Adventist beliefs and doctrines compared to the Early Church from Christ

reddogs · Jul 24, 2026

So what do Adventist hold as beliefs and doctrines, compared to the Early Church as shaped by the teachings of Jesus, and written by the apostolic witnesses, and its spread of the Gospel through the missionary journeys of Paul and others.

Well, to begin with you have the Sabbath as held by the Early Church, no one can deny that as scripture is clear.

Then you have the Early Church belief that Jesus was the promised Messiah, fulfilling the prophecies of the Scriptures and proclaimed by the Apostles.

The belief of the resurrection and gift of eternal life, as the Early Church clearly held to belief in the resurrection of Jesus and the life eternal gift He had for those who believed.

Adventist believe in Salvation through Faith in Christ and the Early Church clearly taught that salvation was available through faith in Jesus Christ.

Adventist believe in the Holy Spirit and its work and we see the Early Church believed in the active presence of the Holy Spirit, who guided and empowered believers.

Adventist hold to coming together to worship on the seventh day and the early Church believed in gathering on the seventh day for worship, prayer ant thanksgiving.

Adventist hold to Baptism by Immersion and we see the Early Church believed in Baptism by Immersion as Christ gave as an example at the river Jordan, and it was a significant rite of initiation into the Christian community, symbolizing the believer's identification with Christ's death and resurrection.

Adventist hold to the literal return of Christ as the Early Church held waiting for Christ Second Coming to take the saints to the heavenly kingdom.

Adventist hold to the possibility of a believer stumbling and falling from grace and must deny self and follow Christ as the Early Church and Christ and the Apostles and Paul and others clearly taught.

Adventist hold to the need for repentance, and confession for the remission of sins as the Early Church held and as Christ and the Apostles clearly taught.

Adventist hold to the biblical state of the dead as the Early Church that the dead know nothing and lay silent in the grave turning to dust awaiting the resurrection at the last day.

If you look in history you find even more of what the Early Church held as core beliefs that are found in Adventism. Aristides, a converted Athenian philosopher, wrote one of our earliest Christian apologies to the Roman emperor Hadrian around 125 A.D. He summarizes what Christians believe..

"The Christians, then, trace the beginning of their religion from Jesus the Messiah; and he is named the Son of God Most High. And it is said that God came down from heaven, and from a Hebrew virgin assumed and clothed himself with flesh; and the Son of God lived in a daughter of man. This is taught in the gospel, as it is called, which a short time was preached among them; and you also if you will read therein, may perceive the power which belongs to it. This Jesus, then, was born of the race of the Hebrews; and he had twelve disciples in order that the purpose of his incarnation might in time be accomplished. But he himself was pierced by the Jews, and he died and was buried; and they say that after three days he rose and ascended to heaven (Apol. 2, Syriac)." One of the Earliest (and Clearest) Summaries of Early Christian Beliefs - Canon Fodder

Aristides makes it clear that Christians affirm a number of key truths:

1. The divinity of Jesus: “God came down from heaven…” In the mind of Aristides, Jesus is not an angel, or a semi-divine being, but the very God of heaven itself.

2. The incarnation: “clothed himself with flesh.” In very vivid language, the author affirms that Jesus is God enfleshed; he took upon himself a real human body (contra the Docetists).

3. The virgin birth: “from a Hebrew virgin.” This doctrine flows naturally from the prior two. If Jesus is God, and he took on human flesh, then his conception would be distinctive from other human beings.

4. The authority of the Gospels: “taught in the gospel…and you also if you read therein, may perceive the power which belongs to it.” Notice for Aristides, there are books called a “gospel” which you can “read” to learn more about the person of Jesus. Moreover, these gospels contain a certain “power” which the reader can discern.

5. The authority of the apostles: “and he had twelve disciples.” Aristides recognizes that Jesus had an authority structure through the twelve that was necessary “so that the purpose of his incarnation might in time be accomplished.”

6. His death on the cross: “pierced by the Jews.” This is a clear reference to Jesus’ crucifixion under Pontius Pilate at the request of the Jewish leadership.

7. His resurrection: “after three days he rose.” Jesus did not stay in the grave but was raised from the dead.

8. His ascension: “ascended into heaven.” Jesus returned to his former heavenly home, in a position of power and glory.

The Early Church had Gods truth that Christ left it and we must study what the Early Church believe and held before corruption and apostasy came in, We see what Paul says in his second letter to the Thessalonians, he foretold the great apostasy which would come into the church. He declared that before the return of Christ would, "come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who exalteth himself above all that is called God;" Even at that early date he saw, creeping into the church, errors in belief that would prepare the way for the false teachings to come in.

The Liturgist · Jul 24, 2026

reddogs said:
Well, to begin with you have the Sabbath as held by the Early Church, no one can deny that as scripture is clear.

I positively deny that the Adventist doctrines on the Sabbath are consistent with the doctrines of the Early Church as depicted in the New Testament on the basis of the New Testament text that we have discussed repeatedly. The Resurrection narratives, the rebuke of the Pharisees for their criticism of our Lord for gathering wheat with His disciples and healing the sick on the Sabbath, the descent of the Holy Ghost in Acts 2, the Eucharists on the First day later in Acts, the collection of tithes on the FIrst Day in 1 Corinthians 16, Colossians 2:16 carving out a further special injunction against the general principle of “Judge not lest ye not be judged “ in respect of the Sabbath, the rejection of the idea of the Law as salvific in Romans 6 and Galatians 3:15-5:15, all of these combine to create a message which in my view and that of most Christians does not require literal Sabbath observance as a salvation-level issue.

Also I would note St. Aristides of Athens espoused views which most closely resemble those of the modern Greek Orthodox Church.

BobRyan · Jul 24, 2026

The Liturgist said:
I positively deny that the Adventist doctrines on the Sabbath are consistent with the doctrines of the Early Church as depicted in the New Testament

Provide an actual New Testament quote to support your speculation in that regard.

The Liturgist said:
on the basis of the New Testament text that we have discussed repeatedly. The Resurrection narratives

identify something that is amiss.

The Liturgist said:
, the rebuke of the Pharisees for their criticism of our Lord for gathering wheat with His disciples and healing the sick on the Sabbath

Is that supposed to be a problem for Adventists?
Are Jewish Pharisees before the cross in Mark 7, supposed to be first century NT Christians in your POV?

The Liturgist said:
, the descent of the Holy Ghost in Acts 2

Do Adventists say they deny Acts 2, in your POV?
An actual Adventist myself I confirm that we affirm Acts 2 and Pentecost

The Liturgist said:
, the Eucharists on the First day later in Acts, the collection of tithes on the FIrst Day in 1 Corinthians 16,

There is no gathering or collection mentioned at all as taking place on week day 1 in 1 Cor 16.
Is it your POV that individuals in the first century church could not "Lay by himself" funds on week day 1, to be used later at an actual gathering??.

The Liturgist said:
Colossians 2:16 carving out a further special injunction against the general principle of “Judge not lest ye not be judged

Matt 7 has the exact same injunction before the cross. Is it your POV that God's Law was deleted before the cross?

The Liturgist said:
the rejection of the idea of the Law as salvific

so say well all. Lost people don't "stop taking God's name in vain long enough to turn into a born again Christian" that is not hos salvation works and it is not what Adventists teach.

Were you confused on that detail?

The Liturgist said:
in Romans 6 and Galatians 3:15-5:15, all of these combine to create a message which in my view and that of most Christians does not require literal Sabbath observance

Gal 3 does not even mention the Sabbath nor does it mention the command not to take God's name in vain, nor does it say the commandments of God have been deleted.

ARe you reading the text??

BobRyan · Jul 24, 2026

reddogs said:
So what do Adventist hold as beliefs and doctrines, compared to the Early Church as shaped by the teachings of Jesus, and written by the apostolic witnesses, and its spread of the Gospel through the missionary journeys of Paul and others.

Well, to begin with you have the Sabbath as held by the Early Church, no one can deny that as scripture is clear.

Then you have the Early Church belief that Jesus was the promised Messiah, fulfilling the prophecies of the Scriptures and proclaimed by the Apostles.

The belief of the resurrection and gift of eternal life, as the Early Church clearly held to belief in the resurrection of Jesus and the life eternal gift He had for those who believed.

Are you interested in discussing every single belief in this thread?

reddogs · Saturday at 6:32 AM

BobRyan said:
Are you interested in discussing every single belief in this thread?

Very good question, the issue is that the true Early Church if one looks was until the corruption of the pagan Greek and Roman philosophy that came in. So this would place it up to the Quartodeciman controversy. when Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna who was personally taught by John the apostle, faced off against the corruption with Anicetus, the bishop of Rome.

Freth · Saturday at 6:44 AM

I read a Facebook post yesterday that brought up an important point.

"If fulfilling your wedding vows doesn’t abolish them, why do you think Jesus fulfilling the law abolished it?"

Paul's statement on the law.

Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Keeping wedding vows is different than keeping the law, isn't it?

The parable of the king's son's marriage in Matthew 22 parallels key events of end time prophecy and the actual marriage supper of the Lamb. In the parable, those who attend the wedding are wearing garments. What garments?

Isaiah 61:10 I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.

What does the law have to do with righteousness?

Psalm 119:142 Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.

Romans 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Paul's statement would seem to be problematic: for the fulfilling of the law in us is establishing it, not abolishing it. Without the law, do we have righteousness? "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us." Where else have we seen this statement concerning the law?

Matthew 5:18 "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

John makes a couple of statements concerning those who are blessed; the saints who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and have the testimony of Jesus which is the Spirit of prophecy (Revelation 12:17, 14:12, 19:10).

Revelation 19:9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.

Revelation 22:14-15 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

Those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb are also those who have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. They do His commandments. What commandments? The Ten, as cited in Revelation 22:15.

The Liturgist said:
I positively deny that the Adventist doctrines on the Sabbath are consistent with the doctrines of the Early Church as depicted in the New Testament on the basis of the New Testament text that we have discussed repeatedly.

The Adventist doctrines on the Sabbath have been shown to be based strictly on scripture countless times.
The Adventist doctrines on the Sabbath cannot be consistent with the doctrines of the Early Church if those doctrines are in direct opposition to what scripture says.
The New Testament does not negate the law it establishes it. Therefore, it cannot be said that the New Testament is against the Sabbath whatsoever, unless men (i.e. the "Early Church") took it upon themselves to change the law of God as was prophesied in Daniel 7:25. Indeed this has also been proven to be the case, evidenced by Sunday sacredness throughout Christendom. Prophecy was fulfilled and points directly to the issue at hand.

In closing...

It is apparent to me (as per scripture shown) that the marriage supper of the Lamb, the very wedding vows, include the law of God, and so the law of God cannot be separated from the marriage.

Matthew 5:6-13 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

reddogs · Saturday at 7:03 AM

The Liturgist said:
I positively deny that the Adventist doctrines on the Sabbath are consistent with the doctrines of the Early Church as depicted in the New Testament on the basis of the New Testament text that we have discussed repeatedly. The Resurrection narratives, the rebuke of the Pharisees for their criticism of our Lord for gathering wheat with His disciples and healing the sick on the Sabbath, the descent of the Holy Ghost in Acts 2, the Eucharists on the First day later in Acts, the collection of tithes on the FIrst Day in 1 Corinthians 16, Colossians 2:16 carving out a further special injunction against the general principle of “Judge not lest ye not be judged “ in respect of the Sabbath, the rejection of the idea of the Law as salvific in Romans 6 and Galatians 3:15-5:15, all of these combine to create a message which in my view and that of most Christians does not require literal Sabbath observance as a salvation-level issue.

Also I would note St. Aristides of Athens espoused views which most closely resemble those of the modern Greek Orthodox Church.

Well my brother I would quote Revelation 22:14, but lets look into what Paul is trying to convey in his writings, we can look at a text that I think you know well.

Romans 6:14
For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Well does it do away with Gods Law, so that those who follow the Ten Commandments are 'legalistic'. Is Paul saying that the Ten Commandments have any further claims upon the believer, that they no longer have to keep the Law. Well, Paul gives a answer to that as he knew that would be the question as we see.

Romans 6:15
What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

Paul makes clear that this is not so we can sin, but that under grace, those who truly believe will not go into sin as he states 'God Forbid' to such a thought. So what is Paul talking about here in Romans, well we get a clue in his letter to Corinthians.

1 Corinthians 9:20-21
20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

So what is Paul saying here, well obviously he is talking about the Jews versus the Gentiles, but notice he says a curious thing, 'being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ'. So what is Paul saying, well lets look directly at the words of Christ.

Matthew 5:20
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

This is clear, being under to law to Christ is beyond the level of the literal law, that it surpasses even what the Jews and their teachers thought it was and followed. The law was intended by God to keep before the minds of Israel and men everywhere that the real meaning and purpose of the law lay in the full and final revelation when Christ would come to this world. And what does Christ say, He says that ones righteousness would go beyond the law if one wanted to enter into eternal life. We see it in His response to the rich young man.. Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 19:16-22 - King James Version

The Liturgist · Saturday at 3:08 PM

reddogs said:
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The idea that we are capable of attaining that righteousness on our own, that is Pelagianism, and was refuted definitively by St. Augustine and St. John Cassian.

reddogs said:
Well does it do away with Gods Law, so that those who follow the Ten Commandments are 'legalistic'. Is Paul saying that the Ten Commandments have any further claims upon the believer, that they no longer have to keep the Law. Well, Paul gives a answer to that as he knew that would be the question as we see.

Worshipping on Sunday is not sinning, neither is it a violation of the Ten Commandments, or indeed any other commandment in the Bible (indeed Scripture contains no prohibition against worship on the First Day whatsoever).

The Liturgist · Saturday at 3:12 PM

Freth said:
"If fulfilling your wedding vows doesn’t abolish them, why do you think Jesus fulfilling the law abolished it?"

Strawman: I did not say the law had been abolished. I rather simply referred to what the Holy Apostle Paul said in Romans and particularly in Galatians 3:15-5:15, in which he explains what the function of the Law was and makes it clear that Christians are not under the law but under grace.

It would be helpful if people would reply to the arguments I actually make. I will not defend positions I never espoused.

The Liturgist · Saturday at 3:30 PM

Freth said:
Those who are called to the marriage supper of the Lamb are also those who have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. They do His commandments. What commandments? The Ten

Interestingly the text doesn’t say the Ten, and it mentions some things which were not explicitly referred to by the Ten, for example, the prohibition on sorcery. And as for the bit about dogs, well, the Decalogue says nothing about them (also, it seems more likely that the text is referring to humans who act like dogs than actually referring to canines, since every other item is an item of moral reproach, behaviors that can be repented of and which Christ our True God will also forgive, whereas being a dog is an immutable ontological condition).

It is important to remember that the Decalogue was augmented by Christ, who issued a new commandment, “That you love one another as I loved you”, in addition to summarizing the Ten down to two basic commandments, the Shema and the Golden Rule. So interpreting a reference to “Commandments” as being the Decalogue, while leaving out the New Commandment, as well as the other new instructions of Christianity for the reception of God‘s grace through faith, Baptism, Holy Communion and so on becomes immediately problematic.

SabbathBlessings · Saturday at 3:31 PM

The interesting thing about Galatians the law thats being mentioned is not once the Sabbath commandment. It’s no where to be found in all of Galatians. The law thats Paul is constantly speaking about is circumcision. Circumcision/uncircumcision is mentioned 16 times in Galatians. So obviously a different law Paul speaks of, than what people try to make it about, thats absent from the Text. There is a reason why Paul is speaking about the law of circumcision, he does it in a few chapters and explains why.

At any rate, how did Paul compare circumcision with the commandments of God.

1 Cor 7:19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.

The Liturgist · Saturday at 3:36 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
The interesting thing about Galatians the law thats being mentioned is not once the Sabbath commandment. It’s no where to be found in all of Galatians.

Argument from silence fallacy.

SabbathBlessings said:
At any rate, how did Paul compare circumcision with the commandments of God.

Galatians 3:15-5:15 is not limited to circumcision, it refers to the Law as a whole.

tall73 · Saturday at 3:38 PM

The Liturgist said:
And as for the bit about dogs, well, the Decalogue says nothing about them (also, it seems more likely that the text is referring to humans who act like dogs than actually referring to canines, since every other item is an item of moral reproach, behaviors that can be repented of and which Christ our True God will also forgive, whereas being a dog is an immutable ontological condition).

It could be a reference to Deuteronomy 23:

17 “There shall be no ritual harlot of the daughters of Israel, or a perverted one of the sons of Israel. 18 You shall not bring the wages of a harlot or the price of a dog to the house of the LORD your God for any vowed offering, for both of these are an abomination to the LORD your God. (NKJV)

As it is parallel to "a perverted one" in the Hebraic parallelism it is usually held to be talking about a male prostitute.

SabbathBlessings · Saturday at 3:41 PM

The Liturgist said:
Argument from silence fallacy.

Galatians 3:15-5:15 is not limited to circumcision, it refers to the Law as a whole.

Not so, if the law of circumcision is different than the commandments of God according to Paul and God for that matter, than there are two different laws being spoken of not one, just as God Himself said. Trying to make the Scripture say something it just does not mention even once in 6 whole chapters and insisting its about it and ignoring the law that it is mainly speaking about and refers to Gal2:3 Gal3:10 Deut 31:24-26 seems like a bad idea, because its no longer allowing the Scripture to interpret itself and we are only sanctified by the Truth of God’s words, not ours.

Jesus came to end one law Dan9:27 Heb10:1-10 and magnify another one Isa 42:21KJV Mat5:19-30 two different fulfillments with two very different laws. One written by God Himself Exo31:18 Deut4:13 that nothing more was added Deut5:22 and nothing can be taken from it or added to it Ecc3:14 because who has a greater testimony to speak over God’s Exo31:18 no one as far as I am concerned and Paul made it clear everything has to be according to Christ Col2:8 and we ought to obey God over man.

tall73 · Saturday at 4:05 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
Not so, if the law of circumcision is different than the commandments of God according to Paul and God for that matter, than there are two different laws being spoken of not one, just as God Himself said. Trying to make the Scripture say something it just does not mention even once in 6 whole chapters and insisting its about it and ignoring the law that it is speaking about Gal2:3 Gal3:10 Deut 31:24-26 seems like a bad idea, because its no longer allowing the Scripture to interpret itself and we are only sanctified by the Truth of God’s words, not ours.

Jesus came to end one law Dan9:27 Heb10:1-10 and magnify another one Isa 42:21KJV Mat5:19-30 two different fulfillments with two very different laws. One written by God Himself Exo31:18 Deut4:13 that nothing more was added Deut5:22 and nothing can be taken from it or added to it Ecc3:14 because who has a greater testimony to speak over God’s Exo31:18 no one as far as I am concerned and Paul made it clear everything has to be according to Christ Col2:8 and we ought to obey God over man.

We can tell what law he is referring to by his quotations from the law. And it is not only about the sacrificial system, or circumcision.

Galatians 3:10-14

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.”

Paul says as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse., because they do not continue to do them. But he is not referring to sacrificial law here, as you use "works of the law." He quotes from Deuteronomy 27:26, in which the covenant curses are read from mount Ebal. These are certainly moral commands, not commands dealing with sacrifice:

Deuteronomy 27:11-26

11 And Moses commanded the people on the same day, saying, 12 “These shall stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people, when you have crossed over the Jordan: Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Joseph, and Benjamin; 13 and these shall stand on Mount Ebal to curse: Reuben, Gad, Asher, Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali.

14 “And the Levites shall speak with a loud voice and say to all the men of Israel: 15 Cursed is the one who makes a carved or molded image, an abomination to the LORD, the work of the hands of the craftsman, and sets it up in secret.’

“And all the people shall answer and say, ‘Amen!’

16 Cursed is the one who treats his father or his mother with contempt.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

17 Cursed is the one who moves his neighbor’s landmark.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

18 Cursed is the one who makes the blind to wander off the road.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

19 Cursed is the one who perverts the justice due the stranger, the fatherless, and widow.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

20 Cursed is the one who lies with his father’s wife, because he has uncovered his father’s bed.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

21 Cursed is the one who lies with any kind of animal.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

22 Cursed is the one who lies with his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

23 Cursed is the one who lies with his mother-in-law.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

24 Cursed is the one who attacks his neighbor secretly.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

25 Cursed is the one who takes a bribe to slay an innocent person.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

26 Cursed is the one who does not confirm all the words of this law by observing them.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ ” (NKJV)

Paul continues on to speak of the law.

11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.” 12 Yet the law is not of faith, but “the man who does them shall live by them.”

He quotes from Habakkuk to establish that the just shall live by faith. And in contrast to this he says the law is not of faith, but the man who does them shall live by them.

He is quoting from Leviticus 18. Again, this is not a reference to sacrifice, but moral commands, in this case such that even the Canaanites who practiced them were removed from the land:

Leviticus 18:1-29

1 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: I am the LORD your God. 3 According to the doings of the land of Egypt, where you dwelt, you shall not do; and according to the doings of the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you, you shall not do; nor shall you walk in their ordinances. 4 You shall observe My judgments and keep My ordinances, to walk in them: I am the LORD your God. 5 You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, which if a man does, he shall live by them: I am the LORD.

6 ‘None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness: I am the LORD. 7 The nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother you shall not uncover. She is your mother; you shall not uncover her nakedness. 8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. 9 The nakedness of your sister, the daughter of your father, or the daughter of your mother, whether born at home or elsewhere, their nakedness you shall not uncover. 10 The nakedness of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for theirs is your own nakedness. 11 The nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, begotten by your father—she is your sister—you shall not uncover her nakedness. 12 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister; she is near of kin to your father. 13 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is near of kin to your mother. 14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother. You shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt. 15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law—she is your son’s wife—you shall not uncover her nakedness. 16 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness. 17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, nor shall you take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness. They are near of kin to her. It is wickedness. 18 Nor shall you take a woman as a rival to her sister, to uncover her nakedness while the other is alive.

19 ‘Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness as long as she is in her customary impurity. 20 Moreover you shall not lie carnally with your neighbor’s wife, to defile yourself with her. 21 And you shall not let any of your descendants pass through the fire to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God: I am the LORD. 22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. 23 Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it. It is perversion.

24 Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you. 25 For the land is defiled; therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it, and the land vomits out its inhabitants. 26 You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations, either any of your own nation or any stranger who dwells among you 27 (for all these abominations the men of the land have done, who were before you, and thus the land is defiled), 28 lest the land vomit you out also when you defile it, as it vomited out the nations that were before you. 29 For whoever commits any of these abominations, the persons who commit them shall be cut off from among their people. (NKJV)

Again Paul quotes from the law in question:

13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”), 14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. (NKJV)

This refers to Deut. 21, in which someone who committed a capital crime was exposed on a tree.

Deu 21:22 “And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree,

Deu 21:23 his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by God. You shall not defile your land that the LORD your God is giving you for an inheritance.

Paul points out that Jesus took on the shame that a person who committed a crime would take on, but it was for our salvation that He took on death on a cross.

The next section is where we see reference to the introduction of the law 430 years later:

Galatians 3:15-25

15 Brethren, I speak in the manner of men: Though it is only a man’s covenant, yet if it is confirmed, no one annuls or adds to it. 16 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed,” who is Christ. 17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect. 18 For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Here he is referring back to what he already established regarding Abraham:

Galatians 3:8-9

8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.” 9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. (NKJV)

All nations would be blessed through Abraham. They are justified by faith. That was the promise to Abraham. And Paul says the introduction of the law years later does not set aside that all nations would be blessed through Abraham, justified by faith as Abraham was.

Later Paul again indicates which law he is speaking of, by quoting from it. And this is a rare case where a quote from Genesis, regarding Abraham, is acknowledged as a quote from the Torah--the law:

Galatians 4:21 - 5:6

21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— 25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children— 26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written:

“Rejoice, O barren,

You who do not bear!

Break forth and shout,

You who are not in labor!

For the desolate has many more children

Than she who has a husband.”

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. 29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.

1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. 2 Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. 3 And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. 4 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love. (NKJV)

Paul is quite clear. We are not justified by law. And the law in question includes not just the ritual elements, such as circumcision, etc. But it also includes the moral law. We cannot be justified by the law because we have broken the law. If we are trying to be saved by the law we are under a curse. Because we did not continue to do all that was written in the law.

But we are saved by the righteousness that came by faith in the Son of God who gave Himself for us.

We can look at the implications of all this shortly. And no, Paul's point is obviously not that the Galatians have no moral constraints. They were led by their tutor the law to Christ that they might be justified by faith. And now they walk in the Spirit (Chapter 5).

The law is righteous. But it could not save. Because we did not walk in it. We were under its curse. The law brought us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith, and we are now no longer under the tutor.

Galatians 3:21-25

21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. 22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. (NKJV)

As the @The Liturgist pointed out, we are not under the law.

Galatians 4:4-7

4 But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.

6 And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!” 7 Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. (NKJV)

SabbathBlessings · Saturday at 4:11 PM

Galatians 3:10 is speaking about the law Paul is quoting where it came from

Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.”

The book of the law is not the Ten Commandments, it was what Moses wrote in a book placed besides the ark of the covenant as a witness against thee. Moses even indicated it was a different law, Moses never took credit for God’s works Exo32:16 God’s own written and spoken Testimony Exo31:18. Moses gave glory to God and told to fear Him and not sin against God after God spoke His own commandments Exo20:6 Exo20:20 that nothing more was added to them Deut5:22. This idea that God needed man to complete His Law is just not Biblical it came way before Moses or Israel. God’s righteousness Psa 119:172 Isa 56:1-2 is eternal Psa 119:142 meaning no beginning, no ending, its the foundation of God’s throne Psa89:14

Deut 31:24 So it was, when Moses had completed writing the words of this law in a book, when they were finished, 25 that Moses commanded the Levites, who bore the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying: 26 “Take this Book of the Law, and put it beside the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there as a witness against you;

Not the Ten Commandments, not the Sabbath commandment written by God Himself. Exo31:18 this idea that the apostles were against God’s commandments, God’s work, that we cannot add to or take from Ecc3:14 but they edited them anyway, its just not Biblical, its really a sad teaching. Man did that, not His faithful servants.

Paul also made it clear not being under the law does not mean one can sin and break one of God’s commandments Rom 6:14-15 and go against all of God’s teachings Jesus instructed mankind to live by Mat4:4. I am not sure why people use this to teach against Christ when Paul said everything has to be according to Christ Col2:8

I guess its another thing for God’s to sort out in His time.

tall73 · Saturday at 4:27 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
Galatians 3:10 is speaking about the law Paul is quoting where it came from

Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.”

Which of course comes back the usual issue for you. These are moral laws. Including two specified in the ten. There are more than ten moral commandments in the law.

Deuteronomy 27:11-26

11 And Moses commanded the people on the same day, saying, 12 “These shall stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people, when you have crossed over the Jordan: Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Joseph, and Benjamin; 13 and these shall stand on Mount Ebal to curse: Reuben, Gad, Asher, Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali.

14 “And the Levites shall speak with a loud voice and say to all the men of Israel: 15 Cursed is the one who makes a carved or molded image, an abomination to the LORD, the work of the hands of the craftsman, and sets it up in secret.’

“And all the people shall answer and say, ‘Amen!’

16 Cursed is the one who treats his father or his mother with contempt.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

17 Cursed is the one who moves his neighbor’s landmark.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

18 Cursed is the one who makes the blind to wander off the road.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

19 Cursed is the one who perverts the justice due the stranger, the fatherless, and widow.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

20 Cursed is the one who lies with his father’s wife, because he has uncovered his father’s bed.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

21 Cursed is the one who lies with any kind of animal.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

22 Cursed is the one who lies with his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

23 Cursed is the one who lies with his mother-in-law.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

24 Cursed is the one who attacks his neighbor secretly.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

25 Cursed is the one who takes a bribe to slay an innocent person.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’

26 Cursed is the one who does not confirm all the words of this law by observing them.’

“And all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’ ” (NKJV)

SabbathBlessings said:
The book of the law is not the Ten Commandments, it was what Moses wrote in a book placed besides the ark of the covenant as a witness against thee.

The book of the law included all the law, even the ten.

SabbathBlessings · Saturday at 4:35 PM

No issue for me, the book taught people how to keep God’s commandments. God never elevated the book over the Ten Commandments, Moses certainly didn’t do that, most of man has always elevated man over God, so it’s nothing new. Jesus spoke of this plainly, peoples fear of God comes from mans traditions laying aside fearing God and keeping God’s commandments (His version) Exo20:20 Isa 29:13 Mat15:3-14

Of course the law of Moses what was written in the book, included the Ten Commandments, God’s commandments are for everyone, for those who love Him Exo20:6 but only the Ten Commandments is the Testimony of God, written and spoken personally by God Exo31:18 only the Ten Commandments was inside God’s ark Exo40:20 under God’s mercy seat Exo25:21 which His blood covers and is in heaven Rev11:19 because justice and righteousness is the foundation of God’s throne Psa 89:14 Isa 56:1-2, its eternal Psa 119:142 and one day soon jutice and mercy will come together Rev11:18-19 Exo20:6 Pro28:13

tall73 · Saturday at 5:00 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
No issue for me, the book taught people how to keep God’s commandments.

Great, then we can agree that the book of the law was not blotted out in Col. 2.

Colossians 2:13-15

13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. 15 Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it. (NKJV)

SabbathBlessings · Saturday at 5:08 PM

We do not need the book of the law, if God's commandments are being kept.

God very clearly said He came to end what was written in the book of the law -sacrifices and offerings No one could get the access for the forgiveness of sin in the OT of animal sacrifices without circumcision.

Dan 9:27 Then he shall confirm a [k]covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.

Not what God commanded- it was always different at least according to what God said.

Jer 7: 22 For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices. (in the book of the law)23 But this is what I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be My people. And walk in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well with you. God wrote and spoke the Ten Commandments and added no more Exo20:1-17 Exo31:18 Exo32:16 Deut5:22

Animal sacrifices could never take away sins Heb10:1-10 why Jesus had to come and take away that wall of separation of circumcision so anyone after the Cross can have access to forgiveness of sin through the blood of Jesus, by repenting from sin (breaking God's laws, His version Exo20:20 Exo20:1-17 1John3:4 James 2:11 Rom7:7) which means understanding what sin is, being sorry for our sins and asking Jesus to change our heart and help us forsake our sins Pro28:13 walking a new path in Christ Rom6:1-4.

This is what Paul was constantly correcting, not if one should obey or not obey one of God's commandments or if one can edit God's commandments including themselves, which would make the servant greater than the Master. Ecc3:14 John13:16

These are just circular arguments, we are speaking about Galatians, nothing about the Sabbath in Galatians, the law Paul keeps referring to is circumcision. Paul never taught we do not have to keep God's commandments or taught we can edit them if they don't suit us, that did not come from God's servants. Dan7:25

When we try to lower God's own written and spoken Testimony, no good discussion can come from it, so best I move on.

God will sort this out in His time.

Adventist beliefs and doctrines compared to the Early Church from Christ

Contributor

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Junior Member

Junior Member

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Well-Known Member

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Sophia7's husband

Well-Known Member

Sophia7's husband

Well-Known Member

Sophia7's husband

Well-Known Member

Sophia7's husband

Well-Known Member

Similar threads