As a pastor, I have counseled many precious souls in a similar state as you seem to be in. Let me just say - There are good reasons to fear not hurting anymore. It is usually a bad sign. It can mean important things are in danger of dying in you, things you desperately don't want to lose. I nearly died inside because I mishandled the hurt. But, thank you Jesus, I was able to recover.

You're suggesting I'm saying we should be willing to obey but not actually obey? I'm not understanding why you felt compelled to comment here.



Jesus said:



Jesus wasn't dense or dimwitted, so God was able to communicate fine to Him, right? Jesus says He has called us "friends" because "all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you."

Where did Jesus say we should obey Him (or the Father) because "I said so." (or "He said so.")?

This seems to be diametrically opposed to what Jesus is saying in John 15:15.

hmmmmm, i didnt realize anyone would come to that conclusion.
i believe it doesnt hurt anymore for a variety of reasons. one because i understand somewhat of their circumstances, and another because i have forgiven them and only want their best.

Excellent response, MM.

So are you saying that Jesus revealed everything 2000 years ago, and there's nothing new to learn since then? If so, how could Paul say "How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!" many years after Jesus spilled all the beans? Was he not paying attention? Or was he not as friendly with Jesus as I had assumed?

I just quoted Jesus, so wouldn't your question have been better posed as, "Was Jesus saying that He revealed everything 2000 years ago, and there's nothing new to learn since then?"



Perhaps what you're suggesting is not what Jesus was saying.

As I pointed out, there are several reasons given for keeping the Sabbath.

The foundation of observing the Sabbath is that God rested on this day, the crowning act of creation. The Sabbath is a memorial of creation, and its observance recognizes God as the Creator.

It's also a memorial of redemption, a them which is explained in detail in Hebrews. By faith we enter into the rest of God, which is what the Sabbath is all about.

The Sabbath is also the seal of God and a sign of sanctification.

This is just scratching the service!



MM, I hear you saying:

1.Jesus calls us friends if we do what He commands. (agreed)
2.Being His friend does not mean we stop being His servant.

However, regarding the second point, I still don't understand what you think Jesus meant by saying He no longer calls us servants but friends because He has told us all things He heard from His Father. Jesus makes two points here:

a.He calls us not servants, but friends.
b.His reason for doing this is because He has made known to us all things He heard from His Father.

You seem to be denying both of Jesus' points. Surely by saying "not servants but friends," Jesus did not mean "both servants and friends." He must have had something in mind in making this distinction. What was it?

He tells us what it is. "A servant does not know what his master is doing." That's the different. He calls us not servants but friends because He has told us what God revealed to Him, so that it cannot be said that we don't know what the master is doing, unlike the ignorant servant. Clearly this is Jesus' point, isn't it?



MM, I agree that our obedience to God should not be egocentric, I point I've often made to you in our discussions regarding sins of ignorance, and I also agree that the points your are mentioning are elements of what slavish obedience encompasses. However, it is not what EGW is dealing with in the context of the statement I quoted, which is the following:



What she brings out here is that slavish obedience is in contrast to intelligent appreciation. These, by the way, are the differences of the Old and New Covenants.



The Old Covenant consists of a slavish obedience to laws written on stone, which is why it "gendereth to bondage." In the New Covenant the law is written in the heart, and one is constrained to obey by the agape of God, revealed in the cross of Calvary (which agrees with the 5T 269.2 quote you pointed out).

Jesus also said, "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you." So I know He knew there was more to learn after He left.


I know it wasn't what Jesus was saying. Paul, whom He tutored personally for 3 years, still considered God's judgments unsearchable and His ways past finding out. Yet, you imply that His friends have all the info He has to give. And in this thread, you teach that God does not expect obedience simply based on trusting His character, but requires understanding from His dense and dimwitted creatures.

You're not being accurate with your statements here. I quoted Jesus:



I didn't go beyond what He said. He said "for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you." I have said nothing beyond this.

Also I have not taught what you are suggesting. What I have said is that God does not desire a slavish obedience, but rather one based on evidence, reason and understanding. I've also said that Jesus said He calls us "not servants, but friends" because "all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you."

That's why I'm now trying to figure out exactly what you are saying.

You wrote in post #106306, in response to MM:

MM was essentially saying, "God doesn't tell us everything that He could because we are too dumb. And sometimes we have to trust that He knows what He's doing even if we don't."

Were you agreeing with MM? It seemed to me that you were contradicting him by pointing out that Jesus wasn't too dumb. Am I right so far? Then, in this context, you throw in His statement that "all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you."

MM said God knew stuff that He didn't tell the disciples. Are you agreeing with that or not?


Slavish obedience is bad, we agree. What I'm taking issue with is the concept that taking God at His word because we trust His goodness and wisdom, and distrust our own competence, constitutes slavish obedience. What I'm taking issue with is the teaching that God thinks it is good that we question His character, and make Him explain Himself every time He gives a command.

I don't want my children doing that; and I don't think God wants His children doing that.


Jesus also said, "Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you." It wasn't dependent on "understanding" His commands.