• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,481
5,541
USA
✟713,847.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
the context in Mat 5 leaves an impression that it is from the old.
Its best to let the Text speak for itself. Thats what we are told to do Pro 3:5-6 changing words changes meanings and in the end, it turns up to be our will and not God's, which is not saving.
However if the 10 are not from the old then what other covenant are they from?
Said to those of old means from generation to generation, not the Ten Commandments are "old" and to be disregarded.

Much like the story of the rich young ruler

Mat 19:16 Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good[d] Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?”

17 So He said to him, [e]“Why do you call Me good? [f]No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

18 He said to Him, “Which ones?”

Jesus said,‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false witness,’ 19 ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ ”

20 The young man said to Him, “All these things I have kept from my youth. What do I still lack?”

Jesus told Him plainly how to receive eternal life. Can't be made more clearer and not the first time Christ associated salvation with keeping the Ten Commandments. Not that it's how one is saved, it's how the save live Rev 14:12. Unfortunately for the rich young ruler while he may have loved his neighbor and kept those commandments, he placed his great riches above God breaking the very first commandment. Exo 20:3
We can infer this plainly from the text. However, even if you disagree Jesus quotes the law, then shows us a better way. his conclusions do not end at the law in question, but rather his focus is on his better way, so should ours.
I have explained this before, but I'll be happy to try again. Jesus is showing us a better way to keep the commandments and in doing so, the literal commandments would all be kept, everyone one of them. Jesus associated anger with murder. It's the thoughts of anger that lead to murder. Jesus wants us changed from the inside out and through Him we can overcome those thoughts of anger, contempt, lust and in doing so, thou shalt not murder and thou shalt not commit adultery would automatically be kept. He is not giving a pass to break the literal commandments; we are not to break the least of these and it comes with serious consequences as it is sin and one would be in fear of Judgement. The spiritual aspect of the commandments are greater than the literal, not lessor. If we see ourselves breaking the literal commandments its not possible to be keeping the spiritual aspect. Jesus did not end the Ten Commandments here or anywhere in the scriptures, He associated keeping them with eternal life and when we don't keep them our heart is far from Him and we are spiritual blind and will end up in a ditch Mat 15:3-14 Mat 5:19-30 which is off the narrow path. I'm not sure why anyone would not what to keep the Ten Commandments, most people don't object to 8 or 9 of them until it comes to the Sabbath- that has to do with our time. But this is mans will not God's will. God wants us to keep all of them though love and faith.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,481
5,541
USA
✟713,847.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I’ve been making biblical arguments the whole time. And exposing Ellen White’s heresy of obtaining justification through works of the law is 100% biblical which is why I quoted Galatians.
I guess you are not familiar with her writings, because that's not at all what she teaches. I'll give you a couple examples

The plan for the salvation of lost mankind is based on man's acceptance by faith alone of Christ's substitutionary death. This lesson was taught at the gate of Eden as Adam and his descendants slew the sacrificial lamb. It was taught in the wilderness as the brazen serpent was elevated by Moses, and the people with the venom of the poisonous serpents in their veins were restored by looking in faith at the saving symbol. It was taught by the sacrificial system given to Israel. It was taught by prophets and apostles. Again and again we are taught that salvation is by grace through faith, and at the same time we are made to understand: FW 12.1

While true faith trusts wholly in Christ for salvation, it will lead to perfect conformity to the law of God. Faith is manifested by works (The Review and Herald, October 5, 1886). FW 12.2

It's much like what the bible teaches. We have all sinned so deserve the death penalty, but through Christ we can receive eternal life. Salvation is through faith by grace Eph 2:8

Those with faith believe Jesus, His teachings and His example and live differently than the lost. 1 John 2:3-6 Rev 14:12 Not to be saved, but because one is saved. Most people teach we are saved from the penalty of sin, but what Jesus wants is to save us from the power of sin, we are not saved in our sins, we are saved from sin Mat 1:21 We must confess and forsake our sins Pro 28:13

And this is how a saved person lives according to the bible

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

This is the faith that reconciles

Rev 22: 14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.

Your statement that the SDA is the “remnant” required me to resort to exposing its heretical origins.
Interesting, this is what people said about Jesus and they were so wrong, can't help to wonder how many professed Christians would have believed Jesus in His day or been like the Pharisees who wrongly judged and killed God's only Son. It's best not to Judge, if she is wrong, it will get sorted out on Judgement Day just like it will for all of us. She taught everything must be tested by scriptures and obeying God the way He said is not heretical, but it was what Jesus was accused of as well, so people are often wrong that's why it's best to leave the Judging to God.

However that's not at all what I said. According to scriptures these are the characteristics of the remnant Church Rev 12:17 Rev 14:12, which is not following the majority
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,481
5,541
USA
✟713,847.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
In 2 Corinthians 3 Paul said that the letter of the law written in stone brought death but the letter written in our hearts which surpasses it brought liberty.

“Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some, letters of commendation to you or from you? You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts. Such confidence we have through Christ toward God. Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God, who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory. For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses it. For if that which fades away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory. Therefore having such a hope, we use great boldness in our speech, and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away. But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart; but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”
‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭3‬:‭1‬-‭17‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬
Yes, this is a tough passage and one many never carefully read or try to reconcile with Christ's teachings. Here is a detailed commentary breaking this down.

Paul says in 2 Cor. 3 that the Ten Commandments, which was written in stone (verse 3) were a ministration of death and condemnation that was abolished.

THE SHORT ANSWER

Since the law was written in the hearts of the Corinthians, and they literally became living, moving and walking epistles, it follows that the Law was not abolished, but rather changed from tables of stone to “fleshy tables of the heart” (verses 2- 3). One need not tell them to avoid stealing, killing or lying. So long as they continue submitted to the Spirit, they will live the precepts of the Law in their lives. They are “known and read by all men.” How then, pray tell, has the Ten Commandments been abolished?

Two things are mentioned as done away, the ministration of that which was engraved on stone, along with the glory that was shining on the face of Moses (verses 7-16). The latter was replaced by Christ’s more glorious face, according to verses 13-18. But what does Paul mean by “ministration?” The word holds the original meaning of service towards others. Note that it was not the Decalogue itself, but the ministration of it, or the then instituted manner of teaching and enforcing it, that was abolished, to be succeeded by the ministration of the same Law by the apostles and the Spirit (3:3, 4:1)!
The ultimate proof that the Ten Commandment are not here being spoken of as abolished is in verse 12:

“Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, [which] put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.”

In Exodus 34 we read the story to which Paul is referring to. It says in verse 29 that “when Moses came down from Mount Sinai” the “two tablets of the Testimony were in Moses’ hand…” Thus they could look at the Decalogue. What, then, was it that they could not look at? “And when Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil on his face… And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him” (verses 33-25). What the Israelites could “not stedfastly look” at was the face of Moses when he covered it. That was what was abolished, to be replaced by the face of Christ!
Unfortunately, this veil still prevented their hearts from seeing the glory of Christ when they read the scriptures. But when that heart is turned to the Lord, “the vail shall be taken away” and they shall behold “the glory of the Lord” (verses 14-18). These same people have the Law in their hearts, manifest it through their actions and as a result do not go around saying that it has been abolished.

THE LONG ANSWER

2 Corinthians 3 is the critic’s go-to when they want to claim that the Ten Commandments have been abolished, but a closer examination of each text in question reveals a different story.(6)Before speaking of what has been abolished, Paul actually establishes the Ten Commandments by revealing that the Corinthians are living examples of what the New Covenant looks like in living form. They are the epistle because, as the New Covenant promised, the Ten Commandments have been written in their hearts (cf. verses 1-3, Jer. 31:33). In other words, far from being abolished, they are reestablished in a better location, from tables of stone to “fleshy table of the heart” (verse 3). Keep in mind that we are literally talking about the Ten Commandments here, because that is the allusion when the text speaks about “tables of stone.”
What does the text mean by the heart? Not the literal organ of course. The heart represents the mind, the seat of all thoughts, intellect, passions, desires, affections and endeavors. The mind is what makes who we are in person and character, and dictates our actions in the physical realm. “For as he thinketh in his heart” says the wise man, “so is he” (Prov. 23:7). So then, if the Law was written in their hearts, it has become a natural part of their very being. One need not tell them to avoid stealing, killing or lying. They know the Law, their very impulse, so long as they continue submitted to the Spirit, is to obey God. Their lives demonstrate it’s precepts to the whole world as if they were living, walking, and talking epistles. People can read the Law in their lives and character. They are “known and read by all men.” How then, pray tell, has the Ten Commandments been abolished? Any thinking man with reasoning powers can see that such a claim flies in the face of the very point that Paul is trying to make here!
With this in mind we know for sure that what follows in this chapter cannot now say that the Ten Commandments have been abolished. Therefore, a critical look at each reference to something being abolished reveals exactly what those things were. Let us do that now:

“But if the ministration of death, written [and] engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which [glory] was to be done away. How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation [be] glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which is done away [was] glorious, much more that which remaineth [is] glorious.” (verses 7-11).
Two things are mentioned as done away with here, the ministration of that which was engraved on stone, along with the glory that was shining on the face of Moses. The latter was replaced by Christ’s more glorious face, according to verses 13-18. But what does Paul mean by “ministration?” The word holds the original meaning of service towards others. Note that it was not the Decalogue itself, but the ministration of it, or the then instituted manner of teaching and enforcing it, that was abolished, to be succeeded by the ministration of the same Law by the apostles and the Spirit (3:3, 4:1)! It is like taking a man from point A to point B on a bike versus taking him on a car. The car is the better, faster way. But changing the mode of transportation does not change the man being transported. Whereas before of their own strength the people sought to reach the standard of the moral precepts of the Decalogue,(8) now God takes His people there by using His Spirit to write the Ten Commandments in their hearts.
Recall the New Covenant promise, “I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts.” “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do [them].” (Jer. 31:33, Eze. 36:26-27). Clearly what was removed was the manner in which that law is given. The ministration changed, not the Law.
The ultimate proof that the Ten Commandment are not here being spoken of as abolished is in verse 12:

“Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, [which] put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.”
In Exodus 34 we read the story to which Paul is referring to. It says in verse 29 that “when Moses came down from Mount Sinai” the “two tablets of the Testimony were in Moses’ hand…” Thus they could look at the Decalogue. What, then, was it that they could not look at? “And when Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil on his face… And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him” (verses 33-25). What the Israelites could “not stedfastly look” at was the face of Moses when he covered it. That was what was abolished, to be replaced by the face of Christ!
Unfortunately, this veil still prevented their hearts from seeing the glory of Christ when they read the scriptures. But when that heart is turned to the Lord, “the vail shall be taken away” and they shall behold “the glory of the Lord” (verses 14-18).

Two things remain to be addressed. What did Paul mean when he said that the letter kills, and why did he address the Ten Commandments as the ministration of death and condemnation? One answer will suffice to reply to both these questions. The phrase “letter of the law” is an idiomatic phrase contrasting the spiritual, or principles of the law from the literal keeping of the words of the law. That there are these two aspects to the Law is made crystal clear by Jesus when he used the seventh commandment as an example. One can keep the letter (literally having relations with another woman outside your marriage) and yet break the spiritual aspect (lusting after that woman in your heart).(10) When one tries to keep the letter of the law, without the spiritual principles, you will fail, and thus be condemned to death by it. Moreover, when you are not aware of the Law, it will condemn you once you do become aware of it, because you will see that you are in violation. This is why the Law is called the ministration of death and condemnation, because it kills you and condemns you when you break it, not when you keep it!
Paul does not go deep into explaining what he means by death and condemnation here, but he does in Romans. Notice:

“What shall we say then? [Is] the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.” But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all [manner of evil] desire. For apart from the law sin [was] dead. I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. And the commandment, which [was] to [bring] life, I found to [bring] death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed [me].” (Rom. 7:7-11)
It was the moment he became aware that he was in violation of the tenth commandment that the Law condemned him to death. You see the problem was not in keeping the commandment, but in not keeping the commandment! Note the next three verses:

“Therefore the law [is] holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.” (Rom 7:12-14).
Three important details I want to highlight here:

  1. The fact that the Law points out his sin places no fault on the law, but on him. Thus the Law is “holy, just and good.”
  2. It was sin that produced death in him. The commandment pointed out his fault, and in this way brings death only when you are in violation of it!
  3. Did the fact that the commandment pointed out his sin mean that he no longer had to keep it? Of course not! He clearly said that that which is good, the Law, has not become death to him.
It would not be the first time that the Law is spoken of in this manner. Notice how David speaks of the Law in the same way but uses that as motivation to actually keep it!

“All Your commandments [are] faithful; They persecute me wrongfully; Help me! They almost made an end of me on earth, But I did not forsake Your precepts. Revive me according to Your lovingkindness, So that I may keep the testimony of Your mouth.” (Psa. 119:86-88).
The critics view their inability of keeping the Law as a reason to avoid it or believe it must have been abolished. But the Bible views our inability to keep it as a reason to cry out to God for strength to obey!

Now, how can the Law be both death/condemnation and also “holy, just and good?” As explained above, it is death when breaking it, but life when keeping it. The old “ministration” of the Ten Commandments under Moses came with punishments and death when broken. Since the people could not keep the Law (Heb. 8:8), God now has a new ministration, the ministration of righteousness. God is now placing the Law in the heart of the individual who desires it, causing him to obey it, and thus avoiding the penalty that comes with breaking it. It is too bad that the critics interpret 2 Cor. 3 to mean that the Law has been abolished. Not only is that contrary to the context, but it leads the believer to go on breaking a Law he thinks is abolished!
The very next chapter says that the life of Christ is made “manifest” through the believer (2 Cor. 4:10-11). This is the very essence of the New Covenant. Christ lives His life, a life of obedience, through the acts of the believer, essentially causing him to live the moral precepts of the Law that has been written in his heart. So rather then going around saying that the Ten Commandments have been abolished, the believer, living under the New Covenant, will both manifest obedience to them through his acts and proclaim the importance of obedience to others as well.
 
Upvote 0

JesusFollowerForever

Disciple of Jesus
Jan 19, 2024
1,271
869
quebec
✟82,210.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I really want to know what you say :heart:

My impression was that you were saying that laws relating to purity and holiness would be moral laws, and therefore still in effect

Does Leviticus 15:2-3 relate to purity and holiness?

Lev 15:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When any man hath a running issue out of his flesh, because ofhis issue he is unclean.
Lev 15:3 And this shall be his uncleanness in his issue: whether his flesh run with his issue, or his flesh be stopped from his issue, it is his uncleanness.
Lev 15:4 Every bed, whereon he lieth that hath the issue, is unclean: and every thing, whereon he sitteth, shall be unclean.
Lev 15:5 And whosoever toucheth his bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even
Lev 15:6 And he that sitteth on any thing whereon he sat that hath the issue shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even
Lev 15:7 And he that toucheth the flesh of him that hath the issue shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.

this law in lev 15-2-3 is very specific and touches abnormal fluid loss from men due mostly to infection. in the following verses, it explain that what these fluids touched was also unclean ( they could be infectious) , the reason it a medical reason and were mostly for the israelites in the desert to remain healthy by following these instructions. these were quite reasonable back then, today people go see a doctor and would get prescribed antibiotics..

also it is to keep the Levites ""pure"" to perform the rituals of the tabernacle. GOD would not let them approach if they were diseased or drunk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leaf473
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,856
8,382
Dallas
✟1,091,033.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The plan for the salvation of lost mankind is based on man's acceptance by faith alone of Christ's substitutionary death.
How many denominations that don’t observe the sabbath have this exact same message in their statement of faith? It still doesn’t change the fact that she taught that unless you observe the sabbath you won’t receive salvation, unless you somehow believe that those who receive the mark of the beast will receive salvation.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Bob S
Upvote 0

Bob S

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 5, 2015
4,947
2,355
90
Union County, TN
✟834,411.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, this is a tough passage and one many never carefully read or try to reconcile with Christ's teachings. Here is a detailed commentary breaking this down.

Paul says in 2 Cor. 3 that the Ten Commandments, which was written in stone (verse 3) were a ministration of death and condemnation that was abolished.

THE SHORT ANSWER

Since the law was written in the hearts of the Corinthians, and they literally became living, moving and walking epistles, it follows that the Law was not abolished, but rather changed from tables of stone to “fleshy tables of the heart” (verses 2- 3). One need not tell them to avoid stealing, killing or lying. So long as they continue submitted to the Spirit, they will live the precepts of the Law in their lives. They are “known and read by all men.” How then, pray tell, has the Ten Commandments been abolished?

Two things are mentioned as done away, the ministration of that which was engraved on stone, along with the glory that was shining on the face of Moses (verses 7-16). The latter was replaced by Christ’s more glorious face, according to verses 13-18. But what does Paul mean by “ministration?” The word holds the original meaning of service towards others. Note that it was not the Decalogue itself, but the ministration of it, or the then instituted manner of teaching and enforcing it, that was abolished, to be succeeded by the ministration of the same Law by the apostles and the Spirit (3:3, 4:1)!
The ultimate proof that the Ten Commandment are not here being spoken of as abolished is in verse 12:

“Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, [which] put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.”

In Exodus 34 we read the story to which Paul is referring to. It says in verse 29 that “when Moses came down from Mount Sinai” the “two tablets of the Testimony were in Moses’ hand…” Thus they could look at the Decalogue. What, then, was it that they could not look at? “And when Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil on his face… And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him” (verses 33-25). What the Israelites could “not stedfastly look” at was the face of Moses when he covered it. That was what was abolished, to be replaced by the face of Christ!
Unfortunately, this veil still prevented their hearts from seeing the glory of Christ when they read the scriptures. But when that heart is turned to the Lord, “the vail shall be taken away” and they shall behold “the glory of the Lord” (verses 14-18). These same people have the Law in their hearts, manifest it through their actions and as a result do not go around saying that it has been abolished.

THE LONG ANSWER

2 Corinthians 3 is the critic’s go-to when they want to claim that the Ten Commandments have been abolished, but a closer examination of each text in question reveals a different story.(6)Before speaking of what has been abolished, Paul actually establishes the Ten Commandments by revealing that the Corinthians are living examples of what the New Covenant looks like in living form. They are the epistle because, as the New Covenant promised, the Ten Commandments have been written in their hearts (cf. verses 1-3, Jer. 31:33). In other words, far from being abolished, they are reestablished in a better location, from tables of stone to “fleshy table of the heart” (verse 3). Keep in mind that we are literally talking about the Ten Commandments here, because that is the allusion when the text speaks about “tables of stone.”
What does the text mean by the heart? Not the literal organ of course. The heart represents the mind, the seat of all thoughts, intellect, passions, desires, affections and endeavors. The mind is what makes who we are in person and character, and dictates our actions in the physical realm. “For as he thinketh in his heart” says the wise man, “so is he” (Prov. 23:7). So then, if the Law was written in their hearts, it has become a natural part of their very being. One need not tell them to avoid stealing, killing or lying. They know the Law, their very impulse, so long as they continue submitted to the Spirit, is to obey God. Their lives demonstrate it’s precepts to the whole world as if they were living, walking, and talking epistles. People can read the Law in their lives and character. They are “known and read by all men.” How then, pray tell, has the Ten Commandments been abolished? Any thinking man with reasoning powers can see that such a claim flies in the face of the very point that Paul is trying to make here!
With this in mind we know for sure that what follows in this chapter cannot now say that the Ten Commandments have been abolished. Therefore, a critical look at each reference to something being abolished reveals exactly what those things were. Let us do that now:


Two things are mentioned as done away with here, the ministration of that which was engraved on stone, along with the glory that was shining on the face of Moses. The latter was replaced by Christ’s more glorious face, according to verses 13-18. But what does Paul mean by “ministration?” The word holds the original meaning of service towards others. Note that it was not the Decalogue itself, but the ministration of it, or the then instituted manner of teaching and enforcing it, that was abolished, to be succeeded by the ministration of the same Law by the apostles and the Spirit (3:3, 4:1)! It is like taking a man from point A to point B on a bike versus taking him on a car. The car is the better, faster way. But changing the mode of transportation does not change the man being transported. Whereas before of their own strength the people sought to reach the standard of the moral precepts of the Decalogue,(8) now God takes His people there by using His Spirit to write the Ten Commandments in their hearts.
Recall the New Covenant promise, “I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts.” “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do [them].” (Jer. 31:33, Eze. 36:26-27). Clearly what was removed was the manner in which that law is given. The ministration changed, not the Law.
The ultimate proof that the Ten Commandment are not here being spoken of as abolished is in verse 12:


In Exodus 34 we read the story to which Paul is referring to. It says in verse 29 that “when Moses came down from Mount Sinai” the “two tablets of the Testimony were in Moses’ hand…” Thus they could look at the Decalogue. What, then, was it that they could not look at? “And when Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil on his face… And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him” (verses 33-25). What the Israelites could “not stedfastly look” at was the face of Moses when he covered it. That was what was abolished, to be replaced by the face of Christ!
Unfortunately, this veil still prevented their hearts from seeing the glory of Christ when they read the scriptures. But when that heart is turned to the Lord, “the vail shall be taken away” and they shall behold “the glory of the Lord” (verses 14-18).

Two things remain to be addressed. What did Paul mean when he said that the letter kills, and why did he address the Ten Commandments as the ministration of death and condemnation? One answer will suffice to reply to both these questions. The phrase “letter of the law” is an idiomatic phrase contrasting the spiritual, or principles of the law from the literal keeping of the words of the law. That there are these two aspects to the Law is made crystal clear by Jesus when he used the seventh commandment as an example. One can keep the letter (literally having relations with another woman outside your marriage) and yet break the spiritual aspect (lusting after that woman in your heart).(10) When one tries to keep the letter of the law, without the spiritual principles, you will fail, and thus be condemned to death by it. Moreover, when you are not aware of the Law, it will condemn you once you do become aware of it, because you will see that you are in violation. This is why the Law is called the ministration of death and condemnation, because it kills you and condemns you when you break it, not when you keep it!
Paul does not go deep into explaining what he means by death and condemnation here, but he does in Romans. Notice:


It was the moment he became aware that he was in violation of the tenth commandment that the Law condemned him to death. You see the problem was not in keeping the commandment, but in not keeping the commandment! Note the next three verses:


Three important details I want to highlight here:

  1. The fact that the Law points out his sin places no fault on the law, but on him. Thus the Law is “holy, just and good.”
  2. It was sin that produced death in him. The commandment pointed out his fault, and in this way brings death only when you are in violation of it!
  3. Did the fact that the commandment pointed out his sin mean that he no longer had to keep it? Of course not! He clearly said that that which is good, the Law, has not become death to him.
It would not be the first time that the Law is spoken of in this manner. Notice how David speaks of the Law in the same way but uses that as motivation to actually keep it!


The critics view their inability of keeping the Law as a reason to avoid it or believe it must have been abolished. But the Bible views our inability to keep it as a reason to cry out to God for strength to obey!

Now, how can the Law be both death/condemnation and also “holy, just and good?” As explained above, it is death when breaking it, but life when keeping it. The old “ministration” of the Ten Commandments under Moses came with punishments and death when broken. Since the people could not keep the Law (Heb. 8:8), God now has a new ministration, the ministration of righteousness. God is now placing the Law in the heart of the individual who desires it, causing him to obey it, and thus avoiding the penalty that comes with breaking it. It is too bad that the critics interpret 2 Cor. 3 to mean that the Law has been abolished. Not only is that contrary to the context, but it leads the believer to go on breaking a Law he thinks is abolished!
The very next chapter says that the life of Christ is made “manifest” through the believer (2 Cor. 4:10-11). This is the very essence of the New Covenant. Christ lives His life, a life of obedience, through the acts of the believer, essentially causing him to live the moral precepts of the Law that has been written in his heart. So rather then going around saying that the Ten Commandments have been abolished, the believer, living under the New Covenant, will both manifest obedience to them through his acts and proclaim the importance of obedience to others as well.
When you copy and paste someone else's writings it is proper to give credit.

How do you explain away Eph 2 where Paul tells us Jesus is the end of the Law. And, of course, there is Gal 3:19.. And the proper interpretation of Matt 5:16-17 is that Jesus ended the Law.

2Cor 3 tells us in very plain words that the Ten Commandments were temporary. Don't forget that the Law was given at Sinai for the nation of Israel. Gentile nations were never given the Law. Law includes the ten.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,481
5,541
USA
✟713,847.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
How many denominations that don’t observe the sabbath have this exact same message in their statement of faith?
Most churches stop there, but thats not the full gospel message. They don’t teach repentance when Christ did. Luke 24:46-47 Mat 4:17 because our salvation is from sin Mat 1:21. They teach we are saved from the penalty of sin, when Christ wants to save us from the power of sin.
It still doesn’t change the fact that she taught that unless you observe the sabbath you won’t receive salvation, unless you somehow believe that those who receive the mark of the beast will receive salvation.
Can you please point out where we can disobey God and live in the scriptures? This was the very first lie the other spirit told Eve that sadly, is still working today. It’s not what Jesus taught Mat 19:17-19 Mat 5:19-30 Mat 15:3-14 and if we believe in Jesus we should believe His teachings.

You keep isolating the Sabbath commandment, when God did not, Exo 34:28 Deut 4:13. Apply this same reasoning with any of the other commandments. Can we worship other gods and be saved? Murder and be saved? Covet and be saved? We are not saved in our sins, we are saved from sin. Mat 1:21 Sin is breaking God’s law 1 John 3:4 Rom 7:7 breaking one we break them all James 2:10-12 and in doing so one will be in fear of sin and Judgement Mat 5:19-30. If we continue in sin this is what we have to look forward to Heb 10:26-30 but if we repent (which means a change of direction) and confess and forsake our sins we will receive mercy Pro 28:13 1 John 1:9. There is no caveat for the Ten expect the Sabbath commandment, the one God said to Remember that uses the words holy and blessed. If we believe under God’s mercy seat are only nine commandments, when God told us there are Ten- well I guess we will all find out soon enough. I would not want to remove anything that covers us under His mercy seat especially the commandment that points to Christ our Redeemer and Savior Exo 20:11 Eze 20:20 and how we are sanctified Eze 20:12 made for man Mark 2:27, because man can’t sanctify themselves, we need God, even though sadly many try.

Guess we will have to agree to disagree and all will get sorted out soon enough.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,856
8,382
Dallas
✟1,091,033.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes, this is a tough passage and one many never carefully read or try to reconcile with Christ's teachings. Here is a detailed commentary breaking this down.

Paul says in 2 Cor. 3 that the Ten Commandments, which was written in stone (verse 3) were a ministration of death and condemnation that was abolished.

THE SHORT ANSWER

Since the law was written in the hearts of the Corinthians, and they literally became living, moving and walking epistles, it follows that the Law was not abolished, but rather changed from tables of stone to “fleshy tables of the heart” (verses 2- 3). One need not tell them to avoid stealing, killing or lying. So long as they continue submitted to the Spirit, they will live the precepts of the Law in their lives. They are “known and read by all men.” How then, pray tell, has the Ten Commandments been abolished?

Two things are mentioned as done away, the ministration of that which was engraved on stone, along with the glory that was shining on the face of Moses (verses 7-16). The latter was replaced by Christ’s more glorious face, according to verses 13-18. But what does Paul mean by “ministration?” The word holds the original meaning of service towards others. Note that it was not the Decalogue itself, but the ministration of it, or the then instituted manner of teaching and enforcing it, that was abolished, to be succeeded by the ministration of the same Law by the apostles and the Spirit (3:3, 4:1)!
The ultimate proof that the Ten Commandment are not here being spoken of as abolished is in verse 12:

“Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, [which] put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.”

In Exodus 34 we read the story to which Paul is referring to. It says in verse 29 that “when Moses came down from Mount Sinai” the “two tablets of the Testimony were in Moses’ hand…” Thus they could look at the Decalogue. What, then, was it that they could not look at? “And when Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil on his face… And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him” (verses 33-25). What the Israelites could “not stedfastly look” at was the face of Moses when he covered it. That was what was abolished, to be replaced by the face of Christ!
Unfortunately, this veil still prevented their hearts from seeing the glory of Christ when they read the scriptures. But when that heart is turned to the Lord, “the vail shall be taken away” and they shall behold “the glory of the Lord” (verses 14-18). These same people have the Law in their hearts, manifest it through their actions and as a result do not go around saying that it has been abolished.

THE LONG ANSWER

2 Corinthians 3 is the critic’s go-to when they want to claim that the Ten Commandments have been abolished, but a closer examination of each text in question reveals a different story.(6)Before speaking of what has been abolished, Paul actually establishes the Ten Commandments by revealing that the Corinthians are living examples of what the New Covenant looks like in living form. They are the epistle because, as the New Covenant promised, the Ten Commandments have been written in their hearts (cf. verses 1-3, Jer. 31:33). In other words, far from being abolished, they are reestablished in a better location, from tables of stone to “fleshy table of the heart” (verse 3). Keep in mind that we are literally talking about the Ten Commandments here, because that is the allusion when the text speaks about “tables of stone.”
What does the text mean by the heart? Not the literal organ of course. The heart represents the mind, the seat of all thoughts, intellect, passions, desires, affections and endeavors. The mind is what makes who we are in person and character, and dictates our actions in the physical realm. “For as he thinketh in his heart” says the wise man, “so is he” (Prov. 23:7). So then, if the Law was written in their hearts, it has become a natural part of their very being. One need not tell them to avoid stealing, killing or lying. They know the Law, their very impulse, so long as they continue submitted to the Spirit, is to obey God. Their lives demonstrate it’s precepts to the whole world as if they were living, walking, and talking epistles. People can read the Law in their lives and character. They are “known and read by all men.” How then, pray tell, has the Ten Commandments been abolished? Any thinking man with reasoning powers can see that such a claim flies in the face of the very point that Paul is trying to make here!
With this in mind we know for sure that what follows in this chapter cannot now say that the Ten Commandments have been abolished. Therefore, a critical look at each reference to something being abolished reveals exactly what those things were. Let us do that now:


Two things are mentioned as done away with here, the ministration of that which was engraved on stone, along with the glory that was shining on the face of Moses. The latter was replaced by Christ’s more glorious face, according to verses 13-18. But what does Paul mean by “ministration?” The word holds the original meaning of service towards others. Note that it was not the Decalogue itself, but the ministration of it, or the then instituted manner of teaching and enforcing it, that was abolished, to be succeeded by the ministration of the same Law by the apostles and the Spirit (3:3, 4:1)! It is like taking a man from point A to point B on a bike versus taking him on a car. The car is the better, faster way. But changing the mode of transportation does not change the man being transported. Whereas before of their own strength the people sought to reach the standard of the moral precepts of the Decalogue,(8) now God takes His people there by using His Spirit to write the Ten Commandments in their hearts.
Recall the New Covenant promise, “I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts.” “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do [them].” (Jer. 31:33, Eze. 36:26-27). Clearly what was removed was the manner in which that law is given. The ministration changed, not the Law.
The ultimate proof that the Ten Commandment are not here being spoken of as abolished is in verse 12:


In Exodus 34 we read the story to which Paul is referring to. It says in verse 29 that “when Moses came down from Mount Sinai” the “two tablets of the Testimony were in Moses’ hand…” Thus they could look at the Decalogue. What, then, was it that they could not look at? “And when Moses had finished speaking with them, he put a veil on his face… And the children of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses’ face shone: and Moses put the vail upon his face again, until he went in to speak with him” (verses 33-25). What the Israelites could “not stedfastly look” at was the face of Moses when he covered it. That was what was abolished, to be replaced by the face of Christ!
Unfortunately, this veil still prevented their hearts from seeing the glory of Christ when they read the scriptures. But when that heart is turned to the Lord, “the vail shall be taken away” and they shall behold “the glory of the Lord” (verses 14-18).

Two things remain to be addressed. What did Paul mean when he said that the letter kills, and why did he address the Ten Commandments as the ministration of death and condemnation? One answer will suffice to reply to both these questions. The phrase “letter of the law” is an idiomatic phrase contrasting the spiritual, or principles of the law from the literal keeping of the words of the law. That there are these two aspects to the Law is made crystal clear by Jesus when he used the seventh commandment as an example. One can keep the letter (literally having relations with another woman outside your marriage) and yet break the spiritual aspect (lusting after that woman in your heart).(10) When one tries to keep the letter of the law, without the spiritual principles, you will fail, and thus be condemned to death by it. Moreover, when you are not aware of the Law, it will condemn you once you do become aware of it, because you will see that you are in violation. This is why the Law is called the ministration of death and condemnation, because it kills you and condemns you when you break it, not when you keep it!
Paul does not go deep into explaining what he means by death and condemnation here, but he does in Romans. Notice:


It was the moment he became aware that he was in violation of the tenth commandment that the Law condemned him to death. You see the problem was not in keeping the commandment, but in not keeping the commandment! Note the next three verses:


Three important details I want to highlight here:

  1. The fact that the Law points out his sin places no fault on the law, but on him. Thus the Law is “holy, just and good.”
  2. It was sin that produced death in him. The commandment pointed out his fault, and in this way brings death only when you are in violation of it!
  3. Did the fact that the commandment pointed out his sin mean that he no longer had to keep it? Of course not! He clearly said that that which is good, the Law, has not become death to him.
It would not be the first time that the Law is spoken of in this manner. Notice how David speaks of the Law in the same way but uses that as motivation to actually keep it!


The critics view their inability of keeping the Law as a reason to avoid it or believe it must have been abolished. But the Bible views our inability to keep it as a reason to cry out to God for strength to obey!

Now, how can the Law be both death/condemnation and also “holy, just and good?” As explained above, it is death when breaking it, but life when keeping it. The old “ministration” of the Ten Commandments under Moses came with punishments and death when broken. Since the people could not keep the Law (Heb. 8:8), God now has a new ministration, the ministration of righteousness. God is now placing the Law in the heart of the individual who desires it, causing him to obey it, and thus avoiding the penalty that comes with breaking it. It is too bad that the critics interpret 2 Cor. 3 to mean that the Law has been abolished. Not only is that contrary to the context, but it leads the believer to go on breaking a Law he thinks is abolished!
The very next chapter says that the life of Christ is made “manifest” through the believer (2 Cor. 4:10-11). This is the very essence of the New Covenant. Christ lives His life, a life of obedience, through the acts of the believer, essentially causing him to live the moral precepts of the Law that has been written in his heart. So rather then going around saying that the Ten Commandments have been abolished, the believer, living under the New Covenant, will both manifest obedience to them through his acts and proclaim the importance of obedience to others as well.
I never said the law was abolished, I said that the letter that is written on our hearts surpasses the law that was written in stone and gives us liberty. The letter that is written in my heart tells me that it’s perfectly fine that I rest on any day of the week. It tells me I should honor God, I shouldn’t worship idols, I shouldn’t steal or murder, I shouldn’t commit adultery, I shouldn’t lie, I should honor my parents, unless they want me to do something that is in opposition to God’s law, it also tells me I should and shouldn’t do a lot more than these. One thing is absolutely certain, it doesn’t convict at all about not observing the sabbath. I honor God every single day of my life and He gives me confidence that He is pleased with that. Hence the liberty the law written on my heart has given me.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,856
8,382
Dallas
✟1,091,033.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Can you please point out where we can disobey God and live in the scriptures?
Here you go again parroting Ellen White’s heresy of justification through works of the law. You pretend that you don’t but in your argument you constantly do. This is the exact same argument that would’ve been made to the Galatians about circumcision by the Judaizers. You have to be circumcised to be saved. You have to observe the sabbath to be saved. That’s exactly what you’re saying here. Maybe it’s not what you do that condemns a person but why you do it that condemns a person. The Pharisees kept the law, why were they condemned?
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,481
5,541
USA
✟713,847.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I never said the law was abolished, I said that the letter that is written on our hearts surpasses the law that was written in stone and gives us liberty. The letter that is written in my heart tells me that it’s perfectly fine that I rest on any day of the week. It tells me I should honor God, I shouldn’t worship idols, I shouldn’t steal or murder, I shouldn’t commit adultery, I shouldn’t lie, I should honor my parents, unless they want me to do something that is in opposition to God’s law, it also tells me I should and shouldn’t do a lot more than these. One thing is absolutely certain, it doesn’t convict at all about not observing the sabbath. I honor God every single day of my life and He gives me confidence that He is pleased with that. Hence the liberty the law written on my heart has given me.
Thats depending on our own works not God's Exo 32:16 when we decide which laws it essentially makes one their own god.

There are not different laws written in the heart that we can pick and choose from- God said His law was written in the heart Heb 8:10 and His law includes the Sabbath Exo 20:8-11 thus saith the Lord that was made for mankind Mark 2:27 and is still a commandment Luke 23:56 because God said He would not alter His Words Psa 89:34 Mat 5:18 which is why Jesus in His own Words said the Sabbath would be kept by His faithful decades after the Cross Mat 24:20 and for eternity Isa 66:23. I believe its best we obey God over following man, but God loves us so much He gives us free will and would never force obedience onto us, but hopes we follow Him through love and faith.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,856
8,382
Dallas
✟1,091,033.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Thats depending on our own works not God's Exo 32:16 when we decide which laws it essentially makes one their own god.

There are not different laws written in the heart that we can pick and choose from- God said His law was written in the heart Heb 8:10 and His law includes the Sabbath Exo 20:8-11 thus saith the Lord that was made for mankind Mark 2:27 and is still a commandment Luke 23:56 because God said He would not alter His Words Psa 89:34 Mat 5:18 which is why Jesus in His own Words said the Sabbath would be kept by His faithful decades after the Cross Mat 24:20 and for eternity Isa 66:23. I believe its best we obey God over following man, but God loves us so much He gives us free will and would never force obedience onto us, but hopes we follow Him through love and faith.
Right which brings us right back to circumcision. You still see no difference at all between the written law and the law written in our hearts. So you’re saying that only the SDA has the law written on their hearts and all other Christians who don’t have any convictions about the sabbath don’t have the law written on their hearts which basically means that we’re not really Christians at all. You keep on trying to push the idea that the law has never changed but the law has in fact changed several times according to the scriptures. Adam & Eve were told they could eat plants. Noah was told he could eat anything that moves, he just couldn’t consume blood. The Israelites were given specific dietary restrictions, and now those restrictions have been removed. Circumcision was a commandment of God that was abolished. Burnt offerings was a commandment of God that was abolished. New moon and sabbath rituals were commandments of God that were abolished. You ignore all of these facts when you post passages implying that God’s laws never change when it’s the scriptures themselves that tell us that they have in fact changed numerous times.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,481
5,541
USA
✟713,847.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Right which brings us right back to circumcision. You still see no difference at all between the written law and the law written in our hearts. So you’re saying that only the SDA has the law written on their hearts and all other Christians who don’t have any convictions about the sabbath don’t have the law written on their hearts which basically means that we’re not really Christians at all. You keep on trying to push the idea that the law has never changed but the law has in fact changed several times according to the scriptures. Adam & Eve were told they could eat plants. Noah was told he could eat anything that moves, he just couldn’t consume blood. The Israelites were given specific dietary restrictions, and now those restrictions have been removed. Circumcision was a commandment of God that was abolished. Burnt offerings was a commandment of God that was abolished. New moon and sabbath rituals were commandments of God that were abolished. You ignore all of these facts when you post passages implying that God’s laws never change when it’s the scriptures themselves that tell us that they have in fact changed numerous times.
Circumcision was not one of the Ten Commandments Exodus 20 and physical circumcision was discussed to death in Galatians, Acts and Corinthians

This was the conclusion :

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

Circumcision was always about the heart Col 2:11 cutting off the flesh of sin, being reborn in Christ. In Christ, do we sin (break His law 1 John 3:4) or obey Him? John 14:15-18 Acts 5:32 In Christ do we follow His example or do our own thing 1 John 2:5-6

The SDA church did not create the Sabbath commandment, you give us way too much credit- God did, written on His Authority which is there no greater- why all throughout the Bible from the beginning Gen 2:1-3 Exo 20:11 to the end Isa 66:23. Kept by everyone we are told to follow Exo 20:11 Luke 4:16 Acts 18:4 we can take another path God does not force us to obey Him, but hopes we come to repentance and obey Him through love and faith.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
9,302
2,555
55
Northeast
✟240,864.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Lev 15:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When any man hath a running issue out of his flesh, because ofhis issue he is unclean.
Lev 15:3 And this shall be his uncleanness in his issue: whether his flesh run with his issue, or his flesh be stopped from his issue, it is his uncleanness.
Lev 15:4 Every bed, whereon he lieth that hath the issue, is unclean: and every thing, whereon he sitteth, shall be unclean.
Lev 15:5 And whosoever toucheth his bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even
Lev 15:6 And he that sitteth on any thing whereon he sat that hath the issue shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even
Lev 15:7 And he that toucheth the flesh of him that hath the issue shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.

this law in lev 15-2-3 is very specific and touches abnormal fluid loss from men due mostly to infection. in the following verses, it explain that what these fluids touched was also unclean ( they could be infectious) , the reason it a medical reason and were mostly for the israelites in the desert to remain healthy by following these instructions. these were quite reasonable back then, today people go see a doctor and would get prescribed antibiotics..

also it is to keep the Levites ""pure"" to perform the rituals of the tabernacle. GOD would not let them approach if they were diseased or drunk
Very interesting :heart: And the part about bathing and washing your clothes... Is that a moral commandment?
 
Upvote 0

JesusFollowerForever

Disciple of Jesus
Jan 19, 2024
1,271
869
quebec
✟82,210.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Very interesting :heart: And the part about bathing and washing your clothes... Is that a moral commandment?
Now you are testing me. The Ten Commandments are often viewed as the foundation of moral law in tradition. They are consideted central to ethical behaviour, as they address fundamental issues of right and wrong, human relationships, and obligations to the divine. The 10 commandments are based on Love.
 
Upvote 0

Leaf473

Well-Known Member
Jul 17, 2020
9,302
2,555
55
Northeast
✟240,864.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Now you are testing me.
I am both testing you and discussing the law. It is good to discuss the law

The Ten Commandments are often viewed as the foundation of moral law in tradition. They are consideted central to ethical behaviour, as they address fundamental issues of right and wrong, human relationships, and obligations to the divine. The 10 commandments are based on Love.
You had talked about how it is important to keep the moral commandments, but not the ceremonial laws. This means we have to have a way to separate them.

Do you believe that you have a way to separate the moral commandments from the ceremonial laws? If so, please apply your method to the passages in Leviticus 15 that we are talking about

 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,856
8,382
Dallas
✟1,091,033.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The plan for the salvation of lost mankind is based on man's acceptance by faith alone of Christ's substitutionary death.
Well she also said this about observing the dietary laws.

Is my diet such as will bring me in a position where I can accomplish the greatest amount of good? If we cannot answer these questions in the affirmative we stand condemned before God for He will hold us all responsible for the light which He’s shown upon our path.

In short, if we don’t observe the dietary laws we stand condemned before God. So according to what she said here salvation is not even remotely based on the acceptance by faith alone of Christ’s substitutionary death. When salvation is dependent upon keeping the sabbath and the dietary laws using the words FAITH ALONE is a direct contradiction to these requirements.

Were you not aware that she taught this? She may have claimed that she taught we are saved by faith alone but that isn’t what she actually taught.

You can skip to 12 minutes into the video if you want to hear it for yourself.

 
Upvote 0

JesusFollowerForever

Disciple of Jesus
Jan 19, 2024
1,271
869
quebec
✟82,210.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I am both testing you and discussing the law. It is good to discuss the law


You had talked about how it is important to keep the moral commandments, but not the ceremonial laws. This means we have to have a way to separate them.

Do you believe that you have a way to separate the moral commandments from the ceremonial laws? If so, please apply your method to the passages in Leviticus 15 that we are talking about

why do you test me?

About these laws ( other than the 10 commandments) I know of them but not know them very well since I am not Jewish. But I know that some of them can be useful, I know also that some can no longer be applied, like the laws concerning the sacrifices since Jesus fulfilled them with his life, His Blood and suffering so we can obtain eternal life.
Jesus is the only way to eternal Life. This is what he wants for all of us.

John 14:6 (NKJV):
Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
 
Upvote 0

SabbathBlessings

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 12, 2020
13,481
5,541
USA
✟713,847.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Well she also said this about observing the dietary laws.

Is my diet such as will bring me in a position where I can accomplish the greatest amount of good? If we cannot answer these questions in the affirmative we stand condemned before God for He will hold us all responsible for the light which He’s shown upon our path.

In short, if we don’t observe the dietary laws we stand condemned before God. So according to what she said here salvation is not even remotely based on the acceptance by faith alone of Christ’s substitutionary death. When salvation is dependent upon keeping the sabbath and the dietary laws using the words FAITH ALONE is a direct contradiction to these requirements.

Were you not aware that she taught this? She may have claimed that she taught we are saved by faith alone but that isn’t what she actually taught.

You can skip to 12 minutes into the video if you want to hear it for yourself.

I think the issue is the word faith. It’s a huge word in scripture but people make it into a small word.

If we have faith in Jesus we would trust and believe His teachings to do them or just hear them. James 1:22

Don’t you know our bodies are a temple for the Holy Spirit that we need to keep them clean not only in what we eat but also in our thoughts and actions.

What does God teach on the dietary laws? Once God deems something an abomination, they stay that way.

Isa 66:17 “Those who sanctify themselves and purify themselves, To go to the gardens After an idol in the midst, Eating swine’s flesh and the abomination and the mouse, Shall be consumed together,” says the LORD.

There is no scripture that says we can disobey God and live. That’s was the very first lie from the devil that still works today. You disagreed with this previously, but never provided scripture that says we are saved in our sins and can be disobedient to God without repentance which means a change of direction and live.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,856
8,382
Dallas
✟1,091,033.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
why do you test me?

About these laws ( other than the 10 commandments) I know of them but not know them very well since I am not Jewish. But I know that some of them can be useful, I know also that some can no longer be applied, like the laws concerning the sacrifices since Jesus fulfilled them with his life, His Blood and suffering so we can obtain eternal life.
Jesus is the only way to eternal Life. This is what he wants for all of us.

John 14:6 (NKJV):
Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
Ellen White would’ve added that those who do come to the Father but didn’t observe the sabbath and the dietary laws would be condemned. Not sure if you were aware of this or not.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,856
8,382
Dallas
✟1,091,033.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I think the issue is the word faith. It’s a huge word in scripture but people make it into a small word.

If we have faith in Jesus we would trust and believe His teachings to do them, not just hear them.

What does God teach on the dietary laws?

Isa 66:17 “Those who sanctify themselves and purify themselves, To go to the gardens After an idol in the midst, Eating swine’s flesh and the abomination and the mouse, Shall be consumed together,” says the LORD.

There is no scripture that says we can disobey God and live. That’s was the very first lie from the devil that still works today. You disagreed with this previously, but never provided scripture that says we are saved in our sins and can be disobedient to God without repentance which means a change of direction and live.
Oh so you agree with her then. Because when I made this statement about justification thru works of the law

I’ve been making biblical arguments the whole time. And exposing Ellen White’s heresy of obtaining justification through works of the law is 100% biblical which is why I quoted Galatians. Your statement that the SDA is the “remnant” required me to resort to exposing its heretical origins.
Your response was that she taught faith alone. Now you’re saying that faith alone means justification thru works of the law. So you just went in a circle there in your response.
 
Upvote 0