Is the Seventh Day Adventist Church orthodox

[LoveGodsWord]

If you truly love God, as you assert, why is it that you selectively ignore His commandments?

I don't selectively ignore God's commandments *Romans 2:1-12. I love God and keep His commandments because of His great love, mercy and grace for me who am but the chiefest of sinners *John 14:15; John 15:10; 1 Timothy 1:15 including God's 4th commandment that most people have forgotten out of ignorance *James 4:17; Acts of the Apostles 17:30-31 when God tells us to "remember" *Exodus 20:8 because he has made me free to walk in His Spirit *Galatians 5:16 which is the fruit of faith *Romans 3:31; 1 John 5:2-4; Matthew 7:17-23 in all those who believe and follow God's Word. If I am ever tempted to sin I have an advocate with the father *1 John 2:1-4. What about you? Do you believe Jesus has come to save us from our sins or do we continue in sin (breaking his commandments) *1 John 3:4 like the children of the devil as shown from the scriptures in 1 John 3:6-10; 1 John 2:3-4? According to Jesus the hour is coming and now is that the true worshipers will worship God in Spirit and in truth. God is a Spirit and those who worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in truth *John 4:23-24. God's people are in every Church living up to all the light of His Word that he has revealed to them. God is calling us all out from following man-made teachings and traditions of men back to the pure Word of God *Revelation 18:1-4. Gods sheep will hear His Voice (the Word) and follow him. Those who do not hear will not follow because they are not His sheep according to John 10:26-27. The question we should all be asking ourselves is who are we believing and following; God or man? Jesus says those who follow man-made teachings and traditions that break the commandments of God are not worshiping God in Matthew 15:3-9.

 

[tall73]

Though it is the fifth commandment of the 10 commandments Paul calls it the first commandment with promise because the fifth commandment of the 10 commandments to honor our father and mother is the first commandment of our duty of love to our neighbor which is the second great commandment as Jesus teaches in Matthew 22:26-40 where he quotes Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18.

That is some convoluted explanation of what "with promise" means.

Why did he change the promise?

Exodus:
that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

Ephesians:
That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.​

Given that there is a promise in the commandment, the first to include one, and Paul goes on to modify the promise to work outside of the land of Israel and the context of the curses and blessings, it is pretty clear it means the first "with a promise".

These commentaries that look at the Greek note the construction.

Cambridge:
[the first … with promise] In the Decalogue, to which here the reference plainly is, it is in fact the only “commandment with” definite “promise.” But the Decalogue is, so to speak, the first page of the whole Law-Book of Revelation.
“With”:—lit. “in”; attended, surrounded, by promise.

Alford:
he ἐν, as in reff.—in the sphere or department of—characterized by—accompanied with), that it may be well with thee, and thou be long-lived upon the earth (he paraphrases the latter portion of the commandment, writing for ἵνα μακρ. γένῃ, ἔσῃ μ.,—and omitting after γῆς, (τῆς ἀγαθῆς, so in Exod., but not in Deut.) ἧς κύριος ὁ θεός σου δίδωσίν σοι: thus adapting the promise to his Christian readers, by taking away from it that which is special and peculiar to the Jewish people.

Robertson's Word pictures:
The first commandment with promise (entolē prōtē en epaggeliāi). En here means “accompanied by”

 

[tall73]

The point being made that I am glad your now conceding is that if we love God and our fellow man we will be keeping all of God's 10 commandments as shown in these scriptures. This of course includes Gods' 4th commandment which is one of God's 10 commandments as shown in Exodus 20:8-11.

The point was as the text said:

Mat 22:37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the great and first commandment.
Mat 22:39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

The rest you just mentioned did not flow from what the text said. You were indicating earlier it was summarizing the ten. It states, plainly, that all the law and prophets depend on these two.

Now if that means you must do all in the law and prophets, you are not doing that. But instead, we agree on moral law. And that is what is under debate.

 

[tall73]

According to God's Word in the new covenant God's ISRAEL are all those who believe and follow God's Word.

Oh, very sorry, we are not to that point yet. You have not given your position on the beard and mixing of livestock texts.

 

[tall73]

If you truly love God, as you assert, why is it that you selectively ignore His commandments?

Well give him credit. He is the only Adventist I have ever seen who said that a woman is unclean after her pregnancy because it is a health law!

But he is doing his best not to answer the question about disfiguring a beard or mixing livestock.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Not really. The context of Ephesians 6:1-3 is speaking to children [v1] telling them to honor their parents saying "Honor your father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise." in [v2], which is actually the fifth commandment of the 10 commandment found in Exodus 20:12.

Though it is the fifth commandment of the 10 commandments Paul calls it the first commandment with promise because the fifth commandment of the 10 commandments to honor our father and mother is the first commandment of our duty of love to our neighbor which is the second great commandment as Jesus teaches in Matthew 22:26-40 where he quotes Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18.

Jesus says here that the two greatest commandments of loving God with all of our heart mind and soul and the second great commandment as loving our neighbor as our selves is simply summarizing obedience to God's 10 commandments and God's word. Honoring our parents therefore as it is shown in Ephesians 6:1-3 is the first commandment of our duty of love to our fellow man. Paul expresses the same concept here in Romans 13:8-10 where he says

"Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loves another has fulfilled the law. For this, {notice if we love our neighbor we will keep God's commandments} You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, You shall not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly summed up in this saying, namely, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Love works no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law".

No one loves God or their fellow man by breaking anyone of Gods' 10 commandments as love is expressed through obedience to God's law not by breaking God's 10 commandments according to the scriptures. (see 1 John 2:3-4; 1 John 3:4-9; Revelation 12:17; Revelation 14:12; Revelation 22:14).

Hope this is helpful.

Your response here...

That is some convoluted explanation of what "with promise" means.

I am sorry dear friend we will have to agree to disagree here. I have only posted Gods' Word which is not my words but Gods' Word and Gods' Word is not convoluted if we prayerfully ask him to help us to understand it. (John 14:26; 16:13; 7:17). I also provided the full post for context above that you may have not considered if it may be helpful.

Why did he change the promise? Exodus: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. Ephesians: That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. Given that there is a promise in the commandment, the first to include one, and Paul goes on to modify the promise to work outside of the land of Israel and the context of the curses and blessings, it is pretty clear it means the first "with a promise".

The problem your having in your argument here for me is that if you read the post you are quoting from my application to the 5th commandment is to the second great commandment of loving our neighbor as our self not to disagreeing with the promise in the scripture. So perhaps that is where your confusion is here. I am discussing application to God's 5th commandment of the 10 commandment as the first commandment of the second great commandment of our duty of love to our fellow man. So we are clear I do not disagree with your post. I am only coming from a different view point (application to the second great commandment of love) that agrees with your post .

These commentaries that look at the Greek note the construction.

Cambridge:
[the first … with promise] In the Decalogue, to which here the reference plainly is, it is in fact the only “commandment with” definite “promise.” But the Decalogue is, so to speak, the first page of the whole Law-Book of Revelation.
“With”:—lit. “in”; attended, surrounded, by promise.

Alford:
he ἐν, as in reff.—in the sphere or department of—characterized by—accompanied with), that it may be well with thee, and thou be long-lived upon the earth (he paraphrases the latter portion of the commandment, writing for ἵνα μακρ. γένῃ, ἔσῃ μ.,—and omitting after γῆς, (τῆς ἀγαθῆς, so in Exod., but not in Deut.) ἧς κύριος ὁ θεός σου δίδωσίν σοι: thus adapting the promise to his Christian readers, by taking away from it that which is special and peculiar to the Jewish people.

Robertson's Word pictures:
The first commandment with promise (entolē prōtē en epaggeliāi). En here means “accompanied by”

Thank you but your making arguments no one is arguing about here so your commentaries are not relevant to our discussion and what you were quoting from and does not disagree with what I was sharing with you earlier.

That said I would like to throw a question on your thinking here as well as your commentaries to help show where I am coming from. You claim here and your argument is that the 5th commandment is the first commandment with a promise attached to it. I am not disagreeing with this but have you considered that the first commandment that has a promised attached to it is not the fifth commandment but the second commandment (Exodus 20:4-6) of our duty of love to God (e.g [5] negative and positive promises "visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;[6], And showing mercy to thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments")?

I was only applying a different view with the other scriptures provided earlier showing that the first four commandments *Exodus 20:3-11 are our duty of how we love God while the second six commandments *Exodus 20:12-17 (see Romans 13:8-10) are how we love our fellow man and that love is expressed in obedience to God's law not by breaking Gods' law which was what I was posting about earlier to you unless your trying to argue that your commentaries are stating that God's 5th commandment does not have application to the second great commandment of love to our neighbor which of course they are not.

You go on here to to try and show a distinction between Exodus 20:12 and Ephesians 6:2. For me personally besides some slight changes in the exact wording which Paul does a lot when quoting old testament scripture in the new testament, I do not see any change to the meanings here unless your trying to argue a difference between "land and "earth". Either way I believe it is God who gives us our places to live and stay here in the earth. Of course the promised land was given to the physical nation of Israel under the old covenant as long as they followed God. Today we are in the new covenant and we wait for the return of our Lord at the second coming and for a New heavens and a New earth where we will receive our final resting place according to the new covenant.

Hope this helps.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

The point was as the text said:

Mat 22:37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the great and first commandment.
Mat 22:39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

The rest you just mentioned did not flow from what the text said. You were indicating earlier it was summarizing the ten. It states, plainly, that all the law and prophets depend on these two.

Now if that means you must do all in the law and prophets, you are not doing that. But instead, we agree on moral law. And that is what is under debate.

Of course everything in the post you are quoting from flows with what you stated from the scripture in Matthew 22:40 for which I agreed. The point being made was you agreeing with Matthew 22:40. Therefore if you agree that when Jesus says "On these two commandments of love to God and man hang all the law and the prophets" You must therefore agree that this includes all of God's 10 commandments correct? Which also includes the Sabbath? Don't forget we are going by what Jesus actually says in Matthew 22:36-40 right?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Oh, very sorry, we are not to that point yet. You have not given your position on the beard and mixing of livestock texts.

As posted a little earlier, according to God's Word in the new covenant God's ISRAEL are all those who believe and follow God's Word. There is now no more Jewish believer or Gentile believer under Gods' new covenant gospel commission. All believers are now one in Christ. If we are not a part of God's ISRAEL in the new covenant we have no part in God's new covenant promise of Hebrews 8:10-12 from Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36:24-27. Gentile believers are now grafted in place of Jewish unbelievers according to the scriptures and very much a part of God's true ISRAEL according to the scriptures. (detailed scripture response starting here if your interested on who God's ISRAEL is in the new covenant). As to beard? I do not have one is there any scripture that tells me I should grow one? As to livestock I do not have any so this is not relevant though we should seek as much as possible to follow all of God's laws because there are many laws outside of the 10 commandments that are still applicable today (e.g clean and unclean food laws). As to woman's childbirth I am not a woman. So what is it you need to discuss? None of these arguments your trying to put up of course are an excuse to break any one of God's 10 commandments according to James in James 2:10-11 or Paul in Hebrews 10:26-31 do you think?

 

[bbbbbbb]

I don't selectively ignore God's commandments *Romans 2:1-12. I love God and keep His commandments because of His great love, mercy and grace for me who am but the chiefest of sinners *John 14:15; John 15:10; 1 Timothy 1:15 including God's 4th commandment that most people have forgotten out of ignorance *James 4:17; Acts of the Apostles 17:30-31 when God tells us to "remember" *Exodus 20:8 because he has made me free to walk in His Spirit *Galatians 5:16 which is the fruit of faith *Romans 3:31; 1 John 5:2-4; Matthew 7:17-23 in all those who believe and follow God's Word. If I am ever tempted to sin I have an advocate with the father *1 John 2:1-4. What about you? Do you believe Jesus has come to save us from our sins or do we continue in sin (breaking his commandments) *1 John 3:4 like the children of the devil as shown from the scriptures in 1 John 3:6-10; 1 John 2:3-4? According to Jesus the hour is coming and now is that the true worshipers will worship God in Spirit and in truth. God is a Spirit and those who worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in truth *John 4:23-24. God's people are in every Church living up to all the light of His Word that he has revealed to them. God is calling us all out from following man-made teachings and traditions of men back to the pure Word of God *Revelation 18:1-4. Gods sheep will hear His Voice (the Word) and follow him. Those who do not hear will not follow because they are not His sheep according to John 10:26-27. The question we should all be asking ourselves is who are we believing and following; God or man? Jesus says those who follow man-made teachings and traditions that break the commandments of God are not worshiping God in Matthew 15:3-9.

Well, I suppose, given your definition of keeping commandments I am just as thorough in keeping commandments as yourself. I go about kindling fires every day of the week.

 

[BobRyan]

I stated for non-sda's Ellen White's writings are a good way to show Adventist teaching because most Adventists agree with her writings.

I think that non-SDAs on a forum like CF have two good sources for Adventist teaching.
1. The public online statement of beliefs for our denomination.
2. The people they find here who are SDA and who do not limit their response to "what did Ellen White say"

But as a non-SDA someone might want to make some claim that can't be proven by the online statement of beliefs of the SDA denomination and then quote some snip from a text written by Ellen White -- the last thing I want to do is drag non-SDAs through a bunch of different quotes of Ellen White showing context and meaning to avoid misquote snip rendering etc because I don't see a large interest for that sort of accuracy outside of an everyone-is-SDA group that is already familiar with all the texts.

You have said you consider her inspired. I do not at all consider any of the theologians you mentioned inspired.

True - but I don't quote Ellen White or ask that others accept her as an inspired source since non of my statements are a quote of Ellen White.

I also do not accept Bible commentaries and the various Confessions of Faith as inspired and almost nobody does that I have found - yet they are a handy reference that a great many people are familiar with and respect for Bible scholarship. They demonstrate that the point I am making is not of the form "well you only view it that way because you are Adventist".

A. It is very difficult to support a claim that all the Bible Commentaries and Confessions of Faith that I quote are "Adventists".
B. And VERY often it turns out that the very point of difference that discussion reduces down to - is some difference that is NOT at all unique or specific to an Adventist doctrinal POV. This is especially true in the "Sabbath and the LAW" section of CF when it comes to the TEN Commandments.

My guess is that you already know that these reasons for sticking with the Bible and various statements from accepted Bible scholars to make an objective easy-to-follow case.

 

[BobRyan]

Exo 20:12 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the LORD your God is giving you.
​

The commandment, as related to Israel, was tied to the covenant curses and blessings in which disobedience would result in them being driven from the land.

I did not state that the commandment to honor father and mother is not moral. I stated that Paul changes the promise. He restates the moral command to honor father and mother. And he relates a promise more fitting to gentiles who do not live in the promised land, where the curses of being removed from the land apply.

Just as it would have applied to gentiles in the OT. No change NT vs OT

 

[tall73]

As to beard? I do not have one is there any scripture that tells me I should grow one? As to livestock I do not have any so this is not relevant

Well we tried. It was your suggestion we trade comments. However you stopped answering, and are just repeating.

So that's it. It was still an interesting discussion.

 

[BobRyan]

And it is the first of the commandments given, more than just the ten, with a promise.

The other of the ten did not have a promise.

none of the first 4 are stated as having a promise so the 5th is the first in that unit of Ten with a specific promise in that unit of Ten. The command to not worship or serve images/idols gives no specific promise for doing so.



4 “You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath, or in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not worship them nor serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, inflicting the punishment of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing favor to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
The only unit of Law where the 5th commandment is "the first commandment with a promise" is the TEN. This is irrefutable proof that the context for the 5th commandment in Paul's quote was within the distinct unit of Law "the TEN".

That doesn't follow. Exodus 19 God lays out the broad strokes of the covenant. The people agree to do all that the Lord commands.

He relates the 10 commandments in Exodus 20. They were the first of any of the commandments to be given.

There are a great many commands from God from Genesis to Exodus 20, and with a number of them there are promises.


Once the ten are given the people are in fear:

Exo 20:18 Now when all the people saw the thunder and the flashes of lightning and the sound of the trumpet and the mountain smoking, the people were afraid and trembled, and they stood far off
Exo 20:19 and said to Moses, “You speak to us, and we will listen; but do not let God speak to us, lest we die.”
Exo 20:20 Moses said to the people, “Do not fear, for God has come to test you, that the fear of him may be before you, that you may not sin.”
Exo 20:21 The people stood far off, while Moses drew near to the thick darkness where God was.​

So sure, it was the first commandment with a promise. And I think everyone acknowledges it is in the 10. However, that does not cut out other commandments beyond the ten from the statement.

It is not the first command in the bible with a promise. It is not the first command in the book of Exodus with a promise.

16 Go and gather the elders of Israel together and say to them, ‘The Lord, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob has appeared to me, saying, “I am indeed concerned about you and what has been done to you in Egypt. 17 So I said, I will bring you up out of the oppression of Egypt to the land of the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite, to a land flowing with milk and honey.”’ 18 Then they will pay attention to what you say; and you with the elders of Israel will come to the king of Egypt, and you will say to him, ‘The Lord, the God of the Hebrews, has met with us. So now, please let us go a three days’ journey into the wilderness, so that we may sacrifice to the Lord our God.’ 19 But I know that the king of Egypt will not permit you to go, except under compulsion. 20 So I will reach out with My hand and strike Egypt with all My miracles which I shall do in the midst of it; and after that he will let you go. 21 I will grant this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians; and it shall be that when you go, you will not go empty-handed. 22 But every woman shall ask her neighbor and the woman who lives in her house for articles of silver and articles of gold, and clothing; and you will put them on your sons and daughters. So you will plunder the Egyptians.”

It only works within the unit of ten.

 

[BobRyan]

Paul recognizes it as applicable moral law. He reiterates that law. But he does not state it the same as in the commandment to Israel. He changes the promise, which was specific to their context.

The covenant with Israel was specific to their land. And in the covenant curses and blessings remaining in the land was dependent on obedience. The promise relates to them staying in the land the Lord God gave them.

Paul restates the command, but changes the promise to something that applies to all people, in every land. So he has taken moral law and shown that it is still applicable

The application he shows for all mankind is the same as it was in the OT given that all mankind were not Jews in the OT just as they are not all Jews in the NT. How is that any change at all?

 

[tall73]

none of the first 4 are stated as having a promise so the 5th is the first in that unit of Ten with a specific promise in that unit of Ten.

What is the second with a promise in the "unit of ten"?

There are a great many commands from God from Genesis to Exodus 20, and with a number of them there are promises.

So then either...Paul is wrong, or he is talking about the covenant with God that was just referenced in Chapter 19, as I stated, and the people's agreement to do all the Lord has spoken. Then the Lord started giving commandments. And there were more than ten, as everyone, some more reluctantly than others, have admitted in this thread.

It only works within the unit of ten.

Bob, it only works if it is not just the unit of ten. He said the first with promise, not the only.

Then God keeps giving commandments.

If you say it only works in the "unit of the ten" then point to the second promise in the unit of ten.

 

[tall73]

The application he shows for all mankind is the same as it was in the OT given that all mankind were not Jews in the OT just as they are not all Jews in the NT. How is that any change at all?

Bob, I think you can figure out these are not the same:

Exo 20:12 τίμα τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν μητέρα, ἵνα εὖ σοι γένηται, καὶ ἵνα μακροχρόνιος γένῃ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς τῆς ἀγαθῆς, ἧς κύριος ὁ θεός σου δίδωσίν σοι.

Eph 6:3 ἵνα εὖ σοι γένηται καὶ ἔσῃ μακροχρόνιος ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς.

 

[tall73]

I think that non-SDAs on a forum like CF have two good sources for Adventist teaching.
1. The public online statement of beliefs for our denomination.
2. The people they find here who are SDA and who do not limit their response to "what did Ellen White say"

I will let you argue with yourself earlier in the thread:

I understand that you are using it show that this is not just something you are saying off the top of your head and that she is a good SDA source to indicate what many SDAs think so from your context it probably is logical in that regard.

And of course, even the 28 Fundamental beliefs are not inspired (well unless you go with the notion that the GC in session is speaking for God), but you think Ellen White is. So it is obvious why non-sda quote her.

 

[tall73]

True - but I don't quote Ellen White or ask that others accept her as an inspired source since non of my statements are a quote of Ellen White.

Bob, you agree you think everything she wrote is true. And even the fundamentals which you tell people to reference say her writings are inspired. That means everything she wrote is in fact admissible.

 

[tall73]

I think that non-SDAs on a forum like CF have two good sources for Adventist teaching.

I noticed you had no issue with me quoting Ellen White when it clarified she did not come up with Adventist doctrines, and made clear the timeline with her statements.

Now you keep making the claim that you don't use Ellen White so that no one can claim that you got the teaching from Ellen White.

However, you know I have not made that claim. I even specifically argued (using Ellen White's words and historical references) that Ellen White was not the one responsible for coming up with Adventist theology.

And when you claimed I stated Ellen White was the only reason to have a particular view of the tares, I never stated that either. However, I did point out how your own arguments changed once a statement from Ellen White was mentioned.

In any case, whatever approach you take with non-SDA normally, that has little to do with your discussion with me. I will cite her because you think she is inspired. And you have agreed with that. And the fundamentals agree with that.