Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,224
Members1,326
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: teresaq]
#107450
01/11/09 03:34 PM
01/11/09 03:34 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: Insisting that people who lived before the Exodus had better reasons for keeping the Sabbath than what Moses wrote in Genesis 2:1-3 and Exodus 20:8-11 does not prove it, Tom. Please post a quote from the SOP that specifically says so, that is, that specifically says the people who lived before the Exodus had better reasons for keeping the Sabbath than what Moses wrote in Genesis 2:1-3 and Exodus 20:8-11.
T: Here you wrote "more reasons" instead of "better reasons." In regards to what you actually claimed, that I was "insisting" that they had "better reasons" I responded, "I never asserted they had better reasons for keeping the Sabbath." As you can see from what you quoted, what you asserted is wrong; indeed, I did not assert they had "better reasons." Ugh! Time to pull teeth . . . again. You’re going to feel a little tug, Mr. Ewall, but you won’t feel any pain. Trust me. Open wide. Enough of being silly. Let’s back up and start over. I believe Gen 3:1-3 and Ex 20:8-11 give as reason for keeping the Sabbath the fact God rested on that day. This reason is sufficient to trust and obey God intelligently rather than slavishly. No other reasons are needed. Do you agree? Regarding the rest of the post, I think there's a confusion in regards to the ceremonial law, which was a celebration of the Gospel promises in Christ, and the OC. Are you saying the rules and rites associated with the daily and annual feasts and ceremonies are a part of the NC and not the OC? What about everything else God told Moses? Do you also think the civil laws fall under the NC? What about the dietary, sanitary, and judicial laws? Ellen said the reason God gave Moses such minute “additional precepts” was so that the Jews “need not err”. They “applied” and “simplified” the principles of the Ten Commandments in a way that their dull and desensitized minds could grasp the full extent and meaning of the law. Listen: That the obligations of the Decalogue might be more fully understood and enforced, additional precepts were given, illustrating and applying the principles of the Ten Commandments. {PP 310.1}
These laws were to be recorded by Moses, and carefully treasured as the foundation of the national law, and, with the ten precepts which they were given to illustrate, the condition of the fulfillment of God's promises to Israel. {PP 311.3}
The definite directions which the Lord gave to Moses in regard to the duty of His people to one another, and to the stranger, are the principles of the Ten Commandments simplified and given in a definite manner, that they need not err. {SR 149.1} Did obeying any of these “additional precepts” engender bondage? If not, which precepts do you think engendered bondage, which “was contrary” to the Jews? Of everything God commanded Moses in addition to the Ten Commandments, what do you think engendered bondage? Please state your position in your own words. Thank you.
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: teresaq]
#107451
01/11/09 04:57 PM
01/11/09 04:57 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
He didn't just tell them [on the road to Emmaus] the truth, so that they not would believe it "because I said so," but explained things from Scripture, so their faith would be based on evidence, reason and understanding.
Please reread what I wrote, with the "not" in place, and see if that makes more sense. Sorry for any confusion. The placement of the underlined “not” seems awkward. I suspect you are trying to convey the idea that Jesus explained the truth to them from the Bible so that their faith could be based on evidence, reason, and understanding - as opposed to them believing it based solely on His word. IOW, He didn’t expect them to believe the truth simply because He said so. He proved it from the Bible. If this is what you are saying, then my question still stands, namely, what did the passages Jesus quoted to them say that constitute more than a “Thus saith the Lord”? They only describe who, what, when, and where. They do not explain why. If you think otherwise, please prove it. Post one of the passages Jesus might have quoted that explains why He had to become a man and die on the cross. Did Moses explain why? Also, where does Moses say the animal sacrifices symbolize the death of the Son of God? M: Yes, Ellen very clearly endorsed whatever Waggoner was preaching about at the time. Do know precisely what it was that she so wholeheartedly endorsed? I read through the Ten Truths on that link you posted (don't know where) but didn't find anything all that startling. I do remember having concerns regarding several things. Do you know where that post of mine is?
T: No, I don't know where your post is. I wouldn't look for something "startling" however. Rather, look for principles of truth. In particular, what Colin suggested was foundational, is a good thing to look for. Did Waggoner say anything that I cannot find clearly spelled out in SC or FW? When I went through the Ten Truths link I found myself questioning several key points. Here they are again: 1. I do not agree that Jesus died the second death. He “tasted” and consumed and conquered it. Satan is the one who will die our second death with our sins. 2. I do not agree sinners must resist Jesus’ love to be lost. I believe sinners are already lost and must do something to be saved, namely, embrace Jesus. 4. I do not think lost sheep are lost because they made a conscious decision to be lost based on their misunderstanding of God’s character. They are lost because they know not God. Most do not understand why they are lost. 6. I do not agree that the NC is a one-way promise. It is conditional upon our consent and cooperation. Ellen wrote, “All that the Lord hath spoken we will do. This is the pledge that God's people are to make in these last days.” 9. I prefer “faith that works by love and purifies the soul” as a definition of genuine faith. This kind of faith makes both justification and sanctification realities in the life.
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: teresaq]
#107452
01/11/09 05:06 PM
01/11/09 05:06 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: I see harmony in her statements. Do you see harmony in them? And, do you see harmony between Ellen and Elliot?
t: so, youre saying that this glad tidings quote, in essence is not saying the same thing as egw in pp? that the quotes you provided cancel out the glad tidings quotes, but not her other statements in the pp? Yes and no. Yes, I believe all the quotes I posted agree with the PP quote you posted. And, no, I didn't say one way or another if her statements agree with Waggoner's statements in the Glad Tidings quote that was posted. I was interested in what you think. You expressed your opinion about it when you wrote, The PP quote “backs up the quote from glad tidings”. I was merely hoping you would elaborate on how and why. At any rate, here's what I think about it. Here’s the Glad Tidings quote: The Glad Tidings
What are the two covenants?--The two women, Hagar and Sarah; for we read that Hagar is Mount Sinai, "which gendereth to bondage." That is, just as Hagar could not bring forth any other kind of children than slaves, so the law, even the law that God spoke from Sinai, can not beget freemen. It can do nothing but hold them in bondage. "The law worketh wrath:" "for by the law is the knowledge of sin." The same is true of the covenant from Sinai, for it consisted merely of the promise of the people to keep that law, and had, therefore, no more power to make them free than the law itself had,--no more power than they already had in their bondage. Nay, rather, it "gendered to bondage," since their making it was simply a promise to make themselves righteous by their own works, and man in himself is "without strength."
Consider the situation: The people were in the bondage of sin; they had no power to break their chains; but the speaking of the law made no change in their condition; it introduced no new feature. If a man is in prison for crime, you can not release him by reading the statutes to him. It was the law that put him there, and the reading of it to him only makes his captivity more painful.
"Then did not God Himself lead them into bondage?"--Not by any means; since He did not induce them to make that covenant at Sinai. Four hundred and thirty years before that time He had made a covenant with Abraham, which was sufficient for all purposes. That covenant was confirmed in Christ, and, therefore, was a covenant from above. See John 8:23. It promised righteousness as a free gift of God through faith, and it included all nations. All the miracles that God had wrought in delivering the children of Israel from Egyptian bondage were but demonstrations of His power to deliver them and us from the bondage of sin. Yes, the deliverance from Egypt was itself a demonstration not only of God's power, but also of His desire to lead them from the bondage of sin, that bondage in which the covenant from Sinai holds men, because Hagar, who is the covenant from Sinai, was an Egyptian. So when the people came to Sinai, God simply referred them to what He had already done, and then said, "Now therefore, if ye will obey My voice indeed, and keep My covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine." Ex.19:5. To what covenant did He refer?--Evidently to the one already in existence, His covenant with Abraham. If they would simply keep God's covenant, that is, God's promise,--keep the faith,--they would be a peculiar treasure unto God, for God, as the possessor of all the earth, was able to do with them all that He had promised. The fact that they in their self-sufficiency rashly took the whole responsibility upon themselves, does not prove that God led them into making that covenant, but the contrary. He was leading them out of bondage, not into it, and the apostle plainly tells us that covenant from Sinai was nothing but bondage. Here’s the Patriarchs and Prophets quote: Patriarchs and Prophets
Another compact--called in Scripture the "old" covenant--was formed between God and Israel at Sinai, and was then ratified by the blood of a sacrifice. The Abrahamic covenant was ratified by the blood of Christ, and it is called the "second," or "new," covenant, because the blood by which it was sealed was shed after the blood of the first covenant. That the new covenant was valid in the days of Abraham is evident from the fact that it was then confirmed both by the promise and by the oath of God--the "two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie." Hebrews 6:18. {PP 371.1}
But if the Abrahamic covenant contained the promise of redemption, why was another covenant formed at Sinai? In their bondage the people had to a great extent lost the knowledge of God and of the principles of the Abrahamic covenant. In delivering them from Egypt, God sought to reveal to them His power and His mercy, that they might be led to love and trust Him. He brought them down to the Red Sea--where, pursued by the Egyptians, escape seemed impossible--that they might realize their utter helplessness, their need of divine aid; and then He wrought deliverance for them. Thus they were filled with love and gratitude to God and with confidence in His power to help them. He had bound them to Himself as their deliverer from temporal bondage. {PP 371.2}
But there was a still greater truth to be impressed upon their minds. Living in the midst of idolatry and corruption, they had no true conception of the holiness of God, of the exceeding sinfulness of their own hearts, their utter inability, in themselves, to render obedience to God's law, and their need of a Saviour. All this they must be taught. {PP 371.3}
God brought them to Sinai; He manifested His glory; He gave them His law, with the promise of great blessings on condition of obedience: "If ye will obey My voice indeed, and keep My covenant, then . . . ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation." Exodus 19:5, 6. The people did not realize the sinfulness of their own hearts, and that without Christ it was impossible for them to keep God's law; and they readily entered into covenant with God. Feeling that they were able to establish their own righteousness, they declared, "All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient." Exodus 24:7. They had witnessed the proclamation of the law in awful majesty, and had trembled with terror before the mount; and yet only a few weeks passed before they broke their covenant with God, and bowed down to worship a graven image. They could not hope for the favor of God through a covenant which they had broken; and now, seeing their sinfulness and their need of pardon, they were brought to feel their need of the Saviour revealed in the Abrahamic covenant and shadowed forth in the sacrificial offerings. Now by faith and love they were bound to God as their deliverer from the bondage of sin. Now they were prepared to appreciate the blessings of the new covenant. {PP 371.4}
The terms of the "old covenant" were, Obey and live: "If a man do, he shall even live in them" (Ezekiel 20:11; Leviticus 18:5); but "cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." Deuteronomy 27:26. The "new covenant" was established upon "better promises"--the promise of forgiveness of sins and of the grace of God to renew the heart and bring it into harmony with the principles of God's law. "This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts. . . . I will forgive their iniquity, and will remember their sin no more." Jeremiah 31:33, 34. {PP 372.1}
The same law that was engraved upon the tables of stone is written by the Holy Spirit upon the tables of the heart. Instead of going about to establish our own righteousness we accept the righteousness of Christ. His blood atones for our sins. His obedience is accepted for us. Then the heart renewed by the Holy Spirit will bring forth "the fruits of the Spirit." Through the grace of Christ we shall live in obedience to the law of God written upon our hearts. Having the Spirit of Christ, we shall walk even as He walked. Through the prophet He declared of Himself, "I delight to do Thy will, O My God: yea, Thy law is within My heart." Psalm 40:8. And when among men He said, "The Father hath not left Me alone; for I do always those things that please Him." John 8:29. {PP 372.2}
The apostle Paul clearly presents the relation between faith and the law under the new covenant. He says: "Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh"--it could not justify man, because in his sinful nature he could not keep the law--"God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Romans 5:1; 3:31; 8:3, 4. {PP 373.1} Here are the other quotes I posted: Assorted Quotes
God's favor toward Israel had always been conditional on their obedience. At the foot of Sinai they had entered into covenant relationship with Him as His "peculiar treasure. . . above all people." Solemnly they had promised to follow in the path of obedience. "All that the Lord hath spoken we will do," they had said. Exodus 19:5, 8. And when, a few days afterward, God's law was spoken from Sinai, and additional instruction in the form of statutes and judgments was communicated through Moses, the Israelites with one voice had again promised, "All the words which the Lord hath said will we do." At the ratification of the covenant, the people had once more united in declaring, "All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient," Exodus 24:3, 7. God had chosen Israel as His people, and they had chosen Him as their King. {PK 293.1}
Preparation was now made for the ratification of the covenant, according to God's directions. . . . {1BC 1107.2}
Here the people received the conditions of the covenant. They made a solemn covenant with God, typifying the covenant made between God and every believer in Jesus Christ. The conditions were plainly laid before the people. They were not left to misunderstand them. When they were requested to decide whether they would agree to all the conditions given, they unanimously consented to obey every obligation. They had already consented to obey God's commandments. The principles of the law were now particularized, that they might know how much was involved in covenanting to obey the law; and they accepted the specifically defined particulars of the law. {1BC 1107.3}
If the Israelites had obeyed God's requirements, they would have been practical Christians. They would have been happy; for they would have been keeping God's ways, and not following the inclinations of their own natural hearts. Moses did not leave them to misconstrue the words of the Lord or to misapply His requirements. He wrote all the words of the Lord in a book, that they might be referred to afterward. In the mount he had written them as Christ Himself dictated them. {1BC 1107.4}
Bravely did the Israelites speak the words promising obedience to the Lord, after hearing His covenant read in the audience of the people. They said, "All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient." Then the people were set apart and sealed to God. A sacrifice was offered to the Lord. A portion of the blood of the sacrifice was sprinkled upon the altar. This signified that the people had consecrated themselves--body, mind, and soul--to God. A portion was sprinkled upon the people. This signified that through the sprinkled blood of Christ, God graciously accepted them as His special treasure. Thus the Israelites entered into a solemn covenant with God (MS 126, 1901). {1BC 1107.5}
The covenant that God made with His people at Sinai is to be our refuge and defense....This covenant is of just as much force today as it was when the Lord made it with ancient Israel. {AG 142.2}
[Ex 19:7, 8 quoted, which includes, All that the Lord hath spoken we will do] This is the pledge that God's people are to make in these last days. Their acceptance with God depends on a faithful fulfillment of the terms of their agreement with Him. God includes in His covenant all who will obey Him. {1BC 1103.11} Waggoner wrote, “The covenant from Sinai . . . consisted merely of the promise of the people to keep the law . . . it was simply a promise to make themselves righteous by their own works . . . He did not induce them to make that covenant at Sinai.” Whereas Ellen wrote, “The covenant that God made with His people at Sinai is to be our refuge and defense . . . This covenant is of just as much force today as it was when the Lord made it with ancient Israel . . . “All that the Lord hath spoken we will do.” This is the pledge that God's people are to make in these last days.” The OC was a necessary inconvenience. It was “contrary” (Col 2:14) to them in that it was a huge hassle to operate and observe day after day, year after year. But it was needful to remind the “prone to forget” Jews 1) just how bad sin is, 2) that sin and salvation cost the death of Jesus, and 3) the importance of trusting in Jesus to empower them to experience “righteousness and true holiness” (Eph 4:24). But all those feasts and ceremonies were a big burden. They were tedious, costly, and time consuming. It was a form of “bondage” (Gal 4:24). They had to work like slaves to keep everything up and running right. It’s a good thing it all ended on the cross with Jesus. But we still need to work hard every day to remember what the OC stood for. In this sense it has "just as much force today" as it did back then. In its place, however, Jesus gave us the Communion Service, which is far less wearisome and far more rewarding. The OC was, therefore, initiated, designed, and implemented by God to teach the Jews and us how to live in harmony with the conditions of the NC. It was never intended to replace the NC. “Now they were prepared to appreciate the blessings of the new covenant . . . If the Israelites had obeyed God's requirements, they would have been practical Christians. They would have been happy; for they would have been keeping God's ways, and not following the inclinations of their own natural hearts.” But Waggoner seems to have felt differently about it. On this point I disagree with him. Php 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
...The good works of the believer are wrought through the human agent by Christ himself. They are doers of the words of Christ, and will not only impart blessings of the highest order to others, but as they render implicit obedience to Christ, they represent his character, and bring joy to the heart of Christ, and to all the holy ones of heaven. {SSW, July 1, 1894 par. 6}
....While it is God that works in us to will and to do of his own good pleasure, we are to co-operate with him while he works through us. We must guard against lifting up our souls in self-esteem. But you will say, How am I to know that Christ is in my heart? If, when you are criticised or corrected in your way, and things do not go just as you think they ought to go,--if then you let your passion arise instead of bearing the correction and being patient and kind, Christ is not abiding in the heart. {RH, July 12, 1887 par. 9} So, are you saying that this Glad Tidings quote, in essence is not saying the same thing as EGW in PP, that the quotes I provided cancel out the Glad Tidings quote, but not her other statements in the PP?
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#107457
01/11/09 07:25 PM
01/11/09 07:25 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2024
Very Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,984
CA, USA
|
|
people seem to read items differently. guess there isnt much that can be done about that. no sense arguing over it.
The people did not realize the sinfulness of their own hearts, and that without Christ it was impossible for them to keep God's law; and they readily entered into covenant with God. Feeling that they were able to establish their own righteousness, they declared, "All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient." Exodus 24:7. ...{PP 371.4}
Psa 64:5 ...an evil matter: they commune of laying snares privily; they say, Who shall see them?
Psa 7:14 Behold, he travaileth with iniquity, and hath conceived mischief, and brought forth falsehood. 15 He made a pit, and digged it, and is fallen into the ditch which he made. 16 His mischief (and his violent dealing) shall return upon his own head.
Psa 7:17 I will praise the LORD according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the name of the LORD most high.
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: teresaq]
#107462
01/12/09 01:01 AM
01/12/09 01:01 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
I believe Gen 3:1-3 and Ex 20:8-11 give as reason for keeping the Sabbath the fact God rested on that day. This reason is sufficient to trust and obey God intelligently rather than slavishly. No other reasons are needed. Do you agree? This is a different question than you asked before. I view this as a hypothetical question, as I don't think anyone has been limited to the reasons given here. In particular, why ignore the other reasons given in the Pentateuch, all of which was written by Moses? In answer to your hypothetical question, I don't think just those 7 verses are enough to intelligently obey the Sabbath. MM, regarding the OC and the NC, we're thinking about this differently. You are thinking of all the laws and regulations which were given at Sinai. I understand the OC to be the vain promises which the people made to God, to try to establish their own righteousness. EGW comments as follows: The terms of the "old covenant" were, Obey and live: "If a man do, he shall even live in them" (Ezekiel 20:11; Leviticus 18:5); but "cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." Deuteronomy 27:26. The "new covenant" was established upon "better promises"--the promise of forgiveness of sins and of the grace of God to renew the heart and bring it into harmony with the principles of God's law. "This shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts . . . . I will forgive their iniquity, and will remember their sin no more." Jeremiah 31:33, 34.
The same law that was engraved upon the tables of stone is written by the Holy Spirit upon the tables of the heart. Instead of going about to establish our own righteousness we accept the righteousness of Christ.(PP 372) Paul writes that the OC "gendereth to bondage." If it were simply a matter of keeping rites which point to Christ's death, of course this is not something which leads to bondage. So there's more to it than that. Waggoner explains: That the covenant and promise of God are one and the same thing, is clearly seen from Gal.3:17, where it appears that to disannul the covenant would be to make void the promise. In Genesis 17 we read that God made a covenant with Abraham to give him the land of Canaan--and with it the whole world--for an everlasting possession; but Gal.3:18 says that God gave it to him by promise. God's covenants with men can be nothing else than promises to them: "Who hath first given to Him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things." Rom.11:35,36. It is so rare for men to do anything without expecting an equivalent, that theologians have taken it for granted that it is the same with God. So they begin their dissertations on God's covenant with the statement that a covenant is "a mutual agreement between two or more persons, to do or refrain from doing certain things." But God does not make bargains with men, because He knows that they could not fulfil their part. After the flood God made a covenant with every beast of the earth, and with every fowl; but the beasts and the birds did not promise anything in return. Gen.9:9-16. They simply received the favor at the hand of God. That is all we can do. God promises us everything that we need, and more than we can ask or think, as a gift. We give Him ourselves, that is, nothing, and He gives us Himself, that is, everything. That which makes all the trouble is that even when men are willing to recognize the Lord at all, they want to make bargains with Him. They want it to be a "mutual" affair--a transaction in which they will be considered as on a par with God. But whoever deals with God must deal with Him on His own terms, that is, on a basis of fact--that we have nothing and are nothing, and He has everything and is everything, and gives everything. (The Glad Tidings) This is what I think the issue was, a matter of trying to establish one's own righteousness, as EGW puts it, rather than simply accepting by faith that which God wanted to give them. Did obeying any of these “additional precepts” engender bondage? No. It was their unbelief which kept them in bondage. The people refused the covenant God had made with Abraham, which was the EC, the promise to write the law in their hearts. Instead they preferred the law written on stone, seeking to establish their own righteousness, as opposed to accepting the righteousness of Christ. As EGW pointed out, in the quote above, this was the different between the OC and the NC. If not, which precepts do you think engendered bondage, which “was contrary” to the Jews? Unbelief, not precepts, is what put them into bondage. Of everything God commanded Moses in addition to the Ten Commandments, what do you think engendered bondage? Please state your position in your own words. Thank you. I did above. Well, I quoted EGW and Waggoner too, but I also explained things in my own words. Basically the people were rejecting Christ. Christ spoke out against the same mindset when He said to them, "You seek the Scriptures, because you think in them you have life, but they are the which testify of Me. And you won't come to Me that you might have life." The OC is trying to establish one's own righteousness by trying to keep a law written on stone. The NC is to believe in Christ, accepting His righteousness by faith, having the law written in the heart.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: Tom]
#107464
01/12/09 01:26 AM
01/12/09 01:26 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
What did the passages Jesus quoted to them say that constitute more than a “Thus saith the Lord”? They only describe who, what, when, and where. They do not explain why. If you think otherwise, please prove it. Post one of the passages Jesus might have quoted that explains why He had to become a man and die on the cross. This seems an odd assertion and request. Much of the Old Testament speaks of Christ, with teachings as to why things would be done and not simply what. If you read Romans, and see the passages which Paul quotes from, those are good examples. Isa. 53 is a good example, and many other places in Isaiah. A text which says that God would create a man finer than the Gold of some place, can't remember the name; doesn't matter. Anyway, this speaks to God's plan of creating men with character. There are many Psalms which testify of Christ. Reasoning from prophecy, Christ gave His disciples a correct idea of what He was to be in humanity. (DA 799) A correct idea of what He was to be in humanity would have to include why, not just what. Did Moses explain why? Also, where does Moses say the animal sacrifices symbolize the death of the Son of God?[/quote] Did Waggoner say anything that I cannot find clearly spelled out in SC or FW? Yes. Just to mention one thing, I don't think she speaks at all about the Covenants in these books. To name another, I don't think she addresses Christ's taking our nature in these books either. When I went through the Ten Truths link I found myself questioning several key points. Here they are again:
1. I do not agree that Jesus died the second death. I disagree with the wording chosen there. I would say He "tasted" the second death, or "experienced" it. He “tasted” and consumed and conquered it. Satan is the one who will die our second death with our sins. I'd be more careful how I put this. Satan doesn't die with our sins, but he suffers for his part, his responsibility, not just for our sins, but for his responsibility in regards to everyone. Satan and his angels suffered long. Satan bore not only the weight and punishment of his own sins, but also of the sins of the redeemed host, which had been placed upon him; and he must also suffer for the ruin of souls which he had caused. (EW 294) 2. I do not agree sinners must resist Jesus’ love to be lost. The SOP clearly states this in a number of places. Here's one: The light shining from the cross reveals the love of God. His love is drawing us to Himself. If we do not resist this drawing, we shall be led to the foot of the cross in repentance for the sins that have crucified the Saviour. Then the Spirit of God through faith produces a new life in the soul. (DA 176) Here's another: None will ever come to Christ, save those who respond to the drawing of the Father's love. But God is drawing all hearts unto Him, and only those who resist His drawing will refuse to come to Christ.(DA 387) I believe sinners are already lost and must do something to be saved, namely, embrace Jesus. The thing they must do they will do if they don't resist. 4. I do not think lost sheep are lost because they made a conscious decision to be lost based on their misunderstanding of God’s character. They are lost because they know not God. Most do not understand why they are lost. I think you're misunderstanding something here, that is, I believe you're understanding something to have been said which was not said. Could you please quote what you had in mind here? 6. I do not agree that the NC is a one-way promise. You cut this off in mid-sentence. What was written is that it is a one-way promise to write His law in our heart. This is just what Jeremiah says. It is conditional upon our consent and cooperation. Ellen wrote, “All that the Lord hath spoken we will do. This is the pledge that God's people are to make in these last days.” Read Jeremiah 31:31-34. There's no promise by anyone in this passage but God. This is the declaration of the New Covenant. Ellen White, in the PP passage I quoted previously, states that in the NC the law is written in the heart, as opposed to on stone, and that instead of seeking to establish our own righteousness, we accept the righteousness of Christ. She was explaining the different between the OC and the NC in writing this. 9. I prefer “faith that works by love and purifies the soul” as a definition of genuine faith. This kind of faith makes both justification and sanctification realities in the life. This isn't a definition of faith. It's a declaration of what genuine faith does. Were you responding to this?: Faith is understood in its true biblical sense—a heart appreciation of the agape of Christ. If so, I think this is a wonderful definition of faith; that is, faith is a heart appreciation of the love of God, especially as revealed on the cross.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: teresaq]
#107516
01/13/09 07:15 PM
01/13/09 07:15 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: So, are you saying that this Glad Tidings quote, in essence is not saying the same thing as EGW in PP, that the quotes I provided cancel out the Glad Tidings quote, but not her other statements in the PP?
t: people seem to read items differently. guess there isnt much that can be done about that. no sense arguing over it.
The people did not realize the sinfulness of their own hearts, and that without Christ it was impossible for them to keep God's law; and they readily entered into covenant with God. Feeling that they were able to establish their own righteousness, they declared, "All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient." Exodus 24:7. ...{PP 371.4} Bummer. After all that hard work compiling all those posts so I could ask you the same question you asked me and then you just drop it. Oh well. Perhaps next time you can let me know ahead of time you're not going to share your thoughts on it. Or vise versa.
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#107518
01/13/09 07:48 PM
01/13/09 07:48 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: Let’s back up and start over. I believe Gen 3:1-3 and Ex 20:8-11 give as reason for keeping the Sabbath the fact God rested on that day. This reason is sufficient to trust and obey God intelligently rather than slavishly. No other reasons are needed. Do you agree?
T: This is a different question than you asked before. I view this as a hypothetical question, as I don't think anyone has been limited to the reasons given here. In particular, why ignore the other reasons given in the Pentateuch, all of which was written by Moses? In answer to your hypothetical question, I don't think just those 7 verses are enough to intelligently obey the Sabbath. Yes, it is a different question. That’s why I said, “Let’s back up and start over.” And you finally gave me an answer, which was, No, you do not believe keeping the Sabbath because God rested on that day is a sufficient reason to trust and obey God intelligently rather than slavishly. End of story. No more questions. Thank you. MM, regarding the OC and the NC, we're thinking about this differently. You are thinking of all the laws and regulations which were given at Sinai. I understand the OC to be the vain promises which the people made to God, to try to establish their own righteousness.
Basically the people were rejecting Christ. Christ spoke out against the same mindset when He said to them, "You seek the Scriptures, because you think in them you have life, but they are the which testify of Me. And you won't come to Me that you might have life."
The OC is trying to establish one's own righteousness by trying to keep a law written on stone. The NC is to believe in Christ, accepting His righteousness by faith, having the law written in the heart. What are the terms and conditions of the NC? What are the terms and conditions of the OC? Also, in light of what you wrote above, please explain the following points Ellen raised in PP: Another compact--called in Scripture the "old" covenant--was formed between God and Israel at Sinai, and was then ratified by the blood of a sacrifice. {PP 371.1}
But if the Abrahamic covenant contained the promise of redemption, why was another covenant formed at Sinai? In their bondage the people had to a great extent lost the knowledge of God and of the principles of the Abrahamic covenant. {PP 371.2}
All this they must be taught. {PP 371.3}
Now by faith and love they were bound to God as their deliverer from the bondage of sin. Now they were prepared to appreciate the blessings of the new covenant. {PP 371.4}
The terms of the "old covenant" were, Obey and live: "If a man do, he shall even live in them" (Ezekiel 20:11; Leviticus 18:5); but "cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." Deuteronomy 27:26. The "new covenant" was established upon "better promises"--the promise of forgiveness of sins and of the grace of God to renew the heart and bring it into harmony with the principles of God's law. {PP 372.1}
The same law that was engraved upon the tables of stone is written by the Holy Spirit upon the tables of the heart. Instead of going about to establish our own righteousness we accept the righteousness of Christ. His blood atones for our sins. His obedience is accepted for us. Then the heart renewed by the Holy Spirit will bring forth "the fruits of the Spirit." Through the grace of Christ we shall live in obedience to the law of God written upon our hearts. {PP 372.2}
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: Tom]
#107519
01/13/09 08:43 PM
01/13/09 08:43 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: What did the passages Jesus quoted to them say that constitute more than a “Thus saith the Lord”? They only describe who, what, when, and where. They do not explain why. If you think otherwise, please prove it. Post one of the passages Jesus might have quoted that explains why He had to become a man and die on the cross. T: This seems an odd assertion and request. Much of the Old Testament speaks of Christ, with teachings as to why things would be done and not simply what. If you read Romans, and see the passages which Paul quotes from, those are good examples. Isa. 53 is a good example, and many other places in Isaiah. A text which says that God would create a man finer than the Gold of some place, can't remember the name; doesn't matter. Anyway, this speaks to God's plan of creating men with character. There are many Psalms which testify of Christ. Reasoning from prophecy, Christ gave His disciples a correct idea of what He was to be in humanity. (DA 799) A correct idea of what He was to be in humanity would have to include why, not just what. I've read the passages you cited and I did not see where God explains why Jesus had to become a man and die on the cross. Please be more specific. Thank you. Did Moses explain why Jesus had to become a man and die on the cross? Also, where does Moses say the animal sacrifices symbolize the death of the Son of God? I don't see where you addressed this question. M: Did Waggoner say anything that I cannot find clearly spelled out in SC or FW?
T: Yes. Just to mention one thing, I don't think she speaks at all about the Covenants in these books. To name another, I don't think she addresses Christ's taking our nature in these books either. Perhaps you overlooked the following references: "Nothing but His righteousness can entitle us to one of the blessings of the covenant of grace. We have long desired and tried to obtain these blessings but have not received them because we have cherished the idea that we could do something to make ourselves worthy of them. We have not looked away from ourselves, believing that Jesus is a living Saviour. We must not think that our own grace and merits will save us; the grace of Christ is our only hope of salvation. " {FW 36.1}
"When the principle of love is implanted in the heart, when man is renewed after the image of Him that created him, the new-covenant promise is fulfilled, "I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them." Hebrews 10:16. {SC 60.2}
"In the Word of God the honest seeker for truth will find the rule for genuine sanctification. . . 'For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.' {FW 97.2} I could have included PP and DA where Ellen clearly explains the covenants and the human nature of Jesus. The real intent of my question is - I don't see where Waggoner explained vital truths that cannot be found clearly explained in the SOP. Do you? M: When I went through the Ten Truths link I found myself questioning several key points. Here they are again:
1. I do not agree that Jesus died the second death. He “tasted” and consumed and conquered it. Satan is the one who will die our second death with our sins.
T: I disagree with the wording chosen there. I would say He "tasted" the second death, or "experienced" it. I'd be more careful how I put this. Satan doesn't die with our sins, but he suffers for his part, his responsibility, not just for our sins, but for his responsibility in regards to everyone. Jesus will place upon the head of Satan the sins of the saved. While thus burdened Satan will suffer and die. In this way the sins of the saved are eliminated, exterminated. Listen: But not so when the great controversy shall be ended. Then, the plan of redemption having been completed, the character of God is revealed to all created intelligences. The precepts of His law are seen to be perfect and immutable. Then sin has made manifest its nature, Satan his character. Then the extermination of sin will vindicate God's love and establish His honor before a universe of beings who delight to do His will, and in whose heart is His law. {DA 764.3}
The whole universe will have become witnesses to the nature and results of sin. And its utter extermination, which in the beginning would have brought fear to angels and dishonor to God, will now vindicate His love and establish His honor before the universe of beings who delight to do His will, and in whose heart is His law. Never will evil again be manifest. Says the word of God: "Affliction shall not rise up the second time." Nahum 1:9. The law of God, which Satan has reproached as the yoke of bondage, will be honored as the law of liberty. A tested and proved creation will never again be turned from allegiance to Him whose character has been fully manifested before them as fathomless love and infinite wisdom. {GC 504.1} M: 2. I do not agree sinners must resist Jesus’ love to be lost. I believe sinners are already lost and must do something to be saved, namely, embrace Jesus.
T: The SOP clearly states this in a number of places. The thing they must do they will do if they don't resist. Do you think sinners are lost by default? Or, do you think they are saved by default? If sinners do nothing at all are they lost or saved? M: 4. I do not think lost sheep are lost because they made a conscious decision to be lost based on their misunderstanding of God’s character. They are lost because they know not God. Most do not understand why they are lost.
T: I think you're misunderstanding something here, that is, I believe you're understanding something to have been said which was not said. Could you please quote what you had in mind here? I was responding to number 4 of the Ten Truths. M: 6. I do not agree that the NC is a one-way promise. It is conditional upon our consent and cooperation. Ellen wrote, “All that the Lord hath spoken we will do. This is the pledge that God's people are to make in these last days.”
T: You cut this off in mid-sentence. What was written is that it is a one-way promise to write His law in our heart. This is just what Jeremiah says. Read Jeremiah 31:31-34. There's no promise by anyone in this passage but God. This is the declaration of the New Covenant.
Ellen White, in the PP passage I quoted previously, states that in the NC the law is written in the heart, as opposed to on stone, and that instead of seeking to establish our own righteousness, we accept the righteousness of Christ. She was explaining the different between the OC and the NC in writing this. Do you think God writes His law in the hearts of sinners without their consent and cooperation? Or, do you think their consent and cooperation are required? M: 9. I prefer “faith that works by love and purifies the soul” as a definition of genuine faith. This kind of faith makes both justification and sanctification realities in the life.
T: This isn't a definition of faith. It's a declaration of what genuine faith does. Actions speak louder than words. "Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works."
|
|
|
Re: Is it possible to obey God before understanding His reasons for giving the command?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#107536
01/14/09 06:12 AM
01/14/09 06:12 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Yes, it is a different question. That’s why I said, “Let’s back up and start over.” And you finally gave me an answer What's up with this? You recognize this is a different question, a question which I immediately answered, the first time you asked it, and you respond, "And you finally game me an answer." What did you want me to do? Answer the question before you asked it? What are the terms and conditions of the NC? What are the terms and conditions of the OC? Also, in light of what you wrote above, please explain the following points Ellen raised in PP:
The terms of the OC were the proud and unbelieving promise of the people to do all that the Lord had commanded. Ellen White characterizes this as the people seeking to establish their own righteousness. The NC was established upon "better promises," the promises of forgiveness and the writing of the law in heart. She characterized this as accepting the righteousness of Christ. The condition is faith.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|