Israel's Example to Us

[Icyspark]

1 Corinthians 10:1-13​

Warnings From Israel’s History​

For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. They all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.​

​

Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did. Do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written: “The people sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry.” We should not commit sexual immorality, as some of them did—and in one day twenty-three thousand of them died. We should not test Christ, as some of them did—and were killed by snakes. And do not grumble, as some of them did—and were killed by the destroying angel.​

​

These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the culmination of the ages has come. So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall! No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.​

Let's take a look at what Paul means by saying the Israelites are an example to us. According to this passage:

"God was not pleased with most of them" (i.e. the people of Israel). Why not? Well, Paul lists off some of the bad examples the Israelites left for us.

1. They committed idolatry.
2. They committed sexual immorality.
3. They tested Christ.
4. They grumbled.

What was the result for each of these "evil things . . . they did"? With the example given of sexual immorality, God punished the people by killing 23,000 of them! With the example of testing Christ, God sent snakes to kill them! When the grumbled, they were killed by the destroying angel! Pick your poison. God isn't messing around with sin.

With these examples provided, Paul goes on to say that they were recorded "as warnings for us." Warnings? Now there's a word which is filled with explicit and obvious meaning. God doesn't look fondly upon His new covenant church "setting our hearts on evil things as they did." To those who may think they are "standing firm," Paul admonishes them to "be careful that you don't fall!" That is said in the context of resisting temptation, which he acknowledges that no one is compelled to embrace the temptation. God always provides "a way out" so that we can resist the temptation.

The Scriptures are cohesive and noncontradictory. Look for the main and plain meaning of the Scriptures and almost always you will see the common thread that ties it all together.

I pray this helps.

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[robycop3]

Let us not forget that the only clearly-identified Israelis known to us are the Jews, but they're only 1/4 of Israel. the IDs of the others are not known to us, but GOD knows who they are, & He will make it known to them in His time.

 

[SDAchristian]

Let us not forget that the only clearly-identified Israelis known to us are the Jews, but they're only 1/4 of Israel. the IDs of the others are not known to us, but GOD knows who they are, & He will make it known to them in His time.

AV Ro 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel:
AV Ga 3:29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Are you saying Paul is wrong to say things ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[robycop3]

AV Ro 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel:
AV Ga 3:29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Are you saying Paul is wrong to say things ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

God made certain promises to LITERAL ISRAEL, & of course there'll be Christians among them.If you're Christ's, you're part of SPIRITUAL Israel, regardless of literal inheritance.

 

[SDAchristian]

God made certain promises to LITERAL ISRAEL, & of course there'll be Christians among them.If you're Christ's, you're part of SPIRITUAL Israel, regardless of literal inheritance.

So according to your words, Sabbath was made for "LITERAL ISRAEL" and "SPIRITUAL Israel" then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[Icyspark]

Let us not forget that the only clearly-identified Israelis known to us are the Jews, but they're only 1/4 of Israel. the IDs of the others are not known to us, but GOD knows who they are, & He will make it known to them in His time.

Hi robycop3,

I'm not sure how you arrive at this conclusion. Neither do I understand how this relates to the opening post. Paul's warning to us about not doing those things Israel did has nothing to do with any supposed 3/4 of Israel which is no longer recognized in Scripture. A large portion of Israel was cut off because of unbelief (see Romans 11:11-24) and we should be careful lest we also are cut off.

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[robycop3]

Hi robycop3,

I'm not sure how you arrive at this conclusion. Neither do I understand how this relates to the opening post. Paul's warning to us about not doing those things Israel did has nothing to do with any supposed 3/4 of Israel which is no longer recognized in Scripture. A large portion of Israel was cut off because of unbelief (see Romans 11:11-24) and we should be careful lest we also are cut off.

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

The vision of Ezekiel was for the WHOLE House of Israel. God promised Israel & Judah would become one nation again. And in Scripture, we never see "a Jew from the tribe of Dan" for example.

 

[SDAchristian]

The vision of Ezekiel was for the WHOLE House of Israel. God promised Israel & Judah would become one nation again. And in Scripture, we never see "a Jew from the tribe of Dan" for example.

AV Re 7:4-8 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: [and there were] sealed an hundred [and] forty [and] four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel. 5 Of the tribe of Juda [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Reuben [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Gad [were] sealed twelve thousand. 6 Of the tribe of Aser [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Nepthalim [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Manasses [were] sealed twelve thousand. 7 Of the tribe of Simeon [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Levi [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Issachar [were] sealed twelve thousand. 8 Of the tribe of Zabulon [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Joseph [were] sealed twelve thousand. Of the tribe of Benjamin [were] sealed twelve thousand.

Does GOD has the right to make updates between the OT/OC and NT/NC ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[Icyspark]

The vision of Ezekiel was for the WHOLE House of Israel. God promised Israel & Judah would become one nation again. And in Scripture, we never see "a Jew from the tribe of Dan" for example.

Hi robycop3,

Regardless of whatever point you're tryna make, what does this have to do with 1 Corinthians 10:1-13?

In my "Ten Reasons I'm a Sabbatarian" thread you reject the admonition to follow the examples of Jesus and Paul. In the passage above we're admonished NOT to follow the example of the Israelites yet it appears that you're willing to reject this counsel of Paul as well? Paul says we shouldn't "set our heart on the evil things that they did," yet your position is that Gentiles are not constrained by anything other than undefined love. Wouldn't you agree that your position is untenable in light of Paul's "warning" to us in these 13 verses?

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[robycop3]

Hi robycop3,

Regardless of whatever point you're tryna make, what does this have to do with 1 Corinthians 10:1-13?

In my "Ten Reasons I'm a Sabbatarian" thread you reject the admonition to follow the examples of Jesus and Paul. In the passage above we're admonished NOT to follow the example of the Israelites yet it appears that you're willing to reject this counsel of Paul as well? Paul says we shouldn't "set our heart on the evil things that they did," yet your position is that Gentiles are not constrained by anything other than undefined love. Wouldn't you agree that your position is untenable in light of Paul's "warning" to us in these 13 verses?

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Remember, the O.T. Israelis' main sins were idol worship & sexual sin. While idol worship is little-found in the USA today, sexual sin is more-common than ever, especially with acceptance of LGBTQ, backed by the law.

We are NOT under the O.T. law any more. Jesus fulfilled it all, & implemented the New Covenant. He summed up the law by saying that treating others as one wishes to be treated, loving one's neighbors as oneself, covered everything, except to love GOD more than anyone else.

 

[Buzzard]

If Israel is an Example for the SDA's
why are you following in their footstep ???

 

[Icyspark]

Remember, the O.T. Israelis' main sins were idol worship & sexual sin. While idol worship is little-found in the USA today, sexual sin is more-common than ever, especially with acceptance of LGBTQ, backed by the law.

We are NOT under the O.T. law any more. Jesus fulfilled it all, & implemented the New Covenant. He summed up the law by saying that treating others as one wishes to be treated, loving one's neighbors as oneself, covered everything, except to love GOD more than anyone else.

Hi robycop3,

Jesus fulfilled the law, but He did not abolish it. Far from abolishing it, Jesus expanded the law. He came to "magnify the law and make it honorable." Why expand the law and increase it's honor for perhaps 3 years only to get rid of it completely? If the law was problematic enough to get rid of it doesn't that imply that the Giver of the law is problematic? If the Giver of the law is problematic in supplying a law which needed to come to an end, then what kind of god are you worshiping? You should really examine Hebrews 8 to understand why a new covenant was needed. It wasn't because of any problem on God's part (see verse 8 to see where the real problem was).

If the law is fulfilled, why worry about idolatry at all? Why worry about sexual sin? How can there even be "sin" when the law which identifies sin is gone? If your position is true, then effectively you are sinless and have no need of confessing your "sins" or even a need for a Savior.

The new covenant is not without "laws." The plurality of laws in the new covenant are no longer written on tablets of stone but on the "tablets of human hearts" (c.f. Hebrews 8:10). The reality is that those who challenge the continuity of the law are only really contesting the one command on the tablets which says "remember." This is the one command they--in their humanity--think we should forget. It doesn't matter that Jesus's example was to observe the Sabbath; that He never told anyone that He was going to end His holy day; that He said His Sabbath was made for human beings; that His disciples all observed the Sabbath; that Paul observed the Sabbath; and that he preached to Gentiles on every Sabbath for a year and a half.

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[SDAchristian]

If Israel is an Example for the SDA's
why are you following in their footstep ???

AV 1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

Could you please give an example outside of Jesus' example ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[Icyspark]

If Israel is an Example for the SDA's
why are you following in their footstep ???

Hi Buzzard,

Even if SDA's were following Israel's example, does that mean you are free to do likewise?

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[robycop3]

Hi robycop3,

Jesus fulfilled the law, but He did not abolish it. Far from abolishing it, Jesus expanded the law. He came to "magnify the law and make it honorable." Why expand the law and increase it's honor for perhaps 3 years only to get rid of it completely? If the law was problematic enough to get rid of it doesn't that imply that the Giver of the law is problematic? If the Giver of the law is problematic in supplying a law which needed to come to an end, then what kind of god are you worshiping? You should really examine Hebrews 8 to understand why a new covenant was needed. It wasn't because of any problem on God's part (see verse 8 to see where the real problem was).

If the law is fulfilled, why worry about idolatry at all? Why worry about sexual sin? How can there even be "sin" when the law which identifies sin is gone? If your position is true, then effectively you are sinless and have no need of confessing your "sins" or even a need for a Savior.

The new covenant is not without "laws." The plurality of laws in the new covenant are no longer written on tablets of stone but on the "tablets of human hearts" (c.f. Hebrews 8:10). The reality is that those who challenge the continuity of the law are only really contesting the one command on the tablets which says "remember." This is the one command they--in their humanity--think we should forget. It doesn't matter that Jesus's example was to observe the Sabbath; that He never told anyone that He was going to end His holy day; that He said His Sabbath was made for human beings; that His disciples all observed the Sabbath; that Paul observed the Sabbath; and that he preached to Gentiles on every Sabbath for a year and a half.

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Paul, writing on authority of Jesus, wrote in Col.2 that gentiles were not under the law God gave to Israel, including sabbaths & other observances.. Jesus, & the apostles after jesus returned to heaven, made it clear that one cannot be saved by keeping the law. And we are certainly required to keep man-made rules such as "no pants on women", etc.

As for sabbaths, Jesus, as a man, was a Jew, & so were the apostles, so they observed sabbaths as special worship days. When Paul preached on sabbaths, it was according to Jewish custom, & the gentiles who wished to hear him knew it. The sabbath was given to Israel FOREVER, same as passover.

Jesus' only commands for observances were to observe Communion in remembrance of Him, and for the foot-washing observance. And these things are modified for modern times, just as in Jesus' time, not that many Jews had herds & flocks of animals any more, & used money insteada trade & barter mosta the time, so Jews generally bought animals for sacrifice and/or placed money in a collection box at the temple or local synagogues.

 

[SDAchristian]

Paul, writing on authority of Jesus, wrote in Col.2 ...

I know Paul has the same role to Gentiles, as Moses did for Jews. Will any be surprised when, Paul and Moses do their work together, that they will actually agree completely in Jesus' work of salvation for man ???

AV Hb 10:29-30 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance [belongeth] unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.

"writing on authority of Jesus", That is a RCC phrase, that is misunderstood and misused throughout history. Will that "authority of Jesus" let man today, execute divine "Vengeance [belongeth] unto me" ???

AV Col 2:16-17 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [is] of Christ.

AV Hb 8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, [that] thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

From point of view, discernment between "shadows"/"types" to "fulfillment in Christ's body"/"anti-types" is need of review.

I will offer again, to go through with you, their the associations.

---

AV Mk 2:27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:

AV Hb 4:9-10 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. 10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God [did] from his.

GOD rested at the end of creation week as Our Creator, giving us an example of righteous rest, BEFORE sin entered the world. The weekly sabbath rest is for our relationship with Our Creator, before sin.

Their are other "sabbath [days]" that are redemption types, and should not be confused with the original GOD kept "The sabbath was made for man".

---

AV Jn 5:43-47 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. 44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that [cometh] from God only? 45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is [one] that accuseth you, [even] Moses, in whom ye trust. 46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. 47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

"for he wrote of me", Failing to recognize Jesus in the OT is salvific to recognizing Jesus' role in the NT. Moses was Jesus' eye witness in the Temple of Heaven, as the plan of salvation.

AV Ac 17:30-31 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by [that] man whom he hath ordained; [whereof] he hath given assurance unto all [men], in that he hath raised him from the dead.

I hope everyone succeeds with Jesus in this judgment.

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[Icyspark]

Paul, writing on authority of Jesus, wrote in Col.2 that gentiles were not under the law God gave to Israel, including sabbaths & other observances.. Jesus, & the apostles after jesus returned to heaven, made it clear that one cannot be saved by keeping the law. And we are certainly required to keep man-made rules such as "no pants on women", etc.

As for sabbaths, Jesus, as a man, was a Jew, & so were the apostles, so they observed sabbaths as special worship days. When Paul preached on sabbaths, it was according to Jewish custom, & the gentiles who wished to hear him knew it. The sabbath was given to Israel FOREVER, same as passover.

Jesus' only commands for observances were to observe Communion in remembrance of Him, and for the foot-washing observance. And these things are modified for modern times, just as in Jesus' time, not that many Jews had herds & flocks of animals any more, & used money insteada trade & barter mosta the time, so Jews generally bought animals for sacrifice and/or placed money in a collection box at the temple or local synagogues.

Hi robycop3,

It isn't going to help you any if you ignore the biblical texts which refute your position and continue to talk past me instead of having a conversation. I again made several points in the post to which you just replied and you, again, ignored those points and jumped to something altogether different in an effort to dismiss the things which you are either unwilling or unable to incorporate into your biblical world-view.

Here're the questions you just ignored. If you'd be so kind, I'd appreciate an answer to them:

• Why expand the law and increase it's honor for perhaps 3 years only to get rid of it completely?
• If the law was problematic enough to get rid of it doesn't that imply that the Giver of the law is problematic?
• If the Giver of the law is problematic in supplying a law which needed to come to an end, then what kind of god are you worshiping?
• If the law is fulfilled, why worry about idolatry at all?
• Why worry about sexual sin?
• How can there even be "sin" when the law which identifies sin is gone?

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[Icyspark]

Hi robycop3,

It isn't going to help you any if you ignore the biblical texts which refute your position and continue to talk past me instead of having a conversation. I again made several points in the post to which you just replied and you, again, ignored those points and jumped to something altogether different in an effort to dismiss the things which you are either unwilling or unable to incorporate into your biblical world-view.

Here're the questions you just ignored. If you'd be so kind, I'd appreciate an answer to them:

• Why expand the law and increase it's honor for perhaps 3 years only to get rid of it completely?
• If the law was problematic enough to get rid of it doesn't that imply that the Giver of the law is problematic?
• If the Giver of the law is problematic in supplying a law which needed to come to an end, then what kind of god are you worshiping?
• If the law is fulfilled, why worry about idolatry at all?
• Why worry about sexual sin?
• How can there even be "sin" when the law which identifies sin is gone?

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

NOTE TO LURKERS

This is what generally happens with the critics of Adventism. When they are confronted with questions that challenge their preconceived ideas they tend to ignore them.

Let me just repost them so we can see what questions are too difficult to answer:

Here're the questions you just ignored. If you'd be so kind, I'd appreciate an answer to them:​

• Why expand the law and increase it's honor for perhaps 3 years only to get rid of it completely?​
• If the law was problematic enough to get rid of it doesn't that imply that the Giver of the law is problematic?​
• If the Giver of the law is problematic in supplying a law which needed to come to an end, then what kind of god are you worshiping?​
• If the law is fulfilled, why worry about idolatry at all?​
• Why worry about sexual sin?​
• How can there even be "sin" when the law which identifies sin is gone?​

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

 

[robycop3]

NOTE TO LURKERS

This is what generally happens with the critics of Adventism. When they are confronted with questions that challenge their preconceived ideas they tend to ignore them.

Let me just repost them so we can see what questions are too difficult to answer:

Here're the questions you just ignored. If you'd be so kind, I'd appreciate an answer to them:​

• Why expand the law and increase it's honor for perhaps 3 years only to get rid of it completely?​

• ​

[/QUOTE]
Because that was God's will.

• If the law was problematic enough to get rid of it doesn't that imply that the Giver of the law is problematic?

  ​

No, man couldn't & can't keep it all. The prob was man's. That's why God sent Jesus to be the Savior from the penalty of breaking the law. He fulfilled all its sacrificial requirements, which were but a forerunner of Himself.

• If the Giver of the law is problematic in supplying a law which needed to come to an end, then what kind of god are you worshiping?

  ​

Moot point. See my above answer.

• If the law is fulfilled, why worry about idolatry at all?

  ​

Because Jesus said that whoever was not for Him was against him, & that obviously includes idolators.

• Why worry about sexual sin?

  ​

Because Jesus spoke against adultery & fornication, as did Paul & other apostles.

• How can there even be "sin" when the law which identifies sin is gone?

  ​

It's not all gone. The sacrificial & ceremonial parts are.The parts against conduct are still in force. (Murder, stealing, etc.)

God bless!

But for the grace of God go I,cyspark

Now, lemme ask YOU :

How come you criticize people for keeping only part of the law, when you do the same thing ?

 

[SDAchristian]

How come you criticize people for keeping only part of the law, when you do the same thing ?

AV 1Jn 2:1-4 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world. 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

That question goes both ways, Right ???

Yours in Christ, Michael