Do you understand the points I have articulated? If so, do they contradict your view? Again, I believe Sister White makes it clear that God gave the old covenant to the COI to obey and to follow, the same as the new covenant. The law in Galatians refers to both the moral and the ceremonial laws. Do you think Waggoner agrees with this view? And, do you agree with Sister White that the issue is not a vital question?

What did Waggoner's detractors oppose? They thought he was soft on sin, that his view of the law excused law breaking. Which, to some degree, was his own fault, because he tended to overstate things. Sister White opposed the oppositions unChristlike spirit, not necessarily their view of things, though she did think their view of the law was as dry as the hills of Gilboa.

Mike,

Your EW quotes are so short that they could mean absolutely anything. Could you provide at least some context? Some of them acctually are so short that it eludes me what you are trying to communicate by posting them.

/Thomas

Thomas, sorry about the brevity, but it's usually best to keep it short, it appears though that I have cut it too short. Would you mind reading it online elsewhere? If so, here's a link:

http://egwdatabase.whiteestate.org/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates$fn=default.htm$vid=default

Or

http://www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/

Mike: Do you understand the points I have articulated? If so, do they contradict your view?

Tom: Your points do. What EGW wrote doesn't. Her views agree with Waggoner's, as she herself said they did. I agree with them.

Mike: Again, I believe Sister White makes it clear that God gave the old covenant to the COI to obey and to follow, the same as the new covenant. The law in Galatians refers to both the moral and the ceremonial laws. Do you think Waggoner agrees with this view? And, do you agree with Sister White that the issue is not a vital question?

Tom: Have you read "The Law in Galatians" by Butler, or "The Gospel in Galatians" by Waggoner? Are you aware that you are espousing Butler's ideas? (who opposed Waggoner)

Mike: What did Waggoner's detractors oppose? They thought he was soft on sin, that his view of the law excused law breaking. Which, to some degree, was his own fault, because he tended to overstate things. Sister White opposed the oppositions unChristlike spirit, not necessarily their view of things, though she did think their view of the law was as dry as the hills of Gilboa.

Tom: Do you realize you are saying the same things and holding the same views as those who opposed Waggoner said and held?

quote:

---

The message given us by A. T. Jones, and E. J. Waggoner is the message of God to the Laodicean church, and woe be unto anyone who professes to believe the truth and yet does not reflect to others the God-given rays. (1888 Mat 1052)

---

If you're interested in reading "The Gospel in Galatians," here is a link.

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:DBL_hP5cRLMJ:www.truthaboutgodministries.com/gospel_in_galatians.htm+waggoner+%22The+Gospel+in+Galatians%22&hl=en


Your characterization of the differences in the teachings of Waggoner and Butler, as well as the what the essential points of Waggoner's teaching is way off. Rather than comment right away, I'll wait and see if you'd like to read what Waggoner wrote and see for yourself.

Sister White is very clear. God gave the COI the old covenant to obey and to follow, and the law in Galatians refers to both the moral and the ceremonial laws. Do these inspired insights disagree with Waggoner? If so, then I guess he was wrong on those particular points, which doesn't mean he got everything wrong, since Sister White did say some positive things about his message.

After rereading "The Law and the Covenants" (chapter 32) in Patriarchs and Prophets, I have no desire to reread Waggoner, especially since you have made it clear that some of his views contradict what Sister White wrote. You haven't convinced me that Sister White got it wrong, and trying to quote her approval of Waggoner, as though it were a blanket approval, doesn't cut it with me. Whatever he might have said that was right will be reflected in the SOP, why should I get it second hand? from an uninspired source?

Would it be possible to decide this by the bible alone?

/Thomas

Yes, of course. The Lord made the covenant with the COI. Nowhere in the Bible does it say the old covenant originated with the COI, and that God reluctantly went along with it because they were immature or whatever. Sister White makes this very clear in the Bible study she recorded in PP.

Exodus
24:8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled [it] on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.

Given that EGW said:

1) If Waggoner's teaching agree with what she wrote in PP, then it was "truth."
2) Shortly thereafter described Waggoner's view as "truth,"

doesn't it follow from elementary logic that she believed Waggoner's view to be the same as hers? Yet you seem to believe they were different. Was Ellen White confused about this? Did she think her views really agreed when they didn't?

Mike, I couldn't tell from your answer if you read the link I provided on "The Gospel in Galatians." This would be a good thing to read in order to understand the issues involved.

In particular, a question I asked which I don't recall was addressed was why would accepting Waggoner's view of the Covenants lead one to accept his view of the law in Galatians? It is important to understand the answer to this question for a number of reasons. For one thing, this link shows what issue regarding Waggoner's view of the Covenants was specifically endorsed by Ellen G. White.

Tom.

I rather think that the principle of the Old covenant was really based on the flesh, on men’s works to gain life, because that is exactly as what God had instructed.

“Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein; I am the Lord your God. E shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments; which if a man do, he shall live in them; I am the Lord” – Leviticus 18:4,5.

This idea was approved by Paul himself:
“The law is not of faith; but, the man that doeth them shall live in them” – Galatians 3:12. (read also Romans 10:5).

Why did God instructed men to seek life through obedience to the law, even he knew that no flesh would be justified in his sight by the deeds of the law (Romans 3:19,20)? God knew before hand that no man might ever be justified by the law and rewarded with life eternal for his perfect righteousness in obeying the law, but he still issue the law in written to COI and made them all come under its jurisdiction and judgment.

Why no man might ever achieve a righteousness through obedience to the law, either with faith in Christ or not, that would give him life? Because the Law is God’s principle, holy, good and just while men fall short of God’s glory and has a fallen nature that by default could only do the things that is against the law.

Is God then a liar? No, because Christ, the Son of Man has proved that God is right and just, because he is the only “man” in earth history that is able to obey the law perfectly and fulfill it demands. He was justified by the law and rewarded with life for his righteousness, death could not hold him in its possession.

Then, why, even knowing no man would justify by the law, God still issued the law and instructed COI to keep and obey it to gain life?

Because God must seek a legal right to justify men guilty and deserve to die for their sins. Otherwise he would be blamed for the suffering of the world and for the death upon men. Meanwhile on the other hand, God must prove Christ righteousness that justify him as men Savior and sin Redeemer, which also justify God righteousness in issuing his law, which a man do it, he shall live by them (proven by Christ).

If the law could be obeyed and the demands fulfilled, it might means that God has lowered his standard of righteousness to the level of fallen men, or that the Law giver is a god with same characteristic as men.

Therefore, the Old Covenant was issued based on men efforts to gain life, as God’s instruction. Few who knew that it would only lead to condemnation alone and hang their hope in the coming Savior introduced in the law through faith. At the judgment, they would be justified by their faith.

Therefore, Paul said that the law written in stone tablets kills, serving it lead to condemnation and death (2 Corinthians 3:6-9) for it is a real truth for fallen men. Thus, even those who put their faith in the coming Savior also were justified to die by the law (Galatians 4:4,5), but they were saved by their faith in Christ.

The issuing of the Law to legally justify sinners to die and legally justify Christ to save men was a way of God in the Plan of Creation to abolish sin and killing sinners in order his would be kingdom might reign forever in righteousness and holiness .

So, I believe that the function of the Law ceased at the cross when the purpose was fulfilled (Luke 16:16; John 19:30; Galatians 3:19; Colossians 3:14; Ephesians 2:15).

From the cross, God maintain a New Covenant with Christ’ believers, the Covenant of grace based on faith and his mercy in forgiving sins. Through faith and a walk after the Spirit, a believer might live a righteous life that is in harmony with God’s will and his principle and by justification of faith, he is justified to enter heaven and see God.

The principle of the Old Covenant, serving the law written on stone tablets to gain life is substituted with the new ministry of the New Covenant, the ministry of the Spirit that gives life (2 Corinthians 3:11, Galatians 3:23-25, Hebrews 10:16,17).

In His love

James S

No comment till now???

In His love

james S.