Hi,
First of all let me introduce you to how things run here at CF. Ellen White is referred to by SDAs as Ellen White, EGW or Ellen G White. Condescending remarks are against site-wide rules.
Ellen is Ellen's name, and referring to her in that manner throughout 5000 posts on CARM hasn't caused anyone to make the remark you do. I believe you're offended for a perception that isn't valid nor expedient to discussion.
I apologize that I just now found your post. It looks as if you did indeed reply to me, but your post is anchored as a reply to the OP. This site is acting odd.
How was the Mosaic covenant faulty? Heb 8 didn't say it was because of the law. It says it was because of the faulty promise (of man).
Not quite.
Let me post the text, Hebrews 8:6-8
6: But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also
He is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
7:
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8:
For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah...
The nature of the fault is identified in verse 8, laying the blame on the people that the Mosaic covenant was given to. Elsewhere we can confirm that this exact reason was because nobody could comply with the old covenant, and you can find this in Romans 11:32, where God concluded everyone disobedient, so that He may have mercy on ALL.
But the fault of the people is attributed by the author right back at where the blame belongs: the covenant itself. A covenant that no one can keep will not provide justification for anyone, and is faulty in and of itself. That is precisely how verse 7 reads; a fault was determined in the first covenant, and was the reason a second covenant was made.
The 10 commandments were not codified in Eden. But the principles existed.
Principles aren't holy, and your comments are going to leave you at a loss to explain Romans 7:10-13:
10: And
the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11: For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
12: Wherefore
the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13: Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid.
But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
You can't even claim that the "principles" of the law existed in Eden without leaping to an assumption that doesn't exist in Scripture, as a law isn't necessary to guide unfallen man in light of the comments of 1 Timothy 1:9, which reads "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient...", and is consistent with the 'added' nature of the law recorded in Galatians 3:19.
Which law do you believe is written on the hearts under the new covenant?
From Jeremiah and Hebrews, what you ask requires some speculation. I conclude that the
Torah written into us is an allusion to the Holy Ghost, as the result from Him is to know
Him, with no further need for instruction (Hebrews 8:11).
Torah means 'instruction' as much as it means 'law' in the Hebrew. This inference makes the
Torah instruction obsolete, doesn't it?
Hebrews 7:18-19
18: For there is verily a
disannulling of the commandment going before for the
weakness and
unprofitableness thereof.
19: For
the law made nothing perfect,
but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.
However, we don't need to speculate about what law
isn't written into us. Hebrews 8:8 is specific that it is a
new covenant, and Hebrews 8:9 is specific that
it would not be according to the covenant made at Sinai - simply, it is
specific in denying the ten commandments entrance into our hearts and minds.
Not quite. James called the law of liberty. And Jesus Himself said 'if you love me, keep my commandments'. The commandment of God is the law of love. And the motive of keeping the law of God is love.
I hope you can provide an answer for the point I made, "Hebrews 10:9 tells us (the old) can't even coexist alongside the new covenant".
I don't see how you can allude to the law of liberty as the ten commandments when James does not cite it as such.
Ellen White was
specific in her reference that the 'law of love' was her name affixed to the ten commandments.
The Apostle Paul is
equally specific in His reference of 2 Corinthians 3:7 to the tables of stone with the ten commandments as
death.
It is up to you to reconcile how a death sentence constitutes love.
All of your other calls to the attention of keeping His commandments is done without citing what commandments Jesus gave us, and John recorded those in his epistle (1 John 3:23). These are not the ten commandment covenant He made propitiation for to redeem us
from.
I was a Pentecostal then a Baptist. I studied my way into the Adventist church. And I helped a few others studied their way in the Adventist church also. So I don't think your statement qualifies for anything.
My point was that Fundie #10 doesn't exist from a basis in Scripture, but is utterly dependent on Ellen.
And my other point was that every former who posts on CARM is consistent in their position that they studied their way into
orthodox Christianty.
Funny how you immediatly equated that as disparate apart from Adventism without making a comment on the 'orthodox' qualifier I mentioned.
On the contrary, when I studied the Adventist doctrines, I used the bible, not the writings of Ellen White. To be honest, when I was studying these doctrines, I didn't really care to join the SDA church nor did I care for what Ellen White wrote at the time.
Well, I have been non-denom, Baptist, Messianic Judaic, Baptist again, and now I'm non-denom again.
The journey of knowing
Him isn't going to leave you planted in any particular denomination. Jesus made His church as His Body, and His Body doesn't deserve to be divided.
Victor
