Why do SDA’s reject the words of the Bible?

They specifically reject the following texts.

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.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.8.13&version=ESV

Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.”https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.9.18,Heb.9.19,Heb.9.20&version=ESV

then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.10.9&version=ESV
 
They specifically reject the following texts.

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.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.8.13&version=ESV

Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.”https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.9.18,Heb.9.19,Heb.9.20&version=ESV

then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.10.9&version=ESV

Why do SDA's reject the words of the Bible? (i.e. specifically Holy Scripture listed above) Answer: Perhaps SDA's are "visual" learners in this matter. There are three main types of learning styles: 1) Visual 2) Auditory 3) Kinesthetic

Holy Spirit "inspired" Holy Scripture should never be rejected. Every word of God is true! (i.e. Genesis 1:1 - Revelation 22:21)

Hebrews 9:15-17 New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson.

15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

16 For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. 17 For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives.


This is "visually" displayed in the Key of David illustrations. (i.e. slide 12 of 12)

"... This Memorial Day observance during Holy Week ended, at the time that it normally would have first begun. On this Memorial Day the second covenant was established, and the first taken away."

(Key of David illustrations - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-vRZXXbDELqfrMOM1aGgVH9icPmPgpIx/view)


In Messiah’s (Christ’s) service,
David Behrens
Soli Deo Gloria!
Bringing Christian harmony to all the world
 
They specifically reject the following texts.

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.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.8.13&version=ESV

Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.”https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.9.18,Heb.9.19,Heb.9.20&version=ESV

then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.10.9&version=ESV


Persons who pretend to be SDA and Christian would do well to first understand what a covenant is before attempting to castigate those with whom they are pretending to be associated.

A covenant is an agreement. A covenant/agreement is not to be conflated--which is what you are apparently doing--with the thing agreed to. In the above case the people and God covenanted that the perfect law God gave should be obeyed. The people failed in their agreement/covenant to keep God's law. That is why in the discussion of the need for a new covenant/agreement Hebrews records that "God found fault WITH THE PEOPLE," as opposed to finding fault with His perfect law, which again is apparently what you are doing. But why did God find fault with the people? "Because they did not remain faithful to [God's] covenant." So no. The law wasn't what ended. It was the failed agreement that ended.

This is super easy for anyone who doesn't have a predetermined belief that the law is somehow bad and that the God of the Bible is likewise also implicated in their darkened imagination. If the law is bad then the giver of the law is obviously tainted by association. It's an ipso facto.

I find it so disturbing that people who claim to be Christians portray the God of the Bible as being errant and untrustworthy. They portray Him as failing to foresee the inevitable problems of his unfortunate and unkeepable law that he needs to come along later and undo the fiasco he created. This is not the infinite, all-knowing God of the Bible. This is the finite and fallible god of their own imagination.

Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.

Just shining a light on your expressed darkness.
 
Persons who pretend to be SDA and Christian would do well to first understand what a covenant is before attempting to castigate those with whom they are pretending to be associated.

A covenant is an agreement. A covenant/agreement is not to be conflated--which is what you are apparently doing--with the thing agreed to. In the above case the people and God covenanted that the perfect law God gave should be obeyed. The people failed in their agreement/covenant to keep God's law. That is why in the discussion of the need for a new covenant/agreement Hebrews records that "God found fault WITH THE PEOPLE," as opposed to finding fault with His perfect law, which again is apparently what you are doing. But why did God find fault with the people? "Because they did not remain faithful to [God's] covenant." So no. The law wasn't what ended. It was the failed agreement that ended.

This is super easy for anyone who doesn't have a predetermined belief that the law is somehow bad and that the God of the Bible is likewise also implicated in their darkened imagination. If the law is bad then the giver of the law is obviously tainted by association. It's an ipso facto.

I find it so disturbing that people who claim to be Christians portray the God of the Bible as being errant and untrustworthy. They portray Him as failing to foresee the inevitable problems of his unfortunate and unkeepable law that he needs to come along later and undo the fiasco he created. This is not the infinite, all-knowing God of the Bible. This is the finite and fallible god of their own imagination.

Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.

Just shining a light on your expressed darkness.

Do you believe that the Key of David illustrations portray the God of the Bible as being errant and untrustworthy?


In Messiah’s (Christ’s) service,
David Behrens
Soli Deo Gloria!
Bringing Christian harmony to all the world
 
Do you believe that the Key of David illustrations portray the God of the Bible as being errant and untrustworthy?


In Messiah’s (Christ’s) service,
David Behrens
Soli Deo Gloria!
Bringing Christian harmony to all the world


Hi davbeh2010,

I am unfamiliar with what that is. Please do tell :D
 
Hi davbeh2010,

I am unfamiliar with what that is. Please do tell :D


The Key of David illustrates the 100% Holy Spirit "inspired" chronology of the passion, death, burial, and glorious Resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, "on earth", "according to the Scriptures".

(Key of David illustrations - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-vRZXXbDELqfrMOM1aGgVH9icPmPgpIx/view)


In Messiah’s (Christ’s) service,
David Behrens
Soli Deo Gloria!
Bringing Christian harmony to all the world
 
The Key of David illustrates the 100% Holy Spirit "inspired" chronology of the passion, death, burial, and glorious Resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, "on earth", "according to the Scriptures".

(Key of David illustrations - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-vRZXXbDELqfrMOM1aGgVH9icPmPgpIx/view)


In Messiah’s (Christ’s) service,
David Behrens
Soli Deo Gloria!
Bringing Christian harmony to all the world


Hi davbeh2010,

I'm not sure what this has to do with the discussion at hand, but no, I don't believe the God of the Bible is errant and untrustworthy. Why would you think I would believe that?

I opened your link and briefly looked at the numerous charts provided. Why is it called The Key of David and why should this be important to me?

God bless!
 
Hi davbeh2010,

I'm not sure what this has to do with the discussion at hand, but no, I don't believe the God of the Bible is errant and untrustworthy. Why would you think I would believe that?

I opened your link and briefly looked at the numerous charts provided. Why is it called The Key of David and why should this be important to me?

God bless!

You answered a question I did not ask. This is the question that I asked:
Do you believe that the Key of David illustrations portray the God of the Bible as being errant and untrustworthy?


Discussion at hand: Christian SDA's post said - "He does away with the first in order to establish the second."

davbeh2010's post said - "This is "visually" displayed in the Key of David illustrations. (i.e. slide 12 of 12)"

"... This Memorial Day observance during Holy Week ended, at the time that it normally would have first begun. On this Memorial Day the second covenant was established, and the first taken away ."


I'm not sure what your reply to Christian SDA's original post has to do with the discussion at hand. (i.e. "He does away with the first in order to establish the second.")


In Messiah’s (Christ’s) service,
David Behrens
Soli Deo Gloria!
Bringing Christian harmony to all the world
 
You answered a question I did not ask. This is the question that I asked:
Do you believe that the Key of David illustrations portray the God of the Bible as being errant and untrustworthy?


Discussion at hand: Christian SDA's post said - "He does away with the first in order to establish the second."

davbeh2010's post said - "This is "visually" displayed in the Key of David illustrations. (i.e. slide 12 of 12)"

"... This Memorial Day observance during Holy Week ended, at the time that it normally would have first begun. On this Memorial Day the second covenant was established, and the first taken away ."


I'm not sure what your reply to Christian SDA's original post has to do with the discussion at hand. (i.e. "He does away with the first in order to establish the second.")


In Messiah’s (Christ’s) service,
David Behrens
Soli Deo Gloria!
Bringing Christian harmony to all the world


Hi davbeh2010,

What makes you think that "the key of David" would be familiar to me or anyone else on this forum? What makes you think that "the key of David" has any relevance to the discussion regarding what a covenant is?
 
Why do SDA's reject the words of the Bible? (i.e. specifically Holy Scripture listed above) Answer: Perhaps SDA's are "visual" learners in this matter. There are three main types of learning styles: 1) Visual 2) Auditory 3) Kinesthetic

Holy Spirit "inspired" Holy Scripture should never be rejected. Every word of God is true! (i.e. Genesis 1:1 - Revelation 22:21)

Hebrews 9:15-17 New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson.

15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

16 For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. 17 For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives.


This is "visually" displayed in the Key of David illustrations. (i.e. slide 12 of 12)

"... This Memorial Day observance during Holy Week ended, at the time that it normally would have first begun. On this Memorial Day the second covenant was established, and the first taken away."

(Key of David illustrations - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-vRZXXbDELqfrMOM1aGgVH9icPmPgpIx/view)


In Messiah’s (Christ’s) service,
David Behrens
Soli Deo Gloria!
Bringing Christian harmony to all the world
Never ever heard of key of David at all, where have you gotten it from because that’s not Adventism at all
 
Never ever heard of key of David at all, where have you gotten it from because that’s not Adventism at all

James 1:16-18 Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson
16 Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren. 17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning. 18 Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures.

Holy Spirit "inspired" Holy Scripture should never be rejected. Every word of God is true! (i.e. Genesis 1:1 - Revelation 22:21)

In Messiah’s (Christ’s) service,
David Behrens
Soli Deo Gloria!
Bringing Christian harmony to all the world
 
Persons who pretend to be SDA and Christian would do well to first understand what a covenant is before attempting to castigate those with whom they are pretending to be associated.

A covenant is an agreement. A covenant/agreement is not to be conflated--which is what you are apparently doing--with the thing agreed to. In the above case the people and God covenanted that the perfect law God gave should be obeyed. The people failed in their agreement/covenant to keep God's law. That is why in the discussion of the need for a new covenant/agreement Hebrews records that "God found fault WITH THE PEOPLE," as opposed to finding fault with His perfect law, which again is apparently what you are doing. But why did God find fault with the people? "Because they did not remain faithful to [God's] covenant." So no. The law wasn't what ended. It was the failed agreement that ended.

This is super easy for anyone who doesn't have a predetermined belief that the law is somehow bad and that the God of the Bible is likewise also implicated in their darkened imagination. If the law is bad then the giver of the law is obviously tainted by association. It's an ipso facto.

I find it so disturbing that people who claim to be Christians portray the God of the Bible as being errant and untrustworthy. They portray Him as failing to foresee the inevitable problems of his unfortunate and unkeepable law that he needs to come along later and undo the fiasco he created. This is not the infinite, all-knowing God of the Bible. This is the finite and fallible god of their own imagination.

Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.

Just shining a light on your expressed darkness.

Hi Icyspark,

Do you know the differences between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant? What would they be?

The OP mentioned this but not clearly. What do you think these verses mean to you?

Hebrews 8:
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. 8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”

13 In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
 
Last edited:
Hi Icyspark,

Do you know the differences between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant? What would they be?

The OP mentioned this but not clearly. What do you think these verses mean to you?

Hebrews 8:
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. 8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”

13 In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.


Hi CharismaticLady,

I believe if you read the post to which you just replied you would see that I pointed out the reason why God found fault with the first covenant. You would also see that I pointed out that a covenant is an agreement. IOW, the covenant and the law to which they agreed should be obeyed are not synonymous. Most ppl conflate the two.

You were the first person to respond on the thread I started titled, "The New Covenant," so you've read my position on Hebrews 8. My question is why are you acting like you don't understand that a covenant is an agreement and that the reason God replaced the old with the new was not because there was any problem with His perfect law. Starting in verse 8 of your supplied quote above we read, "Because finding fault with them ... because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord." Or, as the NIV puts it, "God found fault with the people ... because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord."

Note that "God found fault with the PEOPLE." That your highlighted portion of Hebrews 8 focusses on the fault of the covenant without acknowledging the obvious fact of where that fault was found gives indication that you are tacitly attempting to place the fault on the law. Don't you find that in doing so that you are also implicitly placing blame on God? After all, if the law He gave was anything less than perfect and if it needed to be replaced because it is faulty that implies that the god who gave it likewise faulty. It's an ipso facto. I don't know about you but I don't worship a God who is anything less than perfect.

I pray this helps.
 
Last edited:
Hi CharismaticLady,

I believe if you read the post to which you just replied you would see that I pointed out the reason why God found fault with the first covenant. You would also see that I pointed out that a covenant is an agreement. IOW, the covenant and the law to which they agreed should be obeyed are not synonymous. Most ppl conflate the two.

You were the first person to respond on the thread I started titled, "The New Covenant," so you've read my position on Hebrews 8. My question is why are you acting like you don't understand that a covenant is an agreement and that the reason God replaced the old with the new was not because there was any problem with His perfect law. Starting in verse 8 of your supplied quote above we read, "Because finding fault with them ... because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord." Or, as the NIV puts it, "God found fault with the people ... because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord."

Note that "God found fault with the PEOPLE." That your highlighted portion of Hebrews 8 focusses on the fault of the covenant without acknowledging the obvious fact of where that fault was found gives indication that you are tacitly attempting to place the fault on the law. Don't you find that in doing so that you are also implicitly placing blame on God? After all, if the law He gave was anything less than perfect and if it needed to be replaced because it is faulty that implies that the god who gave it likewise faulty. It's an ipso facto. I don't know about you but I don't worship a God who is anything less than perfect.

I pray this helps.

Yes, the people were at fault. However, how can you overlook " He has made the first obsolete."

Icyspark, I love SDAs because you care about being righteous. I will always fight people who fight you. But that doesn't mean that I believe your doctrine is scriptural. It is because you live up to the light you have, whereas most of those who fight against SDAs are bound by doctrines of demons and believe Jesus covers all their past, present and future sins as long as we believe Jesus is the Son of God. THAT is not the gospel. The New Covenant is the gospel. The Old Covenant was the Law of sin and death. And just because the people couldn't keep it doesn't mean it is still valid except to sinners.

SDAs only disturb me when I see you all believing some of the same things taught in those churches. Lets see if I can remember some examples of what they teach. You tell me if you are taught this or not.

1. We will always be sinners as long as we are in these bodies.
2. Jesus cleanses us of our past, present and future sins.
3. Jesus paid the penalty for our sins. Period. (So what does that mean? We can sin without condemnation? Or what?)
4. 1 John 1:8 is about Christians. "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."
5. Grace is unmerited favor.

I asked you what you believe the gospel is, and if you answered, please copy and paste it here....
 
Yes, the people were at fault. However, how can you overlook " He has made the first obsolete."

Icyspark, I love SDAs because you care about being righteous. I will always fight people who fight you. But that doesn't mean that I believe your doctrine is scriptural. It is because you live up to the light you have, whereas most of those who fight against SDAs are bound by doctrines of demons and believe Jesus covers all their past, present and future sins as long as we believe Jesus is the Son of God. THAT is not the gospel. The New Covenant is the gospel. The Old Covenant was the Law of sin and death. And just because the people couldn't keep it doesn't mean it is still valid except to sinners.

SDAs only disturb me when I see you all believing some of the same things taught in those churches. Lets see if I can remember some examples of what they teach. You tell me if you are taught this or not.

1. We will always be sinners as long as we are in these bodies.
2. Jesus cleanses us of our past, present and future sins.
3. Jesus paid the penalty for our sins. Period. (So what does that mean? We can sin without condemnation? Or what?)
4. 1 John 1:8 is about Christians. "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."
5. Grace is unmerited favor.

I asked you what you believe the gospel is, and if you answered, please copy and paste it here....


Hi CharismaticLady,

Again, I believe you are conflating the agreement with what was agreed upon (i.e. the law). My position is very simply that the agreement was obsolete. In the new agreement God promised that He would write His laws upon our hearts. If you believe that the old covenant equals the law then you have a problem in that you believe that a god who gave laws that he needed to revise is somehow now able to come up with better laws to write on our hearts. I believe the laws my God gave were/are "perfect, refreshing the soul." That, my friend, is Scriptural and you can't make something more perfect than perfect.

I must've missed where you asked me about what I believe the gospel is. Please share where you asked this.

God bless.
 
Hi CharismaticLady,

Again, I believe you are conflating the agreement with what was agreed upon (i.e. the law). My position is very simply that the agreement was obsolete. In the new agreement God promised that He would write His laws upon our hearts. If you believe that the old covenant equals the law then you have a problem in that you believe that a god who gave laws that he needed to revise is somehow now able to come up with better laws to write on our hearts. I believe the laws my God gave were/are "perfect, refreshing the soul." That, my friend, is Scriptural and you can't make something more perfect than perfect.

I must've missed where you asked me about what I believe the gospel is. Please share where you asked this.

God bless.

Icyspark, the Ten Commandments didn't have anything to do with God being on the inside of us. They had to keep the Law with their sin nature in tact. THAT is why the people were at fault, and why they could only keep the commandments by the letter of the law. This was their problem:

Romans 7:
19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.

The Ten Commandments IS the Covenant. It is called the ministry of death, because of the sin nature.

Ex. 34:28 ...And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments;

2 Corinthians 3:
5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.

The New Covenant is the ministry of the Spirit. The ministry of death is obsolete. The New Covenant commandments have to do with Jesus and the eternal laws of loving God with all our spirit, soul and body, and loving our neighbor as ourselves. Love is not in the Ten Commandments. Why? Because it was written to those who were always sinners. Jesus took away our sin nature. 1 John 3:5. We don't need the letter of the law, just abide in Jesus.
 
Hi CharismaticLady,

Again, I believe you are conflating the agreement with what was agreed upon (i.e. the law). My position is very simply that the agreement was obsolete. In the new agreement God promised that He would write His laws upon our hearts. If you believe that the old covenant equals the law then you have a problem in that you believe that a god who gave laws that he needed to revise is somehow now able to come up with better laws to write on our hearts. I believe the laws my God gave were/are "perfect, refreshing the soul." That, my friend, is Scriptural and you can't make something more perfect than perfect.

I must've missed where you asked me about what I believe the gospel is. Please share where you asked this.

God bless.

I found this one that I didn't see your answer; I'll still look for the one on the gospel. The New Covenant IS the gospel. Maybe that is what I had in mind.

Hi Icyspark,

Do you know the differences between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant? What would they be?

What is the gospel? Now its official! LOL
 
Hi CharismaticLady,

Again, I believe you are conflating the agreement with what was agreed upon (i.e. the law). My position is very simply that the agreement was obsolete. In the new agreement God promised that He would write His laws upon our hearts. If you believe that the old covenant equals the law then you have a problem in that you believe that a god who gave laws that he needed to revise is somehow now able to come up with better laws to write on our hearts. I believe the laws my God gave were/are "perfect, refreshing the soul." That, my friend, is Scriptural and you can't make something more perfect than perfect.

I must've missed where you asked me about what I believe the gospel is. Please share where you asked this.

God bless.

Here are these also:

SDAs only disturb me when I see you all believing some of the same things taught in those churches. Lets see if I can remember some examples of what they teach. You tell me if you are taught this or not.

1. We will always be sinners as long as we are in these bodies.
2. Jesus cleanses us of our past, present and future sins.
3. Jesus paid the penalty for our sins. Period. (So what does that mean? We can sin without condemnation? Or what?)
4. 1 John 1:8 is about Christians. "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."
5. Grace is unmerited favor.
 
Icyspark, the Ten Commandments didn't have anything to do with God being on the inside of us. They had to keep the Law with their sin nature in tact. THAT is why the people were at fault, and why they could only keep the commandments by the letter of the law. This was their problem:

Romans 7:
19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.


Hi CharismaticLady,

I wonder if you'd like to supply a biblical definition of sin? And then tell me what sin is still dwelling inside a person who does what they do not want to do?


The Ten Commandments IS the Covenant. It is called the ministry of death, because of the sin nature.

Ex. 34:28 ...And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments;


You still don't seem to get it. You continue to illustrate that you conflate the word "covenant" with the Ten Commandments. This is a problem with many people.

noun​
an AGREEMENT, usually formal, between two or more persons to do or not do something specified.​
Law. an incidental clause in such an agreement.​
Ecclesiastical. a solemn agreement between the members of a church to act together in harmony with the precepts of the gospel.​

You don't get to redefine the meaning of words to suit your own purposes. Let's just the word "covenant" with the word agreement in your supplied text reference and read it again: "Ex. 34:28 ...And He wrote on the tablets the words of the AGREEMENT, the Ten Commandments;" Again, the agreement was bad (i.e. "God found fault with the people"), not what was agreed that should be obeyed.


2 Corinthians 3:
5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.

The New Covenant is the ministry of the Spirit. The ministry of death is obsolete. The New Covenant commandments have to do with Jesus and the eternal laws of loving God with all our spirit, soul and body, and loving our neighbor as ourselves.


This is a strange line of reasoning. Icy similar excuses given by other critics of Adventism. The odd part is that when pressed almost everyone will acknowledge the reality that they accept 9 of the Ten Commandments as still being valid. It's only the one we're commanded to remember that now we're mysteriously supposed to forget. Strange indeed. Just so we're clear, is that what you're advocating? Are you one of those people who embraces nine of the commandments and only wishes to forget the fourth commandment? Are you one of those people who looks at those of us who rest according to the commandment and accuses us of works? If so that'd be quite ironic, right?


Love is not in the Ten Commandments. Why? Because it was written to those who were always sinners. Jesus took away our sin nature. 1 John 3:5. We don't need the letter of the law, just abide in Jesus.


This too is a rather bizarre conclusion for you to draw and illustrates a huge gap in your understanding of the God of the Bible. EVERYTHING God does is about love. Have you not heard, "God is love"?

Deuteronomy 11:1
Love the Lord your God and keep his requirements, his decrees, his laws and his commands always.
John 14:15
“If you love Me, keep My commandments.
1 John 5:3
Loving God means keeping his commandments, and his commandments are not burdensome.

Christians obey Jesus because we love Jesus. We love Jesus because He first loved us. He loves us so He provided us with directions for how live according to what is best for us and what makes both Him and us happy. To claim that that is not love is ... um ... not loving.

I pray this helps.
 
Last edited:
What is the gospel? Now its official! LOL


Hi CharismaticLady,

1 Corinthians 15:1-8
Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

The new covenant/agreement is certainly good news, but it is not the Gospel.

I pray this helps.
 
Back
Top