???
And there's no passage saying that Christ came to disprove Satan's accusations about the character of God.
The meaning is clear that Christ came to prove that the law is immutable. "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law."
As to a commentary, I would quote the following inspired ones:

"Much was involved in this controversy. Intense interests were at stake. The questions to be answered were: 'Is God's law imperfect, in need of being amended or abrogated? or is it immutable? Is God's government stable? or is it in need of changes?' Not only before those living in the city of God, but before the inhabitants of all the heavenly universe, were these questions to be answered." {TDG 14.1}

"Christ himself declares that he came not to destroy the law of ten precepts, which was spoken from Sinai. He says, 'Verily I say unto you,'-- making the assertion as emphatic as possible,--'Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.' Here he teaches not merely what the claims of God's law had been and were then, but that these claims should hold so long as the heavens and the earth remain. This testimony should forever settle the question. The law of God is as immutable as his throne. It will maintain its claims upon all mankind in all ages, unchanged by time or place or circumstances." {ST, September 4, 1884 par. 4}

"Christ came not to destroy the law or the prophets, but to fulfill them to the very letter. The atonement of Calvary vindicated the law of God as holy, just, and true, not only before the fallen world, but before heaven and before worlds unfallen." --Signs of the Times, June 20, 1895.

What's confusing about this? I'm saying you can't find a single commentary to support this idea, not even ours, that the text you cited was speaking of this theme.



This has been seen by many in Scripture. I've mentioned someone wrote two books on the subject, over 1,000 pages, discussing this theme.



This wasn't my point.



You can't prove a certain theme can be shown from Scripture by avoiding Scripture.

My argument has been that the Great Controversy, above all, involves God. This is the theme of Scripture; God revealing Himself through Christ for a fallen world, to set him right with God. We can consider this two ways. From the SOP, we have that the "whole purpose" of Christ's mission was the revelation of God, in order to set men right with God. So this establishes the point. Apart from the SOP, if we consider Scripture, it can be shown that Christ's mission was, as Ellen White states, to reveal God. We can prove this the same we she did, by considering John 17.

Also I've put forth the challenge to show from Scripture that Christ came to disprove Satan's accusations that the law could not be kept. The Scripture you quoted stated that Christ did not come to set aside the law and the prophets. This looks to be countering the idea that He was saying things which were contrary to the law and the prophets. So He said not one jot or tittle would pass way without all being fulfilled, making the point that *He* was the fulfillment of the law and the prophets. It's all about Christ. He's the center of everything. God revealed in the flesh is the shining brilliance of Scripture.

Jesus said, "you search the Scriptures, and they are they which testify of Me, but you will not come to Me that you might have life." Eternal life is found in Christ. The Scriptures testify of Christ, that we might find life in Him.

Tom, I agree with Rosangela. The GC concerns the validity of the law. The unfallen decided before Lucifer was cast down to earth to love God. The question now is - Is it possible for fallen beings to repent and to obey the law perfectly? The answer will be forever settled when the 144,000 survive the time of trouble. This answer will serve to confirm (not establish) what the unfallen already believe by faith, namely, that it is possible for fallen beings to repent and to obey the law perfectly.

I haven't said it doesn't. I've said that the GC is primarily about God, not that it doesn't involve the law.



That's a question. It's not "the" question. "The" question is, what is God like? Is He like Satan has claimed He is?



Again, this is an issue, but not the fundamental one. For example:



As an aside, I don't understand the motivation for the position that you're arguing. Why do you think it is better to view things as primarily a contest as to whether or not the law can or should be obeyed as opposed to what the true character of God is?

I’m not avoiding Scripture at all!

Obviously there is no direct verse saying that Christ came to disprove either Satan's accusations about the law or his accusations against the character of God. You have to analyze texts in a chain to construe a theology. Boyd’s problem is that he saw just one angle of the subject and failed to see the other, which is equally important.

The theme of the law is present in the great controversy from its beginning to its end. Satan fell because he transgressed God’s law. He is mentioned as transgressing the law at his fall. His attempt to be like God is an obvious transgression of the 1st commandment (Isa. 14:13, 14; Eze. 28:15-17). Christ plainly accuses him of murder and lying in heaven (John 8:44), which are obvious transgressions of the 6th and 9th commandments. The clear reference here is to the hatred he harbored toward the Deity and to the lies he told the angels about God’s law and character in order to persuade them to join him. So, clearly, the transgression of the law was at the root of Satan’s fall.

Satan then induces our first parents to transgress the first and tenth commandments (Gen. 3:5), thus leading them into sin. Thus, the fall of our first parents also occurred by their transgression of the law.

“Therefore, ... through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom. 5:12). And sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4).

In the first advent of Christ we have the climax of the great controversy. The most direct teaching of Christ about God’s law is located in Matt. 5:17-19. He said He had come not to abolish the law but to fulfill it. And He did fulfill it – despite Satan’s efforts to the contrary, He said, “I have kept My Father’s commandments” (John 15:10). The “law” in Matt. 5:17-19 evidently refers to the Pentateuch, but especially to the ten-commandment law which lies at its heart. Christ declared that law to be immutable. Satan had declared in heaven that the law of God needed to be changed or abolished because it couldn’t be kept. Hence the importance of Christ’s words. And Christ taught this not only by His words, but by His acts. When He died on the cross He proved the law of God immutable, for if the law could have been changed or abolished to meet man’s needs, Christ would not have needed to die. Christ not only saved man, but defeated and judged Satan at the cross. “Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, ‘Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down’” (Rev. 12:10). Since Satan is described as “the accuser of our brethren,” we must infer that he claims they, like himself, are transgressors of God’s law, and he denies heaven’s right to extend grace and forgiveness to them. But the cross gave Christ this right, and Satan was thus “cast down.”

Finally, the last great struggle in this great controversy will be primarily about the law of God (Rev. 14:9-12).

It’s a pity Boyd didn’t see any of this. It’s all there in the Bible.

I haven't read the latest posts here, but I think a significant source of the disagreement is the false dichotomy between God's character and His law. It's an understandable error for those who have been taught that God's law is a yoke of bondage, done away by Christ's sacrifice. But Adventists know that God's law is a transcript of His character. To have a controversy over one is to have a controversy over the other.

This wasn't a concern of first century Judaism. Or before that. Where are you going to find this theme in Scripture? Who was interested in this?



Where would you direct him to find it?



One can describe Satan's fall in terms of the Ten Commandments. One can also describe it in terms of his breaking the first great commandment, to love God with all your heart and mind and soul and strength. One can also interpret it in the light of pride, or selfishness. But one could hardly make the argument from either Isaiah or Ezekiel that Lucifer was rebelling against God because he thought the law was unjust.



Satan misrepresented God's character, leading them to believe that God did not have their best interests in heart. This led to their transgression. Their faulty picture of God's character was the root of their problem. The solution to the problem was Jesus Christ.

Ellen White says the "whole purpose" of Christ's mission was "the revelation of God," that the only way man could be set right and kept right with God was for Him to become familiar to man.

This theme is easy to establish from Scripture.



The only way man could be set right and kept right with God was by revealing the truth about God, about His character. Now God gave the law, and the law is a transcript of His character, so if there was anything bad about the law, that would speak poorly of God. So it's important to establish the law is holy, good, and righteous, for these reasons.

Also the law is a transcript of God's character, and describes behavior which is not God-like. If we wish to be like God, it's helpful to know what God is like.

Also the law testifies of Christ, in whom we find life. So it was important for Christ to establish this point, so people would go to Him to obtain life.



Where in Scripture do you find this?



On the basis of what? (that is, on what basis are you asserting that the importance of Christ's words are based on Satan's having declared in heaven that the law needed to be changed or abolished because it couldn't be kept).



Christ taught that the law was good, and should be kept, but where did He teach the other things you are saying? (about Lucifer's accusations in heaven)



Where is this taught in Scripture? According to the SOP, the whole purpose of Christ's mission was the revelation of God. Wouldn't this purpose of remained to be accomplished, even if it weren't necessary to prove the law is immutable?



Ok, let me see if I follow this.

1.Satan is called the accuser of the brethren.
2.This means that he accuses the brethren of being transgressors.
3.It also means he denies the ability of Christ to forgive them.
4.But the cross gave Christ this right.
5.Therefore Satan was cast down.

How about the following interpretation?

1.Satan's true character was revealed by the cross.
2.He revealed himself as a murderer.
3.In so doing, he cut off completely any sympathies he had with the angels in heaven.
4.This loss of influence is represented as his being "cast down."



It's not primarily about the law of God, but about God. The last message is a revelation of the character of God. Christ's mission was to reveal God, and when Christ is preached, God is revealed. It is the revelation of God that enables man to keep the law, as without being set right with God, or kept right, it's not possible to keep the law.

To have the law written in the heart is to be in harmony with God. Or, to put it another way, to be reconciled with God is to have the law written in the heart. The instrument of reconciliation is Christ, who reveals the love and character of the Father. The goodness of God leads to repentance. When the sinner sees the love of God shining from the cross, if he does not resist, he is led to respond to the pleading of the Holy Spirit, and is brought into harmony with God. It is the revelation of God, and only the revelation of God, that can lead to obedience to the law.

The central point of Scripture is the goodness of God. That is the final message to be given to the world.



Where? Specifically, where in the Bible is the idea that Satan said in heaven that the law could not be kept? Where is the idea that this is what the Great Controversy is about?

On the other hand, if we wish to establish that there is a controversy about God's character, and that Christ's mission was to reveal that truth about that, this is easy to establish from Scripture.

Christ revealed the character of God, but where did He teach the other things you are saying? (about Lucifer’s accusations in heaven)


???
All those who defend the penal substitution theory see (or should see) this in the Bible.
Galatians 3:13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us
The curse of the law is the penalty of the law. If the law could be changed or abolished, there would be no penalty to be paid, no need for Christ to die.


I think your interpretation is not based on the text. Rev. 12:10 speaks about Satan as an accuser, not as a murderer. It says that “the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down.”
Where is it said in the Bible he had any sympathies with the angels in heaven?


Ok, it’s about both, and both are equally important. “Here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.”


What he said in heaven, one way or the other, must be inferred from what he told our first parents. Here he 1) lied about God’s character, and 2) led man to disobey God. Two aspects, always; not just one. In the great controversy disobedience is the key word. Satan was the first to disobey God; then he induced other angels to do it; then he induced man to do it. This is what "sin" is all about. But the evangelical world is so blinded that they cannot see that the only definition of sin is "the transgression of the law."

? Here's what I've been saying:





You cut off my question off in the middle! Here's what I asked:



Please don't cut something like this off without allowing the thought to be complete. You didn't even quote the rest of it. You didn't consider what I asked. You gave the impression I was saying something I wasn't saying.

I'd appreciate you're answering the question I asked. Specifically "Wouldn't this purpose have remained to be accomplished, even if it weren't necessary to prove the law is immutable?"







No, God is more important. If they were both equally important, one should be able to prove both from Scripture. It's easy to prove what I'm asserting from Scripture, but not what you're asserting. Specifically you are asserting that Lucifer claimed in heaven that the law could not be kept, etc. Where in Scripture do you see this theme?



My question was "Specifically, where in the Bible is the idea that Satan said in heaven that the law could not be kept?"

Tom,

I'm not following you! Of course there are details supplied by Ellen White. What I understand you to be saying is that the aspect of the law in the Great Controversy cannot be proven from the Bible. And what I'm trying to tell you is that it can be proven from the Bible.

What Satan said in heaven is not written in the Bible. Where is it written in the Bible that he misrepresented God's character in heaven? In view of this, this question you keep asking does not make any sense to me:



What I'm trying to say is that the strategy he used in heaven can only be inferred from the strategy he used on earth with Adam and Eve. That's why I said that here he 1) lied about God’s character, and 2) led man to disobey God. The two aspects are involved. But, as both can be only inferred in relation to heaven, not proved, then I conclude you wish to leave the "heaven" part outside of the discussion. Is this what you mean? If it isn't, I'm not following you.

In case heaven is left out, we begin with Adam and Eve, where, again, both aspects are involved - which leaves us where we started. There is no way you can leave the law outside of the great controversy and pretend that it can't be found in the Bible. The great controversy on earth began when Satan distorted God's character and led man to disobey God's law. Disobedience is a key factor in the great controversy - there's no way around this. In fact, he just distorted God's character as a means to an end - lead man to disobey God. That's why Ellen White said that the great controversy is primarily about the law, although God's character is also involved.


Again, I'm not following you! Do you want to discuss this from the Bible or from the SOP? What I tried to point out to you was that you couldn't prove what you had just said from the Bible. Of course I knew Ellen White's passage.


Again, I'm not following you! I just wished to show that it's possible to demonstrate from the Bible that when Christ died on the cross He proved God's law immutable. Of course it's easy to prove from the Bible the aspect of God's character. What I'm trying to do is to show you that the aspect of the law is also there - for those who are willing to see it.