, and have kept thy law.”

Psalms 119:67 “Before I was afflicted I went astray: but now have I kept thy word.”

Psalms 119:100 “I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.”

Psalms 119:101 “I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep thy word.”

Psalms 119:104 “Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.”

Psalms 119:106 “I have sworn, and I will perform it, that I will keep thy righteous judgments.”

Psalms 119:113 “I hate vain thoughts: but thy law do I love.”

Psalms 119:115 “Depart from me, ye evildoers: for I will keep the commandments of my God”

Psalms 119:121 "I have done judgment and justice: leave me not to mine oppressors.”

Psalms 119:128 “Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way.”

Psalms 119:129 “Thy testimonies are wonderful: therefore doth my soul keep them.”

Psalms 119:133 “Order my steps in thy word: and let not any iniquity have dominion over me.”

Psalms 119:145 “I cried with my whole heart; hear me, O LORD: I will keep thy statutes.”

Psalms 119:146 “I cried unto thee; save me, and I shall keep thy testimonies.”

Psalms 119:163 “I hate and abhor lying: but thy law do I love.”

Psalms 119:166 “LORD, I have hoped for thy salvation, and done thy commandments.”

Psalms 119:167 “My soul hath kept thy testimonies; and I love them exceedingly.”

Psalms 119:168 “I have kept thy precepts and thy testimonies: for all my ways are before thee.”

Obviously, there is a change in King David before this point. This then closes this article, please return to the index page to continue to the next chapter.