Faith is not a work but an instrument in apprehending Christ, by whom we are made ritghteous.
The likeness of Christ is greater than the law. And the work of the spirit to renew us in that image is greater than the law can perform. Law-keeping cannot transform us into Christ's image.
Walking in spirit and living in Christ will never be contrary to the law. It will always demonstrate the goodness of the law.
The hallmark of the NT is death to self: no power or control over maintaining our righteousness or our improvement.
The Law cannot keep us in favor with God.
The law cannot improve our moral qualities or improve our character.
The Law cannot keep flesh in submission.
We cannot please God through obedience of the law.
We live by faith in Christ and not by obedience to the law
Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH."
3:12
However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "HE WHO PRACTICES THEM SHALL LIVE BY THEM."
3:13
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE "--
3:14
in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
3:15
Brethren, I speak in terms of human relations: even though it is only a man's covenant, yet when it has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds conditions to it.
Amos, who lived approximately 800 years before the crucifixion, was presented this prophecy by God:
Amos 8:4-9 -- Hear this, you who trample the needy and do away with the poor of the land, saying "When will the new moon be over that we may sell grain, and the Sabbath be ended that we may market wheat?" -- skimping the measure, boosting the price and cheating with dishonest scales . . .
"In that day," declares the Sovereign Lord, "I will make the sun go down at noon and darken the earth in broad daylight. I will turn your religious feasts into mourning and all your singing into weeping."
Would just abolishment of the ceremonial feast days allow them to begin marketing wheat on the Sabbath? No! This would require the abolishment of the fourth commandment for God to allow this to happen without penalty. Do we have any record in the Scriptures that met the requirements as to when this ever happened?
Mark 15:33-37 -- At the sixth hour (Noon) darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour (3:00 PM) and at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice . . . "My God, My God, Why have you forsaken me?"
Vs. 37 -- With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last.
This would clearly indicate that they could now start marketing wheat on the Sabbath without penalty. It is very and precisely pinpointed to the time of Christ's crucifixion.
[2]
Approximately 700 years prior to the time of Christ, Hosea, a contemporary of Isaiah, was instructed by the Lord about Israel's
adulterous spiritual relationship with Him. God instructed Hosea to marry an adulterous woman (Gomer) to give him some insight as to how he felt about Israel. The Lord revealed to Hosea some of His future plans for Israel.
Hosea 2:11 -- I will stop all her celebrations; her yearly festivals (Passover, trumpets, tabernacles, etc.), her new moons, (monthly), her Sabbath days (weekly appointed feasts) -- all her appointed feasts.
In case we had any possible misconception of just which festivals God was referring to, He conveniently concluded the verse with all her (Israel's) appointed feasts. I believe it was with the same convenience that approximately 700 years prior to Hosea that God listed all His sacred assemblies of feast days.
Lev. 23:1,2 -- The Lord said to Moses, "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: These are my appointed feasts, which you are to proclaim as sacred assemblies:
Vss. 3-43 (Moses then lists in order and describes each of these appointed feasts).
1. The Sabbath
2. The Passover & Unleavened Bread
3. First Fruits
4. Feast of Weeks
5. Feast of Trumpets
6. Day of Atonement
7. Feast of Tabernacles
Vs. 44 -- So Moses announced to the Israelites the appointed feasts of the Lord.
Here in Leviticus we have God's list of all His ceremonial sacred feast days. In Hosea, 700 years later, we are told that all her sacred feast days would be brought to an end.
If the sacrifices associated with each of these sacred holy days came to an end, wouldn't the sacred day also come to an end, of being a sacred day, at the same time? All agree that the sacrificial offerings on each of these days has come to an end at the time of the cross. All also agree that the sacred day associated with these prescribed sacrifices has lost its holiness by its fulfillment by Christ on the cross. Only the Sabbatarians insist on retaining the sacredness for the Sabbath, even though agreeing that the sacrificial offering intimately associated with that day was abolished at the cross.
It almost seems that God anticipated this ploy and made a special point that the Sabbath was abolished in His prophecy to Amos in Amos 8:4,5, and the specific time it would be accomplished by a description of the verifying sign as described in Mark 15:33-37.
[3]
For New Testament verification of when and where this abolishment of the Sabbath occurred we find described in Colossians.
Col. 2:13,14 -- When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful natures, God made you alive in Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. . . .
Vss. 16, 17 -- Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival (yearly feast days), a new moon celebration (monthly feast days) or a Sabbath day (weekly).
These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
Here again we have these sacred feast days coming to their ending at the time the written code (Sinaitic Covenant) was nailed to the cross. They were all only shadows of the reality which is found in Christ.
These holy feast days, including the Sabbath, and all coming to their end at the cross are all identical to the timing and circumstances as listed in the two previous prophetic descriptions.
[4]
Gal. 3:16,17 -- The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say "and to seeds," meaning many people, but "and to your seed," meaning one person, who is Christ.
What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. . . .
This passage is very informative. This verifies that the law (Sinaitic Covenant) was introduced 430 years after the promise was made to Abraham. This is speaking of the time the covenant was introduced to the Israelites at Mt. Sinai. We have this doubly confirmed by the statement of Moses to the Israelites given after their 40 years of wandering in the wilderness.
Deut. 5:2,3 -- The Lord our God made a covenant with us at Horeb (Sinai). It was not with our fathers that the Lord made this covenant, but with us, with all of us who are alive here today. (Then from verse 6-22 Moses repeats to them the ten commandments).
This is proof positive that this Ten Commandment Law originated with the Israelites when they came out of Egypt. "It was not with our fathers that the Lord made this covenant." Their fathers extended all the way back to Adam and this is another nail in the coffin of that unscriptural doctrine that the Ten Commandment Law existed from the time of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. Continuing --
Gal. 3:19 -- What then was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come.
This states in irrefutable terms that the law (Sinaitic Covenant -- Ten Commandments) was introduced or added until (and only until) the seed to whom the promise referred had come. This assures us that this covenant was a temporary measure and was only to last until Christ should come. Are you seeing all these passages lining up and portraying one non-contradicting scenario?
I believe it is absolutely necessary to realize that the Sinaitic Covenant and the Ten Commandments are interchangeable.
Deut. 4:12, 14 -- Then the Lord spoke to you out of the fire. You heard the sound of words but saw no form; there was only a voice. He declared to you his covenant, the Ten Commandments, which he commanded you to follow and then wrote them on two stone tablets.
Keep this text in mind also when we study proof # 5.
[5]
Gal. 4:22-31 -- For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.
These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar.
Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children.
But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise.
At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son."
Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.
The graphic description of the Sinaitic Covenant is figuratively represented by Abraham's slave woman, Hagar, who bore him a son. It does not tell us the time to get rid of the Sinaitic Covenant, but it had to be prior to the time of Paul's presentation.
Prior to the cross the Sinaitic Covenant was in force and no Israel- ite had the permission from God to get rid of the 'slave woman.' This can only mean to get rid of the Sinaitic Covenant -- Ten Commandment Law and associated rules and regulations of this covenant which had held the Israelites in bondage.
The "son of the slave woman will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son" can only mean that those who insist on retaining any part of the Sinaitic Covenant are under obligation to keep it all and also that they will not share in the inheritance as promised to Abraham's free born son.
[6]
2 Cor. 3:7-11 -- Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, (The ten commandments -- 100% certain) came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, fading though it was, will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious?
If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! . . . And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts?
Notice the characteristics of this ministry that brought death -- the Ten Commandments.
1. It brought condemnation and death.
2. It was temporary -- fading away.
3. It was to be replaced by the ministry of the Spirit -- the ministry that would last
Vss. 14-16 -- 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.
Paul is speaking of the unbelieving Israelites in his day. Their minds were made dull to the point that whenever the old covenant (Ten Commandment Law) was read they believed that it was still in effect. It had not been removed because they had refused to accept Christ as their Savior and "only in Christ is it taken away."
Exactly so is the experience of the Sabbatarians who tenaciously hold on to a portion of the old covenant as binding in their lives because they have refused to believe that Christ has taken it entirely out of the way. They have steadfastly refused to believe this in spite of the fact that this is so plainly stated in multiple places in the Scriptures which we have been studying.
[7]
Paul, in his letter to the Gentile believers in Ephesus, reminds them that prior to the cross they were excluded from the promises and benefits extended to the Israelites:
Eph. 2:12, 13 -- Remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
Vss. 14-16 -- For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.
Can there any longer be any doubt that this barrier of hostility, the ministry that brought condemnation and death; the ministry that was engraven in letters on stone, is speaking of the Sinaitic Covenant -- even the ten commandments.
It is just as plain that Christ destroyed this barrier -- the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments (all 10 of them) and regulations. By this act Christ reconciled both Jew and Gentile to God through the cross, by which He put to death their hostility. Could it have been explained any plainer?
I believe it should be plain to all that the Sinaitic Covenant, with all its associated rules and regulations came to its end at the cross.
There are numerous additional texts which could be given, but surely the above should be more than sufficient.
The first response I receive from a Sabbatarian to this presentation is: Now you must feel free to commit murder, rape, steal and curse God without penalty. The answer to that statement is that God has not left us in doubt as to our comportment in the era of the new covenant.
The ten commandment law came to an end at the cross, but the great moral principles were brought into the New Covenant era through New Testament instructions. In the New Testament every duty of the Christian in their worship to God is given. Using the KJV we find:
The first commandment is validated � 50 times
The second, idolatry, is condemned � 12 times
The third, profanity, is condemned � 4 times
The fifth, honor mother and father � 6 times
The sixth, murder, is condemned � 6 times
The seventh, adultery, is condemned � 12 times
The eighth, theft, is condemned � 6 times
The ninth, false witness, is condemned � 4 times
The tenth, Covetousness, is condemned � 9 times.
Is it any surprise that the fourth commandment -- keep the Sabbath holy -- is never repeated?
In all of Paul's careful instructions to Gentile converts as to their Christian duty, not one mention of Sabbath observance is given. In several long lists of the sins that are offensive to God, Paul never mentions Sabbath breaking in any form. He never mentions it as a requirement to keep or any adverse consequences if it is disregarded.
If the fourth commandment is still in effect since the cross, and if it was the most important commandment, as SDA believers have been taught, wouldn't we have received careful instructions to this fact from the Bible? Of a certainty we have an abundance of statements to support the present day adherence to the Sabbath from the writings of the SDA church. Note some that even claim as being given directly from God:
The Lord gave me the following view in 1847, while the brethren were assembled on the Sabbath at Topsham, Me.
We felt an unusual spirit of prayer. And as we prayed the Holy Ghost fell upon us. . . I was lost to earthly things and was wrapped in a vision of God's glory. I saw an angel flying swiftly to me. He quickly carried me from the earth to the holy city. . .
After viewing the glory of the holy (place), Jesus raised the second veil and I passed into the holy of holies.
In the holiest I saw an ark. . . In the ark was the golden pot of manna, Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of stone, which folded together like a book. Jesus opened them, and I saw the ten commandments written on them with the finger of God . . .
The four of the first table shone brighter than the other six. But the fourth, the Sabbath command- ment, shone above them all, -- The holy Sabbath looked glorious -- a halo of glory was all around it.
I saw that the Sabbath commandment was not nailed to the cross. If it was, the other nine commandments were; and we are at liberty to break them all, as well as to break the fourth.
-- Early Writings, p. 32, 33.
Can any knowledgeable believer of the Bible continue to believe that Jesus actually showed her these things in vision? Who can not fail to see that every one of the seven separate Bible passages that we have studied are diametrically contradictory to this "vision"? In opposition to our seven Scriptural proofs, that the Sabbath, as God's holy day, terminated at the cross, we are not shown one simple text to prove the opposite. Certainly, if this vision was from God, then His word as given to us in the Bible is unreliable.
While I was in the process of bringing these Scriptural passages together, refuting the 'vision' Ellen had in 1847, I couldn't help but remember the "success" that Albion Ballinger had in collecting a series of plain Bible texts for a similar purpose. He was one of the church's leading ministers.
From his study of the Bible he became convinced of the explicit evidence that when Christ entered within the veil on His return to heaven, following His crucifixion, He entered the most holy place instead of the first apartment (holy place). This is very certain from Scripture and generally held by most Christian denominations.
He presented EGW with eight separate but irrefutable texts that proved that fact. The problem for the Adventist perspective was that this proof destroyed their unique doctrine (the Investigative Judgment) which separated them from their Christian brothers and made them special. It didn't matter that this doctrine is completely unscriptural. Small wonder the other Christian churches have been unable to find it in the Bible.
Ellen White writes of Ballenger's attempt to present Scriptural evidence against the "truth."
After the passing of the time in 1844 they (the founding fathers) received the light and walked in the light, and when the men claiming to have new light would come in with their wonderful messages regarding various points of Scripture, we had, through the moving of the Holy Spirit, testimonies right to the point, which cut off the influence of such messages as Elder G. (Ballenger) has been devoting his time to presenting.
-- Selected Messages, Vol. 1, p. 160.
Those positions, no matter how buttressed by Scripture, were headed off at the pass by "testimonies right to the point." Personal insight that God had revealed to her in vision. You notice she doesn't say these messages were cut off by clear Scriptural evidence. At the close of the letter Elder Ballenger wrote to E. G. White presenting his case; he says:
Four times the Lord uses the term "within the veil" and in every case applies it to the inner apartment four times the Lord uses the term "without the veil" and in every instance applies it to the outer apartment. There is thus an eight-fold "thus saith the Lord," testifying that "within the veil" refers to the holy of holies, and not to the outer apartment as you assert ...
Before publishing my manuscript I sent it to several ministers holding official positions, whose loyalty is unquestioned, and asked them to show me from Scripture where I was in error. I promised that should they do this I would not publish the manuscript. Not one brother attempted to show me my error from the word of God.
One wrote: "Candor compels me to say I can find no fault with it from a Bible standpoint."
Another said: "I have always felt that it was safer to take the interpretation placed upon the Scriptures by the Spirit of Prophecy as manifested through Sister E. G. White rather than to rely upon my own judgment or interpretation."
Ballenger then goes on to say:
And now, Sister White, what can I do? If I accept the testimony of the Scriptures, I find myself under your condemnation; and you call me a wolf in sheep's clothing, and warn my brethren and my family against me. But if I reject His word for yours, can you save me in the judgment?
This letter she never replied to. She did comment more about this in her article in Selected Messages above:
We are not to receive the words of those who come with a message that contradicts the special points of our faith. They gather a mass of Scripture, and pile it as proof around their asserted theories. This has been done over and over again during the past fifty years. And while the Scriptures are God's word, and are to be respected, the application of them, if such application moves one pillar from the foundation that God has sustained these fifty years, is a great mistake. He who makes such an application knows not the wonderful demonstration of the Holy Spirit that gave power and force to the past messages that have come to the people of God.
Elder G's (Ballenger) proofs are not reliable. If received, they would destroy the faith of God's people in the truth that has made us what we are.
We must be decided on this subject; for the points that he is trying to prove by Scripture are not sound. They do not prove that the past experience of God's people was a fallacy.
That's exactly what it would prove and it was irrefutable Scriptural
evidence that they didn't even try to refute from the Scriptures. They had no problem defending her claims from her writings: source they chose to believe above the Scriptural evidence.
So, what makes me think I will succeed where Ballenger failed? We both have irrefutable Scriptural evidence. The one advantage I have is the Internet. The officials in the church are no longer able to suppress truth that exposes their vulnerable doctrines
Galatians 4:9 �But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
10 �Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
11 �I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.
Colossians 2:14 �Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15 �And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
16 ��Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 �Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
Colossians 2:20 �Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21 �(Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 �Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?
23 �Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.
Ephesians 2:15 �Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
Romans 3:26 �To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
27 �Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 �Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Christ is the reality of the law, there eveyone is justified by faith only.Keeping the law only proves you don't believe what Christ has done for you.
In Hosea it does not say when the feast will end.It could be after revalations.To understand the feast is to understand christ.
All of the feast point to Jesus.We in the church celebrate pentacost. As it is the day Jesus went to heaven.Many of the feast do point to actions by christ.It teaches us that in gods plan he has a spring-summer-fall-and winter.
The spring was when jesus was here the 1st time. The summer is when the church is here.The fall jewish feast shows us that christ will blow the trumpet and the raptur will happen,This is leading into the anti-christ and winter is the rule of anti-christ.
Jesus return brings back to the spring.1,00 year rule.
If you do not study the feast how can you disagree with somebody who does?These feast tell of christ life.
The passover meal itself tells how Jeusu was wrapped in white linen. The jews wrap one piece of bread up in a white linen.
Was not christ body wrapped that way?
AHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
See my point not to study the feast you do not know how to win a jew to christ.Study and honor it and you will be able to say here this is why that is done.
Go to your christian book store pick up a book on the passover.
dgrimater, Why not take God as his word and why practice shadow of the Christ when you can have the real thing?
Galatians 4:9 �But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
10 �Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
11 �I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain
Colossians 2:14 �Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15 �And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
16 ��Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 �Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
Colossians 2:20 �Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21 �(Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 �Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?
23 �Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.
Colossians 2:8 �Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Those who observe days, and feast and holy days are following after men. All ordinance have been done away with.
Ephesians 2:15 �Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
We Worship God just in the spirit now and not with our flesh such as observing days or what we eat or drink.
Philippians 3:3 �For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Thank you Steve, he that is of God hears God's word.
John 8:47 �He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
God will not except a works program of any kind that involves sinful flesh {and we are all guilty of sin} it either has to be all grace or all works.
Romans 3:27 �Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 �Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Isaiah 64:6 �But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
Romans 3:23 �For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Romans 5:12 �Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Romans 5:15 �But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Romans 5:16 �And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
Romans 5:18 �Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
There Steve, maybe one of the self righteous one's hopefully will read this and rethink what they are doing.
I'm sure you can add to the above Steve, so why don't you go for it and give us something I probably left out. As you know the testimony of two or more makes a difference.
