 |
Sinners by Choice
What Inspiration Teaches About the Nature of Human Sin
An article by Kevin D. Paulson published on GreatControversy.org on November 20, 2003
The April 2l, l997 issue of U.S. News & World Report ran a cover story featuring a little child, emblazoned with the headline, “Born Bad?” (l). As violent crime and other destructive behaviors tear at society's fabric, thoughtful citizens wonder aloud whether “nature” or “nurture,”—destiny or choice—plays the most decisive role in determining human conduct.
The doctrine of involuntary sin—what some call original sin—continues to create controversy in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Because this issue is central to our understanding of Jesus' humanity and the earthly prospect of sinless obedience, as well as the principles of God's government and His reverence for creaturely choice, it is essential that it be clarified yet again.
Words and Definitions
Because the term “original sin” carries so much baggage in many minds, and because our basic sense of fairness recoils at the idea of ascribing guilt to people for conditions or behaviors which they never willingly chose, many Adventists who believe all humans are born sinners try to use less offensive language in expressing their views. The problem with most of these less-offensive terms is that they basically teach the same thing as the Augustinian, Calvinistic doctrine itself—namely, that because of Adam's sin, all his descendants enter this world as involuntary transgressors.
Some, for example, will say that while no one inherits guilt at birth, we all inherit a sinful nature which they believe to be sin itself, thus making God's forgiveness necessary before a single sinful choice is made. Others will claim that while people are not automatic sinners at birth, the force of the fleshly nature exerted upon our weakened will power makes “reflexive” sinning inevitable prior to the age of accountability. Still others will voice the utterly absurd claim that babies are obviously sinners because they die, which they supposedly couldn't do if they weren't sinners. (Animals die too. Are they sinners?)
The old saying about “a rose by any other name” applies very much to the issue before us. Original sin by any other name is still original sin. And any doctrine which places sin beyond the power of human choice is a fundamental concession to the most basic premise of original sin, regardless of whether certain features of the Augustinian doctrine might at times be quarreled with.
Clarifying Our Authority
Before we begin, it is imperative that we acknowledge the pre-eminent, exclusive authority of Bible truth and its amplification in the Spirit of Prophecy. The Bible is clear that “all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:l6) (2). We are also advised that “comparing spiritual things with spiritual” (1 Corinthians 2:l3) is the means whereby the Holy Spirit reveals truth.
God has likewise given us the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy, “to correct those who err from Bible truth” (3), and “to correct specious errors, and to specify what is truth” (4). The most basic method of inspired interpretation is laid down in the following statement:
The testimonies themselves will be the key that will explain the messages given, as scripture is explained by scripture (5).
Unless this principle is first acknowledged, it is really not profitable to continue the discussion. If human presuppositions, scholarly opinions, and the vagaries of experience are allowed to influence our doctrinal conclusions, we will never arrive at the unity for which Christ prayed in John l7. We often forget that before Christ prayed, “That they all may be one” (John l7:2l), He entreated His Father, “Sanctify them through Thy truth: Thy word is truth” (v. l7). Sanctification through God's Word of truth is thus the divine prerequisite for Christian unity. Contemporary Adventism is not divided by controversy because the inspired writings are so hard to understand, but because some have sought to mingle those writings with human ideas and opinions, and have thus not allowed the counsel of God to explain itself.
Having established this premise, we can proceed with our discussion.
“Born in Sin” versus “Born a Sinner”
The voluntary nature of human sin is clear in the pages of the Bible: “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son” (Eze. l8:20). “To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin” (James 4:l7).
Elsewhere the book of James is clear that the urges of the fleshly nature do not constitute sin apart from choice:
But every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin; and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death (James 1:14-15).
In other words, only when lust conceives does sin occur, which is what choice is all about. Merely being drawn away, or tempted, by lustful desire is not sin. Ellen White agrees:
There are thoughts and feelings suggested and aroused by Satan that annoy even the best of men; but if they are not cherished, if they are repulsed as hateful, the soul is not contaminated with guilt and no other is defiled by their influence (6).
The passage from Ezekiel is especially decisive in the present discussion, since according to the doctrine of original sin, all humans bear the iniquity of their father Adam. But the above Scriptures are clear that men and women bear their own sins, and acquire their own guilt through choice.
Neither Scripture nor Ellen White ever state that anyone is born a sinner. Two passages into which this concept is often read include Psalm 5l:5 (“Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me”) and an Ellen White statement where she speaks of Seth as being “born in sin” (7). But one can be born into a particular environment without becoming part of that environment. One born in a particular country is not necessarily a citizen of that country. Seth and David were both born into a sinful world, but Inspiration never declares either of them—or anyone else—to have been born a condemned sinner.
Commenting on Psalm 51:5, one modern Adventist supporter of original sin writes:
God respected (Adam's and Eve's) free will and choice, and withdrew from the human race.… Thus all Adam's offspring came into the world without God.… As concerning all other men (except Christ), they are born without God (8).
But if in fact this is true, how is one to understand the following verses from the psalmist?
But Thou art He that took me out of the womb, Thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts. I was cast upon Thee from the womb, Thou art my God from my mother's belly (Psalm 22:9).
For Thou art my hope, O Lord God, Thou art my trust from my youth. By Thee have I been holden up from the womb: Thou art He that took me out of my mother's bowels (Psalm 71:5-6).
For Thou hast possessed my reins: Thou hast covered me in my mother's womb (Psalm 139:13).
Ellen White makes a similar observation as to the influence godly mothers can exert on their children:
Even the babe in its mother's arms may dwell as under the shadow of the Almighty through the faith of the praying mother. John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit from his birth. If we will live in communion with God, we too may expect the divine Spirit to mold our little ones, even from their earliest moments (9).
To claim, as does the author quoted earlier, that all since Adam have inevitably been born without God, clearly flies in the face of the above inspired statements. When viewed in the light of the totality of inspired evidence, Psalm 51:5 cannot be seen as teaching the inevitable sinnerhood of all on account of Adam. Rather, David is simply saying from the depth of his contrition that his mother was a sinner, and so was he. In no way does this verse, or any other in Holy Scripture, remove the process of becoming a sinner from the realm of free will.
One will search the Ellen White CD-ROM in vain for any passage which speaks of people being “born sinners,” “born transgressors,” “sinners at (or from) birth,” “transgressors at (or from) birth,“ or any number of comparable words and phrases. The notion of involuntary sin is simply not found in the writings of Inspiration.
The Message of Romans Five
Perhaps the passage most commonly used, in an attempt to support the doctrine of original sin from Scripture, is Romans 5:12-19. It is worth quoting in full:
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed where there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of Him that was to come. But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift be grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offenses unto justification. For if by one man's offense death reigned by one: much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. Therefore as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Three points, among others, stand out in these verses:
Life and death, as described in this passage, are eternal rather than temporal. This becomes clearest in verse 17, which speaks of how those “which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.” Obviously this refers to the future eternal reign of the saints with Christ (Revelation 5:10). Elsewhere in Romans Paul, when speaking of life and death in a spiritual sense, refers to eternal rather than temporal reality (Romans 8:13). Here Paul uses this language in the same way as Jesus, who declared to the rich young ruler, “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments” (Matthew 19:17; see also Luke 10:28).
So when Romans 5:12 speaks of death passing upon all men, temporal death (though certainly real) is not the focus. As we noted earlier, the claim that newborn babies must be sinners because they experience physical death, is obviously exploded by the fact that animals experience such death as well.
- The phrases “judgment came” and “the free gift came,” found in verse 18, are supplied, which is why the King James Version places them in italics. This is especially significant because this verse is often the cornerstone of the claim that both Adam's condemnation and Christ's justification have been accomplished for all, whether they like it or not. But without these added phrases, it is easier to harmonize this verse with others in this passage which indicate the decisive role of choice in making real the provisions of both sin and salvation.
Three verses in this passage make it clear that whatever the role played by Adam and Christ in the human saga, free choice is what makes humans either condemned sinners or justified saints. Regarding condemnation, Romans 5:12 declares that “death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” Notice it doesn't say death (eternal) has passed on all men because Adam sinned, but rather, because all have sinned.
The same holds true for justification. Despite the claims of some, Paul isn't saying here that all men and women have been involuntarily justified by the events of Calvary. Rather, he states that the ones justified are those who “receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness” (verse 17, italics supplied). Verse 19 clarifies the same point, which declares that “as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” Obviously, just as the many being made sinners has occurred because “all have sinned” (verse 12), so the many being made righteous is here depicted as a future event determined by the choice of individuals, not a past event occurring once for all at the cross.
The theme of Romans 5 is really quite simple: Adam led the world into sin, and Christ has offered to lead us out of it. But just as the choice to sin is ours, so is the choice to accept Christ's righteousness.
None Forced to Transgress
Because “all have sinned” (Romans 3:23; 5:l2), “the children of Adam share his guilt and its consequences” (10). Never do we read that Adam's children share his guilt merely by being born. Another statement, often quoted to support involuntary sin, declares:
Adam was required to render perfect obedience to God, not only in his own behalf, but in behalf of his posterity. God promised him that if he would stand the test of temptation, preserving his allegiance to the Creator during the great trial to which he would be subjected, his obedience would ensure his acceptance and favor with God. He would then be forever established in holiness and happiness, and these blessings would extend to all his posterity. But Adam failed to bear the test. And because he revolted against God's law, all his descendants have been sinners (11).
But in the very next paragraph, we read the following:
God's law had once been written in the hearts of men and women. But their cherished sins dimmed and nearly effaced that writing. The impressions made by sin gradually wore away the impressions of the law (12).
What has caused all of Adam's descendants to become sinners? Their “cherished sins.” Choice.
Some might ask whether “all” Adam's descendants, as stated in this passage, includes stillborn babies and those who die in infancy. Inspiration gives no precise answer here, and thus we should not speculate. We only know that no inspired statement ever describes someone as becoming a sinner immediately at birth. One Bible verse does say, “The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies” (Psalm 58:3). But notice this refers specifically to the wicked, not to all mankind. We will later observe in our study how the children of wicked parents follow a downward path very quickly after birth, on account of their parents' neglect and evil doings.
Another, similar statement tells us:
As a result of Adam's disobedience every human being is a transgressor of the law, sold under sin (l3).
But this passage must be placed alongside others:
No man can be forced to transgress. His own consent must be first gained, the soul must purpose the sinful act, before passion can dominate over reason, or iniquity triumph over conscience (14).
It is not in the power of Satan to force anyone to sin. Sin is the sinner's individual act. Before sin exists in the heart, the consent of the will must be given, and as soon as it is given, sin is triumphant, and hell rejoices. But there is no excuse for sin, either big or little (15).
Notice how she says that before sin can exist in the heart, the will must choose. How then can it be said that sin exists in every heart from the moment of birth? Though the above statements are clear that Adam's sin has resulted in all human beings becoming sinners, we are never told that this has happened apart from their personal choice. Romans 5:l2 again comes to mind: “For as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”
In other words, while Adam's sin has resulted in all his descendants following his example, it has still been their choice to do so. Ellen White, commenting on this verse, makes this clear:
Human beings have degenerated. One after another they fall under the curse, because sin has entered into the world, and death by sin.… We may choose God's way and live; we may choose our own way, and know that sin has entered into the world, and death by sin (l6).
Elsewhere she writes:
If the race had ceased to fall when Adam was driven from Eden, we should now be in a far more elevated condition physically, mentally, and morally. But while men deplore the fall of Adam, which has resulted in such unutterable woe, they disobey the express injunctions of God, as did Adam, although they have his experience to warn them from doing as he did in violating the law of Jehovah. Would that man had stopped falling with Adam. But there has been a succession of falls (l7).
In another statement she is clear that the transmission of Adam's sin to his descendants has occurred “from mind to mind”—in other words, through influence and choices:
To a large degree Satan has succeeded in the execution of his plans. Through the medium of influence, taking advantage of the action of mind on mind, he prevailed on Adam to sin. Thus at its very source human nature was corrupted. And ever since then sin has continued its baleful work, reaching from mind to mind. Every sin committed awakens the echoes of the original sin (l8).
From “mind to mind” implies choice, not something inevitable resulting from birth.
“The Only Definition of Sin”
The above statements reinforce what Ellen White repeatedly declares to be the only definition of sin found in the word of God:
‘Sin is the transgression of the law.’ This is the only definition of sin (19).
The only definition we find in the Bible for sin is that ‘sin is the transgression of the law’ (I John 3:4) (20).
If we have not the faith that works by love, and purifies the soul from every stain of sin, then we have a spurious faith. Christ is not the minister of sin. And what is sin? The only definition given in God's word is, ‘Sin is the transgression of the law’ (21).
In order to let Jesus into our hearts, we must stop sinning. The only definition for sin that we have in the Bible is that it is the transgression of the law (22).
And as we noted earlier, one will search the Ellen G. White writings in vain for any passage which declares men and women to be transgressors of God's law simply by being born.
Some might wonder if perhaps Ellen White had overlooked what some hold to be another definition of sin in Scripture, this one found in Romans 14:23: “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” But since, according to Scripture, “without faith it is impossible to please Him” (Hebrews 11:6), it becomes clear that unless one has faith, the transgression of God's law is inevitable, since the only power available to resist temptation would be absent. Which means, in sum, that 1 John 3:4 and Romans 14:23 are simply two ways of saying the same thing. According to Scripture, as well as Ellen White, sin is a voluntary act.
Separation from God
Again we need to define our terms carefully. When we speak here of separation from God, we are not speaking of being barred from the tree of life and from the intimate fellowship with God enjoyed by our first parents. All humans since the fall have been born into that state of separation. Here we are speaking of separation from God as synonymous with sin, the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4).
Some have quoted the following two statements as evidence that we are born in a state of spiritual separation from God:
By sin we have been severed from the life of God. Our souls are palsied (23).
By nature we are alienated from God. The Holy Spirit describes our condition in such words as these: ‘Dead in trespasses and sins,’ ‘the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint,’ ‘no soundness in it.’ We are held fast in the snare of Satan, ‘taken captive by him at his will’ Ephesians 2:l; Isaiah l:5-6; 2 Timothy 2:26 (24).
But if we finish the above two statements, it becomes clear that this is a condition acquired by choice, not birth. The first of the above statements continues as follows:
Of ourselves we are no more capable of living a holy life than was the impotent man capable of walking.… Do not wait to feel that you are made whole. Believe His word, and it will be fulfilled. Put your will on the side of Christ. Will to serve Him, and in acting upon His word you will receive strength. Whatever may be the evil practice, the master passion which through long indulgence binds both soul and body, Christ is able and longs to deliver. He will impart life to the soul that is ‘dead in trespasses.’ Ephesians 2:l (25).
Notice she speaks of “the evil practice, the master passion which through long indulgence binds both soul and body” (italics supplied). She doesn't say we are bound to evil practices and master passions through birth.
The second of the above statements continues as follows:
God desires to heal us, to set us free. But since this requires an entire transformation, a renewing of our whole nature, we must yield ourselves wholly to Him (26).
Notice how the earlier part of this statement speaks of how “by nature” we are alienated from God. Now we read that setting us free requires the “renewing of our whole nature.” Our study will later demonstrate how Inspiration makes a clear distinction between the lower, fleshly nature and the choices of the will, otherwise called the higher nature. Obviously the above statement, when it speaks of our whole nature being renewed, is referring to the higher nature, since other inspired statements are clear that the lower, fleshly nature will not be changed this side of eternity (27). Which means, of course, that being “alienated by nature” refers to an act of the will, not to sinful tendencies received at birth.
Another statement is also used to prove that all are born in a state of separation from God:
Adam and Eve persuaded themselves that in so small a matter as eating of the forbidden fruit, there could not result such terrible consequences as God had declared. But this small matter was the transgression of God's immutable and holy law, and it separated man from God, and opened the floodgates of death and woe upon the world (28).
But nothing indicates that “man” in this context refers to the whole human family, irrespective of their choices. The context of this passage warns against procrastination, admonishing us not to “put off the work of forsaking your sins” (29), and declares that “every act of transgression, every neglect or rejection of the grace of Christ" is ‘hardening the heart’ and ‘depraving the will’ (30). The entire theme here is our choice to sin or not to sin. We read nothing in this context of sin as an involuntary state of being acquired at birth.
The Bible is clear that “your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid His face from you” (Isaiah 59:2). Notice it doesn't say Adam's sin has separated us. Our own sins have done this. The following Ellen White statements agree:
Just as soon as we separate ourselves from God by sin, which is the transgression of His law, Satan takes control of our minds (31).
By choosing to sin, men separate themselves from God, cut themselves off from the channel of blessing, and the sure result is ruin and death (32).
God does not separate from His people, but His people separate themselves from God by their own course of action (33).
So long as the people of God preserve their fidelity to Him, so long as they cling by living faith to Jesus, they are under the protection of heavenly angels, and Satan will not be permitted to exercise his hellish arts upon them to their destruction. But those who separate themselves from Christ by sin are in great peril (34).
Their iniquitous practices did that for Israel which all the enchantments of Balaam could not do—they separated them from God (35).
Never do we read that anyone has been separated from God merely by being born into the human family. Such separation, according to the above statements, is the result of a conscious choice.
“An Inheritance of Disobedience, of Guilt and Death”
A number of Ellen White statements use the word “inheritance” to describe the results of Adam's sin. Following are several examples:
The inheritance of children is that of sin. Sin has separated them from God.… As related to the first Adam, men receive from him nothing but guilt and the sentence of death (36).
Christ volunteered to come to this earth and stand at the head of fallen human beings, who were heirs of guilt, under sentence of eternal death (37).
These dear children received from Adam an inheritance of disobedience, of guilt and death (38).
We need to remember our cardinal rule of interpretation, stated in an Ellen White passage quoted earlier: “The testimonies themselves will be the key that will explain the messages given, as scripture is explained by scripture” (39). As with the Bible, when we find Ellen White statements which appear to disagree with each other, we need to dig deeper, allowing Inspiration to define more fully the words and thoughts in question.
We have already seen clear inspired evidence that sin is not an involuntary state (Ezekiel l8:20; James 1:14-15; 4:l7), that “no man can be forced to transgress” (40). When one of the above statements, speaking of children, declares that “sin has separated them from God” (41), we must place it alongside another we have seen, which declares that people “separate themselves from God by their own course of action” (42). We must also remember Isaiah 59:2: “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid His face from you.”
Moreover, the above statement which speaks of children being separated from God does not say explicitly that they have inherited this condition through no choice of their own. We will discuss the issue of inheritance in a moment, but it should be clearly noted that even though the sentences on inheritance and separation occur one after the other, they are not necessarily discussing the same thing. Other statements, as we have seen, are very explicit about separation from God being a matter of choice.
Another statement, speaking of sin and its consequences, helps us better understand the above statements:
It is a sin to be sick, for all sickness is the result of transgression. Many are suffering in consequence of the transgression of their parents. They cannot be censured for their parents' sin; but it is nevertheless their duty to ascertain wherein their parents violated the laws of their being, which has entailed upon their offspring so miserable an inheritance; and wherein their parents' habits were wrong, they should change their course, and place themselves by correct habits in a better relation to health (43).
Notice she speaks of sickness as sin because “all sickness is the result of transgression,” and that parents, through violating the laws of health, bequeath to their children a “miserable inheritance.” But she also makes it clear that these are the parents' sins, and that children “cannot be censured” for them. She never says this “miserable inheritance” makes the children automatic sinners. Thus, when she states that “the inheritance of children is that of sin” (44), she means this inheritance results from sin, not that children inherit sin itself.
The statements quoted earlier also speak of our receiving from Adam “nothing but guilt and the sentence of death” (45), of our being “heirs of guilt” (46), and our receiving “an inheritance of disobedience, of guilt and death” (47). But other statement are very clear that sin and guilt are experienced by choice:
There are thoughts and feelings suggested and aroused by Satan that annoy even the best of men; but if they are not cherished, if they are repulsed as hateful, the soul is not contaminated with guilt and no other is defiled by their influence (48).
Temptation is not sin; the sin lies in yielding (49).
Never does she say that sin lies in merely being born. When we put the above statement on the inheritance of disobedience and guilt, together with the earlier statement on a “miserable inheritance” resulting from sickness and sin, as well as the above statement on guilt resulting from choice, we can see that the “inheritance of disobedience and guilt” described by Ellen White is in fact an inheritance which results from these things, not one which involuntarily renders us sinful and guilty.
No statement anywhere in the inspired writings teaches involuntary sin or guilt. She does state that “no man inherits holiness as a birthright” (50), but she doesn't say we inherit sin as a birthright either. What we receive as a birthright, according to Ellen White, are tendencies to sin (51), not sin itself.
We must also understand that Ellen White, like the Bible, does not always speak of an inheritance as something involuntarily received. Sometimes she does speak of inheritance as involuntary, but in other cases she doesn't. Context and the inspired consensus tell the difference. Many Bible texts, of course, speak of the inheritance of God's people, received on condition of faith-based obedience (Psalm 37:29; Isaiah 60:2l; Matthew 5:5; 25:34; Luke l0:25; I Corinthians 6:9; Galatians 3:29; Titus 3:7; Hebrews 9:15; Revelation 2l:7). Several Ellen White statements say the same thing:
All who have ever come to Him repentant, confessing their sins, He has received into His favor, and freely pardoned them. And if they remain true to Him, He will exalt them to His throne, and make them His heirs to the inheritance which He has purchased with His own blood (52).
He (Christ) is able to lift them from the pit of sin, that they may be acknowledged as the children of God, heirs with Christ to an immortal inheritance (53).
He takes every sin away, and puts on us His robe of righteousness woven in the loom of heaven.… We are adopted into the heavenly family, and we shall inherit the mansions prepared for those who are obedient (54).
The following statement speaks of the choice between two inheritances:
Their (the saints') following Christ may have broken friendship with worldly relatives, but look at the exchange—their names written in the Lamb's book of life—elevated, yes, greatly exalted to be partakers of salvation--heirs with God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ to an imperishable inheritance.… Shall we call this a sacrifice on our part because we yield error for truth, light for darkness weakness for strength, sin for righteousness, and a perishable name and inheritance for honors that are lasting, and an immortal treasure? (55).
We see, therefore, that in the light of the inspired consensus, statements which speak of an inheritance of disobedience and guilt can be viewed either as referring to the results of sin and guilt, or to the choice to receive a perishable inheritance in place of the eternal one. But the inspired consensus does not permit us to conclude that anyone has inherited, without choice, actual sin or guilt.
Sins of Ignorance
We have already seen the verse which declares: “To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin” (James 4:l7). Another verse speaks of how, “at the times of their ignorance God winked at” (Acts l7:30). God, in His absolute fairness, does not hold men and women accountable for truth they do not know. Ellen White declares:
God does not deal thus with His creatures. His wrath is never visited upon sins of ignorance (56).
Describing the various functions of Christ's intercession, she writes:
The minds of all who embrace this message are directed to the most holy place, where Jesus stands before the ark, making His final intercession for all those for whom mercy still lingers and for those who have ignorantly broken the law of God. This atonement is made for the righteous dead as well as for the righteous living. It includes all who died trusting in Christ, but who, not having received the light upon God's commandments, had sinned ignorantly in transgressing its precepts (57).
In order for any sin to truly qualify as a sin of ignorance, God must be sure that if light and truth had been available to such a person, it would have been accepted. Willful ignorance and neglect are not excused here (Hebrews 2:3). In Ellen White's words:
In His sufferings and death Jesus has made atonement for all sins of ignorance, but there is no provision made for willful blindness (58).
Children and the Age of Accountability
Much controversy has surrounded the question of whether infants and very young children are capable of, or responsible for, acts of sin. We must resist the temptation to speculate beyond what Inspiration has revealed; for indeed, much that relates to this subject is known only to God.
For example, no inspired statement has yet been found which tells precisely when the age of accountability arrives for everyone. In the absence of such clarity, we can only conclude that this age arrives at different times for different people. Only God can know at which point in each child's life a sense of responsibility and spiritual understanding begins to develop.
But Inspiration does tell us that at a very early age, children require discipline and understand correction:
Children are left to come up instead of being trained up. The poor little children are thought not to know or understand a correction at ten or twelve months of age, and they begin to show stubbornness very young (59).
I tremble especially for mothers, as I see them so blind, and feeling so little the responsibilities that devolve upon a mother. They see Satan working in the self-willed child of even but a few months of age. Filled with spiteful passion, Satan seems to be taking full possession (60).
The mother's work begins with the babe in her arms. I have often seen the little one throw itself and scream, if its will was crossed in any way.… These little ones cannot discern what spirit is influencing them, and it is the duty of the parents to exercise judgment and discretion for them. Their habits must be carefully watched. Evil tendencies are to be restrained, and the mind stimulated in favor of the right. The child should be encouraged in every effort to govern itself (61).
The book [Education] that is coming out will have much to say in regard to the great principles that are to be carried out in training the children, from the very baby in arms. The enemy will work right through those children, unless they are disciplined. Someone disciplines them. If the mother or the father does not do it, the devil does (62).
The fact that not all little children will be taken to heaven is brought vividly to mind in Ezekiel, chapter 9, where those with slaughter weapons are commanded, “Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women"”(v. 6). Commenting on this point, Ellen White states the following:
Your children should be made to mind you. Your word should be their law. Parents, take hold of this work, for the destroying angel is soon to pass around and slay utterly both old and young--men, women, and little children (63).
I saw that you were rearing children to be cut down by the destroying angel unless you speedily turn square about and be faithful to your children. Think you God can cover or hide and preserve children whose iniquity He hates? No, never. God hates the passion, evil tempers, etc, manifested by unruly children. He cannot save them in the time of trouble. They will be eternally lost (64).
Some parents allow Satan to control their children, and their children are not restrained, but are allowed to have wicked tempers, to be passionate, selfish, and disobedient. Should they die these children would not be taken to heaven (65).
Some might think it cruel for God to punish little children in the fires of hell. But if they possess sufficient understanding to be responsible for their actions, and only God can know this, such punishment will be fair and just. Many will recall the shocking crime which occurred some years ago in Chicago, when two small children strangled a little boy because he wouldn't help them steal candy. Urban gangs, both in America and elsewhere, now include gangs of very small children who commit grisly violence as a way of life. A television report a few years ago from Lima, Peru, described a gang known as the “Piranhas,” consisting mostly of children under the age of twelve who routinely commit mayhem, robbery, and murder. Few, I suspect, would consider God unjust for cutting down these child savages with the sword of the destroying angel.
Children and Slaves
Of course, we must remember that if one does not understand the difference between right and wrong, they will not be resurrected to suffer the flames of hell. Our God, on account of His supreme love and fairness, will not punish those guilty of ignorant sin. Paul declares, “For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law” (Romans 2:l2). We noted earlier Ellen White's words:
God does not deal thus with His creatures. His wrath is never visited upon sins of ignorance (66).
But at the same time, God cannot take anyone to heaven who has not developed, through divine grace, the ways of righteousness. Ellen White makes the following comments about the slave whose spirituality has been repressed by his master:
I saw that the slave master will have to answer for the soul of his slave whom he has kept in ignorance, and the sins of the slave will be visited upon the master. God cannot take to heaven the slave who has been kept in ignorance and degradation, knowing nothing of God or the Bible, fearing nothing but his master's lash, and holding a lower position than the brutes. But He does the best thing for him that a compassionate God can do. He permits him to be as if he had not been, while the master must endure the seven last plagues and come up in the second resurrection and suffer the second, most awful death. Then the justice of God will be satisfied (67).
We do well to remember that slavery and involuntary servitude are by no means extinct in our modern world. So-called “sweat shops,” where foreign-born workers often labor in slave or near-slave conditions, continue to exist in large urban centers of the United States. Slave labor camps can still be found in the People's Republic of China. In countries such as Thailand, young boys and girls are frequently sold into prostitution against their will. None need regard the above inspired statement, which speaks of slave masters suffering the seven last plagues, as applying to some bygone era.
Thankfully, of course, not all slaves have experienced the degree of spiritual repression described in the above statement, for we read elsewhere:
Then commenced the jubilee (at Christ's second coming), when the land should rest. I saw the pious slave rise in victory and triumph, and shake off the chains that bound him, while his wicked master was in confusion and knew not what to do (68).
These pious slaves can be viewed in much the same category as those heathen who, though ignorant of the Bible, befriend the missionaries and develop godly character out of an innate sense of right and wrong (69). But even if one's knowledge of divine truth is extremely elementary, all are accountable for adhering—through God's grace—to whatever degree of light and truth they possess. Ellen White is clear: “Every one who enters the pearly gates of the city of God will be a doer of the Word” (70).
As with slaves, little children will be judged in accordance with their level of spiritual awareness, which only God can determine. Like the spiritually ignorant slave, the spiritually ignorant child will not be resurrected to suffer the second death, but will be as if he had not been. But just as we can assume that if a slave knew of God's will but failed to claim divine power for obedience, so a child who has a similar knowledge—however minuscule--will be accountable before God if that knowledge is not obeyed.
“Reflexive Sinning”
Some believe that because of their fallen natures and weakened moral powers, children before the age of accountability inevitably engage in “reflexive sinning,” being powerless before the onslaught of temptation in the absence of a sanctified will. If such persons hold to the Bible truth that Jesus took fallen humanity in the incarnation, they maintain that He was born with a sanctified will so that such “reflexive sinning” was absent from His infancy and early childhood. Such persons also believe that because children who commit this reflexive sinning do so in ignorance, such acts are covered by the intercession of Christ like all other sins of ignorance (71).
First of all, we must remember Ellen White's very clear statements that the human Jesus had absolutely no advantage over fallen man in the struggle with temptation:
Jesus revealed no qualities, and exercised no powers, that men may not have through faith in Him. His perfect humanity is that which all His followers may possess, if they will be in subjection to God as He was (72).
If Christ had a special power which it is not the privilege of man to have, Satan would have made capital of this matter. The work of Christ was to take from the claims of Satan his control of man, and He could only do this in the way that He came—a man, tempted as a man, rendering the obedience of a man (73).
Jesus, the world's Redeemer, could only keep the commandments of God in the same way that humanity can keep them (74).
Never does Scripture or Ellen White imply that the infant or child Jesus had any advantage not available through imparted divine power to all children. Ellen White declares plainly, “There is no excuse for sinning” (75). She never adds, “… unless you're a child living before the age of accountability.”
The following Ellen White statement is clear that Christ's pattern of sinless living, which makes human sin unnecessary, applies to His infancy as much as to any period of His life:
Men and women frame many excuses for their proneness to sin. Sin is represented as a necessity, an evil that cannot be overcome. But sin is not a necessity. Christ lived in this world from infancy to manhood, and during that time He met and resisted all the temptations by which man is beset. He is a perfect pattern of childhood, of youth, of manhood (76).
It is not out of harmony with the inspired consensus to claim that Christ was born with a sanctified will, for Ellen White maintains, concerning Christ, “He was fitted for the conflict by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit” (77). But in a statement we studied earlier, she says our children can experience the same advantage, even from birth:
Even the babe in its mother's arms may dwell as under the shadow of the Almighty through the faith of the praying mother. John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit from his birth. If we live in communion with God, we too may expect the divine Spirit to mold our little ones, even from their earliest moments (78).
A similar statement also tells us:
I know that some questioned whether the children of even believing parents should be saved, because they have had no test of character and all must be tested and their characters determined by trial. The question is asked, ‘How can little children have this test and trial?’ I answer that the faith of the believing parents covers the children, as when God sent His judgments upon the firstborn of the Egyptians.…Christ blessed the children brought to Him by the faithful mothers. He will do this now if mothers will do their duty to their children and their children and educate them in obedience and submission. Then they will bear the test and will be obedient to the will of God, for parents stand in the place of God to their children (79).
It may be appropriate to describe sins committed before the age of accountability as sins of ignorance, much as a sincere Baptist Christian who ignorantly breaks the true Sabbath qualifies for this category. And certainly it is true that without the sanctifying grace of God, all of us—old and young—are helpless against the lure of sin. But at the bottom line, a sin cannot be called a sin—ignorant or otherwise—unless it is avoidable through knowledge and the power of divine grace. Sin, as well as righteousness, is the result of choice, for “no man can be forced to transgress” (80).
Infants and young children can be molded by the Holy Spirit even as Jesus and John the Baptist were. The sinless life of our Saviour in fallen human nature proves that at no time in our existence, from infancy to manhood, can our inherited fleshly nature compel the consecrated soul to sin.
Some at this point will raise the question, “If any human being could go through life without sinning, would such a person need a Saviour?” This objection reminds us of those who think that if the end-time saints live without the continuous need of forgiveness, they don't need Christ anymore. This is absurd. The imparted power of Christ, made possible by His earthly life and death, is the only means whereby anyone can live without sinning. This is what Biblical salvation is all about—to be saved from sin (Matthew l:2l). Forgiveness is available “if any man sin" (1 John 2:l), but the saving power of Christ is still needed to keep us from sinning.
In short, to not need forgiveness isn't the same as not needing a Saviour, for the Saviour's role is both to forgive and to empower. And so long as we retain our fallen, fleshly natures, this imparted power is needed to keep us from falling.
The Lower and Higher Natures
The inspired consensus is clear that both lower and higher forces exist in human nature. More than any other point, this aspect of inspired teaching helps to clarify the true nature of sin in human beings, as well as certain seemingly contradictory Ellen White statements on the human nature of Christ Jesus pointed this out when He stated to His disciples, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41). Paul said the same thing when he wrote, “I keep under my body and bring it into subjection” (1 Corinthians 9:27).
Ellen White speaks along similar lines when she writes: “The will is not the taste or the inclination, but it is the deciding power” (81). Other passages spell out this clear distinction:
The body is to be brought into subjection. The higher powers of the being are to rule. The passions are to be controlled by the will, which is itself under the control of God (82).
If enlightened intellect holds the reins, controlling the animal propensities, keeping them in subjection to the moral powers, Satan well knows that his power to overcome with his temptations is very small (83).
Intemperance of any kind benumbs the perceptive organs, and so weakens the brain nerve power that eternal things are not appreciated, but are placed upon a level with common things. The higher powers of the mind, developed for elevated purposes, are brought into slavery to the baser passions (84).
Another statement makes it clear that the flesh of itself is incapable of sin:
The lower passions have their seat in the body and work through it. The words “flesh” or “fleshly” or “carnal lusts” embrace the lower, corrupt nature; the flesh of itself cannot act contrary to the will of God (85).
It is through the higher powers of our being that moral and spiritual choices are made. Neither sin nor righteousness is possible unless the higher nature is exercised. Evil passions and sinful propensities can only be contained in the lower nature, which the above statement declares to be incapable of sin. But such passions and propensities can be cast out of the higher nature, which involves the will and character. The following statements make this clear:
The only power that can create or perpetuate true peace is the grace of Christ. When this is implanted in the heart, it will cast out the evil passions that cause strife and dissension (86).
We must realize that through belief in Him it is our privilege to be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. Then we are cleansed from all sin, all defects of character. We need not retain one sinful propensity (87).
Clearly, when Ellen White speaks of evil passions cast out and sinful propensities not retained, she is not teaching holy flesh, for in another statement we read that “appetite and passion must be brought under the control of the Holy Spirit. There is no end to the warfare this side of eternity” (88). Here is how, at long last, we can resolve what appears to be conflict between those Ellen White statements which say, on the one hand, that Jesus did not have evil propensities or like passions as we (89), and others which say clearly that He did (90). The one set of statements refer to His higher nature, where the will and character choices reside. The other set of statements refer to His lower, fleshly nature, which “of itself cannot act contrary to the will of God” (91).
Those wishing for a more in-depth study of how this distinction between lower and higher forces in human nature resolves the current Adventist discussion on the human natue of Christ, are invited to consult the present writer's article, ‘The Lower and Higher Natures: The Key to Resolving the Adventist Christology Debate,’ available from this website (92).
Conclusion
The U.S. News article quoted at the beginning states the issue remarkably well: “Heredity might be involved in some kinds of alcoholism. But no gene can make you buy a bottle of Scotch, pour a glass, and toss it down” (93).
The article might as well have quoted Ellen White:
There are thoughts and feelings suggested and aroused by Satan that annoy even the best of men; but if they are not cherished, if they are repulsed as hateful, the soul is not contaminated with guilt and no other is defiled by their influence (94).
The strongest temptation cannot excuse sin. However great the pressure brought to bear upon the soul, transgression is our own act. It is not in the power of earth or hell to compel anyone to do evil. Satan attacks us at our weak points, but we need not be overcome. However severe or unexpected the assault, God has provided help for us, and in His strength we may conquer (95).
And finally:
There are many who in their hearts murmur against God. They say, ‘We inherit the fallen nature of Adam, and are not responsible for our natural imperfections.’ They find fault with God's requirements, and claim that He demands what they have no power to give. Satan made the same complaint in heaven, but such thoughts dishonor God (96).
- “Born Bad?” (cover story), U.S. News & World Report, April 2l, l997.
- All Bible texts are from the King James Version.
- Ellen G. White, Early Writings, p. 78.
- ________, Selected Messages, vol. 3, p. 32.
- ________, Ibid, vol. l, p. 42.
- ________, That I May Know Him, p. 140.
- ________, Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 53.
- Edward Heppenstall, The Man Who Is God: A Study of the Person and Nature of Jesus, Son of God and Son of Man (Washington, D.C, Review and Herald Publishing Assn, 1977), p. 107.
- White, Desire of Ages, p. 512.
- ________, Review and Herald, May 19, 1890.
- ________, Manuscript Releases, vol. 9, p. 229.
- Ibid.
- ________, In Heavenly Places, p. l46.
- ________, Testimonies, vol. 5, p. l77.
- ________, Signs of the Times, Dec. 18, 1893.
- ________, Ibid, June 27, l900.
- ________, SDA Bible Commentary, vol. l, p. l082.
- ________, Review and Herald, April l6, l90l.
- ________, SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 951.
- ________, Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 320.
- ________, Signs of the Times, Nov. 24, 1887.
- Ibid, March 3, 1890.
- ________, Desire of Ages, p. 203.
- ________, Steps to Christ, p. 43.
- ________, Desire of Ages, p. 203.
- ________, Steps to Christ, p. 43.
- ________, Counsels to Teachers, p. 20; Acts of the Apostles, pp. 560-56l; SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 2, p. 1032.
- ________, Steps to Christ, p. 33.
- Ibid, p. 32.
- Ibid, p. 33.
- ________, Review and Herald, July l2, l887 (italics supplied).
- ________, Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 235.
- ________, 1888 Materials, p. l0ll (italics supplied).
- ________, Maranatha, p. 95.
- ________, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 455.
- ________, Child Guidance, p. 475.
- ________, Manuscript Releases, vol. l2, p. 6l.
- Ibid, vol. l3, p. l4.
- ________, Selected Messages, vol. l, p. 42.
- ________, Testimonies, vol. 5, p. l77.
- ________, Child Guidance, p. 475.
- ________, 1888 Materials, p. l0ll.
- ________, Counsels on Health, p. 37.
- ________, Child Guidance, p. 475.
- Ibid.
- ________, Manuscript Releases<, vol. l2, p. 6l.
- Ibid, vol. l3, p. l4.
- ________, That I May Know Him, p. l40.
- ________, Our High Calling, p. 87.
- ________, Selected Messages, vol. l, p. 3l0.
- ________, Adventist Home, pp. 24l, 256; Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 306.
- ________, Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, pp. 176-177.
- ________, Welfare Ministry, p. 93.
- ________, That I May Know Him, p. l08.
- ________, Review and Herald, April 28, l859.
- ________, Signs of the Times, Nov. 1, 1899.
- ________, Early Writings, p. 254.
- ________, SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. ll45.
- ________, Review and Herald, March 28, 1893 (italics original).
- ________, Child Guidance, p. 289.
- ________, Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. l50.
- ________, Selected Messages, vol. 3, pp. ll7-ll8.
- ________, Manuscript Releases, vol. 9, p. 323.
- Ibid, p. 352.
- ________, Selected Messages, vol. 3, p. 3l5.
- ________, Signs of the Times, Nov. l, l899.
- ________, Early Writings, p. 276.
- Ibid, p. 286.
- ________, Desire of Ages, p. 638; Prophets and Kings, p. 376; Christ's Object Lessons, p. 385.
- ________, This Day With God, p. 94.
- ________, Early Writings, p. 254.
- ________, Desire of Ages, p. 664.
- ________, SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 930.
- Ibid, p. 929.
- ________, Desire of Ages, p. 3ll.
- ________, Faith I Live By, p. 2l9; see also Manuscript Releases, vol. l7, p. 25.
- ________, Desire of Ages, p. l23.
- Ibid, p. 5l2.
- ________, Selected Messages, vol. 3, pp. 3l3-3l4.
- ________, Testimonies, vol. 5, p. l77.
- Ibid, p. 5l3.
- ________, Ministry of Healing, p. l30.
- ________, Messages to Young People, p. 237.
- ________, Review and Herald, Aug. 11, l887.
- ________, Adventist Home, p. l27.
- ________, Desire of Ages, p. 305.
- ________, SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 943.
- ________, Counsels to Teachers, p. 20.
- ________, Testimonies, vol. 2, pp. 201-202, 509; SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. ll28.
- ________, In Heavenly Places, p. l55; Christ Triumphant, p. 260; Signs of the Times, April 9, l896; Oct. l7, l900.
- ________, Adventist Home, p. l27.
- Kevin D. Paulson, “http://www.greatcontroversy.org/reportandreview/pau-lhnature.php3. The Lower and Higher Natures: The Key to Resolving the Adventist Christology Debate”, published on GCO April 10, 2003.
- Wray Herbert, “Politics of Biology,” U.S. News & World Report, April 2l, l997, p. 78.
- White, That I May Know Him, p. l40.
- ________, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 42l.
- ________, Signs of the Times, Aug. 29, 1892.
