The Remnant Online

Study => Bread of Life => Topic started by: Richard Myers on May 15, 2007, 06:22:00 PM

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 15, 2007, 06:22:00 PM
Parts of the Mosaic law were types and shadows that ceased to be binding at the death of Christ. Other aspects were only for the state of Israel which was a theocracy. But, there are other parts of the Mosaic law which remain binding today. They are a revelation of the laws of our being. Like the health principles revealed, there is much that many do not wish to bring into their lives because they do not desire to give up a perverted heart. Let us study this subject that we might receive the blessings God has for us in the Bible.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Sister Marie on May 15, 2007, 11:25:00 PM
A great subject. Where shall we start?

------------------
With Christian Love,
Sister Marie

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on May 16, 2007, 02:55:00 AM
I am partially responsible for the introduction of this new thread, which is a positive and constructive response in part to my throwing out red herrings.
Traditionally, Adventism considers the annual feasts to foreshadow Christ and to end with him. I think that is a consistent view. Having read the extensive discussion of the Feast of Tabernacles on this forum, I notice that an essential issue was never noted. Those suggesting that the observation of the annual feasts was binding, never discussed the timing of the feasts. If I understand correctly, we do not have access to any Biblical calendar with certitude. The present Rabbinical calendar represents a development in tandem with Christianity from the time of Hillel II (two centuries after the New Testament) and extending over a period of several hundred years before being finally fixed. While we do not know the dating of the feasts at the time of Christ (and Paul), we do know that they were NOT calculated or observed by the same calendar that Jews use today. Thus in order to observe them, we would have to accept Rabbinical authority on one hand, or else determine the proper dating on the other.
At the time of Christ, there were at least two datings for the annual feasts and new moons: that of the Sadducean authorities at the temple in Jerusalem, and that of the Qumran sectarians, based on the solar Jubilees calendar. These datings differed from each other and from the present Rabbinical calendar in ways that cannot be determined with exactitude. Even the dating of the "new moon" is at question, whether it should be calculated or observed, whether it relates to the lunation or the sighting of the crescent, whether it relates to the new moon or the full moon, and whether it relates rather to the first day of the month disregarding the moon altogether as calculated in the Qumran Jubilees calendar. As the Jubilees calendar is over one day short of the solar year, it also presents a problem that we have no certainty of. We do not know if at the time of Christ an intercalary week was periodically inserted, or whether the users of the calendar adjusted it to the solar year periodically or not. If they did not, we cannot recuperate it. If they did, we would have to know the method of intercalation that they used in order to recuperate it, which we do not.
The date of neither annual feast nor new moon as observed in Bible times can be established today. The only day that is established with absolute certainty is the Sabbath. Therefore, only the Sabbath can be seen as a duty.
It is of no use to discuss the obligation of keeping an Old Testament ordinance, if we cannot establish the necessary perameters of doing so. If we could establish the duty of keeping annual feasts, based on theological reasoning or reading of the Scripture, we still could not keep them, since we do not know when they occur.

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
Parts of the Mosaic law were types and shadows that ceased to be binding at the death of Christ. Other aspects were only for the state of Israel which was a theocracy. But, there are other parts of the Mosaic law which remain binding today. They are a revelation of the laws of our being. Like the health principles revealed, there is much that many do not wish to bring into their lives because they do not desire to give up a perverted heart. Let us study this subject that we might receive the blessings God has for us in the Bible.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Sister Marie on May 16, 2007, 08:06:00 AM
A very interesting point brother Thomas, and one that I had never thought of before. I'm glad that you mentioned that as it makes a lot of sense. The Sabbath, on the other hand, has never changed. Like the Bible, God has preserved it all these years.  :)

------------------
With Christian Love,
Sister Marie

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 16, 2007, 10:24:00 AM
Most of the Christian world accepts that the shadows have passed away and that the reality is Christ. We do not observe the Passover, but rather the Lord's supper has taken its place.

But, what of the other judgments and statutes? What was their purpose? Are they related to the moral law? I think that we can say they are. There were some that were unique to the state of Israel as a theocracy. There is no longer a theocracy, so these statues are not binding upon us today. We can learn from them though. The statutes that are not shadows and are not related directly to a theocracy we have no reason throw away. They are light regarding the laws of our being. They are the instructions God has given that we may be successful in this world and prepared for the next.

At first glance many will seem to be too far removed from our way of life, from modern society. But, upon closer examination we shall find much wisdom in the statutes. What many will refuse to accept is in fact wisdom from God that will bless us as we walk in the light.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Sister Marie on May 16, 2007, 05:49:00 PM
Let's not talk just about them as a whole, but would you start with them one by one or a few at a time. As a whole I don't think we will get near the blessing of understanding like we would if we get into each of them.  :)

------------------
With Christian Love,
Sister Marie

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 17, 2007, 08:53:00 AM
Amen - let's do it. I am particularly interested in those civil laws pertaining to the COI - death penalties having to do with wrongs in the camp, etc.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 17, 2007, 09:43:00 AM
It appears that there are "civil" laws that relate only to the theocracy. When God led Israel, He was responsible for the ultimate results of His leading. Not having the direct leadership of a state today, these laws are not applicable as I see it. When we remove these "civil" laws and the "shadows" we are still left with statutes that apply to us as individuals today. Some examples?  How about taking an animal out of a ditch on the Sabbath Day. Or not eating fruit from a newly planted tree. And, letting your land rest to make it more productive? Are there more?

How about not eating fat? Not eating blood? Not drinking alcohol?  We have only begun to scratch the light God has given to His people.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 18, 2007, 07:23:00 AM
Some posts have been transferred to the Moderator Forum for discussion.

The classification of "civil" laws is not easy.  We will need to discover the principles involved in doing so. There are statutes that were restricted to Israel. How do we discover which ones apply and which ones do not?

It is rather obvious that the state is not to stone those who build a fire on the Sabbath. This was a statute that was only to be executed by the theocracy. Same for the death penalty for the glutton. What many pass off as being of little importance is quite important. We must discover how to apply the statutes that we have been given in the Old Testament.

The shadows are only shadows. The theocracy laws were for Israel, but the rest are for our blessing today. A correct application will protect us from those who would attempt to apply the shadows and the civil laws to us today and will enable us to benefit from the laws of our being that have been lost.

The state will yield soon to the fallen churches and make a law which will attempt to force the conscience based on a wrong interpretation of this subject. The statutes regarding punishment for breaking the Sabbath Day were restricted to Israel as a theocracy. Yet, the church is to enforce the seventh-day Sabbath in her realm.

We must not look to man, but we must search the Bible and discover the correct principles in this important subject.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: JimB on May 18, 2007, 08:07:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
We will need to discover the principles involved in doing so. There are statutes that were restricted to Israel. How do we discover which ones apply and which ones do not?

I think this needs to be fleshed out before we can go on to talking about examples. I can think of examples to talk about but until we can decide which ones are still binding we will be putting the cart before horse.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 18, 2007, 09:05:00 AM
May we take it to Mod3 Forum so Thomas and I can participate?
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 18, 2007, 09:37:00 AM
The subject is the Death Penalty and it is opened in the Moderator/Member2 Forum. Access is open to members by request. Click on "Contact us" at the bottom of the page and ask for access to Mod/Mem2.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 18, 2007, 09:57:00 AM
Thank you!
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 19, 2007, 09:04:00 AM
Can we agree that the state is not to punish those who build a fire on the Sabbath?

Can we agree that it is sin to him that knoweth to do good and doeth it not? It is not good to drink blood. It is therefore sin to him that knows they ought not drink blood. Can we agree?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on May 19, 2007, 01:45:00 PM
Here is a good example:

Leviticus:

3:17   It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood.  

I think of this in the same way as I do unclean meats. What is unclean is still unclean today. Nothing has changed in the unclean meats that can make them clean today.

If a person is unclean then they remain unclean. Only when one is willing to be made clean by the blood of Jesus can a person be made clean.

This is talking about salvation, not food so the food issues is still the same that we are not to eat fat nor blood or unclean things.

Revelation:

18:2   And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.  

Notice the comparison between what is Babylon and that which is unclean. If all was fit for food what unclean bird is God speaking about to John here?

So therefore there still are unclean things to eat even today. Now we come to a very important verses in the Bible in 1 Timothy:

4:1   Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;  
4:2   Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;  
4:3   Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.  
4:4   For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:  
4:5   For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.  

It does not say all meats, but meats that god had created to be eaten. Did God create unclean meats to be eaten? No!

If we are to speak about every creature of God is good, then man are creatures and is it good to eat each other?  

There has to be logic and reasons that God gives in wisdom and when we seek that wisdom we seek the truth and are blessed.  


------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 19, 2007, 03:53:00 PM
So we have statutes and judgments from the Mosaic law that are part of the moral law. They are an extension of the ten commandments. They fill in what it is hard for us to see.

Why is it that we ought not drink blood? The Bible says so, but can we know why the Bible tells us not to drink blood? Can we know which commandment this statute comes close to?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 19, 2007, 04:39:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
So we have statutes and judgments from the Mosaic law that are part of the moral law. They are an extension of the ten commandments.

The SOP says that, but I can't remember the quote. Anybody have a clue?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 19, 2007, 07:37:00 PM
Hi, Richard and Arnold. The quote you are looking for is given below in a following post - it is from a Signs of the Times article that is fabulously astounding to those of us who do not recognize the link. These discoveries are such a blessing.

The life is in the blood. I just read it while going through Exodus through Deuteronomy to review the statutes.

You asked:    

quote:
Why is it that we ought not drink blood? The Bible says so, but can we know why the Bible tells us not to drink blood? Can we know which commandment this statute comes close to?

Because life is in the blood - it makes sense (to me) that it would be directly related to the Sixth Commandment. SOP says in the citations given below that the life current is in the blood. And by extention to that commandment it is a direct link to the health message. "Don't eat the blood." Doing so can poison the body, thus harm the temple and possibly kill it.


Ministry of Healing, 271-2
Counsels on Diet and Foods, 91
Counsels on Health, 59, 173
1SM, 114
Testimonies, Vol 2, 525


What also strikes me is the connection of one consuming what is the "life" of another living being.

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-23-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 19, 2007, 07:43:00 PM
Yes, life is in the blood, therefore we ought to do all that we can to make good blood. One of the great dangers to our blood is found in the blood of diseased animals and humans. Now, who knew that a thousand years ago? But, we know it today and are thankful that God told us to not drink the blood.

For those that refuse to study this subject and continue to eat meat with blood in it, you are at great risk of infection from many diseases and so are your children. The Bible is warning us to refrain from ingesting blood and your doctor will warn you to not even touch human blood. How much worse to touch animal blood....and even much worse to allow it into your stomach. The animals are carrying many diseases and they can be transmitted via blood.

Any other great light in the Old Testament statutes?  Or was it just for the Jews?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Sister Marie on May 19, 2007, 10:57:00 PM
Our bodies, the Bible says, are the temple of God, and also that we are not the owners of it. Our job is to take care of this complete body and not put in it things that will harm it or defile it.

------------------
With Christian Love,
Sister Marie

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 23, 2007, 01:58:00 PM
Here it is, Richard and Arnold:

The SOP tells us the judgments and statutes guarded the Ten Commandments ...

June 17, 1880 The Law of Moses.
-
By Mrs. E. G. White.
-

    The Lord did not leave his people with the precepts of the decalogue alone. Moses was commanded to write, as God should bid him, judgments and laws giving minute directions in regard to their duty, thereby guarding the commandments engraved on the tables of stone. Thus did the Lord seek to lead erring man to a strict obedience to that holy law which he is so prone to transgress. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 1}

    If man had kept the law of God, as given to Adam after his fall, preserved in the ark by Noah, and observed by Abraham, there would have been no necessity for the ordinance of circumcision. And if the descendants of Abraham had kept the covenant, of which circumcision was a token or pledge, they would never have gone into idolatry, nor been suffered to go down into Egypt; and there would have been no necessity for God to proclaim his law from Sinai, engraving it upon tables of stone, or guard it by definite directions in the judgments and statutes given to Moses. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 2}

    Moses wrote these judgments and statutes from the mouth of God while he was with him in the mount. The definite directions in regard to the duty of his people to one another, and to the stranger, are the principles of the ten commandments simplified and given in a definite manner, that they need not err. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 3}

    The Lord said of the children of Israel, "Because they had not executed my judgments, but had despised my statutes, and had polluted my Sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers' idols, wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live." Because of continual disobedience, the Lord annexed penalties to the transgression of his law, which were not good for the transgressor, or whereby he should not live in his rebellion. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 4}

    By transgressing the law which God had given in such majesty, and amid glory which was unapproachable, the people showed open contempt of the great Lawgiver, and death was the penalty. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 5}

    "Moreover also, I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them. But the house of Israel rebelled against me in the wilderness: they walked not in my statutes, and they despised my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them; and my Sabbaths they greatly polluted. Then I said, I would pour out my fury upon them in the wilderness, to consume them." {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 6}

    The statutes and judgments given of God were good for the obedient. "They shall live in them." But they were not good for the transgressor; for in the civil law given to Moses, punishment was to be inflicted on the transgressor, that others should be restrained by fear. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 7}

    Moses charged the children of Israel to obey God. He said unto them, "Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the Lord God of your fathers giveth you." {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 8}

    The Lord gave Moses definite instructions in regard to the ceremonial offerings which were to cease at the death of Christ. This system, first established with Adam after his fall, and taught by him to his descendants, was corrupted before the flood, and also by those who separated themselves from the faithful followers of God, and engaged in the building of the tower of Babel. They had no faith in the Redeemer to come, and they sacrificed to gods of their own choosing, instead of the God of Heaven. Their superstition led them to great extravagances. They taught the people that the more valuable their offerings, the greater would be the pleasure of their gods, and consequently the greater the prosperity and riches of their nation. Hence, human beings were often sacrificed to these senseless idols. Many of the laws which governed these nations were cruel in the extreme. They were made by men whose hearts were not softened by divine grace, and while the most debasing crimes were passed over lightly, a small offense would be visited by the most cruel punishment. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 9}

    Moses had this in view when he said to Israel, "Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the Lord my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it. Keep, therefore, and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the Lord our God is in all things that we call upon him for? and what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?" {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 10}

    God was a wise and compassionate lawgiver, judging all cases righteously, and without partiality. While the Israelites were in Egyptian bondage, they were surrounded with idolatry. The Egyptians were regarded as the most learned nation then in existence, and their worship was conducted with great pomp and ceremony. Other nations held the most cruel and absurd traditions as a part of their religion, and revolting customs found a place in their idolatrous service. Prominent among these was the practice of causing their children to pass through the fire,--to leap over the altar upon which a fire was burning before their idol. If a person could do this without injury, the people received it as evidence that the god accepted their offerings, and favored especially the one who had passed through the fiery ordeal. He was loaded with benefits, and was ever afterward greatly esteemed by all the people. He was never punished however aggravated might be his crimes. Should another person be burned in passing through the fire, his fate was sealed; the people believed that their gods were angry and could be appeased only by the life of the unhappy victim, and he was accordingly offered as a sacrifice. Even some of the children of Israel had so far degraded themselves as to practice these abominations. The Lord manifested his displeasure by causing the fire to consume their children in the act of passing through it. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 11}

    Because the people of God had confused ideas of the sacrificial offerings, and mingled heathen customs with their ceremonial worship, the Lord condescended to give them definite directions, that they might understand the true import of those sacrifices which were to last only till the Lamb of God should be slain, who was the great Antitype of all their sacrificial offerings. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 12}

    Moses understood the plan of salvation through Christ, by these sacrificial offerings, and by the manifestation of his glory which he had been permitted to behold. The perfection of God's goodness, his image, his excellency and glory had been revealed to him. He saw the suffering, self-denial and self-sacrifice of Him who was one with the Father, to save fallen man. It had been revealed to Moses that the glory enshrouded in the pillar of cloud was the Son of the infinite God, whom the sacrificial offerings typified. In answer to his most earnest pleadings, "Show me thy way," the future had been opened before him when the type would meet antitype in the death of Christ. He saw mercy and justice blended in harmony and love expressed without a parallel. Israel was just as fully and amply saved through Christ as we are-today. Moses had the assurance that the Mediator of Israel had the guardianship of his people, and that he was just the protection which their necessities required. If disaster came upon them, if their enemies prevailed against them in battle, it was the rebuke of God upon them because they had sinned and in sinning had broken the law of God. {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 13}


This Signs of the Times article is astoundingly enlightening and has caused me to edit this post. The statutes and judgments were a hedge, so to speak, guarding the Ten Commandments.  

And however we look at these laws and judgments that were meant to teach the COI the various aspects of the TC, we know the health laws are still binding - we do know this ... can we agree that they are still binding?

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-23-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: JimB on May 23, 2007, 02:05:00 PM
I also will start digging up what I can. I am anxious to develop some principles that will aid us in deciding which ones are still binding.

I agree that the health laws are still binding. It only makes sense to me since the physiology of the pig did not magically change at the cross.

However, are all the hygiene laws still binding?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 23, 2007, 02:08:00 PM
Again, having to edit this post because of a seemingly better understanding, the statues and judgments have a direct bearing on the Ten Commandments and must be laid over them and decided upon which ones are related to God, Commandments 1 through 4 and which ones are related to man, 5 through 10.

Civil laws typically relate to how man is to treat man.

I am thinking ... bear with me as I am from Texas and am slower than most!  ;D

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-23-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 23, 2007, 02:16:00 PM
   
quote:
Originally posted by Jim B:

However, are all the hygiene laws still binding?


Outside the ceremonial system? Like burying human excrement instead of wasting good fresh water to flush it away? Good question ... my first impression is that they are, indeed,  because they are directly related to the health of the individual and of those around the individual, but let's find out!


[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-23-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 23, 2007, 02:29:00 PM
This is going to be a huge job of categorizing  on second thought. Let's begin with Exodus 21 - the judgments and take them as they come.

KJV-R (Webster) Exodus 21:1 Now these arethe judgments which thou shalt set before them.

2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.

3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.

4 If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.

5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:

6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.

7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.

8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.

9 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters.

10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.

11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.

12 He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.

13 And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver himinto his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee.

14 But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die.

15 And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.

16 And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.

17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.

18 And if men strive together, and one smite another with a stone, or with hisfist, and he die not, but keepeth hisbed:

19 If he rise again, and walk abroad upon his staff, then shall he that smote himbe quit: only he shall pay forthe loss of his time, and shall cause himto be thoroughly healed.

20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.

21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

23 And if anymischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

26 And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake.

27 And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake.

28 If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall bequit.

29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death.

30 If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him.

31 Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him.

32 If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.

33 And if a man shall open a pit, or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein;

34 The owner of the pit shall make itgood, andgive money unto the owner of them; and the dead beastshall be his.

35 And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die; then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money of it; and the dead ox also they shall divide.

36 Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past, and his owner hath not kept him in; he shall surely pay ox for ox; and the dead shall be his own.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 23, 2007, 02:43:00 PM
Exodus 21 clearly has to do with Commandments Five through Ten. How we deal with people and their property: slaves, husbands and wives and parents. Notice there are some death penalty offenses listed.

Verse 12 - smiting a man so that he dies - you die. Sixth Commandment

Verse 15 - smiting father or mother - you die. Fifth Commandment

Verse 16 - steal a person (kidknapping a slave?) - you die. Eighth Commandment

Verse 17 - cursing father or mother - you die. Fifth Commandment

Verse 23 - life for life. Sixth Commandment

Verse 29 - you have an ox that kills and you do not notify people of it and it kills someone - you and the ox die. Ninth Commandment

These are all commandment based - they are still binding but the state does not enforce them except for murder and even special circumstances, at that.


[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-23-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 23, 2007, 02:58:00 PM
Time for a question ... and be gentle with me as I have six thousand years of sin and degradation, along with inherited sinful tendencies - as this question is burning in my mind at this point in my schooling on this subject.

Why did we quit killing witches, sorcerers, adulterers, idolators, rebellious children who cursed parents, homosexuals, and people who defamed the Sabbath?

Is it because we became a secular society and got accustomed to the sin and just let it slide, like so many things these days, or chose more "civilized ways" to deal with it?  

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-23-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 23, 2007, 05:48:00 PM
KJV-R (Webster) Exodus 22:1 If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.

2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shedfor him.

3 If the sun be risen upon him, there shall beblood shedfor him; forhe should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

4 If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep; he shall restore double.

5 If a man shall cause a field or vineyard to be eaten, and shall put in his beast, and shall feed in another man's field; of the best of his own field, and of the best of his own vineyard, shall he make restitution.

6 If fire break out, and catch in thorns, so that the stacks of corn, or the standing corn, or the field, be consumed therewith; he that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution.

7 If a man shall deliver unto his neighbour money or stuff to keep, and it be stolen out of the man's house; if the thief be found, let him pay double.

8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges, to seewhether he have put his hand unto his neighbour's goods.

9 For all manner of trespass, whether it befor ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, orfor any manner of lost thing, which anotherchallengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; andwhom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.

10 If a man deliver unto his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast, to keep; and it die, or be hurt, or driven away, no man seeing it:

11 Thenshall an oath of the LORD be between them both, that he hath not put his hand unto his neighbour's goods; and the owner of it shall accept thereof, and he shall not make it good.

12 And if it be stolen from him, he shall make restitution unto the owner thereof.

13 If it be torn in pieces, thenlet him bring it forwitness, andhe shall not make good that which was torn.

14 And if a man borrow oughtof his neighbour, and it be hurt, or die, the owner thereof beingnot with it , he shall surely make it good.

15 But if the owner thereof bewith it, he shall not make itgood: if it bean hired thing, it came for his hire.

16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.

17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.

18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.

19 Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.

20 He that sacrificeth unto anygod, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.

21 Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

22 Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child.

23 If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry;

24 And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless.

25 If thou lend money to any of my people that ispoor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury.

26 If thou at all take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge, thou shalt deliver it unto him by that the sun goeth down:

27 For that ishis covering only, it ishis raiment for his skin: wherein shall he sleep? and it shall come to pass, when he crieth unto me, that I will hear; for I amgracious.

28 Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.

29 Thou shalt not delay to offerthe first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me.

30 Likewise shalt thou do with thine oxen, and with thy sheep: seven days it shall be with his dam; on the eighth day thou shalt give it me.

31 And ye shall be holy men unto me: neither shall ye eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; ye shall cast it to the dogs.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Cop on May 23, 2007, 10:52:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
Time for a question ... and be gentle with me as I have six thousand years of sin and degradation, along with inherited sinful tendencies - as this question is burning in my mind at this point in my schooling on this subject.

Why did we quit killing witches, sorcerers, adulterers, idolators, rebellious children who cursed parents, homosexuals, and people who defamed the Sabbath?

Is it because we became a secular society and got accustomed to the sin and just let it slide, like so many things these days, or chose more "civilized ways" to deal with it?  

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-23-2007).]


Good question! I've been wondering when, or if, this very question would come up. Where is the command or direction from God saying the penalty proclaimed against these sins has been repealed? Have we becomed so "civilized" that we have turned against God's commands in this?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 06:42:00 AM
Brother Cop: I have not yet looked for it and from the appearance of things, it probably does not exist.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 08:05:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jim B:

However, are all the hygiene laws still binding?


SOP on this issue and a few others:

Ministry of Healing Chap. 21 - Hygiene Among the Israelites

    In the teaching that God gave to Israel, the preservation of health received careful attention. The people who had come from slavery with the uncleanly and unhealthful habits which it engenders, were subjected to the strictest training in the wilderness before entering Canaan. Health principles were taught and sanitary laws enforced.  {MH 277.1}

               Prevention of Disease

    Not only in their religious service, but in all the affairs of daily life was observed the distinction between clean and unclean. All who came in contact with contagious or contaminating diseases were isolated from the encampment, and they were not permitted to return without thorough cleansing of both the person and the clothing. In the case of one afflicted with a contaminating disease, the direction was given:  {MH 277.2}
   
"Every bed, whereon he lieth, . . . is unclean: and everything, whereon he sitteth, shall be unclean. And whosoever toucheth his bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. And he that sitteth on anything whereon he sat . . . shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. And he that toucheth the flesh of him . . . shall wash his clothes,and bathe himself in water
                                                                 , and be unclean until the even. . . . And whosoever toucheth anything that was under him shall be unclean until the even: and he that beareth any of those things shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. And whomsoever he toucheth . . . and hath not rinsed his hands in water, he shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. And the vessel of earth, that he toucheth, . . . shall be broken: and every vessel of wood shall be rinsed in water." Leviticus 15:4-12.  {MH 277.3}
   
The law concerning leprosy is also an illustration of the thoroughness with which these regulations were to be enforced:  {MH 278.1}
   
"All the days wherein the plague shall be in him [the leper] he shall be defiled; he is unclean: he shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his habitation be. The garment also that the plague of leprosy is in, whether it be a woolen garment, or a linen garment; whether it be in the warp, or woof; of linen, or of woolen; whether in a skin, or in anything made of skin; . . . the priest shall look upon the plague: . . . if the plague be spread in the garment, either in the warp, or in the woof, or in a skin, or in any work that is made of skin; the plague is a fretting leprosy; it is unclean. He shall therefore burn that garment, whether warp or woof, in woolen or in linen, or anything of skin, wherein the plague is: for it is a fretting leprosy; it shall be burnt in the fire." Leviticus 13:46-52.  {MH 278.2}
   
So, too, if a house gave evidence of conditions that rendered it unsafe for habitation, it was destroyed. The priest was to "break down the house, the stones of it, and the timber thereof, and all the mortar of the house; and he shall carry them forth out of the city into an unclean place. Moreover
                                                                        he that goeth into the house all the while that it is shut up shall be unclean until the even. And he that lieth in the house shall wash his clothes; and he that eateth in the house shall wash his clothes." Leviticus 14:45-47.  {MH 278.3}

                    Cleanliness

    The necessity of personal cleanliness was taught in the most impressive manner. Before gathering at Mount Sinai to listen to the proclamation of the law by the voice of God, the people were required to wash both their persons and their clothing. This direction was enforced on pain of death. No impurity was to be tolerated in the presence of God.  {MH 279.1}
   
During the sojourn in the wilderness the Israelites were almost continually in the open air, where impurities would have a less harmful effect than upon the dwellers in close houses. But the strictest regard to cleanliness was required both within and without their tents. No refuse was allowed to remain within or about the encampment. The Lord said:                                                                            

    "The Lord thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy." Deuteronomy 23:14.  {MH 280.1}

                       Diet

    The distinction between clean and unclean was made in all matters of diet:  {MH 280.2}
   
"I am the Lord thy God, which have separated you from other people. Ye shall therefore put difference between clean beasts and unclean, and between unclean fowls and clean: and ye shall not make your souls abominable by beast, or by fowl, or by any manner of living thing, . . . which I have separated from you as unclean." Leviticus 20:24, 25.  {MH 280.3}
   
Many articles of food eaten freely by the heathen about them were forbidden to the Israelites. It was no arbitrary distinction that was made. The things prohibited were unwholesome. And the fact that they were pronounced unclean taught the lesson that the use of injurious foods is defiling. That which corrupts the body tends to corrupt the soul. It unfits the user for communion with God, unfits him for high and holy service.  {MH 280.4}
   
In the Promised Land the discipline begun in the wilderness was continued under circumstances favorable to the formation of right habits. The people were not crowded together in cities, but each family had its own landed possession, ensuring to all the health-giving blessings of a natural, unperverted life.  {MH 280.5}
   
Concerning the cruel, licentious practices of the Canaanites, who were dispossessed by Israel, the Lord said:  {MH 280.6}
   
"Ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them." Verse 23. "Neither shalt thou
                                                                          bring an abomination into thine house, lest thou be a cursed thing like it." Deuteronomy 7:26.  {MH 280.7}
   
In all the affairs of their daily life, the Israelites were taught the lesson set forth by the Holy Spirit:  {MH 281.1}
   
"Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are." 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17.  {MH 281.2}

                     Rejoicing

    "A merry [rejoicing] heart doeth good like a medicine." Proverbs 17:22. Gratitude, rejoicing, benevolence, trust in God's love and care--these are health's greatest safeguard. To the Israelites they were to be the very keynote of life.  {MH 281.3}
   
The journey made three times a year to the annual feasts at Jerusalem, the week's sojourn in booths during the Feast of Tabernacles, were opportunities for outdoor recreation and social life. These feasts were occasions of rejoicing, made sweeter and more tender by the hospitable welcome given to the stranger, the Levite, and the poor.  {MH 281.4}
   
"Rejoice in every good thing which the Lord thy God hath given unto thee, and unto thine house, thou, and the Levite, and the stranger that is among you." Deuteronomy 26:11.  {MH 281.5}
   
So, in later years, when the law of God was read in Jerusalem to the captives returned from Babylon, and the people wept because of their transgressions, the gracious words were spoken:  {MH 281.6}
   
"Mourn not. . . . Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions unto them for whom nothing is prepared: for this day is holy unto our Lord: neither be ye sorry; for the joy of the Lord is your strength." Nehemiah 8:9, 10                                                                            

And it was published and proclaimed "in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying, Go forth unto the mount, and fetch olive branches, and pine branches, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written. So the people went forth, and brought them, and made themselves booths, everyone upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the street of the water gate, and in the street of the gate of Ephraim.
                                                                         
And all the congregation of them that were come again out of the captivity made booths, and sat under the booths. . . . And there was very great gladness." Verses 15-17.  {MH 282.1}
   
God gave to Israel instruction in all the principles essential to physical as well as to moral health, and it was concerning these principles no less than concerning those of the moral law that He commanded them:  {MH 283.1}
   
"These words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates." Deuteronomy 6:6-9.  {MH 283.2}
   
"And when thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying, What mean the testimonies, and the statutes, and the judgments, which the Lord our God hath commanded you? Then thou shalt say unto thy son, . . . The Lord commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that He might preserve us alive, as it is at this day." Verses 20-24.  {MH 283.3}
   
Had the Israelites obeyed the instruction they received, and profited by their advantages, they would have been the world's object lesson of health and prosperity. If as a people they had lived according to God's plan, they would have been preserved from the diseases that afflicted other nations. Above any other people they would have possessed physical strength and vigor of intellect. They would have been the mightiest nation on the earth. God said:  {MH 283.4}
   
"Thou shalt be blessed above all people." Deuteronomy 7:14.
                                                                           
   
"The Lord hath avouched thee this day to be His peculiar people, as He hath promised thee, and that thou shouldest keep all His commandments; and to make thee high above all nations which He hath made, in praise, and in name, and in honor; and that thou mayest be an holy people unto the Lord thy God, as He hath spoken." Deuteronomy 26:18, 19.  {MH 284.1}
   
"And all these blessings shall come on thee, and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God. Blessed shalt thou be in the city, and blessed shalt thou be in the field. Blessed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy ground, and the fruit of thy cattle, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep. Blessed shall be thy basket and thy store. Blessed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and blessed shalt thou be when thou goest out." Deuteronomy 28:2-6.  {MH 284.2}
   
"The Lord shall command the blessing upon thee in thy storehouses, and in all that thou settest thine hand unto; and He shall bless thee in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. The Lord shall establish thee an holy people unto Himself, as He hath sworn unto thee, if thou shalt keep the commandments of the Lord thy God, and walk in His ways. And all people of the earth shall see that thou art called by the name of the Lord; and they shall be afraid of thee. And the Lord shall make thee plenteous in goods, in the fruit of thy body, and in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy ground, in the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers to give thee. The Lord shall open unto thee His good treasure, the heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season, and to bless all the work of thine hand. . . . And the Lord shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto                                                                               the commandments of the Lord thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them." Verses 8-13.  {MH 284.3}
   
To Aaron the high priest and his sons the direction was given:  {MH 285.1}
    "On this wise ye shall bless the children of Israel, saying unto them,


    "Jehovah bless thee, and keep thee:
     Jehovah make His face to shine upon thee,
     And be gracious unto thee:
     Jehovah lift up His countenance upon thee,
     And give thee peace.
     So shall they put My name upon the children of Israel;
     And I will bless them."


    "As thy days, so shall thy strength be.
     There is none like unto God, O Jeshurun,
     Who rideth upon the heaven for thy help,
     And in His excellency on the skies.
     The eternal God is thy dwelling place,
     And underneath are the everlasting arms. . . .
     Israel dwelleth in safety,
     The fountain of Jacob alone,


    "In a land of corn and wine;
     Yea, His heavens drop down dew.
     Happy art thou, O Israel:
     Who is like unto thee, a people saved by the Lord,
     The shield of thy help,
     And that is the sword of thy excellency!"
                    Numbers 6:23; 6:24-27, A.R.V.;
                      Deuteronomy 33:25-29, R.V.  {MH 285.2}
   
The Israelites failed of fulfilling God's purpose, and thus failed of receiving the blessings that might have been theirs. But in Joseph and Daniel, in Moses and Elisha, and many others, we have noble examples of the results of the true plan of living. Like faithfulness today will produce like results. To us it is written:
                                                                           
    "Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into His marvelous light." 1 Peter 2:9.


    "Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord,
      And whose hope the Lord is."
    He "shall flourish like the palm tree:
      He shall grow like a cedar in Lebanon.
    Those that be planted in the house of the Lord
      Shall flourish in the courts of our God.
    They shall still bring forth fruit in old age."
      "They shall be vigorous and covered with foliage."


    "Let thine heart keep My commandments:
     For length of days, and long life,
     And peace, shall they add to thee."
    "Then shalt thou walk in thy way safely,
     And thy foot shall not stumble.
     When thou liest down, thou shalt not be afraid:
     Yea, thou shalt lie down, and thy sleep shall be sweet.
     Be not afraid of sudden fear,
     Neither of the desolation of the wicked, when it cometh.
     For the Lord shall be thy confidence,
     And shall keep thy foot from being taken."
             Jeremiah 17:7; Psalm 92:12-14; 92:14, Leeser;
                                    Proverbs 3:1, 2, 23-26.  {MH 286.1}

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 08:12:00 AM
Regarding the additional statutes and judgments, the SOP says this in Patriarchs and Prophets:

That the obligations of the Decalogue might be more fully understood and enforced, additional precepts were given, illustrating and applying the principles of the Ten Commandments. These laws were called judgments, both because they were framed in infinite wisdom and equity and because the magistrates were to give judgment according to them. Unlike the Ten Commandments, they were delivered privately to Moses, who was to communicate them to the people.  {PP 310.1}
   
The first of these laws related to servants. In ancient times criminals were sometimes sold into slavery by the judges; in some cases, debtors were sold by their creditors; and poverty even led persons to sell themselves or their children. But a Hebrew could not be sold as a slave for life. His term of service was limited to six years; on the seventh he was to be set at liberty. Manstealing, deliberate murder, and rebellion against parental authority were to be punished with death. The holding of slaves not of Israelitish birth was permitted, but their life and person were strictly guarded. The murderer of a slave was to be punished; an injury inflicted upon one by his master, though no more than the loss of a tooth, entitled him to his freedom.  {PP 310.2}

    The Israelites had lately been servants themselves, and now that they were to have servants under them, they were to beware of indulging the spirit of cruelty and exaction from which they had suffered under their Egyptian taskmasters. The memory of their own bitter servitude should enable them to put themselves in the servant's place, leading them to be kind and compassionate, to deal with others as they would wish to be dealt with.  {PP 310.3}

    The rights of widows and orphans were especially guarded, and a tender regard for their helpless condition was enjoined.                                                                            "If thou afflict them in any wise," the Lord declared, "and they cry at all unto Me, I will surely hear their cry; and My wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless." Aliens who united themselves with Israel were to be protected from wrong or oppression. "Thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt."  {PP 310.4}
   
The taking of usury from the poor was forbidden. A poor man's raiment or blanket taken as a pledge, must be restored to him at nightfall. He who was guilty of theft was required to restore double. Respect for magistrates and rulers was enjoined, and judges were warned against perverting judgment, aiding a false cause, or receiving bribes. Calumny and slander were prohibited, and acts of kindness enjoined, even toward personal enemies.  {PP 311.1}
   
Again the people were reminded of the sacred obligation of the Sabbath. Yearly feasts were appointed, at which all the men of the nation were to assemble before the Lord, bringing to Him their offerings of gratitude and the first fruits of His bounties. The object of all these regulations was stated: they proceeded from no exercise of mere arbitrary sovereignty; all were given for the good of Israel. The Lord said, "Ye shall be holy men unto Me"--worthy to be acknowledged by a holy God.  {PP 311.2}
   
These laws were to be recorded by Moses, and carefully treasured as the foundation of the national law, and, with the ten precepts which they were given to illustrate, the condition of the fulfillment of God's promises to Israel.  {PP 311.3}

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 08:22:00 AM
The law of God existed before the creation of man or else Adam could not have sinned. After the transgression of Adam the principles of the law were not changed, but were definitely arranged and expressed to meet man in his fallen condition. Christ, in counsel with His Father, instituted the system of sacrificial offerings; that death, instead of being immediately visited upon the transgressor, should be transferred to a victim which should prefigure the great and perfect offering of the son of God (Ibid., March 14, 1878).  {1BC 1104.5}
   
Precepts Given to Guard Decalogue.--In consequence of continual transgression, the moral law was repeated in awful grandeur from Sinai. Christ gave to Moses religious precepts which were to govern everyday life. These statutes were explicitly given to guard the ten commandments. They were not shadowy types to pass away with the death of Christ. They were to be binding upon men in every age as long as time should last. These commands were enforced by the power of the moral law, and they clearly and definitely explained that law (Ibid., April 15, 1875).  {1BC 1104.6}

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-24-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 09:10:00 AM
It is interesting that the SOP does not separate those statutes and judgments that applied to a specific time or place - she makes rather a blanket statement saying they "were" to be binding for all ages.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 10:18:00 AM
From EGW comments in the SDA Bible Commentary regarding statutes and judgments. We cannot help but see how these are still binding.

1, 2. Become Familiar With Levitical Law.--We are to become familiar with the Levitical law in all its bearings; for it contains rules that must be obeyed; it contains the instruction that if studied will enable us to understand better the rule of faith and practice that we are to follow in our dealings with one another. No soul has any excuse for being in darkness. Those who receive Christ by faith will receive also power to become the sons of God (Letter 3, 1905).  {1BC 1110.4}


Agricultural and Tithing Laws a Test. --The tithing system was instituted by the Lord as the very best arrangement to help the people in carrying out the principles of the law. If this law were obeyed, the people would be entrusted with the entire vineyard, the whole earth. [Quotes Lev. 25:18-22.] . . .  {1BC 1112.5}
   
Men were to cooperate with God in restoring the diseased land to health, that it might be a praise and a glory to His name. And as the land they possessed would, if managed with skill and earnestness, produce its treasures, so their hearts, if controlled by God, would reflect His character. . . .  {1BC 1112.6}
   
In the laws which God gave for the cultivation of the soil, He was giving the people opportunity to overcome their selfishness and become heavenly-minded. Canaan would be to them as Eden if they obeyed the Word of the Lord. Through them the Lord designed to teach all the nations of the world how to cultivate the soil so that it would yield healthy fruit, free from disease. The earth is the Lord's vineyard, and is to be treated according to His plan. Those who cultivated the soil were to realize that they were doing God service. They were as truly in their lot and place as were the men appointed to minister in the priesthood and in work connected with the tabernacle. God told the people that the Levites were a gift to them, and no matter what their trade, they were to help to support them (Ibid.).

Diet Modified Disposition, Activated Mind. --The state of the mind has largely to do with the health of the body, and especially with the health of the digestive organs. As a general thing, the Lord did not provide His people with flesh meat in the desert, because He knew that the use of this diet would create disease and                                                                              insubordination. In order to modify the disposition, and bring the higher powers of the mind into active exercise, He removed from them the flesh of dead animals. He gave them angel's food, manna from heaven (MS 38, 1898).  {1BC 1112.8}


No Thread of Selfishness in Web of Life.--Deuteronomy contains much instruction regarding what the law is to us, and the relation we shall sustain to God as we reverence and obey His law.  {1BC 1118.6}
   
We are God's servants, doing His service. Into the great web of life we are to draw no thread of selfishness; for this would spoil the pattern. But, oh, how thoughtless men are apt to be! How seldom do they make the interests of God's suffering ones their own. The poor are all around them, but they pass on, thoughtless and indifferent, regardless of the widows and orphans who, left without resources, suffer, but do not tell their need. If the rich would place a small fund in the bank, at the disposal of the needy ones, how much suffering would be saved. The holy love of God should lead every one to see that it is his duty to care for some other one, and thus keep alive the spirit of benevolence. . . . With what goodness, mercy, and love God lays His requirements before His children, telling them what they
                                                                           1119
are to do. He honors us by making us His helping hand. Instead of complaining, let us rejoice that we have the privilege of serving under so good and merciful a Master (Letter 112, 1902).  {1BC 1118.7}


No Uncleanness of Body, Word, or Spirit. --In order to be acceptable in God's sight, the leaders of the people were to give strict heed to the sanitary condition of the armies of Israel, even when they went forth to battle. Every soul, from the commander-in-chief to the lowest soldier in the army, was sacredly charged to preserve cleanliness in his person and surroundings; for the Israelites were chosen by God as His peculiar people. They were sacredly bound to be holy in body and spirit. They were not to be careless or neglectful of their personal duties. In every respect they were to preserve cleanliness. They were to allow nothing untidy or unwholesome in their surroundings, nothing which would taint the purity of the atmosphere. Inwardly and outwardly they were to be pure [Deut. 23:14 quoted] (Letter 35, 1901).  {1BC 1119.4}
   
We know His will, and any departure from it to follow ideas of your own is a dishonor to His name, a reproach to His sacred truth. Everything that relates to the worship of God on earth, is to bear in appearance a striking resemblance to heavenly things. There must be no careless disregard in these things, if you expect the Lord to favor you with His presence. He will not have His work placed on a level with common, temporal things (MS 7, 1889).  {1BC 1119.5}
   
All those who come into His presence should give special attention to the body and the clothing. Heaven is a clean and holy place. God is pure and holy. All who come into His presence should take heed to His directions, and have the body and the clothing in a pure, clean condition, thus showing respect to themselves and to Him. The heart must also be sanctified. Those who do this will not dishonor His sacred name by worshiping Him while their hearts are polluted and their apparel is untidy.
                                                                         
God sees these things. He marks the heart- preparation, the thoughts, the cleanliness in appearance, of those who worship Him (MS 126 1901).  {1BC 1119.6}

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 02:10:00 PM
Jim and I have come up with five categories for the OT civil laws. If anyone can discover more, please advise.

Ceremonial, health, hygiene, agricultural and civil.

For the sake of this examination, we will not address the ceremonial aspects of the first five books of the Bible. And we will label the judgments into one of the remaining  categories and whether or not they are still applicable today.

How's that?

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-25-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on May 24, 2007, 02:34:00 PM
I came across this statement and do not see it here, so let me share:

"It would be a scene well-pleasing to God and angels, would His professed followers in this generation unite, as did Israel of old [referring especially to the revival in the days of Nehemiah], in a solemn covenant to "observe and do all the commandments of the Lord our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes" (SW June 7, 1904).  {3BC 1139.2}

So does the word all apply to the judgments and statutes?

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 02:47:00 PM
Liane: I believe the SOP can even answer that:

 

quote:
They were not shadowy types to pass away with the death of Christ. They were to be binding upon men in every age as long as time should last. These commands were enforced by the power of the moral law, and they clearly and definitely explained that law (Ibid., April 15, 1875). {1BC 1104.6}

Also - from everything I have read, it appears that the statutes belonging to hygiene also apply to us today.

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-24-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 24, 2007, 02:48:00 PM
Thanks to Sis Sybil, I got the quotes I was thinking about. Here they are, all together:

quote:
    The minds of the people, blinded and debased by slavery and heathenism, were not prepared to appreciate fully the far-reaching principles of God's ten precepts. That the obligations of the Decalogue might be more fully understood and enforced, additional precepts were given, illustrating and applying the principles of the Ten Commandments. These laws were called judgments, both because they were framed in infinite wisdom and equity and because the magistrates were to give judgment according to them. Unlike the Ten Commandments, they were delivered privately to Moses, who was to communicate them to the people.  {PP 310.1}

    Moses wrote these judgments and statutes from the mouth of God while he was with him in the mount. If the people of God had obeyed the principles of the ten commandments, there would have been no need of the specific directions given to Moses, which he wrote in a book, relative to their duty to God and to one another. The definite directions which the Lord gave to Moses in regard to the duty of his people to one another, and to the stranger, are the principles of the ten commandments simplified and given in a definite manner, that they need not err.  {1SP 265.1}

    In consequence of continual transgression, the moral law was repeated in awful grandeur from Sinai. Christ gave to Moses religious precepts which were to govern the everyday life. These statutes were explicitly given to guard the ten commandments. They were not shadowy types to pass away with the death of Christ. They were to be binding upon man in every age as long as time should last. These commands were enforced by the power of the moral law, and they clearly and definitely explained that law.  {RH, May 6, 1875 par. 10}

    Moses wrote these judgments and statutes from the mouth of God while he was with him in the mount. The definite directions in regard to the duty of his people to one another, and to the stranger, are the principles of the ten commandments simplified and given in a definite manner, that they need not err.  {ST, June 17, 1880 par. 3}


These statements seem to say that the statutes were based on the 10C, and therefore are just as binding today. WDYT?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 02:53:00 PM
Arnold, my brother! Glad to see you once more!

Yes - when they are solidly attached to the Ten Commandments, they are binding.

What do you think of the four categories thus far? Can you think of any others we have missed?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 24, 2007, 02:55:00 PM
And where would you place the command "Do not let a witch live"?

To the First Commandment? That is my guess.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on May 24, 2007, 06:56:00 PM
Hi Sybil:

So are you saying that there are some civil, diet and hygiene laws are shadows? I thought the ceremonial laws were the only shadows, did I miss something in reading above?

I read the same statements as Arnold above and it appears to me that all are binding by the Tenn Commandments.

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

[This message has been edited by Liane H (edited 05-24-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 25, 2007, 06:45:00 AM
We are still looking at them - and over time will discover the binding ones out of these categories.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on May 25, 2007, 11:17:00 AM
In my mind it is good to do the research to learn these statutes and judgments, but to decide which ones are still binding is not necessary if I read what was said by the Spirit of Prophecy:

"to "observe and do all the commandments of the Lord our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes"

The issue is these are not binding upon the world but to us for our own good. We may not be able to fulfill the punishments as they are written, but we are obligated to obey them ourselves.

This could be pushing the church into a place of new light and knowledge with God for the last generation that follow the Lamb.

It is worth the study.

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on May 25, 2007, 11:23:00 AM
As a further thought and view we may not be able to exact the same punishment, but we could disfellowship those that do not follow the principles of God's statutes and judgments.

When Roger Williams lived in Massachusetts and he sinned against the church there he was banished from the church and sent to the wilderness to die. Some wonderful indians took him in and he lived.

He founded the state of Rhode Island that I was born and opened the door to freedom of thought and worship of God which was the foundation of our first amendment right to worship.

Our standard in the church is so low that we should hold our head down in shame for what we are today as a denomination. It must grieve God to see how we are today, but time is coming when that all will be behind us and the 144,000 will reflect Jesus and cause His coming soon.

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on May 25, 2007, 11:27:00 AM
Further thought from Dueteronomy:

4:2   Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.  

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 25, 2007, 03:31:00 PM
We will be astonished at our findings in this study and I do not say that lightly. The standards have been so lowered that most of us don't even know what is sin and what isn't sin.

Jim and I are working on a chart with all the five categories. We will pass it around via e-mail after we have finished entering all the statutes so we can get everyone's input.

I'd say there are many more binding than not binding.  

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on May 25, 2007, 04:02:00 PM
Can I e-mail to you my input?

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

[This message has been edited by Liane H (edited 05-25-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 25, 2007, 07:29:00 PM
I think we have another category - I just hit Lev 18 with the Laws of Sexual Morality. FYI
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 28, 2007, 02:38:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
Arnold, my brother! Glad to see you once more!

Yes - when they are solidly attached to the Ten Commandments, they are binding.

What do you think of the four categories thus far? Can you think of any others we have missed?


Sis Sybil,

I've been rather busy lately, with moving to a new residence and all the packing and unpacking that entails. But this is a very interesting topic.

I would like to categorize the statutes, but not in the way you have been doing it. The foundation of life is God's character, the transcript of which are the 10 Commandments. The SOP tells us that the statutes were given to help the people understand and keep the commandments.

So, here are my categories:

1) Shadows - done away by Christ's death.
2) Same - continue as is.
3) Modified - continue concept, but implementation is different.

I haven't studied this as much as I'd like, but I'm guessing most end up in #3. The hard part is figuring out the core concept, then figuring out the new implementation.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Sister Marie on May 28, 2007, 07:04:00 AM
Good Morning Brother,

On #3 Would you please give me an example of this? For just looking at it the first thing that came to mind was that Sunday keepers keep the concept, they have just added a new implementation of it. So of course, we don't want to do that. So please provide for me an example of what you mean.     :) Thanks

P.S. #1 and 2 are very good, for this is the core of interest we are trying to decide, if we should keep them or not.

Another thought that is coming is that the Moslems keep most if not all of these things, and it is with this idea in mind that they come against the Christians with fever, considering us to be no good and worthy of death because we do not keep them. They feel it gives them the right to kill us with God's go ahead. They too have the concept but have added their own desired implementation of the concept.

We don't want people to think of us as being like them, so does one pick and chose, and how do we keep ourself from having people think of us as they do them. We are here to water the earth with Truth that they may be saved, they are here to kill all but themselves. (Those who follow their faith). That is one way we are different. Just thoughts.

So are there rules that really were "just for them" and just for their time frame?" And how do we know how to tell the difference? I'm just sort of thinking out loud.

------------------
With Christian Love,
Sister Marie

[This message has been edited by Sister Glass (edited 05-28-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 28, 2007, 07:17:00 AM
Right on, Arnold - good thoughts!
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 28, 2007, 10:39:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sister Glass:
On #3 Would you please give me an example of this?

One example could be in the area of slaves. The rules for slavery were different for Israelites than for strangers. We don't have slaves today, but are there underlying principles that apply to employees? Perhaps.

Another is the cancellation of debt on the Jubilee. How do we implement that? Is that #3, or maybe it is #2?

Another is the Feast of Tabernacles. What did it typify? From what I can tell, the anti-type has yet to be fulfilled. Therefore, shouldn't it still be binding? At least, the parts that have not yet been fulfilled?

On that note, maybe there should be a 1a and 1b: Fulfilled Shadows and Unfulfilled Shadows.

quote:
Originally posted by Sister Glass:
For just looking at it the first thing that came to mind was that Sunday keepers keep the concept, they have just added a new implementation of it.

Indeed, they do keep SOME of the concepts. But their failure to keep ALL of the concepts is what leads to the faulty implementation.

One concept is that we do exactly what the Lord commands, no additions or deletions. The failure here leads to failures in other commands.

quote:
Originally posted by Sister Glass:
So are there rules that really were "just for them" and just for their time frame?"

I don't think so. God is the same, so His character is the same, so His requirements are the same.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 28, 2007, 02:39:00 PM
Again, right on, Arnold - I have learned from others that the Feast of Tabernacles MAY be something we need to look at from the feast; otherwise everything attached to the ceremonials as far as rituals is a fulfilled shadow.

Now, we need to get straight on the categories. I like the generalized categories Arnold suggested, but I also like specific categories. Let us decide which ones to use.

Now - Jim and I just finished the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet of all the texts dealing with statutes and judgments: Exodus to Deut. If anyone wants me to send it to them for a study sheet, I will. Just give me your e-mail address. It did copy onto MS Word for those who do not have Excel.

So here we go.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 28, 2007, 02:45:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
Most of the Christian world accepts that the shadows have passed away and that the reality is Christ. We do not observe the Passover, but rather the Lord's supper has taken its place.

But, what of the other judgments and statutes? What was their purpose? Are they related to the moral law? I think that we can say they are. There were some that were unique to the state of Israel as a theocracy. There is no longer a theocracy, so these statues are not binding upon us today. We can learn from them though. The statutes that are not shadows and are not related directly to a theocracy we have no reason throw away. They are light regarding the laws of our being. They are the instructions God has given that we may be successful in this world and prepared for the next.

At first glance many will seem to be too far removed from our way of life, from modern society. But, upon closer examination we shall find much wisdom in the statutes. What many will refuse to accept is in fact wisdom from God that will bless us as we walk in the light.


Intimately living with them over the past week through simply reading them carefully, then entering them, text by text, I have been incredibly moved by the depth and detail of each - the broad implications as well as the simplicity encompassed in a very short command. For one, I can see many we do not practice today because we ARE so far removed from their giving four thousand or so years ago. Aren't we privileged to still have the account?

Reading toward the end of Deuteronomy the curses associated with disobedience, you can clearly see "Israel gone wrong" throughout her history. How that nation has been plagued, right down to specific curses.

It makes one tremble.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 29, 2007, 11:24:00 AM
More thoughts...

quote:
Originally posted by Sister Glass:
Another thought that is coming is that the Moslems keep most if not all of these things, and it is with this idea in mind that they come against the Christians with fever, considering us to be no good and worthy of death because we do not keep them. They feel it gives them the right to kill us with God's go ahead. They too have the concept but have added their own desired implementation of the concept.

The law of love being the foundation of the government of God, the happiness of all intelligent beings depends upon their perfect accord with its great principles of righteousness. God desires from all His creatures the service of love--service that springs from an appreciation of His character. He takes no pleasure in a forced obedience; and to all He grants freedom of will, that they may render Him voluntary service. {PP 34.3}

These murderers might know of some of God's truth, but they lack the foundation of His government.

Who can read the heart but God? Yet, they will presume to read your heart and kill you if they don't like what they see. In that, they echo their father: I will be like the Most High.

quote:
Originally posted by Sister Glass:
We don't want people to think of us as being like them, so does one pick and chose, and how do we keep ourself from having people think of us as they do them. We are here to water the earth with Truth that they may be saved, they are here to kill all but themselves. (Those who follow their faith). That is one way we are different.

We cannot be different by picking and choosing. In fact, that is how they are. We are called to walk in truth - all truth.

Here's how we are to be different:

John  13:34 - A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.  

1John 2:9-11 - He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now. He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him. But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.

2John 1:5 - And now I beseech thee, lady, not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that we love one another.

On the other hand, the strongest witness that God has sent His Son into the world is the existence of harmony and union among men of varied dispositions who form His church. This witness it is the privilege of the followers of Christ to bear. But in order to do this, they must place themselves under Christ's command. Their characters must be conformed to His character and their wills to His will. {AA 549.1}

The grace of Christ must mold the entire being, and its triumph will not be complete until the heavenly universe shall witness habitual tenderness of feeling, Christlike love, and holy deeds in the deportment of the children of God. {AG 235.2}

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 29, 2007, 03:00:00 PM
Our elder who is in the medical biz write this when I sent him the texts:

quote:
You are absolutely right, many of the relevant laws still apply and are not spoken of. I remember Dr. Hardinge in his book about the Sanctuary related one of these laws how women are not to have intercourse within so many days of their period and then turned to some research that was done on cervical cancer in the general population and a group of orthodox Jewish woman in the Boston area. The Jewish women cancer rate was easily a 3rd of the general female population thus signifying that these laws are there today for our protection. I view the 10 commandments as for our protection and therefore Mosaic statutes are the same – for our wellbeing.

As we study these statutes, we will see so many that have been dropped off and virtually forgotten - meanwhile disease runs rampant.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 29, 2007, 03:34:00 PM
Question: isn't seduction considered false witness, therefore being tied directly to the 9th commandment? This may be a no-brainer to some, I just want to make sure while going through the list.

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 05-29-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 29, 2007, 03:51:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
Quote
...women are not to have intercourse within so many days of their period...

As we study these statutes, we will see so many that have been dropped off and virtually forgotten - meanwhile disease runs rampant.

Yes, many have been neglected, to our loss. But the one mentioned here is still remembered in some circles. But it's really hard to bring it up in Sabbath School.  ;)

BTW, the husbands should also abstain during this time.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 29, 2007, 03:53:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
isn't seduction considered false witness

Adultery and covetousness, too.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

[This message has been edited by asygo (edited 05-29-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 29, 2007, 04:13:00 PM
One law, one custom shall be for you and for the dwelling stranger. Num 15:16

Doesn't this statute (paraphrased) nullify the arguments for cultural applications regarding some Paulien statements in the NT?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 29, 2007, 05:11:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
One law, one custom shall be for you and for the dwelling stranger. Num 15:16

Doesn't this statute (paraphrased) nullify the arguments for cultural applications regarding some Paulien statements in the NT?


I don't think so. Lev 25:39-46 specifies different statutes for the Israelite and the stranger regarding slavery. Whether we like it or not, they were not treated equally.

But when it comes to offerings, sacrifices, and atonement (which Num 15 is addressing) the requirements are the same for the Israelite and the stranger. Maybe there's a lesson there.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on May 29, 2007, 06:01:00 PM
You are right - there are differences. Thanks for keeping me straight!
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 30, 2007, 11:32:00 AM
It is interesting that so many ignore the statutes that contain so many blessings for humanity. We are making progress in our study.

When we see that there are both ceremonial and moral statutes we have made an important distinction. We throw out the ceremonial and now look at the moral statutes. But, is it not true that a distinction needs to be made in regards to the laws that would apply to a theocracy and those that would not be limited in such a manner? If we can discern the basis for this distinction then it appears that we would be able to rule out those that would only apply in a theocracy and be left with those that are still binding today. Is there any other reason to nullify the moral statutes that God gave to Moses? I can think of nothing else to restrict the application of these judgments and statutes.

How can we know which statutes would apply only to a theocracy?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 30, 2007, 12:00:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
How can we know which statutes would apply only to a theocracy?

Plus, isn't the church a theocracy? If so, those statutes should still apply today, sans the death penalty.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: JimB on May 30, 2007, 01:05:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
Plus, isn't the church a theocracy? If so, those statutes should still apply today, sans the death penalty.


Brother Arnold, I'm also looking for an answer to brother Richard's question. However, if we used your logic that the church is still a theocracy therefore the death penalty is still binding. You'd also have to enforce the death penalty for adulterers.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 30, 2007, 02:31:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jim B:
However, if we used your logic that the church is still a theocracy therefore the death penalty is still binding. You'd also have to enforce the death penalty for adulterers.

The church, in its sphere, is a theocracy. But, the sphere of the church today is much smaller than the church of Moses' day. The church no longer has the authority to impose physical death; that's the state's sphere. Therefore, in whatever way it chooses to "cut off" the sinner, it cannot be physical death.

But the church has full authority to enforce its laws within its boundaries. Moreover, its laws are theocratic, rather than democratic. In that sense, it is as much a theocracy today as in Moses' day.

However, there are those who insist that the laws and penalties prescribed through Moses are just as binding today, and must be enforced in the same way today. That puts such people in direct conflict with the state. But they don't care.

Has God authorized the separation of church and state, as we often hear today? Or is the church supposed to function as it did under Moses?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 30, 2007, 02:59:00 PM
While I think  this course of discussion can be profitable, it seems that we need to answer the question as to the principles involved in setting aside those moral statutes that do not apply today.

The idea that the state has separate responsibilities from the church is important. We do not want the state to legislate in regards to the first four commandments. But, do we wish them to use the death penalty for adultery? If not, why not?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 30, 2007, 04:44:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
we need to answer the question as to the principles involved in setting aside those moral statutes that do not apply today.

I think all moral statutes apply today. Moreover, I think all the statutes are moral in nature. And therefore, we are not at liberty to set any aside.

My questions are: 1) What are the underlying principles for each statute, and 2) how do we implement it today?

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
The idea that the state has separate responsibilities from the church is important. We do not want the state to legislate in regards to the first four commandments. But, do we wish them to use the death penalty for adultery? If not, why not?

I believe all of God's commands are moral in nature. Therefore, I don't think the state has any business in enforcing them.

If the state feels it necessary to control and regulate actions, then it is within its authority to do that. But only God reads the heart.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 31, 2007, 08:14:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
I believe all of God's commands are moral in nature. Therefore, I don't think the state has any business in enforcing them.

Are not we to distinguish between the ceremonial and the moral laws?

And, God has told us that the rulers in the land are to enforce morality. Think of what the world would be like if killers were not killed and thieves were not arrested.

You have lost me on this one, Brother Arnold.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on May 31, 2007, 10:40:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
Are not we to distinguish between the ceremonial and the moral laws?

I understand the distinctions made between them, but I don't personally make those distinctions. To me, every law God gives is moral in nature. The only question is how to apply them in my life today.

 

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
And, God has told us that the rulers in the land are to enforce morality. Think of what the world would be like if killers were not killed and thieves were not arrested.

God's laws are primarily concerned with character - thoughts and feelings. Different actions may be called for in different circumstances, but the crux of the matter is the character underlying the action.

When God is at the head of the state - a theocracy - then the state can make judgments about our thoughts and feelings. God reads hearts accurately.

But when man is at the head of the state, the state has no ability to read the heart. In such cases, the state is limited to judging actions. That's where we are today.

If one ends the life of another, then the state can punish for killing. But it is in no position to punish one for hating his brother.

If one has intimate relations with another's spouse, then the state can punish for adultery. But it is in no position to punish one for looking at a woman lustfully.

If one takes what belongs to another, then the state can punish for stealing. But it is in no position to punish one for coveting.

The state can judge actions and punish or reward accordingly, but its jurisdiction ends there. But as Christians, we answer to a higher standard. Our Judge reads the heart, judges motives. The state has no business in that sphere.

 

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
You have lost me on this one, Brother Arnold.

I hope I'm clearer today than yesterday.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

[This message has been edited by asygo (edited 05-31-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 31, 2007, 08:07:00 PM
Thank you, I agree.

Our minds have been running in different channels.

We are trying to see which laws are still binding. The types and shadows are not. That seems to be a good place to begin. The ceremonial laws called forth actions that are no longer to be done. They were binding before the death of Christ, but no longer.

The rest of the statutes and judgments were moral not ceremonial. They were not types and shadows that passed away with the death of Christ.

Some of the moral laws require action today, some do not. We do not stone the glutton. We are looking for the principles that are involved that we might understand which laws we are to obey.

I like your thought, Brother Arnold that none can judge the motive, so when a motive is needed in carrying out the law, those are no longer binding. How many statutes called for a punishment for a violation that only involved motive?  Did the command to kill those who willfully killed another involve motive? If it was an accident, then the motive was not to kill. If the motive was to kill, then the penalty for murder was to be death. What if the motive was to kill in war? Then if the war was a just war, the motive was good. If the war was one of conquest, then the motive to kill was evil. Seems have have run into a small problem with this basis of thinking?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Cop on May 31, 2007, 08:35:00 PM
 
quote:
If the war was one of conquest, then the motive to kill was evil.

I disagree, my Brother. Not all wars of conquest are wrong. When Joshua led Israel into the promised land, was this not a war of conquest? Did they not, in obediance to God, kill and destroy the prior inhabitants and take their land? Was this war of conquest evil?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 01, 2007, 11:12:00 AM
In the statutes, you will see a section that pertains to war in Deut 20. The motive was to approach in peace - but if peace was not accepted, then the motive changed to conquest - utter conquest.

Principles governing warfare - first, set your houses in order   Deut 20:1-9

Going near a city, proclaim an offer of peace   Deut 20:10

If accepted, the people will serve you   Deut 20:11

If not accepted and they war against them, besiege them   Deut 20:12

As it is delivered to you, slay all the males but keep the women and children along with livestock and plunder. Do such to all cities that are far from you, not the nations here   
Deut 20:13-15

But the cities of your inheritance, let nothing that breathes live   Deut 20:16,17

Otherwise they could teach you according to their gods   Deut 20:18

Do not cut down trees for food during warfare, only those that are not for food   Deut 20:19,20

If a man is found dead in a field, an offering and prayer for the guilt not to be charged to the COI   Deut 21:1-9

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 01, 2007, 03:38:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Cop:
I disagree, my Brother. Not all wars of conquest are wrong. When Joshua led Israel into the promised land, was this not a war of conquest? Did they not, in obediance to God, kill and destroy the prior inhabitants and take their land? Was this war of conquest evil?

Very good, Brother Cop!   :)  

But, I would suggest that this was not a war of conquest, but one of liberation. When the King returns to His land and finds barbarians occupying it, is He not entitled to drive out those who are in rebellion?  

Some would try and make the analogy for today, but it does not work. God is not as man. I guess we need to better define a war of conquest so that the nations of the world will understand when they may go to war and when they may not, in God's eyes.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 01, 2007, 05:05:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
We are trying to see which laws are still binding. The types and shadows are not. ... They were binding before the death of Christ, but no longer.

I use a simple definition: If the law prefigured something that Christ has already done, then it is no longer binding. Otherwise, it is still binding.

For example, killing lambs is abolished because Jesus, the Lamb of the world, has already been killed in the antitype.

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
I like your thought, Brother Arnold that none can judge the motive, so when a motive is needed in carrying out the law, those are no longer binding. ... Seems have have run into a small problem with this basis of thinking?

God's laws are still binding even when motives are in question. But how we enforce them will be different because the church and state are separated.

Consider the guy caught picking up sticks on the Sabbath. He was obviously doing that which was forbidden. But Moses did not immediately execute him. Instead, they arrested him, then asked God what to do about it. Only after God told them to stone him did they enforce the prescribed punishment.

Here are a couple of points I get from that story:

Today, God's government on earth - the church - still judges motives. But it no longer has the power to execute sinners. Therefore, the enforcement will be different. God will have to bring about radical changes to fully enforce His laws, i.e. returning in glory.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 02, 2007, 03:50:00 PM
     
quote:
Originally posted by asygo:

Consider the guy caught picking up sticks on the Sabbath. He was obviously doing that which was forbidden. But Moses did not immediately execute him. Instead, they arrested him, then asked God what to do about it. Only after God told them to stone him did they enforce the prescribed punishment.



As I am understanding this - you made the point - which was a beginning point of the command to execute the man who broke the Sabbath in this manner.

God set about creating laws that required death of the sinner. Not that is matters in this particular discussion but what kind of sin was that? Was this man sinning in ignorance or was he in full rebellion? Various penalties for various sins against God and fellow men.

A murderer is obviously in full rebellion - and it appears as if the man who picked up sticks, against the command not to do it, was also in full rebellion and the result was death by stoning.

So after Moses got the command as to what to do regarding this sin, he carried it out and we have no record of his going before the Lord a second time on this offense - or others, for that matter that I can find. There was no doubt about this man's guilt. The command set a precedence, so to speak, giving the remedy of such a person in rebellion.

In our discussion of the death penalty in another forum (Mod 2 - ask for entrance), it has been stated that God wanted purity among His people. Penalties, in their various forms, were meant to either correct bad behavior or to absolutely put to death, cleansing the camp of one in full rebellion. If gone unchecked, it would spread from one individual to another.

It is not my understanding that Moses consulted the Lord every time sin was committed in the camp AFTER he had the statutes and judgments in hand. However, when situations came up and the Lord needed to be consulted, the High Priest did have the Urim and Thummim.

We have a command related to the Sabbath upon which Ellen White further elaborates - and that is cooking on the Sabbath. We have a Preparation Day to ready ourselves, our homes and our food for the Sabbath. It is SO HOLY that cooking as done on other days of the week is not permitted. Manna did not fall on the Sabbath - double portions were given on Friday - no one cooked on the Sabbath while in the wilderness. How much worse is picking up sticks and making a fire on the Sabbath in the eyes of God?

Well, I see I'm getting carried away - and to finish this post, it is evident that it was a serious offense that God gave an order to remedy and Moses and the COI took it from there. It was a law on the books, so to speak.

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-04-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 02, 2007, 05:54:00 PM
   
quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
God's laws are still binding even when motives are in question. But how we enforce them will be different because the church and state are separated.

Three considerations on this point:

First, the state is not to enter into legislation that involves the first four commands that deal with our responsibilities to God. So, where there is a punishment for violating a statute that has to do with the first four commandments, the state is not to be involved.

Second, how about the church? The church does not "punish" for sin. It may restrict participation, but there is no punishment as in Israel when a theocracy. And, the church is not to disfellowship except in the area where there are violations of the tests of fellowship, and there is open sin unrepented of.

Third, legislation and punishment regarding the last six commandments is in the hands of the state. While we agree the statutes are binding, we now need to understand how far the state is to go in legislation and punishment.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 02, 2007, 05:58:00 PM
Continuing on with these thoughts, we want to know more than just about punishment. We want to know our duty to God, the church, our family, society, and ourselves. These statutes may not carry a penalty from the church or state, but this does not mean that God will wink at these sins. I think this is the most important part of this discussion. The other points are important, but these statutes that are moral are the laws of our being and to violate them is to sacrifice blessings.

[This message has been edited by Richard Myers (edited 06-04-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 04, 2007, 11:42:00 AM
Okay ... in deciding the binding aspects of the Mosaic Law, we can put aside all the ceremonial laws as they pointed to Christ.

What's left? Everything that supports the Ten Commandments - which is all of them. Our duty to God: the first four; our duty to each other: the last six. The SOP says this:  Become Familiar With Levitical Law.--We are to become familiar with the Levitical law in all its bearings; for it contains rules that must be obeyed; it contains the instruction that if studied will enable us to understand better the rule of faith and practice that we are to follow in our dealings with one another. No soul has any excuse for being in darkness. Those who receive Christ by faith will receive also power to become the sons of God (Letter 3, 1905).  {1BC 1110.4}

The church upholds and considers all ten in church life. As a very smart friend so recently reminded me, there are tests of fellowship recorded in the book of Acts as well as other things that have been shown to us since the writing of that book (SOP for instance) - we use them as far as church discipline - and we can certainly discuss these; however, the state is to legislate the moral laws that have to do how people treat other people in society - so they specifically handle the last six commandments.

The statutes and judgments give practical application to the Ten Commandments, so as far as I can tell, all the statutes outside the ceremonial laws are binding.

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-05-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 04, 2007, 01:13:00 PM
I can see no reason to reject the light God has given in the statutes and judgments. They are moral law. But, they are not enforceable in their given manner by the state nor the church. The laws are laws of our being. Laws which we live and die by even if we do not understand them. But, there are penalties commanded and these were especially written for application in the theocracy, Israel. The punishment for violation of moral laws today needs to be decided by the society in which the laws are made. It would appear that great care needs to be taken to consider what is an appropriate punishment in that society.

The first four commandments pertain to our relationship with God and no state is to legislate in this area. God does not want forced worship and He has not provided tools for the state to persecute those who refuse to bow down to Baal. This is what America has been very successful with, the separation of church and state. No legislation in the area of worship.

We appear to be moving forward as we seek wisdom regarding the moral laws of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 04, 2007, 05:15:00 PM
Let's look at some practical applications for a little while and discuss how we can apply the binding aspects of the statutes to our lives. But before we do, Patriarchs and Prophets has this to say of some of the statutes:

 

quote:
The minds of the people, blinded and debased by slavery and heathenism, were not prepared to appreciate fully the far-reaching principles of God's ten precepts. That the obligations of the Decalogue might be more fully understood and enforced, additional precepts were given, illustrating and applying the principles of the Ten Commandments. These laws were called judgments, both because they were framed in infinite wisdom and equity and because the magistrates were to give judgment according to them. Unlike the Ten Commandments, they were delivered privately to Moses, who was to communicate them to the people.  {PP 310.1}
   
The first of these laws related to servants. In ancient times criminals were sometimes sold into slavery by the judges; in some cases, debtors were sold by their creditors; and poverty even led persons to sell themselves or their children. But a Hebrew could not be sold as a slave for life. His term of service was limited to six years; on the seventh he was to be set at liberty. Manstealing, deliberate murder, and rebellion against parental authority were to be punished with death. The holding of slaves not of Israelitish birth was permitted, but their life and person were strictly guarded. The murderer of a slave was to be punished; an injury inflicted upon one by his master, though no more than the loss of a tooth, entitled him to his freedom.  {PP 310.2}
   
The Israelites had lately been servants themselves, and now that they were to have servants under them, they were to beware of indulging the spirit of cruelty and exaction from which they had suffered under their Egyptian taskmasters. The memory of their own bitter servitude should enable them to put themselves in the servant's place, leading them to be kind and compassionate, to deal with others as they would wish to be dealt with.  {PP 310.3}
   
The rights of widows and orphans were especially guarded, and a tender regard for their helpless condition was enjoined.
                                                                         
"If thou afflict them in any wise," the Lord declared, "and they cry at all unto Me, I will surely hear their cry; and My wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless." Aliens who united themselves with Israel were to be protected from wrong or oppression. "Thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt."  {PP 310.4}
   
The taking of usury from the poor was forbidden. A poor man's raiment or blanket taken as a pledge, must be restored to him at nightfall. He who was guilty of theft was required to restore double. Respect for magistrates and rulers was enjoined, and judges were warned against perverting judgment, aiding a false cause, or receiving bribes. Calumny and slander were prohibited, and acts of kindness enjoined, even toward personal enemies.  {PP 311.1}

This is the extent of comments I could locate on the statutes specifically in one setting.

So --- to begin with one that really has my curiosity: why are we not to mix fabrics? Does this pertain to health? Is there something unhealthy about mixing cotton, linen, and wool?

And what about days of purification for women after childbirth or after menstruation? It is interesting that birthing a female requires 66 days of purification over that of a male, which is only 33. One Jewish website says the difference may be explained that a female child is born with the ability to produce life, thereby the difference. Any thoughts?

I am coming to believe the long days of purification after childbirth were ceremonial in nature but the seven day purification after a regular menstruation cycle is strictly for the woman's health. And this, in my mind, goes to waiting those days before a husband and wife come together. It is healthier for her and her body to wait. And on a related issue, science is now showing us the prevelance of cervical cancer in non-Jewish women and not so much at all in Orthodox Jewish women who practice the days of purification as given in the statutes.  


[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-06-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 04, 2007, 06:01:00 PM
Ah...a practical application to the statutes and judgments.  There are blessings for those who want wisdom from above.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 05, 2007, 09:03:00 AM
This little snipit comes from an Orthodox Jewish website discussing why the law of not mixing threads in a fabric:

 

quote:
The law prohibiting Shatnez (mixing of threads on fabrics) falls into the category of what is known as a Chok, a law that cannot be explained. Various reasons have been suggested however. The explanation given by Maimonides is that pagan priests were required to wear garments made of wool and linen. The prohibition may have been established to separate Jews from pagan practices. It is interesting to note however, that the clothing of the priests in the Temple were exempt from the prohibition giving rise to an alternate explanation that the prohibition was designed to separate priestly from public practice.

A second and more colorful explanation is that Abel brought wool as an offering, whereas Cain brought flax. The mixture was lethal and Abel lost his life. The Zohar from the Kabalah, the study of Jewish mysticism, says that wearing Shatnez causes an evil spirit to lurk within the wearer.

A further explanation is that the Parochet, the curtain used in the Temple, and the garments worn by priests in the Temple were made from wool and linen. Therefore. Jews were forbidden to wear anything that was similar.

A more esoteric explanation is that everything has its own spiritual force. By mixing certain items together, these forces are destroyed and cannot perform their assigned task.

Regardless of the reason, the law remains "on the books "


Admittedly even by the author, some of these reasons are almost comical. Do we know of other reasons? Hygiene, static electricity, water absorbtion or repelling? Or was it spiritual?

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-05-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 05, 2007, 01:11:00 PM
I am leaning toward health and hygiene - the law against mixing also goes with the agricultural laws and those against working and breeding various breeds of animals with each other.

Further, the Bible commentary on Deut. 23

    14. No Uncleanness of Body, Word, or Spirit.--In order to be acceptable in God's sight, the leaders of the people were to give strict heed to the sanitary condition of the armies of Israel, even when they went forth to battle. Every soul, from the commander-in-chief to the lowest soldier in the army, was sacredly charged to preserve cleanliness in his person and surroundings; for the Israelites were chosen by God as His peculiar people. They were sacredly bound to be holy in body and spirit. They were not to be careless or neglectful of their personal duties. In every respect they were to preserve cleanliness. They were to allow nothing untidy or unwholesome in their surroundings, nothing which would taint the purity of the atmosphere. Inwardly and outwardly they were to be pure [Deut. 23:14 quoted] (Letter 35, 1901).  {1BC 1119.4}
   
We know His will, and any departure from it to follow ideas of your own is a dishonor to His name, a reproach to His sacred truth. Everything that relates to the worship of God on earth, is to bear in appearance a striking resemblance to heavenly things. There must be no careless disregard in these things, if you expect the Lord to favor you with His presence. He will not have His work placed on a level with common, temporal things (MS 7, 1889).  {1BC 1119.5}
   
All those who come into His presence should give special attention to the body and the clothing. Heaven is a clean and holy place. God is pure and holy. All who come into His presence should take heed to His directions, and have the body and the clothing in a pure, clean condition, thus showing respect to themselves and to Him. The heart must also be sanctified. Those who do this will not dishonor His sacred name by worshiping Him while their hearts are polluted and                                                                             otheir apparel is untidy. God sees these things. He marks the heart-preparation, the thoughts, the cleanliness in appearance, of those who worship Him (MS 126 1901).  {1BC 1119.6}

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-06-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 05, 2007, 11:12:00 PM
Sybil, please send me the excell spreadsheet!
You have all certainly done a lot on this thread while I was in the Ukraine! It's taking a while to catch up on this fascinating subject.
Thomas
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 06, 2007, 06:59:00 AM
We have missed you, dear man! Send me your e-mail address and I will get it to you right away.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 06, 2007, 02:03:00 PM
I am carrying on ... feel free to jump in with words of wisdom.   :)

Leviticus 13 & 14 discuss laws of leprosy. Leslie Hardinge has this to say in his book, With Jesus in His Sanctuary:

 

quote:
"Leprosy develops in two stages: nodular and anesthetic. At first the skin, stretched over rounded, firm cysts, presents a shiny surface. The sluggish circulation of blood then causes the complexion to grow pale until it appears as "white as snow," while underneath lurks rottenness. The nodules, becoming reddish brown, eventually ulcerate into "raw flesh." The survace nerves slowly cease to register pain, and this results in leprosy's anesthetic stage. This is the quiescent side. One might almost call it, its merciful side, when sensation and power to feel disappear. Weakness and paralysis follow, and because he is conscious of no hurt, the leper grows careless, inadvertently allowing his extremeties to bump sharp objects and thus break open. These wounds ulcerate, suppurating toxic "issues."

A most dreaded disease. Two chapters in the Bible are dedicated to its discussion, quarantine and remedies - and remember a leper is cleansed rather than healed. Outside of the obvious solutions the one that caught my attention is the treatment of garments and houses of the leper.

Leprosy in garments was probably caused by various molds. It is reported that these fungi are ubiquitous and grow as readily on clothing as on house walls, when left in damp, ill-ventilated, ill-lighted places and produce reddish patches produced by the growth of the sporendonema, or red mold, very common on cheese.

Symbolically leprous garments typify self-made cloaks of good deeds and benign feelings ingrained with poisonous streaks of selfish uncleanness. The Levitical law provided no hope for such clothing - it must be stripped off and destroyed. And so it is with the houses - producing green mold with millions of minute spores, which, when airborne to suitable sites, establish themselves with incredible speed. The plaster and stones were to be scraped away and the walls rebuilt - but should it reappear, the building was to be destroyed. But if it was rendered clean by the priests the blood of the sparrow was sprinkled on its door posts.

The quarantine of lepers, as we have various quarantines today is a necessity, along with the destruction of clothing and infected areas.

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-06-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 06, 2007, 06:22:00 PM
FYI - Studying in Patriarchs and Prophets, page 308, I found this regarding extentions of certain commandments these statutes are married to:

5th - also includes rulers, ministers whom God has placed in authority

6th - hatred, selfish neglect and oppression are included

8th - forbids wars of conquest, kidnapping, theft and fraud

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 07, 2007, 12:17:00 PM
The information on health is really great. We need to consider how stupid the world was 200 years ago about germs. Now we take it for granted and don't appreciate the light that we have been given in the statutes and judgments in Scripture.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 08, 2007, 12:28:00 AM
Having gone through the Excel page on the law (which I very much appreciate, especially considering the enormous amount of work that has gone into it), I still find myself in a quandary.

There are several issues that have come up, but which I do not think have been completely resolved.

1) The law as a type of Christ. This is the foundation of Adventism and the bedrock on which the doctrine of the sanctuary is based. It is bound to and ought to color the way we say the law in entirety. It also has some bearing on the idea of the law (or a part of it) coming to an end at the death of Christ, which in the light of the sanctuary service takes on quite a different aspect from what we see in Christianity generally. Thus, for example, the matter of the feast of tabernacles was raised.

2) The implementation of the law. I see the individual, the church, and the state mentioned here as implementers. Also, the family is implied. Not only are these three agencies not yet defined in terms of their authority and responsibility, but they have not yet been noted in tyerms to ther relationship to the Mosaic and post-Mosaic institutions. There is rather an assumption of the rather Baptist view of separation of church and state, each having divinely appointed areas of application. The process of getting from a theocracy to a church-state dichotomy is not clear, and raises some skepticism of its validity.

3) The three-fold approach to statutes as being binding, no longer binding, and binding in principle is not adequate. There needs to be more precision in why a particular statute is no long binding, and why another is binding in principle but not in literal detail. It is easy to allow personal and cultural prejudices to determing these.

In sum, I would remark that attempts to summarize the law are many, and some of them might give an indication of what the pitfalls may be. Such attempts are the Mishna and its commentaries in Rabbinical Judaism, and Karaite formulations that reject Rabbinical method and relate to the Pentateuch more directly. There might be something to learn from Karaim. The Samaritan tradition also focuses on the law of Moses in a specific and enlightening way. Furthermore, Islamic views of divine law are very much the heir of the Books of Moses as well. The Islamic process of interpreting the law is fourfold. For Sunnis this consists of sourcing Scripture, tradition, concensus and comparison. The Shi'ites replace comparison with a system of Aristotelian logic.

As I read early Advent history, I think there was a specific assumption apparent in the interpretation of law as well as the bible generally. The process included individual study as a background for Sabbath conferences, where the participants presented their findings and through prayer and discussion came to a concensus of views. When that was impossible, they relied on the Spirit of Prophecy to solve the dilemma. This forum and thread can and does serve in some sense like the Sabbath conferences. It's a good system.


quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
The information on health is really great. We need to consider how stupid the world was 200 years ago about germs. Now we take it for granted and don't appreciate the light that we have been given in the statutes and judgments in Scripture.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 08, 2007, 07:32:00 AM
Yes, Thomas - it is a huge organizational challenge. We are happy to have you in the mix.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 08, 2007, 08:30:00 AM
Yes, Brother Thomas, this in not an easy undertaking, but necessary. When God gives light, He expects us to appreciate it. The matter is made more difficult because of the unregenerate heart that refuses to love the law or decides that it is necessary to add to it. As we study the subject with the intent to glorify our Lord, He will bless us.

Brother Thomas likes the thought of dividing the carrying out of the law into three divisions, the church, the state, and the individual which includes the family.

He says "The process of getting from a theocracy to a church-state dichotomy is not clear, and raises some skepticism of its validity." Yes, this is the problem area. But, we are making progress in that we have our three-fold division. That helps a lot.

We know a few things that we will list:

1.  There is a broad distinction between the moral and the ceremonial.

2.  The ceremonial law is no longer binding.

3.  The state is to refrain from legislating in respect to the first four commandments and any statutes or judgments that pertain to them.

4.  The state is to legislate morality as we see in all societies. The only standard of morality is the Bible standard of which the last six of the Ten Commandments pertain to the laws that would regulate society. The statutes and judgments that uphold the last six which deal with our relationship with each other provide principles that are to guide the state.

5.  The church has a test of fellowship that specifies which laws are to be enforced with disfellowshipping.  The Bible states what that test was 2,000 years ago, but the standard is to be broadened as the church grows.

6.  The church is not to "punish" any lawbreaking beyond restrictions of fellowship, employment, or office holding.

7.  It appears that the statutes and judgments that are not ceremonial and are moral remain binding upon individuals except for the punishment aspect.

8.  The statutes and judgments given to Israel were given to a theocracy which was to be under the direct hand of God. As such the penalties stated were more harsh than would be called for today.

9.  There is at least one moral law which specified the punishment that was pre-Israel that remains binding today. Out of regard for human life, God specified very clearly that if one tried for murder were proved guilty, no atonement or ransom could rescue him. "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed." Genesis 9:6. "Ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death." "Thou shalt take him from Mine altar, that he may die," was the command of God; "the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it." Numbers 35:31, 33; Exodus 21:14. The safety and purity of the nation demanded that the sin of murder be severely punished. Human life, which God alone could give, must be sacredly guarded. And, provision was made that none could be condemned by the witness of only one. Two witnesses were required to safeguard the innocent.

That is the best I can do with my feeble and darkened mind. I know that God has much more to add and if there are corrections to be made, then let us set about doing it.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 08, 2007, 01:15:00 PM
I am in high "student" mode here - so direction from you experienced ones is necessary. So far, I like what is presented as a basis from which to begin. Richard, you summed it up well!

Thomas: your points 1 and 2 I am completely clear on. Ceremonial - gone, fulfilled. The distinction between the church and state, very clear - however, it appears that God even made provisions for that as well. Point 3 is one that will be critical to our understanding - applications of those that are true in principle and how they are still binding. I like your thoughts on these. Precision will count to delete the haze.

I feel we need to look purely at Exodus through Deuteronomy, the Pentateuch. We, as a people, have the advantage of the SOP when considering these; however, very little is said regarding them outside the vast amount written regarding the health message and hygiene in general.

I think, through God's leading, we can flesh these out and come to an understanding of how we can continue to apply them to our lives.

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-08-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 08, 2007, 10:34:00 PM
I'm definitely in high student mode here too, even though the problems are ones with which I have considerable experience from some points of view. But I definitely appreciate the summarized points in Sister Sybil's and Brother Richard's last posts.

It comes to mind that several of the Spirit of Prophecy statements quoted on this thread seem to make the ten commandments central and primary, and other statutes secondary and supportive. That is an idea that does not seem foreign to pre-Adventist Christian thought, but is not reflected in Jewish and Islamic approaches to the law, which tend to accumulate vast numbers of legislation without any visible hierarchy. I think it is a fruitful way of thinking, and it is reflected in the Excel page where some of the statutes are referred to commandments. I think this is one of the ways of achieving some objectivity in reference to the abiding validity of certain statutes. This remark is intended to bring some slight precision into the process.

Continuing the idea of the special place of the ten commandments, I would see some development even within the Bible. Purity laws, for example, seem to change a bit from one era to another. There are other examples as well. My thought is that the ten commandments are the universally binding law of God, whereas the supporting statutes may relate to one prophetic era. The supporting statutes are shown to be universal as they appear time and again in the various prophets. Other statutes are neglected by the prophets and fall by the wayside as no longer being relevant. The principle would be to demonstrate the abiding value of a particular statute by showing that it appears over a long period of time in the Scriptures as evidenced by two or three prophetic witnesses.

There is a fundamental concept here. It is that right action in any prophetic dispensation consists of adherence to the ten commandments plus a partly variable body of statutes. That presupposition is impled in the SDA Fundamentals, where the ten commandments are maintained on one hand and a list of standards or areas of standards on the other. Note the sequence in SDA Fundamentals 19-23.

Assuming that the configuration of ten commandments plus statutes is valid, then the specific SDA configuration is found here. The specific statutes taken are tithing and offerings (21), amusement, entertainment, dress, adornment, rest, exercise, proper diet, abstention from Biblically unclean meat, alcohol, tobacco, abused drugs and narcotics, (22) and statutes regarding marital relations (23).

Are there elements in the Fundamentals are go beyond the Biblical statutes? Are there Biblical statutes that we may find to be binding, but are not mentioned here? My gut feeling at the moment is that the ten-commandments-plus principle is valid, and that the SDA movement has been providentially guided to focus on the "plus" standards that are particularly relevant to our time and place in the Great Controversy. If that is so, it may give us a rule of thumb in evaluating the Biblical statutes, suggesting that some are temporary, local and superceded, while others are still binding and deserve to be examined and fortified with Biblical evidence.

quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
I am in high "student" mode here - so direction from you experienced ones is necessary. So far, I like what is presented as a basis from which to begin. Richard, you summed it up well!

Thomas: your points 1 and 2 I am completely clear on. Ceremonial - gone, fulfilled. The distinction between the church and state, very clear - however, it appears that God even made provisions for that as well. Point 3 is one that will be critical to our understanding - applications of those that are true in principle and how they are still binding. I like your thoughts on these. Precision will count to delete the haze.

I feel we need to look purely at Exodus through Deuteronomy, the Pentateuch. We, as a people, have the advantage of the SOP when considering these; however, very little is said regarding them outside the vast amount written regarding the health message and hygiene in general.

I think, through God's leading, we can flesh these out and come to an understanding of how we can continue to apply them to our lives.


[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-08-2007).]


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 09, 2007, 08:12:00 AM
I knew I was going to love your involvement.  :)  However, I have never thought of The Ten Commandments - Plus consideration. The statutes give us practical applications that directly relate to the TC and I would assume the "plus factor" would have to do with cleaning up the COI after 400 years of being in slavery under Egypt. They forgot how to act, how to worship, how to dress, how to keep themselves clean and undefiled ... and on and on.

Also your reference to the FBs is also something I have not considered - but you are right - nice little connection.

I am away from home base this weekend but will try to locate what I need on the web to further the study. Let's do it!

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 09, 2007, 08:33:00 AM
I wanted to add something regarding "beyond the statutes in the FBs" - my thinking only: The Seventh-day Adventist denomination has especially been blest with the prophetic gift of prophecy. In no way does it add to stated statutes, yet it expands light on them through (sometimes) far-reaching concepts that help us see beyond a singular command that on the surface may appear flatly arbitrary.

Regarding various dispensations - if a statute is morally correct in any era, good for spiritual ethics, health, relationships and stewardship, it is binding.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 09, 2007, 01:17:00 PM
Brother Thomas has caused my mind to stretch a little!   :)  It is such a blessing to be able to listen to others who love God and His Word. We can move much further together than alone.

Something came to mind that I have not thus far considered in our study. We see in the statutes provisions for some things that are contrary to God's law. It is not that God is commanding these things that He does not support, but He has made provision for dealing with them....even though they are contrary to His law. I know that some will object and have a problem with this, but in our present company I think we understand.

An example:  Multiple wives by Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon.  We all understand that God allowed this, made provision for dealing with it, but it is not His law that man should have more than one wife.

Another example:  Slaves. This is not God's will that man should be in servitude to another. But, He made provision for dealing with this foul practice.

And one last thought along this line. God abhors death. It was never His desire that anything should die. Yet, we have death. And, not only do we have death, we have God participating in it and commanding it.

As we move forward, we must do so without any consideration that God is arbitrary. He is not. His ideas are far past ours. As we contemplate His laws, we must always keep in mind His love for us and that His ways are perfect. He has made provision of us who are not perfect, but rather great sinners.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 09, 2007, 01:30:00 PM
Excellent elements to add to our searching. "With a multitude of councelors ... "

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 09, 2007, 08:17:00 PM
Hi Everyone:

I have been reading all of this with great interest and do have some concerns with Brother Richard's number 8 and 9. Let me share:

Genesis:

26:5   Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.  

God's laws and statutes were given to God's people long before Moses and I believe clear back to Adam.

Noting that commandments, statutes and laws are all plural implies that God was giving to His people through His words with those such as Adam, Enoch, Noah and Abraham that the people were without excuse in knowing the true living God.

It is in Moses that God put it in writing for the people to remember and to follow with each generation.

Moses was given the written record of God's ways for all generation to follow when they walk with God. There had been to many generations raised in captivity with the Egyptians that the people lost their way and forgotten the wisdom that God had given before that time.

Moses was a restorer of the breach and what we have today is the same given to us through the Spirit of Prophecy and the Word of God.  

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 09, 2007, 09:50:00 PM
You are very correct, Sister Liane, from what I can see in regards to there being statutes and judgments prior to Israel. I can name a few. We find them in Scripture. But, I don't see any Biblical evidence to suggest that all of the statutes and judgments given to Israel were given in their same form prior to then. The punishment spelled out for Israel, a theocracy, as you would argue, under the control of God, could be more harsh. There was no such system in place prior to Israel that we can find in Scripture. The need arose because of the sins of Jacob's family and their captivity in Egypt where they became slaves.

I find no record of any kind of theocracy prior to Israel. These statutes and judgments were very specific in regards to punishment. They were intended for a nation, not independent families. I agree that that the moral laws were not just for Israel, but for all of humanity before and after Israel, for they are moral in nature. The ceremonial were shadows and are no longer binding. But, the application of the moral laws with their spelled out punishment was directed at Israel and and again I find nothing in Scripture to suggest that they were given prior to Israel in the form given to Moses.

Also you say "Moses was given the written record of God's ways for all generations to follow when they walk with God." I think this is the point where we are having a problem. We agree that the moral laws remain binding, but not as given to Moses. As it was given to Moses it included punishments that we do not consider appropriate today as we are not a theocracy.

As for 9, I am not sure what you wish to disagree with.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 09, 2007, 10:53:00 PM
Brother Richard:

You Said:

"But, I don't see any Biblical evidence to suggest that all of the statutes and judgments given to Israel were given in their same form prior to then."

This is true, but we do not also know that they were not given either. God gave three important things before Moses, His Commandments, His Statutes and His Laws.

The only thing left out was the judgments given to Abraham, but the other three were given.

Now from what we know about the written statutes, laws and commandments, which ones would you suggest that God might have left out before that He gave to them to Moses?

Were the Ceremonial Laws left out before that time? What would have God not given before Moses that was needed and given to the Children of Israel after four hundred years of captivity? Did man change that much from Noah to Moses?

Though God could not be seen as did Adam and Eve after the fall God still was in direct contact with the people through those He communicated what the people should do and not do.

   

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 09, 2007, 11:08:00 PM
Finally found it:

Adam taught his descendants the law of God, and it was handed down from father to son through successive generations. But notwithstanding the gracious provision for man's redemption, there were few who accepted it and rendered obedience. By transgression the world became so vile that it was necessary to cleanse it by the Flood from its corruption. The law was preserved by Noah and his family, and Noah taught his descendants the Ten Commandments. As men again departed from God, the Lord chose Abraham, of whom He declared, "Abraham obeyed My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." Genesis 26:5. To him was given the rite of circumcision, which was a sign that those who received it were devoted to the service of God--a pledge that they would remain separate from idolatry, and would obey the law of God. The failure of Abraham's descendants to keep this pledge, as shown in their disposition to form alliances with the heathen and adopt their practices, was the cause of their sojourn and bondage in Egypt. But in their intercourse with idolaters, and their forced submission to the Egyptians, the divine precepts became still further corrupted with the vile and cruel teachings of heathenism. Therefore                                                                             then the Lord brought them forth from Egypt, He came down upon Sinai, enshrouded in glory and surrounded by His angels, and in awful majesty spoke His law in the hearing of all the people.  {PP 363.2}

He did not even then trust His precepts to the memory of a people who were prone to forget His requirements, but wrote them upon tables of stone. He would remove from Israel all possibility of mingling heathen traditions with His holy precepts, or of confounding His requirements with human ordinances or customs. But He did not stop with giving them the precepts of the Decalogue. The people had shown themselves so easily led astray that He would leave no door of temptation unguarded. Moses was commanded to write, as God should bid him, judgments and laws giving minute instruction as to what was required. These directions relating to the duty of the people to God, to one another, and to the stranger were only the principles of the Ten Commandments amplified and given in a specific manner, that none need err. They were designed to guard the sacredness of the ten precepts engraved on the tables of stone.  {PP 364.1}

If man had kept the law of God, as given to Adam after his fall, preserved by Noah, and observed by Abraham, there would have been no necessity for the ordinance of circumcision. And if the descendants of Abraham had kept the covenant, of which circumcision was a sign, they would never have been seduced into idolatry, nor would it have been necessary for them to suffer a life of bondage in Egypt; they would have kept God's law in mind, and there would have been no necessity for it to be proclaimed from Sinai or engraved upon the tables of stone. And had the people practiced the principles of the Ten Commandments, there would have been no need of the additional directions given to Moses.  {PP 364.2}

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 10, 2007, 03:34:00 AM
Those are absolutely fantastic quotations from the Spirit of Prophecy, Sister Liane.
I wonder if I understand correctly. The ten commandments are the universal law of God once given to Adam and transmitted to his descendants. As need arose, God gave additional, specific statutes which were in fact either 1) detailed amplifications of what was already embodied in the ten commandments and 2) statutes to cover the new situations that disobedience and disregard for the ten commanments produced. An example of the second type is stated as circumcision as given to Abraham.

The implication is that any statute that we find written in the Pentateuch that is still binding is to be inferred from the ten commandments. Inversely, in any specific prophetic dispensation, any new statute that may be needed might also be inferred from the ten commandments (unless it is in the second category, such as circumcision).

In the prophetic dispensation of Jesus, a statute in the first category, an amplification or specific application of the ten commandments might be "a new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another." An example of the second might be baptism, which is not found anywhere as such in the Pentateuch (unless it is hidden in the purity codes), and only obliquely suggested by such passages as the healing of Namaan. The first would in principle go back to Adam. The second apparently only goes back to the New Testamnet.

Going back to my ten commandments plus idea, articles 21 to 23 in the Fundamental Beliefs can therefore be seen as the practical application of the ten commandments as God guided His people in the last days according to the specific needs of the times. As such, they correspond in content (not in cononicity!) to the civil and ceremonial Mosaic laws, which were needed for that time.

So we should relate to the Pentateuch from several points of view:
1) How does a specific statute relate to the ten commandments, and does it have an abiding application or not?
2) How does a specific statute relate to the particular needs of our own time, which are identified for us in the Fundamental Beliefs, articles 21-23, which are in fact a very succinct summary of Spirit of Prophecy principles?
3) Are some of the statutes in the Bible that arose because of the crisis of sin still binding today, or have they been superceded because of changing circumstances? A possible example of that might be the cities of refuge.

These are the things that come to the surface for me as I read Sister Liane's extraordinary quotation from Patriarchs and Prophets.

As you can see, I am trying to get a firm grasp on principles of interpretation, before I get specific with myself and others). I'm sorry to harp on that, but I find myself in trouble as I engage in discussion with people generally (not on this forum). A great deal of the results of any study depend on the presuppositions in the point of departure. Also, this question is so broad, that we can never get any practical results unless the rules of the game are clear and limited from the beginning.

There is another issue nagging my mind. That is the fact that so many people over the centuries have already done this, not just various Jewish individuals and groups. They have all come to differing conclusions, based largely on their starting presuppositions. There is a danger that one or more of us might suddenly come up with something that conflicts with the principles of the Advent Movement. The Spirit of Prophecy should protect one from that, but observation shows that not always to be the case. While studying the Bible with only the motivation of finding truth is admirable, it generally ignores some vital assumptions. I'd hate to participate in the founding of an Advenist splinter group of people going around with a little shovel hanging from their belts anathemetizing all Adventists who use flush toilets.


quote:
Originally posted by Liane H:
Finally found it:

Adam taught his descendants the law of God, and it was handed down from father to son through successive generations. But notwithstanding the gracious provision for man's redemption, there were few who accepted it and rendered obedience. By transgression the world became so vile that it was necessary to cleanse it by the Flood from its corruption. The law was preserved by Noah and his family, and Noah taught his descendants the Ten Commandments. As men again departed from God, the Lord chose Abraham, of whom He declared, "Abraham obeyed My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." Genesis 26:5. To him was given the rite of circumcision, which was a sign that those who received it were devoted to the service of God--a pledge that they would remain separate from idolatry, and would obey the law of God. The failure of Abraham's descendants to keep this pledge, as shown in their disposition to form alliances with the heathen and adopt their practices, was the cause of their sojourn and bondage in Egypt. But in their intercourse with idolaters, and their forced submission to the Egyptians, the divine precepts became still further corrupted with the vile and cruel teachings of heathenism. Therefore                                                                             then the Lord brought them forth from Egypt, He came down upon Sinai, enshrouded in glory and surrounded by His angels, and in awful majesty spoke His law in the hearing of all the people.  {PP 363.2}

He did not even then trust His precepts to the memory of a people who were prone to forget His requirements, but wrote them upon tables of stone. He would remove from Israel all possibility of mingling heathen traditions with His holy precepts, or of confounding His requirements with human ordinances or customs. But He did not stop with giving them the precepts of the Decalogue. The people had shown themselves so easily led astray that He would leave no door of temptation unguarded. Moses was commanded to write, as God should bid him, judgments and laws giving minute instruction as to what was required. These directions relating to the duty of the people to God, to one another, and to the stranger were only the principles of the Ten Commandments amplified and given in a specific manner, that none need err. They were designed to guard the sacredness of the ten precepts engraved on the tables of stone.  {PP 364.1}

If man had kept the law of God, as given to Adam after his fall, preserved by Noah, and observed by Abraham, there would have been no necessity for the ordinance of circumcision. And if the descendants of Abraham had kept the covenant, of which circumcision was a sign, they would never have been seduced into idolatry, nor would it have been necessary for them to suffer a life of bondage in Egypt; they would have kept God's law in mind, and there would have been no necessity for it to be proclaimed from Sinai or engraved upon the tables of stone. And had the people practiced the principles of the Ten Commandments, there would have been no need of the additional directions given to Moses.  {PP 364.2}



Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 10, 2007, 07:16:00 AM
Hi Brother Thomas:

Great post though you write at a much higher level than I could ever do and it takes me time to check certain words to know their meaning I like what you post a great deal.

I never finished High School though I did pass the City College of Pasadena entrance exam, but with other factors I have limited scope in knowledge, but I do try.

Anyway a point that I was looking for also was found:

"From the first, the great controversy had been upon the law of God. Satan had sought to prove that God was unjust, that His law was faulty, and that the good of the universe required it to be changed. In attacking the law, he aimed to overthrow the authority of its Author."  {FLB 80.6}  

The Holy Precepts were even before the earth was made and was in Heaven for all to know. It is God's great laws that Satan did not like and caused the fall in heaven and on this little planet give to us in which to live.

God never leaves any being or place without the knowledge needed to obey and follow Him in all things. There never has been a cover up or lack from God to where we need to stand in our lives to have a happy and good life.

Everything has and is provided to us for which we live from God. Those that find the Law of God a burden are in rebellion against their Creator who knows what is best for our lives.

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 10, 2007, 07:28:00 AM
Out of all the thoughts you presented, Thomas, I do hate to land on this one - I'd hate to participate in the founding of an Advenist splinter group of people going around with a little shovel hanging from their belts anathemetizing all Adventists who use flush toilets.

A word of assurance: "It won't happen!" That is not the purpose of our study. I know of no one on the forum who is that radical. However, during the time of trouble, we may be reduced to using those little shovels in the woods.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 10, 2007, 12:55:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Liane H:

Now from what we know about the written statutes, laws and commandments, which ones would you suggest that God might have left out before that He gave to them to Moses?

Were the Ceremonial Laws left out before that time? What would have God not given before Moses that was needed and given to the Children of Israel after four hundred years of captivity? Did man change that much from Noah to Moses?


I cannot presume to know what is not written. But, I see Biblical principle that would indicate that the statutes and judgments were given to help man keep the Ten Commandments as He saw need. The system that established a nation is different than that which was used to deal with families. There was no high priest that ministered in a Sanctuary. Offerings could be made anywhere, but not so according to the Mosaic law. The laws given to Israel pertained specifically to Israel. There were ceremonial laws in place prior to Israel, but again they were of a different nature. We are talking apple and oranges when it comes to the specific commands included in these statutes. It is obvious that there was no ark of the covenant, no candlestick, no course of priests to make the offerings, no laver in which the priests must wash. No most holy place, no holy place, no bird to be ripped apart, no blood to sprinkle upon the curtain, no etc. etc.

The statutes that were given to Moses that pertained to the civil laws of Israel were given in such a manner to meet the needs of the nation. The same applies to the ceremonial law. We must make a distinction. This is where we need to begin our study. We need to discern how this can be done. The moral nature of these statutes did not disappear with the coming of Christ as did the ceremonial laws.

The economies of the world who legislate in an attempt to provide security and morality can learn much from the economy of Israel. And, churches, families, and individuals are to study the moral aspect of these laws that they may be blessed to learn more about the laws that we live by.

But, I don't think we are ready for churches or states to begin stoning the Sabbath breaker or the glutton. Or how about the homosexual or the adulterer? We need to better understand the nature of the Mosaic law and the application to be made today.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 10, 2007, 01:17:00 PM
The sanctity of marriage was such that departure from the marriage was penalized by stoning. Same with the Sabbath. Break either of these two laws and the penalty was death. There is a connection - God sanctified both at the time of creation.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 10, 2007, 01:30:00 PM
We must remember that God did set up before Moses a very simple forum of sacrifices and we see this very early on in Genesis with Cain and Able. Which did God take note of as being correct?

I am sure that there were instructions in how to do this given by God to Adam and then tot he sons of Adam.

After the falling away in being in bondage God was going to imprint into the people His written word in what was to be done so that these laws, statutes, judgments will remind them what they should do.

God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. He gives the same principles over and over again to each generation in their need to follow Him. There are no apples and oranges, but a centerpiece of truths that expand each time for us to know and understand in the age that we live in.

It is for us to seek these treasures and make them practical in our own lives.    

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 10, 2007, 02:20:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:

I wonder if I understand correctly. The ten commandments are the universal law of God once given to Adam and transmitted to his descendants. As need arose, God gave additional, specific statutes which were in fact either 1) detailed amplifications of what was already embodied in the ten commandments and 2) statutes to cover the new situations that disobedience and disregard for the ten commanments produced. An example of the second type is stated as circumcision as given to Abraham.

I believe this is very accurate. Let me add to this thought. The Ten Commandments were not given in their present state in heaven. There was no need. But, when there became a need, then we were given the Ten Commandments. They are eternal, but they are not needed by all in the universe. They were specifically designed for us in our particular need.

This is a Biblical principle and we can discern this from Scripture.
 

quote:

Going back to my ten commandments plus idea, articles 21 to 23 in the Fundamental Beliefs can therefore be seen as the practical application of the ten commandments as God guided His people in the last days according to the specific needs of the times. As such, they correspond in content (not in cononicity!) to the civil and ceremonial Mosaic laws, which were needed for that time.


That is an interesting thought. The ceremonial laws are no longer binding, but we have some "ceremonies" that are not shadows but have taken their place. One that comes quickly to mind is the Lord's Supper. It is not a "moral" law, but it is part of our church service. It is an important part of our service, but it has nothing to do with moral law or the old ceremonial law that pointed to the future ministry of Jesus. The Lord's supper points us back to the cross and to the current ministry of our Lord.

quote:

So we should relate to the Pentateuch from several points of view:
1) How does a specific statute relate to the ten commandments, and does it have an abiding application or not?
2) How does a specific statute relate to the particular needs of our own time, which are identified for us in the Fundamental Beliefs, articles 21-23, which are in fact a very succinct summary of Spirit of Prophecy principles?


I don't think we can say that the FBs are a succinct summary of the Spirit of Prophecy. I think there is too much left out to say this. But, we ought to be on track if the FBs are Bibical to say that they are like the statutes and judgments, given to help us keep the law of God.

quote:

3) Are some of the statutes in the Bible that arose because of the crisis of sin still binding today, or have they been superceded because of changing circumstances? A possible example of that might be the cities of refuge.

Great example.  This speaks to the nation Israel and their theocracy. We must look beyond the definitive statute to see the moral principle involved. The statute directed the judiciary of the nation. This is not binding upon the nations today, but the principle involved ought to be. It is not a ceremonial law so it is moral. But, here we have an example that deals precisely with our difficulty at hand. There was no statute with identical language prior to Israel and we certainly can't use this language today. But, the moral nature of the statute is for us.

It is for us to discern the "morality" of the law. It is for us to benefit from the principle that God gave to the world even though it was directed specifically to Israel.

quote:

There is another issue nagging my mind. That is the fact that so many people over the centuries have already done this, not just various Jewish individuals and groups. They have all come to differing conclusions, based largely on their starting presuppositions. There is a danger that one or more of us might suddenly come up with something that conflicts with the principles of the Advent Movement. The Spirit of Prophecy should protect one from that, but observation shows that not always to be the case. While studying the Bible with only the motivation of finding truth is admirable, it generally ignores some vital assumptions. I'd hate to participate in the founding of an Adventist splinter group of people going around with a little shovel hanging from their belts anathemetizing all Adventists who use flush toilets.


It is no wonder there are so many different interpretations. The same thing applies to why there are so many different religions. If we reject light, if we reject Scripture, if we do not surrender to Christ fully, then how is it the Holy Spirit is going to give us discernment of advanced light? He won't. The cutting edge of truth will be given to those who are walking in the light and are where God wants to lead His people. He will not give the Baptists who preach you will burn in hell forever, the advanced light. He will not give the Hindus advanced light on the gospel. He is leading His people into one flock, out of Babylon.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 10, 2007, 05:47:00 PM
All of a sudden, this subject has expanded to the point that I need time to consider the depth of possibilities. And I am sure, even then, much will have been missed. Oh, to comprehend the vastness of His law!
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 10, 2007, 06:58:00 PM
Amen, my mind is expanding to better understand this vast subject.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 10, 2007, 09:27:00 PM
It is huge, actually. A careful re-reading of the OT with this in mind will give us a broader understanding.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 11, 2007, 07:00:00 AM
As a study and life changing experience I believe the Mosaic Laws are wonderful to learn many things about the character of God and that which helps us to walk the very narrow and wonderful life of following God.

Binding upon the church these statute and judgments has not been given to us today just as the Feasts Days are not, but I do seen a powerful revelation in learning of them and incorporating some of them into our lives.

I think the health message is one of the most important to learn. God gave them their manna from heaven and gave them their water in the desert and those that did so were blessed.

The same is true today. The right arm of the church is a powerful and great tool in which to learn of God's blessings and character for our lives.

Exodus:

15:26   And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee.  

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 11, 2007, 07:31:00 AM
I was especially interested in Brother Richard's remark about ceremonial law and the New Testament equivalent, with the specific mention of the Lord's Supper.

The idea seems to converge with mine in terms of ten commandments plus. The plus area may change, perhaps during the times of different prophets (the seat of the temple was changed to Jerusalem in David's time for example), but at least with the coming of Christ.

The questions that come to mind are: 1) Are there other New Testament ceremonies that take the place or function of the Old Testament typical ceremonies? 2) Should such ceremonies, that we seem to find appropriate if not obligatory, be evidenced in the Law, or is it sufficient that they are evidenced in the New Testament? This may seem off subject, but I think it is relevant to how we understand Mosaic Law and its binding character.

In the Anabaptist-Pietist traditions that preceded the rise of Adventism, there was a conscious attempt to identify all such New Testament ceremonies and practice them. As we compare Adventism, Protestantism, and Anabaptist-Pietist traditions, it seems to me that Adventism is at least a partial heir of the Anabaptist-Pietist traditions. Rather than seven sacraments of Catholicism or the two ordinances of Protestantism, there is an Adventist equivalent to the old Anabaptist ordinances.

Among these ordanances found in 18th-century German Seventh Day Baptist practice (a tradition that disappeared before the rise of Adventism, for the most part), there were the following.

1) Baptism of believers by trine immersion; 2) laying on of hands; 3) Love feast; 4) The washing of feet; 5) The Lord’s supper; 6) The greeting with a holy kiss; 7) The anointing and laying hands on the sick; 8) Blessing of children.

The Adventist practice is very similar. Adventists differ in the mode of baptism, single backward immersion rather than triple forward; in laying on of hands only for ordination and not after every baptism; and the rejection of the Love Feast and the holy kiss in greeting. I understand that the holy kiss in greeting was practiced among early Sabbatarian Adventists. The practices are remarkably similar, based as they are on a literal and comprehensive view of the New Testament. In sum, Adventists preserve of these 1) baptism by immersion, 2) laying on of hands, 3) footwashing, 4) the Lord's supper, 5) anointing of the sick, 6) and blessing of children, that is six out of eight.

The second question, whether these are evidenced by the Old Testament or the Books of Moses specifically is hard to answer straight off. 18th-century German Seventh Day Baptists did rely heavily on the Books of Moses, at one point even instituting the high priestly regalia. The most important sources for identifying such Old Testament evidence are missing however, as the writings of the Eckerlins have all been destroyed, and these were the most prominent ones having such interests.

Would it be appropriate in summary to say that the ceremonial law of Moses is replaced by the New Testament ordinances of the church? That is my sentiment.

If this is a proper way of viewing the ceremonial laws of Moses, that accounts for a sizeable chunk of the material on the Excel page. The shadows and types of things to come are replaced by memorials from the life, death and resurrection of Christ. That, in principle, would also account for the neglect of Love Feast and the holy kiss, which do not seem so clearly memorials of Christ, as all of the other ordinances are.

Thomas

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
It is no wonder there are so many different interpretations. The same thing applies to why there are so many different religions. If we reject light, if we reject Scripture, if we do not surrender to Christ fully, then how is it the Holy Spirit is going to give us discernment of advanced light? He won't. The cutting edge of truth will be given to those who are walking in the light and are where God wants to lead His people. He will not give the Baptists who preach you will burn in hell forever, the advanced light. He will not give the Hindus advanced light on the gospel. He is leading His people into one flock, out of Babylon.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 11, 2007, 10:49:00 AM
Thomas wrote:  
quote:
Would it be appropriate in summary to say that the ceremonial law of Moses is replaced by the New Testament ordinances of the church? That is my sentiment.

If this is a proper way of viewing the ceremonial laws of Moses, that accounts for a sizeable chunk of the material on the Excel page. The shadows and types of things to come are replaced by memorials from the life, death and resurrection of Christ. That, in principle, would also account for the neglect of Love Feast and the holy kiss, which do not seem so clearly memorials of Christ, as all of the other ordinances are.


I like that idea, Thomas.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 11, 2007, 03:58:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Liane H:

Binding upon the church these statute and judgments has not been given to us today just as the Feasts Days are not, but I do seen a powerful revelation in learning of them and incorporating some of them into our lives.

Sister Liane, our supposition is that the moral law is still binding. While we can see that the punishment for many of the statutes were for a theocracy and do not appear to apply, we can see that in other statutes that they in fact apply and are binding upon the church. Why do you think otherwise?

A clear example in the order of the Seventh-day Adventist Church are some of the statutes that relate to the health message. Part of our test of fellowship states that we will refrain from eating unclean food. This is a direct enforcement of the Old Testament statute.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 11, 2007, 04:22:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:

Would it be appropriate in summary to say that the ceremonial law of Moses is replaced by the New Testament ordinances of the church? That is my sentiment.

If this is a proper way of viewing the ceremonial laws of Moses, that accounts for a sizeable chunk of the material on the Excel page. The shadows and types of things to come are replaced by memorials from the life, death and resurrection of Christ. That, in principle, would also account for the neglect of Love Feast and the holy kiss, which do not seem so clearly memorials of Christ, as all of the other ordinances are.


Never thought of it that way, but it appears to be accurate. I don't see a direct relationship between very many from Old to New Testament.

Moses gave the statutes having received them from God. There was no written Record until that time. Today, we have Bibles, and in the Bible we are instructed by both Jesus and the Apostles how we are to conduct our lives and the ordinances of our church service. It is good to see that other churches perceived many of the ordinances correctly. And of course there are many who add their tradition to the Word.

In the Old Testament the church was commanded to make sacrifice that foreshadowed the death of Christ. Today, in the New Testament we have been instructed as to ordinances in the church that help us to remember the Sacrifice of Christ and His current ministry.

I don't see a direct relationship between the two, but there surely is a similarity in that these ordinances in both dispensations have nothing to do with the "moral" law, but rather they are lessons for us to learn of and to remember Christ, His love, and His great Sacrifice.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 12, 2007, 01:09:00 AM
I don't see a direct relationship between the ceremonial laws and the church ordinances either. Even the Lord's supper is only tenuously related to the Passover. But there seems to be an agreement, at least between the two of us, Brother Richard, that the ceremonial laws are replaced by the ordinances, and that they have in common the fact that they are not moral in character.

In sum, might we say that all of the ceremonial laws come to an end with Christ's ministry on earth? That is my sentiment. That would include all that are types of his life and death, all that are types of his heavenly ministry, and all that are ceremonial, but not types of Christ.

Instead of ceremonial law, we have the six ordinances of the church: baptism by immersion, laying on of hands, footwashing, the Lord's supper, blessing of children, and anointing of the sick. These are all memorials of Christ's earthly ministry.

With these principles clearly in mind, I would review the Excel file and point out one or two issues. In number 47, the law against sacrificing to idols is considered ceremonial, no doubt because it is in reference to sacrifice. At the same time, it is considered binding. Just as a matter of clarity, I would suggest that all prohibitions of idolatry are moral rather than ceremonial, even though the may be compared with positive ceremonial injunctions. It is a more elegent solution to see all ceremonial laws as coming to an end in Christ.

By the same token, number 167 relating to eating meat on the third day, should be seen in my view as a health law rather than ceremonial, and still binding in principle. It speaks against the contemporary habit of ripening meat, which also contains blood. This is an issue that Adventists ought to take into consideration from a health standpoint. I suggest discussion of this point.

While there may be some clarification of a few other laws marked ceremonial as to whether they are part of a ceremonial purity code or health laws, those are the two points on the ceremonial law that caught my eye.

Thomas

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
Never thought of it that way, but it appears to be accurate. I don't see a direct relationship between very many from Old to New Testament.

Moses gave the statutes having received them from God. There was no written Record until that time. Today, we have Bibles, and in the Bible we are instructed by both Jesus and the Apostles how we are to conduct our lives and the ordinances of our church service. It is good to see that other churches perceived many of the ordinances correctly. And of course there are many who add their tradition to the Word.

In the Old Testament the church was commanded to make sacrifice that foreshadowed the death of Christ. Today, in the New Testament we have been instructed as to ordinances in the church that help us to remember the Sacrifice of Christ and His current ministry.

I don't see a direct relationship between the two, but there surely is a similarity in that these ordinances in both dispensations have nothing to do with the "moral" law, but rather they are lessons for us to learn of and to remember Christ, His love, and His great Sacrifice.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 12, 2007, 11:12:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:
I don't see a direct relationship between the ceremonial laws and the church ordinances either. Even the Lord's supper is only tenuously related to the Passover. But there seems to be an agreement, at least between the two of us, Brother Richard, that the ceremonial laws are replaced by the ordinances, and that they have in common the fact that they are not moral in character.

Amen!

quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:

...I would review the Excel file and point out one or two issues. In number 47, the law against sacrificing to idols is considered ceremonial, no doubt because it is in reference to sacrifice. At the same time, it is considered binding. Just as a matter of clarity, I would suggest that all prohibitions of idolatry are moral rather than ceremonial, even though the may be compared with positive ceremonial injunctions. It is a more elegent solution to see all ceremonial laws as coming to an end in Christ.


I agree. This is not a ceremonial statute in the least. There is nothing ceremonial about it. It is one of few moral statutes besides the Ten Commandments that the new church was given. To confuse this with the ceremonial law is to be way off the mark. I am not studying the excel study, Brother Thomas, so I cannot comment on other than what you post here.

quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:

By the same token, number 167 relating to eating meat on the third day, should be seen in my view as a health law rather than ceremonial, and still binding in principle. It speaks against the contemporary habit of ripening meat, which also contains blood. This is an issue that Adventists ought to take into consideration from a health standpoint. I suggest discussion of this point.

While there may be some clarification of a few other laws marked ceremonial as to whether they are part of a ceremonial purity code or health laws, those are the two points on the ceremonial law that caught my eye.


I think whomever did this other study has created confusion where there need be none. When we speak of ceremonial laws, we really ought to limit this to the Old Testament types and shadows. While we have "ceremonies"  today, we ought to limit our verbiage to other than the word ceremonial. Ordinances seems to be the acceptable terminology.

Brother Thomas, I think in this study we are all of the same mind in this respect and are able to move to the moral statutes of the Old Testament which will include the civil statutes given for a theocracy. The sticking point for which I have not yet discovered the principles, is the removal of those things that are no longer binding in these "civil" statutes. It would appear that these statutes , not being ceremonial, are in fact moral. Being moral, then they have meaning for us today. The idea that homosexuality may run rampant in society with no legislation seems unlikely. But, I do not think that the penalty today ought to be capital punishment as in the civil statutes given in Scripture.

And as for stoning the glutton, I cannot even bring myself to say that he ought to be imprisoned.  So, I am shamefully lost in this maze. I know that there are lessons for us to day in these statutes and they are very important as we labor with others in the world. We may not darken the counsel of God with words that are just plain foolishness that did not come from Him, as so many have done and continue to do.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 12, 2007, 01:55:00 PM
Richard: the Excel file is only a listing of every statute from Ex. 21 through Deut. Jim and I typed them out with their verses. It is not a study - it is a worksheet. You didn't get yours?
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 12, 2007, 03:25:00 PM
Sorry, Sister Sybil.  I was making reference to the designation of number 162 (I think Brother Thomas said 167?) relating to eating meat on the third day as a ceremonial law.  Some of these are not easy to understand. I think that is where we have our work cut out for us. Who did the good work in notating the information regarding the verses?

For those who may be reading along without the spread sheet, we have a listing of the statutes and judgments with some of the laws being labeled as ceremonial or moral with a few other distinctions thrown in.

Here are the verses from Leviticua:

19:5   And if ye offer a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD, ye shall offer it at your own will.  

19:6   It shall be eaten the same day ye offer it, and on the morrow: and if ought remain until the third day, it shall be burnt in the fire.  

19:7   And if it be eaten at all on the third day, it [is] abominable; it shall not be accepted.  

19:8   Therefore [every one] that eateth it shall bear his iniquity, because he hath profaned the hallowed thing of the LORD: and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.  

This appears to be a ceremonial statute which involves a moral law. The peace offering which is part of the ceremonial law, is now seen to involve what appears to be a restriction based upon health laws. The meat is to be eaten the day of the offering. But, no later than the following day. If eaten on the third day, it is an abomination and unacceptable.

There may be a ceremonial teaching based upon this abomination on the third day, but it seems that with the ceremony was included a statute to keep the individual safe from bacterial infection. The ceremonial laws were used to teach the gospel in its purity. God did not design that any become sick by way of the ceremonies that shadowed forth His desire to bring them life.

If there is light regarding the ceremonial teaching that will shed light on this aspect of the peace offering, let us examine it.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 12, 2007, 03:45:00 PM
Richard asked:  

Quote
Who did the good work in notating the information regarding the verses?

For those who may be reading along without the spread sheet, we have a listing of the statutes and judgments with some of the laws being labeled as ceremonial or moral with a few other distinctions thrown in.

Jim and I did it. For those who want the Excel spread sheet, PM me and I will send it to you.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 12, 2007, 03:50:00 PM
Regarding bacteria on the meat - it appears to be drained (kosher) - even still would become rancid by that time. No refrigeration ... stands to reason it would be a health law applying to a ceremonial law.

I have not worked on the ML worksheet in a few days - but did note some dual applications on some of the ceremonials. This one could apply as dual to health.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 12, 2007, 07:58:00 PM
We are making progress.  :)  Good job!
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 12, 2007, 08:36:00 PM
Willing offerings comes under the ceremonial in Ex. 25:2 - I consider that a dual application as well.

Leviticus 10:8-20 - against strong drink, intoxicating drinks rendering one unable to distinguish between holy and unholy - is under the ceremonial law with a dual application to health.

A side question: why does Numbers 4:3 differ from Numbers 8:24 in the age of the men to work in the sanctuary? Both texts seem to be describing the same work - Numbers 4:3 says tabernacle of the congregation and 8:24 says "sanctuary," yet these are one in the same.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 12, 2007, 08:48:00 PM
As I was reading Numbers 15:37-41 - the tassles on the garments - the ribbon of blue, I was struck by the reminder this is commanded to be for the COI that "ye seek not after your own heart and your own eyes, after which ye use to go a-whoring: that ye may remember, and do all my commandments, and be holy unto your God."

As a people, we are to be simplistic in our dress, not seeking after our own heart and eyes, to go a-whoring after the world - that through the simplicity of dress, we may remember that we are holy unto God.

I have those texts marked "ceremonial" with a dual application to us today. Do we see that as correct or am I off the mark on this one?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 13, 2007, 12:00:00 AM
The idea of a dual application is probably good. We ought to remember that our classifications are not necessarily inspired: they depend on our own analysis of the content of the statutes. Richard may be right that the term ceremonial is being used too broadly, and therefore sometimes overlaps with the purity code (which is not perhaps relevant to types), and even health laws. Considering the knowledge and mentality of ancient times, it is possible that the distinction between health laws and the purity code is largely in the modern mind.
I would see the apparent conflict in Num 4:3 and 8:24 as follows. 8:24 gives the age span for Levites in general. 4:3 refers specifically to the Kohathites. Why they are exempted from the longer term of service is a matter for speculation, but may refer to a longer term of preparation, since they start later. The work described for them is the setting up and dismantling of the sanctuary, work that might have required some specific training.

quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
Willing offerings comes under the ceremonial in Ex. 25:2 - I consider that a dual application as well.

Leviticus 10:8-20 - against strong drink, intoxicating drinks rendering one unable to distinguish between holy and unholy - is under the ceremonial law with a dual application to health.

A side question: why does Numbers 4:3 differ from Numbers 8:24 in the age of the men to work in the sanctuary? Both texts seem to be describing the same work - Numbers 4:3 says tabernacle of the congregation and 8:24 says "sanctuary," yet these are one in the same.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 13, 2007, 12:07:00 AM
I did some studying on the blue thread a few years ago. It is apparently attached to a garment that was untailored and also served as a sleeping blanket. Furthermore, there is a question of the obtainability of the blue dye in question, the shell from which it was taken being extinct. If one considered the statute binding, the question arises whether 1) the particular article of clothing must thereby be seen as universal, and 2) whether other sources of blue dye are acceptable under the commandment. Those limitations indicate to my mind that the statute was inteneded to be local and temporary in character, and what is universal in it is the reminder to observe the commandments.
I would suggest that rather than attempting to invent a modern application of the statute, a study of the latest prophetic guidance would reveal what today is to be used as a reminder to keep the commandments. That of course is an application of my principle that the "plus" statutes are susceptible to variation under the regimes of succeeding prophets.

Thomas


quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
As I was reading Numbers 15:37-41 - the tassles on the garments - the ribbon of blue, I was struck by the reminder this is commanded to be for the COI that "ye seek not after your own heart and your own eyes, after which ye use to go a-whoring: that ye may remember, and do all my commandments, and be holy unto your God."

As a people, we are to be simplistic in our dress, not seeking after our own heart and eyes, to go a-whoring after the world - that through the simplicity of dress, we may remember that we are holy unto God.

I have those texts marked "ceremonial" with a dual application to us today. Do we see that as correct or am I off the mark on this one?


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 13, 2007, 12:40:00 AM
The Spirit of Prophecy equates the blue ribbon to dress reform.
 What can we think of a people who have had no great light as the church at Battle Creek, who profess faith in the testimonies and then go directly against the light given. I shall not repeat again what has been so often repeated in favor of dress reform. I will state that the simple, modest, convenient and healthful style of dress we advocate answers to us as did the ribbon of blue to the children of Israel. "And the Lord spake unto Moses saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and bid them that they make them fringes in the borders of their garments throughout their generations, and that they put upon the fringe of the borders a ribbon of blue. And it shall be unto you for a fringe, that ye may
                                                                           61
look upon it and remember all the commandments of the Lord, and do them. And that ye seek not after your own heart and your own eyes. That ye may remember, and do all my commandments, and be holy into your God." The great God, the Maker of Heaven and earth, has condescended to the particulars of dress, specifying the style of dress the children of Israel should wear for the purpose of preserving their peculiarity from other nations, and distinguishing them as a people who acknowledged the Creator of the universe as their God, whose ordinances and commandments they obeyed.  {PH123 60.1}
So the principle is still binding, but the detail has changed. Dress should be such both to remind us to keep the commandments and to separate us from tempting influences by our appearance. Should we begin now to sigh and cry, or later?

quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
As I was reading Numbers 15:37-41 - the tassles on the garments - the ribbon of blue, I was struck by the reminder this is commanded to be for the COI that "ye seek not after your own heart and your own eyes, after which ye use to go a-whoring: that ye may remember, and do all my commandments, and be holy unto your God."

As a people, we are to be simplistic in our dress, not seeking after our own heart and eyes, to go a-whoring after the world - that through the simplicity of dress, we may remember that we are holy unto God.

I have those texts marked "ceremonial" with a dual application to us today. Do we see that as correct or am I off the mark on this one?


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 13, 2007, 07:39:00 AM
 
quote:
So the principle is still binding, but the detail has changed. Dress should be such both to remind us to keep the commandments and to separate us from tempting influences by our appearance. Should we begin now to sigh and cry, or later?

Exactly. The principle is there. We have been sighing and crying for a while now, Thomas!

One of our members sent me a little book called "The Ribbon of Blue" which is a beautiful reminder of how far we have fallen in this regard.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 13, 2007, 05:10:00 PM
This is an interesting study.  We like to keep things in order and put things into little boxes, but it appears that this is going to require a few more "boxes".   :)

The discernment needed to see the break between ceremonial and moral is more than human. While the principles appear straight forward the importance is such that we need to go slowly. The Holy Spirit is needed that we may not err.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 13, 2007, 08:37:00 PM
Many more boxes it seems.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 15, 2007, 08:27:00 AM
I'm not comfortable with the ceremonial/moral distinction as the determining factor. I don't see why Christ's advent puts an end to ALL ceremonies.

A better guiding principle would be fulfilled vs. unfulfilled types. The fulfilled ones are done, and the unfulfilled ones keep going. (Of course, moral laws are binding forever.)

Anyway, that's just my little tidbit for now. Busy preparing a sermon. Will be back for real next week.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: JimB on June 15, 2007, 08:52:00 AM
I'm wondering if the following references will help a little?

quote:

"As He (Christ) ate the Passover with His disciples, He instituted in its place the service that was to be the memorial of His great sacrifice.  The national festival of the Jews was to pass away forever. The
service which Christ established was to be observed by His followers in all lands and through all ages" (DA 652).

"In instituting the sacramental service to take the place of the
Passover, Christ left for His church a memorial of His great sacrifice for man.  'This do,' He said, 'in remembrance of Me.'  This was the point of transition between two economies and their two great festivals. The one was to close forever; the other, which He had just established, was to take its place, and to continue through all time as the memorial of His death" (Ev 273-274).

"It was Christ's desire to leave His disciples an ordinance that would do for them the very thing they needed--that would serve to disentangle them from the rites and ceremonies which they had hitherto engaged in as essential, and which the reception of the gospel made no longer of any force. To continue these rites would be an insult to Jehovah. Eating of the body, and drinking of the blood of Christ, not merely at the sacramental service, but daily partaking of the bread of life to satisfy the soul's hunger.  would be in receiving His word and doing His will" (RH June 14, 1898).

"The typical service and the ceremonies connected with it were abolished at the cross. The great antitypical Lamb of God had become an offering for guilty man, and the shadow ceased in the substance" (6BC 1061).


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 15, 2007, 10:34:00 AM
Yes, it does help, Jim - and assist me with this - we observe a ceremonial law, say the one on ingesting intoxicating drinks and we see that it has a moral teaching to it - it places an impairment upon judgment to discern holy and unholy. It has a moral thread running all the way through it.

I am not suggesting, by dual applications, that the ceremonial in whole is still binding because we all know it isn't. It was fulfilled in Jesus; however, the underlying principle that caused that law to be spoken is not only reasonable for those temple servers but for us as well. The Bible has this obligation restated in the New Testament list of requirements for deacons – “not too much wine.” That is how I see it as a dual application.

If a moral thread runs through a ceremonial law, I see no reason why it cannot have a dual application – a secondary application as even some of the prophecies have – take Matthew 24 for instance – there is dual application all the way through that chapter.

Again, God was bringing these people back from a state bordering on heathenism. They had to relearn most everything. Four hundred years of influence had to be washed out of their minds and practices. It is no wonder His guidelines covered the majority of four books in the Bible.

And Arnold! Go preach, brother!  :) We look forward to having you back next week!

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 15, 2007, 11:07:00 AM
I share the discomfort for the ceremonial/moral distinction. But I don't see a fulfilled/unfulfilled distinction as being helpful either. There are two reasons why I think the ceremonial/moral distinction is still advisable, even though I too have some problems with it.
Firstly, the Spirit of Prophecy definitely makes reference and use to the ceremonial/moral distinction. I've wasted a lot of time over the years quarreling with Ellen White, and then coming back to the same position anyway, on the basis of long and arduous Bible study, when I might have had it free as it were, if I had listened the first time.
    God's people, whom He calls His peculiar treasure, were privileged with a twofold system of law; the moral and ceremonial. . . .  {FLB 106.2}
    From the creation the moral law was an essential part of God's divine plan, and was as unchangeable as Himself. The ceremonial law was to answer a particular purpose in Christ's plan for the salvation of the race. The typical system of sacrifices and offerings was established that through these services the sinner might discern the great offering, Christ. . . . The ceremonial law was glorious; it was the provision made by Jesus Christ in counsel with His Father, to aid in the salvation of the race. The whole arrangement of the typical system was founded on Christ. Adam saw Christ prefigured in the innocent beast suffering the penalty of his transgression of Jehovah's law.  {FLB 106.3}
Secondly, to go to the fulfilled/unfulfilled principle with the assumption that "ceremonial" laws that are still unfulfilled types are still binding opens a can of worms. On that basis, for example, the feast of Tabernacles would be binding until we pass into the earth made new, and Yom Kippur would be binding until the judgement is completed.
There are some problems with that. One is practical. We simply do not have certainty about the proper time to observe these annual feasts. Those who do observe them eventually run into arguments and split about when they should be observed. Splits of that kind would be the destruction of Adventist unity. We do know that the Rabbinical calendar in use today is not that of Bible times, if only because it includes a system of postponements that was added well into the Christian era. The Karaim calendar is also post-Biblical in origin. The lunar Islamic calendar does not maintain the cycle of seasons, and the Biblical annual feasts are seasonal. We do not know how the Jubilees calendar adjusted to the solar year or even if it was in use long enough ever to need adjustment. The Church of God and Saints of Christ, if I understand correctly, gives Biblical names to the Gregorian months and observes the feasts on the days numbered in the Bible. Astounding and innocently naive as that may sound, in the end, it's just as good as any other solution.
But even if we knew the proper dates, there might well be theological ramifications that could cause endless debate. In fact, it does not appear that the matter was clearly understood during the first generation of Christians. The book of Acts certainly appears to indicate full participation in the temple service, sacrifices and all, for a couple of decades after the time of Christ and probably up until the destruction of the temple.
And that presents another issue for the observance of annual feasts. They ought to be observed in the place where God has placed his name. I suppose that would be Jerusalem, but then the Samaritans have some very good arguments in favour of Mt Gerizim. Do we really want to dispense with the Spirit of Prophecy ceremonial/moral distinction and find definitive solutions to the issues involved?

quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
I'm not comfortable with the ceremonial/moral distinction as the determining factor. I don't see why Christ's advent puts an end to ALL ceremonies.

A better guiding principle would be fulfilled vs. unfulfilled types. The fulfilled ones are done, and the unfulfilled ones keep going. (Of course, moral laws are binding forever.)

Anyway, that's just my little tidbit for now. Busy preparing a sermon. Will be back for real next week.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 15, 2007, 11:11:00 AM
Sometimes we get a little ahead of where we ought to be. So many things we accept as foundational, but forget others do not. It is a lesson that we need to learn well so we don't leave the honest of heart behind as we rush forward.

I began with the assumption that we would all accept that the ceremonial laws were no longer binding. Brother Arnold does not agree. Brother went back and got a statement for us. Let us pull from Scripture also that we might keep all with us. "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: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ." Col 2:16,17.

By accepted definition, I think, the ceremonial law were those laws that pertained to the sacrificial system wherein were offerings and ceremonies designed to "teach" the plan of salvation. The blood of bulls and goats did not avail any good, but were only examples or "shadows" of the reality which is Christ Jesus.

While it is true that there may be a few remaining shadows to yet be fulfilled, the laws of ceremony are no longer binding. We do not follow any of the ceremonial "laws" that were commands to the nation of Israel. They are no longer part of our church service. This is the difference we have made here in our study.

It appears that the ceremonial laws may have within them some moral principles. So, while the command to do such and such at such and such a time is not binding with the ceremonial laws, we may find that there are some moral principles revealed.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 15, 2007, 12:48:00 PM
Agreed, Richard. You articulated the intent of my last post.

Now, Thomas - you bring up much to ponder ... however, one statement you made "The book of Acts certainly appears to indicate full participation in the temple service" ... I have always wondered about that. And this is a side issue because we know the disciples realized Jesus was the fulfillment of the sanctuary service, sacrifices, ceremonial cleansings, etc.; however, they attended Passover. Now why would they do that knowing Jesus was the fulfillment? Did they do it so they could reach the larger audiences, or did they do it as not to be a stumbling block to those they were longing to reach? Or was it something else all together?

Paul lingered at Philippi in order to keep the Passover. Acts of the Apostles – page 391. SDA Bible Commentary on Philippians says: “It was the time of the Passover, and the apostle kept the feast with the believers.” The "believers" had to be new Christians. Bible says he left “after the feast” – so what can be our conclusions? Was the "feast" referring to The Lord's Supper that Jesus instituted on His last Passover weekend?

Personally, there is no doubt in my mind that they did it to reach larger audiences, not because they felt typical Jewish Passover was still an obligation, but that the feast referred to is The Lord's Supper. Otherwise, it blows away some theories and some serious doctrines.

What think ye? Am I all wet?

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-15-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 15, 2007, 01:20:00 PM
Looking back at Arnold's statement ... it seems he may have meant not "Christ's advent" but "Christ's death." Because he said he preferred "fulfilled" and "unfulfilled."   ???  Do I have that right?

I guess a good question to Brother Arnold would be: which of the ceremonials do you see as unfulfilled?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: JimB on June 15, 2007, 01:41:00 PM
I can't answer for brother Arnold but I think that most people who look into this would say that the Feast of Tabernacles has not yet been fulfilled.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 15, 2007, 02:04:00 PM
The apostles were at times cowards in regards to the subject of the Jews laws.  In their cowardice they sacrificed the life of Paul. And, Paul went along with that which he had taught against when he went into the temple to participate in the Jewish purification rites.

I think that the light is shining much brighter today than then. They had much to learn and unlearn. It took a little time to do so. These ceremonial rites were part of their culture and we would not expect those who thought Christ to not be God when He died on the cross to be perfect in their knowledge of Scriptural interpretation.

There is no question today that the Passover is no longer to be kept. So, how do we look at the situation under study? It is not too difficult to sort it out.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 15, 2007, 02:26:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jim B:
I can't answer for brother Arnold but I think that most people who look into this would say that the Feast of Tabernacles has not yet been fulfilled.

I have heard that but have never studied it to a conclusion.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 15, 2007, 02:30:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:

There is no question today that the Passover is no longer to be kept. So, how do we look at the situation under study? It is not too difficult to sort it out.


No, it isn't when we use the words "binding" and "not binding" ... especially as that was the original intent of the topic.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 15, 2007, 09:29:00 PM
I have gone through the published EGW writings and reviewed each statement where the ceremonial and moral laws are mentioned as such. Anyone can replicate the process in a few minutes by using the search feature on the Spirit of Prophecy CD. I come away with the following points of certainty:
1) The Spirit of Prophecy maintains a two-fold concept of the law: ceremonial and moral.
2) Ceremonial law taught salvation in type, and while it was a ministration unto death in itself, it was glorious in its application to Christ.
3) The moral law is embodied in the ten commandments and remains in force.
4) After the death of Christ, the ceremonial law was no longer in force.
5) We are still subject to the moral law after the death of Christ.
6) Moral law exists in the world from the time of creation.
7) Both ceremonial and moral law are the schoolmaster of Galatians that leads to Christ.
Note that in the parameters of the discussion of ceremonial and moral law, the Spirit of Prophecy does not address the issues of health, purity, and civil law. The real issue of this thread must answer the question of how health, purity and civil issues relate to the moral law, the ten commandments, and to what extent they are therefore still binding.
The Spirit of Prophecy discussion notes an equivalency between ceremonial and non-binding after the death of Christ on one hand, and moral and eternally binding on the other. The health, purity, and civil laws must therefore be relegated to one or the other of these categories.
I would be of the opinion that health laws are moral and binding, and that they all relate to the ten commandments. The command "Thou shalt not kill" implies the positive command to safe-guard life, with the consequence that the health laws are binding.

quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
No, it isn't when we use the words "binding" and "not binding" ... especially as that was the original intent of the topic.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 16, 2007, 07:30:00 AM
Amen!  We are blessed to have this understanding. The moral laws are the laws of our being. To understand them is to be truly blessed!  We need to figure out how these civil laws apply today. They are indeed moral, but it appears that punishment is not to be followed. We are getting close.  :(

Happy Sabbath, all.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 17, 2007, 10:05:00 PM
I've been waiting for a response to this post by Brother Richard. We have basically come to the point of how to relate to the state and to the church.
I think one can roughly divide the Old testament into two parts: the theocratic prophets and the post-exilic prophets. The one expresses how to live within the theocratic system, the other how to live within the pagan empires. The church and state today are basically in the pagan empire system.
There are several relevant prophets, but I think Jeremiah and Daniel are among the most prominant. I see both of them espousing two principles: 1) cooperate with the State wherever possible to foster good; 2) take a courteous, but unyielding stand in favour of God's moral law.
Now comes the red herring. Given its presuppositions of what right doctrine is, the Roman Catholic church has consistently done just that. It has wielded power over the State whenever possible, and it has stuck to its guns in terms of doctrine and morals.
Note that Rome has preserved the separation of church and state much better than the Reformation, which has consistently fostered the nationalistic State Church system. Look at Germany, Switzerland, Holland, England, Scotland, and the Nordic countries, all Protestant, all with an established church dating back to the Reformation.
Don't get me wrong. I have lived about the most anti-Catholic life possible. In fact, I truly believe that there is a Jesuit infiltration of the SDA administration going back to the 1920s. But we need to see both history and present reality with clear-sightedness.
This is not an answer to anything. It is just opening up the issues of church and state in view of what is binding in moral law and how it should be implemented.


quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
Amen!  We are blessed to have this understanding. The moral laws are the laws of our being. To understand them is to be truly blessed!  We need to figure out how these civil laws apply today. They are indeed moral, but it appears that punishment is not to be followed. We are getting close.   :(

Happy Sabbath, all.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 17, 2007, 11:13:00 PM
You are right dear brother when it comes to Protestant failures in the world. America is the shining example of a Protestant nation.

But, in regards to the Roman Church, she is no better. Look at the Vatican. It is a state and has not allowed her citizens to vote at all!

And, look throughout the world at the large number of Catholic countries that in practice are very Catholic. Most of South America is Catholic. The church has much power in these countries and also has fostered much corruption.

But, your point is well taken, that Protestant nations are not Protestant at all, they have state supported churches, official religions. America's day is coming to an end. She too is going backwards. Come soon Lord Jesus.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 18, 2007, 09:51:00 AM
This goes beyond the first four commandments relating to God and the last six to man along with the statutes which uphold both categories? Sorry - my mind works simplistically.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 18, 2007, 12:51:00 PM
Dear Brother Thomas:

You stated and well:

"I think one can roughly divide the Old testament into two parts: the theocratic prophets and the post-exilic prophets. The one expresses how to live within the theocratic system, the other how to live within the pagan empires. The church and state today are basically in the pagan empire system."

The separation of church and state has grown and has protected us from what is going on today, but there are those that say the separation of church and state is a myth that needs to be killed.

Soon there will be men that will do all they can to bring a theocratic form of government which was existing here before the constitution and will come back again that will come with the National Sunday Law and finally the death penalty for those that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

It does not take much reading or awareness to see what is going on around us. The evidence is coming from all directions that we are in the last hour of earth and life as we know it.

I pray that God will give us the wisdom to stand in these dark days and that those that learn at the feet of Jesus will be well prepared for the trying hours before us.  

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 18, 2007, 04:04:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:

This is not an answer to anything. It is just opening up the issues of church and state in view of what is binding in moral law and how it should be implemented.



Yes, dear brother, this is the issue. It is a concern for us in our individual lives, in the church, and in the nation. Moral is moral. It is what is right. What we read in Scripture is the only standard of morality. There is no other for indians, blacks, whites, Chinese, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims or atheists.  These statutes express what is right and what is wrong and it makes no difference what anyone says.

We want to  know how we are to implement them in our lives and in our nations. If they are not ceremonial they are moral. If they are moral, then they are binding. But, there is the aspect of penalties and some cases the statute may have been written for a specific application in Israel, a theocracy. Are there cases where the application for Israel is not possible for us today?  And, what about the penalties? They appear to be too severe in many cases for today when we have no theocracy.

I have no problem with the state enforcing the moral laws, but we surely don't want the same penalties applied in the old testament for Israel, a theocracy. Let us get this settled out. What else is needed to get on solid ground here?

Which of the moral laws do we not want to see enforced by the state today even without severe penalties?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 18, 2007, 05:50:00 PM
The first four, for sure. They are reserved between man and God; however, how we relate to our fellow human beings are a matter of commandments five through ten.

Killing, stealing and lying are the easy ones to see the state enforce - we want them enforced; but how do they enforce the fifth (well, possibly charges of neglect on this one), the seventh and the tenth? How are those enforced by the state?

Adultry is not something I have ever seen anyone charged with except as a "cause" for divorce - but no penalty or jail time. Loss of home, income and children is likely the penalty one pays.

Coveting sometimes leads to stealing, but coveting alone? How does the state bring charges against that?

Questions to ponder and work out.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 18, 2007, 09:10:00 PM
The issue of penalties and the ten commandments is a good place to start.
I think Sister Sybil's dividing the commandments up into punishable and non-punishable is interesting. There is a text in the Qur'an that states that the punishment for Sabbath-breaking is for those who differed about it and is relegated to the Day of Judgement.
On the other hand, let's think about the Sabbath. The Sabbath includes guarantees for the non-negotiable rights of subordinates, not only children, but workers and animals. Shouldn't that be enforced by the State if anything? It's the one thing that keeps us from descending into the law of the jungle, where everything is up for negotiation, and the most powerful impose their own values.
Shouldn't we be lobbying for Sabbath laws, rather than merely opposing Sunday laws and harping on religious freedom as the issue? The Sabbath is a concrete reminder to employers, for example, that they do not have absolute power over those in their employ. And shouldn't domestic animals of everyone have the same rights, not just those belonging to Jews and Seventh-day Adventists?

quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
The first four, for sure. They are reserved between man and God; however, how we relate to our fellow human beings are a matter of commandments five through ten.

Killing, stealing and lying are the easy ones to see the state enforce - we want them enforced; but how do they enforce the fifth (well, possibly charges of neglect on this one), the seventh and the tenth? How are those enforced by the state?

Adultry is not something I have ever seen anyone charged with except as a "cause" for divorce - but no penalty or jail time. Loss of home, income and children is likely the penalty one pays.

Coveting sometimes leads to stealing, but coveting alone? How does the state bring charges against that?

Questions to ponder and work out.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 18, 2007, 09:24:00 PM
I prize your mind! You have such a unique way of approaching these things, you rascal!

You gave a reason, but I don't like it  ;D for legislating the Sabbath. If we lived in a theocracy, we would do it - it has been done before ... but since we don't, how do we handle it? You don't want to consider "freedom of conscience?" Then how about loyalty to God that no man can come between -  and those owing to God are the first four in the great Law of love.

If the Sabbath could be legislated by the civil authorities, then we could legislate against bowing down to idols or outlaw all the gods except One - or legislate against taking His Name in vain ... that would set us up as a state run by a religion. And we could throw in public stoning as the punishment. We know what happens when that is the case. So I would vote against it and leave the first four commandments out of the hands of the civil authorities and give them the last six to deal with.

Tell me, Thomas - what do we do with coveting? You have the mind for that one.  :)

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 19, 2007, 06:32:00 AM
In a democratic republic the people elect their leaders. God looked down at man and said, most of them will reject me and my truth. So, man is to be left free to choose whom he shall worship. If they make law regarding worship, it will be used to persecute my children. There is no need to make a law to keep the Sabbath Day holy to the contrary any law that will enforce worship will be used against God and His children. Thus, in the US God helped us to choose correctly and provide for liberty of conscience in matters of worship.

It is an issue today and the main reason is because it is easy to see that society has fallen to such a state that the last six of the commandments are no longer held in high esteem, but rather are said to be only for the religious and not a matter for legislation. Such an absurd statement. It may be that there is some room for discussion, but this flies in the face of not only reason, but history. The laws of most nations are grounded in Scripture even if they don't know it. Most cultures have laws against murder and stealing. We are so far removed from holiness that we can't even see a man or woman going to jail for adultery. Even though it is destroying society. And, we even go further and when there is adultery reward the guilty party with half of the assets including half of the children. We have been blinded.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 19, 2007, 06:38:00 AM
You've got my number, haven't you!
Actually, in the imperfect world we live in, the compromises we make in the name of freedom of religion might be the best we can do. We quite simply do not live in a theocracy.
Not only the tenth commandment, but the fifth, presents some problems of implementation. Interestingly, I understand a Rabbinical explanation of the tenth commandment notes that it is only for Jews, since Gentiles could never live up to it. I hope I'm quoting that correctly.
Do you thing that the big four, prohibition of stealing, committing adultery, killing, and bearing false witness, are sufficient for state intervention, and that the others should be left to conscience and the church? In practice I might be willing to go with that.
But there are problems with freedom of religion, very practical problems. It may be that the big four are sufficient to prevent abuse of freedom of religion too. Most abuse of freedom of religion falls within those categories.

quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
I prize your mind! You have such a unique way of approaching these things, you rascal!

You gave a reason, but I don't like it   ;D for legislating the Sabbath. If we lived in a theocracy, we would do it - it has been done before ... but since we don't, how do we handle it? You don't want to consider "freedom of conscience?" Then how about loyalty to God that no man can come between -  and those owing to God are the first four in the great Law of love.

If the Sabbath could be legislated by the civil authorities, then we could legislate against bowing down to idols or outlaw all the gods except One - or legislate against taking His Name in vain ... that would set us up as a state run by a religion. And we could throw in public stoning as the punishment. We know what happens when that is the case. So I would vote against it and leave the first four commandments out of the hands of the civil authorities and give them the last six to deal with.

Tell me, Thomas - what do we do with coveting? You have the mind for that one.   :)


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 19, 2007, 09:22:00 AM
Yes - in the fallen condition of the world, the first four cannot be touched or legislated.

And for the last six commandments that cannot be legislated, because of the world's fallen condition, conscience must be the rule as far as I can reason.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 19, 2007, 10:40:00 AM
It is interesting when we look at the 5th and tenth commandment. How does one legislate in these areas?  Even in a theocracy, point me to specific legislation and punishment. I don't think we can. Sister Sybil has touched on something that does reveal a portion of the 5th commandment and in some societies there are laws relating to the need to care for parents. You cannot legislate love, but you can legislate responsibility and this has been done. Is this according to the standard of Scripture? I think so. Is it good to have the nations of the world legislate in this area?  I think so.

How about number ten?  This is a little confusing to me. It seems very close to Thou Shalt Not Steal. Help me out and let us see what the difference is so we can see if there are indeed moral laws that already spring from this important commandment.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 19, 2007, 11:39:00 AM
Yes - they kiss each other relative to a motive (coveting) that leads to stealing and other things.

Paul, I believe, tells us to be content with what we have been given ... (thinking out loud)

KJV: "Thou shalt not covet they neighbour's HOUSE, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's WIFE, not his MANSERVANT, nor his MAIDSERVANT, nor his OX, nor his ASS, nor ANYTHING that is thy neighbour's."


As the seed planted by coveting leads to eventual action, one could break several commandments. It just might be that the tenth commandment works as a summary of several commandments as motive is locked in with it. And all sin begins in the heart/mind before it is carried out. Ten could be the safeguard commandment on dealing with our neighbours stuff.

Thoughts?????

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-19-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 19, 2007, 12:28:00 PM
That's the way I see it. It sounds as if God wanted us to know that we need new hearts. Jesus spoke very specifically to this when he gave the sermon on the mount, did He not? So, the last commandment is indeed a "moral" law, but the motive of the heart is unknown to man or the state. So, it is not a matter of legislation, but a warning identical to the one Jesus gave in His sermon from the mount. A personal warning that we might look upon our own motives that we might understand the wickedness within.

We are making progress!! No arbitrary rules of interpretation have been laid down, but rather a pleading with God to teach us His ways that we may glorify Him.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 19, 2007, 12:35:00 PM
As I contemplated my last post, a thought came to mind.  Has not the foundation of our legal system taken into consideration the last commandment? Do we not consider the motives of the heart when pronouncing sentence? Do we not codify the last commandment into our system of justice?

It is true that we cannot know the intent of the heart....unless we are told.  Let me explain.  When a man kills a man. He is guilty of killing the man. But, our legal system like God's justice does not stop there. God gave to Israel the Cities of Refuge. Why? And how does that work with our current legal system today? And what does that have to do with the last commandment and our present legal system?

God's ways are simple..... but deep to us!! Until the lights come on through the precious ministry of the Third Person of the Godhead!

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 19, 2007, 01:04:00 PM
Yep - intentional, unintentional; manslaughter, murder
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 19, 2007, 01:39:00 PM
The Lord would not have us with slaves, yet He made provisions for the treatment of slaves.

He would not have divorces, yet He made provision for them.

He would not have war, yet He made provisions on how a war is to be fought.

He would not have us eat animals, yet made provisions on how to safely eat them in an emergency (after the flood)

... an so on.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 19, 2007, 02:12:00 PM
The SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 1, page 607 has some good comments on the 10th Commandment:

quote:
The tenth commandment is supplementary to the eighth, for covetousness is the root from which theft grows. In fact, the tenth commandment strikes at the roots of the other nine. It represents a decided advance beyond the morality of any other ancient code. Most codes went no further than the deed, and a few took speech into account, but none proposed to regulate the thoughts. This prohibition is fundamental to human experience in that it penetrates to the motive behind the outward act. It teaches us that God sees the heart and is concerned less with the outward act than with the thought from which the action springs. It establishes the principle that the very thoughts of our hearts come under the jurisdiction of God's law, that we are as responsible for them as for our actions. The wrong thought entertained promotes a wrong desire, which in time gives birth to a wrong action. A man may refrain from adultery because of the social and civil penalties that follow such transgressions, yet in Heaven's sight he may be as guilty as if he actually committed the deed - Matthew 5:28.

The basic commandment reveals the profound truth that we are not the helpless slaves to our natural desires and passions. Within us is a force, the will, which, under the control of Christ, can submerge every unlawful desire and passion. It sums up the Decalogue by affirming that man is essentially a free moral agent.


Wow - it confirmed what was already implied.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 19, 2007, 02:18:00 PM
Do we want to pause and discuss this prohibition against evil thoughts?

Richard has addressed this as it relates to the motive when an injustice is punished. And as such, there appears to be a valid reason to punish a premeditated act, as well as a valid reason to show mercy on an accidental or non-premeditated act.

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-19-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 19, 2007, 09:08:00 PM
I think the tenth commandment does not focus so much on the desire to acquire things in themselves as power.
The house represents the basis or store of wealth. The wife, I'm afraid, represents social connections that open both markets and safety in moving among them. People do still marry for inherited wealth and family connections. But in ancient times that aspect may well have been more overt. Workers are a means of producing wealth, but also in themselves a vehicle of power. One of the most direct ways of manipulating power is to have as many subordinates as possible. It applies, whether they are slaves or employees. The ox is a vehicle of production, corresponding to the modern industrial complex. The ass is a vehicle of transportation, necessary to getting goods to market and expanding profits. The commandment thus expresses all of the major factors in the creation of excess wealth and therefore of power.
When you stop to think about it, the production of excess wealth, beyond what is necessary of obvious security, is an insanity. What is amazing is that what appear to be normally intelligent people continue to acquire wealth beyond their needs. It is the blindness of the desire for power that creates that in a human being, and it is so common that most of us take it for granted.
The inordinate acquisition of wealth and thus power may actually be an area of legislation. In USA has had anti-trust laws, and sometimes they have actually had an effect.
In the same way Brother Richard already mentioned that there may be aspects of the fifth commandment that can, should be and have been legislated. Certain responsibilities in regard to parents are legislatable moral laws. There are some examples in the Pentateuch, on the excel page nos. 12 and 14. The punishment, interestingly, for cursing one's mother is death.
But that brings me back to a very serious thought about the Sabbath commandment. There are "secular" aspects of that commandment as well. It does state that subordinates have non-negotiable rights. Not only children (who are potentially agricultural labor), but employees and animals have non-negotiable rights. If those rights are not legislated, we automatically fall into the situation in which the more powerful lobby controls the rights of subordinates without limitation. That's called the law of the jungle.
While I agree that the secular state is the best we seem to be able to achieve under present conditions, and that the secular state should not and must not legislate religion, must or may the State legislate the protection of the non-negotiable rights of the subordinate? Since the commandment identifies only one such right, the right to be free of subordination on the Sabbath, the question is naturally open. And once it is open, it is also open for the possibility of discussing whether the commandment means Saturday, Sunday, or one day in seven. This foundational reality is behind the Sunday-law problem. Is there no resolution except the extremes of either opening the way to Sunday-laws or even Sabbath laws on the one hand, or opening the door to the abuse of the powerful on the other hand?
Labour laws, animal rights laws and environmental laws basically fall under the fourth commandment. If they are acceptable, why is the line drawn specifically at that point?


quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
Do we want to pause and discuss this prohibition against evil thoughts?

Richard has addressed this as it relates to the motive when an injustice is punished. And as such, there appears to be a valid reason to punish a premeditated act, as well as a valid reason to show mercy on an accidental or non-premeditated act.

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-19-2007).]


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 19, 2007, 10:18:00 PM
Amen, Sister Sybil. There is indeed safety in a multitude of counselors. Is it not a blessing to see others who have come to the same conclusion?

So, the tenth commandment is the basis for moral laws. It is understood that if one pre-meditates killing, then it is different than an accidental killing. More than establishing the need to legislate the last six, we also see that the civil statutes given to Israel have a moral element that is binding today. The cities of refuge are there to uphold the tenth commandment.  We are learning much as we seek to understand God's ways.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 19, 2007, 10:24:00 PM
Brother Thomas as usual has put his finger on some important aspects of the law of God. It is too important to treat lightly, so I will have to wait until I have more time to address it properly.  It will be good to see what others say.  :)
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 20, 2007, 01:17:00 PM
It appears as if a little "jack pot" has been stumbled upon. Kudos, Thomas!

I'm out of here until the first - do carry on!

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-20-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 21, 2007, 09:10:00 AM
Brother Thomas' post regarding religious freedom is important. He brings to light that it is not good enough to refuse to legislate in the area of the first four, but it may require legislation to insure the rights of individuals to be free from having to work on the Sabbath. A very interesting point. How do we address the need to be able to not work on the Sabbath or any other day of one's choosing based upon religion, without breaking our own principle of not legislating in matters or worship?

This is another example of the great blessing God gave to America, making America a shining example. How is this problem resolved in harmony with Biblical principle?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 21, 2007, 06:58:00 PM
The 4th commandment forbids labor on the 7th day, but it can be interpreted to also command labor on the other 6. "Six days shalt thou labor..."

One problem is that if the wrong day is chosen by the legislature as the Sabbath, then we can be forced to work on the real Sabbath.

A bigger problem is that there might be conscientious disagreement over which day is the Sabbath. If a man keeps Sunday because that's what he believes is the right day, then I should not force him to abide by my conscience.

quote:
It was right for the king to make public confession, and to seek to exalt the God of heaven above all other gods; but in endeavoring to force his subjects to make a similar confession of faith and to show similar reverence, Nebuchadnezzar was exceeding his right as a temporal sovereign. He had no more right, either civil or moral, to threaten men with death for not worshiping God, than he had to make the decree consigning to the flames all who refused to worship the golden image. God never compels the obedience of man. He leaves all free to choose whom they will serve. {PK 510.4}

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 21, 2007, 07:05:00 PM
Parts of the 4th commandment other people's right to rest. That's why buying/selling is not appropriate on that day.

So, I agree with Bro Thomas that there are parts of it that can be legislated by a secular government. On the Sabbath, nobody works.

But again, implementation becomes well-nigh impossible outside of a theocracy.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 21, 2007, 07:32:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
Looking back at Arnold's statement ... it seems he may have meant not "Christ's advent" but "Christ's death." Because he said he preferred "fulfilled" and "unfulfilled."    ???  Do I have that right?

I guess a good question to Brother Arnold would be: which of the ceremonials do you see as unfulfilled?


For me, "Christ's advent" encompasses his entire physical sojourn on earth, and therefore includes His death.

And I agree with Bro JimB's answer. It would seem that the Feast of Tabernacles has not been fulfilled.

Fundamental to this whole thing is God's character - love. His law, which he requires us to obey, is merely a transcript of His character. Therefore, everything He commands us is just some manifestation of love.

Why would any of His laws be abolished?

One possibility is that God made a mistake. He made a law which turned out to be unloving. And so He abolishes it.

But that's ridiculous because God knows everything. So His laws cannot be mistakes.

Another possible reason is that He made a law that is a shadow of something bigger and better. Then, when the real thing comes along, and reveals God's character better, the law is abolished because it no longer has a purpose. The anti-type replaces type.

That's how I see the sacrificial system. It was established to teach us the truths of salvation. But when Christ came as the Lamb slain, then  we don't need to slay the animals anymore. That is a valid reason why we don't kill Passover lambs anymore.

But what of those things in the Mosaic law that have not yet been fulfilled? What reason do we have for considering those abolished?

For example, the sinner was to take his sacrifice and slice it up in various ways. One thing he did was to cut off the fat. That teaches us that we are to cut off sin, which is still binding today. But now we have the eating of Christ's flesh and drinking His blood that teaches us that lesson. So, the principle is kept, but the implementation is altered. But it was not abolished.

If we ignore laws for no better reason than "that was for the Jews" then we are no better than those who say obedience was for the Jews. And in the end, we will be as deceived as they are.

But all this considers merely how binding a law is. It does not consider implementation.

Let me ask a question to push the envelope a bit: If our human government is such that it will not allow us to implement God's laws the way He wants them implemented, are we not obliged to leave such a government to follow God's will?

For example, if the US decided to implement a Sunday law, should we not leave for a place that will allow us to follow God's command? Now, since the US forbids us to implement the death penalty on Sabbath breakers (and mother cursers), should we not leave for a place that will allow us to follow God's command?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 21, 2007, 07:35:00 PM
All the commandments have a physical manifestation of obedience or disobedience, except the 10th. Coveting only happens in the heart and mind. As such, it is beyond man's ability to make definitive judgments about it, regardless of how hard he tries. Though the courts try to take into account the defendant's motives, it's conclusions can never be 100% beyond doubt.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 22, 2007, 02:25:00 AM
Brother Arnold's thoughtful posts focus on two issues: keeping the law under conditions of religious freedom in a secular state, and understanding the ceremonial and moral law.

Absolute religious freedom in a secular state is impossible to maintain. It works, to the extent it works, because a specific configuration of parameters has been established by the religious groups who agreed in sum to tolerate one another. Absolute religious freedom would end in people claiming the right to do anything in the name of a personally established religion. That is the problem in fact that the US is heading towards. It is simply limited by law and the fact that people have a limited imagination. While there are thousands of religions, they are really only a few types of chocolate wrapped in all different kinds of wrappers.
We have a tradition, established in colonial times, of Sabbath observance, both for Jews and Seventh Day Baptists, and later for others. It is the appears of new religions that is putting pressure on the principle, and will eventually, according to the Spirit of Prophecy, result in the readjustment of the freedom of religion principle is ways to exclude Sabbath observance. What needs to be fostered is not religious freedom in the absolute, but the limited configuration that has been traditional.

An example of a development ddangerous to freedom of religion in terms of the day of rest is the recently invented moon-sabbath, which wanders through the week, making it very difficult for employers to respect the rights of its adherents. This weakens the delicate limit of tolerance, which is Sabbath or Sunday, Friday not being observed as a rest-day by Muslims, only as a day of public congregation for an hour in the afternoon. A society is just about able to function permitting the choice of one day in two. But a proliferation of exotic traditions would change that, jeopardizing the freedom of Sabbath-observance.

Brother Arnold brings up an important issue in noting that ceremonial and moral law may overlap in a particular Mosaic statute. That is a very rational perception. I do have one problem, however, in seeing both moral and ceremonial applications of a single statute. That is specifically the mental process that permits the ceremonial perception of the Sabbath commandment. The particular day is seen as ceremonial, while the principle of rest, Sunday, one day in seven, or a symbolic representation of salvation is seen as the valid, permanent, moral application of the commandment. Unless it is absolutely necessary to do so, we should interpret the statutes as either moral and binding or ceremonial and not binding after Christ. To fail to distinguish clearly between moral statutes and ceremonial statutes opens the door to anarchy of interpretation with no hope of any two people on earth agreeing. The attaining of perfect agreement is questionable as it is.


quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
All the commandments have a physical manifestation of obedience or disobedience, except the 10th. Coveting only happens in the heart and mind. As such, it is beyond man's ability to make definitive judgments about it, regardless of how hard he tries. Though the courts try to take into account the defendant's motives, it's conclusions can never be 100% beyond doubt.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 22, 2007, 10:56:00 AM
I am very glad my brother's and sister's are really doing so well with sharing gems that many of us will learn from.

My goal is to sit back and read and absorb. This is way to deep for me and I am no fool to try and pretend to be otherwise.

Thank you all for the rich blessings of this study.

God Bless you in your work and sharing.  

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 23, 2007, 09:51:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
Parts of the 4th commandment other people's right to rest. That's why buying/selling is not appropriate on that day.

So, I agree with Bro Thomas that there are parts of it that can be legislated by a secular government. On the Sabbath, nobody works.

But again, implementation becomes well-nigh impossible outside of a theocracy.



Hello, brothsers! May we assume we can never legislate a Sabbath's rest as we will never again have a theocracy on this earth? It is interesting to pick apart the 4th commandment - I love discecting things; however, let's work with what we have - the first four commandments being duty bound to God and the last six to our fellow man?

Ideally, what we wish for is not going to happen - prophecy tells us so - so may we gather ourselves back up to look at what is possible for us?

Am I being too simplistic?  :)

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 23, 2007, 10:33:00 AM
Well maybe I will put my foot in my mouth and share.

As far as I can see we cannot legislate any of the ten commandments. Man may try to set up something similar and use the ten as a foundation, but no one can legislate the heart.

Man can force a person to follow the ten commandments and obey them on the outward view, but what is in the heart only God can legislate that a person will obey the ten from within.

Man can force, but only God can move a person from within to follow and obey his laws. It is to God that He can stir the mind and soul to see the quality of the ten commandments.

Man can enforce and make people do things they may not want to do, but we have seen in past history those that died in the faith died because the inward person was moved by the Spirit and obeyed God rather than man.

For us that love God and desire to follow His principles in our lives will obey all the ten precepts because we do it out of love, not because we have to. We see the goodness in obeying them and learning of His will in our lives because His principles are just and good.

Though they are just and good when man may force people to obey, if the heart is not moved by the truth of the precepts they will do it out of rebellion.

Will some people get the picture and obey later after being forced to obey the just and good precepts? I suspect some might, but knowing the heart of man if God is not in their lives they will rebel and rebel.

For they do not have the love of God that moves them to follow and serve a Holy God.  

 

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: JimB on June 23, 2007, 01:03:00 PM
Sister Liane, I understand what you're saying. The use of laws never change anyone's heart. It is like the story I hear a while back about a little girl who was being punished for bad behavior and she was made to stand in a corner. As she was standing there.. she said... "I may be standing but in my mind I'm sitting." Even in punishment she was still rebelling.

However, I differ from you (at least I think I do) when it comes to enforcing the 10 Commandments. I do believe that the last 6 should be legislated and codified into laws. We need laws that govern how man treats man. I can not force a man to love God but I can hopefully deter him from stealing, raping, murdering etc... etc.. without these kinds of laws there would be anarchy.

If I have to live next door to someone who chooses to ignore God's love hopefully the laws will at least restrain his behavior even if they don't change his heart.

I know that not everyone will accept God's laws so in this case I'm more interested in behavior modification than I am heart modification.

I'll leave the heart modification up to God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 23, 2007, 03:08:00 PM
Hi Brother Jim:

We already have such laws, not perfect, but such laws. As a nation we have set up standards of living so that we can live together and not hurt each other in the things we do.

Something as simple as a double yellow line in the middle of the road is an example of right things to do.

But when it comes to saying we are going to make the 10 Commandments the law of the land then I stand back and say what.

We cannot force people to believe in God, obey God or follow His precepts. All we can do is make laws that reflect proper conduct   that reflects the same principles without make Our God a force of what we believe.

We do not live in a nation Under God as it was more in the past. We are a nation of many different beliefs, but the underlining principles such as stealing, killing and immoral character which we can find in many other nations can be established no matter where we live and can obey.

Unfortunately even within the body of those that believe in God as believed in the Holy Bible there are differences of truth and light and then again who's truth would we enforce and make laws?

I know it sounds very liberal, but my logic is not to force people to believe as I do, but to live under a set of laws that we all can agree upon and follow so that we do not hurt others or ourselves.

Whatever there needs to be a balance, but as the times we live in that balance is getting harder and harder to have as the times are more troubled and the coming of Jesus is near.

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: JimB on June 23, 2007, 04:56:00 PM
Yes, we do already have those kinds of laws and they are based on the 10 Commandments. They had to get the standard somewhere. The forefathers of our wonderful country were of protestant background and had to base our laws on something and the 10 Commandments was it. Unlike Europe where laws changed depending on who was in power of the throne/s and before 1798 where and when laws came from the Pope.

The last six commandments do not force anyone to believe in God the way I do but they do try encourage people to behave civilly towards one another. As much as some would like to deny it not stealing and not murdering is based on the Bible.

Yes, our country is becoming more liberal and turning a blind eye to many things and we are loosing our protestant heritage. Which is why I believe we are loosing the blessing of the Lord.

However, now I think I'm dragging this discussion of course.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 23, 2007, 05:44:00 PM
No you are not. It is important to remember that the foundation of our laws did come from a Christian foundation and the principles though written in a secular way were built on that foundation.

The world has moved further and further from God and His truths. Though they believe they are following God and His principles, they have left the sacred light that was given to them by standing still instead of moving forward to advance light that could have been theirs.

Thus was born the Seventh-day Adventist Church given to a last generation that will follow the Lamb.  

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

[This message has been edited by Liane H (edited 06-25-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 25, 2007, 01:02:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
May we assume we can never legislate a Sabbath's rest as we will never again have a theocracy on this earth?

Why? Why is a theocracy required to eradicate physically obvious manifestations of disobedience? Isn't that what is being suggested for the last 6 commandments?

Let us be careful what principles we espouse, lest it be turned against us.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 25, 2007, 07:28:00 AM
Dear Sybil & Asygo:

You asked:  

"May we assume we can never legislate a Sabbath's rest as we will never again have a theocracy on this earth?"

Here is what the Pen of Inspiration states:

"The principles of the Ten Commandments existed before the fall and were of a character suited to the condition of a holy order of beings. After the fall the principles of those precepts were not changed, but additional precepts were given to meet man in his fallen state." {SR 145.2}

We need to think about this also:

"The law of God existed before man was created. The angels were governed by it. Satan fell because he transgressed the principles of God's government. After Adam and Eve were created, God made known to them His law. It was not then written, but was rehearsed to them by Jehovah." {SR 145.1}

If God's law is eternal then on the New Earth we will still have those Ten Precepts as well and if we have those Ten Precepts in God's perfect world we should have once again a theocracy government headed by God and given in order to all of mankind.

Am I missing anything here?

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: JimB on June 25, 2007, 08:36:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
sn't that what is being suggested for the last 6 commandments?

Let us be careful what principles we espouse, lest it be turned against us.


Brother Arnold, please explain more. I'm not sure that I'm following you (maybe I am).

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 25, 2007, 09:00:00 AM
A law requiring everyone to keep the Sabbath - even for unbelievers? That is what I am talking about. If one is legislated, what happens to freedom of conscience in a fallen world?
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 25, 2007, 09:11:00 AM
That is why we need to hold onto the separation of church and state, but then again that is a liberal idea and we are suppose to be conservative, but as some of us we find ourselves on different place on different issues and more like a checkered mind in the way the world is, then we are with God's principles.  

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 25, 2007, 05:25:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jim B:
Brother Arnold, please explain more. I'm not sure that I'm following you (maybe I am).

My questioning was designed to highlight why we think we need a theocracy to enforce the 4th commandment. And the question remains. Why do we need a theocracy to enforce the Sabbath?

When that question is answered, we need to answer another. Why don't we need a theocracy to enforce the last 6? Especially in light of the fact that the 10th is kept or violated without any physical manifestation whatsoever.

Then, let's think carefully about the principles that guide us in deciding what we can or cannot enforce. Once that principle is specified, let's imagine how we would like it if that "gun" was pointed in our direction.

Yes, I'm being purposely vague at this time. I want people to think very honestly and candidly, without me influencing their train of thought. Take the principles to their logical conclusion and decide if that's where you really want to be.

When we speak of legislating the lives of others, we must tread very carefully.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 25, 2007, 05:30:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
A law requiring everyone to keep the Sabbath - even for unbelievers? That is what I am talking about. If one is legislated, what happens to freedom of conscience in a fallen world?

OK. Keep thinking about that.

Who is being legislated? Upon whose authority does such legislation rest?

Then see if those answers apply to the last 6 commandments.

This goes back to the original question. When we speak of binding aspects of the law, who is bound and who is doing the binding?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 25, 2007, 08:55:00 PM
You sly fox! I know where you are going with this. Forgive typos, am on an unfamiliar laptop ...

We cannot legislate the Sabbath and you know it, genius friend of mine. It would backfire on us in a New York second and is contrary to all that is God ... that is why I say it cannot happen. He will not have someone forced to serve Him. He wants it done willingly, not because of a law stipulating such. It is the law of liberty, not of bondage.

In my pea brain it comes down to this: we don't have a theocracy - we are in a dismal fallen state of affairs - but we do have the spiritually minded. God's people are bound to the first four absolutely because of HIM - and we are bound to the last six because of our love for brothers and sisters. It is simple. We cannot expect the UNspiritual persons around us to give a flip about the first four, especially not a holy day - THE holy day. It is foreign business to them.

Talk to me.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 25, 2007, 08:57:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Liane H:
That is why we need to hold onto the separation of church and state, but then again that is a liberal idea and we are suppose to be conservative, but as some of us we find ourselves on different place on different issues and more like a checkered mind in the way the world is, then we are with God's principles.  


It is the ideal for freedom - it holds no party affiliation.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 25, 2007, 09:11:00 PM
Luther's concept of the State as a necessary evil is perhaps apt here. It runs in parallel with the slightly different Anabaptist view, that the State is established by the will of God for the purpose of controlling the wicked, yet only the wicked themselves are to participate in the State. The church of God is completely separate from the State.
I think brother Arnold is correct in his implication that Adventist views of the State and its role need to be clarified. Adventists have largely accepted an American and Baptist view of separation of Church and State, wherein both are viewed as divinely established and essentially good, but separate. Do Luther or the Anabaptists have something to teach us about an inherent evil in the institution of the State itself?
If the State is inherently evil, but within the will of God nevertheless functions to limit the perpetration of evil by wicked men, then legislating the ten commandments would be a highly questionable act. Nevertheless, the Spirit of Prophecy clearly supported believers being actively involved in achieving Prohibition. Even further back in history, English Seventh Day Baptists have an old tradition of annually petitioning the monarch to make the ten commandments the law of the land.
Thomas

quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
It is the ideal for freedom - it holds no party affiliation.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 26, 2007, 08:37:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
He will not have someone forced to serve Him. He wants it done willingly, not because of a law stipulating such. It is the law of liberty, not of bondage.

Does this hold true for the last 6 commandments?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 26, 2007, 08:42:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
God's people are bound to the first four absolutely because of HIM - and we are bound to the last six because of our love for brothers and sisters.

Think about this for a moment. What power or authority makes the law binding to me? I see 3 options:

  1. God, who gave the commands.
  2. Me, who received the commands.
  3. God/people, who are the "target" of the commands.

Which of these 3 determines whether or not a law is binding?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

[This message has been edited by asygo (edited 06-26-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 26, 2007, 08:58:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:
legislating the ten commandments would be a highly questionable act. Nevertheless, the Spirit of Prophecy clearly supported believers being actively involved in achieving Prohibition.

Upon whose authority do the 10C rest? Upon whose authority does the US Constitution rest?

The answers should clarify things a bit, I think.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 26, 2007, 09:58:00 AM
   :o Gotta hit the books and think! Gotta figure in the great controversy theme ... my good men, you have  me reeling in the deepest waters of thought ...    ;D S

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-26-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 26, 2007, 10:09:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
OK. Keep thinking about that.

Who is being legislated? Upon whose authority does such legislation rest?

Then see if those answers apply to the last 6 commandments.

This goes back to the original question. When we speak of binding aspects of the law, who is bound and who is doing the binding?


God and God - to the first two questions.

God's people are bound and He is the binder. God would have it that ALL men should be saved - thus binding all the people He possibly can to His will. "If ye love Me, keep My commandments."

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 26, 2007, 01:08:00 PM
We cannot, through freedom of conscience, legislate worship - the "first four" - Babylon will do that through a spurious command that will persecute the saints. The seventh day Sabbath will stand as the very test to define those "of God" and those who are not. To legislate such would require a force of the will and that is contrary to the nature of God.

And we cannot throw a moral obligatory blanket over the entire ten precepts as they are distinctly separate in duties to God (not legislated) and the duty to man - (legislated). God does not force worship, but man will before the Second Coming.

The secular mind does not profess to be governed by the commandments of God, especially through the "first four." They will, however, agree that most, if not all, of the "last six" are a guard against complete lawlessness. They are "moral" in their minds and good for society.

On those points Thomas brought up against prohibition, etc., it is our duty to assist society with our involvement ... we must do more of it.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 26, 2007, 05:08:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
God and God - to the first two questions.

That was in answer to "Who is being legislated? Upon whose authority does such legislation rest?"

Don't you mean "people and God"? Surely you don't mean to say that God is being legislated.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 26, 2007, 08:05:00 PM
Sybil has brought up the issue of the distinction between the first four and the last six commandments a number of times and perhaps others have as well. Although her summary is correct and clear, I shall recapitulate it here with some supporting arguments.
I and others have pointed out, through several examples, why there are issues in the first section of the law that refer to human relations and human liberty and need to be taken into account in legislation. The result is a conundrum of issues that fail of resolution. Any reasonably intelligent person can create havoc. Where real genius lies is in the courage and insight to cut the Gordian knot, not sit and unravel it.
The Spirit of Prophecy, the real genius, makes the distinction between the first table and the second table of the Decalogue as the distinction between duty to God and duty to humankind, the latter of which is subject to human legislation and the former not. That should be enough for me, just as it is enough that the Spirit of Prophecy makes the dual-distinction between the ceremonial law and the moral law, despite my capacity to multiply categories and cloud the issue.
Thus we have, defined by the Spirit of Prophecy, ceremonial law, which is not binding after Christ, and the moral law, which is binding. We have within the moral law, again defined by the Spirit of Prophecy, the first table of duties to God, which not humanly legislable, and the second table of duties to humankind, which is humanly legislable. There may be areas of difficulty in this, as we have pointed out, but in theory the distinction is clear.
Brother Arnold brings up the very valid issue of human authority in human legislation. Who has the right to bind whom? We can easily tie another Gordian knot here as well. Setting the church aside for the moment, the answer seen by most commentators of Genesis 9 is that under the covenant of Noah, which is binding on all people, humans living in societies have the divinely given duty to legislate and enforce laws to maintain order and safety. This interpretation implies 1) the divine sanction of human legislation and 2) the right and duty of humans to legislate order and safety on the basis of their own reason and perceived needs. As I see it, this interpretation of the covenant of Noah demolishes the Lutheran and Anabaptist concept of the State as evil, but does not conflict with the American Baptist, Adventist, et al. concept of separation of Church and State.
In sum the State has the right and duty to legislate moral laws that further and maintain order and safety, but not the establishment of religion. The establishment of religion is under the jurisdiction of the Church and not the State.

quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
We cannot, through freedom of conscience, legislate worship - the "first four" - Babylon will do that through a spurious command that will persecute the saints. The seventh day Sabbath will stand as the very test to define those "of God" and those who are not. To legislate such would require a force of the will and that is contrary to the nature of God.

And we cannot throw a moral obligatory blanket over the entire ten precepts as they are distinctly separate in duties to God (not legislated) and the duty to man - (legislated). God does not force worship, but man will before the Second Coming.

The secular mind does not profess to be governed by the commandments of God, especially through the "first four." They will, however, agree that most, if not all, of the "last six" are a guard against complete lawlessness. They are "moral" in their minds and good for society.

On those points Thomas brought up against prohibition, etc., it is our duty to assist society with our involvement ... we must do more of it.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 27, 2007, 12:00:00 AM
Not that I have definitive answers, but let me lay out a bit more clearly where my head is at right now.

The topic - Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law - has a lot of facets. But the fundamental facet to me is the authority of the one giving the law. Settling that will go a long way toward how binding it is, and who is bound by it. This is true for secular laws as well as religious laws.

The Mosaic law, as has been already discussed, can be categorized in various ways. But I think we all agree that the 10C is at the summit. So I'll start there.

The authority of the 10C comes from the fact that they were given by God. God is the one who requires obedience to them. Regardless of what one does or does not believe, the 10C must be obeyed because that's God's will. I hope we all agree so far.

Roughly speaking, the first 4 address our duty to God, and the last 6 address our duty to man. But note that even with this distinction, the fact remains that each and every one of those commandments must be obeyed because God said so. The law is binding, not because of the "target" of the law (God or man), but because the Creator gave the law.

Because God is Spirit, His law is spiritual in nature and must be obeyed in spirit. That means that true obedience, the kind God requires, must be done on the level of our thoughts and feelings - character. Mere physicial compliance is not sufficient. But, when it is in our hearts to obey God and we make efforts to obey, He makes up for our unavoidable deficiences in physical compliance. (See FW 50 and 3SM 196.) IOW, our motives are more important than our actions when it comes to obeying God's law.

You can see this when analyzing the 10th commandment. Yes, it is in the "duty to man" section. Yet, obedience or disobedience to the command is purely on the level of thoughts and feelings; there are no actions involved.

So, when it is suggested that the last 6 can be legislated by man, it tells me that the details have not been thorougly considered. (There are two sayings that are very useful in computer programming: 1) The devil is in the details, and 2) take care of the molehills and the mountains will take care of themselves.) Because of man's inherent inability to read the heart, the 10th commandment can never be legislated by man. More generally, man cannot judge if another has met the standard of God's law - obedience at the level of thoughts and feelings.

But does that mean that man cannot legislate others' behavior? No, it does not. What it does mean is that man cannot require compliance to God's law. Let me clarify that.

God's law says, "Thou shalt not kill." Jesus explained that the commandment encompasses our thoughts. Therefore, hating another breaks that commandment.

We cannot make any laws about hating because we're not equipped to see the evidence. But we can make laws about ending another's life.

But here's the crucial point. Upon whose authority can we legilate against killing? Because we are men, the only authority we have is that of man. IOW, we can tell other people to abstain from killing because WE do not want killing. It is very important to understand that human laws can only be based on human authority.

We cannot make a law against killing with the justification that God does not want killing. It is beyond our authority to make such a law because it is beyond our ability to judge obedience or disobedience to God's standard - the character.

The laws of the land can reflect aspects of God's law, but we should never imagine that we are enforcing God's law. Humans can only create and enforce laws based on human authority and will. Once we get on the path of "we must make this law because God says so in the Bible" we have gone where we have no right to be.

Now, let's look at the Sabbath. True, it is about worship. As such, it is fundamentally a spiritual law. And from that angle, man can never legislate it. Only God knows who is or is not worshipping Him in spirit and in truth.

But from a civil point of view, we can protect the rights of the manservant, maidservant, etc. The 4th commandment says they have the right to rest on that day, and we can - we must - protect that right.

Can we legislate it based on God's command? No. We legislate it because it is the will of the people. If the people agree that it is good to protect the right to worship according to one's conscience, then appropriate laws can be passed to reflect that. And I believe that anyone who is a true Christian will agree to protect the freedom of conscience.

(Note: Every commandment, except the 10th, has a physical manifestation of obedience or disobedience that can be legislated by man.)

What if the majority of the people don't want it? Then we can't have it. Regardless of what God wants, human laws can only be derived from human will. And if we want to change that situation, the solution is to work for the conversion of souls so that they will submit their wills to God's.

So when we talk about which laws are binding, we have to consider who gave the law. The 10C were given by God, and unless He changes His mind, they are binding. The US Constitution was given by man, and it is only binding until other men change it (think Prohibition).

I don't know if that clarifies things enough, but my mind is starting to shut down now.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 27, 2007, 04:53:00 AM
Actually, Brother Arnold, I think that you have brought some clarity here, clarity of an important kind. While the moral aspects of the ten commandments may guide human legislators, the secular state does not have the right to legislate divine law, only human law. I don't think that has been brought foreward with any clarity before your post. It is an important issue.

What do we do with the binding character of divine law, then? If the State has no part in it, then is it not left to the individual, the family, the Church? All of those media have the possibility of enforcing divine law. The individual does so through self-government and personal devotions, the family through family worship and family rules, and the Church through Church discipline.

We need to determine clearly what moral issues are defined by the Bible and how they may be best implemented within the State, Church, family and individual life.

Thomas

quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
Not that I have definitive answers, but let me lay out a bit more clearly where my head is at right now.

But does that mean that man cannot legislate others' behavior? No, it does not. What it does mean is that man cannot require compliance to God's law. Let me clarify that.

But here's the crucial point. Upon whose authority can we legilate against killing? Because we are men, the only authority we have is that of man. IOW, we can tell other people to abstain from killing because WE do not want killing. It is very important to understand that human laws can only be based on human authority.

The laws of the land can reflect aspects of God's law, but we should never imagine that we are enforcing God's law. Humans can only create and enforce laws based on human authority and will. Once we get on the path of "we must make this law because God says so in the Bible" we have gone where we have no right to be.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 27, 2007, 08:55:00 AM
Men and women today can make any law at any time if they can get enough people to believe it and go through the process of turning a law into a law and that included the Ten Commandments.

As I have watched the process of as an example of Megan's law we can see the nature of people mixing emotions with logic and making a bad law.

Given enough circumstances in a situation we can see even in the United States the Ten Commandments and I mean all ten becoming law with the fourth being the centerpiece of the false Sabbath.

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 27, 2007, 09:08:00 AM
Excellent statements, my brothers. Good reasoning. I am glad to see the distinctions agreed upon.

Thomas - in church and at home for the first four - His people are bound to these as the secular minded cannot be bound to something they are yet to acknowledge and accept.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 27, 2007, 09:10:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
That was in answer to "Who is being legislated? Upon whose authority does such legislation rest?"

Don't you mean "people and God"? Surely you don't mean to say that God is being legislated.


Upon your clarification given above, you are correct.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 27, 2007, 09:43:00 AM
Sister Sybil:

You said:

"Thomas - in church and at home for the first four - His people are bound to these as the secular minded cannot be bound to something they are yet to acknowledge and accept."

One does not have to accept or even believe it, but if there are enough people to pass the Ten Commandments as law of the land they certainly can force people to do it, but cannot force the heart to believe it.

Good example is Baal? Those in charge can force people to bow down or accept it by mouth and deed. Daniel is a good example of those that would not, but many would just to avoid suffering the consequences of not obeying the laws.

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 27, 2007, 10:13:00 AM
Oh, yes, Liane - and we will have that example before all is over on this earth. I was speaking of the difference between the spiritually minded and those who are not. God's way does not include force.

Regarding legislating thoughts, earlier in this thread motive was brought up as an indicator relative to one's intentions. It appears to be the closest possible element that could bear sway regarding the tenth commandment as well as others it encompasses. What say ye?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 27, 2007, 12:02:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:
What do we do with the binding character of divine law, then? If the State has no part in it, then is it not left to the individual, the family, the Church? All of those media have the possibility of enforcing divine law. The individual does so through self-government and personal devotions, the family through family worship and family rules, and the Church through Church discipline.

We need to determine clearly what moral issues are defined by the Bible and how they may be best implemented within the State, Church, family and individual life.


I do believe that the State has no direct part in enforcing God's law. A Republic/Democracy, as an institution, is amoral. Its morality is derived solely from its citizens' morality. And even then, the State has no business judging morality. And since obedience to God's law is a matter of morality, the State cannot enforce it in any way that comes close to the way God intends.

Now, we have church, family, and individual forms of government. We might also add employer to that list.

Again, if we are considering enforcing God's law in those contexts, we must consider the method for gathering and evaluating the appropriate evidence. But if you look carefully, you will find that they are all in the same boat as the State - none can read the heart. Even the individual, though it is the most likely form of government to know the heart, is prone to be self-deceived. So, with the possible exception of self-government, none of these can enforce divine law.

However, there is an important distinction between these forms of government and a Republic/Democracy. The morality of these institutions is not based solely on its subjects. Except for the individual whose ruler is its lone subject, these forms of government can, and often do, impose external standards of morality upon its subjects.

Let's consider the employer first, since that's the easiest. If one chooses an employer that is religious (such as a denominational institution), then it is likely that the employer's morality will influence the job description. If your employer does not want stealing, then you will be bound to abstain from it. But you can always choose another employer if you wish.

Next comes the church. Ideally, the church imposes the morality that it learns from God as described in the Bible. If one disregards the church's interpretation of God's law, then he is liable to be disciplined by the church. As with the previous case, you can change churches if you wish.

The family, OTOH, cannot be changed. You have what you get, until you are able to leave and start your own family. This is the closest one we have to what Israel had at first. The father fills the role of Moses as the human leader who is, ideally, being led by God. The subjects - wife and children - are to respect and obey the human leader as the representative of God.

But the father, like Moses, is human and cannot read the hearts. Though he can enact laws that enforce physical compliance to God's law, He cannot judge spiritual conformity using only his natural abilities. To have any insight on true obedience to God's law, he must rely on divine revelation.

Here's something that many misunderstand. The father's primary job is not to teach his subjects to mindlessly comply with his demands. That's tyranny, totally unlike God's ways. The father's primary job is to establish an environment conducive to leading the subjects to submit themselves to God's direct leading. If he accomplishes that, he has done his job well. (In this aspect, the church has much the same job.)

That leads to the only form of government that has any shot at achieving true conformity to God's law - the individual. If one wants to obey God's law, God provides sufficient grace to do it. But the experience is between him and God. And in the end, the final arbiter of whether or not one has obeyed is God, not the individual. But it is within the individual's power, and only within the individual, to willingly submit himself to God's benevolent rule. And that is the only kind of obedience that God accepts.

So the way I see it, moral issues can only be truly implemented on the individual level. Other forms of government can and must enact laws in order to safeguard the individual's freedom to submit himself to God, but that is the extent of their jurisdiction. To go beyond the evaluation and reward/punishment of the "outward appearance" and try to legislate morality is to overreach their authority, and is an attempt to do that which they are inherently incapable of doing.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

[This message has been edited by asygo (edited 06-27-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 27, 2007, 01:26:00 PM
Fabulous summation on home, family and church.  All ten, but especially the first four belong in this area. It is right on in my estimation of things; however, I cannot get past your statement on governments not legislating any part of the last six commandments.

What do we do about killing, abuse of parents, stealing, adultry, lying and the root of all sin, coveting - the silent sin of the heart?

Based upon your beautiful explanation given immediately above, as Christians in home and church we can apply every single commandment to the law of our lives and whatever the current civil governments decide is necessary to legislate, that goes along with God's moral law, and is the will of the people through their voting voices, then we can adhere to them in good conscience. Is that what you are saying?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 27, 2007, 01:58:00 PM
In reviewing the last several pages, it seems Thomas did rediscover an important aspect to this discussion: distinctions between divine law and human law.

When speaking to the distinctions between the two tables, this has always, always been the silent assumption on my part and have been unable to get past it. Jesus makes the distinction and so does the SOP. Purely speaking, Arnold is correct in saying the state cannot legislate divine law - only human law. However!!!!!!!!! The second table, the "last six" are laws dealing with human to human boundaries. They just so happen to also be divine law. The concepts are there - they are complete, lacking nothing. A good moral code. Governments (not dictatorships) have established grand social orders based upon these codes and have done quite well. We want laws that will keep the evil in us from harming our brothers and sisters and vice versa. Therefore, adaptations from the divine law to bring about social order through civil governments is where we are. See such an adaptation in SDA BC Vol. 1, page 616 to 619. The Code of Hammurabi - it is such an adaptation to the Mosaic Law of Statutes and Judgments - yet it even predates the giving of those statutes.

We want to know how to apply the binding statutes to our lives. Most of us can locate a witch - what do we do with her/him once we have located them? I have not heard of a witch burning in quite a while, much less a witch stoning - yet we are not to permit a witch to live.  What do we do? Do we accept the fact that there are witches all around us (spiritualism) and determine to keep ourselves and our children away from them because evil waxes on greater and greater levels in these last days and the government will not do anything about them? So we revert to the church law and the family law (Arnolds stated model which we did a fine job of defining in another topic) and be rulers unto ourselves by avoiding them? Or do we lobby for a return to the Salem days?

It is seemingly a monumental task bordering on the barbaric, of course, yet what do we do with some of these statutes?

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 06-27-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 27, 2007, 03:13:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
I cannot get past your statement on governments not legislating any part of the last six commandments.

Human governments cannot legislate the 10th commandment. I am well-nigh immovable on that point, unless somebody can convince me that man can somehow read the heart accurately. Porcine flight is closer to reality.

As for the other commandments, human governments can legislate those, but they cannot justify such laws using God or the Bible. To do so would be using the apparatus of the state to enforce the will of God - an impossibility that results in disaster whenever attempted.

If you want to legislate certain aspects of the 10C, and I'm sure many of us do, then you have to do it based on YOUR desires, not God's. Instead of saying, "We should outlaw killing because God doesn't like killing," you should say, "We should outlaw killing because WE don't like killing." Keep the divine will out of it and it should be fine. Then your biggest problem would be getting enough people to see it your way.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 27, 2007, 03:14:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
Arnolds stated model which we did a fine job of defining in another topic

Which topic is that?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 27, 2007, 04:30:00 PM
Ordination, women elders, and the order in the church. I love those studies.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on June 27, 2007, 04:41:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
Human governments cannot legislate the 10th commandment. I am well-nigh immovable on that point, unless somebody can convince me that man can somehow read the heart accurately. Porcine flight is closer to reality.

As for the other commandments, human governments can legislate those, but they cannot justify such laws using God or the Bible. To do so would be using the apparatus of the state to enforce the will of God - an impossibility that results in disaster whenever attempted.

If you want to legislate certain aspects of the 10C, and I'm sure many of us do, then you have to do it based on YOUR desires, not God's. Instead of saying, "We should outlaw killing because God doesn't like killing," you should say, "We should outlaw killing because WE don't like killing." Keep the divine will out of it and it should be fine. Then your biggest problem would be getting enough people to see it your way.



We have, a few pages back, discussed the impossibility of legislating the tenth commandment - it quite possibly goes to motive in the punishment phase of a "wrong"
where mercy or added sentence could be considered. I would never agrue that the 10th could be legislated. Unfortunately it has been batched in with the last six when reference is being made to the conversation. I apologize for doing so because I am remembering the specificity, fine detail we mulled through when dealing with other topics.

We are one in thought, but probably not exact words when it comes to the principles involved in who creates what laws. The porcupines can rest at ease - there is peace in this discussion  ;D xox S

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 27, 2007, 05:47:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
The second table, the "last six" are laws dealing with human to human boundaries.

Then we should make human to human laws - laws made by humans, to be obeyed by humans, required by humans, judged by humans, enforced by humans....

But keep in mind that human to human relationships also exist in the 4th commandment. Also, the 10th is between the individual and God, no one else.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 27, 2007, 08:24:00 PM
Can one tell me if they can legislate the fifth one? How does one go about to make people honor their parents?

Let say a father who committed incest or abuse their children that can be done in so many ways that cannot be seen by the public.

You know our homes are suppose to be our private place and the public and the government is not to interfere what goes on behind closed doors and on our property, though we are seeing much of it taking place over and over again.

Was this touched upon before as I have not seen it?    

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 27, 2007, 08:59:00 PM
In reading through these posts, one feature arises from Brother Arnold's messages that is very important. Human institutions can legislate outward behaviour, but not heart motives.

There are countries that attempt to legislate divine law, mostly Islamic. In Islam every action is defined in terms of 1) motive expressed in the heart and 2) outward action. For example, before a Muslim begins to pray, he silently makes an expression of his motivation "I lay two protrations of obligatory morning prayer in sacrifice to Allah the Most High". Then he performs the act of prayer. All Muslims consider that both are necessary for the act to be valid. But in countries where Islamic law is legislated, it is only the outward form of an Islamic act that is considered. Correspondingly, law refers to public acts and leaves private acts to the discretion of the individual. This only to show that State attempts to legislate divine law must and do fall back on the same distinction that Brother Arnold has so wisely defined. I think we all agree, however, that such attempts to legislate divine law are illegitimate on the part of the State, whether they are Islamic or Christian or the expression of any other religious tradition.

I turn to focus on an issue that Sister Sybil and I believe Sister Liane brought up or at least implied, and that is the implementation of human laws in regard to human relations (that may reflect divine laws especially in commandments six to nine and elsewhere).

Agreeing that human societies may legislate human laws (and as Brother arnold points out, these are human laws even when they correspond to divine statutes in the Bible), the act of legislation implies implementation, and implementation implies the right and duty of punishing the offender. In the USA, punishment seems to be mostly in the realms of fines, community service, incarceration, and death.

Both in legislation and punishment, the Bible believer probably has the duty to use her influence for bringing human laws into as close agreement with divine law as is possible for human laws. The first concern is to prevent clashes, as for example human laws requiring sacrifice to idols, which was the big issue between early Christians and the Roman state. The second concern is to close the gap in values.

Incarceration is not a Biblically-evidenced form of punishment. The death sentence is. Fines and restitution are also found in the Bible. In addition, the Bible accepts physical mutilation as punishment.

Just as we cannot, according to Brother Arnold and I believe he is correct, legislate divine law, we cannot legislate divine punishment. Punishment must be within the bounds of human authority.

I am going to express my opinion on punishment just as an illustration that there will arise disagreement among humans (and Adventists!) on the matter. I believe fines are valid, and that is in common with the Bible and the State. I believe, along with the Bible, that restitution is important. In this area, the State falls down and needs improvement. The victim of a crime often becomes the victim of the court as well. I believe that death and mutilation are valid forms of punishment under divine law, but not under human law. In this I disagree with the State (USA) which practices the death sentence, and agree with the State in its refraining from physical mutilation. I am not sure about incarceration, but I believe that the State has the right to enact human punishment that is different from the divine punishment noted in the Bible, as Brother Arnold's principle implies.

Now someone here may argue that the State has the right to inflict the death sentence, because the death sentence is Biblical. My response would rest on Brother Arnold's principle of human law, human punishment and human enforcement as being distinct from divine law, even in the matter of murder, false witness, etc. The argument must be that appeal to divine law in regard to punishment is not valid for human laws. If the death sentence is a valid act of the State, it must be so on the basis of other arguments than Biblicity. If human punishment must follow the model of divine punishment, thus accepting the death sentence, then it must do so, at the minimum, consistently. To be consistent would mean that the State must relinquish incarceration, which is not Biblically-sound punishment, and begin to implement physical mutilation. You can't have it both ways.

Furthermore, the State should then implement the death sentence for crimes in the Bible that demand the death sentence, such as cursing one's mother. In fact, the Spirit of Prophecy predicts the legislation of the death sentence for Sunday-breaking.

In sum, in my opinion, human punishment that involved fines and restitution would be valid and reflect divine principles as well. In addition, human punishment that included community service and incarceration is extra-Biblical, but in my view within the bounds of human authority.

How do we resolve disagreement on what human punishment is within the bounds of human authority? In practice, we do so democratically. It would be my duty, therefore, in the USA, to lobby for legislation against the death sentence and for the improvement of restitution.

Actually, in practice, considering the forecast, we should be lobbying not only against the legislation of Sunday laws, but against the death sentence as well. The prediction is that the two go hand in hand.

quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
Then we should make human to human laws - laws made by humans, to be obeyed by humans, required by humans, judged by humans, enforced by humans....

But keep in mind that human to human relationships also exist in the 4th commandment. Also, the 10th is between the individual and God, no one else.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 28, 2007, 12:08:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:
Just as we cannot, according to Brother Arnold and I believe he is correct, legislate divine law, we cannot legislate divine punishment. Punishment must be within the bounds of human authority.

Bro Thomas,

Though I have not thought through the punishment aspect as much as the legislation aspect, the argument seems reasonable. At this point, I agree with your basic thrust.

I was thinking about incarceration, and I remembered one instance. When they caught the guy picking up sticks on the Sabbath, they put him in "jail" until they received the divine order to mete out divine punishment.

Of course, in a government that cannot promote one deity over another, that won't work. While the minority is protected from undue restraint or coercion, the majority's will is irrelevant. But that protection is currently eroding, and will someday completely disappear. In the meantime, we must protect it in every way possible.

That's why I always view legislation of moral issues with a wary eye. Even if the idea being promoted is correct, it makes it easier for the majority to trample upon the minority. And if we do not slow it down, the day when we are the minority being trampled underfoot will come that much sooner.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 28, 2007, 12:46:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Liane H:
Can one tell me if they can legislate the fifth one? How does one go about to make people honor their parents?

It is not humanly possible to force one to positively honor his parents. However, it is possible for men to forbid practices that may be construed as dishonorable, and/or require practices that my be construed as honorable.

In the Bible, cursing one's mother was a capital offense.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 28, 2007, 01:25:00 PM
If we do not execute the cold blooded killer and do not incarcerate him, and he is poor, what shall we do after he kills four or five kids?

And if we do not legislate in areas of morality, then we would not have laws dealing with murder, since it is a moral law.

Somewhere we seem to have gotten off track and even those who do not read a Bible could see a difficulty here.

I think we may need to become just a little more practical and stay with the Bible as we look for answers to our questions.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 28, 2007, 02:16:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
And if we do not legislate in areas of morality, then we would not have laws dealing with murder, since it is a moral law.

Indeed, it is a moral law. And we humans cannot legislate it as such.

But still, we humans don't like getting killed. So, we legislate it amorally. "Killing is forbidden because we humans don't like it." Keep morals and God out of it, and we don't get into the unenviable position of sitting in God's seat.

I know, it seems like a very fine technicality, but it's the only way I've figured out so far to keep myself from getting killed AND uphold God's standard of freedom of conscience. It might not seem very practical right now, but the time it buys will seem well worth it when we are being hunted down like animals because we do not conform with the majority's idea of what constitutes morality.

Consider carefully what kind of gun you wield, because it might be pointed at you someday.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

[This message has been edited by asygo (edited 06-28-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 28, 2007, 03:14:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
I think we may need to become just a little more practical and stay with the Bible as we look for answers to our questions.

As I see it, considerations of human legislature are really off-topic. When we speak of the binding aspects of the Mosaic law, we must necessarily keep thinking in terms of divine requirements, and not human enforcement.

But how we address divine requirements with human government is a very important topic. As I previously wrote, it has implications from the international level all the way down to the individual level. I'm seriously considering making that the topic for my upcoming sermon on 7/14. We'll see.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 28, 2007, 09:09:00 PM
After reading Brother Arnold's letters, I think I have a much clearer understanding of the relationship between Biblical moral law and the role of the State.
The Rabbinical understanding of the Noachian covenant, that Gentile societies have the obligation to establish order and justice, without reference to the ceremonial or moral law, begins to make sense here. That is an issue of government, and, given Brother Arnold's premises, it is off-topic to discuss it as we focus on the binding aspects of Mosaic law, that is, moral law.
Nevertheless, as Brother Richard points out, we do live under government and we do participate in its system of maintaining justice and order. Brother Arnold's warning that moral law must not be established by secular government is very apt. A law legislated against murder is not a moral law and has nothing to do with the Biblical statutes.
There is another issue, especially for those living in the USA. Genesis 10:5 establishes the division of Gentile lands. You people are living on American Indian land and you have no right to do so. The US government is an illegal system. A perfect parallel would be twenty or thirty illegal immigrants in London getting together in Hyde Park and voting among themselves to set up a State in Great Britain. It wouldn't become legal no matter how many generations they claimed to maintain it. Unless you are a descendant of American Indians, you are a guest in a foreign country, whether you were born there or not, and as a guest, to set up a government system and begin to legislate laws is behaving badly at the least and criminal at the worst. The US government is just a foreign workers union with no legal basis. People who don't rempent of supporting it will have to meet it in the judgement under accusations of accessory to the crimes of stealing and murder. It's going to be a surprise for some.
Under the principles of Noachian covenant, Native American societies have the obligation to establish systems to maintain order and justice. Such systems were in place when the illegal immigrants first arrived. They should be revamped to take over the governing of the whole country, and non-members either given temporary residence permits and gradually assimilated or then deported.
One final thing. After a ten-year period of grace, the speaking of English should be outlawed. There are 300 native languages to choose from in North America, and since the time of the tower of Babel it has been the express will of God that a diversity of languages be used. The fostering of one world language that has arisen in the last two decades is the same kind of rebellion against God that the tower of Babel represented.
Is Brother Arnold right about government being off topic in this thread? You bet your bottom button he is.


quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
As I see it, considerations of human legislature are really off-topic. When we speak of the binding aspects of the Mosaic law, we must necessarily keep thinking in terms of divine requirements, and not human enforcement.

But how we address divine requirements with human government is a very important topic. As I previously wrote, it has implications from the international level all the way down to the individual level. I'm seriously considering making that the topic for my upcoming sermon on 7/14. We'll see.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 28, 2007, 09:22:00 PM
There only one standard of righteousness and it is the ten commandments, God's law.
All societies have accepted a portion of God's law to live by.  Because one does not wish to acknowledge God, does not do away with His law. It is the law of our being even if we reject it.

I thought we did a good job  of showing how the last commandment is utilized in establishing degrees of murder. I don't think anyone is suggesting that we can know the heart man,  but an act is pre-meditated, then at times it can be seen to be such. It is good that there is a difference in the penalties for murder, just as there was in the Mosaic Law.

It is good that we can learn from the Bible how we ought to act and how we ought to deal with such things. It is the only source of truth in matters of morals.

What we see today are societies that have rejected Bible truth and by their laws have rejected Bible morality. It is good to have laws against murder, theft, adultery, homosexuality, parental abuse, and perjury.
Because there are those who hate God and His laws is no reason to allow them to do as they please when it comes to these areas of life. God would have society protected from immorality by law. It is not the church that is to legislate or punish,  but the people are to elect those who will enact moral laws.

This is seldom the case today. Babylon has failed and thus society reflects this fallen condition. It will only get worse, but there are many who are searching for answers to this problem of morality.

The Mosaic Law gives us a pattern that God established and as we study this pattern we can learn much. The morality has not changed, but the implementation of the law has.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 28, 2007, 09:41:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:
You people are living on American Indian land and you have no right to do so. The US government is an illegal system.

Bro Thomas,

That's some heavy-duty stuff you wrote there. And I thought I was getting radical by thinking that true Christians might have to establish a new state if that is what is needed to be able to keep God's law, including the statutes & judgments. It seems that I have only scratched the surface.  ;)

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 29, 2007, 12:28:00 AM
If I understand Brother Richard correctly, he affirms the principles of the Rabbinical concept of the covenant of Noah, that the Gentile nations have the right and duty to establish government to maintain justice and order. At the same time, with the influence of Babylon, such governments are very imperfect, but it is good that murder, stealing and such things are curtailed to some extent by government.
If I understand Brother Arnold correctly, he is being nice to me despite my "radical" views!
But after the digression, I think we can get some clarity on the original subject from the Spirit of Prophecy. Ellen White calls the ten commandments the moral law which is still binding. She also notes that there is ceremonial law, which is not binding after Christ.
I think the original question touched on what laws in the Books of Moses outside the ten commandments were still binding. The ceremonial laws are not. Are there universally binding moral laws outside the ten commandments? In the excel file Brother Jim and Sister Sybil identified some laws as non-ceremonial, labeling them "health" or "civil" etc.
There is a fine passage in Patriarchs and Prophets that probably gives the best explanation of the ten commandments to be found anywhere. It is followed by this statement:
    "The minds of the people, blinded and debased by slavery and heathenism, were not prepared to appreciate fully the far-reaching principles of God's ten precepts. That the obligations of the Decalogue might be more fully understood and enforced, additional precepts were given, illustrating and applying the principles of the Ten Commandments. These laws were called judgments, both because they were framed in infinite wisdom and equity and because the magistrates were to give judgment according to them. Unlike the Ten Commandments, they were delivered privately to Moses, who was to communicate them to the people."  {PP 310.1}

That says to me that all moral law is encompased in the ten commandments and there is nothing binding that is not stated or implied there. However, because of human weakness, we are not always able to see our duty with clarity. Therefore, prophetic judgements are given in mercy to help us understand what the ten commandments require. These judgements are not universally binding laws in themselves, but particular applications of the ten commandments for people of that time, to help them understand how the law applied to them. I draw the conclusion that they are not binding on us as such, since we live under different conditions, but they are enlightening and help us to apply the ten commandments to our situation.
We can go back to my earthy example, the carrying of a trowel to bury excrements. I think it is valid to see this as a health and hygiene law as well as a law of purity. The text relates to respect for God in keeping the camp clean. It therefore focuses on two human responsibilities: to take care of filthy substances in view of hygiene and health, and to keep the places of living and worship appropriately clean in view of the divine presence. But the specific law does not apply to us today. What applies are the commandments to recognize God's holiness and not to kill, that is, not to diminish health and hygiene. The Mosaic law in enlightening, since it reveals a specific area of importance in keeping these two commandments in the Decalogue. We are still required to remove excrements in an appropriate way, out of regard for health and respect for God.
But the Mosaic "judgements" in and of themselves do not appear to be, in Ellen White's understanding, specifically binding upon us today.
The principle can be seen in the way Ellen White writes about the blue fringes as well. She states that modest dress that reminds us that we are commandment-keepers is the blue fringe for us today. The law of the blue fringe in itself is not binding, but it does enlighten us on how to keep the commandments today in a relevant rather than merely formal way.
I feel ready to give an answer to the question raised at the beginning of this thread. The moral law, which is summed up in the Decalogue, is universally binding upon all people. The ceremonial law is no longer binding since the death of Christ, but is a lesson-book for us to enlighten us about his life, death and priestly ministry. The other judgements were temporary and specific to the Israel of the time, but are enlightening as illustrations of how the ten commandments were applied under specific conditions, and draw our attention to areas that may be of concern to us today. The ten commandments are, in their statements and implications, the expression of the moral law which is still binding today on humankind as creatures of God.
If I may go back to my earlier note on the ten-commandments-plus principle, the "plus" is what Ellen White calls "judgements". They are specific applications of the ten commandments in view of the special situation of a given time. Ellen White, for example, notes that the use of tobacco is an infringement against the first commandment. She also notes that following fashion in dress is an infringement against the first commandment. It appears to me that the specific standards mentioned in the SDA Fundamentals are all applications of the ten commandments for our time.
My conclusion is that the SDA Fundamentals do a very good job in summarizing the moral law for us today in the light of the Books of Moses.


quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
Bro Thomas,

That's some heavy-duty stuff you wrote there. And I thought I was getting radical by thinking that true Christians might have to establish a new state if that is what is needed to be able to keep God's law, including the statutes & judgments. It seems that I have only scratched the surface.   ;)


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 29, 2007, 06:38:00 AM
This may seem very simplistic with you all but maybe these verses can also give some insight.

Deuteronomy:

4:13   And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.  
4:14   And the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.  

Notice the difference in these two verses. The first one: God declared unto YOU His covenant, which He commanded YOU to perform.

In the next verse: The Lord Commanded ME to teach YOU statutes and judgments.

One was given directly from God by Moses to the people and the other one was given by God to and through Moses to teach the people.

Daniel makes this same point:

9:11   Yea, all Israel have transgressed THY LAW, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the LAW OF MOSES the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.

When we come to understand the difference of the Ten Commandments written in stone and the Law of Moses written on skin we see a difference in the eternal aspect of the Ten to the statutes and judgments which are temporal to this world.    

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on June 29, 2007, 06:46:00 AM
It is important to remember that everyone of the Ten can be broken within the heart of man though he may not openly offend them. They are just as guilty as those that commit the very act openly.

We can see the outwardly sins, but only God can see the inwardly character of sin in a person.

Because of the factor it is important for us to realize the importance of those thousand years that we will be with Jesus in heaven and learn the reasons of why many will not be there and why some will be.  

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on June 29, 2007, 11:50:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:
If I understand Brother Arnold correctly, he is being nice to me despite my "radical" views!

I have no problem with radical views, as long as they are correct.

It seems to me you're saying that the statutes and judgments are specific applications of the principles found in the 10C. The principles are binding today, but the specific application might not be applicable anymore. Therefore, we must discover the underlying principles, and apply them in the context we find ourselves in today. Essentially, the law is still binding, but the modern implementation might be different. Is that right?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on June 29, 2007, 08:57:00 PM
Brother Arnold,
You are reading me correctly. However, I'm not suggesting that we search for underlying principles in our own wisdom. I took the idea from the paragraph in Patriarchs and Prophets. The specific applications, "judgements" as Ellen White calls them, are prophetic revelations for the specific time and place. I am suggesting that the Spirit of Prophecy provides similar, relevant "judgements" today, clearly indicating how we should interpret the Mosaic statutes today. An example is Ellen White's "judgement" that the use of tobacco is an infringement on the first commandment.

Mind you, after having been raised on a continual, daily diet of the Spirit of Prophecy, I, like many on this forum no doubt, am likely to draw a conclusion from reading the Pentateuch that I think is based on my own human wisdom, but when I make a search in the Spirit of Prophecy, I find it there. Someone has said that originality consists in having a faulty memory, having forgotten where we read something. But it is the "judgement" of the Spirit of Prophecy that is relevant.
Let me give another example: the tithing system. The Mosaic tithing sytem is a system of three tithes that cannot be separated from the annual feasts. It is a part of the ceremonial law. The Spirit of Prophecy makes a "judgement" on this that does not follow the details of the Biblical tithing laws at all. Rather, it relates to returning a tenth of the income (not the increase of certain agricultural products). This is technically not a Biblical system. Rather, it is a "judgement" related to the commandment "thou shalt not steal" with echoes in the Mosaic tithing system. The Spirit of Prophecy "judgement" goes even further afield from the Mosaic law when it comes to the ribbon of blue. The Spirit of Prophecy "judgement" is simplicity, modesty and health-hygiene in dress.
A search of the Spirit of Prophecy on the word "circumcision" is very revealing in this regard as well.


quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
I have no problem with radical views, as long as they are correct.

It seems to me you're saying that the statutes and judgments are specific applications of the principles found in the 10C. The principles are binding today, but the specific application might not be applicable anymore. Therefore, we must discover the underlying principles, and apply them in the context we find ourselves in today. Essentially, the law is still binding, but the modern implementation might be different. Is that right?


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on July 01, 2007, 08:38:00 PM
Back to page 1 ... what is binding? What isn't?

Although the ceremonials were a fulfilled shadow, there are contained within them practical moral lessons we take from them.

We have stated time and again that the Ten Commandments are binding - the statutes explain in a very practical way the Ten Commandments. That has been stated and generally accepted; however, there has been shown some difficulty in realizing the importance of civil governments legislating commandments five through nine, leaving the tenth that cannot be legislated - we have about settled that.

The basic premise is that the civil governments, through freedom of conscience, have no hand in the first four commandments. They are thusly relegated to the individual and the church. So why, again, should the civil government not be involved with commandments five through nine? If they did not, lawlessness would abound. We need to work through this, Arnold, in order to be in agreement and carry on with the study.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 01, 2007, 08:57:00 PM
I should not speak for Arnold, but I understand him to have raised an important issue. Morality is defined by the ten commandments, but morality is an affair of conscience, and governments do not have the right to interfere in matters of conscience, unless they are theocracies. If we allow government to intrude on conscience, then we have lost the freedom to obey God.

This does not mean that government is not valid, and that it may not legislate on matters of murder, stealing, adultery and lying among other things.

There are two systems in the Bible. First, there is the Noachian covenant with all people, granting Gentile societies the right and obligation to legislate order and justice as written on the human heart. Completely separate from this is the order of the ten commandments, spoken in the singular, and expressing the moral obligations of every individual in personal obedience to God. These moral injunctions, known from creation, were incorporated into the law of the theocracy of Israel, but moral law must not be incorporated in a man-made state.

Thus, the citizen refrains from killing because his representatives in his elected government have legislated a law forbidding killing. But the follower of God refrains from killing because it is a moral principle stated in the ten commandments. When the citizen is a believer, he carries out the behaviour demanded by the state and by the Decalogue for two separate and distinct reasons. In many cases, however, the demanded behaviour will be the same.

This distinction does not in any way ignore the very true fact, established by the Spirit of Prophecy, that the first part of the moral law relates specifically to human relations with God and the second part specifically to human relation with each other.

It is easy to attribute to the State authority that it simply does not have, authority that it has sometimes forcefully and illicitly taken to itself. There is a movement today to focus on the ten commandments, but may SDAs recognize the dangers involved in mixing the ten commandments with public institutions. That has been the general consensus on this forum. Brother Arnold has made no point beyond that, insofar as I can see, and it is an important and consistent one, even if it may seem like hair-splitting.


quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
Back to page 1 ... what is binding? What isn't?

Although the ceremonials were a fulfilled shadow, there are contained within them practical moral lessons we take from them.

We have stated time and again that the Ten Commandments are binding - the statutes explain in a very practical way the Ten Commandments. That has been stated and generally accepted; however, there has been shown some difficulty in realizing the importance of civil governments legislating commandments five through nine, leaving the tenth that cannot be legislated - we have about settled that.

The basic premise is that the civil governments, through freedom of conscience, have no hand in the first four commandments. They are thusly relegated to the individual and the church. So why, again, should the civil government not be involved with commandments five through nine? If they did not, lawlessness would abound. We need to work through this, Arnold, in order to be in agreement and carry on with the study.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 01, 2007, 10:04:00 PM
The issue of the responsibility of the state and the Chrisitian is important. The separation between church and state is important. We need to understand the principles involved.

America "was" a Protestant nation. As such, she would not force the conscience in matters of conscience when it came to worship of God. Did she have the responsibility to legislate "moral" laws? And, if so, how was she to understand what moral meant?

In our desire to keep the state out of the first four commandments, we seem to have suggested that the state has no responsibility to legislate according to the only moral standard there is, commandments five through nine.

To say that the state must be blind to the laws of our being is contrary to God's desire that we not only have moral laws, but know that God is the one who gave them. Those who fight against God may do so, but they at least ought to know that God has given us a standard of righteousness. We are told that the law is for the lawbreakers. We are told that the government is there to punish the lawbreaker and to cause fear to come upon him that he might keep the law.

A society without laws based upon commandments five through nine would indeed be a very sorry society. America was blessed to have laws  based upon these commandments,  but as the church failed in her realm, society has reflected the church's failure in her laws. We now have laws that have rejected much of the law of
God and we see the results.

There is no difficulty in advocating for laws based upon commandments five through nine. Those who kill in cold blood need to know that they will die. They also need to know that they will die again after the thousand years. The first is the state's responsibility, the second is the church's responsibility. Is this a violation of conscience? Absolutely not. God never ever suggested that man be free to choose to kill. If a man says he is going to kill, then God would have the man arrested. This is not a violation of conscience. This is a specious argument that finds no basis in Scripture.

Even in matter of worship, including the day of worship, man is not given a free pass to violate God's law. If a Seventh-day Adventist breaks the Sabbath and refuses to cease to do so, after being labored with, he is to be removed from fellowship.  Freedom of conscience is not what many have made it to be. Freedom to do as one pleases is not found in the Bible. It is a modern concept, but actually it dates back to Cain when he thought he was free to do as he pleased. No, God does not want man to be free to kill, free to steal, or free to remain in the church when violating the test of felloswhip. Restraint is to be used to force people to refrain from some kinds of sin.

The state is to stay out of the first four commandments. But, the church is to remove from fellowship those who violate the first four. Yes, forced out of the church if they do not repent. Freedom is not as  broad as the world paints it. And sadly the church has followed after the world in allowing Sabbath breakers and adulterers to remain in the church even though unrepentant.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 02, 2007, 07:31:00 AM
I am not sure if there is a difference of semantics here, or a real difference of opinion.
I think that all agree that the secular government should make laws that refer to killing, stealing, false witness, and the maintenance of the family.
What the disagreement seems to hinge upon is the matter of conscience, which should be between the individual and God. Another question is to what extent the church may interfere in such issues.
Brother Richard's note suggests that the church and the state have a platform of the same authority, the democratic agreement of the constituents. He seems to see both institutions as having an area of moral authority. Brother Arnold's remarks seem to indicate a desire to preserve religious freedom by disallowing moral authority to the state (but not perhaps to the church, which is another area that needs to be defined).
It seems to me, Brother Richard, that if the state has the right to hand down a death sentence on the murderer on the basis of the Decalogue, then it has the right to hand down a sentence of death on the basis of the Decalogue.
Brother Arnold appears to want basically the same sanctions. The disagreement is not there. But he wants them to be purely human laws when legislated by the state, without reference to divine authority. I share that concern. The United States was never a Protestant nation. It was a nation that maintained that the State had no right to legislate an establishment of religion. Sweden, for example, was a Protestant nation. It had an established state church, the national Lutheran church. All citizens were registered in that church. I was myself when I went to Sweden to live. Perhaps it has changed now. But the state in the USA was separate from the church. It had no right to legislate an establishment of religion. The laws that it legislates against stealing, for example, are based on the common desire of atheists and Christians to live in safety and order. The same goes for the laws sanctioning murder. They are not, in the USA, based on the ten commandments or the moral responsibility to the Creator. They are based on the common values of the citizens as reflected in the actions taken by their representatives.
Actually, I would like to see a government based on the Decalogue, including all ten commandments to the extent that they can be enforced. But I don't see that happening without jeopardizing our freedom to keep the Sabbath on Sabbath. So at this point, I still favour Brother Arnold's position, if I understand it correctly.
The church is another matter, perhaps. When we join the church we vow to maintain its beliefs and standards to the best of our ability. Those standards have a moral basis, not mere a social one. If it comes to the attention of the church that we are not doing so, the church has the right and duty to discipline us. If we continue to rebel against the standards of the church, the church should disfellowship us. I think the church should attempt to take the moral foundation into consideration. It should show patience and lenience when the individual indicates the intention to live up to the standards of the church, but from weakness or other considerations fails to do so. It is only when the individual refuses to accept the moral basis that he should be disfellowshiped.
The State should work in another way altogether. It should not consider the moral side of the issue, but only the behaviour before the law. When a person is proven guilty of failure to keep the law, he should be punished according to the law. The judge should not fail to fine a reckless driver for speeding just because the man says he didn't intend to do it. Speeding should have the same consequences whether or not the speeder admits intention, that is, his moral involvement.
These are just thoughts. I do not really have a definite view here, but Brother Arnold's position makes more sense to me.
Either way, however, in a halfway decent world, both positions should have the same results in any given State.


quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
The issue of the responsibility of the state and the Chrisitian is important. The separation between church and state is important. We need to understand the principles involved.

America "was" a Protestant nation. As such, she would not force the conscience in matters of conscience when it came to worship of God. Did she have the responsibility to legislate "moral" laws? And, if so, how was she to understand what moral meant?

In our desire to keep the state out of the first four commandments, we seem to have suggested that the state has no responsibility to legislate according to the only moral standard there is, commandments five through nine.

To say that the state must be blind to the laws of our being is contrary to God's desire that we not only have moral laws, but know that God is the one who gave them. Those who fight against God may do so, but they at least ought to know that God has given us a standard of righteousness. We are told that the law is for the lawbreakers. We are told that the government is there to punish the lawbreaker and to cause fear to come upon him that he might keep the law.

A society without laws based upon commandments five through nine would indeed be a very sorry society. America was blessed to have laws  based upon these commandments,  but as the church failed in her realm, society has reflected the church's failure in her laws. We now have laws that have rejected much of the law of
God and we see the results.

There is no difficulty in advocating for laws based upon commandments five through nine. Those who kill in cold blood need to know that they will die. They also need to know that they will die again after the thousand years. The first is the state's responsibility, the second is the church's responsibility. Is this a violation of conscience? Absolutely not. God never ever suggested that man be free to choose to kill. If a man says he is going to kill, then God would have the man arrested. This is not a violation of conscience. This is a specious argument that finds no basis in Scripture.

Even in matter of worship, including the day of worship, man is not given a free pass to violate God's law. If a Seventh-day Adventist breaks the Sabbath and refuses to cease to do so, after being labored with, he is to be removed from fellowship.  Freedom of conscience is not what many have made it to be. Freedom to do as one pleases is not found in the Bible. It is a modern concept, but actually it dates back to Cain when he thought he was free to do as he pleased. No, God does not want man to be free to kill, free to steal, or free to remain in the church when violating the test of felloswhip. Restraint is to be used to force people to refrain from some kinds of sin.

The state is to stay out of the first four commandments. But, the church is to remove from fellowship those who violate the first four. Yes, forced out of the church if they do not repent. Freedom is not as  broad as the world paints it. And sadly the church has followed after the world in allowing Sabbath breakers and adulterers to remain in the church even though unrepentant.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 02, 2007, 12:38:00 PM
Brother Thomas, I respect your opinion as I do Brother Arnold's. Here we can look to the Bible and discuss matters without emotion and anger, looking to Christ for our wisdom. I know that we all want His understanding not our own.   :)  I appreciate this opportunity and look forward to our coming into agreement as much as possible. This is a very important subject.

Since the judgments and statutes that were not ceremonial are moral, and they were given to uphold the great moral standard, the ten commandments, we are on topic here as we try and sort out our personal responsibility, church responsibility, and state responsibility in regards to the law of God.

Semantics is indeed an issue in our discussion. We are not used to the words being used in this study, at least not from a Biblical point of view. Some of the words are not understood correctly as they are being used. One such phrase that I use is misunderstood I believe.  Brother Thomas says that the US was not a Protestant nation, but here he is wrong. I think in this case, Brother Thomas considers a Protestant nation to be a nation where there is not separation of church and state. Here I disagree. Because some have been called Protestant nations and have usurped their authority does not mean that a nation cannot be truly a Protestant nation. America was.

She is now giving up her Protestant heritage and beginning to speak as a dragon. A true Protestant nation would not legislate in matters of worship, but would protect liberty of conscience in this area. So, it is a misunderstanding of the correct definition of "Protestant" nation that has caused a problem for us.

Brother Thomas, I am not at my computer, so I cannot give you any help, but only can point you in the right direction. You will find that my understanding is not my own, but what I have learned in my past studies of the subject from the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. If you will take a few minutes, I have confidence that you shall find that America was indeed a Protestant nation in the truest since of the word. As long as she looked to God for her wisdom and strength she was great, but now that it is only a profession of faith, she is about to suffer great destruction. By earthquake, fire, war, disease, the winds of strife are being let loose. All because America has forsaken her God and her Protestant heritage.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on July 02, 2007, 08:06:00 PM
Even though he refrained from speaking for me, I think Bro Thomas understands what I'm trying to say.  ;)

My basic thrust is that human governments cannot enforce matters of conscience. And God's law, at its most fundamental level, is a matter of conscience. Therefore, human government cannot ever hope to enforce God's law in the way that God requires.

However, human governments can make and enforce laws that regulate human actions. Even in commandments 5-9, we are limited to regulating actions. That's just the way non-divine beings are.

In short, man can police man to make sure that they fulfill man's requirements. But we cannot police anyone but ourselves when it comes to God's requirements. Regardless of what laws we make, let's not mistake them for God's law.

That will have to do for the next couple of weeks. I have a program to prepare for this Sabbath, and another sermon the following Sabbath. Be nice while I'm gone.  ;)

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on July 02, 2007, 08:42:00 PM
Arnold, we are always nice!  ;D

Regarding what you just posted ... no, civil governments can ever implement moral laws to  complete satisfaction worthy of God's honor;  that should be the goal of all people - to reach His ideal. I am getting a clearer picture of what exactly you  are intending. And it appears as if I can agree with you in man dealing with man outside the ideal of a theocracy as the laws that are created for our well being and safety are "borrowed" from the original from heaven.

We should never legislate God or worship to Him; however in a fallen society that has a healthy respect for religious liberties, keeping separate church and state, we should legislate behavior toward one another.

Does this wording help in our agreement?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on July 02, 2007, 10:26:00 PM
Sis Sybil,

Yes, I think that wording works better for me.  ;)

Anyway, I hope the distinction between divine requirements and human enforcement crystallizes better in my mind between now and 7/14.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 02, 2007, 11:57:00 PM
Brother Richard,
You are quite correct. Thank you for keeping me straight here. I found the references you were referring to. Ellen White uses the word Protestant in reference to the United states a number of times. I was wrong to limit the word to those nations which have an established State Protestant church.
I also discovered that Ellen White uses the word in the same sense as I, in reference to Protestant nations a few times. She also goes so far as to say that Jesus was a protestant! A bit wild and original, I'd say, but illuminating.
I did lash out in anger once on this list, and lived to regret it. I believe Brother Cop has forgiven it, but still doesn't trust me not to pounce on him! I hope you won't find me making that mistake again.


quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
Brother Thomas, I respect your opinion as I do Brother Arnold's. Here we can look to the Bible and discuss matters without emotion and anger, looking to Christ for our wisdom. I know that we all want His understanding not our own.    :)  I appreciate this opportunity and look forward to our coming into agreement as much as possible. This is a very important subject.

Since the judgments and statutes that were not ceremonial are moral, and they were given to uphold the great moral standard, the ten commandments, we are on topic here as we try and sort out our personal responsibility, church responsibility, and state responsibility in regards to the law of God.

Semantics is indeed an issue in our discussion. We are not used to the words being used in this study, at least not from a Biblical point of view. Some of the words are not understood correctly as they are being used. One such phrase that I use is misunderstood I believe.  Brother Thomas says that the US was not a Protestant nation, but here he is wrong. I think in this case, Brother Thomas considers a Protestant nation to be a nation where there is not separation of church and state. Here I disagree. Because some have been called Protestant nations and have usurped their authority does not mean that a nation cannot be truly a Protestant nation. America was.

She is now giving up her Protestant heritage and beginning to speak as a dragon. A true Protestant nation would not legislate in matters of worship, but would protect liberty of conscience in this area. So, it is a misunderstanding of the correct definition of "Protestant" nation that has caused a problem for us.

Brother Thomas, I am not at my computer, so I cannot give you any help, but only can point you in the right direction. You will find that my understanding is not my own, but what I have learned in my past studies of the subject from the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. If you will take a few minutes, I have confidence that you shall find that America was indeed a Protestant nation in the truest since of the word. As long as she looked to God for her wisdom and strength she was great, but now that it is only a profession of faith, she is about to suffer great destruction. By earthquake, fire, war, disease, the winds of strife are being let loose. All because America has forsaken her God and her Protestant heritage.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 03, 2007, 10:02:00 PM
 :) We each respect each other and since the subject is important we take it seriously!  Brother Cop has forgotten all about what ever it was!  We have short memories when it comes to such things!   :)
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 03, 2007, 10:50:00 PM
Reading the Spirit of Prophecy on searchwords such as law, moral, ceremonial, as well as specifics, I am getting the sense that Ellen White maintains the Decalogue as universal and binding from the beginning, whereas other statutes would not have even been given if unfaithfulness to the ten commandments had not created situations in which they were needed. Thus, ceremonial laws and moral judgements were never, even when they were given, of the same character as the ten commandments. They were emergency interventions. They were needed because of human weakness. They are not so much binding as necessary in the specific emergency.

The SDA Fundamentals and SDA practice generally, establish practices that are not mentioned specifically in the ten commandments, but are taken from underlying principles in the Bible, the guidance of the Spirit of Prophecy, and in reaction to the challenges faced by believers today. Perhaps these additional issues should be seen, not so much as binding, but as necessary to our situation.

The things found in the SDA Fundamentals that are given specifically in addition to the ten commandments and apparently to support them and apply them effectively today are:

Tithes and offerings, discrimination in entertainment and amusements, neatness and modesty in dress, a healthful diet, rest and exercise, abstenance from unclean meats, alcohol, tobacco and drug and narcotic abuse, and divorce and remarriage only in the case of "Biblical grounds".
Adventist standards not mentioned in the Fundamentals include not wearing jewelry and make-up, not participating in secret societies, not joining labour unions, and not gambling or playing card-games commonly used in gambling, and not drinking coffee, tea or cola drinks.  

Presumably in theory the standards mentioned in the Fundamentals are matters for church discipline, whereas those not mentioned have lesser degrees of sanction and to some extent remain a matter of conscience for the individual.

These standards not stated in the ten commandments, which are either necessary or very strongly recommended, are tenuously based on Scripture to varying degrees. But they certainly do not reflect, in anything like a literal correspondence, the judgements found in the Books of Moses.

Might we say that the ten commandments are binding on all people as God's moral law, but everything else in the Pentateuch is in the character of emergency measures for a limited time or place, or guidance in understanding and applying the ten commandments?

Such an emergency measure might be the establishment of the cities of refuge. Such a guidance, illuminating the commandment not to kill with its implication to guard health, would be the laws concerning unclean meats.

The question arises, whether some of this guidance has been overlooked. Here is an example. I noticed living among Muslims that they remove their shoes as an act of reverence before coming into the place of prayer. Removing shoes when coming onto "holy ground" is mentioned in the Bible as well. Is this a matter of new light that will help to prepare the people of God for the coming of Christ?

I think the Spirit of Prophecy protects Adventism from such distraction.

    In time past there have been presented to me for my opinion many non-essential, fanciful theories. Some have advocated the theory that believers should pray with their eyes open. Others teach that, because those who ministered anciently in sacred office were required, upon entering the sanctuary, to remove their sandals and wash their feet, believers now should remove their shoes when entering the house of worship. Still others refer to the sixth commandment, and declare that even the insects that torment human beings should not be killed. And some have put forth the theory that the redeemed will not have gray hair --as if this were a matter of any importance.  {GW 313.1}
    I am instructed to say that these theories are the production of minds unlearned in the first principles of the gospel. By such theories the enemy strives to eclipse the great truths for this time.  {GW 313.2}

I just returned from visiting some old Sabbath-keeping communities in the Ukraine, communities that existed before the coming of Adventism and do not use the writings of Ellen White. They had some practices that are different from SDAs. The women do not cut their hair, and always have their heads covered in public and in prayer. The electrical and water lines to both church and homes is shut off during the hours of the Sabbath, so that nothing will be purchased on that day. Musical instruments are not allowed in accompaniment to Scripture portions sung in Ruthenian plain chant. Musical instruments are allowed only for the singing of hymns. Maybe some of these things are standards that Adventists should emulate. Maybe some of them are nitpicking distractions. Maybe the Spirit of Prophecy could enlighten us on such matters.

[This message has been edited by Thomas M (edited 07-04-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on July 04, 2007, 06:23:00 AM
Hi Brother Thomas:

You said in your above post:

"Adventist standards not mentioned in the Fundamentals include not wearing jewelry."

#22 of the fundamnental beliefs states:

While recognizing cultural differences, our dress is to be simple, modest, and neat, befitting those whose true beauty does not consist of outward adornment but in the imperishable ornament of a gentle and quiet spirit. It also means that because our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit, we are to care for them intelligently."

What do you believe "outward adornment" to mean? Maybe I am missing something here.

Thanks,

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on July 04, 2007, 06:39:00 AM
The SOP also states, Thomas, that had the Scriptures been prayerfully studied, the Spirit of Prophecy would also be unnecessary.

The lower we sink, the more instruction we need.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 04, 2007, 09:41:00 PM
Sister Liane,
I have an idea what "outward adornment" means, but given that the expression is not very precise, I suspect that others might have a different idea. Personally, I think it means, or should mean, jewelry. But it doesn't make it really as clear as the 1889 statement, that says: " that the wearing of gold, pearls, and costly array, or anything designed merely to adorn the person and foster the pride of the natural heart, is to be discarded, according to such scriptures as 1 Tim. 2:9, 10; 1 Peter 3:3, 4."
The present statement does not say that gold, pearls and such-like are meant. Nor does it say that they must be discarded. It mostly makes the point that inner beauty is more important than outer beauty. While my concern does not rise to the level of a complaint, I do see how people who want to water down the standards could latch onto that and think that the Fundamentals justifies their doing so. The 1889 Fundamentals were rather pointed and direct. The present one may not be wishy-washy, but neither is it a strongly worded condemnation of jewelry. I wish it were.

quote:
Originally posted by Liane H:
Hi Brother Thomas:

You said in your above post:

"Adventist standards not mentioned in the Fundamentals include not wearing jewelry."

#22 of the fundamnental beliefs states:

While recognizing cultural differences, our dress is to be simple, modest, and neat, befitting those whose true beauty does not consist of outward adornment but in the imperishable ornament of a gentle and quiet spirit. It also means that because our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit, we are to care for them intelligently."

What do you believe "outward adornment" to mean? Maybe I am missing something here.

Thanks,


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 04, 2007, 09:44:00 PM
For those who truly want to obey God and are constantly seeking His will, the ten commandments in principle appear to be sufficient. Strangely, it is precisely those people, the ones who actually need the guidance the least, who read the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. The human heart is incredibly perverse!

quote:
Originally posted by Sybil:
The SOP also states, Thomas, that had the Scriptures been prayerfully studied, the Spirit of Prophecy would also be unnecessary.

The lower we sink, the more instruction we need.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on July 05, 2007, 11:30:00 AM
Dear Brother Thomas:

Yes I do see what you are saying very clearly. The words "outward adornment" can mean many things to different people.

It could mean jewelry but one could wear jewelry as long as the jewelry is tastful. It indeed is not specific and very dangerous.

I think the church has tried to take on the role to be all things to all people so as not to rock the boat of any. It has for a long, long time tried to be a peacemaker without making any peace.

The greater danger of this is in the outcome more souls will be lost than if they took a firm stand in the first place.

One of my great blessings in coming into this church as that I came in through the law first and love second. It was God's love that opened my eyes of His precious Ten Precepts and showed me His love through them.

I believe that the first three books of Genesis is the whole gospel and would have been more than enough for man, but we being what we are in a sin sick filled world God had to step in again and again to make His message clearly to those that just were not getting it.

Even when God put his precepts on stone and His statutes and judgments in writing it took the children of Israel forty years, yes forty years before they got it right.

Even worse Moses stumbled at the end, but God redeemed him. What a loving God we have.    

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 05, 2007, 10:38:00 PM
Sister Liane,
I agree with you 110 per cent. The Gospel is well portrayed in the first three books of the Bible.
While the New Testament brings us the glorious picture of Jesus as the express image of the Father, the Word of God made flesh, it is unfortunately abused to debase and deny the Word of God made audible on Mount Sinai, engraved in stone, and sealed upon the tables of the human heart by the work of the Holy Spirit.

quote:
Originally posted by Liane H:
Dear Brother Thomas:

Yes I do see what you are saying very clearly. The words "outward adornment" can mean many things to different people.

It could mean jewelry but one could wear jewelry as long as the jewelry is tastful. It indeed is not specific and very dangerous.

I think the church has tried to take on the role to be all things to all people so as not to rock the boat of any. It has for a long, long time tried to be a peacemaker without making any peace.

The greater danger of this is in the outcome more souls will be lost than if they took a firm stand in the first place.

One of my great blessings in coming into this church as that I came in through the law first and love second. It was God's love that opened my eyes of His precious Ten Precepts and showed me His love through them.

I believe that the first three books of Genesis is the whole gospel and would have been more than enough for man, but we being what we are in a sin sick filled world God had to step in again and again to make His message clearly to those that just were not getting it.

Even when God put his precepts on stone and His statutes and judgments in writing it took the children of Israel forty years, yes forty years before they got it right.

Even worse Moses stumbled at the end, but God redeemed him. What a loving God we have.    


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 09, 2007, 08:50:00 PM
When I plant a new fruit tree, does God have any counsel in regards to when I ought to eat the fruit from my new tree? Is this a law of our being or just a suggestion that we may obey or ignore?
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on July 09, 2007, 09:12:00 PM
How about the Sabbaths for the land? Is that literal (i.e. we don't take care of our fruits/vegetables in our yard that year) or figurative (i.e. we quit our jobs for a year) or symbolic/typical (i.e. Christ was the antitype, abolishing the statute)?

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 09, 2007, 11:13:00 PM
I have been slowly coming to the view, as this discussion goes on, that the ten commandments constitute the eternally and universally binding moral law of God. Everything else in the Books of Moses is of limited value, temporary, local, or ceremonial. But the moral judgements are enlightening and the ceremonial laws have lessons in salvation.
I would see a ceremonial aspect in the cycle of Jubilees and the Sabbath years. At the same time, there is a judgement aspect, one that relates to agricultural continuity. Some of these judgements are redefined in the Spirit of Prophecy in ways that are relevant to here and now. Here is all that I can find on fallow ground and trees.

"As we cultivate the soil day by day, we may learn precious spiritual lessons. The fallow ground of the heart must be broken up. It must be warmed by the rays of the sun, and purified by the air. Then the seed, to all appearance lifeless and inactive, is to be dropped into the soil prepared for its reception. Trees also are to be planted, and cultivated with care. And after man has done his part, God's miracle-working power gives life and vitality to the things placed in the soil. Man is not to overlook the power of God, nor is he to neglect his part of the work, appointed to him by God. Man is not to be slothful. His industry is essential if he would have a harvest. And so it is with the work to be done in the human heart and mind. "The seed is the word of God." "He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man."  {RH, October 18, 1898 par. 14}
"     Lessons to Be Learned From Agricultural Process--As they cultivate the soil, the students are to learn spiritual lessons. The plow must break up the fallow ground. It must lie under the rays of the sun and the purifying air. Then the seed, to all appearance dead, is to be dropped into the


                                 -178-

prepared soil. Trees are to be planted, seeds for vegetables sown. And after man has acted his part, God's miracle-working power gives life and vitality to the things placed in the soil. In this agricultural process, there are lessons to be learned. Man is not to do slothful work. He is to act the part appointed him by God. His industry is essential if he would have a harvest.--Ms. 71, 1898, p. 2. ("Come Up to the Help of the Lord," June 14, 1898.)  {11MR 177.4}"

The agricultural principle that appears to be inherent in the Sabbath years is rotation of crops in view of preserving the fertility of the land. I am not aware that Ellen White speaks of crop rotation. This would thus fall in the category of judgements that are not redefined in the Spirit of Prophecy for our time, but suggested in principle, but not binding detail, in the Pentateuch.


quote:
Originally posted by asygo:
How about the Sabbaths for the land? Is that literal (i.e. we don't take care of our fruits/vegetables in our yard that year) or figurative (i.e. we quit our jobs for a year) or symbolic/typical (i.e. Christ was the antitype, abolishing the statute)?


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 09, 2007, 11:17:00 PM
I would add a note on the observance of Sabbatical years. While the principle of crop rotation can be followed today, the Sabbatical years themselves cannot. The law does not establish one year in seven any more than the commandment establishes one day in seven as the Sabbath. We simply do not know for certain when the Jubilee and Sabbatical years are. A number of attempts have been made to establish them, but they are not incontrovertable.

quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:
I have been slowly coming to the view, as this discussion goes on, that the ten commandments constitute the eternally and universally binding moral law of God. Everything else in the Books of Moses is of limited value, temporary, local, or ceremonial. But the moral judgements are enlightening and the ceremonial laws have lessons in salvation.
I would see a ceremonial aspect in the cycle of Jubilees and the Sabbath years. At the same time, there is a judgement aspect, one that relates to agricultural continuity. Some of these judgements are redefined in the Spirit of Prophecy in ways that are relevant to here and now. Here is all that I can find on fallow ground and trees.

"As we cultivate the soil day by day, we may learn precious spiritual lessons. The fallow ground of the heart must be broken up. It must be warmed by the rays of the sun, and purified by the air. Then the seed, to all appearance lifeless and inactive, is to be dropped into the soil prepared for its reception. Trees also are to be planted, and cultivated with care. And after man has done his part, God's miracle-working power gives life and vitality to the things placed in the soil. Man is not to overlook the power of God, nor is he to neglect his part of the work, appointed to him by God. Man is not to be slothful. His industry is essential if he would have a harvest. And so it is with the work to be done in the human heart and mind. "The seed is the word of God." "He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man."  {RH, October 18, 1898 par. 14}
"     Lessons to Be Learned From Agricultural Process--As they cultivate the soil, the students are to learn spiritual lessons. The plow must break up the fallow ground. It must lie under the rays of the sun and the purifying air. Then the seed, to all appearance dead, is to be dropped into the


                                 -178-

prepared soil. Trees are to be planted, seeds for vegetables sown. And after man has acted his part, God's miracle-working power gives life and vitality to the things placed in the soil. In this agricultural process, there are lessons to be learned. Man is not to do slothful work. He is to act the part appointed him by God. His industry is essential if he would have a harvest.--Ms. 71, 1898, p. 2. ("Come Up to the Help of the Lord," June 14, 1898.)  {11MR 177.4}"

The agricultural principle that appears to be inherent in the Sabbath years is rotation of crops in view of preserving the fertility of the land. I am not aware that Ellen White speaks of crop rotation. This would thus fall in the category of judgements that are not redefined in the Spirit of Prophecy for our time, but suggested in principle, but not binding detail, in the Pentateuch.



Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 10, 2007, 12:57:00 PM
It seems we have a work to do in separating the ceremonial from the moral laws?

Let us discuss the statute to let the land rest one in seven years. Is it moral or ceremonial? And if moral, ought we allow our land to rest one in seven years? Is this a law of our being or just a suggestion for the Jews prior to the time of Christ?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 10, 2007, 11:57:00 PM
It seems to me that the Spirit of Prophecy quotations we've already looked at suggest that the moral law equals the ten commandments. Ellen White makes a distinction between moral law (the ten commandments) and ceremonial law. However, she also refers to "judgements" that apply the moral law (the ten commandments) to specific situations. But neither the ceremonial laws nor the "judgements" as such are binding on us today. Rather, they are instructive.

So doing a work to separate the ceremonial laws from the moral laws seems unneccesary. The moral laws are already clearly separated from the rest as the ten commandments.
Ellen White may seem inconsistent in relegating everything else to "ceremonial law", but that is perhaps not so. Even the health laws have a ceremonial aspect.
But let me turn to the question posed, the rest of the land every seventh year. First of all, the texts simply do not say every seventh year. It is a question of a particular year in the cycle of seven, just as the Sabbath is a question of a particular day. The law does not refer to one year in seven, but a particular year in seven. The cycles of seven make up a cycle of 49 years with a Jubilee year. The Gospel clearly makes the coming of Christ the antitype of the Jubilee year. The system is therefore ceremonial. It fits into type and antitype.

Yet there may be a "judgement" or moral aspect in allowing the land to lie fallow. Just as the Spirit of Prophecy has led the church to set up scertain standards that are not in strict adherence to Mosaic judgements but informed by them, we can draw the value of crop rotation from the "judgement" aspect of the Sabbatical years. Crop rotation is moral, as it is part of maintaining the earth as the source of livelihood, something implied at least in the Sabbath commandment if not others.

So I would say that there is little value in difining the statute as a ceremonial law or a judgement, since they are not muturally exclusive. Furthermore, everything outside the ten commandments seems to be called ceremonial in the Spirit of Prophety texts quoted earlier.

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
It seems we have a work to do in separating the ceremonial from the moral laws?

Let us discuss the statute to let the land rest one in seven years. Is it moral or ceremonial? And if moral, ought we allow our land to rest one in seven years? Is this a law of our being or just a suggestion for the Jews prior to the time of Christ?


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on July 11, 2007, 12:24:00 AM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
Is this a law of our being or just a suggestion for the Jews prior to the time of Christ?

Also, it is possible that its purpose is not merely agricultural. Maybe God is telling us something about our need to rest (in some way) every 7 years. Maybe like the weekly Sabbath and tithe, God is trying to teach us that He can do more with 6 years than we can with 7 - i.e. trust Him with our temporal needs.

When I lived in the country, this was a very real concern. I talked to some farmers, and the stock answer was that it does not apply to us today. But I was not ready to adopt their cavalier attitude toward the statutes.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Liane H on July 11, 2007, 06:27:00 AM
I would have to find it because I read it many years ago and it got lost with time and moving.

But there was an topic that I read is that our bodies change every seven years and that this grand cycle of change is the bodies way of renewing itself to keep us in balance.

I do not recall the details, but seven's are an important number to God and should be better known by us. Thus the seventh day is applicable as well.

------------------
Liane, the Zoo Mama
Romans 8:19   For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 14, 2007, 05:41:00 PM
From what I am hearing, it is not a sin to violate the principles of the Mosaic law that is not ceremonial?
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 14, 2007, 10:29:00 PM
Dear Brother Richard,
You addressed your question generally, but I'll answer it for my part. That would not be my thought. The principles must stand, because the principles are applications of the moral law, the ten commandments.
The principle of the law of cities of refuge would stand, but not the actual judgement itself.
That is, we are still responsible to protect the one who has accidently killed another from the slain persons relatives taking revenge on him by killing him. But we are not to do so by providing specific cities in Israel for him to stay in.
We are still to provide for hygienic disposal of human waste, but not required to carry a trowel on our belts to burying it in the sand.
To the extent that the Mosaic judgements are relevant to the world in which we live, they are still binding. But they are not binding as such, just because they are written in the Books of Moses, but because they are still relevant applications of the ten commandments.
What is binding on us today is not the prophetic judgements written my Moses, but the prophetic judgements written by Ellen White. It is the Spirit of Prophecy in each age that responsibly defines the area of moral judgements.
The Spirit of Prophecy today illuminates the Mosaic judgements. The Mosaic judgement is to have a blue ribbon on the border of the outer garment, which doubles as a cloak and blanket. The Spirit of Prophecy notes that for us the blue ribbon represents neatness, modesty, health and hygiene in dress. Thus the Spirit of Prophecy denies the actual judgement itself, but maintains the principle. The principle is an extension of the ten commandments, referring in fact to several of them. Modesty in dress is implicit in the commandment "Thou shalt not commit adultery." Health and hygiene is implicit in the commandment "Thou shalt not kill." Lack of ostentation is implicit in the commandment "thou shalt not covet" and "thou shalt have no other gods."
If we were all spiritually-minded, we could see that for ourselves. But since we are not, we need the prophetic judgements to point the detailed application out to us. The proof of that is in the response such prophetic judgements receive: "I don't see what's wrong with it." The fact that I don't see what's wrong with it is the very reason that Mosaic judgements were made in Moses' day and Spirit of Prophecy verdicts on various issues are relevant to our day.

That is how I see matters at this point of the discussion. You will note that I've made some progress here.

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
From what I am hearing, it is not a sin to violate the principles of the Mosaic law that is not ceremonial?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on July 17, 2007, 06:01:00 AM
Progress, yes, Brother Thomas. And prophetic judgments - I have never thought of that but it does make sense.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on July 17, 2007, 08:31:00 PM
My sermon on this topic is up. Check it out at http://seegoservices.com/SermonAudio.aspx and let me know what you think.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on July 17, 2007, 08:57:00 PM
I wish I had DSL, cable or satellite - it sure would make listening to it easier   ;D. Will download it during the night and listen tomorrow! Roots and Fruits?

Thanks for letting us know.   :)

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 07-17-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on July 17, 2007, 11:27:00 PM
Roots and Fruits.

You should get DSL or cable. It will open up a whole new world. If you're in the middle of nowhere, satellite might be the way to go.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on July 18, 2007, 10:18:00 AM
Nice treatment of the tenth commandment as to what sits in the heart and mind.

Regarding civil governments: Again, commandments 5 through 9 can be legislated through the "action" of the offender.  The moral law happens to control behavior one to another. I truly believe you take liberty in this area. You speak of it as man controlling man with no right to enforce the Ten Commandments. Who else on earth has God entrusted this control through? If man does not do it, who does it? He set up magistrates within the body of the Children of Israel to do just this. And all throughout the OT, the same thing is practiced as ordained by God.

You seem to be applying the entire 10 to our behavior, man to man. You made no attempt to separate that which is required to God - first four commandments, yet lump all of them together saying man has no right to legislate any of them. That they are God's to legislate. And, yes, you briefly state that man will want to legislate worship ...

Where does the difference between right and wrong come from - which is actioned behavior, except through the moral law? Where would man get the idea that stealing from a neighbor is wrong except through one of the commandments?

No problem with church, family and individual forms of government that you speak of ... you brought out some very nice points.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: asygo on July 18, 2007, 11:06:00 AM
Sis Sybil,

I made a new topic in the Worship forum for the sermon (Roots and Fruits (sermon by Arnold Sy Go)). Do you want to discuss the specifics over there? I don't want to derail this thread, since the sermon wasn't exactly about the binding aspects of the Mosaic Law.

------------------
By God's grace,
Arnold M. Sy Go
-end-

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on July 18, 2007, 04:28:00 PM
Yes, Arnold, let's do it! See you there!

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
When I plant a new fruit tree, does God have any counsel in regards to when I ought to eat the fruit from my new tree? Is this a law of our being or just a suggestion that we may obey or ignore?

To those not familiar with this topic, see this connection.

http://remnant-online.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000075.html

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 07-18-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on July 18, 2007, 06:10:00 PM
We should not eat of the fruit of the young tree until its roots and trunk can hold the fruit. The roots must be firmly established. We are to hold off eating for the first four years - then we may eat of it in the fifth year.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 18, 2007, 09:03:00 PM
Is this statute a moral law or ceremonial, and was it a civil law only to be followed by Israel when a theocracy?
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 18, 2007, 10:36:00 PM
My view of this judgement is that it relates to the Sabbath commandment, which includes six days work. The primary work given to humankind in Genesis 2 is care of the earth. The proper care of fruit trees is implied.
Again, I would point out that the detailed content of statutes may not be valid in this time and place, as they are given specifically for Israel in their geographic location. I don't know enough about agriculture to say to what extent the statute itself is valid, but the principle of giving fruit trees the best possible care is definitely valid. I do not see anything ceremonial about this law.

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
Is this statute a moral law or ceremonial, and was it a civil law only to be followed by Israel when a theocracy?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 19, 2007, 12:05:00 PM
I think sometimes  we get a little too close to the tree so that we cannot see the forest. This statute is indeed moral and not ceremonial. So, it is part of the great moral law of our being. Is it to be restricted to Israel of old? I don't see why. What does it have to do with Israel and not us?  

There are blessings in the moral law for us. If we look for the blessings we shall find them.
The law is holy just and good. There is a topic on the fruit tree in the Nature Forum that explains this lesson for us. It is for our good that we understand this statute.....if we intend to plant a fruit tree.   :)

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 20, 2007, 01:13:00 AM
My point of view on this thread, after being enlightened by reading the Spirit of Prophecy on the moral and ceremonial law, has been to try to look at things from that perspective.

1) Ellen White sees the Mosaic law as a two-fold system: the ceremonial and the moral.

    God's people, whom He calls His peculiar treasure, were privileged with a twofold system of law; the moral and ceremonial. . . .  {FLB 106.2}
 
2) Ellen White defines the moral law as the ten commandments.

    In answer to the claim that at the death of Christ the precepts of the Decalogue had been abolished with the ceremonial law, Wesley said: "The moral law, contained in the Ten Commandments and enforced by the prophets, He did not take away. It was not the design of His coming to revoke any part of this. This is a law which never can be broken, which 'stands fast as the faithful witness in heaven.' . . . This was from the beginning of the world, being 'written not on tables of stone,' but on the hearts of all the children of men, when they came out of the hands of the Creator. And however the letters once wrote by the finger of God are now in a great measure defaced by sin, yet can they not wholly be blotted out, while we have any consciousness of good and evil. Every part of this law must remain in force upon all mankind, and in all ages; as not depending either on time or place, or any other circumstances liable to change, but on the nature of God, and the nature of man, and their unchangeable relation to each other.  {GC 262.1}

3) Ellen White defines the ceremonial law as the system of types that pointed forward to Christ.

 From the creation the moral law was an essential part of God's divine plan, and was as unchangeable as Himself. The ceremonial law was to answer a particular purpose in Christ's plan for the salvation of the race. The typical system of sacrifices and offerings was established that through these services the sinner might discern the great offering, Christ. . . . The ceremonial law was glorious; it was the provision made by Jesus Christ in counsel with His Father, to aid in the salvation of the race. The whole arrangement of the typical system was founded on Christ. Adam saw Christ prefigured in the innocent beast suffering the penalty of his transgression of Jehovah's law.  {FLB 106.3}
    There are many who try to blend these two systems, using the texts that speak of the ceremonial law to prove that the moral law has been abolished; but this is a perversion of the Scriptures. The distinction between the two systems is broad and clear. The ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing to Christ, to His sacrifice and His priesthood. This ritual law, with its sacrifices and ordinances, was to be performed by the Hebrews until type met antitype in the death of Christ, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. Then all the sacrificial offerings were to cease. It is this law that Christ "took . . . out of the way, nailing it to His cross." Colossians 2:14. But concerning the law of Ten Commandments the psalmist declares, "Forever, O Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven." Psalm 119:89. And Christ Himself says, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law. . . . Verily I say unto you"--making the assertion as emphatic as possible--"Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Matthew 5:17, 18. Here He teaches, not merely what the claims of God's law had been, and were then, but that these claims should hold as long as the heavens and the earth remain. The law of God is as immutable as His throne. It will maintain its claims upon mankind in all ages.  {PP 365.1}

In sum, there is a two-fold system. The ceremonial law points to Christ and is no longer binding. The moral law, the ten commandments, is binding from Creation and to all time.

We need to keep that clearly in mind in order to focus on trees or woods as the case may be.

So what about fruit trees? We agree that this does not appear to be ceremonial, a type of Christ, but moral. Yet it is not found in the ten commandments.

If we are permitted to decide what is moral and what is not on the basis of our own individual moral sense, there can never be agreement. One will see something one way, another will see it another way. One is going to look at one tree, one is going to look at another.

Let's go back to the category of civil laws that was brought up on this thread. Ellen White recognizes that category in only one passage that I can find:

    These words were but a reiteration of the teaching of the Old Testament. It is true that the rule, "Eye for eye, tooth for tooth" (Leviticus 24:20), was a provision in the laws given through Moses; but it was a civil statute. None were justified in avenging themselves, for they had the words of the Lord: "Say not thou, I will recompense evil." "Say not, I will do so to him as he hath done to me." "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth." "If he that hateth thee
                                                                           71
be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink." Proverbs 20:22; 24:29, 17; 25:21, 22, R.V., margin.  {MB 70.2}

The thrust of her argument is that the statute in reference is not to be carried out, BECAUSE it is a civil statute and not a moral one. She only refers to such a category as a way of denying the binding character of the Mosaic statute. We thus have no Spirit of Prophecy argument for binding civil statutes from the books of Moses.

Ellen White speaks of health laws very often. She sometimes evidences them on the basis of Scripture. But generally, either statedly or in an implied way, the basis is nature, the facts of human existence, and not Scripture or verbal revelation.

I do not know if there is any agreement with me on this perception. There are the ten commandments, which are the universally-binding moral law. In addition to the ten commandments, there are judgements specific to each time and place, brought forward by prophets as needed. These judgements illuminate the ten commandments and have a universally-binding foundation, but their detailed application may be specific and temporary.

Is this framework adequate?
It appears adequately to explain why the Fundamentals contain reference to the ten commandments followed by several articles on other issues which are especially adapted to this time and age.
It appears adequate to me as a way of relating to such Mosaic statutes as those relating to fruit trees. Let us take a look at the fruit trees again.

Question 1: Is this part of the moral law, the ten commandments, or a statute outside the ten commandments?

Answer: It is outside the ten commandments.

Question 2: Is this part of the ceremonial law, a type fulfilled in Christ?

Answer: There is no apparent fulfilment in Christ. (It may be that further contemplation will reveal one, however).

Question 3: If this is not a part of ceremonial law nor a part of the ten commandments, how should it then be understood?

Answer: It is a prophetic judgement given to Israel through Moses as a specific application of the ten commandments to their situation. It must therefore contain an element of universally-binding moral law, although the specific may or may not be applicable to our day and age.

Question 4: Does the prophetic light for this day illuminate this specific statute?

Answer: There does not seem to be a specific comment on the mosaic text. However, the use of fruit in the first years is mentioned otherwise. The following passages suggest that Ellen White used the fruit from trees as soon as it appeared, without regard to the Mosaic statute in question.

    I came here and began work on my place so earnestly that it inspired all with fresh zeal, and they have been working with a will, rejoicing that they have the privilege. We have provoked one another to zeal and good works. The school workers were afraid I would plant the first trees, and now both they and and I have the satisfaction of having the first genuine orchards in this vicinity. Some of our trees will yield fruit next year, and the peaches will bear quite a crop in two years. Mr. -----, from whom we bought our trees, lives about twenty miles from here. He has an extensive and beautiful orchard. He says that we have splendid fruit land.  {TM 242.1}

    I determined to set my trees, even before the foundation of the house was built. We broke up only furrows, leaving large spaces unplowed. Here in these furrows we planted our trees the last of September, and lo, this year they were loaded with beautiful blossoms and the trees were loaded with fruit. It was thought best to pick off the fruit, although the trees had obtained a growth that seemed almost incredible. The small amount of fruit--peaches and nectarines--have served me these three weeks. They were delicious, early peaches. We have later peaches--only a few left to mature as samples. Our pomegranates looked beautiful in full bloom. Apricots were trimmed back in April and June, but they threw up their branches and in five weeks, by measurement, had a thrifty growth of five and eight feet.  {8MR 252.2}
    If the Lord prospers us next year, as He has done the past year, we will have all the fruit we wish to take care of, early and late. The early fruit comes when there is nothing else, so this is an important item. The peaches are rich and juicy and grateful to the taste. We have quince trees set out, and lemon, orange, apple, plum, and persimmon trees. We have even planted elderberry bushes. We planted our vineyard in June. Everything is flourishing and we shall have many clusters of grapes this season.  {8MR 252.3}

Question 5: Are there reasons outside Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy for taking this Mosaic statute into consideration?

Answer: There may be rational reasons. To the extent that the statute can illuminate the moral law of the ten commandments, it may determine action here and now.
There may be scientific reasons. To the extent that the statute appears to coincide with agricultural principles, it may determine orchard husbandry today.

This five-step way of dealing with issues seems logical and adequate to me. It can be applied systematically to the whole of the Books of Moses.


quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
I think sometimes  we get a little too close to the tree so that we cannot see the forest. This statute is indeed moral and not ceremonial. So, it is part of the great moral law of our being. Is it to be restricted to Israel of old? I don't see why. What does it have to do with Israel and not us?  

There are blessings in the moral law for us. If we look for the blessings we shall find them.
The law is holy just and good. There is a topic on the fruit tree in the Nature Forum that explains this lesson for us. It is for our good that we understand this statute.....if we intend to plant a fruit tree.    :)


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 20, 2007, 12:10:00 PM
Brother Thomas, I so much appreciate your desire to get to truth and that you see the inspired Word as our only source of truth.

I think you are on the right path. I think we are moving forward in this most important work. Time does not permit me to fully discuss your post, but I wanted to thank you for your effort that we might come into unity and further our understanding of God's law. We will grow together in our love and knowledge of His ways.

One quick comment, an eye for an eye is said to be a civil statute and as I read the quoted passage I find the counsel to be telling us that we are to leave the execution of this justice to the civil authorities, we are not to take the matter into our own hands. Our work is to do good to them that despitefully use us. But, we are to have a system of justice, civil, that will render an eye for an eye. In the US we have an understanding that the punishment is to fit the crime.  Am I wrong? If not, then the statute commanding an eye for an eye would still be a guide for our civil laws.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 20, 2007, 05:29:00 PM
 
quote:
Originally posted by Thomas M:

So what about fruit trees? We agree that this does not appear to be ceremonial, a type of Christ, but moral. Yet it is not found in the ten commandments.

If we are permitted to decide what is moral and what is not on the basis of our own individual moral sense, there can never be agreement. One will see something one way, another will see it another way. One is going to look at one tree, one is going to look at another.


If the statute is moral, then it is binding in some manner. My concern here is that I don't see that it is applicable to any particular point in time. It does not seem to have any importance specifically to the theocracy, but rather to us all as we think on the moral principle. Why does God say to not eat the fruit for the first three years?

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 20, 2007, 10:11:00 PM
Dear Brother Richard,
My concern has been to establish a foundation for understanding before taking any explicit position on this question or any other.
It is very possible that you and I could agree on our views of this particular statute. But what would be the sense in doing so? It is more useful to atain generally acceptable principles of interpretation. Then all of the statutes or most of them will naturally fall into place.
I do not see any particular limitation on this statute either. Yet the fact is that it is not listed in the ten commandments, at least not directly, and Ellen White herself in writing about the subject does not take three years into consideration. She gobbles up every bit of fruit that appears in total disregard to the moral principle established for all time in this verse.
What I'm suggesting is that only the ten commandments are absolutely binding for all time. Other statutes are for our instruction, but are not binding. They teach us something of value about Christ, as the ceremonial law does. They teach us how the moral law of the ten commandments was applied to certain things in earlier times, and suggest principles that may be applicable now.
When it comes to specifics outside the ten commandments, the guidance of the Spirit of Prophecy is the major source of what is binding. Under Moses, the fruit tree is left for the first three years without harvesting. Under a later prophet, that statute might be ignored, as it is in Ellen White. Each prophet is given guidance specific to his time. Daniel proposes a vegetarian diet in Daniel 1, in contrast to guidance where clean meat is allowed.
The point is not for us individually to set up a criterion for ourselves and determine that this law is binding and that is not, on the basis of what we ourselves see. The point is to accept the ten commandments as universally binding, and the Spirit of Prophecy in each relevant time period as the expression of how moral principles should be applied in each era. It is not necessary for us to see or understand how or why a earlier statute is relevant.
To put it succinctly, if not harvesting fruit for the first three years is still relevant today, then why does the Spirit of Prophecy as expressed in Ellen White's writings disregard it?
My concept, based on the Spirit of Prophecy, of dividing the law into universally binding ten commandments supported by temporary prophetic guidance provides a consistent answer to that question. Do you have an alternative principle?

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
If the statute is moral, then it is binding in some manner. My concern here is that I don't see that it is applicable to any particular point in time. It does not seem to have any importance specifically to the theocracy, but rather to us all as we think on the moral principle. Why does God say to not eat the fruit for the first three years?


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 20, 2007, 10:33:00 PM
Brother Thomas I understand your thoughts and that is why I choose a specific example that we may study this in depth. There is something that we have not discerned clearly, but I believe as we labor together looking unto Christ, we shall learn together.

Here is my anchor in this study: It has been shown that Ellen White stated that statutes and judgments were given to support the ten commandments. Those that are not ceremonial are moral supporting the ten commandments. We have a hard time knowing how they fit, but they do.

What we ought to be able to see because the line is broad is the separation between the ceremonial and the moral. Once we see that it is moral, then it is my understanding that a moral statute is still binding, but if it was a civil statute then we must make a further judgment. If the civil statute was dealing with the first four commandments, then we cannot ask for the state to enforce it. Does this sound right?

There are other concerns that need some study also. This is not an easy matter, but as we seek wisdom, God will help us.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 21, 2007, 04:52:00 AM
Brother Richard,
Your chosen example is a very good one, since it appears impossible to find a ceremonial aspect. Going through each of my five steps of interpretation, it is only at the last one that I can see any clarification. Since verbal revelation in the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy does not help us here, we must find either a rational explanation or a scientific one. I'm not a professional in the field, so I can only guess. It would appear to me that something in the way of fertilizing would be the explanation. The young tree may need the nutients of the first fruit given back to the soil to grow properly. But I suspect there is a good deal of detail in evidence to be found in the science of agriculture.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the moral aspect of agriculture is found in the Sabbath commandment, where six days work is commanded. The first profession given to humankind in Genesis 2 is care of the earth and growing things. This is a moral duty.

The context, by the way, of Ellen White's remarks about fruit trees shows that she was very concerned with their care and well-being.

There is another moral aspect here as well, one that is of relevance today. The artificiality of contemporary life is associated with immorality. Coming closer to nature and the soil in our concerns is associated with a more successfully moral life.

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
Brother Thomas I understand your thoughts and that is why I choose a specific example that we may study this in depth. There is something that we have not discerned clearly, but I believe as we labor together looking unto Christ, we shall learn together.

Here is my anchor in this study: It has been shown that Ellen White stated that statutes and judgments were given to support the ten commandments. Those that are not ceremonial are moral supporting the ten commandments. We have a hard time knowing how they fit, but they do.

What we ought to be able to see because the line is broad is the separation between the ceremonial and the moral. Once we see that it is moral, then it is my understanding that a moral statute is still binding, but if it was a civil statute then we must make a further judgment. If the civil statute was dealing with the first four commandments, then we cannot ask for the state to enforce it. Does this sound right?

There are other concerns that need some study also. This is not an easy matter, but as we seek wisdom, God will help us.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 21, 2007, 11:57:00 AM
I agree. Let us look at the word "moral" for a moment.

From the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ETHICAL b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior c : conforming to a standard of right behavior d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment e : capable of right and wrong action
****************************
When we say these statutes are moral in nature, we mean they are to be the standard of our behaviour. In our study we know that there are some other considerations. We are setting about to define the "other considerations."

The case of the statute on the young fruit trees is a good example since we can see that it was not ceremonial and does not appear to be a civil statute that would apply only to the theocracy.

The question now comes to mind, are there other considerations we have not identified? Yes, I am sure there are, but I do not think they apply to this statute. I have to say that I have a slight advantage in that I have already studied this from a scientific basis and found what appears to be the reason why this is to be a standard that we are to follow today and always.

But, the lesson for us is that we do not need to know the reason for the statute to know that it is for us and our happiness. We are to find the principles relating to the statutes and judgments so that we might know which are binding today. Then we will apply them in a consistent manner even when we do not understand the reasons behind a specific statute.

Case in point:  The world did not know why man was not to eat pork, but it was a moral statute and is binding today. It is part of the standard we are to live our lives by. And, when we understand the science behind the statute, we then understand that not only pig, but cow and sheep are now classified with the pig. These moral statutes are not designed for Pharisees, but for those who want to live their lives within the laws given for our blessing. Rejecting these moral statutes is to reject the blessings God has given.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Thomas M on July 21, 2007, 10:00:00 PM
Dear Brother Richard,
I think we are getting somewhere now. I daresay that your scientific evidence gives the correct explanation of the matter, although I do not know what it is at this point.
This coincides with and agrees with my fifth point of analysis. When we come to the end of the amount of revelation that is given in the ten commandments, the Bible, and the Spirit of Prophecy, then we are at liberty to depend on reason and science to fill in the gaps that we may see.
I daresay that what I have said about the statute of fruit trees in regard to the ten commandments is all very true. But it leaves the why and wherefore unexplained.
We are asked to obey before and without understanding all of the reasons. It is simply impossible for a human society to function, if people refuse to obey until they completely understand all of the reasons behind a law. It was essential for the Israelites, as you say, to avoid eating pork, even though they knew nothing about trichinosis.
The foundational reason for doing something is because we know that God told us to do so. When we get enlightenment from science that confirms it, that is useful to us. But even then, we obey because God told us to do so, not merely because science confirms it. I believe that is what you are saying, and I think it is a good point.


quote:
Originally posted by Richard Myers:
I agree. Let us look at the word "moral" for a moment.

From the Merriam-Webster dictionary:

of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ETHICAL b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior c : conforming to a standard of right behavior d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment e : capable of right and wrong action
****************************
When we say these statutes are moral in nature, we mean they are to be the standard of our behaviour. In our study we know that there are some other considerations. We are setting about to define the "other considerations."

The case of the statute on the young fruit trees is a good example since we can see that it was not ceremonial and does not appear to be a civil statute that would apply only to the theocracy.

The question now comes to mind, are there other considerations we have not identified? Yes, I am sure there are, but I do not think they apply to this statute. I have to say that I have a slight advantage in that I have already studied this from a scientific basis and found what appears to be the reason why this is to be a standard that we are to follow today and always.

But, the lesson for us is that we do not need to know the reason for the statute to know that it is for us and our happiness. We are to find the principles relating to the statutes and judgments so that we might know which are binding today. Then we will apply them in a consistent manner even when we do not understand the reasons behind a specific statute.

Case in point:  The world did not know why man was not to eat pork, but it was a moral statute and is binding today. It is part of the standard we are to live our lives by. And, when we understand the science behind the statute, we then understand that not only pig, but cow and sheep are now classified with the pig. These moral statutes are not designed for Pharisees, but for those who want to live their lives within the laws given for our blessing. Rejecting these moral statutes is to reject the blessings God has given.


Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on July 22, 2007, 11:34:00 AM
Yes, Brother Thomas, this is exactly what I have tried to express. There are blessings for us in the Mosaic law. Blessings that can only come as we learn of these laws or "principles" of our being. This was the purpose for beginning the topic.

It appears as  a maze until we begin to see the principles involved in deciding how they were ordered. We have made a large step forward by understanding that our first division comes in separating the ceremonial from the moral laws. The next help comes from knowing that the statutes and judgements that were not ceremonial were given to help us keep the ten commandments.

Another great help in this work is to know that the state is not to legislate in a manner that would force or restrict one's ability to worship God. In matters of worship the conscience is to be left untrammeled. This is important because Israel was given statutes that did not reveal this truth. Being a theocracy, an individual Jew was to  be stoned for breaking the Sabbath. This we can see is not binding today and the reason why is because there is no longer a theocracy. There will be other statutes and judgments that fit into this category and are no longer binding.

It is a joy to be able to enter into this study with others who have a desire to serve God more fully and to discover more of His law that we may spread this light in the world.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on August 03, 2007, 02:45:00 PM
I have a particular interest in the subject of not mixing wool with linen. Some information has been offered in this topic; however, I just found this one couched in a lengthy discussion of Stephen Haskell at the end of his book on Daniel:

quote:
Lev. 19:19. Garments were ever taken as an emblem of the righteousness of Christ, and when different substances as linen and wool were mingled it spoiled the figure.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on August 04, 2007, 05:04:00 PM
Help us with his thinking on this. My mind is not as exercised as was our dear departed brother's. I think I see what he is saying,  but it seems a little shallow and I know it can't be.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on August 05, 2007, 07:30:00 PM
It appears he was focused on the purity of the robe of Christ's righteousness as a single element - "without mixture" - rather than a literal mixing of materials.

Additionally, there must be a health advantage to wearing only cotton/linen, unmixed with other sources of material that could possibly harm the skin or interfere with the body's electrical flows.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on October 15, 2007, 08:06:00 AM
Considering the Law of Moses was given to the COI just after being delivered by the Hand of God from Egypt - a parallel can be seen relative to us this very day. God, through Moses, sat about reforming His people to learn to live a holy life so they could "cross over" into a better land. He continues that reform today.

It has been a little while since we have discussed the binding aspects of these laws - let's not let them drop. Having re-read the last ten pages of this topic, I am thrilled at some of our discoveries, yet, our ways are not God's ways.

In addition to the spiritual aspect of not mixing linen with wool as Brother Haskell stated, this statute must have a health aspect to it that we have not addressed.

What happens to our bodies when wool and linen are mixed as clothing? Why is there a command against it?

Does it have to do with static electricity?

Does it have to do with perspiration absorbtion? Coolness in the heat, warmth in the winter?

Or is it an overall command not to mix things that has meaning much more far reaching? I cannot get this subject off my mind.  

An Orthodox Jewish website gives this reason: Ancient pagan priests used to wear wool and linen processed together, because they knew how to make use of it for occult practices, including idol worship and other terrible things, and therefore the Torah forbade us to use it for all time, and ordered us to stay far away from shatnez, as well as all other practices of the pagans.

And another one:  The law, it is to be observed, did not prohibit the Israelites wearing many different kinds of cloths together, but only the two specified; and the observations and researches of modern science have proved that `wool, when combined with linen, increases its power of passing off the electricity from the body. In hot climates it brings on malignant fevers, and exhausts the strength, and when passing off from the body, it meets with the heated air, inflames and excoriates like a blister' (Whitelaw).” (emphasis mine throughout)

In other words, WEAVING WOOL WITH LINEN INTO THE SAME CLOTH, when used in a garment, CAUSES EXCESSIVE HEAT, SWEAT AND IRRITATION TO THE BODY - beyond what wool alone would do!

Does this sound reasonable? Or is there more?

[This message has been edited by Sybil (edited 10-15-2007).]

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on October 15, 2007, 08:40:00 AM
Most of the commentary I have found relative to this subject also covers prohibition of mixing (interbreeding) animals as well as mixing crops. There is a theme for the preservation of purity of the seed, whether animal or plant.

Thus far, the commentary on the mixture of clothing causing excessive body heat or interference of the body's electrical currents make the most sense. What think ye?
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on October 15, 2007, 08:53:00 AM
More commentary that appears to add light on this subject:

The Rabbi’s know to interpret Lev.19:19 in light of Deut.22:10-11. The teachings of Leviticus came before those of Deuteronomy. Exodus, Numbers and Leviticus began from the exodus out of Egypt and through out their wandering in the wilderness. Then after Israel’s wandering in the wilderness was about complete, Moses recapped, reminded, explained and expounded many of God’s Statutes, Judgments and Testimonies from Exodus, Numbers and Leviticus - in what is called Deuteronomy. In this summary of the previous teachings of the Pentateuch, Moses often explains these previous passages by adding a bit of clarification by way of additional information and by context. Thus Deuteronomy complements the previous three books, like the gospels complement one another. So let’s see the parallel Statute to Lev.19:19 in Deuteronomy.

Deut 22:9 You shall not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled. 10 You shall not plow with an ox and an ass together. 11 You shall not wear a garment of divers sorts, of wool and linen together.

Notice verse 9 gives us the point of these Statutes of separation – to protect us from DEFILEMENT! There are certain types of seed, that if mixed together will cause them to be defiled because they are DIVERSE in nature. Others can actually complement each other. God’s point is to avoid the unnatural harmful union of things that don’t complement each other.

This word “divers sorts” in Hebrew is “shah-at-naze,” which literally means spun linen and wool into one fabric. This is a “diverse” mixture where the two fabrics are not compatible! Either material by itself is fine. It is the combination that is a problem.

The word translated “diverse,” or “mixed” from the Hebrew is “kala`” which comes from the root word meaning to refrain or restrain, to hold back and restrict.

This is talking about mixing seeds, or fabrics, or oxen – OR PEOPLE in a way that will HOLD THEM BACK causing defilement, friction, and a constant struggle. Other mixtures that are not “diverse” in nature are not prohibited.

Notice here this principle is expanded and explained by Moses by placing it right alongside the prohibition against the unnatural union of yoking the ox and the ass together. The spirit of this statute is against any unnatural or contrary union. It is also against imitating the pagan mystical practices – which is another form of UNNATURAL UNION BETWEEN BAAL AND GOD – paganism and God’s Truth.

That is why Paul made the comparison he did when referring to these Statutes. Notice Paul uses this Statute of not yoking an ox and an ass together (a clean animal with an unclean animal – see Deut.22:10 & Lev.11), to teach God’s principle of not yoking believers together with unbelievers.

2 Cor 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. (KJV)

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on October 15, 2007, 10:35:00 AM
It is an interesting restriction that is still binding. The question in my mind is how far do we go?  Are we to not mix nylon and cotton as in most socks?  Generally we see a small amount of synthetic in socks with the majority being cotton.  It would appear that are better off by using single thread material. I think my wooll socks are 100 % wool. My tshirts are all cotton. Most of my clothing is all cotton. I won't wear synthetic material against my skin.

There is a blessing for us as we search the Bible wanting to live in harmony with the laws of our being. Many don't see it this way and do not want to be disturbed. But, they will lose the blessing that God has in giving to the world much instruction.

If the command to not mix fibers had been part of the sacrificial system, then we would not be concerned, but it was not from all we see. The same applies to much of the Levitical law. The health message has been rejected by much of the Christian Church, to their detriment. The principles involved in this area are of great importance to our happiness and our religious experience.

Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on October 15, 2007, 03:04:00 PM
I am convicted of this.
Title: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on October 16, 2007, 06:12:00 AM
Then what else does God have to reveal to us through His Word that will bless us today? How about the command to not mingle seeds when planting? Is there a blessing in taking care to follow this command? Or was it only for the Jewish economy?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on December 05, 2007, 04:51:40 PM
January 20, 1881 The Cities of Refuge.

By Mrs. E. G. White.

     At the command of God, Moses fixed the future boundaries of the land of Canaan. He then proceeded to select a prince from each tribe, and committed to them the work of dividing the land by lot among the different tribes when they should come in possession. In this arrangement the tribe of Levi alone was exempted. They were considered as especially set apart to the service of God, and hence were given no inheritance among their brethren. Instead of this, forty-eight cities in different parts of the country were to be assigned them, as a permanent dwelling-place.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 1}

     And now the Lord proceeded to give his people another evidence of his care and tender compassion for the unfortunate and the erring. To provide for the effectual punishment of murder, it was customary in ancient times for the execution of the murderer to devolve upon the nearest relative or the next heir of the deceased; and in extreme cases the avenger might pursue the criminal anywhere, and execute vengeance upon him without the formality of a trial. While the Lord would have the crime of murder regarded with great abhorrence, he would carefully guard the innocent. Hence, without entirely destroying the custom of private vengeance, he makes the most thorough provision that the guiltless be not rashly slain without trial, nor the guilty escape punishment.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 2}

     Of the cities assigned to the Levites, six were appointed as cities of refuge, to which the man-slayer might flee for safety. This provision was not designed for the willful murderer; but "that the slayer may flee thither, which killeth any person unawares." "And they shall be unto you cities of refuge, that the man-slayer die not until he stand before the congregation in judgment." Special directions were given to determine whether the man was guilty of willful murder, or had taken life by accident.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 3}

     The cities so wisely provided were to be located within a half-day's journey of every part of the land. It would not often happen that the avenger of blood would be in the spot, hence the unfortunate man-slayer would have an opportunity to flee, and but few would be overtaken before they gained the place of safety.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 4}

     But if the fugitive would escape with his life, there must be no delay; family and employment must be left behind, there was no time to say farewell to loved ones. His life is at stake, and every other interest must be sacrificed to the one purpose,--to reach the city of refuge. Weariness is forgotten, difficulties are unheeded. He does not for one moment slacken his pace until he is safe within the walls of the city.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 5}

     
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on December 05, 2007, 04:53:55 PM
Cities of Refuge continued:

The roads to these cities were always to be kept in good repair; all along the way, sign-posts were to be erected bearing the word Refuge in plain, bold characters, that the fleeing one might not hesitate for a moment. Any person,--Hebrew, stranger, or sojourner,--might avail himself of this provision. The case of the fugitive was to be fairly tried by the proper authorities, and if found guiltless of intended murder he was to be protected in the city of refuge. Should he carelessly wander away beyond the prescribed limits, and the avenger of blood find him, his life would pay the penalty of his disregard for the Lord's provision. Those who remained within the city until the death of the high-priest were then at liberty to return to their possessions.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 6}

     Among the specific directions for the trial of persons suspected of murder were the following: "Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses; but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die." How wise and just is this injunction. If the charge was supported by only one witness, the accused person was not to be condemned, although circumstantial evidence might be strong against him. On the other hand, if proved guilty no atonement or ransom could rescue him. However distinguished his position might be, he must suffer the penalty of his crime. The safety and purity of the nation demanded that the sin of murder be severely punished. Human life, which God alone could give, must be sacredly guarded.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 7}

     The blood of the victim, like the blood of Abel, will cry to God for vengeance on the murderer and on all who shield him from the punishment of his crime. Whosoever,--be it individual or city,--will excuse the crime of the murderer, when convinced of his guilt, is a partaker of his sin, and will surely suffer the wrath of God. The Lord designed to impress upon his people the terrible guilt of murder, while he would make the most thorough and merciful provision for the acquittal of the innocent.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 8}

     God understands the perversity of the human heart. Personal enmity, or the prospect of personal advantage, has ruined the reputation and usefulness of thousands of innocent men, and in many cases has resulted in their condemnation and death. The worthless lives of violent and wicked men have been preserved by a bribe, while those who were guilty of no crime against the laws of the nation have been made to suffer. By their wealth or power, men of rank corrupt the judges and bring false witness against the innocent. The provision that none should be condemned on the testimony of one witness, was both just and necessary. One man might be controlled by prejudice, selfishness, or malice. But it was not likely that two or more persons would be so perverted as to unite in bearing false witness; and even should they do so, a separate examination would lead to a discovery of the truth.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 9}

     This merciful provision contains a lesson for the people of God until the close of time. It was Christ who gave to Moses those explicit directions for the Hebrew host; and when personally with his disciples on earth, the great Leader repeated the same lesson as he taught them, how to treat the erring. One man's testimony was not to acquit or to condemn. One man's views and opinions were not to settle disputed questions. In all these matters, two or more were to be associated, and together they were to bear the responsibility in the case. God has made it the duty of his servants to be subject one to another. No one man's judgment is to control in any important matter. Mutual consideration and respect imparts proper dignity to the ministry, and unites the servants of God in close bonds of love and harmony. While they should depend upon God for strength and wisdom, ministers of the gospel should confer together in all matters requiring deliberation. "That by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established."  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 10}

     The laws instituted by God for the prevention and punishment of crime were marked by strict and impartial justice. But the sinfulness of man perverts the wisest laws, both human and divine. It is because men in authority can be bribed to excuse sin, and let the guilty pass unpunished that justice has fallen in the streets, and equity cannot enter. These evils are causing the earth to become as corrupt as in the days of Noah. The most terrible crimes are becoming so common as hardly to awaken a feeling of horror. Our own nation is guilty before God of permitting the most atrocious crimes to pass unheeded. The accumulating weight of unpunished sin is sinking the nation to destruction. The wrongs they do not condemn and punish are making this people the subjects of God's retributive justice. Licentiousness, robbery, and murder, continually on the increase, are deluging our world, and preparing it to receive the unmingled wrath of God.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 11}

     
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on December 05, 2007, 05:00:33 PM
Cities of Refuge continued:

The injunctions of God to the Hebrews should cause us to be filled with horror at the thought of even unintentionally destroying a human life. But when man is put to death by his fellow-man, to serve some selfish purpose, --as Naboth was slain that Ahab might obtain the coveted vineyard,--what honor [horror], what anguish, should be felt by those who make and execute  the laws! How zealous should be their efforts to ascertain the facts, and  then decide the case with strict integrity, and execute the penalty with  impartial justice.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 12}

     It was the opposite course pursued by the antediluvian world that made the growth of wickedness so rapid, and violence and crime so widespread, that God cleansed the earth from its moral pollution by a flood. It was the fact that licentiousness and murder were lightly regarded that fitted Sodom for God's judgments. Had those in authority taken upon themselves the work which the Lord had appointed them,--fathers commencing in their own families to correct wrong, and magistrates and rulers acting with promptness and decision to punish the guilty,--others would have feared, and crime would have decreased. God would not then have deemed it necessary to take the matter in hand himself, and by terrible things in righteousness, execute the justice which had been perverted by men in authority.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 13}

     To increase the horrors of murder, and aid in the detection of the criminal, the Lord ordained that when the body of a murdered person was found in the land, the most solemn and public ceremony should be held, under the direction of the magistrates and elders in connection with the priests of God's appointment. "If one be found slain in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee to possess it, lying in the field, and it be not known who hath slain him; then thy elders and thy judges shall come forth, and they shall measure unto the cities which are round about him that is slain; and it shall be, that the city which is next unto the slain man, even the elders of that city shall take a heifer, which hath not been wrought with, and which hath not drawn in the yoke; and the elders of that city shall bring down the heifer unto a rough valley, which is neither eared nor sown, and shall strike off the heifer's neck there in the valley. And the priests, the sons of Levi shall come near; for them the Lord thy God hath chosen to minister unto him, and to bless in the name of the Lord: and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke be tried. And all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley; and they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it. Be merciful, O Lord, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel's charge. And the blood shall be forgiven them. So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you, when thou shalt do that which is right in the sight of the Lord."  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 14}

     After the most diligent search had failed to discover the murderer, the rulers were by this solemn ceremony to show their abhorrence of the crime. They were not to regard with carelessness and negligence the deeds of the guilty. In all their acts they were to show that sin has a contaminating influence,--that it leaves a stain upon every land and every person who will not by all possible means seek to bring the wrong-doer to justice. God regards as his enemies those who will by any act of negligence shield the guilty. They are in his sight partakers in the evil deeds of the sinner.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 15}

     Here are lessons which God's people at the present day should take to heart. There are grievous sins indulged by individual members of the church,--covetousness, over-reaching, deception, fraud, falsehood, and many others. If these sins are neglected by those who have been placed in authority in the church, the blessing of the Lord is withheld from his people, and the innocent suffer with the guilty. The officers in the church should be earnest, energetic men, having a zeal for God, and they should take the most prompt and thorough measures to condemn and correct these wrongs. In this work they should act, not from selfishness, jealousy, or personal prejudice, but in all meekness and lowliness of mind, with a sincere desire that God may be glorified. Inhumanity, false dealing, prevarication, licentiousness, and other sins, are not to be palliated or excused; for they will speedily demoralize the church. Sin may be called by false names, and glossed over by plausible excuses and pretended good motives, but this does not lessen its guilt in the sight of God. Wherever it may be found, sin is offensive to God, and will surely meet its punishment.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 16}

     The cities of refuge appointed for God's ancient people are a symbol of the Refuge provided and revealed in Jesus Christ. The offering made by our Saviour was of sufficient value to make a full expiation for the sins of the whole world, and all who by repentance and faith flee to this Refuge, will find security; here they will find peace from the heaviest pressure of guilt, and relief from the deepest condemnation. By the atoning sacrifice of Christ, and his work of mediation in our behalf, we may become reconciled to God. The blood of Christ will prove efficacious to wash away the crimson stain of sin.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 17}

     A merciful Saviour appointed the temporal cities of refuge, that the innocent might not suffer with the guilty. The same pitying Saviour has by the shedding of his own blood wrought out for the transgressors of God's law a sure Refuge, into which they may flee for safety from the pangs of the second death. And no power can take out of his hands the souls who flee to him for pardon.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 18}

     As the man-slayer was in constant peril until within the city of refuge, so is the transgressor of God's law exposed to divine wrath until he finds a hiding-place in Christ. As loitering and carelessness might rob the fugitive of his only chance for life, so delays and indifference may prove the ruin of the soul. Our adversary, the devil, is on the watch constantly to destroy the souls of men, and unless the sinner is sensible of his danger and earnestly seeks shelter in the eternal Refuge, he will fall a prey to the destroyer.  {ST, January 20, 1881 par. 19}
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Greg Goodchild on December 05, 2007, 05:59:24 PM
Then what else does God have to reveal to us through His Word that will bless us today? How about the command to not mingle seeds when planting? Is there a blessing in taking care to follow this command? Or was it only for the Jewish economy?

In God's object lessons the concept is no mingling of the seed of God with the seed of unconverted man. Gen 6:4. It expands to all mingling of truth and error - the message is don't do it. God is all truth and no error and so will His people be as well.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on December 05, 2007, 08:19:25 PM
Amen, by the natural, so may we understand the spiritual.

So, let us return to the natural. Does God mean that we ought not mingle the seeds of our crops? Or was this injunction only for Israel. Has this law been abolished, or is it binding today?

Thank you, Sister Sybil for the "cities of refuge" posts. Because we are not living in a theocracy, the government of Israel is not binding upon us today. But, there are principles involved in this. Do those principles put forth in the Old Testament dealing with the punishment for death carry over into our age? Do our laws reflect this in any way?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Greg Goodchild on December 05, 2007, 10:00:11 PM
Amen, by the natural, so may we understand the spiritual.

So, let us return to the natural. Does God mean that we ought not mingle the seeds of our crops?
BG: Do we need to mingle seeds in our crops today to feed us?
Or was this injunction only for Israel. Has this law been abolished, or is it binding today?
BG: Since we are no longer under the literal theocracy, but have chosen to live under the spiritual theocracy, the principles remain binding.
Thank you, Sister Sybil for the "cities of refuge" posts. Because we are not living in a theocracy, the government of Israel is not binding upon us today. But, there are principles involved in this. Do those principles put forth in the Old Testament dealing with the punishment for death carry over into our age? Do our laws reflect this in any way?
BG: yes the laws are binding, but the application of the penalties will not be applied until the Jesus returns to earth.

Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on December 05, 2007, 10:17:45 PM
yes the laws are binding, but the application of the penalties will not be applied until the Jesus returns to earth.

It appears to me that our laws do indeed reflect the Biblical principle including penalties. Those who premeditate murder are treated differently than those who do not. The Biblical punishment for premeditated murder is death and this is how we are to do it today also. And, in a few states it is still done. It used to be common, but liberal values have stopped the death penalty and the corruption in the courts has resulted in unfair sentences in some cases.

Quote
the application of the penalties will not be applied until the Jesus returns to earth.

What penalties? Not the ones spoken of in the Bible for this our day.  The dead will not be raised to suffer punishment when Jesus comes now. And when He returns after the thousand years, that punishment has nothing to do with the punishment spelled out in the Old Testament for various crimes. How can the application of those penalties be applied when Jesus comes?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Greg Goodchild on December 05, 2007, 10:31:47 PM
Aren't works the issue for ascertaning punishment for the final judgment? If one picks up sticks on Sabbath today, even we would not punish him with stoning would we? But in the final punishment they will be stoned and burned with fire.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on December 06, 2007, 03:19:48 PM
"in the final punishment they will be stoned and burned with fire."

I am not aware of this. Who will stone anyone in the final judgment?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on December 06, 2007, 03:36:07 PM
I saw that but made no comment on it, thinking our brother might be considering God's reserves underneath the earth breaking up to join in with the fire from heaven to cleanse the earth of sin, thus potentially causing stones to fly and return to earth killing its inhabitants. ???

I have never heard this either at the judgment but allowed my mind to wonder in consideration of what I described above.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Greg Goodchild on December 06, 2007, 04:59:26 PM
Revelation 17:16 "and the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire."  Is Babylon burned with fire?

Revelation 16:21 "And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent..." Was the hail in the form of "stones"?

When God sends these judgments will God's people approve of His judgments, and will this approval mean that God's people are in harmony with Jesus?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on December 06, 2007, 05:21:24 PM
We were thinking literal and you were thinking in more symbolic terms, although the Bible does call the hail "stones" - it is a supplied word.

Typically when there is a discussion of stoning people, our first thought is not of hail but of stone - rock ...

We need to either greatly expand our ability to see symbolic imagery in even the simplest words, or we might begin to suggest you use language that is readily identifiable with the subject matter.

Either way, communication is difficult at best.
  :)
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Greg Goodchild on December 06, 2007, 08:24:21 PM
We were thinking literal and you were thinking in more symbolic terms, although the Bible does call the hail "stones" - it is a supplied word.

Typically when there is a discussion of stoning people, our first thought is not of hail but of stone - rock ...

We need to either greatly expand our ability to see symbolic imagery in even the simplest words, or we might begin to suggest you use language that is readily identifiable with the subject matter.

Either way, communication is difficult at best.
  :)

I think your first statement is the key to the communication. A literal position does make it difficult to "see" the spiritual interpretation. To this very day many SDAs have a difficult time with John 6. Many feel that Jesus was unfair to people to ask them to eat his flesh and drink his blood. If you literally read John 6 it puts you into a bind. But so to be as clear as possible when reading a section of Scripture like John 6 what is the best terminology to put on the process of understanding this section of Scripture the way Jesus wants it to be understood - Spiritually or litrally?

The interpretation of John 6 you refer to can only be seen as symbolic.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on December 25, 2007, 10:09:18 PM
Do we need to mingle seeds in our crops today to feed us?

I don't know. I don't think so. But, I have never quite come to the point of asking if I need to do something in order to know if God wants me to do it. I usually try and understand what God wants me to do based on what is written.

The way I read the Bible, God is telling us not to mingle our seed, our food seed.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Brian M on December 26, 2007, 08:59:50 AM
The way I read the Bible, God is telling us not to mingle our seed, our food seed.

Mingle? As in genetically modified? I would assume that would fall under the category of mingled seed - in the literal sense.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on December 26, 2007, 10:08:07 AM
I think that we have indeed moved into a new area of "mingling seed".  :(

In Bible times, I believe it was a command to not plant crops in the same field so as to cross pollinate various plants and lose the original plant. So, one ought to plant seeds for different plants that will cross pollinate in different fields to avoid this problem. Today, we suffer greatly from not having done so. We have lost many of our seeds.

And, yes this new science of genetic engineering has rapidly destroyed our "good" seeds. Sadly, too many do not value the counsel given in Scripture.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Brian M on December 26, 2007, 10:50:33 AM
I think that we have indeed moved into a new area of "mingling seed".  :(

In Bible times, I believe it was a command to not plant crops in the same field so as to cross pollinate various plants and lose the original plant. So, one ought to plant seeds for different plants that will cross pollinate in different fields to avoid this problem. Today, we suffer greatly from not having done so. We have lost many of our seeds.

And, yes this new science of genetic engineering has rapidly destroyed our "good" seeds. Sadly, too many do not value the counsel given in Scripture.

I agree! Scripture comes out on top and way ahead again!
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on December 31, 2007, 10:31:46 PM
I agree! Scripture comes out on top and way ahead again!

But there are those who object to us applying the Mosaic law to the world today.  They lose the blessing that we have gained, Brother Brian.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on February 03, 2008, 10:56:10 AM
Elder S. N. Haskell on the Cities of Refuge - from his Bible Handbook, 1919:

Life Only Through Christ, As Taught By The Cities Of Refuge

Num. 35:11-14. The six cities of refuge were a constant reminder that eternal
life was a gift and not an inherent human inheritance. P.P. 516.

Deut. 19:2, 3. The roads leading to the cities were to be kept in good repair that
the one fleeing might not be hindered. P.P. 515.

Num. 35:15. The refuge was free to all; even the stranger and sojourner might
flee thither. P.P. 515.

Num. 35:16-25. The regulations regarding these cities taught that there were
degrees of crime. It was possible to go so far in sin that the sinner was delivered
over to the avenger even at the gate of the city. P.P. 516.

Heb. 6:4-6; Matt. 12:31, 32. There is an unpardonable sin.

Heb. 12:16, 17. Illustrated in the case of Esau.

Joshua 20:4. Confession was made at the gate before the one fleeing was
received.

1 John 1:9. The sinner must confess.

Num. 35:26-29. Inside the city was life; outside the city was death. P.P. 517.

Prov. 18:10; Ps. 91:2. Christ is a refuge. P.P. 516, 517.

1 John 5:11, 12; John 15:4-7. Our safety is to abide in Christ.

Num. 35:26-28. If one presumptuously went outside the city, his life could be
taken.

Eze. 18:24-26. The one that turns from the refuge of Christ, dies the second
death.

Joshua 20:6; Num. 35:25. There were two important events to which the dweller in the city looked forward,–the judgment and the death of the high priest. The judgment decided his destiny; the death of the high priest restored him to freedom of the land. The decision in the judgment decides our eternal
destiny; and when our High Priest ceases to be high priest, our adversary, the devil, has no power to take our life, and we come into possession of our eternal inheritance.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: teresaq on August 02, 2008, 08:43:13 PM
i havent read all on this topic, but it seems great!!
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on August 02, 2008, 09:08:31 PM
Oh, it is a great topic, Teresa. There is a wealth of information contained in these pages. It has been one of the most enjoyable studies I have ever participated in.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 23, 2009, 03:53:31 PM
Just a short reminder that there are three distinct sets of laws in the Bible. Moral, ceremonial, and civil. The ceremonial and the civil do not apply today, but the moral law does. The civil law would have involved moral law, but because Israel was a theocracy, there were severe punishments prescribed. God does not err.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on October 19, 2009, 06:04:57 PM
While studying the covenants I came across this incredible quotation from Inspiration. Try to imagine it!

If man had kept the law of God, as given to Adam after his fall, preserved by Noah, and observed by Abraham, there would have been no necessity for the ordinance of circumcision. And if the descendants of Abraham had kept the covenant, of which circumcision was a sign, they would never have been seduced into idolatry, nor would it have been necessary for them to suffer a life of bondage in Egypt; they would have kept God's law in mind, and there would have been no necessity for it to be proclaimed from Sinai or engraved upon the tables of stone. And had the people practiced the principles of the Ten Commandments, there would have been no need of the additional directions given to Moses.  {PP 364.2}

Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on October 19, 2009, 09:53:10 PM
Could the people have kept  the law?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on October 19, 2009, 10:15:43 PM
Not through their own power. But we need to remember, "By faith, Abraham ..." had the ability many years prior to their time as captives. The initial wilderness experience found them without a knowledge of God. After so many years under Egyptian rule they were reduced to profound ignorance of who they once were in the sight of God. Therefore it was necessary for God to remind them who He is and how far they had fallen, so He gave them a transcript of His character that acted as a mirror to their very souls, exposing their true condition and extreme need of a Saviour.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on October 19, 2009, 11:01:03 PM
Amen!!  There is no excuse for sin. God, at great expense provided a remedy for our sin sick souls. He gave us His Son, that we might become partakers of His divine nature. This did not begin with the new covenant, it was a promise made to Adam. God promised that He would put enmity in his heart IF he would learn of Christ and accept Him as Saviour. He taught Adam and his children through the animal sacrifices that Jesus would take the sins upon Himself of all who would come to Him by faith.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on October 20, 2009, 05:06:09 AM
That is exactly what He did.  :)
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on October 20, 2009, 07:59:24 AM
Amen! And thus He gives us His Spirit and causes us to walk in His statutes, and we shall keep His judgments, and do them. Eze. 36: 27.  A reference not only to the ten commandment law, but the portions of the Mosaic law that are not civil nor ceremonial.  Thus, the feast days are excluded. 
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 07, 2010, 05:32:52 AM
I noticed that at the end of Leviticus, vs 34 says, "these are the commandments which the Lord commanded Moses for the children of Israel on Mt Sinai."  All that He laid out for them to do were commandments -- From what I have studied so far, I cannot agree that the whole feast is excluded because you are calling it ceremonial, my dear friend.  I am more convince than ever that only the temporary offering and sacrifice portion of any of the convocations we nailed to the cross -- that part of every service that included these sacrificial regulations.  Jesus is alive and still offering his blood, so the in effect, the sacrifice is still being offered.  The original observance of the Seventh-day Sabbath did also involve the sacrificing of animals and we know that the 4th commandment did not get nailed to the cross. (see 1 Chron. 23:31; 2 Chron. 2:4; 2 Chron. 8:13; 2 Chron. 31:3; Neh. 10:33; Eze. 45:17).

“That God who reads the hearts of everyone, will bring to light hidden things of darkness where they were often least suspected, that stumbling blocks which have hindered the progress of truth may be removed, and God have a clean and holy people to declare His statutes and judgments. “The Captain of our salvation leads His people on step by step, purifying and fitting them for translation, and leaving in the rear those who are disposed to draw off from the body, who are not willing to be led...” 1T 333

What is this light that has been hidden or these stumbling blocks which have hindered the progress of truth?  Anyone have a thought on this?  These statutes and judgments are obviously part of the last Elijah message to the world.  Also, I have noticed that there is more to "restoring the breach" that just preaching the Sabbath more fully.  The beast changed times as well as laws.

I am more convinced than ever that many more of these Levitical laws than I thought, are still required.  I think God gave us the SOP to reinstate many of these things.  I will continue to study and please show me where I might be off. :)  Thank you!
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on April 07, 2010, 05:49:45 AM
Jesus' sacrifice, His blood, replaces those of lambs and rams. We are in the "anti-typical" day of Atonement. How is it we can reinstate the "typical" when it found its fulfillment in the "anti-typical"? It can't be done.

I cannot see how the Sabbath is drawn into this question. Before the fall of mankind there were many weekly Sabbaths void of sacrifices. How do you account for that? 
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 07, 2010, 06:30:31 AM
I know it's hard to expand one's thinking beyond that which we have known for years, dear sister, but not all has been fulfilled -- not every type has reached it's anti-type.  That is the whole point I'm trying to make.  When you look at a 2300 day chart, you see Christ's death in the middle, but then there's more chart.  Why is there more chart?  Is that what we're asking? ;)  How come the chart didn't stop at his death?  The whole plan of redemption was prefigured in the sanctuary service -- it reaches it's complete fulfillment in the earth made new with the Feast of Tabernacles.  Then we will still be coming together to worship on new moons and holy days; just as the universe did before sin (and is probably still doing).  Our little world is temporal -- we need to expand our thinking to how eternity see's things. :)

“In like manner the types which relate to the second advent must be fulfilled at the
time pointed out in the symbolic service.” GC 399,400
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 08, 2010, 04:24:54 AM
If the feast days in your mind, Brother  Tim are moral law, as the Feast Keepers teach, and they have not been nailed to the cross as the Bible says in Colossians, then you need to keep them as the Jews did, including the Passover.  None were keeping the Day of Atonement in 1844, nor did the church after 1844. New light? No, a new false teaching unsupported by Scripture. There is a broad line between the moral law and the ceremonial law.

As you can read in this thread, there are many "moral" laws in the statutes and judgments that are not recognized. These are binding and we are to adhere to them as the light comes. New light? Yes, but it is in harmony with Scripture and really is not new at all. The Jews understood and so do some today. The church will be seen as "legalistic" by some when we express the idea that we are to refrain from eating foods that are now "unclean" because the animals are sick. But this is "moral" law. When we plant our fruit trees, it is not ceremonial law to refrain from eating the fruit from the tree for five years. It is moral law. Being moral law, it is binding today. If it is law that you are looking for, then there is more to learn. With the knowledge comes responsibility. Let us begin with that which is easy to understand. To him that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin. When moral law is discovered, we are to walk in the light by the grace that God gives. As our understanding deepens we are to obey that truth also. And, we are to teach others who want to know.

The health message is just as binding as the ten commandments because it is an integral part of the moral law. When we see others harming themselves by eating foods that are not healthy, we are to pray for them, and when given an opportunity share with them the dangers of eating diseased food. This is moral. It is such a blessing to find those that are discovering these important truths. They are meant to be a blessing not only to the church, but to the world. Many dying from heart disease, diabetes, and cancer don't have to if they will walk in the light of Scripture.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 08, 2010, 05:54:41 AM
Good morning, friend.  I am seeing more clearly your definition of what you mean when you speak of "moral law" and "ceremonial law."   In order to clarify my thinking about your thinking :), let me ask you a couple questions.  I'm asking because I believe we might be thinking too narrowly of what is moral law as well as defining too broadly what is ceremonial. 

Would you define "moral law" as anything God asks us to do? -- and as you rightly point out, "the testimony (example and teaching) of Jesus, which is the spirit of prophecy is also moral law.   He also told us to watch and pray.  Right?  He told us that we can know when the time is near -- even at the door.  Yes?  He gave us signs in the sun, moon and stars, which if we ignore, we do so at our own peril.  I this moral law?  How would you best define the law of gravity or the law of perpetual motion?  Moral law?  Natural law?  What about natural consequences?  How about this one -- the law of reciprocal influence, where speaking and hearing our own words have an effect on and strengthen what we think.  Or this one, the law of mutual influence; those we associate with and listen to, influence and strengthen what we believe.  What is the reason we are counseled to "forsake not the gathering together as some do?"  Is this counsel moral law?  When God created the "appointed times" to get together (spiritually), what do you imagine He we thinking?

“The writings of Moses were taught by Joshua to all Israel... This was in harmony with the express command of Jehovah providing for a public rehearsal of the words of the book of the law every seven years, during the Feast of Tabernacles... Had this counsel been heeded through the centuries that followed, how different would have been Israel’s history. PK 465

As to ceremonial law -- “The ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing to Christ, to His sacrifice and His priesthood. This ritual law, with its sacrifices and ordinances, was to be performed by the Hebrews until type met antitype in the death of Christ, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. Then all the sacrificial offerings were to cease. It is this law that Christ ‘took...out of the way, nailing it to His cross.’” PP 365

“The Lord gave Moses definite instructions in regard to the ceremonial offerings which
were to cease at the death of Christ.
” ST 6/17/1880

I think these quotes exemplify what I want to bring to your attention.  Notice that the ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing both to Christ's "sacrifice" and His "priesthood."  We agree that type met anti-type in Christ's death regarding his "sacrifice."  What about his priesthood -- was that nailed to the cross as well?  No.  We notice that only "the sacrificial offerings were to cease.  It is this law that Christ took our of the way, nailing it to His cross."

Physical Israel kept these appointed times to the letter, just as spiritual Israel is to keep these appointed times in "spirit and in truth."  If we keep ignoring these appointed times that God has given to show His timeline, we risk being asleep and without enough oil.  In fact, though we have stopped sacrificing animals, we are not to stop offering "spiritual sacrifices."

“Yes also, as lively stones, are built upon a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to
offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.” 1 Peter 2:5

To me this discussion about whether we should keep the feasts is a distraction -- what we should be asking ourselves is, what are the lessons God means for us to learn from these "appointed times?"

What do you believe, brother Richard, that the following quote means to us as a people?

“The significance of the Jewish economy is not yet fully comprehended. Truths vast
and profound are shadowed forth in its rites and symbols...” COL 133

Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 08, 2010, 06:08:23 AM
Good morning, Brother Tim.

What do you believe, brother Richard, that the following quote means to us as a people?

“The significance of the Jewish economy is not yet fully comprehended. Truths vast
and profound are shadowed forth in its rites and symbols...” COL 133

The ceremonial law of rites and symbols are types and shadows whose teachings are important to us today. We have much to learn from them. We do not perform these rites, but we are to study and learn from them. The Jews misunderstood the symbol of the lamb. Even the disciples of Christ failed to understand that He must die. How very sad. Such a deception. The church today needs to rightly understand the sanctuary and its services that we may not be deceived. What was taught by shadows is what we are living today. To know where Christ is and what the plan of salvation involves is a matter of spiritual life and death.

The system of types and shadows when rightly understood confirm what we see taught in the New Testament. It was the gospel in types and shadows. The Jews looked forward to the cross, we look back at it. They had shadows of the cross, we have the blazing glory of it.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 08, 2010, 06:48:30 AM
Good morning, friend.  I am seeing more clearly your definition of what you mean when you speak of "moral law" and "ceremonial law."   In order to clarify my thinking about your thinking :), let me ask you a couple questions.  I'm asking because I believe we might be thinking too narrowly of what is moral law as well as defining too broadly what is ceremonial.  

Would you define "moral law" as anything God asks us to do? -- and as you rightly point out, "the testimony (example and teaching) of Jesus, which is the spirit of prophecy is also moral law.   He also told us to watch and pray.  Right?  He told us that we can know when the time is near -- even at the door.  Yes?  He gave us signs in the sun, moon and stars, which if we ignore, we do so at our own peril.  I this moral law?  How would you best define the law of gravity or the law of perpetual motion?  Moral law?  Natural law?  What about natural consequences?  How about this one -- the law of reciprocal influence, where speaking and hearing our own words have an effect on and strengthen what we think.  Or this one, the law of mutual influence; those we associate with and listen to, influence and strengthen what we believe.  What is the reason we are counseled to "forsake not the gathering together as some do?"  Is this counsel moral law?  When God created the "appointed times" to get together (spiritually), what do you imagine He we thinking?

There are indeed different kinds of law. We are not interested in natural law such a the laws of physics. We are interested in just two kinds of law in our present discussion. Actually three, there was civil law in the Old Testament also. Civil laws have to do with the laws that pertained to Israel as a theocracy. We are not interested in the civil laws in this topic, only that they existed and must be considered as we seek to separate out the moral laws since they are still binding. As we read through the Old Testament, we sift out the civil law and are left with moral laws and ceremonial laws.  The two are distinct. There is a broad line between the two. Moral law has to do with our behavior. What is right and what is wrong. Ceremonial law has to do with the rites and symbolic teaching of the plan of salvation.

Quote
As to ceremonial law -- “The ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing to Christ, to His sacrifice and His priesthood. This ritual law, with its sacrifices and ordinances, was to be performed by the Hebrews until type met antitype in the death of Christ, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. Then all the sacrificial offerings were to cease. It is this law that Christ ‘took...out of the way, nailing it to His cross.’” PP 365

Notice that the ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing both to Christ's "sacrifice" and His "priesthood."  We agree that type met anti-type in Christ's death regarding his "sacrifice."  What about his priesthood -- was that nailed to the cross as well?  No.  We notice that only "the sacrificial offerings were to cease.  It is this law that Christ took our of the way, nailing it to His cross."

We do not have to go any further than the quote you have shared, Brother Tim, to see the truth. “The ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing to Christ...

What is the law we are speaking of here? Is it moral or ceremonial? It is ceremonial law. What is the "ceremonial" law? It is "made up of symbols pointing to Christ.".

What else is spoken of in this statement as pertaining to the "ceremonial" law? “The ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing to Christ, to His sacrifice and His priesthood." It was not just about the sacrifices, but it was about Christ and the plan of salvation. In types and shadows the "ceremonial" laws revealed the "priesthood" of Christ. It through types and shadows taught what was going to happen in the future. It taught about the sacrifice of Christ and about His priesthood in the heavenly sanctuary. This includes His role as mediator. It reveals the plan of salvation which includes the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary from sin and the response to our prayers from heaven. It reveals much about the unseen world that we need to better understand. This is the "ceremonial" system composed of types and shadows.

Notice also, that this "ceremonial" law is also referred to "ritual" law. Ceremonies and rituals were nailed to the cross at the death of Christ. "This ritual law, with its sacrifices and ordinances, was to be performed by the Hebrews until type met antitype in the death of Christ, the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world."

Thank you for providing this information that supports what I have been trying to say is included in the "ceremonial" laws.

Quote
To me this discussion about whether we should keep the feasts is a distraction -- what we should be asking ourselves is, what are the lessons God means for us to learn from these "appointed times?"

We are not discussing the feasts. This topic is studying the "binding aspects of the Mosaic law." We are attempting to learn the difference between the laws that are still binding and those that are not. When we began this topic, the "feast keepers" were not a concern. They have gained influence of late. Their false teachings have spread rapidly and are discussed elsewhere. They have made the feast days and issue and by so doing have created division where there ought to be unity. They declare that you and I are under obligation to keep the feast days.

Here  we want to concentrate on how to understand that which we are to live by. The laws of our being are revealed so that we may be happy and prosperous. They are for our blessing. Don't we want to know how we ought to live? How we ought to treat others? This is the function of the moral law. It is a revelation of the character of our God.

The ceremonial law was binding on the Israelites before the cross. It is  no longer. The cross has come and we are set free from the unnecessary burdens of keeping the ceremonial laws. But, they are instructive just as you expressed. We are to learn the "lessons from these appointed times." We are not to keep them, but to learn from them.  Hope this helps to clarify the difference between the ceremonial and moral laws.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 08, 2010, 07:10:26 AM
To further clarify the "moral" law let me add this thought. God did not trust His moral law to the memory of a people who were prone to forget His requirements, but wrote them upon tables of stone. He would remove from Israel all possibility of mingling heathen traditions with His holy precepts, or of confounding His requirements with human ordinances or customs. But He did not stop with giving them the precepts of the Ten Commandments. The people had shown themselves so easily led astray that He would leave no door of temptation unguarded. Moses was commanded to write, as God should bid him, judgments and laws giving minute instruction as to what was required. These directions relating to the duty of the people to God, to one another, and to the stranger were only the principles of the Ten Commandments amplified and given in a specific manner, that none need err. They were designed to guard the sacredness of the ten precepts engraved on the tables of stone. There were no symbols or rituals, they were strictly moral precepts. They are not to teach by symbols, they were not shadows, but they stated clearly what was right and what was wrong.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 08, 2010, 07:21:34 AM
Brother Tim, in doing a little studying this morning, I ran across a statement that supported the idea that the line between the ceremonial and moral was broad. You will never guess where I found it. It preceeds your quoted statement above. Here it is.

"There are many who try to blend these two systems, using the texts that speak of the ceremonial law to prove that the moral law has been abolished; but this is a perversion of the Scriptures. The distinction between the two systems is broad and clear".And then we get to the quote you shared.... "The ceremonial system was made up of symbols pointing to Christ, to His sacrifice and His priesthood...."

We need not err in understanding the difference between the ceremonial and the moral law. One is symbolic and teaches of the plan of salvation, the other deals with our responsibilities to God, our neighbor, and the stranger. Moral law deals with our behavior, what is right and what is wrong. Ceremonial law points to the ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary today. He is interceeding for us and in the process of cleansing the heavenly sanctuary as shadowed forth in the ritual Day of Atonement.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 08, 2010, 04:25:28 PM
There are so many responses that I wish to make to your last posts, that I'll have to answer in pieces as I have time.  Here's a start. :)

If I intentionally misuse or disregard God's natural law, it's a moral issue.  He gave us these laws, written on every fiber of our being to be a blessing.  If I intentionally disregard His appointed times, when He says watch ye therefore, because there will be signs in the sun, moon and stars, it's a moral issue.  William Miller obeyed God in the area of studying out the appointed times.  Any command, in any of these areas that we choose to disregard, is a moral issue.  You keep saying that all types and symbols were nailed to the cross; this is not true and it teaches those who are listening to disregard that which was given to be a blessing from when "the foundations were laid."  This is my concern about elevating one and disregarding the other.  Do you see now what I am saying, my dear friend?  I'm for elevating the standard and learning in all these areas what we are to know to perfectly reflect Jesus.  As we have discovered from other studies, there is no glory in the moral law apart from Christ.

Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 08, 2010, 06:34:42 PM
As we study and pray, God will lead -- This topic attracted my attention, because in the Mosaic Law, I see all instruction and doctrine, including the things surrounding the Sanctuary service as spiritually binding.  David said, "I have seen the consummation of all perfection, but your commandment is exceeding broad."  There is much to be learned from all the commands given to Moses.  I have come to believe that there is less that has passed away than we now think. Best to leave it at that. :)
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 09, 2010, 06:32:21 AM
You keep saying that all types and symbols were nailed to the cross; this is not true and it teaches those who are listening to disregard that which was given to be a blessing from when "the foundations were laid."
My dear brother Richard, I now wish that I had chosen different words that the ones in my quote.  This, perhaps is the least of your concerns at this juncture, but I know you well enough, to know you would never teach anything you believed to be untrue.  Please forgive my very public blunder.  Is there any way that you could lengthen the time given to "modify" our posts? :)  I think two or three days might be a good starting point for me and then we can see if I need more time for regrets at a later point. ::)
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Sister Dee on April 09, 2010, 08:54:02 AM
Is there any way that you could lengthen the time given to "modify" our posts? :)  I think two or three days might be a good starting point for me and then we can see if I need more time for regrets at a later point. ::)

You know, I've often wished for the same thing.   ;)
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Donna H on April 09, 2010, 12:42:16 PM
This is an incredible thread. Incredibly enlightening, and so much to consider:
Psalm 119:97 - O how I love Your law! It is my meditation all the day.

I'm finding this thread quite thrilling...

BUT I've only read up to page 7 of this thread, and I'm running out of stamina, so I have posted a question (or two), and some thought processing. Please forgive me it/they has/have been answered in the discourse I've jumped over. Ah, mostly thinking out loud here.

Seems to me that it is important to clarify and define what "binding" actually means in this discussion. Does it mean applicable and useful? Does it mean legally binding as the Decalogue is? It's been decided that it is not practical for the punishments to be carried out by us, but are we taking the route that God will carry out judgment on us on that day, an account of the statutes?

James 2:12
So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty.

We will be judged by the law of liberty, which is, in my understanding, the Decalogue.

and

We have Jesus who did not condemn the woman who committed adultry.
We have David and Moses who are both murders but were not killed.
We have the example of David breaking the Sabbath law but not being put to death.
We have James 2:3 - For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.  

If some of the statutes were given as provisions (post #97), and they go against the high ways of God, then should we throw those ones out? I don't understand how they could have been given to guard the 10 Commandments, yet cause the breaking of them at the same time (to kill for killing). Yes, there are consequences, and dire consequences, but if we are to show mercy, and to forgive "seventy times seven" times our brother, then doesn' that eliminate alot of the statutes? Or just the consequences?

God will take care of it on the final day. John 12: 46-48:

46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
 
Wouldn't it make sense that we are judged by the 10 Commandments, making them binding, but the statutes are God's help for us to cleanse ourselves, to seperate ourselves from the world and consecrate ourselves so we can hold greater light and be given more wisdom and have fuller measure of the Spirit dwelling within; the applicable statutes will help us to keep the 10 Commandments in their purity, but the statues themselves no longer come with judgment, which would make them non binding?

It might seem like splitting hairs that can't be split, because if that's the case, the non binding and the binding cannot be separated --- unless we achieve the purity of the 10 Commandments, and we no longer need to look to the statutes for guidance, or consequences to inflict.

Hmmmm.

Mathew 22:39-40
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.  

And the new commandment:

John 13:34
34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

... love others not just as we love ourselves, but as Christ loves us. And Christ has given us this opportunity for redemption, forgiveness, mercy, sanctification. Not on judgment or condemnation.


You know, if we look at the law as a representation of Christ, including the sacrificial system, then we can also look at the law as the experience of Christ. The law is Spiritual, it knows no sin, but it was made to be sin by the enemy. The law was corrupted by the enemy and man participated (Pharisees, Israelites disregarding the Law, profaning it):

Romans 6:10-12 
10 and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me;
11 for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.

It's Eden all over again and defamation of God's character.
And Christ has restored God's name, and magified the law and made it honorable (Isaiah 42:21).

Mathew 22:39-40
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.  

hang - Strongs G2910/Thayer's: all the Law and the Prophets (ie. the teaching of the OT on morality) is summed up in these two precepts.

So that would mean all the moral statues, except the ones which were provisional. Jesus did not magnify "an eye for an eye":

Mathew 5:37-39
37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

He magnified the purity of the Law (the moral law), not the statutes that dealt with sin. So that leaves us with the 10 Commandments. The rest seems to be useful, and we are wise to heed the instruction, but it does not seem binding, therfore is open for modifcation to our times?


Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Donna H on April 09, 2010, 12:44:22 PM
AK! How do I edit? I 'posted' instead of 'previewed'.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on April 09, 2010, 12:48:16 PM
Do you see a "modify" button in the right-hand corner?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Donna H on April 09, 2010, 12:48:45 PM
I'm not done  :'(
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Donna H on April 09, 2010, 12:49:10 PM
nope.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on April 09, 2010, 12:50:31 PM
Okay ... I will send it to you via e-mail and you can edit and repost.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 09, 2010, 03:49:24 PM
Seems to me that it is important to clarify and define what "binding" actually means in this discussion. Does it mean applicable and useful? Does it mean legally binding as the Decalogue is? It's been decided that it is not practical for the punishments to be carried out by us, but are we taking the route that God will carry out judgment on us on that day, an account of the statutes?

Binding means that the law has not been annulled or removed as the ceremonial law has been. It is still active and to transgress means that one has sinned. Moral law as differentiated from ceremonial law is still binding.

Quote
If some of the statutes were given as provisions (post #97), and they go against the high ways of God, then should we throw those ones out? I don't understand how they could have been given to guard the 10 Commandments, yet cause the breaking of them at the same time (to kill for killing). Yes, there are consequences, and dire consequences, but if we are to show mercy, and to forgive "seventy times seven" times our brother, then doesn't that eliminate a lot of the statutes? Or just the consequences?

I had pointed out that there are three kinds of law in the Old Testament. There is "moral" law, "ceremonial" law, and "civil" law.  It was confusing for me in the beginning because I had not realized the civil law. It was specifically for Israel while a theocracy. God was their ruler and He took an active part in the administration of the nation. He knows the heart, so He could give laws that called for the death penalty. He could grant mercy or not. Today, we do not follow the "civil" laws in the Old Testament because there are no theocracies. There is to be the death penalty for murder. That is Biblical, but not for Sabbath breaking. The various societies are to determine the penalties for crimes. The moral law in the Old Testament is to be the basis for our laws, but not for punishment. Principles can be drawn from what God did, but the civil laws are not binding today. Let me correct that just a bit. The last six of the ten commandments are to be the basis for our laws, not the first four. They deal with our worship of God. In a theocracy they were binding, but not in today's world. The last six of the ten deal with our relationship with each other.

The binding claims of the law have to do with guilt and eternal life. To him that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin. God's mercy is extended to the sinner in this life to allow for the transformation of character. Mercy is granted for past sins that have been repented of that we may live eternally with Him. If known sins are not repented and forsaken, then the sinner will perish eternally. The wages of sin (transgression of the law) is death.

Donna, you made reference to post #97.  I quote a portion for our convenience.

Something came to mind that I have not thus far considered in our study. We see in the statutes provisions for some things that are contrary to God's law. It is not that God is commanding these things that He does not support, but He has made provision for dealing with them....even though they are contrary to His law. I know that some will object and have a problem with this, but in our present company I think we understand.

An example:  Multiple wives by Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon.  We all understand that God allowed this, made provision for dealing with it, but it is not His law that man should have more than one wife. Another example:  Slaves. This is not God's will that man should be in servitude to another. But, He made provision for dealing with this foul practice. And one last thought along this line. God abhors death. It was never His desire that anything should die. Yet, we have death. And, not only do we have death, we have God participating in it and commanding it.

As we move forward, we must do so without any consideration that God is arbitrary. He is not. His ideas are far past ours. As we contemplate His laws, we must always keep in mind His love for us and that His ways are perfect. He has made provision of us who are not perfect, but rather great sinners.

God did not correct all evils that existed immediately. He dealt with sinful man in stages just as He has not seen fit to condemn all who break the fourth commandment today. Soon, when knowledge is increased of the binding claims of the fourth commandment, then man will be guilty before God for breaking it. God is soooo Very GOOD and soooo very patient!!!!  His ways are past finding out. But, we surely can know of His love and forgiveness. And we do not forget His justice. It is just as important as His mercy.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Donna H on April 09, 2010, 05:22:04 PM
Thank you, Richard.
I'm going to mull over your (re)explanation while I continue reading through the thread.

God bless,
Donna
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 09, 2010, 10:34:21 PM

He magnified the purity of the Law (the moral law), not the statutes that dealt with sin. So that leaves us with the 10 Commandments. The rest seems to be useful, and we are wise to heed the instruction, but it does not seem binding, therfore is open for modifcation to our times?

The ten commandments hang on the two great commandments. That is to say that if we obey the two, we shall be obeying all ten (if we understand them).

The statutes and judgments, the ones that are not ceremonial nor civil, are moral and hang on the ten which hang on the two. The ten are broad and are not seen in the detail that comes forth in the statutes and judgments. Just as the two great commandments are very broad and do not reflect the detail of the ten commandments. God could have just given the two, but we need to have things spelled out a little better, being as dull minded as we are. Now, some, like me, need to go even further and be given more detail. That is the purpose of the statutes and judgments. They further defined what it means to keep the ten commandments. It may be hard to see, but the ten cover it all, just as do the two great commandments. Hope this helps. :)

Have a blessed Sabbath, all!
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Donna H on April 12, 2010, 03:53:29 PM
So, the "eye for eye" principle was 'civil' (Ex. 21:24), and Jesus lifted the principle into the sphere of 'moral', in effect nullifying the 'civil' authority it had? 

Mat. 5:38-39
Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 12, 2010, 04:52:23 PM
Here's a quote saying that the principles haven't changed and won't.  The letter killeth -- but... we can always apply the principle involved.  When God says that something is a statute forever, He must mean it. :)

“The principles set forth in Deuteronomy for the instruction of Israel, are to be followed by God’s people to the end of time. Our prosperity is dependent on the continuance of our covenant with God.” RH 4/25/1907
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 12, 2010, 07:17:36 PM
So, the "eye for eye" principle was 'civil' (Ex. 21:24), and Jesus lifted the principle into the sphere of 'moral', in effect nullifying the 'civil' authority it had?  

Mat. 5:38-39
Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Some of the law being quoted in Exodus is part of the Statutes and Judgments that Moses was given by God. They are not merely "moral" in that some included penalties and some were ceremonial. The civil laws went beyond moral principle to add what was a fair penalty. This was for a nation under a theocracy and at the time it was given. The statutes and judgments that were not civil and were not ceremonial remain in effect today for they were purely moral.

As I understand the statement about an eye for an eye, it was not a law, but it was explaining the basis of the penalty put forth in the law. It was meant to help the hearer understand that God is just. Perfectly just. Thus, the principle is put forth, an eye for an eye. Then comes along Jesus and He appears to undo this. But, did He?

Now, look at what God did in Sacrificing His Son, I ask, was it fair? Was it just?

Dear sister, God is teaching you. I want you to finish the story. What lesson was being taught by Christ when He "appeared" to set aside the principle put forth in Exodus 21:24?

The great issue at stake with God is that the whole universe understand that justice and mercy met at the cross. He would not, could not be unjust, yet He showed mercy to us poor sinners! The Bible is consistent from Genesis to Revelation, but to our feeble minds, we need the Holy Spirit to explain how it is so.  :)  This He so much wants to do. It is His will that you comprehend what Jesus taught in Matt.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Donna H on April 14, 2010, 05:15:51 PM

Now, look at what God did in Sacrificing His Son, I ask, was it fair? Was it just?


No, it wasn't fair. Yes, it was just.
I've fallen "flat on my face", and find myself speechless.

The day has come, Lord, that I call You Ishi.



A little off topic with this thread, but ... all's well.

Thank you, Richard.
God bless,
Donna

Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 15, 2010, 05:23:47 AM
Here, the whole of the Jewish economy seems to be included as law that will in no wise pass, til all be fulfilled.   

     The Creator knows just what elements He has to deal with in human nature. He knows what means to employ to obtain the desired end. The Christian who accepts the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, will look at Bible history in its true bearing. The past--the history of the Jewish economy from beginning to the end--instead of being spoken of contemptuously and sneered at as "the dark ages," will reveal light, and still more light, as it is studied. {UL 96.4}
     Man's word fails, and he who takes the assertions of man as his dependence may well tremble, for he will one day be as a shipwrecked vessel. But God's Word is infallible and endures forever.  Christ declares, "Verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matt. 5:18).  God's Word will endure through the ceaseless ages of eternity.  {UL 96.5}
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 15, 2010, 07:19:34 AM
Brother Tim, if we were take this as truth, it would make shipwreck of our faith. We know that the ceremonial law has ended. We also know that the civil statutes for Israel are no longer binding. We are not to stone Sabbath breakers, nor those who are gluttons. We are not to sacrifice lambs and doves any longer.

In your effort to justify the keeping of the feast days, you appear to be looking for statements to do so? Your feast keeping friends have done this very thing until they have confused many in the church. The law given to Israel can be divided into three kinds of law. The moral law which is still binding.

The civil law which was for Israel, a  nation under the direct rule of god, a theocracy. The penalties proscribed no longer are binding. Societies today are to decide the penalty for gluttony, if there is to be one.

The ceremonial law, which was to teach about the plan of salvation, ceased at the cross to be binding.  Not all types had met their anti-types. They are shadows of things to come. Most have been fulfilled. Some have a secondary fulfillment. Because they reveal the future, does not mean that the church is to follow the law of the ceremonies. It was a lesson book that we can still learn from without dressing up and keeping a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;  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.

The seventh-day Sabbath is a moral law, but the ceremonial Sabbaths and other feast days have been "blotted out".  The history of Israel is for us whom the ends of the world have come upon. How are we to know where our high priest is today if we do not understand the shadows that teach us not not only where He is, but what He is doing.

From the New Testament Book of Hebrews we are given much light.  It reveals that we are to understand the lessons from the Hebrew economy. We are not to act out the ceremonies, but we are to understand the significance of the ceremonies.

[It was] therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.  
  9:24   For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, [which are] the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:  
  9:25   Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;  
  9:26   For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.  
  9:27   And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:  
  9:28   So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.  

We can now better understand why this statement was made: The past--the history of the Jewish economy from beginning to the end--instead of being spoken of contemptuously and sneered at as "the dark ages," will reveal light, and still more light, as it is studied.  Many have no idea that the ceremonial law revealed the plan of salvation. Many "sneer" at the Old Testament. They want the lessons to be nailed to the cross as well as the laws. So sad! And, they rebel against the idea that the moral law is still binding. All who believe this lose great blessings by not understanding the moral laws that we are to live by. By so doing we find our happiness. It is hard when one does not live within the laws of our being.

There is a wide separation between the moral and the ceremonial law. We may all come to see this. It is my prayer that our discussion is helping many to better understand the Old Testament Scripture and thus much of the New Testament which is dependent upon Old Testament writings.  I have given a good example from the Book of Hebrews. Those ignorant of the Hebrew economy cannot understand the meaning of these passages and many others like them.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 15, 2010, 12:48:06 PM
Richard, I intentionally posted in the Mosaic Law thread; not the feast day thread, for what it could bring to this subject.  I already know how you feel about FD's.  This thread is a good study even without the other. :)  In other quotes EGW talks about God's principles spanning every age, we do not take every detail literally.  Much applies to spiritual Israel, spiritually, just as the letter applied to physical Israel.  Do you agree? 

Don't worry, I'm not pushing feast days except for what spiritual Israel can learn spiritually.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 15, 2010, 09:01:52 PM
Here, the whole of the Jewish economy seems to be included as law that will in no wise pass, til all be fulfilled.   

Help us better understand what you are saying here, Brother Tim. I must be misunderstanding what you mean. To me this means that all of the law given to Moses is still binding. Is that what you are saying?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 16, 2010, 04:39:46 AM
I intentionally let the EGW quote speak for what it may instruct spiritually.  What do you think it means?  When I come across a quote from her including a Bible text, she usually ties it to her subject before or after she quotes it.   This is how I know to interpret what she is saying.  The subject is "the Jewish economy" from beginning to end.  The text is "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, til all be fulfilled." Matt 5:18.  I suppose this text could be read, "until each aspect of the law is fulfilled." -- but, to me she is definitely tying the whole Jewish economy to Matt 5:18.  

There are 129 hits when I type in the phrase, "Jewish economy."  I am still reading all of them.  Without presupposing what I am saying, what are your thoughts? :)  Though my eyebrows raise and my ears perk up, I may not know all this SOP quote is saying, but just that it sounds important enough to share on this subject.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 16, 2010, 07:51:23 AM
It is very important as  I explained. She is not talking about the "moral law" when making reference to the "Jewish economy". Jesus was pointing the Jews and us to the "moral law", not the ceremonial law. When we are looking to prove something, we will find much, but often, it is not truth. I have had to deal with error for many years. There is so very much twisting of the Scriptures to make them say that which they do not. We need the Holy Spirit to help us discern what is truth. I cannot convince you that the ceremonial law is done away with, but it surely is. Colossians states it very clearly, and we all understand that there are to be no more lambs killed. That is a good beginning to stop moving in that direction. Then why the statement about the Jewish economy?

This is why:   1 Corinthians.....
  10:1   Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;  
  10:2   And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;  
  10:3   And did all eat the same spiritual meat;  
  10:4   And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.  
  10:5   But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.  
  10:6   Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.  
  10:7   Neither be ye idolaters, as [were] some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.  
  10:8   Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.  
  10:9   Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.  
  10:10   Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer.  
  10:11   Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.  

We are to study the lessons put before us. It is more than just their sin and how God dealt with them, they were God's chosen people and had been entrusted with the light from His throne. They had the sacred oracles. The plan of salvation was revealed in the sanctuary and its services. These rites were to cease when the curtain separating the Most Holy Place from the Holy Place was ripped from top to bottom by the hand of God. No more shadow plays. No more sacrifices. The ceremonial that you make reference to is nailed to the cross. What happened at the moment the curtain was ripped from top to bottom by an unseen hand? Christ died at the exact same time. What does this tell us, Brother Tim? Why did God the Father rip the temple curtain?

Try to keep your mind on this point instead of going after the thoughts that entertain your mind in reference to the possibilities that exist. There are many important "lessons" in the Jewish economy for us today. Lessons about the plan of salvation. We do not act them out any longer. That brings reproach upon Christ. We have the cross in its blazing glory set before us. We do not need to act it out. Christ has died. Now, for much of Christianity, we need to understand why He died and what He is doing today. Most have been deceived about the ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary. We have now been entrusted with great light. You, my dear brother are responsible for sharing these truths.

Begin with the light that has been agreed upon, walk in it and if God finds it will be a blessing, He will send "new light". But, first concentrate on the light that has been rejected or not understood. There is so much in this area, that needs to be gathered up and followed, that we ought not be worried about seeking after "new light".  The teachings of the church regarding the ceremonial law is correct. The dividing of the ceremonial law from the moral law happened at the cross. The very first thing to be discerned is that the health laws are moral. If you want to be a blessing to the world, then discover the relationship between the health laws given to Israel and the disease so rampant in the world today. Here is what was being spoken of about the Jewish economy. They were given much light through the statutes and judgments that was not ceremonial. Seek that which is easy to understand and build upon it and God will bless you, my dear friend.

The health laws that we live by are so very important to our mental abilities. Violate the laws of health and the brain suffers. When the brain suffers, then the ability of the mind to comprehend spiritual things is impaired. God wants us to be able to reason and to hear that "still small voice" speaking things of great importance to us.

Let me be more pointed in my remarks that you may be blessed. In the Jewish economy, God directed the people to not eat "unclean" food. He spelled out what that consisted of. This is moral law that when violated leads to sickness and premature death. When studying this, we discover that there is a basis for calling a food "unclean". Today, these foods remain unclean, but a new class of food has joined this list. In order to understand this, we must be diligent students of both the Old and the New Testament. Unclean is not an arbitrary designation. It was based upon the fact that some "foods" were not healthy for human consumption. God loves us to warn us. Now, as we study, we find that we are to eat for health, not contrary to health principles. Blessed art thou, O land, when thy king is the son of nobles, and thy princes eat in due season, for strength, and not for drunkenness! Ecclesiastes 10:17.    Life is in the blood and perfect health requires perfect circulation of that good blood. Therefore, we want to build good blood. We are not to put any injurious thing into our mouths no matter how good it tastes. God gives us grace to refuse to do injury to ourselves. But, how many Christians understand the binding force of the health laws given to the Jewish economy? So very few.

If we comprehend the value of studying the Jewish economy then God will open to us many things that will bless us. When we see the principles involved, then we we see how far removed we are from where He wants us to be. The church has been given great light that it is not walking in, my friend. Let us be about that which is "old light" that has been either rejected or ignored. It will prove to be a great blessing for you and in turn for multitudes you come in contact with. A primary lesson of great importance is that Jesus is our living High Priest who is in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary. Again, much of Christianity and the world do not understand this. If they were to better understand the Jewish economy,  they would not remain in darkness. Let us help them to see the bright light shining forth from the types and shadows that were nailed to the cross. These lessons are for us today whom the ends of the world are come upon.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 16, 2010, 06:17:05 PM
You are misjudging, my friend.  I wish you knew me better. :)   I thought we were discussing the whole mosaic law, but I shall try to receive the obvious intent of your chastisement in the right spirit.

I am asked concerning the law in Galatians. What law is the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ? I answer: Both the ceremonial and the moral code of ten commandments.  {1SM 233.1}
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 16, 2010, 07:09:04 PM
Here, the whole of the Jewish economy seems to be included as law that will in no wise pass, til all be fulfilled.   

     The Creator knows just what elements He has to deal with in human nature. He knows what means to employ to obtain the desired end. The Christian who accepts the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, will look at Bible history in its true bearing. The past--the history of the Jewish economy from beginning to the end--instead of being spoken of contemptuously and sneered at as "the dark ages," will reveal light, and still more light, as it is studied. {UL 96.4}
     Man's word fails, and he who takes the assertions of man as his dependence may well tremble, for he will one day be as a shipwrecked vessel. But God's Word is infallible and endures forever.  Christ declares, "Verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matt. 5:18).  God's Word will endure through the ceaseless ages of eternity.  {UL 96.5}

Brother Tim, I am sorry if I misunderstand. It appears that you are trying to link the ceremonial law and the moral law. Am I wrong?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 17, 2010, 06:48:23 AM
Although my thoughts have been repeated many times and (after reading them again) I have been clear in what I am saying and what I am not saying, you choose to take them in the same way -- and you now seem to be saying that if I ate the same food as you, we would see things the same way spiritually.  I repect you immensely, dear brother, but that cannot seriously be what you mean. :)  or is it? :-\

When I post an inspired quote with little of my own thought, you treat it as if I originated it -- we can all read it for what it may bring to each one, no matter what the dietary -- mental or otherwise.  We both use the bold feature to point out what we think to be important, but I have noticed, my dear friend, that we do not read the texts and quotes to mean the same thing.  It seems that we both find opposing inference in the same inspired writings.  

I do see, however, that the health message is an oft-reoccurring theme that you go back to, no matter what topic we are on.  Whether you have meant this (rather direct) council for me personally or all in general, it is clearly uppermost in your mind.  Many in the church create division over this subject and make it a test.  Let me share this statement with you, not as an excuse for my dietary (which is improving as I struggle with it), but for perspective.

Let not individuals gather up the very strongest statements, given for individuals and families, and drive these things because they want to use the whip and to have something to drive. Let these active, determined temperaments take the Word of God and the testimonies, which present the necessity of forbearance and love and perfect unity, and labor zealously and perseveringly. With their own hearts softened and subdued by the grace of Christ, with their own spirits humble and full of the milk of human kindness, they will not create prejudice, neither will they cause dissension and weaken the churches.  {3SM 286.3}
    
     The question whether we shall eat butter, meat, or cheese, is not to be presented to anyone as a test, but we are to educate and to show the evils of the things that are objectionable. Those who gather up these things and drive them upon others do not know what work they are doing. The Word of God has given tests to His people. The keeping of God's holy law, the Sabbath, is a test, a sign between God and His people throughout their generations forever. Forever this is the burden of the third angel's message--the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. {3SM 287.1}

I am not trying to force a certain point of view, but I may present ideas that might open up understanding, as we are counciled.  All are free to disregard or study further.  We need not be frightened by a suggestion outside the mainstream of TRO thought. :)  Are we  seeing a "false Gospel" behind every rock?  Is God not strong enough to keep us in the way that we should go?  You have said many times that truth will not suffer from close study.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 17, 2010, 08:39:30 AM
Here, the whole of the Jewish economy seems to be included as law that will in no wise pass, til all be fulfilled.   

     The Creator knows just what elements He has to deal with in human nature. He knows what means to employ to obtain the desired end. The Christian who accepts the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, will look at Bible history in its true bearing. The past--the history of the Jewish economy from beginning to the end--instead of being spoken of contemptuously and sneered at as "the dark ages," will reveal light, and still more light, as it is studied. {UL 96.4}
     Man's word fails, and he who takes the assertions of man as his dependence may well tremble, for he will one day be as a shipwrecked vessel. But God's Word is infallible and endures forever.  Christ declares, "Verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matt. 5:18).  God's Word will endure through the ceaseless ages of eternity.  {UL 96.5}

I am sorry that you are offended, Brother Tim. If you want me to entertain the idea that the ceremonial law is still binding, I will not. If you did not mean to say that, I keep giving you the opportunity to say so. I brought up the health message as an example of moral law that Seventh-day Adventist "teach" is still binding. We will not baptize anyone who continues to eat unclean foods. For those not of our faith who may be reading, I explained why it is moral law. Again, I am sorry to have offended you, but I believe that God would have me share these truths for those who have been confused by false teachings, especially having been taught that the seventh day Sabbath has been done away with because it was part of the ceremonial law. Many have accepted this as truth when it is not. There is consistency in the truth and that is what we see when we can separate the ceremonial law from the moral law by a broad line.

The moral law is immutable. It will not pass away even when the ceremonial law has seen its complete fulfillment. The feast of tabernacles and the day of atonement have not seen their complete fulfillment, but we do not celebrate these feast days as did the Jews. Like the Passover, they are ceremonial law, not moral law. As we have stated from the very beginning of this topic, the moral law does not pass away, but the ceremonial law did at the cross. It is not a complicated matter to follow. Here is a statement that may help you better understand this truth: The law of God is as immutable as His throne. It will maintain its claims upon mankind in all ages.   Here you can see that there is a marked contrast between any other set of laws and the "moral" law of God. This inspired statement cannot be applied to the ceremonial law. It helps put the quotes you have shared in perspective.

Brother Tim, what I am sharing is what the church has taught. These are not my thoughts, but a teaching that is well supported by Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy and the church. Are there teachings in the church that may be wrong? Yes, but this is not one of them. Let me ask you one question that will help me better understand if I am not seeing what you are saying. What do you think this statement means? The law of God is as immutable as His throne. It will maintain its claims upon mankind in all ages. Does it include any of the ceremonial laws?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 17, 2010, 09:01:22 AM
I did not say that I was offended, dear brother.  Strong statements require strong responses.  We have both posted these.  I have said and continue to say that you are taking the "nailing" too far.  I will explore this with you later if you wish.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Ed Sutton on April 17, 2010, 12:06:46 PM
Using Bible software - phrase search - "the law* of moses" - 22 Bible Texts, 21 apply - first 5 books of the Bible and the Book of Job - are all the Books Moses wrote

(verse 1 of 22 ) Joshua 8:31  As Moses the servant of the LORD commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moses, an altar of whole stones, over which no man hath lift up any iron: and they offered thereon burnt offerings unto the LORD, and sacrificed peace offerings.
Joshua 8:32  And he wrote there upon the stones a copy of the law of Moses, which he wrote in the presence of the children of Israel.

talking about the post Promised land conquest of Ai, and killing Ai's king and the proper way to build an altar as deliniated in the law of moses, and plastering over those stones of the altar and writting for public display what moses had earlier written.


it is noted that this king's carcass was left hanging during and till after eventide (sunset) and after the evening mediations were finished and gone for the day, showing how cursed this king and all Ai were in the sight of God.  For it is written in Galatians 3:13  Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:   and all hebrews not covered by the daily mediations were considered cursed by God and of the company of Azazel.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Ed Sutton on April 17, 2010, 12:31:50 PM
(verses 2 & 3 on the list )Joshua 24:6 - 25:30    The story of aged Joshua's charge and challenge to the fickle hebrew people - to utterly destroy the peoples God commanded to be destroy, as Moses had written it out in the Bible Books covered by what are called "the law of Moses."

so the first 3 verses of the 22 verse search results - clearly do not contain specific directions for 2010 AD.   principles to learn from - YES, but specific directions to continue observing - NO.  

It is noted that the laws of Moses covered in the Books of the Bible he wrote under inspiration do not all cover ceremonies, types, shadows;  but also how to identify and follow right and wrong (How to Biblically Fear God ) <which is still commanded in Revelation and assumed from Biblical context still a binding command with rewards and consequences still activly assigned and never discontinued in canon of Scripture injunctions occuring at any later date or under conditions causing a discontinuance >.  


Looking at the "laws of Moses"  examine what is being refered to before including or disgarding.   It is OK to be a ready scribe, but not a muddying set of feet in a previously clear stream of Biblically accurate understanding.

So lets take our time, and look and examine the rest of the texts in the list of "law* of Moses".    Jesus used what Moses wrote to establish the foundation of His Identity and Ministry among the Jews and all new converts so there is long term value there, but Jesus did not use Moses writtings to continue everything from the past.

So the need remains to identify what Biblically remains of what Moses wrote, is in force, and what is not, and look at the principles and lessons involved.

(verse 4 in the list) 1 Kings 2:3  And keep the charge of the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and his testimonies, as it is written in the law of Moses, that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest, and whithersoever thou turnest thyself:

Verse 4 of 22 - Refering to King David's commanding his son Solomon - how to rule, and not foget to deal swiftly with Joab, but to stay within the boundries established by Moses.     Too generic for 2010 AD, because it does not spell out what Moses wrote, from the wording it is assumed that Solomon has studied and already knows.

Verse 5 of 22 - A morality & civil law issue - that 2010 AD still needs to follow.    

2 Kings 14:6  But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses,   wherein the LORD commanded , saying,   The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

 more later
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 17, 2010, 03:58:43 PM
I do see, however, that the health message is an oft-reoccurring theme that you go back to, no matter what topic we are on.  Whether you have meant this (rather direct) council for me personally or all in general, it is clearly uppermost in your mind.  Many in the church create division over this subject and make it a test.  Let me share this statement with you, not as an excuse for my dietary (which is improving as I struggle with it), but for perspective.

Let not individuals gather up the very strongest statements, given for individuals and families, and drive these things because they want to use the whip and to have something to drive. Let these active, determined temperaments take the Word of God and the testimonies, which present the necessity of forbearance and love and perfect unity, and labor zealously and perseveringly. With their own hearts softened and subdued by the grace of Christ, with their own spirits humble and full of the milk of human kindness, they will not create prejudice, neither will they cause dissension and weaken the churches.  {3SM 286.3}
    
     The question whether we shall eat butter, meat, or cheese, is not to be presented to anyone as a test, but we are to educate and to show the evils of the things that are objectionable. Those who gather up these things and drive them upon others do not know what work they are doing. The Word of God has given tests to His people. The keeping of God's holy law, the Sabbath, is a test, a sign between God and His people throughout their generations forever. Forever this is the burden of the third angel's message--the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. {3SM 287.1}

The thing that I like about this format is that when I say something, it is not only recorded in heaven, but it will be here for a long time that all may understand what I have taught. And what I teach here is what I teach in the church. Your post infers that my utmost concern is telling others what they must eat. The Healthful Living Forum and the Right Arm Forum have ten years of my posts. No where will you find this attitude on my part. I do not know what you eat or what you believe in regards to health. You do not post in those forums. My remarks here have nothing to do with your personal life. I am teaching Bible truth. You will find me often discussing health matters because I love people and hate to see them and their children suffer.  The health message is not a tool to drive anyone, but it is given that we may help others as Jesus did. Seventh-day Adventists are to be educated in health reform and are to not only practice it, but to use it to benefit their families, church members, and neighbors. We do not push this on people, we offer it. I have found most people in the world are happy to learn about these truths. Sadly, many who understand there is a connection between spirituality and health are offended by such presentations because it condemns their own religious standing. But, that is not my desire. I want to help. I apologize if in any way I led you to believe I was talking about your health practices. It was not my intention to do so. I thought that it would help you to better understand the delineation between moral and ceremonial law.

When I post an inspired quote with little of my own thought, you treat it as if I originated it -- we can all read it for what it may bring to each one, no matter what the dietary -- mental or otherwise.  We both use the bold feature to point out what we think to be important, but I have noticed, my dear friend, that we do not read the texts and quotes to mean the same thing.  It seems that we both find opposing inference in the same inspired writings.  

That is precisely what I thought. But, I keep giving you opportunity to say I am wrong. That you do not mean what it appears. But, even now, I am not going to assume I know what you are saying. You are going to have to spell it out for us. The quotes you share are not sufficient because I do not see them saying what I believe you to mean them to say. We have gone around in circles and this is not good. You know exactly what I have been teaching in this thread and it does me little good to repeat it. All of the statements you share are not seeming to make any difference. So, tell us what you are wanting to say. And, since I think I know where you are going, by the bolded in the statements, then I ask that you tell me how you see a couple of other statements that appear to contradict your interpretation.

I repeat this question that you have not answered:

Here, the whole of the Jewish economy seems to be included as law that will in no wise pass, til all be fulfilled.  

Help us better understand what you are saying here, Brother Tim. I must be misunderstanding what you mean. To me this means that all of the law given to Moses is still binding. Is that what you are saying?

And this question:

Here, the whole of the Jewish economy seems to be included as law that will in no wise pass, til all be fulfilled.  

     The Creator knows just what elements He has to deal with in human nature. He knows what means to employ to obtain the desired end. The Christian who accepts the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, will look at Bible history in its true bearing. The past--the history of the Jewish economy from beginning to the end--instead of being spoken of contemptuously and sneered at as "the dark ages," will reveal light, and still more light, as it is studied. {UL 96.4}
     Man's word fails, and he who takes the assertions of man as his dependence may well tremble, for he will one day be as a shipwrecked vessel. But God's Word is infallible and endures forever.  Christ declares, "Verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matt. 5:18).  God's Word will endure through the ceaseless ages of eternity.  {UL 96.5}

Brother Tim, I am sorry if I misunderstand. It appears that you are trying to link the ceremonial law and the moral law. Am I wrong?

I am really trying to better understand what your are saying, because it appears to be inconsistent. I asked this question also?

Let me ask you one question that will help me better understand if I am not seeing what you are saying. What do you think this statement means? The law of God is as immutable as His throne. It will maintain its claims upon mankind in all ages. Does it include any of the ceremonial laws?

Answering these questions will surely help me to better understand what you are trying to say. It appears from what you have presented and bolded that you are mixing the moral and the ceremonial laws. It seems that you want some of the ceremonial law to be moral, but only until it is fulfilled. Then rather than being as immutable as His throne, you then wish to say it is no longer binding. Maybe I am wrong, but you need to try and answer my sincere questions about what you believe. That way there is no misunderstanding about what you are saying. :) We then can re-examine what we believe in light of what you are presenting as "strong statements".

Then, I also ask that you point out the portion of what I have stated that is wrong. I do believe the truth can stand a close examination. And, I have surely left no question in your mind with my "strong statements" as to what I am saying. :)  I pray that even though my presentation of truth has been  firm, that my manner of posting has not revealed any lack of love towards you. At times a refusal to submit to error can be seen that way, but in this case, it is not so. My concern for others who read what is being posted does not diminish my love for you. I am not offended by your calling into question what I present as truth. I just ask that you be forthright in doing so. Tell us what you believe and show me where you think I am in error. The Holy Spirit is well able to do the convincing. We leave that with Him. :)



Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 18, 2010, 07:38:27 AM
Richard, I had to chuckle as I read back the health post where you said, "Let me be more pointed in my remarks that you may be blessed."  As I read it again, (you may want to read it again, also) it still seems to be saying the same thing to me.  But if you say that you didn't mean it that way, of course I believe you.  And as always, I don't doubt the love that we have as Christian brothers. 

I will try to express what I am seeing in these studies more succinctly, but I will only suggest -- 
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 18, 2010, 10:24:33 AM
Thank you, my friend. Communications at the best of times is difficult. I have re-read my post. I am sorry that you misunderstood my intent. I believe if you carefully look at what I posted, again, you can see the intent is to show an example of "moral" law that Seventh-day Adventists teach is binding. I then attempted to point out why. It was not just that you would be blessed by a better understanding of the basis for moral law, but that others not of our faith might better understand that which they have never entertained as Biblical truth. It is a poorly understood subject. For the benefit of all who are reading, let us review it once again.

Let me be more pointed in my remarks that you may be blessed. In the Jewish economy, God directed the people to not eat "unclean" food. He spelled out what that consisted of. This is moral law that when violated leads to sickness and premature death. When studying this, we discover that there is a basis for calling a food "unclean". Today, these foods remain unclean, but a new class of food has joined this list. In order to understand this, we must be diligent students of both the Old and the New Testament. Unclean is not an arbitrary designation. It was based upon the fact that some "foods" were not healthy for human consumption. God loves us to warn us. Now, as we study, we find that we are to eat for health, not contrary to health principles. Blessed art thou, O land, when thy king is the son of nobles, and thy princes eat in due season, for strength, and not for drunkenness! Ecclesiastes 10:17.    Life is in the blood and perfect health requires perfect circulation of that good blood. Therefore, we want to build good blood. We are not to put any injurious thing into our mouths no matter how good it tastes. God gives us grace to refuse to do injury to ourselves. But, how many Christians understand the binding force of the health laws given to the Jewish economy? So very few.

If we comprehend the value of studying the Jewish economy then God will open to us many things that will bless us.

This statement is full of blessings for humanity. But, for our purposes, I am attempting to bless you by revealing why this part of the law given through Moses is "moral" law and thus still binding. It is based upon upon the laws of our being. It is not a shadow of something to happen in the future as is ceremonial law. If we violate the laws pertaining to health, we suffer. God does not want us to suffer. All moral law is the same. Violation of these causes suffering. Violation of what is ceremonial does not effect our lives. Ceremonial law was a teaching tool. It thus becomes easy to differentiate between the ceremonial and the moral laws given through Moses in the statutes and judgments.

Again, I am sorry that you took this personally, it was not meant that way, but to give an example of moral law and to explain why it is immutable. I find it interesting and informative that we need fear offending those in the world with health information, if we present it tactfully, because they do not see a "moral" aspect to following health principles. With Christians who comprehend that moral law brings judgment when the law is broken, there is offense too often. But, this would only come when the receiver of the information understands that the law is binding. To him that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin. Therefore, if the individual does not understand that the health message is moral and still binding, then they do not feel condemnation. This is further evidence that the health message is indeed moral law and still binding. Otherwise no offense would be taken with the presentation of the information. It would be seen as merely instructive and not a "moral" issue.

When a Jew approaches me and tells me that I need to sacrifice a lamb that my sins could be forgiven, there is no guilt, not offense taken as I consider that I have not sacrificed a lamb. I know that the offering of sacrifices was not moral law, but ceremonial. It had no value other than to teach the Jews that Christ would take upon Himself our sins. The blood of bulls and goats could save no one, only the blood of the anti-type, Jesus Christ could atone for sin.,
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on April 18, 2010, 02:34:46 PM
Adam taught his descendants the law of God, and it was handed down from father to son through successive generations. But notwithstanding the gracious provision for man's redemption, there were few who accepted it and rendered obedience. By transgression the world became so vile that it was necessary to cleanse it by the Flood from its corruption. The law was preserved by Noah and his family, and Noah taught his descendants the Ten Commandments. As men again departed from God, the Lord chose Abraham, of whom He declared, "Abraham obeyed My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws." Genesis 26:5. To him was given the rite of circumcision, which was a sign that those who received it were devoted to the service of God--a pledge that they would remain separate from idolatry, and would obey the law of God. The failure of Abraham's descendants to keep this pledge, as shown in their disposition to form alliances with the heathen and adopt their practices, was the cause of their sojourn and bondage in Egypt. But in their intercourse with idolaters, and their forced submission to the Egyptians, the divine precepts became still further corrupted with the vile and cruel teachings of heathenism. Therefore then the Lord brought them forth from Egypt, He came down upon Sinai, enshrouded in glory and surrounded by His angels, and in awful majesty spoke His law in the hearing of all the people.  {PP 363.2}

He did not even then trust His precepts to the memory of a people who were prone to forget His requirements, but wrote them upon tables of stone. He would remove from Israel all possibility of mingling heathen traditions with His holy precepts, or of confounding His requirements with human ordinances or customs. But He did not stop with giving them the precepts of the Decalogue. The people had shown themselves so easily led astray that He would leave no door of temptation unguarded. Moses was commanded to write, as God should bid him, judgments and laws giving minute instruction as to what was required. These directions relating to the duty of the people to God, to one another, and to the stranger were only the principles of the Ten Commandments amplified and given in a specific manner, that none need err. They were designed to guard the sacredness of the ten precepts engraved on the tables of stone.  {PP 364.1}

If man had kept the law of God, as given to Adam after his fall, preserved by Noah, and observed by Abraham, there would have been no necessity for the ordinance of circumcision. And if the descendants of Abraham had kept the covenant, of which circumcision was a sign, they would never have been seduced into idolatry, nor would it have been necessary for them to suffer a life of bondage in Egypt; they would have kept God's law in mind, and there would have been no necessity for it to be proclaimed from Sinai or engraved upon the tables of stone. And had the people practiced the principles of the Ten Commandments, there would have been no need of the additional directions given to Moses.  {PP 364.2}
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 21, 2010, 05:22:51 AM
Truth is progressive -- this means to me that light comes increasingly to God's people as time goes on.  As I look at what was binding in the Mosaic law, I compare it to what the SOP says is required.  She admitted that she didn't have all the light, but surely God gives us wisdom to ad two and two.  For example -- EGW says in this statement that God requires us to come to these yearly feasts.  Would you consider this moral or ceremonial law? -- as I think about this, I ask myself, "does everything fit neatly into one of these old testament categories?"  I also wonder if keeping these feasts that EGW says are required will make a "ship wreck" of our faith as has been previously stated?

 Let all who possibly can, attend these yearly gatherings. All should feel that God requires this of them. If they do not avail themselves of the privileges which He has provided that they may become strong in Him and in the power of His grace, they will grow weaker and weaker, and have less and less desire to consecrate all to God.
                                                                            198
{ChS 197.3}

     Come, brethren and sisters, to these sacred convocation meetings, to find Jesus. He will come up to the feast. He will be present, and He will do for you that which you most need to have done. Your farms should not be considered of greater value than the higher interests of the soul. All the treasures which you possess, be they ever so valuable, would not be rich enough to buy you peace and hope, which would be infinite gain, if it cost you all you have and the toils and sufferings of a lifetime. A strong, clear sense of eternal things, and a heart willing to yield all to Christ, are blessings of more value than all the riches, and pleasures, and glories of this world.--Testimonies, vol. 2, pp. 575, 576. {ChS 198.1}
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 21, 2010, 08:14:44 AM
Brother Tim, this is a public forum where the world can read. There are those in Christianity that keep the feasts. We believe this is contrary to the truth. Please continue your questions about the Feast Keepers and their false teaching in that thread.

As for your thought that additional light has come that may extend the duties of man, I believe you are right. It will not contradict the principles of past law, moral law. With some concern, I hope you can understand that this is a perfect example, I will endeavor to share an example of such light.  Some who read may be offended, but many who read will be blessed by both the understanding of what you are presenting, new light, and by the increased knowledge that can bless them and their family's health.

In the Old Testament God gave moral through the statutes and judgments that were to bless the whole world, not just the Jews. One such body of law, as I have pointed out, was the health principles. It was given to be a blessing to preserve health. As you say, truth is progressive. One reason why it is progressive is that some things change. This world is growing weary. Sin is taking its toll on not only human life, but on all created things including the animals. They groan under the wickedness of man. Disease continues to increase in both animal and man. Some do not understand there is a connection between the diseases in animals and those who eat them or their milk and eggs. There are many diseases that are contracted from eating animal products. Some have no cure such as Mad Cow Disease.  It is always fatal when diagnosed in humans. E-coli is more common today and can kill the old and young when infecting them. It comes primarily from cow feces and has found its way into even our vegetables, but most often infects through ground beef. The greatest risk that I know of is cancer. I believe that much of human cancer is contracted from a virus. Most dairy is infected with a Leukemia Virus. And, virus can cause cancer. This is not well understood by most of us, but it is true.

When the Old Testament was written, God gave the world light that was then applicable. The animals were not sick as they are today. Therefore, it is written that a certain set of animals were "unclean" and not be a source of food, for they would transmit disease to humans. Today, they remain unclean. But, truth is progressive and when circumstances change, in this case as a result of sin, God does not leave man ignorant of the changed conditions. The animals are toxic today. God revealed this to us over a hundred years ago that all flesh carried a risk of disease if eaten. And, He did not leave it there. Through inspiration we were told that "soon" the animals would be so diseased that there would be no safety in eating eggs or milk. We were told to teach others how to prepare healthful food without the use of any animal product. This was not ceremonial law, but moral law. It was given as "new light", but because it was moral law, it could have been discovered without the inspiration of new light. We know that reason for the designation of "unclean" was for health purposes, so therefore when science revealed what we know today about the fact that cancer can be caused by a virus, and that Leukemia Virus infects most milk, we then can understand that we are not to use animal products for food.

But, God revealed this to us ahead of the event when we were told "soon" it would occur. Yes, you are right, dear brother, light is progressive. The principles have been revealed, but circumstances can change. I hope we are making progress in our study of "moral" law versus ceremonial law. The ceremonial has passed away, being nailed to the cross, and the moral law is still to be a blessing for humanity.

Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 21, 2010, 11:02:49 AM
The purpose for beginning this topic was to better understand the nature of God's law, His moral law. In order to have a clear understanding, it is necessary to understand that there are three sets of laws in the Old Testament. Two of which are no longer binding because they were given for Israel while a nation, a theocracy to be ruled by God. There are to be no more theocracies so the civil law given in the Old Testament is no longer binding. The ceremonial law was not moral. It was given to "teach" about the plan of salvation. It was instructive by using what is called types and shadows. Types or shadows of the real things which were future events. The lamb that was sacrificed by the Israelites was a type, a shadow, a symbol of Jesus who is our sacrifice. There is no moral law in this, it was a tool to teach about Christ and His work on earth and in the heavenly sanctuary. Jesus is our high priest today. There are events that are now taking place and will take place in the future, but the shadows that taught this, were nailed to the cross. This is to say, that this law is ended. None are to sacrifice according to the ceremonial law. But, we are to sacrifice. Because we are to give up our dainties and use the money saved for the work of giving the gospel, does not mean that the ceremonial law is still in effect. It is not. That some events are future, does not mean we are to continue observing any part of the ceremonial law. It is no longer binding.

The moral law is still binding. Therefore, we are to discern the difference between that which was moral, that which was civil, and that which was ceremonial. When we can do this, then we will be blessed by better understanding the laws we are to live by, the moral law. There is a blessing in so doing.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Mimi on April 21, 2010, 11:52:48 AM
Good summation, Richard.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Tim2 on April 21, 2010, 04:20:31 PM
Yes, good summation Richard. :)  I'm a fan, too ;).  

If I may read between the lines (since you chose not to answer my direct questions), are you saying that anything God may require after dispensing with the civil and ceremonial law, by process of elimination is moral law and therefore binding?  I think that Gospel dispensations change and principles need to keep up, but what think ye? 
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 21, 2010, 06:03:51 PM
Brother Tim, I am sorry if I missed a direct question. It is my habit to answer direct questions. I appreciate when others answer my questions and I try to do the same. I went back looking for something I missed. Let me know if I missed more. 
 Are we  seeing a "false Gospel" behind every rock?

It is true that false gospels abound in Christian churches, but what we are examining here is the foundation of the gospel truth. If we err in understanding what God ask of us, then how can we receive grace?  So, no I am not seeing  a false gospel, but the opportunity to teach false gospels if the fourth commandment is linked with the ceremonial law. Or if statutes and judgments that deal with eternal realities are seen as abolished.

Quote
Is God not strong enough to keep us in the way that we should go?


God will keep all from being tempted beyond what they can bear, IF they will abide in Christ. Sin reveals a separation between the sinner and Christ.
[/quote]

Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on April 21, 2010, 06:42:47 PM
I intentionally let the EGW quote speak for what it may instruct spiritually.  What do you think it means?  When I come across a quote from her including a Bible text, she usually ties it to her subject before or after she quotes it.   This is how I know to interpret what she is saying.  The subject is "the Jewish economy" from beginning to end.  The text is "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, til all be fulfilled." Matt 5:18.  I suppose this text could be read, "until each aspect of the law is fulfilled." -- but, to me she is definitely tying the whole Jewish economy to Matt 5:18.  

I guess maybe I did not present my thoughts clear enough, so I will share again what we have been told she means:

In His sermon on the mount, Jesus did not dwell on the specifications of the law, but He did not leave His hearers to conclude that He had come to set aside its requirements. He knew that spies stood ready to seize upon every word that might be wrested to serve their purpose. He knew the prejudice that existed in the minds of many of His hearers, and He said nothing to unsettle their faith in the religion and institutions that had been committed to them through Moses. Christ Himself had given both the moral and the ceremonial law. He did not come to destroy confidence in His own instruction. It was because of His great reverence for the law and the prophets, that He sought to break through the wall of traditional requirements which hemmed in the Jews. While He set aside their false interpretations of the law, He carefully guarded His disciples against yielding up the vital truths committed to the Hebrews.  

The Pharisees prided themselves on their obedience to the law; yet they knew so little of its principles through every-day practice, that to them the Saviour's words sounded like heresy. As He swept away the rubbish under which the truth had been buried, they thought He was sweeping away the truth itself. They whispered to one another that He was making light of the law. He read their thoughts, and answered them, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill." Here Jesus refutes the charge of the Pharisees. His mission to the world is to vindicate the sacred claims of that law which they charge Him with breaking. If the law of God could have been changed or abrogated, then Christ need not have suffered the consequences of our transgression. He came to explain the relation of the law to man, and to illustrate its precepts by His own life of obedience.

God has given us His holy precepts, because He loves mankind. To shield us from the results of transgression, He reveals the principles of righteousness. The moral law is an expression of the thought of God; when received in Christ, it becomes our thought. It lifts us above the power of natural desires and tendencies, above temptations that lead to sin. God desires us to be happy, and He gave us the precepts of the moral law that in obeying them we might have joy.

When the law was proclaimed from Sinai, God made known to men the holiness of His character, that by contrast they might see the sinfulness of their own. The law was given to convict them of sin, and reveal their need of a Saviour. It would do this as its principles were applied to the heart by the Holy Spirit. This work it is still to do. In the life of Christ the principles of the law are made plain; and as the Holy Spirit of God touches the heart, as the light of Christ reveals to men their need of His cleansing blood and His justifying righteousness, the law is still an agent in bringing us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith.    
  
"Till heaven and earth pass," said Jesus, "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." The sun shining in the heavens, the solid earth upon which we dwell, are God's witnesses that His law is changeless and eternal. Tho they may pass away, the divine precepts shall endure. "It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." The system of types that pointed to Jesus as the Lamb of God, was to be abolished at His death; but the precepts of the Decalogue are as immutable as the throne of God.  

So, what is being said in Matt. is in reference to the "moral" law. And, the statement being made is not that one day after fulfillment the law will be abolished. No, just the opposite. It is what we have always understood this verse to say. The moral law is as immutable as the throne of God. And if this is not good enough to explain what was being said, here is the rest of the quote:

Since "the law of the Lord is perfect," every variation from it must be evil. Those who disobey the commandments of God, and teach others to do so, are condemned by Christ. The Saviour's life of obedience maintained the claims of the law, and showed the excellence of character that obedience would develop. All who obey as He did, are likewise declaring that the law is "holy, and just, and good."    

Jesus takes up the commandments separately, and explains the depth and breadth of their requirement. Instead of removing one jot of their force, He shows how far-reaching their principles are, and exposes the fatal mistake of the Jews in their outward show of obedience. He declares that by the evil thought or the lustful look the law of God is transgressed. One who becomes a party to the least injustice, is breaking the law, and degrading his own moral nature. Murder first exists in the mind. He who gives hatred a place in his heart, is setting his feet in the path of the murderer; and his offerings are abhorrent to God.  

The plan of redemption contemplates our complete recovery from the power of Satan. The command, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect," is a promise. God's ideal for His children is higher than the highest human thought can reach.

The statement in its context reveals God's concern for our character. The moral law as distinguished from the ceremonial law points out sin in the life. It is a revelation of character, the character of our God. The point being made about in the verse we are looking at has everything to do with the fact that the law is never going to be abolished. This was the intent of the statement that quoted the verse. It has nothing do do with some portions of the ceremonial law not being fulfilled. It addresses the truth that the "moral" law will not ever terminate, never. It cannot be more clear what the intent is.

If there are other questions, dear brother, that you feel I have not responded to, I am sorry. Point them out and I will respond.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Daniel on May 09, 2010, 05:33:28 AM
I intentionally let the EGW quote speak for what it may instruct spiritually.  What do you think it means?  When I come across a quote from her including a Bible text, she usually ties it to her subject before or after she quotes it.   This is how I know to interpret what she is saying.  The subject is "the Jewish economy" from beginning to end.  The text is "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, til all be fulfilled." Matt 5:18.  I suppose this text could be read, "until each aspect of the law is fulfilled." -- but, to me she is definitely tying the whole Jewish economy to Matt 5:18.  

I guess maybe I did not present my thoughts clear enough, so I will share again what we have been told she means:

In His sermon on the mount, Jesus did not dwell on the specifications of the law, but He did not leave His hearers to conclude that He had come to set aside its requirements. He knew that spies stood ready to seize upon every word that might be wrested to serve their purpose. He knew the prejudice that existed in the minds of many of His hearers, and He said nothing to unsettle their faith in the religion and institutions that had been committed to them through Moses. Christ Himself had given both the moral and the ceremonial law. He did not come to destroy confidence in His own instruction. It was because of His great reverence for the law and the prophets, that He sought to break through the wall of traditional requirements which hemmed in the Jews. While He set aside their false interpretations of the law, He carefully guarded His disciples against yielding up the vital truths committed to the Hebrews.  

snipped . .
If there are other questions, dear brother, that you feel I have not responded to, I am sorry. Point them out and I will respond.

Daniel:  It has been sometime since I have read anything here and find this subject quite fascinating.  I hope y'all don't mind if I throw my two cents into this mix.  First off I am not sure if anyone has posted this comment or not for the SOP.  

Precepts Given to Guard Decalogue. - In consequence of continual transgression, the moral law was repeated in awful grandeur from Sinai.  Christ gave to Moses religious precepts, which were to govern everyday life.  These statutes were explicitly given to guard the Ten Commandments.  THEY WERE NOT SHADOWY TYPES TO PASS AWAY WITH THE DEATH OF CHRIST.  They were to be binding upon men in every age as long as time should last.  These commands were enforced by the power of the moral law, and they clearly and definitely explained that law (ST April 15, 1875). Ellen G. White Comments - Exodus 20:3 pg 1104 SDA Commentaries Vol. 1

Secondly we find God speaking through Malachi:

“1 ¶ For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. 2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. 3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do [this], saith the LORD of hosts. 4 ¶ Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, WITH the statutes and judgments.” (Malachi 4:1-4)

Through Isaiah God tells us WHY this earth will be destroyed with plagues:

“1 ¶ Behold, the LORD maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof. 2 And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest; as with the servant, so with his master; as with the maid, so with her mistress; as with the buyer, so with the seller; as with the lender, so with the borrower; as with the taker of usury, so with the giver of usury to him. 3 The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly spoiled: for the LORD hath spoken this word. 4 The earth mourneth [and] fadeth away, the world languisheth [and] fadeth away, the haughty people of the earth do languish. 5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. 6 Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left.” (Isaiah 24:1-6)

We find in Daniel exactly what would be "nailed to the cross" other than Christ Himself:

“And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.” (Daniel 9:27)

Mrs. White confirms this completely.  When one does a "word study" on what she meant by "ceremonial laws" that were nailed to the cross one finds she says the exact same thing Daniel said.

I do believe God is calling His people back, asking as to remember His statutes and judgments as admonished in Malachi 4.  Early on in this discussion or in another re feast days someone posted it was impossible to know when the fall feast could or should take place.  I do believe God honors our best efforts to honor Him, even if we are ignorant of when.


Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Daniel on May 09, 2010, 06:13:35 AM
Brother Tim, if we were take this as truth, it would make shipwreck of our faith. We know that the ceremonial law has ended. We also know that the civil statutes for Israel are no longer binding. We are not to stone Sabbath breakers, nor those who are gluttons. We are not to sacrifice lambs and doves any longer.

In your effort to justify the keeping of the feast days, you appear to be looking for statements to do so? Your feast keeping friends have done this very thing until they have confused many in the church. The law given to Israel can be divided into three kinds of law. The moral law which is still binding.

The civil law which was for Israel, a  nation under the direct rule of god, a theocracy. The penalties proscribed no longer are binding. Societies today are to decide the penalty for gluttony, if there is to be one.

The ceremonial law, which was to teach about the plan of salvation, ceased at the cross to be binding.  Not all types had met their anti-types. They are shadows of things to come. Most have been fulfilled. Some have a secondary fulfillment. Because they reveal the future, does not mean that the church is to follow the law of the ceremonies. It was a lesson book that we can still learn from without dressing up and keeping a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;  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.

The seventh-day Sabbath is a moral law, but the ceremonial Sabbaths and other feast days have been "blotted out".  The history of Israel is for us whom the ends of the world have come upon. How are we to know where our high priest is today if we do not understand the shadows that teach us not not only where He is, but what He is doing.

From the New Testament Book of Hebrews we are given much light.  It reveals that we are to understand the lessons from the Hebrew economy. We are not to act out the ceremonies, but we are to understand the significance of the ceremonies.

[It was] therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.  
  9:24   For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, [which are] the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:  
  9:25   Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;  
  9:26   For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.  
  9:27   And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:  
  9:28   So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.  

We can now better understand why this statement was made: The past--the history of the Jewish economy from beginning to the end--instead of being spoken of contemptuously and sneered at as "the dark ages," will reveal light, and still more light, as it is studied.  Many have no idea that the ceremonial law revealed the plan of salvation. Many "sneer" at the Old Testament. They want the lessons to be nailed to the cross as well as the laws. So sad! And, they rebel against the idea that the moral law is still binding. All who believe this lose great blessings by not understanding the moral laws that we are to live by. By so doing we find our happiness. It is hard when one does not live within the laws of our being.

There is a wide separation between the moral and the ceremonial law. We may all come to see this. It is my prayer that our discussion is helping many to better understand the Old Testament Scripture and thus much of the New Testament which is dependent upon Old Testament writings.  I have given a good example from the Book of Hebrews. Those ignorant of the Hebrew economy cannot understand the meaning of these passages and many others like them.


Daniel:  Can you give us a verse that states God's Laws, in the NT, have been nailed to the cross?  When Mrs. White speaks of the ceremonial law she speaks of the sacrifices and oblations, nothing else.  God's salvational calendar IS outlined in the annual feast and it is because many do not study them we find many being blown about by many winds of doctrine.  God, in the last chapter of malachi IS calling us back to remember the statutes and judgments given to Moses.  Why should we not do so?
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Wally on May 09, 2010, 09:57:09 AM
When you speak of "statutes and judgments" just what do you mean?  Some of the Mosaic laws pertained to an agricultural people living under a theocracy, in a Mediterranean climate.  They were to kindle no fire on the Sabbath.  I've not found a text where that law was abolished.  Must I keep my house (which is heated with wood) freezing cold on winter days to avoid breaking the Sabbath?  What about wearing clothing that contains linen and wool?  Or sowing my garden with "mingled seed?"  Shall I execute my children if I find that they have adopted a pagan religion, such as Buddhism?  Shall I also execute any Wiccan with whom I come in contact?  We are not under a theocracy.  When the question was put to the NT church as to how much of the law the Gentiles were to observe, they came up with only a few things:  For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication:  from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well.  Fare ye well.  Acts 15:28, 29.  Why would we want to add burdens which the Holy Spirit was unwilling to add?

Don't forget that much of what the prophets said in relation to Israel was conditional, dependent upon their fidelity to God.  When they were rejected as a nation, those prophecies could not be literally fulfilled in a literal Israel, but will be fulfilled symbolically by spiritual Israel.  Malachi was speaking to literal Israel before the advent of the Messiah.  One must take that context into consideration when interpreting what he meant by "the statutes and judgments."  Part of Mal. 4 is a prediction of what would have happened had Israel remained faithful, but since they failed, it must be understood in in a way that is more symbolic.  I hardly think that in the new earth we will be walking on the literal ashes of the wicked.  But, since Jerusalem and the temple were supposed to stand forever, the destruction of the wicked would most likely have been accomplished in a somewhat different fashion than what we expect will happen at the end of the millennium.

I am familiar with the statement from the SOP which you quoted.  She does not elaborate on that, and I think we must be careful that we do not read into it more than she meant.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on May 09, 2010, 10:56:28 PM
It has been sometime since I have read anything here and find this subject quite fascinating.  I hope y'all don't mind if I throw my two cents into this mix.  First off I am not sure if anyone has posted this comment or not for the SOP.  

Of course we don't mind. We restrict "teaching" to those truths we hold to be truth, but we want to hear what others believe and where there is disagreement, we invite questions as to why we believe what we do. The church has always taught that the feast days are ceremonial and have ended. That does not assure it correct, but from our study with feast keepers we agree with the church's position. The basis for our understanding is indeed found in this topic. It is broader than the feast days an does shine light on the fact that most err in their wanting to eliminate many "moral" laws that are found in the statutes and judgments. The purpose of this thread is to bring to light the principles upon which we may separate the moral laws from those which are no longer binding either because they were ceremonial or they were "civil" law for Israel a theocracy.

Quote
Precepts Given to Guard Decalogue. - In consequence of continual transgression, the moral law was repeated in awful grandeur from Sinai.  Christ gave to Moses religious precepts, which were to govern everyday life.  These statutes were explicitly given to guard the Ten Commandments.  THEY WERE NOT SHADOWY TYPES TO PASS AWAY WITH THE DEATH OF CHRIST.  They were to be binding upon men in every age as long as time should last.  These commands were enforced by the power of the moral law, and they clearly and definitely explained that law (ST April 15, 1875). Ellen G. White Comments - Exodus 20:3 pg 1104 SDA Commentaries Vol. 1

Secondly we find God speaking through Malachi:

“1 ¶ For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. 2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. 3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do [this], saith the LORD of hosts. 4 ¶ Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, WITH the statutes and judgments.” (Malachi 4:1-4)

Through Isaiah God tells us WHY this earth will be destroyed with plagues:

“1 ¶ Behold, the LORD maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof. 2 And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest; as with the servant, so with his master; as with the maid, so with her mistress; as with the buyer, so with the seller; as with the lender, so with the borrower; as with the taker of usury, so with the giver of usury to him. 3 The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly spoiled: for the LORD hath spoken this word. 4 The earth mourneth [and] fadeth away, the world languisheth [and] fadeth away, the haughty people of the earth do languish. 5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. 6 Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left.” (Isaiah 24:1-6)

We find in Daniel exactly what would be "nailed to the cross" other than Christ Himself:

“And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.” (Daniel 9:27)

All that you have shared is truth, Brother Daniel. But, while all squares are indeed rectangles, not all rectangles are squares. You may not conclude from these statements that all statutes and judgments are still binding. Neither may we teach that only the sacrifices were to cease. There is always more than we usually can understand. The Bible is larger than a few verses.

Quote
I do believe God is calling His people back, asking as to remember His statutes and judgments as admonished in Malachi 4.

God is indeed bringing us to an understanding that some of the statutes and judgments remain binding because they are "moral" law, not ceremonial or civil. These laws are meant to be a blessing to us. We ought to pray and study to better understand the laws of our being. One such example that the church has taught is still binding from these statutes are the health laws. There are others that we have not understood, but our study ought to help us see which are moral and which are not.

Quote
Early on in this discussion or in another re feast days someone posted it was impossible to know when the fall feast could or should take place.  I do believe God honors our best efforts to honor Him, even if we are ignorant of when.

We have a topic on "Why Christians do not Keep the Feast Days where this is discussed. Let us keep this present discussion on topic. We do not want to discuss the keeping of the feast days here. The principles upon which we are to understand moral versus ceremonial and civil is the object of this discussion. We have presented the truth that there are ceremonial laws, moral laws, and civil laws. We are told that the line between moral and ceremonial is broad. I agree. There is no reason to be confused. The civil laws pertained to Israel a theocracy and from what I understand, they were associated with penalties. Many of these civil statutes were based on moral law, but again, they were dealing with a nation under the direct rule of God and therefore are not binding today. This does not mean that a nation could not adapt some of these these statutes. But, they are not to be seen as binding as are the "moral" statutes.

Again, our study here is to discern the principles by which we may classify the laws given in the Bible. Many churches teach a rejection of Old Testament laws as being under the Old Covenant and therefore no longer binding. This is far removed from the truth. It is not hard to understand that the ten commandments are still binding. They did not come into being with Israel, but are moral in nature and predated the nation Israel. The only real problem with the ten commandments for most who object is the Sabbath, which was given at creation for all mankind. To obscure this and the gospel, there has been created a "new theology" that not only attempts to obscure the Sabbath, but also makes an excuse for sin.

Going beyond the ten commandments, we find some other "moral" laws given to Israel in statutes and judgments that are not "shadows" or civil laws, but in fact moral in nature and are for our guidance in life. To break these moral laws is to suffer some kind of loss. It is like eating an unclean food, we will suffer. God gave moral laws that we would not suffer. He gave ceremonial laws that we would learn of the plan of salvation. They were shadows of the reality. Not all have been fulfilled, but the shadows were to cease at the cross. We are told they were "nailed to the cross". We do not keep the Passover, the Lord's Supper has taken its place. We do not sacrifice a lamb, the Lamb, Jesus Christ, has been sacrificed.    

This is not an easy subject because of the error being taught throughout Christian churches. The Bible is to be our study. In it we find truth. Let us try to take what we have been taught and compare it to Scripture. As Bereans, we do not trust our faith to others. As Protestants, we must look to the Bible, not to fallible man for our understanding. He who converses with God through the Scriptures will be ennobled and sanctified. As he reads the inspired record of the Savior's love, his heart is melted in tenderness and contrition. He is filled with a desire to be like the Master, to live a life of loving service.  

Type has met anti-type in the death of God's Son. Christ has risen from the dead, proclaiming over the tomb, "I am the resurrection and the life." He has sent His Spirit into our world to bring all things to our remembrance. By a miracle of His power He has preserved His written Word through the ages. Shall we not, then, make this Word our constant study, learning from it God's purpose for us? As we do this, we shall come into unity of doctrine as well as unity of Spirit.

Brother Daniel, do you agree that there are three sets of laws we are studying that were given to Israel? Can we classify all law in Scripture as "moral", "ceremonial", or "civil"? And if so, can we say that only moral law is still binding?

Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Ed Sutton on May 18, 2010, 09:56:01 AM
  In this chapter -   AA - The Acts of the Apostles (1911)   Chap. 19 - Jew and Gentile , is given direct detailed Holy Ghost sent commentary, explanation, and like Scripture ..... 2nd Timothy 16  All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:17  That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

And why is that ?  Because God saw what we now see, the same evils existing in the days of the Apostles is not uprooted and quenched, but alive and working again to leaven the whole body of believers in the SDA faith.

But as the leaven of multifaceted refusal to believe and obey God that grows into open wickedness matures,  it develops into open revolt.  Therefore the continuing commands of God through Paul to Timothy revive their first century insistancy and urgency.

In actions without words, as there was no knowledge of any such conversation between ever them , in actions and the way things worked out - was not the life and work of Joe Crews toward a younger Doug Batchlor - mirrioring these words from Paul facing execution - to Timothy.

2nd Timothy 4:
1 ¶  I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;
2  Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
3  For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4  And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
5  But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.
6  For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.
7  I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:
8  Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

Three evils are forcibly brought to mind while reading this chapter - They have returned because their author Satan sees how well they weakened belivers in the first century.

1. Denial of Christ's Messiahship - return to amalgamated psudo judiasm - ceremonialism readopted after Divine directions command otherwise.  Notice the paragraphs that refer to it.   Satan's desire is creating disconnections from Christ every way he can, as God will not stop actions of free will, persistantly followed - even to do this evil that  once even carried Barnabus away for a short time, except that Paul stood in the breach.

2.  LSU - The tares in assendency and the Gospel Order of the denomination imitating Eli toward his apostate sons in the priesthood weakening the nation and causing God's name & faith to be blasphemed among those who delight to do so.

3. Rebellion against the Worldwide Church decision that harmonized with Scripture, setting women above God's place for men, thus creating precedents that could open doors for Mary worship in the SDA faith among converts from that error who are still disposed in heart to worship various mother godesses.    

The worship of the gueen of Heaven, insulted Heaven so well in ancient centuries, that Satan is pleased to revive it, even if in stages.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Peter L on March 02, 2013, 11:49:41 PM
When the Law is mentioned in the Bible it does not only refer to the 10 commandments but, refers to the Law as a whole with the ceremonial laws, levitical Laws, health laws, 10 commandments.
Hebrews 7:5 KJV
(5) And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

The law in this verse is not talking about the 10 commandments, but is referring to the law of tithe to the priesthood.

Hebrews 7:28 KJV
(28) For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.

The law in this verse is the law of the priesthood and again not the 10 commandments.

Hebrews 8:4 KJV
(4) For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:

The law in this text again is not the 10 commandments but the law of offering gifts and sacrifices given to the levitical priests. So from these few verses we can see that when the Law is mentioned it is not just referring to the 10 commandments, but the law as a whole.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Peter L on March 02, 2013, 11:51:47 PM
Isaiah 8:20 KJV
(20) To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

H8451
תּרה תּורה
tôrâh tôrâh
to-raw', to-raw'
From H3384; a precept or statute, especially the Decalogue or Pentateuch: - law.

The Law in this verse is torah which is the whole law not just the 10 commandments. This verse says anyone not teaching according to the Torah is not teaching God's light.

Matthew 5:17 KJV
(17) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Jesus said He did not come to destroy the Torah. From this is must be noted that everything Jesus taught was in accordance with the Torah.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on March 03, 2013, 06:43:21 AM
When the Law is mentioned in the Bible it does not only refer to the 10 commandments but, refers to the Law as a whole with the ceremonial laws, levitical Laws, health laws, 10 commandments.

Brother Peter, from my understanding, when the law is mentioned it does not always refer to the law as a whole. And your examples reveal this. I do not understand.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Peter L on March 04, 2013, 12:23:45 AM
I have been thinking about the Law and trying to understand more, so I have come here to mention these things to hear others thoughts. I have been having discussions with non SDA about the Law. Jesus when He said it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a man, people use that as an excuse for eating outside of the diet God has given us.

Jesus said He did not come to destroy the Law, that means since if the Law is the Torah then He could not have meant that we can eat outside of the diet God has given us. We know that some people misquote what Jesus said but, if Jesus did not come to destroy the Torah then other questions come to mind.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on March 04, 2013, 08:02:15 AM
Good morning, Peter. You will appreciate this thread.  Read through it and you will see some of the difficulties in understanding what is still binding and what is not. Understanding the division in the laws will help. But, adding to the confusion is the New Testament teaching of Paul where he is attempting to explain to Pharisees and those under their influence that one is not saved by the keeping of the law. He also had to deal with the Pharisaical attitude towards the ceremonial law which was no longer binding. These three areas of law when rightly understood help us to work with those who have been deceived about the law and the gospel.  Paul's teaching is used in an attempt to teach that one is saved while sinning, that we are no longer under the law, but under grace. 
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: wigina on June 02, 2013, 08:29:29 PM
I did not know why we ro not eat pork or other meats as outlined in the bible. Infact when asked why i would always say the bible prohibits it until I went to study medical sciences and until such a time that it was clearly revealed to me. Now I know why God in his wisdom gave out all those elaborate laws! You see Israel craved for meat yet they had the option of food from heaven. Now that we also crave for meat yet we know that we can have every thing gotten from meat(nutrient) in plants woe unto us. The diseases that affect all the animals that we are told not to partake of are  those referred to as ''non-human diseases. Thses may then kead to terrible epidemics. I think therefore that our sacrifice is Jesus. But the law he gave moral health or otherwise must be followed. When  you marry your sister then what happens? Recessive genes are morr often expressed and deformity of the offspring is the result. It is not a blind faith that we have but an enightened one! Thats why our punishment if we do not conform will be severe! The Lord will say and justly so ''I gave them the law, but you I gave the explanations thereof and you did not follow to, how should I deal with you oh generation of vipers''.
I will always pray and make sure that in Christ I am and will not fall into the category....
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 02, 2013, 09:27:33 PM
That is right, wigina. God did not always tell us why we are to act in a certain way. He just told us what is best for us and expected us to believe Him. Now, we find out many of the reason why. When reading the Bible, we find that when man began eating meat, his life span dropped from over 900 years to less than a hundred in a short span of time. Today, cancer and many other diseases we are discovering can be transmitted from animal products. But, few will believe that the diet God gave in the beginning is best. Few will take control of their passions and appetites. Why? Because the mind not given to Christ has no power to do what right because it is right. Our fallen human natures are corrupt and one must be born of His Spirit to do any good thing. God's law is for our good. Blessings will attend all who walk in the light.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: wigina on June 02, 2013, 10:08:32 PM
Gods people are always a minority thats whywhen the correct diet is followed the people are given names! When you say you are an Adventist you are readily labelled ''out of the ordinary'' its so amazing! But thank God He already knew this and informed us that we are a peculiar people.
Title: Re: Binding Aspects of the Mosaic Law
Post by: Richard Myers on June 03, 2013, 10:36:34 AM
Amen! And above everything else, what identifies us, that separates us from others is the Sabbath. There are many true Christians filled with His Spirit in other churches, so it is not the Spirit of God that separates us from others, but our keeping of the Sabbath is the sign that we are His church. It led me into the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and so it will do for others also.

 "Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you." Exodus 31:13. "Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them." Ezekiel 20:12. "And hallow my sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the LORD your God." Ezekiel 20:20.