God's Law = God's Character

[Gary K]

I looked at a pdf of the one Practical Lessons and was rather disappointed. Either he forgot a lot or they did not teach that much to their rabbinic students a century ago. There were several things he got wrong, including the part where Hillel was the more harsh legalist compared to Shammai. (it was the other way around)

From my reading of the Talmud, and granted I have not studied it in depth, I see the school of Hillel as being the stricter of the two. I cannot prove it by any means for I have not spent years studying the Talmud, but to me it seems as if Hillel was the Pharisee and Shammai the Sadducee as these were to the two great schools of thought during Christ's time, and of the two the Pharisees were the more influential and the stricter of the two. The Sadduccees seemed to have abandoned a lot more scripture, gone further down the road of Greek thought, than the Pharisees had, although both groups were very guilty of this as is most of Christendom these days, as they didn't even buy into the idea of an afterlife and a resurrection. Remember, it was the Sadduccees who came to Jesus with the question based upon the laws of inheritance about the woman married to a bunch of brothers who had kept on dying off, and who she would be married to in heaven. In that question the underlying assumption was the invalidity of the law of inheritance in this context and unreality of a life after death.

 

[Dave-W]

to me it seems as if Hillel was the Pharisee and Shammai the Sadducee as these were to the two great schools of thought during Christ's time,

No. Both were Pharisees.
The Sadducees were headed up by the High Priest and were almost all Temple priests and Levites. The Sadducees had the temple, the Pharisees had all of the synagogues.

On the divorce question, Shammai said that it could only be if the husband found her to not be a virgin on their wedding night. Hillel said he could divorce her for any way that was annoying, even burning dinner too often. ("for any reason")
On harvesting and eating grain on the Sabbath, Hillel said it was ok as long as the grain was not ground or cooked and it was only for one's own consumption. Shammai said it was not allowed at all.
On healing on the Sabbath, Hillel said performing medical intervention was allowed on the Sabbath, even if a life was NOT in immediate danger. Shammai said it was all prohibited.

BTW - Gamaliel who let the apostles off with a warning in Acts 5 and was Paul's mentor, was Hillel's grandson.

The Sadducees seemed to have abandoned a lot more scripture, gone further down the road of Greek thought, than the Pharisees had,

Abandoned? No. They never accepted anything other than the 5 books of Moses as "Scripture." The reason they did not accept an afterlife or resurrection was it was not seen in the books of Moses.

Doctrinally, the Pharisees were much more correct.

 

[Soyeong]

Ellen White wrote that Satan rebelled against the "Govt of God" slandering God's Character...
...According to what I've read this took place prior to the formation of the world.
...Which by default would have been prior to the "Sabbath".
...How can the ten commandments define God's Character when God 'is'.
...And the one commandment SDA's claim is the most important didn't exist until after the creation of Adam?

God's holiness is eternal and therefore His instructions for how to act in accordance with His holiness are likewise eternal, so the institution of the Sabbath was not adding to God's holiness, but it was a revelation and a reflection of His holiness as something that He did because He is holy, which teaches us about His holiness and how to reflect it. So the Sabbath was in accordance with God's holiness prior to the formation of the world, it was just that he had not yet revealed that to be the case. The Mosaic Law does not define God's character so much as it teaches us various aspects of His character and how to act in accordance with it.

 

[Soyeong]

Is there a passage in Scripture that tells us that the law of God is directly tied to His character? I've looked through this thread and can't seem to find this important piece of information.

BFA

There are many verses that speak about the Law as being God's instructions for how to walk in His ways, such as Deuteronomy 10:12-13, so it is teaching us how to act in accordance with His attributes or character.

 

[Soyeong]

If the sabbath has always existed and if it preceded creation, must we conclude that it is not a memorial of creation?

BFA

As stated, the Sabbath is a memorial of God's rest, not a memorial of creation.

 

[Gary K]

No. Both were Pharisees.
The Sadducees were headed up by the High Priest and were almost all Temple priests and Levites. The Sadducees had the temple, the Pharisees had all of the synagogues.

On the divorce question, Shammai said that it could only be if the husband found her to not be a virgin on their wedding night. Hillel said he could divorce her for any way that was annoying, even burning dinner too often. ("for any reason")
On harvesting and eating grain on the Sabbath, Hillel said it was ok as long as the grain was not ground or cooked and it was only for one's own consumption. Shammai said it was not allowed at all.
On healing on the Sabbath, Hillel said performing medical intervention was allowed on the Sabbath, even if a life was NOT in immediate danger. Shammai said it was all prohibited.

BTW - Gamaliel who let the apostles off with a warning in Acts 5 and was Paul's mentor, was Hillel's grandson.

Abandoned? No. They never accepted anything other than the 5 books of Moses as "Scripture." The reason they did not accept an afterlife or resurrection was it was not seen in the books of Moses.

Doctrinally, the Pharisees were much more correct.

Very interesting. I bow to your much greater knowledge of Jewish history.

While, according to your knowledge Jewish history, Gilbert may have gotten some minor things wrong, his main points still are correct on the controversies between the Jews and Jesus. The Sermon on the Mount addressed a lot of what was found in the Oral law, and Peter's statement on it being unlawful for a Jew to keep company with a Gentile, and a lot of what Paul wrote concerning law is illuminated by what Gilbert says about the Gemara and Mishna. It also explains why a lot of people stopped following Jesus after the Sermon on the Mount.

Don't take me as being hostile to Jews or the religion of the Jews. I'm not. I don't view a Jew any differently than I do a Gentile. I don't see anything in the Biblical history of the Jews that is outside the scope evil done by the rest of humanity. In fact, I think we have, in a lot of respects, done far worse than the Jews have ever done. We Gentiles are just as guilty of Christ's blood as were the Jews, in fact, it was a Gentile who ordered the death of Christ as the Jews were a conquered people at the time and did not have the authority to sentence anyone to death.

And, the Greek influence is just as strong, if not stronger, in the Gentile world than it is the Jewish world. We have all bowed to her reasoning and ideas.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Spot on, with the exception that God's Law consists of more than just the decalogue. For example, in 1 Peter 1:13-16, we are told to have a holy conduct for God is holy, which a reference to Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to have a holy conduct, such as Leviticus 11:44-45, where having a holy conduct for God is holy involves refraining from eating unclean animals. There are many verses that refer to the Mosaic Law as being God's instructions for how to walk in His ways, so all of His commands were given to teach us about Him and how to reflect His character.

I would agree that some of the Mosaic law is relevant and helpful to us in our walk but not necessary for Salvation.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

God's holiness is eternal and therefore His instructions for how to act in accordance with His holiness are likewise eternal, so the institution of the Sabbath was not adding to God's holiness, but it was a revelation and a reflection of His holiness as something that He did because He is holy, which teaches us about His holiness and how to reflect it. So the Sabbath was in accordance with God's holiness prior to the formation of the world, it was just that he had not yet revealed that to be the case. The Mosaic Law does not define God's character so much as it teaches us various aspects of His character and how to act in accordance with it.

I would add to this that before the fall of mankind, worshipping our Creator was a part of our nature and not an afterthought. After sin came into the world, and our hearts were turned from God, this attribute that was in existence since God first created was necessary to be explained to us in our sinful state. Untainted beings don't need a reminder to "remember the Sabbath" or more accurately, "remember to take time to worship the Creator.

 

[Soyeong]

I would agree that some of the Mosaic law is relevant and helpful to us in our walk but not necessary for Salvation.

It's not just relevant and helpful in our walk, but it is the way. I agree it is not necessary in order to become saved, but rather it is what our salvation looks like.

I would add to this that before the fall of mankind, worshipping our Creator was a part of our nature and not an afterthought. After sin came into the world, and our hearts were turned from God, this attribute that was in existence since God first created was necessary to be explained to us in our sinful state. Untainted beings don't need a reminder to "remember the Sabbath" or more accurately, "remember to take time to worship the Creator.

Prior to the Fall, we were made in God's image, so we reflected His character or attributes, but after the Fall, we were no longer in God's image, and the rest of the Bible is about God restoring us to His image.

 

[Erickem]

God may devote themselves to good works.