Are Gentiles under Jewish Law?

[brakelite]

We might just straighten this matter out.

I said

"If Jesus was "fully man" and had a fully human consciousness,
there would be no reason to humble himself."

You said,

"However, if you cannot believe that Jesus was fully man and at the same
time fully God"

Either, Jesus was fully man with the consciousness of man or Jesus was God in human flesh,
that is man with the mind of God. Do you get my drift. You cannot have both, man is born sinful
and wicked, ie: man is born into this perversity. Jesus was not sinful and wicked, nor does it appear
that He was born into this depravity. What was the reason Jesus could resist sin and we cannot?
Was he identical to us in every way brakelite, or was Jesus truly God Almighty in human flesh.

I do see where you are coming from...certainly Jesus did not have the inherited tendency toward sin that we have. How did Jesus resist sin? By faith in the power of His Father's word. He did not use His own divine power to resist sin, else He would have an advantage over us and could not empathise with our situation. The truth is He does understand, He has 'been there done that', thus we can have confidence in His strength as we surrender to Him as He surrendered to His Father.
We have the same promises. We also can be partakers of the divine nature and thus overcome.
"Not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit saith the Lord".

Jer. 9:23 ¶ Thus saith the LORD, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches:
24 But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD.

Just as Jesus did nothing without the Father, nor can we without Jesus.

 

[David777]

Hello brakelite.

What is investigative judgement?

 

[caprice09]

Romans Chapter 5

How is it possible that Adam (also called a son to God) can betray the nature of God in which He was made, but Christ (being God with us) cannot bear the burden of the nature of flesh? And if He cannot what hope is there of the saved who are called the Body of Christ? Are we not that opposing nature that God has reconcilled unto Himself through Christ?

"As the Son of God, Christ is held up as a righteous contrast to Adam, who betrayed the Father and led all people through himself toward sin. This far superior glory in Jesus is revealed manifold in His coming in the flesh, as the Son of Man (Adam); avenging Adam’s betrayal of humbling himself to the ways of sin, through Christ humbling Himself to the death of the cross, manifesting the gospel of grace; whereby all in Him are redeemed unto righteousness and holiness unto the LORD. For if Adam, a Son of God, can betray his heritage and nature in God, to rebel and lead all within him unto sin, then Christ, as the Son of Man, contrary to the fallen nature of the flesh, can sanctify unto righteousness all in Him through the gospel of grace."

However the only scripture I could think to support your position is this:
1 Cor 15:45 "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit." To which I concede to the deity of Christ as the significance of all that is revealed through the cross, but insist upon the burden of flesh born by Him, as a revelation of the longsufferings of the Father against the very existance of sin, and the fleshly nature of the church now reconcilled unto a Holy God.

About as close as I could come to your argument is to say that Adam, though made in the likeness and image of God, surely has proven himself immeasurably less than God, inasmuch as Christ came "in appearance as a man," though has proven Himself infinitely more than man (and offering more than man can obtain alone).

 

[David777]

Hello all.

John

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 He was in the beginning with God.

3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.

5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

God in the flesh, the creator in the flesh, the source of light and love in the flesh.

 

[David777]

Brakelite.

Hello, I do require an explanation of investigative judgement.

 

[David777]

Hello brakelite.

I have been reading about "investigative judgement".

You really do not want my version of this SDA doctrine
do you?

Please respond, be strong and quote the sources.

This is not a personal attack on you brakelite, just
shining the light on prophecy, testing you might say.

Do not be timid.

 

[brakelite]

I have been reading about "investigative judgement".

You really do not want my version of this SDA doctrine
do you?

Please respond, be strong and quote the sources.

This is not a personal attack on you brakelite, just
shining the light on prophecy, testing you might say.

Do not be timid.

I would be fascinated by your sources for your reading. If I wanted to understand carpentry, I wouldn't go to a plumber. I know that in Sydney there are several well stocked Adventist book-stores (ABC) where you will find any number of books devoted entirely to this subject. You may of course resort to those who have written against the doctrine, but one knows that to understand what someone's beliefs are and why they believe them, one doesn't go to the opposition. So, here you are, asking me. A good start, however, if you have been sincerely studying the subject with a genuine view to understand it and where we are coming from in relation to the investigative judgment, you will have realised by now that the subject is very deep, covers not just Biblical exegesis but also Hebrew and Middle Eastern culture, as well as an appreciation of old testament types and antitypes, an understanding of the feast days and their fulfilment in Christ, prophetic symbolism, and a raft of other issues.

If you have however not done such an exhaustive study, but have simply relied on anti-adventist propaganda and half baked presumptions and lies, then you are right, I am not interested in your version of that particular doctrine.

Not to say that I am afraid of it either. It is the only doctrine that is totally unique to our faith. It is a wonderful subject that can occupy ones studies for months and still not exhaust all that it can encompass. It is not for the faint-hearted. Nor is it something that can answered in a couple of posts in a forum such as this. And to be honest, nor is it something that I can answer just from the top of my head without some further study on my part and some assistance from my own library. That said, I can give you a brief outline, but it won't satisfy because it will leave too many questions....like I said, many books have been written on this subject, some not covering everything, and written by far abler men than me. I recommend them, not me.

 

[David777]

Hello Brakelite.

It is good to recieve a reply from you regarding
investigative judgement. Thank you brakelite.

I would be fascinated by your sources for your reading. If I wanted to understand carpentry, I wouldn't go to a plumber. I know that in Sydney there are several well stocked Adventist book-stores (ABC) where you will find any number of books devoted entirely to this subject. You may of course resort to those who have written against the doctrine, but one knows that to understand what someone's beliefs are and why they believe them, one doesn't go to the opposition. So, here you are, asking me. A good start, however, if you have been sincerely studying the subject with a genuine view to understand it and where we are coming from in relation to the investigative judgment, you will have realised by now that the subject is very deep, covers not just Biblical exegesis but also Hebrew and Middle Eastern culture, as well as an appreciation of old testament types and antitypes, an understanding of the feast days and their fulfilment in Christ, prophetic symbolism, and a raft of other issues.

If you have however not done such an exhaustive study, but have simply relied on anti-adventist propaganda and half baked presumptions and lies, then you are right, I am not interested in your version of that particular doctrine.

Not to say that I am afraid of it either. It is the only doctrine that is totally unique to our faith. It is a wonderful subject that can occupy ones studies for months and still not exhaust all that it can encompass. It is not for the faint-hearted. Nor is it something that can answered in a couple of posts in a forum such as this. And to be honest, nor is it something that I can answer just from the top of my head without some further study on my part and some assistance from my own library. That said, I can give you a brief outline, but it won't satisfy because it will leave too many questions....like I said, many books have been written on this subject, some not covering everything, and written by far abler men than me. I recommend them, not me.

I highlighted the important points you raised within your reply.

So I will reply to each highlighted point.

From what sources does one more fully understand a doctrinal
position?

Firstly, the scripture, secondly conviction via Holy Spirit, arguments
for and arguments against. This is a more sound approach rather than
just an acceptance of someones beliefs.

Unless you peruse the opposition's arguments you may be holding an
unsound doctrine without realizing that it is unsound. Our approach is
somewhat different brakelite.

Next point, it may be the only doctrine that differs from the rest on the
surface. But, beneath the advertised doctrinal points as listed by
SDA there are other doctrines of which I am aware brakelite.
Your organisation is not the only offender, I would hazard a guess
that all Christian and non Christian organizations do the same.

My sources are from official SDA texts brakelite, certainly not
half baked assumptions.

Brakelite, I am asking you to offer a summary of the IJ doctrine.
I am being polite and offering you the opportunity to state the
official position of the SDA organization on this doctrine.

How else will viewers of this thread be able to understand the
for and against, unless they see both sides?

Brakelite you would be an expert on IJ compared with me,
this is a walk in the park for you. I am surprised at your
reluctance, very surprised.

Also, you do realize that you cannot lose, if your doctrine
is sound you win. If it is unsound you stand corrected and
you win again. This a sure bet, have a go you mug (oz slang).

 

[brakelite]

It is good to recieve a reply from you regarding
investigative judgement. Thank you brakelite.



I highlighted the important points you raised within your reply.

So I will reply to each highlighted point.

From what sources does one more fully understand a doctrinal
position?

Firstly, the scripture, secondly conviction via Holy Spirit, arguments
for and arguments against. This is a more sound approach rather than
just an acceptance of someones beliefs.

Unless you peruse the opposition's arguments you may be holding an
unsound doctrine without realizing that it is unsound. Our approach is
somewhat different brakelite.

Next point, it may be the only doctrine that differs from the rest on the
surface. But, beneath the advertised doctrinal points as listed by
SDA there are other doctrines of which I am aware brakelite.
Your organisation is not the only offender, I would hazard a guess
that all Christian and non Christian organizations do the same.

My sources are from official SDA texts brakelite, certainly not
half baked assumptions.

Brakelite, I am asking you to offer a summary of the IJ doctrine.
I am being polite and offering you the opportunity to state the
official position of the SDA organization on this doctrine.

How else will viewers of this thread be able to understand the
for and against, unless they see both sides?

Brakelite you would be an expert on IJ compared with me,
this is a walk in the park for you. I am surprised at your
reluctance, very surprised.

Also, you do realize that you cannot lose, if your doctrine
is sound you win. If it is unsound you stand corrected and
you win again. This a sure bet, have a go you mug (oz slang).

Forgive me if I am wrong, however it seems to me that your motivation in asking is simply to engender an opportunity for yourself to debate a topic to which you believe you have all the answers. Adventists have been studying this topic for 160 years, I have for 13, it is deep and complex, and you think that after some cursory reading on the internet you have what it takes to refute it?
You have a problem with far simpler issues than the investigative judgement, how can you understand more complex issues. Allow me to give you an example.
You need to engage in linguistic gymnastics to defend your understanding of the word 'perish' as in John 3:16. To you, that word means eternal life, yet in every dictionary I can think of anything that perishes is dead. If you cannot understand simple English and the Greek word from which it is translated and its very similar meaning, απολλυμι, ie to destroy, and likewise, 'everlasting destruction' as in 2 Thess. 1:9 to you also means everlasting life.....then what hope for understanding more complex issues regarding God's judgement to which the destruction of the wicked is but a detail, albeit an important one?
You have entered into this conversation with a preconceived intent to debate and refute it without coming close to the intensive study such a topic requires...why should I play this game with you?

 

[David777]

Hello brakelite.

I do forgive you and always will.

I sense your animosity brakelite, this IJ is a
very sensitive topic to you and the SDA.

No wonder it is not mentioned in puiblic.

I do not doubt when I post my version
of IJ you will not even read it fully.

You will regard me as trampling on the pearls
of insight granted by the one and only true
prophet EGW.

This is the truth is it not brakelite.

Ellen carries the sane weight in prophecy
as the Old and New Testament prophets.

2000 prophecies all testable and without error!

You surely can understand that I would wish
to fathom these prophecies and test them
against the scriptures. This is what God
demands we do brakelite. If you do not test
the prophecies you would not be obeying
the scriptures.

I did not mention the Health reform.

I thought that IJ would be more appropriate.

Remember brakelite, you are on TJ, TJ is not
an SDA forum. Not only do I have the right to
question prophecy, I have a duty to do this.

It was your preoccupation with your version of
eschatology that triggered my interest in SDA.
Are you surprised that I wish to discuss your
theology with you. Surely not brakelite.

What are forums all about?

Debating a discussion on matters where differences
exist. Here the central subject is Jesus Christ and
the associated theologies and doctrinal points
which people inadvertently raise.

You have a cloak and dagger approach to this forum.
Concealing and avoidance.

What do you really fear?

 

[B-A-C]

I would question any church with a woman as head of the Church.

1Tim 2:12 and 1Cor 14:34-35

 

[David777]

Hello B-A-C.

I would seriously question any 'head of the church'.

Jesus is the CEO of the Church and no one else.

 

[Barny]

I would seriously question any 'head of the church'.

Jesus is the CEO of the Church and no one else.

AMEN !!

Ps 23:1 "The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want."

John 10:11 "“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep."

1Pet 2:25 "For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls."

Rev 7:17 "for the Lamb who is in the midst of the throne will shepherd them and lead them to living fountains of waters."

 

[David777]

Missed something brakelite.

You stated a point which I did not reply to.

This is what you stated;

You have a problem with far simpler issues than the investigative judgement,
how can you understand more complex issues. Allow me to give you an example.
You need to engage in linguistic gymnastics to defend your understanding of the
word 'perish' as in John 3:16. To you, that word means eternal life, yet in every
dictionary I can think of anything that perishes is dead. If you cannot understand
simple English and the Greek word from which it is translated and its very
similar meaning, απολλυμι, ie to destroy, and likewise, 'everlasting destruction'
as in 2 Thess. 1:9 to you also means everlasting life.....then what hope for
understanding more complex issues regarding God's judgement to which
the destruction of the wicked is but a detail, albeit an important one?

Where did you get this idea from, I lean towards annihilation not eternal damnation brakelite.

I think you have your wires crossed brakelite, you are confusing me
with someone else.

So you see I am more than able to understand the scriptures and any
concepts that you may raise.

Therefore, I must proceed with an examination of Ellen's prophecies.

 

[David777]

Hello brakelite.

Warning: the following information contains information which is highly misleading.
Not suitable for young Christians! It is Seventh Day Adventist material,
regarded as heresy by some Christians.

Ellen G White is the great prophet in the SDA church.

Ellen G White was also an author.

Ellen G White carries the same authority in her prophecies as Biblical prophets.
This is the view of the SDA.

The following verses are from Ellen G White, in fact it is a vision or prophecy would
be more accurate. I will highlight the information which seems to contradict the scriptures.

We felt an unusual spirit of prayer. And as we prayed the Holy Ghost fell upon us. We were very happy. Soon 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. In the city I saw a temple, which I entered. I passed through a door before I came to the first veil. This veil was raised, and I passed into the holy place. Here I saw the altar of incense, the candlestick with seven lamps, and the table on which was the shewbread. After viewing the glory of the holy, Jesus raised the second veil and I passed into the holy of holies.

In the holiest I saw an ark; on the top and sides of it was purest gold. On each end of the ark was a lovely cherub, with its wings spread out over it. Their faces were turned toward each other, and they looked downward. Between the angels was a golden censer. Above the ark, where the angels stood, was an exceeding bright glory, that appeared like a throne where God dwelt. Jesus stood by the ark, and as the saints' prayers came up to Him, the incense in the censer would smoke, and He would offer up their prayers with the smoke of the incense to His Father. 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. On one table were four, and on the other six. The four on the first table shone brighter than the other six. But the fourth, the Sabbath commandment, shone above them all; for the Sabbath was set apart to be kept in honor of God's holy name. 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. I saw that God had not changed the Sabbath, for He never changes. But the pope had changed it from the seventh to the first day of the week; for he was to change times and laws ....

I saw that the holy Sabbath is, and will be, the separating wall between the true Israel of God and unbelievers; and that the Sabbath is the great question to unite the hearts of God's dear, waiting saints (Early Writings, 1963, pp. 32,33).

There seems to be a number of problems with this prophecy.

a) There is no temple in the Holy City, please read John's version
in his vision of the Holy City.

"I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and
the Lamb are its temple (Rev. 21:22)."

b) Scripture states the Sabbath command when given to Moses was a memorial for
Israel to remember their deliverance from Egypt. It was not given in honor of God's holy name.

c) I saw that the holy Sabbath is, and will be, the separating wall between the true Israel of
God and unbelievers; and that the Sabbath is the great question to unite the hearts of God's dear,
waiting saints (Early Writings, p. 33).

Also, Ellen said;

"The pope has changed the day of rest from the seventh to the first day. He has thought
to change the very commandment that was given to cause man to remember his Creator.
He has thought to change the greatest commandment in the decalogue and thus make
himself equal with God, or even exalt himself above God (Early Writings, p. 65).

So the sabbath is the greatest commandment in the decalogue?

Not according to Jesus I might say, please read;

"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied:
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with
all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.
And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the
Prophets hang on these two commandments (Mt. 22:36-40).

Wrong Ellen G White in three out of three.

I need you to inspect this information and reply brakelite.

 

[brakelite]

Warning: the following information contains information which is highly misleading.
Not suitable for young Christians! It is Seventh Day Adventist material,
regarded as heresy by some Christians.

Ellen G White is the great prophet in the SDA church.

Ellen G White was also an author.

Ellen G White carries the same authority in her prophecies as Biblical prophets.
This is the view of the SDA.

This is the view of the SDA....judge for yourself if this is any different from what scripture teaches would be manifest within God's NT church....
Affirmations....

1. We believe that Scripture is the divinely revealed word of God and is inspired by the Holy Spirit.
2. We believe that the canon of Scripture is composed only of the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments.
3. We believe that Scripture is the foundation of faith and the final authority in all matters of doctrine and practice.
4. We believe that Scripture is the Word of God in human language.
5. We believe that Scripture teaches that the gift of prophecy will be manifest in the Christian church after New Testament times.
6. We believe that the ministry and writings of Ellen White were a manifestation of the gift of prophecy.
7. We believe that Ellen White was inspired by the Holy Spirit and that her writings, the product of that inspiration, are applicable and authoritative, especially to Seventh-day Adventists.
8. We believe that the purposes of the Ellen White writings include guidance in understanding the teaching of Scripture and application of these teachings, with prophetic urgency, to the spiritual and moral life.
9. We believe that the acceptance of the prophetic gift of Ellen White is important to the nurture and unity of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
10. We believe that Ellen White's use of literary sources and assistants finds parallels in some of the writings of the Bible.

Denials....

1. We do not believe that the quality or degree of inspiration in the writings of Ellen White is different from that of Scripture.
2. We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White are an addition to the canon of Sacred Scripture.
3. We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White function as the foundation and final authority of Christian faith as does Scripture.
4. We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White may be used as the basis of doctrine.
5. We do not believe that the study of the writings of Ellen White may be used to replace the study of Scripture.
6. We do not believe that Scripture can be understood only through the writings of Ellen White.
7. We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White exhaust the meaning of Scripture.
8. We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White are essential for the proclamation of the truths of Scripture to society at large.
9. We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White are the product of mere Christian piety.
10. We do not believe that Ellen White's use of literary sources and assistants negates the inspiration of her writings.

The following verses are from Ellen G White, in fact it is a vision or prophecy would
be more accurate. I will highlight the information which seems to contradict the scriptures.

We felt an unusual spirit of prayer. And as we prayed the Holy Ghost fell upon us. We were very happy. Soon 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. In the city I saw a temple, which I entered. I passed through a door before I came to the first veil. This veil was raised, and I passed into the holy place. Here I saw the altar of incense, the candlestick with seven lamps, and the table on which was the shewbread. After viewing the glory of the holy, Jesus raised the second veil and I passed into the holy of holies.

In the holiest I saw an ark; on the top and sides of it was purest gold. On each end of the ark was a lovely cherub, with its wings spread out over it. Their faces were turned toward each other, and they looked downward. Between the angels was a golden censer. Above the ark, where the angels stood, was an exceeding bright glory, that appeared like a throne where God dwelt. Jesus stood by the ark, and as the saints' prayers came up to Him, the incense in the censer would smoke, and He would offer up their prayers with the smoke of the incense to His Father. 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. On one table were four, and on the other six. The four on the first table shone brighter than the other six. But the fourth, the Sabbath commandment, shone above them all; for the Sabbath was set apart to be kept in honor of God's holy name. 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. I saw that God had not changed the Sabbath, for He never changes. But the pope had changed it from the seventh to the first day of the week; for he was to change times and laws ....

I saw that the holy Sabbath is, and will be, the separating wall between the true Israel of God and unbelievers; and that the Sabbath is the great question to unite the hearts of God's dear, waiting saints (Early Writings, 1963, pp. 32,33).

There seems to be a number of problems with this prophecy.

a) There is no temple in the Holy City, please read John's version
in his vision of the Holy City.

"I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and
the Lamb are its temple (Rev. 21:22)."

Re 11:19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

b) Scripture states the Sabbath command when given to Moses was a memorial for
Israel to remember their deliverance from Egypt. It was not given in honor of God's holy name.

I know the text you are referring to.......
Deut. 5:14 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine ***, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou.
De 5:15 And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.
....however, a reminder to keep the Sabbath was given 3 months before Sinai in the gathering of manna, and of course again when it was encapsulated within the Ten Commandments. It was then given as a memorial of creation, but more importantly, a memorial of the Creator. We adventists have always recognised that within the Sabbath commandment there lies the identifying seal of God, His name. Just like any earthly ruler has a seal which he uses to give authority to his laws, and to identify the lawmaker,to display his title, and his kingdom, so also has God done so with His laws. The Sabbath is His seal, His sign that all may know by whose authority the Ten Commandments are given.

Exodus 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the [HIGH-LIGHT]LORD thy God:[/HIGH-LIGHT] (His name) in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD [HIGH-LIGHT]made[/HIGH-LIGHT]His title ie Creator)[HIGH-LIGHT] heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is[/HIGH-LIGHT] (His kingdom), and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Therefore, when E G White said that the Sabbath is a memorial to His name, this is where she is coming from, and at the same time not discounting the truth that it is also a memorial for Israel's redemption, just as it is for us. She was not changing the word of God nor contradicting it, simply giving it more clarity.

c) I saw that the holy Sabbath is, and will be, the separating wall between the true Israel of
God and unbelievers; and that the Sabbath is the great question to unite the hearts of God's dear,
waiting saints (Early Writings, p. 33).

Also, Ellen said;

"The pope has changed the day of rest from the seventh to the first day. He has thought
to change the very commandment that was given to cause man to remember his Creator.
He has thought to change the greatest commandment in the decalogue and thus make
himself equal with God, or even exalt himself above God (Early Writings, p. 65).

So the sabbath is the greatest commandment in the decalogue?

Not according to Jesus I might say, please read;

"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" Jesus replied:
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with
all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.
And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the
Prophets hang on these two commandments (Mt. 22:36-40).

Wrong Ellen G White in three out of three.

I need you to inspect this information and reply brakelite.

When Jesus was asked what is the greatest commandment, He summarised the entire Decalogue with just two commandments. He was not asked to pick out just one commandment from the ten. If you want to ascertain what commandment God thought the most important of the ten, I suggest you take a quick squizz through scripture and see how often God kept reminding Israel of their refusal to remember it, and how often God punished them for that specific act of disobedience. In the NT nothing changed. Jesus constantly rebuked the Pharisees for desecrating the Sabbath and making it a burden rather than the delight it ought to have been. By His own actions, Jesus example showed how the Sabbath was to be kept. The disciples throughout their lives did likewise.

As for the papal establishment of Sunday laws, that is beyond question. The Catholic church was the first institution to establish Sunday as a 'holy day', and deliberately removed the Sabbath from the mainstream of Christian life. I addressed this fully here....http://www.talkjesus.com/scriptural-bible-answers/9903-sabbath-3.html#post191501

Sabbath observance comes down to who's authority you wish to surrender to. The Sabbath was made holy by a holy God, who sanctified it and set it apart for Himself. He has never changed that. Sunday was a pagan rest day adopted by the Christian church. You choose.

 

[David777]

Hello brakelite.

Must attend to duties, will reply later in the day.

 

[Barny]

Hi brakelite,

You claim that "Sabbath observance comes down to who's authority you wish to surrender to". I've heard similar claims from other SDAs too. No doubt you mean SDAs believe that Christians who do not observe the Sabbath on Saturday are not surrendering to God's authority and therefore not really Christians to begin with. Is this correct?

And what do SDAs do to observe the Sabbath, to keep it holy?
But, SDAs are known for not even observing the Sabbath correctly anyway. SDAs work on the Sabbath, whether it be at their jobs (especially in SDA hospitals) or just lighting a fire on the kitchen stove to cook a meal.

 

[stephen]

Are Gentiles under Jewish Law?

Neither Gentile nor Jew in the matter of saving grace are under the "Law" "The law was a schoolmaster" to bring us to Christ.

Salvation's work was completed on Calvary's cross....Jesus cried "It is finished" The work for the redemption of mankind was completed, Jew Gentile....who are these people?

All one now in Christ Jesus

 

[David777]

Hello Barny.

I had been meaning to ask about how they define obedience
to the sabbath. Particularly relating to the non lighting of fires
on the sabbath.

I had consulted a Jewish source to see how they managed this aspect
of the sabbath law. There answer was no fire, no matches, no ignition
of any form including cars, lights, and electronic equipment.

A pure day of rest and assembly for the nation of Israel.

Highly interested in how the legalistic crew manage the commandment.

I do not think brakelite can respond today as it is the sabbath.