You are not logged in.
This topic was begun because one of our posters claims the Plan of Salvation should be called the Everlasting Covenant :
We do not believe that it is wise to refer to God’s plan to save a people in eternity past as a “covenant.” But we do believe that our one God who is three co-equal and co-eternal persons did make a perfect plan that He would save a people from their sins. But if this plan is not called a covenant by the authors of Scripture, we must think twice about describing it by that name ourselves. The reason we should only use the word “covenant” to describe events in Scripture that are actually called covenants is because of the importance of the word “covenant” in Scripture and the place of prominence the concept has in our theological systems. The danger of calling something a covenant that Scripture does not refer to as a covenant increases the likelihood of making something a cornerstone of our theology that in fact is not an emphasis in Scripture. This of course would lead to an unbalanced and unbiblical theological system
.
http://ids.org/pdf/nctbook.pdf
Confusion will be the result if we don't let the Bible speak for itself but puts our bias in place of it speaking for itself
Offline
Notice this scripture on the same subject:
Hebrews 9:15 "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."
Offline
Read Post #1 above. Does it's discription sound like any group or person that you know. Growing up Adventist, I saw that when talking to "unbelievers" that we/I/ SDAs had to add the Sabbath obedience to the Gospel when spoken or preached. Note from the quote in that post:
The danger of calling something a covenant that Scripture does not refer to as a covenant increases the likelihood of making something a cornerstone of our theology that in fact is not an emphasis in Scripture. This of course would lead to an unbalanced and unbiblical theological system
Has not the Sabbath become to SDAs the Gospel + the Sabbath, instead of realizing the Sabbath has been fulfilled in Christ, our TRUE REST. Christ is the GOSPEL. Period!!
Last edited by bob_2 (11-01-11 2:23 pm)
Offline
Note: http://www.gotquestions.org/abolish-fulfill-law.html
It is especially important to note how the word is used in Matthew 5:17. In this context, “abolish” is set in opposition to “fulfill.” Christ came “...not to abolish, but to fulfill.” Jesus did not come to this earth for the purpose of acting as an opponent of the law. His goal was not to prevent its fulfillment. Rather, He revered it, loved it, obeyed it, and brought it to fruition. He fulfilled the law’s prophetic utterances regarding Himself (Luke 24:44). Christ fulfilled the demands of the Mosaic law, which called for perfect obedience under threat of a “curse” (see Galatians 3:10, 13). In this sense, the law’s divine design will ever have an abiding effect. It will always accomplish the purpose for which it was given.
If, however, the law of Moses bears the same relationship to men today, in terms of its binding status, then it was not fulfilled, and Jesus failed at what He came to do. On the other hand, if the Lord did accomplish His goal, then the law was fulfilled, and it is not a binding legal institution today. Further, if the law of Moses was not fulfilled by Christ—and thus remains as a binding legal system for today—then it is not just partially binding. Rather, it is a totally compelling system. Jesus plainly said that not one “jot or tittle” (representative of the smallest markings of the Hebrew script) would pass away until all was fulfilled. Consequently, nothing of the law was to fail until it had completely accomplished its purpose. Jesus fulfilled the law. Jesus fulfilled all of the law. We cannot say that Jesus fulfilled the sacrificial system, but did not fulfill the other aspects of the law. Jesus either fulfilled all of the law, or none of it. What Jesus' death means for the sacrificial system, it also means for the other aspects of the law.
This is so clear, how can you miss it's meaning Tom, Hubb and others!!!!!!
Offline