“The Law of Christ”

Posted on November 14, 2014 by ACTheologian

Featured Image -- 544

This is the 7th post in a series, for the previous post please click HERE.

The first thing that people ask me when I explain the New Covenant to them is:

“Wait…. does that mean its okay to lie, steal, and commit adultery?”.

I think it’s funny that everyone seems to wonder right off the bat if its okay to commit adultery.  They will usually mix a few others in there for good measure but that seems to be the common denominator.  The answer to that question is no, but I intend to justify this Biblically.

Right now I am going to take a moment to define some of the terms I am using with regards to the Law.  I am not personally comfortable using these words as they are the same terms utilized by SDA.  Understand though that when SDA use these words they define them differently.

Ceremonial:  These are the laws and precepts of the Old Covenant that pointed to Christ, they had a specific function and were fulfilled on the cross.  It should be noted that the term “ceremonial” is not actually found in the Bible.  It is simply a man made word with which one can identify a category of laws seen in the Bible.  One can discern which laws are ceremonial by cross referencing those taught in the old covenant with the new.  If the law IS NOT taught prescriptively in the New Covenant it is a ceremonial law.

Moral:  Moral laws are used to govern society, convict us of sin, and guide us in Christian living.  They have no ceremonial function, they simply teach between right and wrong.  One can discern which laws moral by cross referencing those taught int he old covenant with the new.  If the law IS taught prescriptively in the New Covenant it is a moral law.  Though, as with Ceremonial the Bible does not refer to the Moral law, it can certainly be seen taught as a separate entity from other “ceremonial” laws.  I would argue that the Moral law is what Paul refers to as the “Law of Christ” (Gal 6:2)(1 Cor 9:20-22).

Before we can even establish these distinctions though we have to start from the ground up and prove how we even get there.  It is not enough to just assert such classifications on the law without demonstrating a sound hermenuetic by which one arrives at them.  So before I move on I am going to support the presuppositional thesis I am utilizing.

The Bible doesn’t distinguish between the law of Moses and the Ten Commandments.

It actually refers to both interchangeably, this is key in understanding not only the falsehoods in SDA teaching but in formulating one’s hermenuetic on the law.  The Ten Commandments are so foundational to Christian tradition that it is easy for us laity to get confused.  Tradition is important but it doesn’t trump scripture.  The fact of the matter is, the Ten Commandments received by Moses were a part of a whole at the time of receipt.

I make the case for this HERE.  But the verses that I used to support the fact that the two are referred to interchangeably can be found in the following: (Luke 2:23-24) (1 Chr 16:40) (2 Chr 31:3) (Mrk 7:10) (Matt 15:4).

The Bible includes the Ten Commandments as part of the Old Covenant.

This is another one that is disconcerting to learn as an SDA but is none the less true.  The laws of the Torah were not only a single unit but they were connected and along with the Old Covenant.

“And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments, and he wrote them on two tablets of stone.” Deut 4:13 ESV

“9 There was nothing in the ark except the two tablets of stone that Moses put there at Horeb, where the Lord made a covenant with the people of Israel, when they came out of the land of Egypt…. 21 And there I have provided a place for the ark, in which is the covenant of the Lord that he made with our fathers, when he brought them out of the land of Egypt.” 1 Kings 8:9, 21

“1 Now even the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly place of holiness… 4 having the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s staff that budded, and the tablets of the covenant.” Heb 9:1,4 ESV

A New Covenant was Prophecied

“31 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. 33 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” Jer 31:31-33 ESV

SDA that I share this with will be quick to point out that the Law is written on our hearts in this “New Covenant”.  And they are correct, the verse does say that.  What an SDA will ignore completely is that it also says that the Old Covenant is “not like”  the new.  This would seem to be teaching us that the two covenants, law included as proven above, are not like each other.  To assert that this verse instead says “same as” would be eisegesis.

We are in the New Covenant era today

We know that this isn’t something we have to wait for now, this is because Jesus Christ initiated the New Covenant at the Last Supper.  Most would take this thesis as a no brainer but I intend to prove everything from scripture.

“20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” Luke 22:20 ESV

The New Covenant made the Old Obsolete

“13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.” Heb 8:13 ESV

Here is the kicker, the old covenant, and associated laws are obsolete.  The Bible makes this very clear, lest there be any confusion keep reading after Heb 8:13.  Go all the way into the next chapter.  You will see in Heb 9:1 the writer again clarifies that he is speaking of the old covenant and then in verse 4 he mentions the ten commandments as being a part of the old covenant.  There is no escaping this as an SDA.  In all the time I have spent chatting with SDA, Hebrew Roots, and other Sabbatarians not a single one has even been able to address this.  They all kinda scatter or change the subject when you bring it up.

We still have Law today even though the Old Covenant, which included laws, is obsolete

This is obvious in many verses in the Bible, but the one that I want to focus on is 1 Cor 9:20-22.

“20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.” 1 Cor 9:20-22 ESV

Notice that Paul juxtaposes the “Law” associated with the Jews up and against the “Law of Christ” which he asserts that he is under.  If there were no law he would have instead identified with those without the law, but he did not.  If we were under the Torah he would have identified with those under the Torah.  Instead he says that he becomes all things for the sake of the Gospel.  I take it he is trying to reach everyone, and I praise the Lord that he did.  But in the same breath the Law that he does identify with is the Law of Christ.  If not the Torah, where do we find the law of Christ?  What passage to we turn to so that we can see what is right and wrong?

The Law of Christ is found in the prescriptive teachings of Jesus Christ and the Apostles

As with most things I would emphasize the Pauline writings as they are the most systematic works found in the New Testament.  That being the case Christ is certainly teaching Law in the gospels, especially in Matt 5, 6, and 7.  How do we tell the difference between references to the Torah in the New Testament and the Law of Christ?  Sometimes this is not always easy, you usually have to look at the context.  But one of the nice things is that John is very consistent, when he uses the Greek word “Entole” to refer to the Law it is always in reference to the Law of Christ.  When he uses “Nomos” to refer to the law it is to identify the Torah.  This can be used to juxtapose the teachings regarding either against each other for clarification.

Sadly I do not recall who to credit this breakdown of “Nomos” and “Entole” in the writings of John.  But for the sake of any of my readers I am posting it here.  I found this from a pastor online and added it to my notes.  I wish I could credit him properly.

“ἐντολή (“entole”)– the New Covenant precepts, teachings and instructions of Jesus.

Of the nine occurrences of the noun ἐντολή (“entole”) in John’s Gospel, four refer to a “command” (John 10:18; 12:49–50) or “commands” (John 15:10b) given to Jesus by God the Father (cf. the use of the verb entellomai in 14:31). Five occurrences refer to a “command” (John 13:34; 15:12) or “commands” (John 14:15, 21; 15:10a) given by Jesus to his disciples (cf. the use of the verb in 15:14, 17). One occurrence refers to “orders” given by the Pharisees to inform them of Jesus’ whereabouts (John 11:57). Nowhere in John is “entole” used to refer to the “commandments” of the Hebrew Scriptures. The term commandments in this sense is always called νόμος (“nomos”)

“No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge (“entole”) I have received from my Father.” (John 10:18 ESV)

“Now the chief priests and the Pharisees had given orders (“entole”) that if anyone knew where he was, he should let them know, so that they might arrest him.”(John 11:57 ESV).

“For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment (“entole”) —what to say and what to speak.” (John 12:49 ESV)

“And I know that his commandment (“entole”) is eternal life. What I say, therefore, I say as the Father has told me.” (John 12:50 ESV)

“A new commandment (“entole”) I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another.” (John 13:34 ESV)

“If you love me, you will keep my commandments (“entole”).” (John 14:15 ESV)

“Whoever has my commandments (“entole”) and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.” (John 14:21 ESV)

“If you keep my commandments (“entole”), you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments (“entole”) and abide in his love.” (John 15:10 ESV)

“This is my commandment (“entole”), that you love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command (“entole”) you.” (John 15:12-14 ESV)

“And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments (“entole”). Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments (“entole”) is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected.” (1 John 2:3-5 ESV)

“Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment (“entole”), but an old commandment (“entole”) that you had from the beginning. The old commandment (“entole”) is the word that you have heard. At the same time, it is a new commandment (“entole”) that I am writing to you, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining.” (1 John 2:7-8 ESV)

“Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God; and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments (“entole”) and do what pleases him. And this is his commandment, (“entole”) that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded (“entole”) us. Whoever keeps his commandments (“entole”) abides in God, and God in him. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us.” (1 John 3:21-24 ESV)

“And this commandment (“entole”) we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother.” (1 John 4:21 ESV)

“By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments (“entole”). For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments (“entole”). And his commandments (“entole”) are not burdensome.” (1 John 5:2-3 ESV)

“I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we were commanded (“entole”) by the Father. And now I ask you, dear lady—not as though I were writing you a new commandment (“entole”), but the one we have had from the beginning—that we love one another. And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments (“entole”); this is the commandment (“entole”), just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it.” (2 John 1:4-6 ESV).

“Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments (“entole”) of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.” (Revelation 12:17 ESV)

“Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments (“entole”) of God and their faith in Jesus.” (Revelation 14:12 ESV)”

Νόμους (“nomos”) – the Old Covenant law.

John makes a clear distinction between the two words. For example, “For the law (“nomos”) was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.” (John 1:17 ESV). “Has not Moses given you the law (“nomos”)? Yet none of you keeps the law (“nomos”). Why do you seek to kill me?” (John 7:19 ESV). When John writes of the New Testament laws he uses “entole”. For example, “A new commandment (“entole”) I give you, that you love one another, even as I loved you, that you also love one another” (John 13:34) “A new commandment (“entole”) I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another.” (John 13:34 ESV). So when John says, “commandments” he never means the Ten Commandments, but always means the teachings of Jesus especially faith (John 14:1 & 1 John 3:23a) or love (John 13:34; 14:15; 15:12-17 & 1 John 3:23b). Further John underlines this by writing that we are to obey “his commandments” not just “the commandments” which shows that John was not referring to the Ten Commandments, but to the New Covenant teachings of Jesus, “his commandments”.

John also records for us that we will be judged not by laws written on stone, but by the words of Jesus. “If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.” (John 12:47-48 ESV). Jesus never commanded Christians to keep the Sabbath and for good reason. He is our Sabbath rest. “Come to me all you who are weary and find life burdensome, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon your shoulders and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble of heart. Your souls will find rest, for my yoke is easy and my burden light” (Matthew 11:28-30).

“For the law (“nomos”) was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.” (John 1:17 ESV)

“Philip found Nathanael and said to him, ‘We have found him of whom Moses in the Law (“nomos”) and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.’” (John 1:45 ESV)

“Has not Moses given you the law (“nomos”)? Yet none of you keeps the law (“nomos”). Why do you seek to kill me?” (John 7:19 ESV)

“But this crowd that does not know the law (“nomos”) is accursed.” (John 7:49 ESV)

“Does our law (“nomos”) judge a man without first giving him a hearing and learning what he does?” (John 7:51 ESV)

Now in the Law (“nomos”) Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” (John 8:5 ESV)

“In your Law (“nomos”) it is written that the testimony of two people is true.” (John 8:17 ESV)

“Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law (“nomos”), ‘I said, you are gods’?” (John 10:34 ESV)

“So the crowd answered him, ‘We have heard from the Law (“nomos”) that the Christ remains forever. How can you say that the Son of Man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man?’” (John 12:34 ESV)

“But the word that is written in their Law (“nomos”) must be fulfilled: ‘They hated me without a cause.’” (John 15:25 ESV)

“Pilate said to them, ‘Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law (“nomos”).’ The Jews said to him, ‘It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death.’” (John 18:31 ESV)

“The Jews answered him, ‘We have a law(“nomos”), and according to that law he ought to die because he has made himself the Son of God.’” (John 19:7 ESV)

Neither I John, II John, III John or the Book of Revelation use the term “nomos.”

There is an obvious problem with what I have argued so far, and that is the implications one can take with it.  Here is the thing, if the Law of Christ is a brand new set of laws hot off the shelf then that would imply that Christ fulfilled one law and gave us another.

While the New Covenant is different than the Old, the fact that cannot be ignored is that the laws that come associated with the New Covenant can also be found in the laws associated with the Old Covenant.  Nine of the ten Commandments are actually an excellent example of this.

I.  Acts 14:15 and I Corinthians 8:5, 6   

II.  I Corinthians 10:7, 14 & I John 5:21   

III.  Colossians 3:8

IV.  None

V.  Ephesians 6:2; Colossians 3:20  

VI.  Romans 13:9  ; I Peter 4:15   

VII.  Romans 7:2 ; I Corinthians 6:9   

VIII.  Romans 13:9 ; Ephesians 4:28   

IX.  Ephesians 4:25 ; Colossians 3:9  

X.  Romans 13:9 ; Hebrews 13:5     

So how do we pull everything together so that this makes sense?  Were there two sets of laws or just one?

The answer I believe, is that there has only ever been one set of Moral Laws.  They have always been the Law of Christ.  God simply issued them to us through an intermediary (Gal 3:19) along with Ceremonial Laws which pointed to Gospel.

In the Torah you have Law and Gospel in the make up of its 613 Laws.  The gospel can be glimpsed at in types and shadows of animal sacrifices, Sabbath days, and other various laws that set apart the Nation of Israel as the people that would bring the Messiah to the world in their very lineage.

So in truth, we have the Torah even now.  Yet the ceremonial functions are received in the person of Christ.  Where as the Moral Law of Christ serves the same functions that it always has.  Most notably, among other Biblical uses it stops the mouth of sinners to bring them to repentance.

“19 Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.” Romans 3:19 ESV

A Seventh-Day Adventist will usually assert that all of the Ten Commandments found as listed in Exodus 20 are the Moral Law of Christ.  The problem with this is that if you subject the Ten Commandments to the same Moral vs Ceremonial test that you do all other laws found in the Torah you find this is not the case.  Instead you find that 9 of the 10 Commandments are re-taught prescriptively by the Apostles after the Cross.

Moral vs Ceremonial

Examine the diagram above carefully.  First notice that the Sabbath Day commandment is not found in the new testament.  Some might reference places where the Sabbath is mentioned in conversation or in a descriptive fashion but it is never taught prescriptively.  All of the other commandments of the Decalogue are taught prescriptively in the New Covenant.

Notice that some laws are taught prescriptively in the New Covenant, like those on sexual immorality, but the punishments that go along with them are not.  I would advise you to do a read through of the Torah.  You will find that the laws that are Ceremonial by this definition either set apart Israel from other nations or clearly pointed to Christ.  An obvious example is the animal sacrificial system that was a type and shadow of its anti-type fulfillment, the one time sacrifice of Christ our true Passover Lamb.

All Sabbaths were ceremonial and pointed to Christ as well, not just the weekly Sabbath.  For a full breakdown walk through focused on the Sabbath please click HERE.

All Moral Laws are defined in the Bible by Christ:

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

In this next verse we can see that Paul actually defines the moral law more specifically.  Paul chimes in on the same theme and calls it the “Law of Christ”.

“Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” Gal 6:2 ESV

The point that cannot be made clear enough though is that the Sabbath day is simply a ceremonial law, it is not binding to New Covenant Christians.  I realize Christian tradition on the Ten Commandments, especially in American Evangelical Christianity, makes it really hard to accept that one of the ten is obsolete.  This is why it is important to rely on the word over and above the traditions of men (Mark 7:7).

If you are new to these theological concepts and would like a good pure teaching on what the Ten Commandments mean to a new covenant Christian I recommend reading Martin Luther’s Small Catechism.  They are cheap on amazon, but if you want to simply read it online you can find it free HERE.  Keep in mind, he uses a different numbering of the 10 Commandments than you might be used to.  The principals however are the same.

Posted in Leaving Adventism | Tagged , | 30 Comments

Ellen G White – Refuted

Posted on November 12, 2014 by ACTheologian

Ellen-G_-White-pic

Below is the first post that I put together on Ellen White.  It is more of an overview of the reasons I rejected her as a false prophet when I was coming out of Adventism.  For the benefit of others I will keep it as is.  Since then I have compiled more comprehensive studies HERE.

I was never an avid EGW reader while I was SDA.  I knew a few handy EGW quotes and was familiar with the Church apologetics surrounding her.  If someone around me ever accused EGW of being a false prophet I usually knew what to say to stick up for her.

There are a range of SDA beliefs on Ellen G White. Some believe that she was a prophet in every sense that Isaiah or Jeremiah were and that every word she ever wrote was inspired by God.  Others will say that they believe her books were inspired but nothing else.  While still others only believe some of her writings were inspired but wont identify which.  Lastly, there are a few Adventists who don’t believe she is anything more than an author in a troubling time, that said they will not call her a false prophet.  I have met no current SDA who is willing to use those words on her.

The Bible says that we are to test prophets and prophecy.  The most objective means that we have to test a prophet is what the Bible has given us here:

 “And you may say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?” When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.” Deut 18:21-22 ESV

I think that this should be the verse that we use to test a prophet, its fair and objective. However, there are some that will assert that “when EGW was correct she was inspired and when she was incorrect it was just her own opinion”.  That is a fascinating assertion in and of itself and never one that I held, but lets look at what EGW said about her own inspiration so that we have a baseline.

“I wrote many pages to be read at your camp meeting. Weak and trembling, I arose at three o’clock in the morning to write you. God was speaking through clay. You might say that this communication was only a letter. Yes, It was a letter, but prompted by the Spirit of God, to bring before your minds things that had been shown me. In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper, expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision-the precious rays of light shining from the throne.” (EGW, Selected Messages, bk. l, p. 27.)

It is therefore clear from her own pen that she taught all of her writings to be inspired. Logically that means I can test anything that she wrote down. This is a really big deal, as I remember many SDA would usually defend her by stating only the books were inspired but not her letters, this is because it is well known even in SDA that she contradicts herself many times in her letters.

That said, there are many failed prophecies that she wrote and many false teachings, however I am simply going to focus on the ones that convinced me personally that she was a false prophet.

She Prophesied that Old Jerusalem would never be built up

“I was pointed to some who are in the great error of believing that it is their duty to go to Old Jerusalem, and think they have a work to do there before the Lord comes. . . . I saw that Satan had greatly deceived some in this thing. . . . I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would bebuilt up; and that Satan was doing his utmost to lead the minds of the children of the Lord into these things now, in the gathering time.” Early Writings, p. 75

Here is a picture of modern Jerusalem today in case you were not aware that it has been rebuilt:

Jerusalem-Temple-Mount

She Prophesied that the Door to Salvation and grace had been shut in 1844

For those of you who have never heard about the “Shut Door” vision please allow me to explain. It was the belief of the Millerites that Jesus Christ would return to Earth in 1844.  When this didn’t happen Ellen White had a vision where she was told that though the Second Coming had not transpired, the Door to Mercy and grace had been shut in 1844.  She was also told that the Second Coming would quickly follow.  However, as the years passed this vision became a point of embarrassment.    Ellen White even started flat out denying that she ever had such a vision and accused people of misquoting her.  When you read SDA apologetics those are the letters they will quote.

Below is a quote of a letter that she wrote in 1845, before the belief was unpopular, where EGW is clear about her position on the issue:

“At the time I had the vision of the midnight cry I had given it up in the past and thought it future, as also most of the band had. . . . After I had the vision and God gave me light, he bade me deliver it to the band, but I shrank from it. I was young, and I thought they would not receive it from me. . . . The view about the Bridegroom’s coming I had about the middle of February, 1845, while in Exeter, Maine, in meeting with Israel Dammon, James, and many others. Many of them did not believe in a shut door. I suffered much at the commencement of the meeting. Unbelief seemed to be on every hand. . . . The Lord worked in mighty power, setting the truth home to their hearts. . . . Most of them received the vision, and were settled upon the shut door. Letter B-3, 1847: Letter to Joseph Bates, July 13, 1847, White Estate.

The above prophecy is especially troubling because if true that would imply that all Christians today cannot be saved because the door to mercy and grace has been shut for ~160 years.

If you want to read more about the shut door prophecy please click HERE. There you will find copies of the original letters in her handwriting.  They can also explain more about this sorted issue if you desire to conduct further research on your own.

Disregarding the glaring Galatians 1:8 violation for just a brief moment, what we have here is a clear failed prophecy, there is no way to save this one. It wasn’t provisional at all, and it’s most telling that SDA apologists prefer to ignore it altogether.

Teachings on Geology and Volcanoes

“At this time immense forests were buried. These have since been changed to coal, forming the extensive coal beds that now exist, and also yielding large quantities of oil. The coal and oil frequently ignite and burn beneath the surface of the earth. Thus rocks are heated, limestone is burned, and iron ore melted. The action of the water upon the lime adds fury to the intense heat, and causes earthquakes, volcanoes, and fiery issues. As the fire and water come in contact with ledges of rock and ore, there are heavy explosions underground, which sound like muffled thunder. The air is hot and suffocating. Volcanic eruptions follow; and these often failing to give sufficient vent to the heated elements, the earth itself is convulsed, the ground heaves and swells like the waves of the sea, great fissures appear, and sometimes cities, villages, and burning mountains are swallowed up.” Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 108-109

I am not a geologist, my entire education on such matters derives completely from a class I took in high school back in 2002.  But I seem to recall that volcanoes are due Lava rising to the surface of the Earth.  Ellen seems to think that the Lava is caused by coal mixing with oil and causing “fiery issues”.  Take this in conjunction with the fact that Ellen declared all of her writings to be inspired rays of light from the throne and you can see that SDA have a sticky situation here.

Amalgamation of Man and Beast

“But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere.” Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 64.

“Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood, there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men.” Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 4, p. 75.

When I mention the above to SDA today they generally are all over the map on what they think Ellen White meant by amalgamation of man and beast.  The problem is, SDA in her day interpreted this as the origination non-white races.  There is record of this in writing, Uriah Smith even attributed the amalgamation as explaining the existence of primitive races discovered in his day.  The fact is, Ellen White never corrected that racist interpretation of her words.  You be the judge.

Invasion of England

In 1862 she predicted that England would declare war on the North during the civil war:

“when England does declare war, all nations will have an interest of their own to serve, and there will be general war, general confusion.” The result will be that “this nation [the United States] will . . . be humbled into the dust.” Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 259

This simply never happened.  SDA I have brought this up with will tell me that I need to replace the word “when” with “if” at the beginning of the above passage.  That is seriously their argument, the problem is that Ellen White didn’t use the word “if”, she used the word “when”.  I simply refuse to read otherwise, a prophets prediction fails or succeeds on its on merits.

Partial Atonement

Ellen White says

“It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom thesins of the truly penitent will finally be placed.” The Great Controversy, p. 422.

“As the priest, in removing the sins from the sanctuary, confessed them upon the head of the scapegoat, so Christ will place all these sins uponSatan, the originator and instigator of sin.” TheGreat Controversy, p. 485.

“Their sins are transferred to the originator of sin.” Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, p. 475.

The Bible Says

 

. . . and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed 1 Peter 2:24 ESV

The next day he saw Jesus coming to him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” John 1:29 ESV

The Seal of God

Ellen White Says

“The sign, or seal, of God is revealed in the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath, the Lord’s memorial of creation.” Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 8, p. 117.

“Too late they see that the Sabbath of the fourth commandment is the seal of the living God.” TheGreat Controversy, p. 640.

“The seal of the living God is placed upon those who conscientiously keep the Sabbath of the Lord.” 7A Bible Commentary, p. 980.

 

The Bible Says

“In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation –having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise.” Eph 1:13 ESV

“Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” Eph 4:30 ESV

“Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge.” 2 Cor 1:21-22 ESV

The Deity of Christ

Below Ellen White teaches that Jesus Christ was a created being, made by the Father.

“The Eternal Father, the unchangeable one, gave his only begotten Son, tore from his bosom Him who was made in the express image of his person, and sent him down to earth to reveal how greatly he loved mankind.” EGW, Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, 07-09-1895, “The Duty of the Minister and the People,” Par. 14.

In addition to that Ellen White taught that Jesus Christ was exalted to equality with the Father at some time after the creation of angels but before the creation of the world.

“The exaltation of the Son of God as equal with the Father was represented as an injustice to Lucifer, who, it was claimed, was also entitled to reverence and honor.” EGW, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 37

She even goes so far as to speak of a meeting in which Christ was exalted in his pre-incarnate state with angels present as witnesses.  For a full breakdown of this heresy in context please click HERE.

Plagiarisms

What bothers me with this is less the issue of plagiarism and more the issue of credibility.  Many times she would say “I was shown….” and then quote a author of her day.  The implication being that an angel had shown her something either in vision or plenary inspiration.  To me that is unacceptable, we don’t see Paul credit his quotes of the Septuagint to an angelic dictation.   I can only assume that she believed she could get away with lying about being a prophet.

“Parents are also under obligation to teach and oblige their children to conform to physical law for their own sakes. . . . How strange and unaccountable that mothers should love their children so tenderly as to indulge them in what they have occasion to know may injure their constitutions and impair their happiness for life. May many children be delivered from such mothers, and from such cruel kindness! . . . The managers and teachers of schools . . .” Philosophy of Health: Natural Principles of Health and Cure, by L. B. Coles (Boston: William D. Ticknor & Company. 1849, 1851, 1853, pp. 144-145):

“I was shown that one great cause of the existing deplorable state of things is that parents do not feel under obligation to bring up their children to conform to physical law. Mothers love their children with an idolatrous love and indulge their appetite when they know that it will injure their health and thereby bring upon them disease and unhappiness. . . . They have sinned against Heaven and against their children, and God will hold them accountable. . . . The managers and teachers of schools . . . Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 3, p. 141, 1872.

Ellen Whites Eats Oysters after the health message

Keep in mind the health message was alleged to have been received by vision in the year 1863.  To keep things fair evidence of her eating meat before that date would be off limits, but I have no problem pointing out contradictions of her doing so after 1863.

“Mary, if you can get me agood box of herrings, fresh ones, please do so. These last ones that Willie got are bitter and old. If you can buy cans, say, half a dozen cans, of good tomatoes, please do so. We shall need them. If you can get a few cans of good oysters, get them.” —Letter 16, 1882

“I do not preach one thing and practice another. I do not present to my hearers rules of life for them to follow while I make an exception in my own case….” —Selected Messages Book 2, p. 302. Letter 12, 1888.

This rabbit hole of Ellen White and meat eating actually goes a fair bit deeper, if you want more information please click HERE.

Ellen Whites Warning

One final note from Ellen G White, after this I only ask that you make up your own mind about where her visions came from.

“God is either teaching His church, reproving their wrongs and strengthening their faith, or He is not. This work is of God, or it is not. God does nothing in partnership with Satan. My work . . . bears the stamp of God or the stamp of the enemy. There is no half-way work in the matter. The testimonies are of the Spirit of God or of the Devil.” Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 4, p. 230.

“If the testimonies speak not according to this word of God, reject them. Christ and Belial cannot be united.” Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, p. 691.

Posted in Ellen White, Leaving Adventism | Tagged , , | 26 Comments

“Changing the Sabbath”

Posted on November 10, 2014 by ACTheologian

jesus-christ-pics-1110

This is the 6th post in a series, for the previous post please click HERE.

One of the things that SDA teach is that all early Christians kept the Sabbath.  I was taught that the Seventh-Day Sabbath was kept by all Christians until the Pope made Constantine officially change the Sabbath.  Ellen White even plainly asserts that it was the Pope who “changed the the sabbath”.

“But the Pope had changed it [Sabbath] from the seventh to the first day of the week; for he was to change times and laws.” – Ellen White, 1847, A Word to the Little Flock

The arguments that SDA offer to back this up are the following:

  • SDA assert that all early Christians kept the Sabbath.
  • SDA will quote the Sunday law that Constantine made shortly after the council of Nicea.
  • SDA will usually show you a letter that the Roman Catholic church put out owning up to being the ones who changed the Sabbath.
  • SDA will teach you about the Waldenses who kept the Sabbath well into the reformation when they were all wiped out by the Pope.

The last point there always convicted me more than the others.  The reason that the Waldenses mattered to me so much for my beliefs on the historic Sabbath truth was a point of logic.  Since I learned from the “Keepers of the Flame” series growing up that they were an untouched remnant of the early Christian faith, then the fact that they were also Sabbath keepers must mean that we all should be.

After learning what the Bible really said as demonstrated in my previous posts, I still wanted to conduct some more research.  Because if the above bullets are actually true as the SDA teach then that would have seemed conflicting to me, so I had to explore it.

Did early Christians really keep the Sabbath?

The answer to this one is yes and no.  There were early Church Fathers who did keep the Saturday Sabbath.  They were however in the minority, and historians report that Sabbath keeping among Christians died out completely as early as 70 – 120 AD.  For those who don’t know, Constantine’s law and the council of Nicea didn’t happen until after 325 AD.  That means that one cannot assert that Constantine “changed the Sabbath” as his laws post date the end of Sabbath keeping altogether.

Below are some Quotes from Early Church fathers to help establish my above points, there are many more such references in our history if you want to find them:

The Epistle of Barnabas, 70-120 AD: Wherefore we Christians keep the eighth day for joy, on which also Jesus arose from the dead and when he appeared ascended into heaven. – The Epistle of Barnabas, section 15, 100 AD, Ante-Nicene Fathers , vol. 1, pg. 147

Justin Martyr, 150 AD: But Sunday is the day on which we hold our common assembly, because it is the first day of the week and Jesus our saviour on the same day rose from the dead. – First apology of Justin, Ch 68

Ignatius of Antioch, 107 AD: let every friend of Christ keep the Lord’s Day as a festival, the resurrection-day, the queen and chief of all the days of the week. – Epistle to the Magnesians, chp 9. Ante-Nicene Fathers , vol. 1, pg. 62-63.

which of course proves that John was not referring to Saturday when he said the following:

“I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet” Rev 1:10 ESV

Did the Waldenses keep the Sabbath?

The answer to this one is a flat out no.  The assertion that they did is simply a lie, and I don’t have a problem saying that as it turns out that SDA’s have been corrected on this many times but don’t seem to care.

The truth of the Waldenses is actually better than fiction and I recommend anyone to look into it.  Yes they were persecuted for their faith.  They were not however wiped out and you can even visit them today if you want to.

For a website dedicated to their history please click HERE.

For a letter written by an actual living Waldensian stating that they never kept the “Sabbath truth” please click HERE.

Did the Pope Change the Sabbath?

Based simply on the fact that the supremacy of Rome, and the office of the Pope did not come about until many years after Constantine was dead should put this one to rest.  However, the SDA do have that letter from the Roman Catholics confidently asserting that they did in fact change the Sabbath and that they have the authority to do things like this as often as they like.

Please don’t forget though that Roman Catholics also teach that Peter was the first Pope, so anything he did they actually claim credit for.  The Roman Catholic doctrine of apostolic succession is a key component to their belief that they changed the Sabbath because anything the apostles did, the Roman Catholic church did.  It is not intellectually honest for SDA to deny apostolic succession and then by the same token embrace the teachings that follow from it to bolster an unrelated point.

If you want more reading on this I recommend:

The Lord’s Day From Neither Catholics nor Pagans an Answer to Seventh-Day Adventism by D.M. Canright

He was an early SDA preacher who actually knew EGW personally. His book is only a buck on kindle and well worth the read.

To be clear, I don’t believe that anyone changed the Sabbath.  It was simply fulfilled on the cross, a careful exegesis of Hebrews chapters 1-4 teaches that Jesus Christ is our Sabbath rest now.

Posted in Leaving Adventism, New Covenant | Tagged , | 18 Comments

The Seal of God

Posted on November 9, 2014 by ACTheologian

wyl_lmg_128876_large

 

This is the 5th post in a series, for the previous entry please click HERE.

As a Seventh-Day Adventist I was taught that the Seal of God in the last days was keeping the Sabbath.  If you don’t keep the Sabbath after what they call “probation” you lose your salvation. This is ultimately a false gospel, Paul has condemned such heresy as “anathema” in (Gal 1:8).

Essentially the false gospel works like this, if you learn the SDA “truth” and turn away from it you are lost from grace no matter what, this would be an individual close of probation where you receive the mark of the beast.  According to SDA teachings this applies to me now.  The other close of probation is general according to SDA teaching.  It occurs at a time unknown in the future and will apply to all those who submit to the “National Sunday Law”, which is supposed to be a law that the Pope and POTUS will enforce on either the whole world or just the United States.  The reason this is a false gospel is that it is different than the one once and for all delivered to the saints by the apostles (Jude 1:3).  Paul explains the real gospel in (1 Cor 15:1-8)(Eph 2:8-9).

Whether they say it directly or not SDA teach that ultimately your salvation is dependent on Sabbath keeping.  They might try to couch it in such terms that indicate that only those who truly have been saved will keep the sabbath, but even by flipping it the requirement ends up the same as to prove one has been saved they must then keep the sabbath.  There is no functional difference in their teaching.  It gets even more sticky than that though because there are so many different ideas about what keeping the Sabbath means.  There is no way to know for sure if you are doing it right.  Then all of a sudden something new gets invented and the elders have to come together and decide if its okay to use that new gadget on the Sabbath.

For example, when I was a kid people would argue at length as to whether or not you could record your favorite Saturday shows with the VCR.  Some said it was fine because you can watch the show on Sunday.  Others say no, recording a show with the VCR is the same thing as requiring your Maidservant or Manservant to work for you.

Even though SDA teachings have damned me to the mark of the beast I have no fear.  I am a baptized forgiven child of God.  The Bible teaches a concept called means of Grace.  The Seventh Day Sabbath is not a means of grace, it is simply old covenant law. The Bible teaches that God gives us the Faith unto his justifying Grace:

faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. Rom 10:17 KJV

Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;   And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 1 Cor 15:3-4 KJV

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:   Not of works, lest any man should boast. Eph 2:8-9 KJV

As this miracle of Faith and Grace transpire God seals us, not with a law but with himself.  God the Holy Spirit of promise is our seal.

In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,   Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory. Eph 1:13-14 KJV

 

Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts. 2 Cor 1:21-22 KJV

 

And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. Eph 4:30 KJV

For those of you who are familiar with these scriptures and did not grow up in an SDA church the above may sound like a no-brainer.  But I cannot convey how much of a joy it was to me personally to learn that I am sealed by the Holy Ghost, not by the Sabbath.  I love God the Holy Spirit, he is wonderful.  He guides me and speaks to me through my Bible everyday.  I cant tell you what a relief it is to rest in his truth.

Since the above verses prove that the Holy Ghost is the Seal of God, it therefore follows logic that whatever the Mark of the Beast is it wont be Sunday Christian Church Services.

Posted in Leaving Adventism, New Covenant | Tagged | 11 Comments

“Carved in Letters on Stone”

Posted on November 9, 2014 by ACTheologian

a_Mse765

This is the 4th post in a series, for the previous post please click HERE.

When I was SDA Matthew 5 was my prooftext in the New Testament.  If I have such a prooftext now that teaches the end of the Old Covenant and the beginning of the New it is 2 Corinthians Chapter 3.  This passage is very plain and self explanatory which is how a good proof-text should be.  My only advice is to read it carefully as Paul covers a lot of material in just 10 verses or so.

I am going to break this down verse by verse and then provide my analysis at the end.  If you want to read the passage through yourself before continuing please click HERE.

“Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God, who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant,…

A few good cross references for this passage are (Luke 22:20) (Heb 8:13) and (2 Cor 5:21).  Notice that the New Covenant begins at the Last Supper, and in doing so makes the Old Covenant obsolete.  Also the importance of sufficiency being from God cannot be ignored.  Read in conjunction with the passage in chapter 5 we are shown from the Word of God that it is Christ’s righteousness that is our sufficiency.

…not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life…

Notice above that two things are being juxtaposed against each other in this verse.  Clearly they are not the same thing.  In this passage:

one is the letter one is the spirit

one kills the other gives life

Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end,

Above this juxtaposition continues and with it we see that the letter/ ministry of death is:

carved on letters of stone

was being brought to an end

Also notice that the word “was” is being used in the past tense.  So by the time that Paul is writing this we see that it has been fulfilled.

will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory?  For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory.

Again, we see the same juxtapositional motif of two things.  The letters of stone is not only stated to have less glory, but the glory which it once has has been laid to rest and surpassed as its glory is relegated to the past tense in the word”was”.  Not only is it rendered obsolete, but the new ministry of the Spirit is said to far exceed it in glory anyways.

Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.

Above it is pointed out that the lesser glory which contained the tablets of stone are brought to an end!  Logically, if one is to refer to law in a new covenant sense that would mean Exodus 20 is the last place we are to look.  It is not only referred to as less glorious, but it was brought to an end!

    Since we have such a hope, we are very bold,  not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face so that the Israelites might not gaze at the outcome of what was being brought to an end.  But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away.” 2 Cor 3:5-14 ESV

And here lies the curse given in the text.  Every year the Jews would read the Torah aloud to everyone.  Here it is saying that if one seeks to remain in this Torah the veil remains over their heart.  Is this not evident among us today with those who seek to live under the Old Covenant?

SDA theology is predicated on the Ten Commandments being the immutable law of God.  I am not arguing for antinomianism.  I would also agree that the law of God is immutable.  But clearly their assertion that it is found in the Old Covenant Ten Commandments is false.  Instead we should turn to the New Covenant to find the Law.

If this is the first time you have come across this concept and you want to learn more I recommend that you skip ahead to a blog post I put together after this particular one was first published.  It is called the Law of Christ.  In that post I put together a simple yet comprehensive Biblical analysis outlining the “Law of Christ.  It is how we know today that murder is still wrong, but other laws such as animal sacrifices and Sabbaths are obsolete.  If you have always wanted a straight forward answer to that please click HERE.

 

Posted in Leaving Adventism, New Covenant | Tagged , | 4 Comments

Matthew Chaper 5

Posted on November 8, 2014 by ACTheologian

The-Sermon-on-the-Mount

This is the 3rd post in a series, for the previous post please click HERE.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but     to fulfill them.   For truly, I say to you,  until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes  one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least  in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great  in the kingdom of heaven.    For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds  that of the scribes and Pharisees, you  will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” Matt 5:17-20 ESV

This is a very popular proof text for SDA, Specifically:

  • “not an iota, not a dot” ESV
  • “ one jot or one tittle” KJV
  • “Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven”

It is important to note here that commandments does not mean the Ten Commandments like the SDA teach. They want you to read that into the text. It does beg the question as to which commandments though, fortunately this is made clear with other scripture.  Do however notice that this is said right after the Beatitudes and right before Jesus Christ starts issuing Commandments all throughout Matt 5, 6, and 7.

Here are a few things to point out:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets”

  • The Greek word here for Law is “Nomon”
  • This is most consistently used throughout the Bible in reference to the Old Covenant Torah.

“And when the time came for their purification according to the Law [Nomon] of Moses, they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord” Luk 2:22 ESV

“Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven”

  • The Greek word here for Commandments is “Entolon”
  • This is most consistently used throughout the Bible in reference to the teachings of Jesus. In Matt 5 this would logically be referring to the Beatitudes.

“For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments [Entolon] of God.” 1 Cor 7:19 ESV

 

I think that it is illogical to assert as SDA do that when Jesus Christ used two different words in the same breath here, he was referring to the same exact thing both times. Based on the greater context of scripture is its much more logical to assert that he used two different words to refer to two different things.

So to say this plainly, I believe that Jesus Christ was speaking to the Old Covenant when he said “Nomon” or “Law” and that he was speaking to the New Covenant when he said “Commandments” or “Entolon”.

What does it mean then to fulfill the Law and the Prophets (Torah)?

  • “I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” ESV
  • “I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” KJV
  • “Law until all is accomplished” ESV
  • “pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” KJV

A plain reading reveals that Jesus is referring to a point in which the Law will be fulfilled/Accomplished.

Common definitions of Fulfilled per Dictionary.com:

  • “to carry out, or bring to realization, as a prophecy or promise.”
  • to satisfy (requirements, obligations, etc.): a book that fulfills a long-felt need.
  • to bring to an end; finish or complete, as a period of time: He felt that life was over when one had fulfilled his threescore years and ten.

 

Samuel Fisk Analyzes Matt 5:17-20 ESV in Dialogue with a Seventh-Day Adventist Pages 7&8 as follows:

“Jesus did not come to destroy any law, not even the ceremonials, but he fulfilled them. “Fulfill” means to complete, accomplish the purpose of; as we find in Luke 24:44, He said “all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me.” Now we know that refers to things to be completed.  The word in this Luke text is the same word in the original as “fulfilled” in Matthew 5.  And in Acts 19:21 the same word is translated “ended;” while in Acts 7:30 it is translated “expired” (“when the forty years were expired’)!  All that shows the word surely means brought to the place where it fully served its purpose.  In Matthew this word occurs 17 times, and 13 times it has to do with prophecy being fulfilled,  which could not mean being continued.”

How did Jesus Fulfill the Law and the Prophets?

“by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.” Col 2:14 ESV

“by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,” Eph 2:15 ESV

“He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.” 1 Pet 2:24 ESV

“When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, “It is finished,” and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” Jhn 19:30 ESV

When I read all the related text, I see that to claim we are still under the Old Covenant would be to diminish the finished work of Christ on the cross.

If you want more material on Matt 5 I recommend these two sources

Click HERE for an audio sermon on the 10 Commandments by Pastor Mark Martin, a former SDA Pastor.

Further reading on this can be done in Sabbath in Christ by Dale Ratzlaff, please click HERE for more information.  I highly recommend this book if you want to dig your teeth into the sabbath from an ex-adventist theological perspective.

A copy of Dialogue with a Seventh-Day Adventist by Samuel Fisk can be downloaded HERE.

Posted in Leaving Adventism | Tagged | 13 Comments

“Sabbaths, New Moons, and Appointed Feasts….”

Posted on November 7, 2014 by ACTheologian

sabbath-day

This is the 2nd post in a series, for the previous post please click HERE

“Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.  These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.” Col 2:16-17 ESV

I was taught as SDA that the above verse was not speaking about the weekly Sabbath at all but only the “Ceremonial Sabbaths” such as the Passover.  I accepted this as a child, however these days I have a hard time believing that 1st century Christians reading this passage for the first time could have arrived at such a notion naturally.  Just think about it for a second, does it seem logical at all that the first time this was read aloud there would have been Christians nudging each other to say “Psssst…. Paul is really only speaking about the non-weekly Sabbaths he just forgot to put it that way…”.

That is my take on it now, however by rightly dividing the word of God we can discern whether or not Paul includes the weekly Sabbath in the above verse.

However, since I am only an “Armchair Theologian” I am going to quote an expert.   Pastor Greg Taylor puts it like this in his book “Discovering the New Covenant” on Page 68 and 69:

“It is crystal clear in these verses that Paul is specifically addressing the New Covenant interpretation of the Old Covenant Jewish Laws. No other religion emphasized circumcision, food laws, and Sabbaths.  There can be no confusion as to what Paul is addressing here. Paul is telling the Colossians not to let these people, who were trying to push their Jewish religious views and customs on the Gentile believers, lay a guilt trip on them about the food laws, the festivals new moons, or the Sabbaths.   Because these were a part of the system that prefigured, or pointed to Christ.  “They were a shadow of things to come”…..

“Throughout the Old Testament this same Construction is used [‘festival or a new moon or a Sabbath’] . Paul was simply reiterating a formula that was used repeatedly to refer to the entire old system, including the seventh-day Sabbath.  This same construction is found in ascending or descending order repeatedly throughout the Old Testament.  There can be no mistake what he meant.  The “Sabbaths” in this common Old Testament construction always refer to the weekly Sabbath.  To try to make this Colossians passages refer to the ceremonial festival Sabbaths ignores this construction.”

“Behold, I am about to build a house for the name of the Lord my God and dedicate it to him for the burning of incense of sweet spices before him, and for the regular arrangement of the showbread, and for burnt offerings morning and evening, on the Sabbaths and the new moons and the appointed feasts of the  Lord  our God, as ordained forever for Israel.” 2 Ch 2:4 ESV

“And they were to stand every morning, thanking and praising the Lord, and likewise at evening, and whenever burnt offerings were offered to the  Lord  on Sabbaths, new moons, and feast days, according to the number required of them, regularly before the  Lord.” 1 Ch 23:30-31 ESV

“We also take on ourselves the obligation to give yearly a third part of a shekel for the service of the house of our God: for the showbread, the regular grain offering, the regular burnt offering, the Sabbaths, the new moons, the appointed feasts, the holy things, and the sin offerings to make atonement for Israel, and for all the work of the house of our God” Neh 10:32-33 ESV

“And I will put an end to all her mirth, her feasts, her new moons, her Sabbaths, and all her appointed feasts.    And I will lay waste her vines and her fig trees,  of which she said, ‘These are my wages, which my lovers have given me.’ I will make them a forest,  and the beasts of the field shall devour them.” Hos 2:11-12 ESV

Above you can see that scripture has interpreted scripture.  Col 2:16-17 must certainly include the weekly Sabbath.  To infer otherwise is eisegesis (reading into the text one’s pre-conceived notions).

So how are these Sabbaths, New moons, and Appointed feasts a “shadow of things to come”?  Understanding that the Sabbath was a shadow and now “obsolete” may be theologically correct but it isn’t enough to stop there.  Instead, we should find out what was meant by that shadow and let the Bible come alive.    I cannot explain this better than Dale Ratzlaff does in his Book Sabbath in Christ Page 72:

“Each of the Sabbaths pointed them forward with hope to the next sabbatical event.  The seventh-day Sabbath was a weekly reminder of the coming seasonal Sabbaths.  The seasonal Sabbaths were a reminder of the coming sabbatical year.  The sabbatical year was a reminder of the coming Jubilee.  This kept of alive.”

To me this understanding shows how the whole Sabbath system pointed to Jesus Christ, who is our Sabbath rest now.  I cannot tell you what a blessing it was for me to rely on Christ alone for my salvation.  Keeping the Sabbath was always my “get of the end times alive” insurance card.  I saw myself as extra saved, although I would have never worded it that way.

Could I be wrong about how Adventists view the Sabbath?  Do they really teach that we must keep the Sabbath to be saved?  I’ll let you make that call yourself after you read a quote from the “Clear Word for Kids Translation” put out by the SDA Church.

Col. 2:16-17, Easy English and Clear Word for Kids: “Don’t let anyone tell you that you have to go through certain rituals, eat certain foods, keep certain feasts, or observe extra Sabbaths to be saved…..”

Forgive me but this clearly seems to be implying that one must keep the old covenant Saturday Sabbath to be saved, and is directed squarely at the children.  I actually had a clear word when I was growing up.  If you want to learn more about the Clear Word please click HERE.

 

Posted in Leaving Adventism, New Covenant | Tagged , | 18 Comments

Old Covenant Prophecied to End

Posted on November 6, 2014 by ACTheologian

creatoin-of-man

This is the 5th post in a series titled “Leaving Adventism”.  For the previous post please click HERE.

In the book of Jeremiah we find an interesting passage where it is prophesied that:

  • A new covenant would be made
  • It would not be like the old covenant
  • That the old covenant was broken

In the future I intend to blog on what it means for the old covenant to have been broken, to do this I will have to post scripture on covenant theology.   But for now just accept the text on its own for what it is saying.

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord , when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the  Lord .  For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord : I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.  And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord ,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the  Lord . For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” Jer 31:31-34 ESV

 

Notice the words “not like” in the above passage.  There are some SDA I have spoken with that will say that the law written on our hearts is the ten commandments.  But this isn’t stated in the text at all.  Besides that, why would we assume that “not like” means “same as”.  We should be expecting a very different Covenant.  Which is what Jesus did.

 

“And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” Luke 22:20 ESV

 

In Hebrews we see the author actually quotes the Jeremiah 31 prophecy.  And then  declares it fulfilled with the new covenant.

 

“For he finds fault with them when he says: “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts ,and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord, ’for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.” In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.Heb 8:8-13 ESV

 

Remember that I said SDA teach the law written on our hearts is the Ten Commandments?  Well we will find just a few verses later in the above passage that this is impossible.

 

“Now even the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly place of holiness.  For a tent was prepared, the first section, in which were the lampstand and the table and the bread of the Presence. It is called the Holy Place. ; Behind the second curtain was a second section called the Most Holy Place, ; having the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s staff that budded, and the tablets of the covenant.” Heb 9:1-4 ESV

There really is no escaping this, since verse 4 above plainly identifies the ten commandments as part of the old Covenant, we know they are obsolete too!

There really is just no getting around the word “obsolete”.  The ramifications of this on Adventist doctrine cannot be ignored.  Among many conclusions we are certain of the following:

  • With the Sabbath only being taught prescriptively in the old covenant and never in the New, this means that the 7th day Sabbath is now obsolete.
  • Which of course means the Sabbath cannot be the Seal of God in Revelation.
  • It therefore follows logically that going to church on Sunday cannot be the mark of the beast either.
  • Also, it is perfectly legal to eat pork, lobster, and shrimp.  You can even drink coffee in public if you want.  None of these things are forbidden in the New Covenant.
Posted in Leaving Adventism, New Covenant | Tagged | 7 Comments

Penalty of the Law

Posted on November 4, 2014 by ACTheologian

Cast-first-stone

This is the forth post in a series, for the previous post please click HERE.

At this point I feel confident in asserting Biblically that there was no separation between the Mosaic Law and the Ten Commandments. They are all one and the same. If the Ten Commandments as a whole unit given by Moses stand today then the whole law of Moses stands right along with it.  This means that if the law was not fulfilled on the cross we are biblically bound to put to death anyone for not observing the Sabbath correctly.

He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses Heb 10:28 KJV

“Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.” Exo 31:14 KJV

And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.   And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.    And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.    And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.    And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses. Num 15:32-36 KJV

I never saw any Adventists actually follow these laws related to the Sabbath.  They will pay close attention to the Sabbath laws that say not to cook or to boil a pot and things of that nature, but when it comes to the Biblical enforcement of the law they stop.  I have never heard a good theological explanation on this from any SDA.

This is especially complicated by the fact that the death penalty itself is not condemned by SDA.  They would still support the government in putting a serial killer to death.  Murder is one of the ten commandments, why do the punishments for that still exist but those for the Sabbath do not?  Its a fair question and the reason SDA cannot reconcile this in a lucid manner is the fact that they don’t recognize the Biblical teaching that the Old Covenant is simply obsolete for New Covenant Christians.

Posted in Leaving Adventism, New Covenant | Tagged | 4 Comments

Nailed to the Cross

Posted on November 4, 2014 by ACTheologian

young man reading small bible

This is the third post in a series, for the previous please click HERE.

I believe I have now established why one can scripturally believe that the Ten Commandments were not separate from the Torah in any material way. That being the case the following two verses undermine SDA teachings quite dramatically.

“by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.” Col 2:14 ESV

“by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,” Eph 2:15 ESV

At the very least, the burden of proof is now on SDA to demonstrate Biblically that the Ten Commandments are separate.  They cannot just say that they are separate and expect anyone to take them seriously without clear, exegetical proof.

The next logical question is if the Ten Commandments are obsolete  as scripture teaches. Does that now mean that it is okay to murder, lie, commit adultery, etc? Well the answer to that is obviously no.  I will cover this in a later post.  There are still a great deal more verses that need to be studied before jumping to the good stuff!

Posted in Leaving Adventism, New Covenant | Tagged | 2 Comments