Advent Talk
Theology Category => Doctrinal Discussions => Topic started by: Hakim on February 11, 2008, 10:06:56 AM
-
Hi folks!
I would like to introduce the topic of the Everlasting Covenant.
The reason for this: In recent years the attacks against the Sabbath and against the Law of God have centered about the covenant. So I started reading books, articles, and listening to speakers. I would have to say that Adventists do not have a unified doctrine on the covenant. In fact, some of the concepts I have heard promoted would play right into the hands of the dispensationalists.
Why is this important? In the covenant is the basis and framework for our doctrines, prophecies, and the meaning of God's interactions with mankind. When you understand the covenant, all these things fall into place.
There are several critical issues: How was the covenant established in the first place? What relation do the covenants (plural) have to the covenant (singular)? What was the old covenant? What is the new covenant? and what does the New Testament say about the covenant?
Admittedly, this IS an ambitious project. I don't expect everyone to agree with me. I do hope that each person will read carefully what is said by me and by others and give carefully thought out responses. In order to make progress in understanding truth, each of us needs to be open minded and be willing to accept truth when it is presented.
More later for an exciting trip!
Hakim ("doc" in Amharic)
-
A very important topic, Hakim. I understand your concern because I, too, have read explanations of "covenants" (plural) that would play into the hands of dispensationalists. I look forward to further thoughts from you.
-
:welcome: to AdventTalk, Hakim!
I also am very interested in the study of the Everlasting Covenant and have looked into it at length in the past, but mainly in the terms of what is said about it in the Old Testament. (Not sure where else reliable and trustworthy information about it would be obtained, except in the New Testament, of course.)
Which concepts have you run into that would play into the hands of the dispensationalists?
-
Covenant Beginning
Statement:
Before Creation there was a council within the Godhead to formulate the Plan of Salvation to be put in use only if man should use his power of choice wrongly, and choose to sin.
Who is the Godhead?
This term is used in the Bible three times (Acts 17:29; Rom 1:20; Col 2:9).
Paul made this statement in his address to the philosophers in Athens:
“Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device” (Acts 17:29).
On his third missionary journey, while in Corinth, Paul wrote to the Christians in Rome. He hoped soon to visit Rome. In preparation for this he wrote this epistle, outlining in strong clear terms the great principles of the Gospel:
“being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).
Paul lived and preached in Ephesus for three years. People from all over western Asia (present day Turkey) traveled to and from Ephesus. Probably Paul never went to Colossae, but from his work in Ephesus the gospel spread to all western Asia.
“For in him (Christ) dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2:9).
Who are the persons who make up the Godhead?These are phrases from a number of verses that name the Father, Son and Holy Ghost:
• Isaiah 11:1-5 “the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, ... the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD; ... of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD:”
• Isaiah 48:16 “and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.”
• Isaiah 61:1 “The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me;... the LORD hath anointed me to preach”
• Matthew 3:16, 17 “he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased”
• Matthew 28:19-20 “Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”
• 1 Corinthians 12:3-4 “No man speaking by the Spirit of God ... can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost”
• 2 Corinthians 13:14 “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all.”
• Ephesians 2:18 “For through him (Jesus) we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.”
Comment:
To best study the Covenant, I would recommend the historical approach. By establishing one point at a time, we will be less confused. So If you don't mind, I will put off the question about dispensationialism for now. The first and most important point is to determine the beginning of the covenant -- how it was established. In this post I hope to show that there IS a Godhead composed of Three Persons.
-------------------------
Hakim
-
The Council in Heaven
Now that we understand that the Godhead is made up of three persons – the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, we are ready to speak of the Council in Heaven. In that Council an agreement was reached on what was the "will of God." The Father would give the Son; the Son would give Himself; and the Holy Spirit would make effectual the grace of God in the hearts of men.
. . . . “For God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).
. . . . “...I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again....” (John 10:17,18).
. . . . "Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,
. . . . "I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart” (Psalms 40:6-10; see also Hebrews 10:7).
It is important here to realize that the covenant is about what God can do, not about what man can do. It is about Jesus Christ, His life on earth, and His sacrifice on Calvary. In this is the promise of eternal life and for restoration of everything that was lost in Eden.
This was referred to as “my covenant” fifty one times in the Bible. You will also find the term “everlasting covenant” sixteen times in the Bible. If you understand this foundation principle you will go a long way to understand covenant language in the rest of the Bible.
When was this Council in Heaven?
• "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Revelation 13:8 KJV
• "the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world." Revelation 13:8 NIV
• "the Lamb that was slain [in sacrifice] from the foundation of the world." Revelation 13:8 AMP
• "stood a Lamb ... for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood." Rev. 5:6-9
• "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and Honour, and glory, and blessing." Revelation 5:12 KJV
• "Who (Christ, the Lamb) verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you," 1 Peter 1:20 KJV
• "inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:" Matthew 25:34
When Jesus came to the Jordan to be baptized by John the Baptist, John immediately identified Him, “Behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). The Messiah is also identified as the Lamb to be slain in Isaiah 53. The decision for Jesus, the Second Person of the Godhead, to play this role was established in Council in Heaven before Creation of this earth. Jesus Christ is the focus and the center of the everlasting covenant.
Comment:
I realize that much of what I have posted is elementary to most on this forum. In another forum, these were points that were challenged repeatedly. Thus, a person must understand even elementary points before we can proceed to deeper understandings.
-------------------------
Hakim
-
Thank you Hakim. This newborn really desires the sincere the sincere milk.
How does this fit with God's promise of land to Abraham or of Moses receiving the Tablets. Those were covenants too weren't they?
-
Fair Havens,
Each time the covenant was renewed, God made promises. These promises were often different, unique. On this basis many have felt that there were a number of covenants that God made with men.
When Adam sinned, he chose to serve another "god," in this case Satan. Adam lost the dominion of this earth to Satan. Satan now had legal control as "Prince of this world."
Remember Genesis 2:17? "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Some have read this as meaning "dying thou shalt die." This is OK, and it fits what we observe -- people started to get old and to die from that time.
However, there was something else: Before the sun set that day, Jesus Christ came and brought the guilty pair into the covenant (Genesis 3:15). "I will put enmity between thee (Satan) and the woman (mankind)." Mankind would be given a conscience, an innate feeling for what was right. They would not be helpless before Satan.
But did Jesus have a right to intervene and take away Satan's prize? NO! Except, He also gave the promise of the Sin Bearer who would buy back all that was lost in Eden. "It shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." He could do so only through suffering, but Sin and Satan would eventually be completely destroyed. This is what is called "prolepsis", acting as if a future event has already occurred.
It is from the sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary that all promises and blessings to mankind flow. The focus of the covenant is Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on Calvary. Without His sacrifice, there is no covenant. With His sacrifice, by faith, God was free to intervene with promises and blessings to Abraham, Israel, to David and Solomon, and with the New Covenant in Jeremiah.
This is a lot to swallow all at once. Please feel free to ask questions and make comments.
--------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
And I encourage you to continue these interesting presentations.
-
The Council in Heaven
Now that we understand that the Godhead is made up of three persons – the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, ... .
-------------------------
Hakim
In reading the New Testament I have noticed that the Apostle Paul in many of his letters to the various churches often begins by invoking(?) God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. [e.g. 1Cor 1:3; 11Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph. 1:2.] He does not mention the Holy Spirit at all in those instances. I have wondered why he does not mention the Holy Spirit. Why
this inconsistency? What then, is the role of the Holy Spirit in the Covenant? So much is still unclear to me.
-
Fair Havens,
If things are still unclear to you that is good! I am a third generation SDA, went through all our schools through medical school, and some things are still unclear to me! The basic truths of the Gospel are simple and easy to understand. Children can understand what is needed. Uneducated natives overseas can understand salvation truth. However, having said that, it is important for each person to understand as much about the Bible as his mind can understand. If a "PhD" has only a 4th grade understanding of the Bible, he will be deceived on Evolution as well as on other things.
So, If you recognize that you are unclear, and if you are still studying you are in good company. Just stay with it.
About the Holy Spirit: I too have noticed that the Holy Spirit is not talked about as much as the Father and the Son. In fact, in the Council in Heaven when the covenant was established, nothing is said about the Holy Spirit. God does not make mistakes. Something like this is done on purpose. I will propose an idea (admitting that I don't really know): God did not intend that we focus on the Holy Spirit except to recognize His work. He knew that the Holy Spirit and His work would be misconstrued in the latter days. Remember in John 3:8 the Holy Spirit is likened to the wind. You cannot see Him, but you can see the effects of His work in the lives of people.
------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
Hubert, I really appreciate what you're doing. :)
I can already see that we're very much "on the same page," but I've not seen it laid out like this before.
I appreciate the point you made that God's covenant is about what God does and not about man's activity.
I look forward to your next installments.
-
- - -
He knew that the Holy Spirit and His work would be misconstrued in the latter days. Remember in John 3:8 the Holy Spirit is likened to the wind. You cannot see Him, but you can see the effects of His work in the lives of people.
------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
Do you have any suggestions on how the Holy Spirit might be miscinstrued in our times?
-
Johann,
I'm sure you have some "tongues speaking" churches in Scandinavia. We even had them in Ethiopia where we spent five years.
Do Adventists have this temptation? Probably not in exactly the same way. But anytime a person accepts a mental impression above the revealed Word of God, isn't he doing the same thing?
Let me step on some toes and present something: I have often heard the statement that "God did not give me the talent of going door-to-door." Maybe this is true in some cases. But is it Biblical? If you put yourself in the path of God's will, will He not give you the talent? Is it all that hard? Yes! For the first house. Then the Spirit takes over and gives you an experience you will not forget.
Maybe one hundred years ago there was the "holy flesh" movement in Indiana. Such persons believed that God had so changed them that all their impressions and desires were holy! Interestingly, this was accompanied by a very worldly style of music. Are we beginning to see some of this in our "contemporary worship" today?
The Willow Creek movement was built on meeting people's "felt needs." Doctrine and Bible study was downplayed. Just recently they did a study of Willow Creek and found that people's lives were not changed, and that their success was in numbers only.
Well, I'm kinda rambling.
-------------------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
So there are things we might have to watch out for? It may surprise you to hear that about 6 or 7 years ago I heard a Sabbath sermon in s Scandinavian church where we were told that the spiritual gift the Seventh-day Adventist church was in dire need of was the ability to speak in tongues!
-
Let me step on some toes and present something: I have often heard the statement that "God did not give me the talent of going door-to-door." Maybe this is true in some cases. But is it Biblical? If you put yourself in the path of God's will, will He not give you the talent? Is it all that hard? Yes! For the first house. Then the Spirit takes over and gives you an experience you will not forget.
Hear ye, hear ye!!
Maybe one hundred years ago there was the "holy flesh" movement in Indiana. Such persons believed that God had so changed them that all their impressions and desires were holy! Interestingly, this was accompanied by a very worldly style of music. Are we beginning to see some of this in our "contemporary worship" today?
I hadn't connected it to the holy flesh movement, but I get your point. Feeling is interpreted as "spirituality" which is deemed the equivalent of holiness.
The Willow Creek movement was built on meeting people's "felt needs." Doctrine and Bible study was downplayed. Just recently they did a study of Willow Creek and found that people's lives were not changed, and that their success was in numbers only.
And many of our pastors went to be trained there ... :(
And I'm afraid we're not done reaping the results. A number of whole churches have gone out from among us, and there will undoubtedly be more.
I'm saying this from the standpoint of not being opposed to contemporary music per se. (A Might Fortress was once contemporary with a recognized secular tune.) The critical thing with using contemporary music is to choose wisely and interpret appropriately (musically, that is). All music used for worship should be biblical in lyrics, with a singable tune, and the words should be understandable when sung. That means that the accompaniment should not overpower the singing.
-
February 15, 2008
Now that we have studied the council in Heaven, the next event is Adam and Eve in Eden. In two short verses Adam and Eve were instructed to avoid the tree in the middle of the garden. The record of Genesis is sparse and does not take into account the oral tradition of that day. Much more information was likely given and just not written down.
16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. Genesis 2:16, 17
How is eating of the forbidden fruit a test? Why would it be so important? After all the fruit was quite like all the other fruit. It looked beautiful, it was sweet, and it tasted good. There was nothing about the fruit that made it bad. It was forbidden for one reason, and for one reason only – because God had forbidden to eat of it. It was a test to see if Adam and Eve would recognize an intelligence greater than theirs and to which they must submit their own wills.
In short Eve was deceived by Satan (the serpent) and ate of the fruit. She brought the fruit to Adam who was not deceived. Adam’s temptation was different. Did he trust God to have an answer for the terrible dilemma he found himself in? Would he lose the lovely Eve, or did God have a plan in mind to save her? Another issue was at stake: Satan wanted dominion of the earth. But he could not get it unless he caused Adam to sin also. Making Eve sin was not enough. Adam had the greater temptation and in sinning he had the greater fall. In choosing to sin he chose for the whole race.
You know the story. I’m sure all heaven mourned. God came to see Adam and Eve before the sun set that day with the covenant:
15 “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” Genesis 3:15.
God would give them a conscience – enmity between mankind and Satan. He would “write the law on their hearts!” There was also the promise of a Sin Bearer who would destroy sin and Satan, but only through His own suffering. The word “covenant” is not used, but it had the features of the everlasting covenant.
If Satan had gained dominion of this earth after Adam’s sin, did God have a right to intervene and give these blessings and promises? No! Except for one thing: In the promise of His coming to buy back all that was lost in Eden, He had the right “in prolepsis” to intervene and bless mankind. In this future promise Christ atoned for man’s sin and offered a legal justification, and a probation so that man could learn of the love and mercy of God.
The focus of the covenant was the promise of a Sin Bearer, and the mandate for men was to show enmity against sin and Satan – to keep the law of God.
-------------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
Dr. Sturges,
It's interesting that you reference God's promise to Adam and Eve as the first mention of the everlasting covenant in view of the fact that later covenant statements were made specifically to the Jews of the Old Testament, particularly the promises of Jeremiah 31 and 33.
-
Artiste,
It is true, the covenant was given to the Jews. Paul says they received the oracles of God. Jesus said that salvation is of the Jews. Many people, including the Jews themselves took a very narrow view of this -- as if the covenant and the blessings of God were to be restricted to the Jews. Much is said in the Old Testament to indicate that God had much broader plans for Israel. He intended that they be a "kingdom of priests" to evangelize the world.
When the captivity ended, Daniel gave a very significant prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27 outlining the mandate God had for Israel and allowing them just 490 years to accomplish this mandate. Read especially verse 24. Here are a number of verses showing that God intended for Israel in the Old Testament to reach all the world:
"All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the LORD: and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee." Psalms 22:27
2 "And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
3 "And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem." Isaiah 2:2-3
"And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth." Isaiah 49:6
4 "Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear unto me, O my nation: for a law shall proceed from me, and I will make my judgment to rest for a light of the people.
5 "My righteousness is near; my salvation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the people; the isles shall wait upon me, and on mine arm shall they trust." Isaiah 51:4-5
"Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people." Isaiah 56:7
See also a more extensive list of verses if needed:
Genesis 49:10; Exodus 19:6; Psalm 67:4; 72:17; 98:2,3; 117:1
Isaiah 11:10; 42:1-4, 6; 45:14; 54:3; 60:1-3; 66:19; Daniel 9:24
Jeremiah 3:17; 16:19; Micah 4:1-2; Zechariah 2:11; Malachi 1:11
Another aspect of this is that Romans 11 indicates that the Christian Church replaced Israel the nation as the chosen people of God, bearing the blessings and the responsibilities of the covenant. 1 Peter 2:9 repeats Exodus 19:5,6 indicating that the same covenant given to Israel is given to the Christian Church.
----------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
I sense that Artiste has an avid interest in a Jewish background. Many Christians believe the Jews are still very privileged to be God's chosen people, and that all of them will be saved.
You mention the promises found in Jeremiah. How do these apply? What advantage do people with a Jewish background have?
-
Johann and Artiste,
In looking at the profiles of several people on this forum, I noted some who have Jewish backgrounds and/or interest in things Jewish. I am one. A certain picture of my mother looks very Jewish. I asked her if she were Jewish, which she denied. Then I asked others if any Jews ever got to Sweden, and was affirmed that indeed they did. So I don't know.
To answer your question and a suggestion to Artiste, I would say that as Christians we need to know what the Bible says, even if it crosses our personal beliefs. We need to know that God is a God of love and mercy. Whatever His plan it is for the best.
On my website, www.everlastingcovenant.com drill down to article #27, "The Chosen People" and follow the hyperlink "To Be a Jew." I have tried to put together what I could find about the status of Jews today. I would have to warn you that I am not a Zionist. I am afraid that some of the beliefs associated with Zionism are fatal deceptions that will cause people to wait for events that will never happen and they will not get ready for Jesus' Second Coming as they should.
On the other hand, I have long had a suspicion that Joshua V. Himes was Jewish. It was because of his talents that William Miller began to speak in large churches and his message spread over America at the time. We need more Joshua V. Himes' today. And I suspect we will find them among the Jews.
--------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
Hakim,
My experience is similar to yours in regards to Jewishness.
You mentioned Romans 11 as indicating that the Christian Church replaced the nation of Israel as the chosen people of God.
As you know, Romans 9, 10, and 11 are written specifically concerning the Jews--Paul's ethnic brethern. Paul says, "I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew"
He said this well after the Jews rejected Jesus and presided over His crucifiction, when it is commonly considered that the Jews as a nation were rejected by God.
Paul had already explained the significance of the natural olive tree: "Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised!"
Paul told the Gentile Christians that they were the wild branches being grafted in, supported by the natural root.
It is interesting that Paul said near the end of Romans 11, "I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, [speaking here to the Gentile Christians] so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in."
I've wondered what the "mystery" was and what was to happen with Israel after the full number of Gentiles had come in.
"For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?" --Romans 11:15
-
Artiste,
Thank you for your reply. I have talked to Jews, especially those who came to Weimar when I was there. It seems that the Holocaust has had a profound effect on the Jewish psyche. Maybe it is lessening now that several generations have passed. It seems that some are angry at God for letting it happen, and have given up all religion, including Judaism. Many had to endure the epithet "Christ Killers." I have always tried to tell them that there is a wide variety of belief within the Christian world, and most would NEVER call anyone a Christ Killer. In fact I found this verse:
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. John 10:17-18
I tell Christians that they must have this verse on the tip of the tongue when speaking with Jews. It is an affirmation that Jesus came to die, that no one took His life, except as He gave it.
It is a problem for me to observe the hostility that most Jews still have for Christianity. Some are being converted, one by one. I just hope that some time there will be many.
-------------------------
In 1972 I went to Loma Linda to take more training in Gastroenterology. It was a problem for me to find office space. There were four others on the staff, two of whom had spacious well appointed offices. But who was willing to share his office but Ray Herber (happens to be Jewish), who had the smallest office. I have had a lot of respect for Ray ever since.
I don't know how interested you are in this. I have heard it said that Adventists generally do not have a well developed view of present day Judaism. Romans 11:25 could well be prophetic. I hope so.
----------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
This is to answer some questions:
Questions have arisen as to the promise of land in the covenant with Abraham,
what view of the covenant plays into the hands of the dispensationalists,
how the Holy Spirit might be miscontrued in these end time,
the whether Christ needed “authority” to intervene after Adam had sinned.
I am not sure that I gave good answers to these questions, partly because I am still learning myself. But let me try again:
At Creation Adam was given dominion over the earth. In this verse Adam was to populate the earth and to subdue it. This included the whole earth, which was the first promise of land. He was also given dominion over all living things.
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. Genesis 1:28
This dominion was lost to Satan when Adam sinned. When God gave the covenant to Abraham, He again promised land. It was a much smaller piece of land, but at Sinai God again said that “all the earth is mine.” This implied that God intended for His people to bring His message to the whole earth. This promise reaches us in this day in the missionary movement of the church.
-----------------------
How do some modern views of the covenant play into the hands of the dispensationalists. First of all, what do the dispensationalists believe? It is their view that the Sinai covenant including the ten commandment law was given just to the Jews. The New Covenant promised in Jeremiah was given to the church at Calvary or at Pentecost, but without the ten commandment law – and particularly without the Sabbath command.
Many Adventists still hold to the concept that the Old Covenant was operative throughout the Old Testament period, and that Jesus brought this to an end at Calvary. Then a New Covenant was instituted at that time. Adventists are then put into a difficult position to show that the ten commandments were given for all people for all time. There are good answers to this, but they would be much stronger with a better understanding of the Covenant. This is being discussed now.
-------------------------
How is the Holy Spirit misconstrued in modern times. I had mentioned the tongues movement. I visited a Nazarene church one time at the invitation of patient-friends of mine. A woman evangelist spoke strongly about the Holy Spirit. The meeting then closed. We stood around and talked. She asked if we believed in the Holy Spirit. We said most assuredly we did. Somehow that was not the right answer. After visiting a little more, we left – but no one else left! We were surprised. I thought the meeting was over. Looking back, I think the meeting did not even start until we left!
Another aspect is the feeling of some that the impressions and/or revelations people get today are more reliable than what the Bible says. This is putting a false view of the Holy Spirit above the Bible.
------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
Continued from above:
I had made the comment that when God gave the covenant to Adam and Eve, He could do so only in the authority He received “in prolepsis” (acting as though a future event has already occurred) from His willing sacrifice on Calvary. Ellen White has said repeatedly that all blessings come to us through the cross of Calvary. Here is an important passage. I apologize for printing so much of it, but it is all significant.
1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
2 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?
3 And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.
5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. Revelation 5:1-6
The scroll with seven seals showed the prophetic history of the Christian Church. Only the Lamb who was slain was able to open the seals and reveal the contents. In the rest of the chapter we find that the “Lamb” is referenced again in verses 8, 12, and 13; and being slain is referenced again in verse nine.
Only by being the Lamb that was slain could Christ intervene and redeem mankind. And for this all creation bows before Him with the highest praise.
-----------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
You have given some good answers, so I venture asking you another question.
Why are you presenting the Everlasting Covenant as so important? Isn't faith in Jesus Christ all we need? Is there a relationship between faith and this covenant?
-
Isn't our role in the covenant the expression of our Faith...after all, as I see the covenant it is a two party contract, we accept the Gift of God and then share that Gift with a broken world as the Divine Hope!!!
But, I do wait with baited breathe for the continuation of this terrific study!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Gailon and Johann and others,
Please pardon my absence. I admit that I bit off more than I could chew. I had started my own www.covenantforum.com which really has not taken off as hoped. There was another forum on which I posted for the last four years, but gradually most of the believers left and only those who questioned everything were left. As you can guess, discussions there were not too rewarding. For several reasons I decided to try some other SDA forums, and started this discussion on three forums.
I really was not prepared for what happened. Discussion has been so intense, rapid, and challenging that I cannot keep up. I have limited my discussion to one of those forums and it is all I can do to keep up there. We have gotten as far as the Sinai covenant(s) and are trying to work through the problems there.This will still take some more time.
I hate to direct people from one forum to another in the interest of fairness. However I do have a website www.everlastingcovenant.com which is my major interest. It is a work in progress, and I am doing a major re-write now. You are welcome to look at it and use anything you want.
My interest in this comes from a paper "The Sabbath and Sunday" by J. Mark Martin. He brings up all the arguments that we have had for over 100 years. However, recent attacks against the law and the Sabbath center around the covenant. I have heard SDA speakers, read articles and books by SDA authors and find that we, as Adventists, do not have a unitary belief on the Sabbath. So, about four years ago I started a project of studying the covenant(s) to find out what the Bible says. The website is the result and it is still in the process of development.
I am going to take a risk and present "Adventist Dispensationalism" in three parts. I will see what I can do to keep upl
------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
Adventist Dispensationalism
Topics:
Definitions
Mediator of a New Covenant
In this article I am speaking to my own church and to a common belief that appears to be Biblical, but that opens up a number of problems with other Biblical concepts.
Definitions
Dispensationalism is to believe that Israel in the Old Testament were under the Sinai covenant, which included the ten commandments and the ceremonial law. They were saved by keeping the law. When Jesus came this “old covenant” came to an end and the New Covenant was instituted whereby the law is written on the heart, and men are saved by grace.
Many Adventists believe that Israel in the Old Testament were under the Old Covenant (undefined). They separate the ten commandments from this covenant, saying that it was in force from Eden and is for all men. Men were saved by faith in the promise of the Messiah in the Old Covenant, and by faith in the fact of His coming in the New. At Calvary the New Covenant was instituted and men were given a fuller and more complete revelation of the character of God.
This is a peculiar mix. While promoting an “old covenant” that was “faulty” for the old testament period and a “new covenant” after the cross, they try to hold onto the ten commandment law as applicable to all men in all places and in all time. Admittedly, this concept seems to be supported by a number of passages in the writing of Paul, and especially in Hebrews 8-10. I will quote just one verse:
Mediator of a New Covenant
“For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance--now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant” (Hebrews 9:15 NIV).
“Christ is the mediator of a new covenant.” This is certainly plain enough. Jesus mediates a new covenant! Further it is stated in His death He ransomed those who sinned under a first (old?) covenant. The sacrifices were done to atone for sin under the “old covenant.” These could not be effective until Jesus had provided the real sacrifice at Calvary, which atoned for the sins of all men – those in both the old testament and those in the church age.
This is plain enough. There is no argument. Or is there?
Paul in Hebrews is dealing with perceptions. He is accepting the terms “new, old, first” etc as commonly used in his day. In fact those terms are being used in the same way today. I propose that the terms “new covenant” and “old or first covenant” are descriptive terms, not necessarily representing historical covenants.
------------------------
to be continued.....
-
Adventist Dispensationalism -- continued part two
Did Jesus bring to an end the Old Covenant and institute a New Covenant at Calvary?
We need to understand where the covenant came from. It was formulated within the council of the Godhead before the foundation of this world. The focus of this covenant was for Jesus to come, live among men a sinless life, die a sacrificial death on Calvary, be resurrected and eventually restore all that was lost in Eden. The purpose of this covenant was the salvation of men and the vindication of the justice and mercy of God.
I don’t think there is any argument on this fact. I must add that the above paragraph describes just ONE covenant. No other covenant with these features has even been made. It is called the “everlasting covenant” or “my covenant.” These terms are used fifteen times and fifty one times respectively in the Bible. They are not obscure terms and can refer to only one thing, the covenant made within the Godhead before the foundation of this world.
It is easy to get bogged down in the details of the “old covenant” and the “new covenant.” Actually, this is important, but let us focus on only one issue: an answer to the above question.
26 “And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 “And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate” (Daniel 9:26-27 KJV).
This passage gives the time of the Messiah’s sacrificial death, and what this will do – confirm the covenant and cause sacrifice and oblation to cease. There is some variation in the translation of gabar. Some will translate this as “confirm” and others have used “make a firm covenant.” Here is Strong’s:
Transliteration: gabar
Vine's Words: Hero
English Words used in KJV:
prevail 14, strengthen 3, great 2, confirm 1, exceeded 1, mighty 1, put 1, stronger 1, valiant 1. [Total Count: 25]
a primitive root; to be strong; by implication to prevail, act insolently :- exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more [strength], strengthen, be stronger, be valiant.
—Strong's Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary
To apply this term, the covenant is “confirmed” (KJV and NIV) and established. It is not ended. The same covenant is now to continue with even greater authority.
Other translations are “to make a firm covenant” NASB or “enter into a strong and firm covenant” (Amplified Bible). Maybe there are others. Do these terms open the door to a “new covenant?” However, no other covenant has ever been made that is comparable with the everlasting covenant, “my covenant” formed in the council of the Godhead before the foundation of this world. If the covenant is made “strong or firm” it is not ended, it is strengthened!
The “New Covenant” at the Last Supper
“For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matthew 26:28 KJV).
“This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26:28 NIV).
“for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26:28 NASB).
“For this is My blood of the new covenant, which [ratifies the agreement and] is being poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26:28 Amplified)
This is the one place where Jesus talks about the “testament” or “covenant.” These verses translate diatheke as either “new covenant (testament)” or as just “covenant.” In each verse the blood is “shed for many for the remission of sins.” There is only one covenant that focuses on the shed blood of Jesus Christ, and that is the everlasting covenant, or my covenant. Here are Strong’s notes on the translation:
Greek Strong's Number: 1242
Transliteration: diatheke
Vine's Words: Covenant
English Words used in KJV: covenant 20, testament 13. [Total Count: 33]
from <G1303> (diatithemai); properly a disposition, i.e. (special) a contract (especially a devisory will) :- covenant, testament.
—Strong's Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary
Greek Strong's Number: 2537
Transliteration: kainos
Vine's Words: New
English Words used in KJV: new 44. [Total Count: 44]
of uncertain affinity; new (especially in freshness; while <G3501> (neos) is properly so with respect to age) :- new.
—Strong's Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary
Of the four translations I brought up, the KJV uses “new covenant,” the NASB and NIV just “covenant,” and the Amplified “new covenant” with the “new” in italics, meaning supplied.
In summary, Jesus confirmed the everlasting covenant by His sinless life, and by His sacrificial death. It was the same covenant held by faith in the Old Testament, and shown by fact in the New Testament.
When we understand what happened at the Cross and what it meant for Jesus to confirm the covenant, we will understand much more about the covenant generally, and a number of other issues will open up.
------------------------
To be continued . . . . . . . . . .
-
Problems with Dispensationalism
1. Ten Commandment Law
Most Protestants will look on the ten commandment law as a part of the old covenant. And the Bible does equate the covenant with the commandments or tables of stone (Exodus 34:28; Deut. 4:13, 23; 9:9, 11, 15). If this covenant is done away at the cross, the ten commandment law is also done away. If pushed Protestants will say that the law of Christ has been expressed in various parts of the New Testament, but not the Sabbath commandment.
A person needs to realize several things. The historical old covenant lasted but a short time and never resumed official status. The covenant offered by God, “my covenant” is everlasting and was the covenant of Adam and Eve, of Abraham, and of Israel throughout their history.
Second, there is much Bible evidence that the nation of Israel, in rejecting their Messiah, also forfeited their status as the Chosen People. The Christian Church is now the “Israel” of God (Gal. 3:29) and hold the privileges and responsibilities of the covenant – including the ten commandment law. Finally, God is not a respecter of persons. He does not have two means of salvation – only through the name of Jesus and His shed blood are sinners saved.
2. Fault in the Old Covenant
William Johnsson, a well known Adventist writer, says that there was fault with the response of the people. Many will agree with him. He goes on to admit that the "old covenant" itself was deficient. This requires careful definition as to just what the “old covenant” was.
When God gave the covenant in Exodus 19:4-6 He gave a perfect covenant offering power to live a holy life through grace. God does not have a faulty work, ever! The people responded by their human promises “All that the Lord has said we will do.” This response was faulty because humans cannot keep the law of God without grace through faith. God accepted this as “a covenant” but not as “my covenant.” God will work with people where they are if their intentions are good. Thus, He accepted these promises as “a covenant” and allowed a ratification ceremony with animal sacrifices. This was a singular event, as “my covenant” can be confirmed only by the willing sacrifice of Jesus Christ on Calvary. This was the classic, historical, old covenant which lasted until the people defied God in their heathen festival at the base of Sinai.
In the perception of Paul, the covenant of works was manifested by rote keeping of the law, meticulous observation of the sacrifices and rituals (John 5:45, 46; 9:28, 29), and a dependence on their descent from Abraham (John 8:33) as a means of salvation. They had forgotten the Messiah to whom these things pointed. In Hebrews chapters eight to ten Paul shows that salvation comes only through the true sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary. The sacrifices of animals can never, of themselves, save from sin.
New Covenant has come to be a descriptive term to describe the covenant of grace. It has a historical background, but the term can also be read as “renewed” covenant.
Old Covenant has also come to be a descriptive term for all forms of legalism or works-religion. It too has a historical background.
3. Ellen White on the New Covenant
Ellen White speaks of two covenants. “The covenant of grace was first made with man in Eden,.... This same covenant was renewed to Abraham in the promise, ‘In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.’.... Though this covenant was made with Adam and renewed to Abraham, it could not be ratified until the death of Christ ... yet when ratified by Christ, it is called a new covenant...” After they broke the covenant in their heathen festival at Sinai, the people “now, seeing their sinfulness and their need of pardon, they were brought to feel their need of the Saviour revealed in the Abrahamic covenant, and shadowed forth in the sacrificial offerings.... Now they were prepared to appreciate the blessings of the new covenant.” (White EG: Patriarchs and Prophets, 370-373).
Ellen White does not say much about the “old covenant” except that it was formed between God and Israel at Sinai. God accepted their attempt at keeping the commandments as a lesson they needed to learn of their need of grace. This “classic old covenant” lasted “only a few weeks.” This was the historical old covenant. The “experiential old covenant” is a part of the sinful nature of man ever since Eden and will last until Jesus comes again (Skip MacCarty: In Granite or Ingrained). That is another story!
--------------------------
to be continued part three ................
-
Adventist Dispensationalism
4. Restored to the Covenant of Grace
After the “old” covenant at Sinai was broken, Moses entered into four intense intercessions with God before "the covenant" was renewed. The broken covenant and the renewed covenant were different. In Exodus 19:4-6 God offered “my covenant” to make of them “a peculiar treasure, a kingdom of priests, an holy nation.” God would do this by grace and the power He showed in delivering them from Egypt.
The people responded by “All that the Lord has said we will do.” This was repeated twice more in Exodus 24 when the old covenant was ratified by animal sacrifice. (“My covenant” can be ratified only by the sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary!) This was a response lacking in faith as the people shortly refused to stand in the presence of God, by the separate ratification ceremony they had, and by their failure within 40 days to keep this covenant.
After Moses’ intercessions God renewed the covenant:
“Behold, I make a covenant: before all thy people I will do marvels, such as have not been done in all the earth, nor in any nation: and all the people among which thou art shall see the work of the Lord: for it is a terrible thing that I will do with thee” (Exodus 34:10).
A remarkable verse! The marvels? God would make of them “a peculiar treasure, a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation!” The evidence of God working among the people is not just important, remarkable, inspiring, or miraculous – it is “terrible!” It is something we don’t have a human word for. This was not the “old covenant,” it was again “my covenant” offered by the grace of God.
5. Do Christians have an Advantage?
Do Christians, having the story of Christ and his life and sacrifice on Calvary and resurrection as a fact, have an advantage over the Old Testament followers of God? No! The Old Testament people had remarkable advantages in the prophets, the Shekinah glory, the Urim and Thummim and other direct manifestations of the power and glory of the living God. There were understandings that developed with the passage of time that were fully revealed only when Jesus came. But the Power of God has always been available to save.
6. Does God have Two Ways to Save People?
Does God have more than one way of Salvation? Is He a respecter of persons? Was looking forward in faith to the coming Redeemer less than our looking back in faith to the fact of His coming? NO! See #5.
7. Behold the Days Come
Jeremiah 31:31-34 speaks of "Behold, the days come." This phrase is repeated three times in this chapter. What days? What is the context? Jeremiah wrote in the early part of the 70 years captivity. The immediate fulfillment came with the restoration to Israel from their captivity. However, there is more. There is also a prophecy of a Kingdom of righteousness on earth after the seventy weeks of Daniel 24 was fulfilled, coinciding with the coming of the promised Redeemer. The final and complete fulfillment comes at the Second Coming of Christ when sin and sinners are no more, and the righteous are redeemed to live with Him for ever.
Is this promised covenant “new” having never been made before? Or is it a renewal “my covenant,” the everlasting covenant of God?
The covenant had been renewed many times with Israel. In Jeremiah 31 we can see a renewal of the covenant after the restoration from the captivity, a ratification and confirmation when Jesus came the first time, and a final fulfillment when He comes the second time. “His mercy endureth forever.” The love of God does not change. His arm is not shortened that He cannot save. The plan of salvation has always been open for people to repent and be saved.
8. Did Jesus End an Old Covenant at the Cross?
Did Jesus end the old covenant by His sacrifice, and institute a new covenant? Did "to confirm" the covenant mean to end it? No!
Did Jesus institute the inoperative "new covenant" at that time, thus ending the old covenant? Having evidence that the covenant of grace had been given to Adam and Eve and to Abraham in the past introduces a problem if a person believes that the Old covenant was in force until ended by Jesus at Calvary. To believe that the Old Covenant was instituted at Sinai and continued to the Cross poses a special problem for Adventists. The ten commandment law was clearly associated with the Sinai covenant, even called “the covenant.”
To say the Old Covenant was ended at the Cross raises the question as to what happened to the ten commandments. There is evidence that the ten commandment law is the law of God for all eternity, but this evidence is largely implied in the patriarchal age. In my opinion, there is strong evidence that God has just one everlasting covenant which has been renewed many times, and finally ratified by Jesus at the Cross. This covenant continues into the New Earth when the covenant blessing is given,
“And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God” (Revelation 21:3).
-------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
Suggestion:
I hate long, long posts -- and here I have done the same! Please pardon.
I would suggest that if you find something of interest, just comment on that one point.
We can always come back for more if needed. Sometimes in discussing one point, other questions are clarified also.
----------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
To summarize what I believe about the Sinai Covenant:
In Exodus 19:4-6 God offered to them the Abrahamic covenant, calling it "my covenant." This is a significant term. "My covenant" indicates something that belongs to God, something that was formulated before Sinai. This term is used 51 times in the Bible.
The Abrahamic covenant is also called the everlasting covenant, and the "new covenant" by EGW (PP 370-373). It was a good covenant. A covenant of grace (Exodus 19:4). It included the ten commandment law as the guidelines to make of them "an holy nation" by grace. There was no fault in this covenant.
There was a faulty covenant made at Sinai. When Moses carried the covenant message to the elders, they responded "All that the Lord hath spoken, we will do." While this is a good statement, implying good intentions, there is evidence that it was presumptuous and self confident. Instead of faith, they feared God. They refused to come into His presence when He came down on the mount. In Exodus 24 they went through a ratification ceremony.
The everlasting covenant or "new covenant" was ratified by Jesus on the cross. The ceremony made in Exodus 24 could have no significance for "my covenant."
As further evidence that the covenant of human promises was a different and faulty covenant is that within 40 days, they had broken this covenant in a most egregious manner.
When the covenant was again given to the people after Moses' intercessions, it was again a covenant of grace (Exodus 34:10). this is an overview, and there will be many questions......
-----------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
With this you are presenting the core of the Gospel. Here we see the difference between the divine and human efforts. This does not diminish our obligation towards God, but it emphasizes that it is God's covenant.
Would you say that every sin has its roots in switching from God's eternal Covenant to the human covenant in Ex. 24, even if the terms are unknown?
-
Johann,
Would you say that every sin has its roots in switching from God's eternal Covenant to the human covenant in Ex. 24, even if the terms are unknown?
Sin is a very large subject in itself. To answer your question directly; that there are sins of attempting to do God's will by our own efforts. These usually arise from human pride. The person who does this does not want to admit that he needs God. He wants to do it himself.
Then there are sins of selfishness. Arrogance, desire for power, money, material things. Not giving God appreciation. Not honoring God for what He has done.
How about sins of rebellion, a direct attack against God?
You can add to the list.
The Ten Commandments describe what sin is. We look at these as being a picture of the "performance" that God requires. The ten can be summarized as two -- love for God and love for our fellow man. Lacking love for God leads to pride. Lacking love for our fallow man leads to selfishness. Pride and selfishness are thus the root causes of sin in this paradigm. And pride and selfishness are the core of the sinful nature. We cannot overcome pride and selfishness without becoming more proud and selfish -- except by the grace and power of God.
Thus, the Ten Commandments relate not just to performance, but to the very nature of man itself. This is how I see it. I'd be interested in your comments.
--------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
Johann,
Would you say that every sin has its roots in switching from God's eternal Covenant to the human covenant in Ex. 24, even if the terms are unknown?
Sin is a very large subject in itself. To answer your question directly; that there are sins of attempting to do God's will by our own efforts. These usually arise from human pride. The person who does this does not want to admit that he needs God. He wants to do it himself.
Then there are sins of selfishness. Arrogance, desire for power, money, material things. Not giving God appreciation. Not honoring God for what He has done.
How about sins of rebellion, a direct attack against God?
You can add to the list.
The Ten Commandments describe what sin is. We look at these as being a picture of the "performance" that God requires. The ten can be summarized as two -- love for God and love for our fellow man. Lacking love for God leads to pride. Lacking love for our fallow man leads to selfishness. Pride and selfishness are thus the root causes of sin in this paradigm. And pride and selfishness are the core of the sinful nature. We cannot overcome pride and selfishness without becoming more proud and selfish -- except by the grace and power of God.
Thus, the Ten Commandments relate not just to performance, but to the very nature of man itself. This is how I see it. I'd be interested in your comments.
--------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
Based upon the Biblical Record and the Counsels this would appear to be an excellent summary.
Thanks for continuing the study, by the way. I shall have to look at your site.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Johann,
Sin is a very large subject in itself. To answer your question directly; that there are sins of attempting to do God's will by our own efforts. These usually arise from human pride. The person who does this does not want to admit that he needs God. He wants to do it himself.
Then there are sins of selfishness. Arrogance, desire for power, money, material things. Not giving God appreciation. Not honoring God for what He has done.
How about sins of rebellion, a direct attack against God?
You can add to the list.
The Ten Commandments describe what sin is. We look at these as being a picture of the "performance" that God requires. The ten can be summarized as two -- love for God and love for our fellow man. Lacking love for God leads to pride. Lacking love for our fallow man leads to selfishness. Pride and selfishness are thus the root causes of sin in this paradigm. And pride and selfishness are the core of the sinful nature. We cannot overcome pride and selfishness without becoming more proud and selfish -- except by the grace and power of God.
Thus, the Ten Commandments relate not just to performance, but to the very nature of man itself. This is how I see it. I'd be interested in your comments.
--------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
I have heard people say that the only definition of sin is found in 1. John 3:4. It seems to me there is a further definition found in vv. 22-24 in that same chapter. What is your idea?
-
There are several words that are used to mean sin of one type or another:
. . . . Sin - transgression of the law. Most people take the narrow view that relates only to performance issues. With a broad understanding of the law, this is a good summary.
. . . . Transgression - seems to limit one to direct breaking of the law.
. . . . Iniquity - persistent sin and of having a sinful nature.
. . . . Rebellion - overt defiance of God. Often occurs subtly in other situations.
. . . . Unbelief - a very basic cause of sin (talk to Bill Sorenson on www.Covenantforum.com or www.atomorrow.com )
. . . . Coventousness - materialism, love of money
You add to the list.....
"And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
"And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment" (1 John 3:22-23
These are very good verses. They require more thought than does 1 John 3:4. I would say that when "commandments" are directly referred to it is usually the ten commandments. But it goes one step further -- to do those things that are pleasing in His sight. We don't want to just "squeak" into heaven, we want to walk in on a red carpet with the bands playing. We want to be welcomed by Jesus and the angels. We want to feel that we belong there. For this we will do whatever "is pleasing in His sight."
We begin by believing on the name of Jesus Christ. This is where grace comes from and where we must begin. Then we show our love to God by showing love to one another! (That is the hard part!)
--------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
The dilemma of Dispensation theology is that these people who subscribe to it don't know how to answer the question: how were people saved in OT times? I have addressed this question to many adherents of that view and some answers are really incredible, like one who said, "Well, they were not judged yet. . .". Another answered--"They will be saved by faithfull obedience" (which includes NO ONE). And a third answer was--"Jesus went to preach the gospel to those in prison. . ."
Now, I asked the one who said that they were not judged yet what would be the criteria for their judgment when they will be judged. He didn't answer me. I insisted in a few days with the same question. No answer again. I asked a third time--nothing said. Again I returned to the same question, and finally he gave me the following answer: He called a friend of his who worked in the Immigration Dept. in the Fort Lauderdale, Fla., to check my condition (whether I was legally or illegally in the country), and even bragged to the other participants of this discussion group that if I were here illegally he would see to it that I were deported! That was his answer, no kidding. . .
By the way, since I am an American citizen since December 2006.
-
Azenilto,
What will you ask when you find out that many Adventists also believe in a form of dispensationalism. By that I mean that they believe that the Jews in the Old Testament were under the Old Covenant, and that the New Covenant was instituted after Jesus died and was resurrected.
Included in this is the ten commandments given at Sinai. They will say that the commandments then were written on stone, were an instrument of condemnation, and that after Jesus died and was resurrected the law is written on the heart.
Added to this is the belief that the sacrifices and ceremonies were a part of the covenant, and since they were ended at the cross, the covenant was also at that time ended - fulfilled and the ten commandments no longer in force.
There are very real problems in this scenario. In my opinion it is not Biblical. Presentations of the covenant in Exodus 19:4-6 and Exodus 34:10 show what God will do by His grace and power in the lives of men in the Old Testament. Many verses also show that God has always been primarily concerned with a changed life, not just an outward keeping of the commandments.
-----------------------
Hubert F. Sturges
-
Very interesting discussion! If i may intrude on your conversation, I would like to bring to your attention what the Holy Spirit, through the apostle Paul, said about the two covenants. Both covenants deal with the law of ten commandents. The old covenant is "the letter" and the new covenant is "the Spirit". Paul says that the law engraved on stones is the ministry of condemnation and death. 2 Cor.3:7. It is as cold as the stones it is engraved upon or as dry as the ink it is written with. The mere letter of the word of God cannot impart life to the sinner and yet it is a "glorious ministry" since it reveals to us our sinful condition and our need of a Saviour. "The letter kills." 2 Cor.3:6,7. If the ministry of the letter of the law, the ministry of death, is a glorious ministry, how much more will the ministry of the Spirit be! For "The Spirit gives life." 2 Cor.3:6.
In other words, received as the voice of God speaking to the soul, the law of ten precepts is Spirit and life to the hearer and therefore the ministry of righteousness. "The Spirit is life because of righteousness." Rom.8:10. Thus it is written, "I the Lord speak righteousness." "The word has gone out of My mouth in righteousness." "All the words of My mouth are with righteousness." "All Thy commandments are righteousness." Isaiah 45:19,23;Prov.8:8;Psalm 119:172.
At Sinai the people were afraid of the voice that would have imparted a new life to them in Christ Jesus. They did not submit to the voice of Him whose word would have renewed the soul unto everlasting life! John 12:50. They asked that Moses speak to them instead. Shortly after, the law was engraved on stones and the people made a covenant or promised to obey all that the Lord had said but shortly after they broke that covenant. The will to obey the law was not lacking but the power to obey was certainly lacking because the letter cannot impart life to the sinner to enable him to obey that law. This experience is well described in Romans 7. There are many who are living under that covenant today even among those of us who profess to believe present truth.
In the New Covenant which was available at Sinai, the people are to receive the ten precepts as the voice of God speaking to the soul in promise. In that Covenant, the people of God make no promise to obey. It is God who makes the promises. Every command is a promise, a most positive promise of its own fulfilment! In that covenant the people, like Abraham, are fully convinced that "What He has promised He is also able to perform." Rom.4:21.
"The ten precepts of the greatest love ever presented to men is the voice of God speaking to the soul in promise. There is not a negative in that law although it may appear thus." E.G. White, 1 B.C.1105.
In other words, afer we have been convicted of sin by the letter of the law we are to come to Christ and receive that same law from His mouth! "Receive, I pray thee, the law from His mouth." Prov.22:22. Then that law is Spirit and life to the hearer! The same law that was once a ministry of death to him has now become the ministry of life, for proceeding out of the mouth of God that same law imparts power, it begets life, even the life of the Infinite One to transform the nature and re-create the soul in the image of God:
"The word of God is the seed. Every seed has in itself a germinating principle. In it the life of the plant is enfolded. So there is life in God's word. Christ says, 'The words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit and they are life.' In every command and in every promise of the word of God is the power, the very life of God by which the command may be fulfilled and the promise realized. He who by faith receives the word is receiving the very life and character of God." Christ's Object Lessons, p.38.
Here is the same truth expressed differently:
"The creative energy (Holy Spirit) that called the worlds into existence is in the word of God. This word imparts power; it begets life. Every command is a promise; accepted by the will, received into the soul, it brings with it the life of the Infinite One. It transforms the nature and re-creates the soul in the image of God. The life thus imparted is in like manner sustained, by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." Education, p.126.
"His power, His very life dwells in His word. Receive the word in faith and it will give you power to obey." Mount of Blessing, p.150.
To receive the word in faith is to receive it as the word of God to us, not written merely, but spoken! "Only he who receives the Scriptures as the voice of God speaking to himself is a true learner." Christ's Object Lessons, p.59.
"He awakens me morning by morning, He awakens my ear, to hear as the learned. The Lord God has opened my ear." Isiaah 50:4,5.
"My sheep hear My voice and they follow Me and I give them eternal life." John 10:27; 12:50.
"Be ye followers of God." Eph.5:1. This command is eternal life! Received as the voice of God speaking to us, we become followers of God in Christ Jesus by the creative energy that is in His word and the life of Christ which is thus imparted is in like manner sustained, by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God!
"Let those who have heard only traditions and human theories and maxims hear the voice of Him whose word can renew the soul unto everlasting life." Christ's Object Lessons, p.40. Amen!
sky
-
Thank you, Sky, for explicating this truth so clearly.
The "old covenant" is really not the Lord's doing. It is man's response that made it "old."
And, of course, what we know of the "new covenant" pre-dates the "old," being in place at "the foundation of the world."
-
Sky and Inge;
What more can I say after your excellent posts.
Actually, I am not good at conversation, but I have no trouble writing, so -- you asked for it!
About that "cold stone" and "dry ink" ....
We have to remember that Paul had a running battle with the Judaizers. Much of what he wrote about the covenant, the sacrifices, the law, faith and grace comes in this context. Thus the context of Paul's writing is a little different than what it was when the law and the covenant were given at Sinai.
As you mentioned, God offered "my covenant" in Exodus 19:4-6. It was a good covenant. A covenant of grace, offered to Adam and to Abraham, and now to Israel at Sinai. The promises were grand, to make of Israel "a peculiar treasure above all peoples" and "a kingdom of priests" and "an holy nation." There was the preamble of grace to both the covenant and to the ten commandment law (Exodus 19:4 and 20:2).
Here is a list of references that show that God wanted Heart religion even in the Old Testament:
Deut. 5:29 “O that there were such an heart in them, that they .. keep all my commandments.”
Deut. 30:6 “The LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart,... to love the LORD thy God.”
Psalm 37:31 “The law of his God is in his (the righteous’) heart;”
Psalm 40:8 “I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart.”
Psalm 51:10 “Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.”
Isaiah 1:17 “Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings...”
Ez. 11:19 “I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:”
Ez. 36:26 “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you:”
This list is not complete by any means.
-------------------------------
Hubert F. Sturges