You are not logged in.
Bob,
It is probably impossible for any man to escape his biases. You have repeatedly accused be of being biased. And maybe I am. However, I have tried to show Bible documentation for what I believe. It is only on this basis that we can dialog.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Hubb, I have been advocating that for some time, Solo Scriptura, and discernment. As in my last post, some logic must enter the discussion. When speculation is what is the main tool used or something other than the Bible, then I question the premise. Since about 1980 I have eliminated studying EGW and spent more time with the Bible. Forunately our schools had us kids memorize verses for Sabbath School and Church School. It was memorized in KJV and most are using NIV now. Can be a problem when using a word search on the computer.
Unfortunately, our parents were at the brunt of some persecution in the 60's that were related to my Dad's death. I don't take lightly that sort prejudice and brutality within the church. I am not out to save a church but my soul.
Offline
Bob,
One of the problems is that one man's speculation is another man's logic. Even when we use Bible texts to support concepts, there can be disagreement on the interpretation of those texts. Ellen White is a help which I appreciate. I do not use her to prove things. I have read a little about your father (my classmate), and I cannot defend persecution or unfairness, even from the church.
We have to realize that Satan is fiercely attacking the church, even putting unconverted persons in the church to cause trouble. But that does not mean that God is not leading the church. The tares will grow with the wheat until the harvest. You can be sure that at my age, I have seen things that I cannot be proud of. But God knows those things, and where we have no influence, He will take care of it.
I would hope that those who have left the SDA church will find a living relationship with Christ, and will renew that relationship every day. I believe that there are things that are soon to happen in this world, and every Christian needs to be ready to hear and follow the leading of the Holy Spirit.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Philip Yancey's book (can't remember the name) about how he had to leave the church to find faith describes what for some is the only way. The constricture and dogma of the church (he was raised a Baptist, I believe) was so confining that it left him no real faith: the doctrines became the most important.
This is what often happens in Adventism: someone (either personal or ancestor) is "converted" to Sabbath or other definitive doctrines and joins the church because it has been identified as the "true" and "remnant" church, the only one (self-proclaimed) that keeps ALL the commandments, and the interpretation given Revelation is proof positive.
When conversion means merely to assent to doctrinal dogma, it is not based on a personal faith, but "faith" in an institution that will surely be the direct route to salvation.
Now, this may be a caricature, but most long-time Adventists recognize this as very true in many instances. One can be a faithful Christian in all denominations; in fact, if one follows the commandments given by Jesus to love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself, is devoid of specific doctrines. The many doctrines taught by Judaism suffocated the life out of people and their constant adherence, or worry about not obeying all left them in constant insecurity.
This same concern over "right" doctrine has caused many Adventists to become so discouraged and disillusioned that they have "thrown in the towel" either to live and enjoy life, or simply to be a good neighbor to all and stop the ceaseless worrying about perfection.
Few who leave Adventism do so in order to "enjoy things of the world" but to throw off the shackles that Adventism has taught them by its insular and backward view: "Things were much better ----years ago" (fill in any date.)
This is the road I have traveled and I speak for hundreds of friends and acquaintances I have known through the years. Most, I expect to see in Heaven as I don't recall that there will be a doctrinal exam, but the reminder of Jesus' admission to the kingdom given in the last part of Matt. 25.
Religion CAN make people better, but for good people to become bad, it takes religion.
"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel about on sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves."
Offline
Where is the phrase "noahide law" to be found in the bible?
Last edited by Yitzak (02-04-11 7:40 pm)
Offline
Yitzak,
I never use the term "noahide law" as there are no such. The term is not in the Bible. There is no organized presentation of "Noahide" law as is the ten commandments. Those who promote this idea claim to find 7 or 9 different laws -- by picking out phrases here and there in Genesis 1-3 and 9. By careful reading of Genesis 9, the chapter after the flood, you will actually find only four phrases that can be construed to be law. At the same time, there is evidence that the Ten Commandments were known before Sinai. Without the law, there is no sin. Sinful acts which come under one or another of the ten commandments are recorded in the Bible, and most important, they were recognized as being sinful.
Interesting, NO?
Last edited by hfsturges (02-04-11 9:42 pm)
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Elaine,
a person will find what he/she is looking for in life, and in the church.
Many people who join the church do so because they are convinced that the doctrines are correct, but for some reason it is a burden to them. They have not the "love of the truth." And lacking this they will find a reason to leave.
Is there no "doctrinal exam" for entrance into heaven? Read Revelation 14:9-11.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Yes, there are those who want to be in the "right" church that claims to be the one with the "truth."
However, the majority of people choose a church where they are welcomed and have friends and feel at home, not because of the correctness of doctrines.
One need only check the churches that are growing. (Hint, in NAD it's not the Adventist church); the attrition rate is about even with the baptism rate. Also, ask any middle-aged or older parents how many of their children are still active members. That's the success rate.
Rev. 14:11: "And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever and they have no reset day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."
How effective the fear of Hell. Jonathan Edwards' sermon still reverberates with that verse.
Why not Matt. 25: 31-46?
Why not Matt. 25:40: "And the Kin will answer and say to them,
Offline
Hubb, go to the Jews to understand the Noahide Laws:
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs … Laws.shtml
This is not backed up by our KJV or NIV but a lot of Judiasm and understanding their 613 laws. This text Paul uses to talk about Natural Law:
Romans 2:12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.
Hubb, this talks to what was law in the times before the 10 Commandments and during the 10 Commandments for the Gentiles. The Noahide Law is talked of mainly by the Jews in their Talmud. Notice no sign of the Sabbath in the Noahide Laws or the Natural logical laws most men would agree to live by or should live by.
Last edited by bob_2 (02-05-11 4:00 am)
Offline
Jews were never a separate people until the time of the Exodus. Thus, the "natural" law Paul referred to was almost universally accepted, as demonstrated in Hamarubba's code: murder, stealing, lying and such are recognized world-wide as being against human nature; thus "natural laws."
Which is why Paul refers to Gentiles who have this law written on their hearts. And Paul clearly expresses the view that Gentiles are not under the Jewish laws in many and various places, including this one in Romans, as well as reported in Acts that Peter said that Jews are forbidden to mix with people of another race but God made it clear that no one was profane (a long Jewish custom). "God does not have favorites, anybody of any nationality who fears Gd and does what is right is acceptable to him.
This was amply demonstrated by the Holy Spirit being poured out to pagans. It was Peter who rebuked the Pharisees who were intent on circumcising the Gentiles: "It would only provoke God's anger now, surey, if you imposed on the disciples the very burden that neither we nor our ancestors were strong enough to support." This could not have meant circumcision only, as all Jews were circumcised on the 8th day.
The ONLY instruction to the Gentile Christians is succinctly given:
"I rule, then, that instead of making things more difficult for pagans who turn to God, we send them a letter telling them merely to abstain from anything polluted by idols, from fornication, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood." Not a mention of all the Jewish laws (all 613) that encumbered the Jews. Christians were simply given this instruction and that they are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus.
The assumption that the new Gentile Christians began observing the seventh day has absolutely no substantiation either from the Bible or early Christian history. While they met in the synagogue, it does not infer that they began observing it as a holy day but the synagogue was the local meeting place for imparting information of various kinds. Only the temple was reserved for Jews only. There is not one single text in the entire NT where the Gentile Christians were ever given instruction on any day to be observed; and the Jews who had multiple restrictions on Sabbath were reprimanded for attempting to enforce Jewish laws on the new Christians.
The New Covenant was inaugurated at Christ's death with the Holy Spirit descending on all nationalities; Judaism became a separate religion and Christianity emerged as no longer a sect of Judaism but a new entity in the religious world.
As for the covenants: all have been abolished and superseded by the New Covenant instituted with Christ's death and resurrection.
Offline
Hubb, the rules of logic seem to be usually objective. Notice these examples:
http://www.collegestudy.org/columbiacollege/id58.html
These rules can be applied to the written Word, can it not? If a covenant is obsolete it no longer needs to be followed. Or, if the Sabbath is a shadow of Christ and fulfilled in Him then the shadow is gone and the Sabbath is no longer required because the reality is here.
Last edited by bob_2 (02-05-11 6:26 pm)
Offline
Elaine,
Can you abolish an "everlasting covenant?"
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Bob,
If a covenant is obsolete it no longer needs to be followed. Or,
if the Sabbath is a shadow of Christ and fulfilled in Him then the shadow is gone and the Sabbath is no longer required because the reality is here. the Sabbath is a shadow of Christ and fulfilled in Him then the shadow is gone and the Sabbath is no longer required because the reality is here.
You are so right. The "obsolete covenant" no longer needs to be followed.
The weekly seventh-day Sabbath is not, and has never been a "shadow" of Christ. The sacrificial lamb in the sanctuary service was the shadow of Christ.
Bob, you have a real obsession about the Sabbath. I don't think you will make any progress until you get over it.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Hubb, who is obsessing here? You in your forum named the Everlasting Covenant, which can not be supported without assumptions and EGW, warn the Seventh day Adventist church that if they believe the Old Covenant is obsolete, with the 10 Commandments at its core and the Sabbath at its core, they will not be able to argue their obsession over a day.
As a child I use to wonder why at Easter we never celebrated Christ’s death. Then I began to realize that most SDAs feel the emphasis of the Sunday morning Resurrection took away from their actual name, Seventhday!! Now, who is obsessing here??????
You certainly can’t read the old Testament without realizing the Ten Commandments were the Covenant. Exodus 34: 28, and Deut 5:1-3 make this very clear. No, Hubb not to be argumentative, because I have watched as you studied and became obsessed on calling the Plan of Salvation the Everlasting Covenant with no Biblical support for it, . Paul’s discussions are very clear in 2 Cor 3: 7 that those tablets “engraved in stone” , well read for yourself:
2 Cor 3:7 Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, 8 will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? 9 If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! 10 For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. 11 And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!
12 Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. 13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate[a] the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit..
Definition of OBSESSION
: a persistent disturbing preoccupation with an often unreasonable idea or feeling
Who has the obsession???
Last edited by bob_2 (02-05-11 8:42 pm)
Offline
Hubb asked:
Can you abolish an "everlasting covenant?"
Let me ask you Hubb, can an everlasting covenant be broken:
Isaiah 24:5 says it can be broken.
Offline
Bob, compare these texts with Isaiah 24:5:
The covenant of God cannot be broken by man.
Deut 7:9 God, which keepeth covenant .. with them that love him .. to a thousand generations
Psalm 89:34 My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.
Psalm 105:8 He hath remembered his covenant for ever, ... to a thousand generations.
Psalm 136:1-26 For His mercy endureth forever (x 26).
Isaiah 54:10 my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed,
Genesis 22:16 By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, (covenant repeated to Abraham)
Hebrews 6:17(NASB) God, desiring even more to show to the heirs of the promise the unchangeableness of His purpose, interposed with an oath,
These verses indicate that the Everlasting Covenant of God cannot be broken. Men had nothing to do with making the everlasting covenant, and there is nothing that men can do to alter or end this covenant. The everlasting covenant of God is that which was formed between Father and Son before the foundation of the world.
A Covenant was also made with men. Such a covenant always pointed to the everlasting covenant of God. This covenant was always temporary, depended on the response of men, and required frequent renewal. The term “everlasting” has been applied to this also, indicating the purpose of God. Best known is the “everlasting covenant” given to Abraham. This was the “template” covenant for all future covenants made with men, and it applied to all Abraham’s descendants, and by extension to the New Testament church.
This covenant in each of its presentations always pointed to the everlasting or NEW covenant.
5 “The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant” (Isaiah 24:5, KJV).
This verse begins with a list of the sins of men, which will separate a man from God.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Bob,
I see no point in arguing about who has the obsession. It was a cheap shot, and I apologize.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Bob,
You have a lot invested in your findings and beliefs. I think we could argue indefinitely over these points, and really get no where. I think we are at a standoff over what we each believe, and maybe better to leave it there.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Wasn't circumcision an everlasting covenant made with Abraham marked in perpetuity? Yet, it was never required of the Gentiles or pagans, but a covenant made with God between his designation of the "Chosen People."
"If that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second."
The preamble to the Decalogue (Deut. 5): "The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all those of us alive here today."
And in Ex. 20: "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt."
God made a covenant ONLY with the Israelites at Sinai. And the old covenant that was written in letters of stone is now obsolete. Please define what other possible covenant that could be?
"God, who also made us adequate as servants of a NEW covenant, NOT of the letter but of the spirit, for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. But if the MINISTRY OF DEATH, IN LETTERS ENGRAVED ON STONES, came with glory....how shall the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory....For to this day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted....but whenever a man turns to the Lord the veil is taken away."
What is your understanding of the "ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones," or that the reading of the old covenant a veil lies over their heart? Do you believe that Christ is the mediator of the new covenant? And that where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it? For a new covenant is never in force while the one who made it lives.
Please describe the Old Covenant and the New which is described in these verses. Is there a difference? When did the New Covenant take effect and when was the Old Covenant no longer valid?
Offline
Hubb let me make a few points:
1. A Covenant must be between parties with an interest, at least two.
2. The Old Covenant was not between God and Jesus His Son, but between God and man through Moses. The Symbols of the Old Covenant were shadows of realities to come. This covenant asked for obedience and faith in a Savior to come that would have salvation in His Blood. Again, the Covenant was between God and man, the mediator was Moses. The code of behavior was the Ten Commandments and the other 603 laws detailing the Old Covenant.
3. This Old Covenant must as stated be obsolete. Heb 8:13. The new code of conduct is Christ's Law. The details given while Christ spoke of His kingdom while He lived on the earth and the directives given by the Apostles of Jesus. The New Covenant had better promises than the Old. The New Covenant is between God and man with Jesus as the mediator and savior and judge. This from it's beginning, will last forever. If there is a Salvational Everlasting Covenant it is this one. The Old could not save. The Messiah had to come and live perfectly and die for our sins ushering in the New Covenant.
4. Had the Covenant, Old and New, been only between God and Jesus, the free will of man would not be necessary to accept it and to allow the Holy Spirit to empower the Christian to good works designed by God for him. The ultimate REST or reward for the Christian is the REST of Heb 4:9, a heavenly reward for the obedient Christian.
Last edited by bob_2 (02-06-11 2:06 am)
Offline
One last important thought. The Abrahamic Promise as the NT calls it, is what goes through the Old and New Covenant. Abraham was a Gentile, and as such it allows obedient Jews and those that believe by faith in the Messiah, and Gentiles to accept the New Covenant and accept the Heavenly Rest as their final reward.
Offline
Bob,
About your points:
#1. nolo contendere
#2. The Old Covenant was between God through the Abrahamic covenant (in turn between the everlasting covenant of God and Abraham by his faith) and the people through their self confident promises. Obedience was expected empowered by grace (Exodus 19:4 and 20:2)
#3. In the minds of ancient Israel, there was only one covenant -- the Abrahamic covenant. It was this that they promised to obey throughout their history. The promises of the people are always weak and faulty, and especially the promises made at Sinai. The new covenant is equivalent to the everlasting covenant of God -- the promise of salvation through Jesus Christ. Even this required a response: A recognition of the holiness of God, and belief and acceptance by faith on the part of man.
#4. The everlasting covenant of God was made before the foundation of the world. No humans existed on this earth at that time. It was an agreement between the Father who would give and the Son who would come and die for salvation of men and restoration of the world. This is the basic underlying covenant to which other covenants always refer.
Abraham was not a gentile, he was a Hebrew. The Jewish nation was rejected as the covenant people of God when they finally and irrevocably rejected Jesus as their Messiah. The Christian church is now given the privileges and responsibilities of the covenant.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Hubb, note what this writer found from his study of a Covenant between God and Jesus:
The Bible does not directly use the word covenant in describing the relation between God and Jesus Christ. Yet once we have become familiar with the features of a covenant, it becomes clear that such a covenant exists. We offer the following evidence:
....
God's eternal covenant with Christ was the reason why God could keep renewing His covenant with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Israel, David and the Christian church. Otherwise the righteous God could no longer have continued His association with the sinful race. Back of every pact which God made with the human family and undergirding every covenant was God's covenant with Jesus Christ. For this reason Old Testament history moved irresistibly forward to its fulfillment in Jesus Christ. Time and time again divine wrath was suspended only because it was put to the account of Jesus Christ, who in due time would pay all covenant debts at the bar of eternal justice.
http://www.presenttruthmag.com/archive/ … 28p1-9.htm
The Covenants mentioned in the Bible are between God and man with mediators usually. (Moses for the Old and Jesus for the New)
Common sense would have that Jesus was the willing sacrifice, so the agreement between God and His Son while important, the New Covenant is of extreme importance to those wanting salvation.
Last edited by bob_2 (02-06-11 5:53 pm)
Offline
You are correct that the covenant(agreement/plan) between God and Jesus can not be interfered with by man, but the covenants of the Bible are between God and man with mediators sometimes.
Offline
I stated:
1. A Covenant must be between parties with an interest, at least two.
What I was trying to point out that the Covenants of the Bible could never be unilateral, they were with man. Abraham, if he had not done what was necessary to be allotted faith, then their was not Covenant.
If you disagree, mention one Covenant in the Bible not given between God and man.
Last edited by bob_2 (02-06-11 5:58 pm)
Offline