"He saved others . . ."

Saturday, April 03, 2010

“He saved others”

Millions of Christians around the world are worshiping their Lord in a special way this weekend. The world with its Easter bunnies thinks we are strange. Stupid, in fact—how could the death of a poor carpenter 2,000 years ago give joy and purpose to our lives today, and then secure heaven for us with God in eternity?

To the world, the nicest thing to be said about Christ on the cross is this: He was a very good man having a very bad day. But we who believe in Jesus understand what was happening on Good Friday: “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not counting our trespasses against us” (2 Cor. 5:19).

Like many of you, this weekend I’m reading again the Gospel account of our Lord’s death and resurrection. Each time something new seems to pop into focus, doesn’t it? This morning I’m captured by the irony of something Christ’s mocking enemies said in Luke 23:35 as He hung on the cross:

And the people stood by, watching, but the rulers scoffed at him, saying, ‘He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, his Chosen One!’”

“He saved others?” You betcha—He sure did! He saved me!

Overwhelmed at the delightful irony of that reality, I started laughing and crying at the same time. This was a little too intense for my cat, who had been resting on my lap. She jumped off and took refuge on top of the couch. And from that safe vantage point she stared at me as if I’m crazy today.

That’s OK, cat. Paul says we are fools for Christ’s sake. And the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength.

Glory to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ!



Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments {tag_commentlist} | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

Guess what happened (when a Christian blogger visited an SDA Church) . . .

Thursday, March 11, 2010

A Christian author/filmmaker/blogger from North Carolina dropped in on a Seventh-day Adventist church one Sabbath and came away with some interesting impressions. Here is Christopher Knight’s report about what he experienced:

“Along the course of my travels I have visited many a place of worship: from every flavor of Baptist church to (accidentally) walking into a sanctuary of snake handlers. And everything in between from Catholic to Mormon, to a Jewish synagogue once upon a time. As a professional journalist I was even once sent to report on a gathering of pagan worshipers.


“But it's been all too rare that I've taken the opportunity to meet in fellowship with other Christians and not as a detached observer but as one who comes also seeking after our Lord and Savior. So it is that a few days ago, I was invited to attend a Sabbath worship service at a Seventh-day Adventist congregation.


“Up 'til now, my knowledge of Seventh-day Adventism has been unusually cursory: I understood that Adventists worship on Saturday instead of Sunday. That was basically it, other than I've long known that Adventists discourage the use of alcohol and tobacco (how I came to know that is a whole 'nother story). But over the course of two days I came to learn and understand a great deal more about those of my fellow servants known as Seventh-day Adventists.’

Blogger Knight continues:

Indeed, I found that the Adventist perspective of the Sabbath to be exceptionally sincere and... perhaps "refreshing" is the most appropriate word? . . . I have to say that in that regard, my own heart came to feel considerable kinship with my Adventist brethren.”

Curious? You can read Knight’s whole blog by clicking here.

Martin





Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments Post has no comments. | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

22 Days with Jesus

Thursday, February 11, 2010

How would you like to spend the next 22 mornings with Jesus, meeting with Him in an unexpected place? I’m thinking about Psalm 119, the longest chapter in the Bible with 176 verses. Recall how Jesus said that all Scripture testifies of Him (John 5:39)—and He was referring specifically of the Old Testament. After all, He is the Word of God (John 1 and 1 John 1), so we should be able to find Him even in Psalm 119.

A few years ago I decided to look for Him there—and wow! Read the following and see for yourself.

Notice that each of the 176 verses in Psalm 119 is bundled into sections of eight verses. So if you read one section for the next 22 mornings, you’ll cover the entire Psalm—and receive an amazing revelation of Jesus.

See for yourself. Here it is: Psalm 119 in light of the New Covenant:
                                                    
  1 Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk with Jesus.
  2 Blessed are those who have Jesus, and who seek Him with their whole heart.
  3 They also refrain from iniquity, they walk in His ways.
  4 You have commanded us to trust diligently in Jesus.
  5 O that my ways were directed to trust in Jesus!
  6 Then will I not be ashamed, when I have respect for Jesus.
  7 I will praise You with uprightness of heart, when I will have learned about Jesus.
  8 I will trust in Jesus; O forsake me not completely.

  9 How shall a young man cleanse his way?  By taking heed to Jesus.
 10 With my whole heart I have sought You; O let me not wander from Jesus.
 11 Jesus I have hid in my heart that I might not sin against You.
 12 Blessed are You, O Lord, teach me about Jesus.
 13 With my lips I have declared Jesus.
 14 I have rejoiced in the way of Jesus, as much as in all riches.
 15 I will meditate in Jesus and have respect for Your ways.
 16 I will delight myself in Jesus, I will not forget Him.

 17 Deal bountifully with Your servant, that I may live and trust in Jesus.
 18 Open my eyes that I may see wonderful things in Jesus.
 19 I am a stranger in the earth, hide not Jesus from me.
 20 My soul breaks for the longing that it has for Jesus at all times.
 21 You have rebuked the proud who are cursed, those who stray from Jesus.
 22 Remove from me reproach and contempt, for I have followed Jesus.
 23 Princes also sat and spoke against me, but Your servant did meditate in Jesus.
 24 Jesus is my delight and my counselor.

 25 My soul is dragging in the dust.  Give me life through Jesus.
 26 I have spoken of my ways and You heard me; teach me about Jesus.
 27 Make me understand the way of Jesus, so I will talk of His wonderful works.
 28 My soul melts for heaviness; strengthen me through Jesus.
 29 Remove from me the way of lying, and grant me Jesus in Your grace.
 30 I have chosen the way of truth; Jesus I have set before me.
 31 I have stayed with Jesus, O Lord, put me not to shame.
 32 I will run the way of Jesus, when You will enlarge my heart.  

 33 Teach me, O Lord, the way of Jesus, and I will keep it to the end.
 34 Give me understanding and I will trust in Jesus, yes, I will follow Him with my whole heart.
 35 Make me travel in the path of Jesus, for in that do I delight.
 36 Direct my heart to Jesus, and not to covetousness.
 37 Turn away my eyes from beholding vanity, and give me life in Jesus.
38 Establish Jesus to Your servant, who is devoted to Your fear.
 39 Turn away my reproach which I fear, for Jesus is good.
 40 Behold, I have longed after Jesus, give me life in Your righteousness.

 41 Let Your mercies come also to me, O Lord, even Your salvation through Jesus.
 42 So will I be able to answer him who reproaches me, for I have Jesus.
 43 And take not the word of truth completely out of my mouth, for I hope in Jesus.
 44 So I will trust in Jesus continually for ever and ever.
 45 And I will walk at liberty, for I seek Jesus.
 46 I will speak of Jesus before kings, and will not be ashamed.
 47 I will lift up my hands to Jesus, whom I have loved.
 48 My hands will I lift up to Your Son, whom I have loved, and I will meditate in Jesus.   

 49 Remember Jesus when You think about me; upon Him You have caused me to hope.
 50 This is my comfort in my affliction: Jesus has given me life.
 51 The proud have ridiculed me greatly, yet I have not strayed from Jesus.
 52 For a long time now I have remembered Jesus, O Lord, and have comforted myself.
 53 Horror has taken hold upon me because of the wicked who forsake Jesus.
 54 Jesus has been my song in the house of my pilgrimage.
 55 I have remembered You, O Lord, in the night, and have trusted in Jesus.
 56 This I had, because I trust in Jesus.   

 57 You are my portion, O Lord, I have said I would trust in Jesus.
 58 I beg for Your favor with my whole heart, be merciful to me through Jesus.
 59 I thought on my ways and I turned my feet to Jesus.
 60 I made haste and delayed not to follow Jesus.
 61 Wicked people have robbed me, but I have not forgotten Jesus.
 62 At midnight I will rise to give thanks to You because of Jesus.
 63 I keep company with all those who respect You, and those who trust in Jesus.
 64 The earth, O Lord, is full of Your mercy; teach me about Jesus.

 65 You have dealt well with Your servant, O Lord, through Jesus.
 66 Teach me good judgment and knowledge, for I have believed in Jesus.
 67 Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I follow Jesus.
 68 You are good, and You do good; teach me about Jesus.
 69 The proud have forged a lie against me, but I will trust in Jesus with my whole heart.
 70 Their heart is as fat as grease, but I delight in Jesus.
 71 It is good for me that I have been afflicted, that I might learn about Jesus.
 72 Jesus is better for me than thousands of gold and silver.

 73 Your hands have made me and fashioned me, give me understanding that I may learn about Jesus.
 74 Those who respect You will be glad when they see me, for I have hoped in Jesus.
 75 I know, O Lord, that Jesus is right, and that You in faithfulness have afflicted me.
 76 I pray You, let Your merciful kindness comfort me through Jesus.
77 Let Your tender mercies come to me that I may live, for Jesus is my delight.
 78 Let the proud be ashamed, for they wronged me without a cause ‑‑ but I will meditate in Jesus.
 79 Let those who respect You turn to me, and those who have known Jesus.
 80 Let my heart be secure in Jesus so I will not be ashamed.

 81 My soul faints for Your salvation, but I hope in Jesus.
 82 My eyes are growing weary for Jesus, saying, When will You comfort me?
 83 I am become like a bottle in the smoke, yet I do not forget Jesus.
 84 How many days are left to Your servant?  When will You execute judgment on those who persecute me?
 85 The proud have dug pits for me, those who do not follow Jesus.
 86 Jesus is faithful; they persecute me wrongfully ‑‑ help me!
 87 They had almost eaten me alive, but I did not forsake Jesus.
 88 Give me life through Your lovingkindness, so I will trust in Jesus.

 89 For ever, O Lord, Jesus is established in heaven.          
 90 Your faithfulness lasts for all generations; You have established the earth, and it abides.
 91 They continue this day through Your sovereignty, for all are Your servants.
 92 Unless Jesus had been my delight, I would have perished in my affliction.
 93 I will never forget Jesus, for with Him You have given me life.
 94 I am Yours, save me; for I have sought Jesus.
 95 The wicked have waited for me to destroy me, but I will think about Jesus.
 96 I have seen the end of all perfection, but Your mercy is exceedingly great.

 97 O how I love Jesus!  He is my meditation all the day.
 98 Through Jesus You have made me wiser than my enemies, for He is ever with me.
 99 I have more understanding than all my teachers, for Jesus is my meditation.
100 I understand more than the ancients, because I trust in Jesus.
101 I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might have Jesus.
102 I have not departed from Jesus, for You have instructed me.
103 How sweet is Jesus to my taste!  Even sweeter than honey to my mouth!           
104 Through Jesus I get understanding, therefore I hate every false way.  

105 Jesus is a lamp for my feet and a light for my path.
106 I have determined and I will follow through with it, that I will trust in Jesus.
107 I am afflicted very much; give me life, O Lord, through Jesus.
108 Accept, I beg You, the freewill offerings of my mouth, O Lord, and teach me about Jesus.
109 My soul is continually in my hand, yet I do not forget Jesus.
110 The wicked have laid a snare for me, yet I have not strayed from Jesus.
111 Jesus I have taken as my heritage for ever, for He is the rejoicing of my heart.
112 I have inclined my heart to follow Jesus always, even to the end.

113 I hate vain thoughts, but Jesus do I love.            
114 You are my hiding place and my shield; I hope in Jesus.
115 Depart from me, you evildoers, for I will follow Jesus.
116 Uphold me through Jesus that I may live, and let me not be ashamed of my hope.
117 Hold me up and I will be safe, and I will have respect for Jesus continually.
118 You have trampled upon everyone who strays from Jesus, for their deceit is falsehood.
119 You put away all the wicked of the earth like dross, therefore I love Jesus.
120 My flesh trembles for fear of You, and I am afraid of Your word.

121 I have done what is right and just; leave me not to my oppressors.
122 Guarantee the well‑being of Your servant; let not the proud oppress me.
123 My eyes fail for Your salvation, and for the word of Your righteousness.
124 Deal with Your servant through Your mercy, and teach me about Jesus.
125 I am Your servant; give me understanding, that I may know Jesus.
126 It is time for You to work, Lord, for they have disregarded Jesus.
127 Therefore I love Jesus above gold, yes, above fine gold.
128 Therefore I consider Jesus to be right in everything, and I hate every false way.

129 Jesus is wonderful, therefore my soul trusts in Him.          
130 The entrance of Jesus gives light, He gives understanding to the simple.
131 I opened my mouth and panted, for I longed for Jesus.
132 Look upon me and be merciful to me, as You have done to those who love Jesus.
133 Establish my steps in Jesus, and let not any sin have dominion over me.
134 Deliver me from the oppression of man; so will I trust in Jesus.
135 Make Your face shine upon Your servant, and teach me about Jesus.
136 Rivers of waters run down my eyes, because they do not trust in Jesus.

137 You are righteous, O Lord, and Jesus is upright.
138 Jesus is righteous and very faithful.
139 My zeal has consumed me, because my enemies have forgotten Jesus.
140 Jesus is very pure, therefore Your servant loves Him.
141 I am small and despised, yet I do not forget Jesus.
142 Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and Jesus is the truth.
143 Trouble and anguish have taken hold on me, yet Jesus is my delight.
144 The righteousness of Jesus is everlasting; give me understanding and I will live.

145 I cried with my whole heart; hear me, O Lord, I will trust in Jesus.
146 I cried to You; save me, and I will follow Jesus.
147 I arose before the dawning of the morning and cried, I hoped in Jesus.
148 My eyes are awake during the night watches, that I might meditate in Jesus.
149 Hear my voice through Your lovingkindness, O Lord; give me life through Jesus.
150 Those who do wickedness are nearby; they are far from Jesus.
151 You are near, O Lord, and Jesus is truth.
152 Concerning Jesus, I have known of old that You have established Him for ever.

153 Consider my affliction and deliver me, for I do not forget Jesus.
154 Plead my cause and deliver me, give me life through Jesus.
155 Salvation is far from the wicked, for they do not seek Jesus.
156 Great are Your tender mercies, O Lord, give me life through Jesus.
157 Many are my persecutors and my enemies, yet I refuse to turn away from Jesus.
158 I saw the transgressors and felt sad, because they refused to follow Jesus.
159 Consider how I love Jesus; give me life, O Lord, through Your lovingkindness.
160 Jesus is true from the beginning, and He endures for ever.

161 Princes have persecuted me for no reason, but my heart stands in awe of Jesus.
162 I rejoice in Jesus as one who finds great wealth.
163 I hate and despise lying, but I love Jesus.
164 Seven times a day I praise You because of Jesus.
165 Great peace have they who love Jesus, and nothing will offend them.
166 Lord, I have hoped for Your salvation, and I have kept my trust in Jesus.
167 My soul has trusted in Jesus, and I love Him exceedingly.
168 I have followed Jesus, for all my ways are before You.           

169 Let my cry come near before You, O Lord; give me understanding through Jesus.
170 Let my supplication come before You; deliver me through Jesus.
171 My lips will utter praise when You have taught me about Jesus.
172 My tongue will speak of Jesus, for He is righteousness.
173 Let Your hand help me, for I have chosen Jesus.          
174 I have longed for Your salvation, O Lord, and Jesus is my delight.
175 Let my soul live and it will praise You, and let Jesus help me.
176 I have gone astray like a lost sheep; seek Your servant, for I do not forget Jesus. 



Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments Post has no comments. | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

Noted Evangelical Scholar Teaches the Cleansing of Heaven’s Sanctuary

Friday, January 08, 2010

            It’s thrilling when trusted Evangelical scholars vindicate the various aspects of Seventh-day Adventist doctrine. For example, the seventh-day Sabbath is gaining increasing respect. So is our understanding of hell—annihilationism, supported by such theological luminaries as John Stott, author of The Cross of Christ. At the Baptist seminary where I recently completed my doctorate, my major professor was a conditionalist, believing as we do that death is unconscious sleep. The SDA view of Christ’s second coming as post-tribulation and pre-millennial is gaining ground, and our health message is increasingly respected by fellow Christians and even secular society.

            Only Seventh-day Adventists package all these truths together into an integrated whole—that is our uniqueness—but it is so good to see our various doctrines affirmed individually.

            Even our doctrine of heaven’s sanctuary, so ridiculed by many, is winning some affirmation from unexpected places. The core of the controversy is the cleansing of that heavenly sanctuary, which is not only denied but derided by ex-Adventists such as Dale Ratzlaff of Life Assurance Ministries.

            Last night I was exploring the new version of Logos Bible Software, preparing a product review of their Platinum package for the March issue of Outlook magazine. I typed one of my favorite Scripture themes, “Christus Victor,” into the command box, and one of the hits took me right into Hebrews 9 and the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary.

            Notice this from D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, an eminent British Evangelical scholar. Referring to Hebrews 9:23, he says: “We are taught here quite clearly that it was necessary that the heavenly place itself should be purified.” That’s in his 1996 book, God the Father, God the Son, published by Crossway Books. He continues: “And thus, it seems to me, we arrive at a kind of understanding of what is meant here by the necessity to purify even the heavenly tabernacle itself.”

            Amazing! This is very much of what Adventists have been saying all these years. Here is the extended quotation from Dr. Lloyd-Jones:

I wonder whether you have ever realised that our Lord, by doing His work upon the cross, has even effected a change in heaven? Let me give you my authority. We read in Hebrews 9:23, ‘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.’ God called Moses up to the Mount and there He gave him instructions about the building of the tabernacle, about the measurements, and how he was to furnish it and exactly what he was to do. And, as the author of Hebrews reminds us, when God had shown Moses everything, He gave him these words of instruction: ‘See … that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount’ (Heb. 8:5). So Moses went down and carried out the instructions. And, as the epistle to the Hebrews reminds us, everything that Moses made had to be purified and it was purified by taking the blood of calves and of goats and water and scarlet wool and hyssop, by sprinkling the book of the law and the people and the various vessels of the ministry and everything in connection with the tabernacle.

“Now this is the author’s argument: ‘It was therefore necessary,’ he says, ‘that the patterns’—in other words, these earthly things; the tabernacle in the wilderness was not ‘the things in the heavens’, it was only something made on the pattern of those things—‘the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these’—the blood of bulls and of goats, water, and so on—‘but the heavenly things themselves [must be purified] with better sacrifices than these.’ And then he goes on, ‘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’ (Heb. 9:23–4).

“So his argument can be put like this: the patterns were purified by blood of bulls and goats but that is not good enough to purify the thing itself, the heavenly tabernacle; this must be purified by something better. And it has been purified by something better. It has been purified by the blood of the Son of God Himself. He offered His own blood. I do beg of you to read again this ninth chapter of Hebrews, indeed, read chapter 8 as well! Go further and read the entire epistle in order that you may grasp this argument. It is a most glorious statement and one of the most mysterious statements in the whole of the Bible. We are taught here quite clearly that it was necessary that the heavenly place itself should be purified and that it has been purified by the blood of Jesus Christ Himself.

“Now the question is: What does this mean? Let me be quite frank and answer that there is a sense in which no one can be too dogmatic about the answer to that question. But it seems to me we must say this: in some mysterious way there is a tabernacle in the heavenly places. There are statements about our Lord entering into that heavenly tabernacle, that holiest of all. I do not pretend to understand it but the statements are made and therefore we must believe that what was made on earth was made on the pattern of that which is in heaven.

“And, further, we can say this: Satan fell from heaven. Our Lord says, ‘I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven’ (Luke 10:18). Satan, as we saw when we were considering the biblical teaching concerning him, was undoubtedly the brightest of the angels in the presence of God, and when he fell, when he rose up with pride and rebelled against God, he did so in the heavens itself. And thus, it seems to me, we arrive at a kind of understanding of what is meant here by the necessity to purify even the heavenly tabernacle itself. In a way that we cannot understand, and that seems to be inscrutable, evil has affected heaven itself. This vile, this foul thing that first caused the fall of Satan, and then caused the fall of man has, if one may use such language, introduced a kind of impurity even into heaven—into the heavenly tabernacle, at any rate. And according to this teaching, as I understand it, it was necessary for our Lord to purify and to purge the heavenly tabernacle of that taint, and the statement here is to the effect that He has done so.

“This, I think, helps us to understand various statements which we find in Scripture, such as Colossians 1:20 where we read, ‘And having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth or things in heaven.’ Through Christ God is going to reconcile all things unto Himself in heaven as well as on earth. I am not suggesting that that is the only explanation but I am suggesting that that is a part of the explanation. And so we are confronted by this truly amazing and remarkable statement, that our Lord, as it were, had to take His own blood, even into heaven itself to get rid of this taint, this foul smear that was left by the fall of Satan. And so, ultimately, heaven, to use the language of the author of Hebrews, is purified entirely; and all evil and all its effects everywhere in heaven as well as upon earth have been removed.[i]

            So there we have it: an amazing affirmation of a much-disputed element of vintage Adventist doctrine—the cleaning of heaven’s sanctuary. Dr. Lloyd-Jones doesn’t get into the prophecies of Daniel, from which SDAs derive the year 1844 as the beginning date for this cleansing. In humility, Lloyd-Jones admits that he doesn’t know what this cleansing is all about—just the fact that it had to happen. He speculates that the heavenly sanctuary became defiled by Lucifer’s sin of rebellion. This is correct in a broad sense, of course, since all defilement originated with Lucifer. But he doesn’t consult the biblical sanctuary system to see specifically how defilement is transferred to the sanctuary.

            Indeed, Lloyd-Jones takes note that Moses’ sanctuary on earth was patterned after the heavenly sanctuary; he just doesn’t follow through on that connection—specifically, that the sanctuary is defiled when we sin, finally to be cleansed by virtue of Christ’s once-for-all-time sacrifice on the cross.

            Meanwhile, of course, “there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,” (Romans 8:1), since we are “accepted in the Beloved” (Ephesians 1:6).  Even as the heavenly judgment proceeds with its audit of salvation history, all who entrust themselves to Jesus may find refuge within the inner temple (Hebrews 6:19) and come confidently to God’s throne of grace (4:16). There we may rejoice “in full assurance of hope until the very end” (6:11), since “by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified” (10:14).

            After the celestial pre-Advent judgment, during which the sins of believers are blotted out, the devil will bear responsibility for his role in defiling us. God will baptize him in the lake of fire, “prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41). Satan had given birth to sin as Lucifer before being cast into the earth, where he seduced the human race. Thus it is appropriate that God will eventually hold him responsible for the whole business of sin.

            So the devil will be the final sin-bearer, in the sense that he must bear responsibility for the entire enterprise of evil. After God’s triumphal verdict in the pre-Advent judgment, all record of evildoing is cleansed from heaven’s sanctuary by authority of Christ’s sacrificial blood. The blame for sin is placed upon its originator and salesman. Satan will be banished as a goat into the wilderness, ultimately to be destroyed in hell with his entourage of rebels. God and His vindicated people will share eternity together on the earth made new.

            To summarize: one by one, the various elements of Seventh-day Adventist doctrine are being affirmed by respected biblical scholarship—even the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary. The unique theological contribution of our denomination is that we are the only faith community who connects all the dots into a complete picture, so the world can see the truth as it is in Jesus for earth’s last days.



[i] D. M. Lloyd-Jones, God the Father, God the Son (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1996), 346-48.



Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments Post has no comments. | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

This website featured in both "Adventist Review" and "Adventist World" magazines

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

     We are happy that our world church featured sdaforme.com in the December 10 Adventist Review, after also being promoted in November’s Adventist World magazine on the president’s page (p. 13). Mid-America Union President Roscoe J. Howard III wrote a guest editorial promoting our website.

     Elder Howard says, “What I most like about the Web site is its positive spirit. Weber and the McConnells counter the attacks against Adventist truth without counterattacking those who oppose us [the SDA church]. They offer gracious responses, taking to heart the apostle Paul’s counsel in 2 Timothy 2:25: ‘Gently instruct those who oppose the truth. Perhaps God will change those people’s hearts, and they will learn the truth.’”

     I hope so. That’s our goal, anyway. We want this website to be represent the loving Spirit of Jesus Christ, not a combative spirit of contention. Our warfare is against the devil’s attacks upon Adventist truth, not against people who oppose us. I am heartsick at the mean spirit of so much of theological discussion, and we will not permit this website to showcase hateful or insulting responses. That’s the main reason we are not posting comments anymore.

     I understand the pain and frustration so many have felt after suffering legalism in an Adventist context, and my heart goes out to you. If you are ready to sit down with us and try to figure out where do you go from here, this website is available as a resource to help you on that journey.

     Another reason I’m not taking comments on this website anymore is that life has gotten so busy for me. I am now assistant to the president of the Mid-America Union on top of my ongoing communication responsibilities. This involves extra travel and other new responsibilities. I’m adjunct teaching at Union College, and trying to keep Outlook magazine coming every month to the 63,000 members of the Mid-America Union. Added to that is my volunteer work with The Hope of Survivors for victims of clergy sexual abuse.

     Given all this, I’m even way behind on answering e-mails and have no hope of catching up until after I’m done teaching my class this semester at Union College. My apologies.

     There are many new things we want to post on this website, plus videos and other media materials. Meanwhile, please browse around what we have posted here. If you haven’t read the “Welcome . . . About this site” on the homepage, please do. It will give you an idea of what we are hoping to accomplish here.

    May God be with you all as we enter this Thanksgiving season, with gratitude most of all for His mercy and truth in Jesus Christ.

Grace and peace,

Martin Weber, DMin, assistant to the president and communication director, Mid-America Union of SDA



Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments {tag_commentlist} | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

Check out our Stories!

Saturday, September 05, 2009
All around the Mid-America Union*, Seventh-day Adventists young and old are joyously connected with their communities in grace-based, selfless service for the Savior. As editor of Outlook magazine, Martin selected a few of the many featured every month, along with photos. To access them, click on the word "Stories" in the middle of the dark gray bar across the top. Select your story, and if you wish to enlarge a photo, double click on it.

BTW, as each new blogs (like this one) are posted, previous ones are moved to the main Blog page. To access them, click on the word "Blog" on the same dark gray bar. You'll see them listed in the middle column of the page. Many of these older blogs have fascinating comments of continuing interest added to them, like these:
   "5 Questions for Dale Ratzlaff"
   "Dale Ratzlaff responds to our questions"
   "Please forgive us--and don't forsake us"
   "True prophet = no errors?"

*The Mid-America Union stretches south from the Canadian border to the border with Oklahoma, and then west from the Mississippi River over the crest of the Rockies. Martin Weber is the communication director for this region.

Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments Post has no comments. | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

Life Assurance Ministries--you amaze me!

Saturday, August 22, 2009

You have much to say about the New Covenant, and we share your enthusiasm for its new life in the Spirit. What we can’t understand is why you feel the New Covenant does away with God’s Law—not as a method of salvation (which would be legalism) but as the test of fully devoted discipleship?

2 Corinthians 3 condemns not God’s Law itself but the futility of having it written on tables of stone, as in the Old Covenant. In the New Covenant, that same Law is “written on the fleshly tables of the heart” (verse 3). It’s not the message that is different but the place where it is written—tables of the heart instead of tables of stone.

If you disagree with that, please tell us which of the Ten Commandments that God’s Spirit of grace won’t write on your heart? The one that forbids disrespecting parents (5th)?  Murdering (6th)?  Adultery (7th)?  Stealing (8th)?  Lying (9th)? How about coveting (10th)? Of course not. Then what about putting false gods before the real God (1st), debasing His image (2nd) or taking His name in vain (3rd)? Certainly not. You’re good with all of those commandments. So where is the problem?

I wonder if it’s that Sabbath commandment, which just won’t go away. So do you throw away the whole Law of God just to get rid of one inconvenient truth? What a pity, since it’s the Sabbath commandment that keeps us from being legalists when honoring the other nine. The Sabbath means rest, remember? Resting in Christ’s finished works? How can you possibly have a problem with that?

My friends at Life Assurance want me to give them evidence that the 10 Commandments are written in the heart under the New Covenant. I think we just I just did! If I didn’t, please do tell me which one of the 10 you don’t want anymore? Only the one that specifically calls us to rest in Christ.

This seems so strange, I can't understand it. You fulfill the other nine commandments while resting in Jesus, while you reject the one commandment that calls us to rest in Christ’s finished works of Creation and Salvation. What kind of sense does this make?

And it gets even worse when our friends at Life Assurance Ministries deny the clear statement of Romans 8:4 that “the righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us.” It doesn’t say that the righteousness of the Spirit is written in our hearts; it says that the Spirit writes the righteousness of the Law in our hearts.

Of course this doesn’t happen in a legalistic way by trying to be good enough before God. It only happens when we rest in Christ, which empowers us to live in the Spirit. So that’s how God’s Law is written in our hearts—by His Spirit, who leads us to Gospel rest (which is what the seventh-day Sabbath is all about!).

Dale Ratzlaff speaks of Christ’s two great commandments of Jesus: to love the Lord with all our hearts and our neighbors as ourselves. Fine. Now which of God’s 10 Commandments do Christ’s two commandments overthrow? Please tell us.

Actually, we already have Christ’s own explanation: “On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Matthew 22:40). The Message Bible puts it this ways; “These two commands are pegs; everything in God’s Law and the Prophets hangs from them.” So there we have it: Christ’s two commandments support God’s Law instead of negating it.

The apostle Paul puts it this way: “Do we then make void the Law through faith?” Yes, according to Life Assurance Ministries. But the Bible says, “God forbid, we establish the Law” (Romans 3:31). Which brings us back to 1 Corinthians 7:19: “Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.”



Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments {tag_commentlist} | Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

Dale Ratzlaff responds to our questions . . .

Monday, August 17, 2009

We welcome his interaction here about the Sabbath.  (The following is also posted as an exchange of comments under the blog “5 Questions for Dale Ratzlaff.”)

Dale Ratzlaff to Martin Weber:

There is no command to keep the Sabbath in the N.T. All the meetings in the book of Acts are in a Jewish setting. There is no instruction on how to keep the Sabbath in letters written to young Gentile churches. Sabbath breaking is never listed in any lists of NT sins. When the Sabbath in mentioned in the epistles, it is either in a negative or unimportant context. The O.T. prophets confront the gentile nations for worshiping idols, blaspheming the name of God, ruthless killing, injustice and immorality, but never for breaking the Sabbath. The Jews considered the Sabbath to be a ritual law. The Jews insisted that a Gentile staying with a Jew was to keep the Sabbath. However, if the Gentile kept the Sabbath on his own he was to be put to death. Jesus, according to John 5 broke the Sabbath and from his defense of his other Sabbath incidents it seems clear that He understood the Sabbath to be a ritual law. The entrance sign to the Old Covenant was circumcision. The continuing sign the Old Covenant was Sabbath. “Remember the Sabbath” The entrance sign to the New Covenant is baptism The continuing sign in the New Covenant is the Lord’s Supper. “Do this in remembrance of Me”

Martin Weber responds:

Dear Dale, thanks for engaging us in dialogue. I appreciate this opportunity to have a Christian discussion and am glad to respond to your statements.

Since the Sabbath day itself was deeply entrenched during Christ’s ministry, there was no need for Him to re-command it. The issue in the Gospels was not whether to keep the Sabbath but how to keep it—and Jesus gave plenty of attention to that. If Christ intended to do away with the Sabbath, He surely wasted a lot of energy defending it. And then to top it off, He proclaimed Himself “Lord of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:8).

As for the rest of the NT, we find nothing negative about the weekly Sabbath—it’s the non-weekly ceremonial sabbaths that are done away with in Colossians 2. Remember, the Mosaic ceremonial laws had monthly and yearly sabbaths beyond the weekly Sabbath of the Ten Commandments (see Leviticus 23:38, for example). Ceremonial laws, such as the monthly and yearly Sabbaths, are obviously what’s under discussion in verses 17 and 18: “So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.” By contrast, the weekly Sabbath of Creation and Calvary is not a temporary shadow pointing forward. It is an eternal memorial calling us to “remember,” pointing back to Christ’s historic accomplishments.

Romans 14 also refers to ceremonial Sabbaths. The continued keeping of them was optional according to one’s own convictions. Note that once again the context in that chapter is Jewish ceremonial laws, not anything in the Ten Commandments.

Throughout the church-planting narrative of the book of Acts, Sabbath-keeping is obviously a fact of life in the early church—and never negatively mentioned. If Paul had done away with the seventh-day Sabbath, there would have been a firestorm of controversy—as we do find regarding circumcision and food laws. 


To summarize: It is simply not credible to imagine that something as fundamental and entrenched as the Sabbath could be abolished without controversy in the NT, particularly when we see so much discussion about other things Jewish—even in the predominantly Gentile churches. For more on this, please check our FAQ in the “Sabbath” section under our “Issues” tab, answering: “Why doesn’t the NT explicitly teach the Sabbath?” (Hint—it does!)

Moving on with your critique, Dale. You consider the Sabbath a Jewish ritual. Well, everything in Jewish culture was ritualized, including eternal moral principles such as marital fidelity—and the eternal worship principle of the Sabbath. Let’s remember that the Sabbath is not rooted in rituals and ceremonies but as the grand memorial of Creation. It was “made for man” (Mark 2:27,28)—not for Jewish ritual. The Greek word there for “man” is anthropos, which you know means “people”—not just Jews.

As for the Gentile nations of the OT not being confronted for breaking the Sabbath—first things first! Pagans first had to turn from their idols to worship the true Creator. Then they could begin keeping the Sabbath, as Gentile converts indeed were invited to do in Isaiah 56 (verses 6, 7).

I can hardly believe, Dale, that you would accuse Jesus of breaking the Sabbath in John 5. This would turn our Savior into a sinner! Yes, He did ignore the Jewish rituals about the Sabbath, and everything else. But if our Lord had broken His Father’s commandment, He could not have challenged His enemies: “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (John 8:46). He kept the Sabbath in His life and even in His death, as along with His disciples He “rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment” (Luke 23:56—evidently the Sabbath was still a commandment when Luke wrote his Gospel, decades later). Only after Jesus honored the Sabbath by resting on that day from His finished work on the cross did He rise from the dead.

Dale, you teach that the Sabbath is done away, and now Jesus Himself is your Sabbath—as if He said: “The Sabbath used to be a day, but now it’s Me.” No, Jesus declared Himself to be Lord of the day, not the day itself. (Let’s maintain the distinction between the Creator and His creation, lest we set the stage for pantheism.) The Sabbath is like baptism in the New Covenant: an expression of identification with Christ for our salvation. Whereas baptism is a once-in-a-lifetime expression of our solidarity with Christ, the Sabbath is a weekly expression of the same faith.

Jesus is not our baptism, and He is not our Sabbath. Both baptism and the Sabbath are symbols of Christ’s rest. It helps to remember that the word “Sabbath” does not mean “works” but “rest”— literally “cessation” from our works. And isn’t that what the Gospel is all about?

Dale, you teach that the New Covenant does away with the Ten Commandments, including the Sabbath. But the NT teaches that what God wrote on the tables of stone in the Old Covenant is now written on our hearts. Hebrews 10:16 says: “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds.” These are not just spiritual principles (as you say), but God’s actual commandments.

Does this obedience amount to legalism? Not when motivated by loving gratitude rather than appeasement.

We are not saved by keeping the law, but the life of faith will make us faithful. Believers become fully devoted disciples, being drawn into harmony with God’s Ten Commandments so that the “righteousness of the law will be fulfilled in us” (Romans 8:3-4). Whereas ceremonial laws are done away with in the NT, God’s eternal law remains to test the genuineness of our faith. And so we read in 1 Corinthians 7:19: “Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.”

Keeping the commandments matters to God, Dale. Does it matter to you?




Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments
Van L. Sailo commented on 18-Aug-2009 05:53 AM
Martin Weber is absolutely right. Let me also add this. Before Jesus died, He predicted that the temple in Jerusalem would be completely destroyed some time after He died. It happened exactly as He prediected in 70 A.D when Roman armies under General Titus surrounded the city and destroyed it. Jesus added, "Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the SABBATH" (Matthew 24:20). Sabbath obviously was very important to Jesus,and will continue to be important to Him even long after His death and it continues to be important today for God's people. If I claim to be a follower of Christ, what's important to Jesus should be important in my life, don't you think so brother Dale? If it was a custom for our Lord to keep the Sabbath (Luke 4:16) and the fourth commandment begins with "REMEMBER" (the Sabbath day. . .) (Ex. 20:11), should people who professed to be God's children engage in "FORGETTING" instead of REMEMBERING" this important commandments of God and what's important to God? If Sabbath was made for "Anthropos" (men or people) like you and me (Mark 2:27, 28), have we ceased to be men or people today?

Love for God made me keep the Sabbath, not for anything else, because it is a memorial of His creation, and a weekly reminder that Jesus the creator of the Sabbath is my rest and my salvation, I will continue to honor Him on His Holy Sabbath. "If you love me" he said, "keep my commandments" except the Sabbath? is that what it said? I don't see that in the Bible! "If you love me, keep my commandments" John 14:15.
Anonymous commented on 18-Aug-2009 08:09 PM
The original rebuttal by MW is long on SDA rhetoric but short on documentation. He does not so much "reply" to DRs comments as use the occasion to spout the standard SDA line, none of which clearly refutes DRs points and much of which is irrelevant to his comments. For this type of exchange to be meaningful it will require give and take, point by point dialog, that goes back and forth and that requires Scriptural documentation on both sides (as opposed to "Ceremonial laws, such as the monthly and yearly Sabbaths, are obviously what’s under discussion in verses 17 and 18" - MW makes no attempt to show why this is "obviously" the case. OBVIOUSLY it is NOT obvious to the majority of non-SDA Christians.)
Michelle S. commented on 20-Aug-2009 09:18 PM
Perhaps this will be more clear for you.

Matthew 22:36-40 states (and please read this for yourself so you can be sure of what it says)that "the great commandment in the law" is "[37] Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. [38] This is the first and great commandment.
[39] And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. [40] On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

These words were spoken by Jesus.

Note that his first commandment to love Lord thy God covers the first 4 commandments (the 4th being to keep the Sabbath), and his second commandment to love thy neighbors as thyself covers the last 6 commandments. Jesus says on these two commandments hang all the law - and that includes the Sabbath.

I also agree, that for everything that was argued upon by those who wanted to slay Christ, any changes of the Sabbath to Sunday would have been vehemently opposed and one more reason to crucify him. The Bible has specifically shown the day to worship the Sabbath. At that end, I challenge anyone to show the scripture(s) where the Bible shows, without a doubt, that the new Sabbath is Sunday - not merely conjecture. I've looked. I can't find it. Can you?
Amy commented on 21-Aug-2009 09:38 AM
Martin Weber says "Dale, you teach that the New Covenant does away with the Ten Commandments, including the Sabbath. But the NT teaches that what God wrote on the tables of stone in the Old Covenant is now written on our hearts. Hebrews 10:16 says: “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds.” These are not just spiritual principles (as you say), but God’s actual commandments."

Read 2 Corinthians 3. I'll post it here

"2You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men;
3being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts."

Yes, the NT does talk about something being written on our heart, but what is it? The 10 commandments? Keep reading 2 Corinthians 3.

"4Such confidence we have through Christ toward God.
5Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God,
6who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."

Here we find the letter of the law contrasting with the Spirit. Notice it says nothing about the spirit of the law. Keep reading and you will see it defines exactly what Spirit means. What is the law it talks about in 2 Corinthians 3?

"7But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was,
8how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?"

What is the law that was engraved on stones? This is not just talking about part of the law, but it actually refers to the tablets of stone - the 10 commandments - the old covenant. Keep reading.

"9For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory. 10For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses it. 11For if that which fades away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory."

Wow, the old covenant was good. It had glory, but it has come to have no glory at all because of what we have now. Again we see a contrast to the 10 commandments and the Spirit. But what is the spirit? Is it the spirit of the law? Keep reading.

"12 Therefore having such a hope, we use great boldness in our speech, 13and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away. 14But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. 15But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart; 16but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away."

Wow, focusing on the old covenant is not beneficial to us. Remember what Exodus 34 says "28So he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did not eat bread or drink water And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments. 29It came about when Moses was coming down from Mount Sinai (and the two tablets of the testimony were in Moses' hand as he was coming down from the mountain), that Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone because of his speaking with Him."

Exodus comes right out and says that the 10 commandments were the words of the covenant. This is what we are warned about focusing on here in 2 Corinthians 3. 2 Corinthians 3 directly warns us that focusing on the law will cause a veil to be upon our hearts. Remember how this chapter started out by saying we have confidence? We can't have confidence in the law or our law keeping. Our adequacy is from God according to 2 Corinthians 3. Focusing on what the Bible calls the Ministy of Death will veil the Gospel. The Gospel of grace does not require law-keeping. Requiring law-keeping to be saved or to stay saved obscures the Gospel. Because with the Gospel our adequacy comes from God! But, but, but it is talking about the spirit of the law, right? Let's keep reading in 2 Corinthians 3...

" 17Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."

The Spirit referred to thoughout 2 Corinthians 3 is not the spirit of the law, but the Holy Spirit. I have not found "spirit of the law" anywhere in the Bible. The ministry of the Holy Spirit is such much more than following a law. The law condemns. The Spirit gives life! Notice what it says here - the Spirit gives liberty! So in 2 Corinthians 3 we find the 10 commandments contrasted with something new. We find the 10 commandments as something we should not focus on. We find that the Gospel can be veiled to those focusing on the 10 commandments. We find that the way of the Spirit is one of adequacy and one of liberty. We find that the Spirit is none other than God Himself.

Now, is it wrong to steal or kill? Of course, but not because of the 10 commandments. If you do uphold the 10 commandments as for the new covenant Christian is that what prevents you from stealing or killing? Or could it be the Holy Spirit?

I'd like to also respond to Martin Weber's statement
"We are not saved by keeping the law, but the life of faith will make us faithful. Believers become fully devoted disciples, being drawn into harmony with God’s Ten Commandments so that the “righteousness of the law will be fulfilled in us” (Romans 8:3-4). Whereas ceremonial laws are done away with in the NT, God’s eternal law remains to test the genuineness of our faith. And so we read in 1 Corinthians 7:19: “Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.”"

Please provide evidence for your claim that new covenant believers will become in harmony with the 10 commandments.

You quoted Romans 8. If you look at it in it's entirety you will again see the same theme as 2 Corinthians 3.

"1Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. "

Again there is that contrast between the law and the Spirit. Is this the spirit of the law? Keep reading.

"3For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."

The righteous requirements of the law are fulfilled in us NOT by following the 10 commandments! It says the opposite!!

"5For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8and those who are in the flesh cannot please God."

The law was written for people in the flesh - people who were not born again. No one could keep the law. Condemnation abounded.

"9However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him."

Again the way of the Spirit is not talking about the essence of the law, but the Holy Spirit! The Holy Spirit is essential to the believer.

"10If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.
11But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you."

Wow, the same theme. The Holy Spirit is what is essential to the Christian. Again here in Romans 8 the law is described as the old way.

1 Corinthians 7 is also quoted in Martin Weber's response. It describes how keeping the commandments of God matters. It sure does, but are our commands the old covenant commands - the commands of the Torah - the commands in the 10 commandments? The commands given to New Covenant Christians is defined in the new covenant. 1 John 3 says

"21Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God;

22and whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do the things that are pleasing in His sight.

23This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us.

24The one who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him We know by this that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us."

Commandments are specifically defined here and they are not the 10 commandments. Our commands are simple - believe in Jesus and love one another.

And love? It goes beyond not stealing. It goes beyond not killing. Love is the more excellent way. Keeping the commandments of God are very important. Keeping the 10 commandments is no more important than wearing tassels on your robe. The old covenant will all it's requirements is the old way. The new covenant is just that - NEW! It is not the old re-written. It is not just written in a new place. The ministry of death has passed into the ministry of the Spirit. The law of the Spirit of life versus the ministry of death - what a contrast. The ministry of death should have no role in a believer's life. For there is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus. Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty!


Anonymous commented on 21-Aug-2009 03:44 PM
Michelle,

Scripture says this about the 7th Day "It is a sign between me and the children of Israel FOREVER." —Exodus 31:16-17
  
Scripture says this about the Day of Atonement: "It shall be a Sabbath of rest unto you ... a statute forever." —Leviticus 16:30-31

In the context of these passages why does forever only apply to the 7th Day Sabbath but NOT the Day of Atonement Sabbath?

Martin responds to Anonymous, commented on 21-Aug-2009 11:13 PM
The meaning of "forever" is determined by the object it is describing. It is used more than 50 times in Scripture for things that have ceased to exist--like the temporary ceremonial sabbaths of the Old Covenant, intended for the Jews alone. But the weekly Sabbath memorializes the eternal provisions of Creation and Salvation (since Jesus rested in the tomb on Sabbath after accomplishing Salvation on the cross), and thus the seventh-day Sabbath abides forever. That's why the NT says that "the Sabbath was made for man" (Mark 2:27)--not just for Jews but for all mankind.
_ Martin
Martin answering Amy (Aug 21 9:38), commented on 22-Aug-2009 01:51 AM
2 Corinthians 3 condemns not God’s Law itself but the futility of having it written on tables of stone, as in the Old Covenant. In the New Covenant, that same Law is “written on the fleshly tables of the heart” (verse 3). It’s not the message that is different but the place where it is written—tables of the heart instead of tables of stone.

If you disagree with that, Amy, please tell me which of the Ten Commandments that God’s Spirit of grace won’t write on your heart? The one that forbids disrespecting parents (5th)? Murdering (6th)? Adultery (7th)? Stealing (8th)? Lying (9th)? How about coveting (10th)? Of course not. Then what about putting false gods before the real God (1st), debasing His image (2nd) or taking His name in vain (3rd)? Certainly not. You’re good with all of those commandments. So where is the problem?

Of course, it’s that Sabbath commandment which just won’t go away. So you throw away the whole Law of God just to get rid of one inconvenient truth. And what a pity, since it’s the Sabbath commandment that keeps us from being legalists when honoring the other nine. The Sabbath means rest, remember? Resting in Christ’s finished works? How can you possibly have a problem with that?

Now, you want me to provide evidence that the 10 Commandments are written in the heart under the New Covenant? I think I just did! If I didn’t, please do tell me which one of the 10 you don’t want anymore? Only the one that specifically calls us to rest in Christ.

This is so weird it boggles the imagination. You fulfill the other nine commandments while resting in Jesus, while you reject the one commandment that calls us to rest in Christ’s finished works of Creation and Salvation. I can't make sense of that.

And it gets even worse when you deny that the clear statement of Romans 8:4 that “the righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us.” It doesn’t say that the righteousness of the Spirit is written in our hearts; it says that the Spirit writes the righteousness of the Law in our hearts.

Of course this doesn’t happen in a legalistic way by trying to be good enough before God. It only happens when we rest in Christ, which empowers us to live in the Spirit. So that’s how God’s Law is written in our hearts—by His Spirit, who leads us to Gospel rest (which is what the seventh-day Sabbath is all about!).

Amy, you speak of Christ’s two great commandments of Jesus: to love the Lord with all our hearts and our neighbors as ourselves. Fine. Now which of God’s 10 Commandments do Christ’s two commandments overthrow? Please tell us.

Actually, we already have Christ’s own explanation: “On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Matthew 22:40). The Message Bible puts it this ways; “These two commands are pegs; everything in God’s Law and the Prophets hangs from them.” So there we have it: Christ’s two commandments support God’s Law instead of negating it.

The apostle Paul puts it this way: “Do we then make void the Law through faith?” Yes, according to Dale Ratzlaff. But the Bible says, “God forbid, we establish the Law” (Romans 3:31). Which brings us back to 1 Corinthians 7:19: “Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.”

Amy commented on 22-Aug-2009 12:06 PM
Martin says “2 Corinthians 3 condemns not God’s Law itself but the futility of having it written on tables of stone, as in the Old Covenant. In the New Covenant, that same Law is “written on the fleshly tables of the heart” (verse 3). It’s not the message that is different but the place where it is written—tables of the heart instead of tables of stone.” -------------------------------------------

2 Corinthians 3 not only contrasts the location, but what is written. 2 Corinthians 3 says that the letter kills. You say that letters – the words of the Ten Commandments which 2 Corinthians 3 calls the ministry of death - are what is written on my heart? 2Corinthians contrasts the 10 commandments with the ministry of the Spirit and it defines Spirit as God. God did not indwell people before Christ’s sacrifice. The Spirit came upon a few individuals before Christ’s sacrifice, but now the Spirit lives within all Christians. -------------------------------------

Look at Galatians 4 “24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27For it is written:
"Be glad, O barren woman,
who bears no children;
break forth and cry aloud,
you who have no labor pains;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband."[b]
28Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son."[c] 31Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.”
In Galatians 4 it also talks about the covenant from Mount Sinai. We know Deuteronomy specifically calls the 10 commandments as the words of the covenant. Here in Galatians it contrasts the two covenants. It talks about the children under the old covenant as slaves and the children of the new covenant as free. In Galatians it says to get rid of the slave woman and her son. Does God free us by putting slavery on our heart?
You said “If you disagree with that, Amy, please tell me which of the Ten Commandments that God’s Spirit of grace won’t write on your heart? “ -------------------------------------

All of them. He doesn’t write the ministry of death on my heart. The new covenant is something new all together! He writes Himself. He writes His love. Apape love. God doesn’t even command us to love Him in the new covenant. 1 John says we love Him because He first loved us. He fills us up with His love.

You said “So you throw away the whole Law of God just to get rid of one inconvenient truth. And what a pity, since it’s the Sabbath commandment that keeps us from being legalists when honoring the other nine. The Sabbath means rest, remember? Resting in Christ’s finished works? How can you possibly have a problem with that?”
----------------------------------------
No, you don’t throw away the law. We uphold the law! Jesus was the only One who was righteous. He was the only One who never sinned. He was the only One who upheld the righteous requirements of the law. He did it for us. No man could do it.
--------------------------------------
I love the Sabbath rest in Christ. The ceremonial shadows that pointed to the rest in salvation are immense and beautiful. But honouring the shadows isn’t what the rest is about. Resting in Christ is about trusting in Him alone for our salvation apart from any works. Salvation is by grace though faith alone. -------------------------------------


You said “And it gets even worse when you deny that the clear statement of Romans 8:4 that “the righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us.” It doesn’t say that the righteousness of the Spirit is written in our hearts; it says that the Spirit writes the righteousness of the Law in our hearts.” -------------------------------------

I don’t deny the statement from Romans. I think the partial quote of a verse does not reveal the meaning intended in the chapter. I’ll quote Romans 8 again. It says “1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. 3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, 4in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.” Look at verse 3. God sent His Son. The righteous requirements of the law are fully met in us because Jesus fully met them. 1 Corinthians says that Jesus is our righteousness. There is no condemnation for us because Jesus paid the price. He freed us from a law that was given to increase sin. Our life now is in the Spirit. God lives in us, not the old covenant law. He set us free from the law of sin and death. -------------------------------------


You said “Amy, you speak of Christ’s two great commandments of Jesus: to love the Lord with all our hearts and our neighbors as ourselves.” ---------------------------------

You misunderstood me here. I quoted the commands in 1 John and not the two greatest commands from the old covenant. The commands from 1 John are different – love one another and believe in Jesus. -----------------------------------

You said “Now which of God’s 10 Commandments do Christ’s two commandments overthrow? Please tell us. Actually, we already have Christ’s own explanation: “On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Matthew 22:40). The Message Bible puts it this ways; “These two commands are pegs; everything in God’s Law and the Prophets hangs from them.” So there we have it: Christ’s two commandments support God’s Law instead of negating it.” -------------------------------------

Jesus was asked the greatest commands in the law – the old covenant law. He said the love one another and love God. Yes, all the Torah hangs on those. But those are not the commands in the new covenant. I quoted 1 John and not Matthew. ------------------------------------

You said “The apostle Paul puts it this way: “Do we then make void the Law through faith?” Yes, according to Dale Ratzlaff. But the Bible says, “God forbid, we establish the Law” (Romans 3:31).” ------------------------------------

No, we don’t void the law. We uphold it. Jesus did it for you. Jesus did what no man could do. He upheld all the righteous requirements of the law for you. And at the same time we are not children of the slave woman. We are now free. And as 2 Corinthians 3 says where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty.
Martin answering Amy commented on 22-Aug-2009 05:39 PM
Yes, Amy, there is liberty in the Spirit of the Lord. Yet something
still gets written in our hearts. And we don’t have to guess what that is: God’s Laws. Notice what this says about the believers who receive Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice for sins under the New Covenant: “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds” (Heb. 10:16).
That’s pretty clear, I’d say. Dale Ratzlaff says that principles not laws are written in the heart of the NC Christian. But here we read that God’s Laws are written in our hearts.
Not literal words, of course. God isn’t tattooing our hearts. No, He is putting within us a willingness to love Him—not according to my whims and feelings but according to His terms, His commandments. It’s called the obedience of faith.
Remember, under the NC we are not trusting for salvation in how well the Law is written in our hearts. That would be a false obedience of works—legalism. That is Old Covenant bondage from Mt. Sinai, slavery of the soul, forever wondering whether we are good enough instead of rejoicing in the grace of God.
We’re free from having to be good enough to be saved! “If the Son shall make you free you shall be free indeed.” Amen! But free to do what?
Free to do as we please? Free to fornicate, lie, steal (or break the Sabbath)? That’s evidently what some Christians think, since there is hardly any measurable difference as to the moral behavior of Christians and the world. One man said: “I love God’s grace—He enjoys forgiving, and I enjoy sinning. So we’ve got a win-win relationship.”
No, that’s not grace, but disgrace. I’m sure we both agree that faith makes a difference in our lives. What kind of a difference? Agape love, as you say.
But what is agape love? It’s more than cheap talk, more than warm feelings. It’s fully-devoted discipleship that keeps God’s commandments:
“And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love [agape] of God is perfected.”
So agape love is shown in the lives of those who keep God’s commandments—not out of legalistic motives but because they have come to know His grace and mercy.
Our brother Dale Ratzlaff insists that this commandment keeping is not referring to the Ten Commandments. Then I would ask both him and you: “Which of the Ten Commandments does this NOT refer to?”
The commandment that says don’t murder? Don’t commit adultery? Don’t steal? Don’t kill or lie or covet? Of course not.
So what’s the problem you have with God’s Ten Commandments?
Don’t tell me, Amy, let me guess! I’ll bet it’s that pesky Sabbath commandment you guys are trying to run away from. You throw out the whole Ten Commandments to get rid of the Sabbath.
What a pity—it’s the Sabbath commandment that delivers us from legalism as we obey God. Once again I’ll point out here that the word Sabbath means “rest,” literally “ceasing” from our own works to rest in Christ’s finished work for us. The Sabbath is a weekly reminder of the Gospel! Every Friday evening when the sun goes down, the Sabbath reminds me to forsake my unfinished works and find rest in the completed accomplishments of our Lord Jesus Christ.
So what part of that weekly seventh-day rest experience do you have a problem with?
Amy commented on 22-Aug-2009 09:00 PM
Yes, God writes His law on our hearts, but why do you believe this equals the 10 commandments? 2 Corinthians 3 comes right out and says that the 10 commandments are the ministry of death. ----------------------------------------------------------

You said “We’re free from having to be good enough to be saved! “If the Son shall make you free you shall be free indeed.” Amen! But free to do what? Free to do as we please? Free to fornicate, lie, steal (or break the Sabbath)?” --------------

Yes, that is what freedom is. We are free to sin. But at the same time we will reap what we sow. Sinning does not change our saved status. If it does then it is salvation by works. Salvation is by grace through faith alone and not by works. We don’t lose our salvation when we sin. Jesus is our righteousness. Jesus is our sanctification. It is not about our works anymore, but about Him working through us. -------------------------

You said “And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love [agape] of God is perfected.” So agape love is shown in the lives of those who keep God’s commandments—not out of legalistic motives but because they have come to know His grace and mercy. Our brother Dale Ratzlaff insists that this commandment keeping is not referring to the Ten Commandments.”------------------------------

And I would have to agree with Dale Ratzlaff and 1 John. That quote is from 1 John and 1 John defines commandments as loving your brother and believing in Jesus. Where does 1 John mention the 10 commandments?---------------------------------------

I don’t have a problem with the Sabbath at all. I’m not running away from anything. What have I said that would lead to that assumption? I said before that the shadows of the Sabbath are beautiful and full of meaning. Yet, I am not under the old covenant law at all. New covenant = new law. My commands in the new covenant go far beyond the commands in the 10 commandments. Galatians 3 says “ 23Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ[h] that we might be justified by faith. 25Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.” If Galatians tells me that I am not under the old covenant law, why are you trying to tell me I am?
Wayne Gayton commented on 22-Aug-2009 10:13 PM
It seems to me that for centuries there was no conflict between the Old and New Testaments. However, as the Sabbath of the 4th commandment received greater recognition one testament pushed the other aside. How grateful I am for grace. I can be saved no other way. It is not my faith or works. It is God's unmerited favor. I have always seen the Sabbath as a relational command. A time when I recognize that He alone is my Creator and Redeemer. This corresponds with Ex. 20 and Deut. 5. God is worshiped as Creator and Redeemer. It seems that those who wish to nullify the Sabbath rest are not balanced in their opion of grace. As they throw out leagalism they throw out the baby with the bath water. David was under the terms of the New Covenant when he proclaimed that God's law was hide in his heart. Ps. 40:8 Jesus epitmized this text in His holy life. To claim that this is for the "Jew" denies that God is not a respector of persons. Mercy and Justice, both aspects of God's character, is His ideal for His people. Micah 6:8 The added quality for mankind is submission. God never forces, but writes His love of love only on the submissive heart.
Martin answering Amy commented on 22-Aug-2009 11:34 PM
Amy, God’s Ten Commandments are only the ministry of death under an old covenant of works. But when we are saved by grace apart from the law (Romans 3), love comes into our hearts. And that expression of agape love fulfills God’s commandments in our hearts—all 10 of them. Maybe you could think of it this way: Just as we lose our lives for Christ’s sake to find them, so we “lose the law” for Christ’s sake in letting go of our efforts to be good enough. But then we discover that same law fulfilling in our hearts. This is the miracle of the New Covenant. The New Covenant does not bring in some new law different than God’s Law, which forbids murder, stealing, adultery, etc. It’s the same law written in a new way—not on tables of stone but on the tables of our hearts. And yes, this happens much more gloriously than anyone could envision—and the seventh-day Sabbath is at the heart of this experience of resting in Jesus. Amy, if you say you haven’t forsaken the Sabbath, I’m not sure what you mean by “shadows of the Sabbath.” The seventh-day Sabbath is not a shadow of anything. It’s a glorious memorial to our salvation in Christ; a weekly opportunity to celebrate everything the New Covenant represents. And please let me clarify once again: I’m not saying we are now suddenly again under the law. We are under grace and it stays that way. That’s how we are saved, and that’s how we live. And once again, the miracle of living under grace is that the Spirit writes that same law in our hearts so we don’t murder, lie, steal, resist the seventh-day Sabbath rest in Christ, etc.
Amy commented on 23-Aug-2009 01:40 AM
You said “Amy, God’s Ten Commandments are only the ministry of death under an old covenant of works.”
=======================================
The 10 commandments are the very words of the old covenant. We are now under a new covenant. The miracle of the new covenant has nothing to do with the law. 2 Corinthians 5 says “17Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! 18All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God. 21God made him who had no sin to be sin[a]for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” The new birth is the miracle of the new covenant.
============================================
Where does the Bible refer to the 10 commandments as part of the new covenant?
===========================================
The seventh-day Sabbath in the old covenant was a shadow of the salvation rest we have in Christ. I don’t worship the shadows, but the reality. I don’t focus on the shadows of the Passover either, but the reality. You are certainly free to memorialize salvation weekly if you prefer.
=================================================
Galatians 3 says that we are not under the old covenant law anymore. “23Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ[h] that we might be justified by faith. 25Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.” Yet, you say the words of the old covenant are written on our heart. Please show me where you find the Bible saying that the words of the old covenant are what is written on our hearts. Is this an assumption or are you basing it on some texts?
Colleen commented on 23-Aug-2009 03:00 AM
The Sabbath is listed as a Feast day in Leviticus 23. And when John says Jesus broke the Sabbath, those words do not mean "Jesus broke the Pharisees laws about the Sabbath."-------------The Bible must be read and understood as we would read and understand other literature. We have to understand the plain, ordinary meanings of the words. They are not "code" for something more obscure.------------------Jesus actually did break the Sabbath; he commanded the paralytic at the Pool of Bethsaida to pick up his bed and walk on the Sabbath. He allowed his disciples to harvest grain and eat it on the fly, so to speak. Just as he broke the other ceremonial laws, touching dead people and lepers as He healed them in clear violation of the law, so He broke the Sabbath. Jesus NEVER broke any moral command. But He did systematically break every "ceremonial" law to demonstrate that He was, in fact, the Messiah--the one the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms foreshadowed.-------------Martin, what would happen if you asked God to remove from your heart whatever attachment was not from Him and to give you Himself and only what He wants for you? Would you be willing to seriously surrender to God your loyalty to the Sabbath to see what God might do or say to you?--------------
Colleen
Martin answering Amy commented on 23-Aug-2009 01:35 PM
Hi again, Amy. I do appreciate your holding me accountable to the New Covenant Gospel. Regarding 2 Corinthians 3, once more: It’s not the words of the Law that get literally written in the heart, as if somehow tattooed. It is what the Law represents in each of its 10 commandments, as summed up in Christ’s two commandments—
which of course were themselves carried over from the Old Testament (Deut. 6:4-6 and Lev. 19:18). So if we are going to do away with OT teaching on law we will have to do away with Christ’s two commandments as well! (Life Assurance Ministries ought to keep that in mind when they embrace those two commandments but throw away the other laws of the OT.) The best NT passage to help me understand law vs. grace, OC vs NC, is Romans 7—one of the most important chapters in the Bible to me, and very formative in my theology. Paul sets it up a few verses earlier in Rom. 6:14: “For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.” Then in opening chapter 7, he explains what it means not to live under law. More than most Adventists envision, I admit. He is talking about more than just not being under the law’s condemnation; we are also not under the dominion or supervision of the law (you point out from Gal. 3—the law is our schoolmaster to lead us to Christ, so now we are no longer under that legal schoolmaster but under grace to Christ.) The law ultimately tests the genuineness of our faith, but it does not motivate or define our faith. Back to Romans 7, we find the two covenants illustrated by two husbands: “1 Or do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? 2 For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. 3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress. 4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God.” So there we have it: one woman (representing humanity) and two husbands, representing the two covenants. Husband #1 represents the OC, in which we are bound to perform the demands of the law as long as we are alive. (This includes the whole Jewish legal system, not only the ceremonial laws. Once again I acknowledge that many Adventists don’t understand this, but verse 7 proves that the Ten Commandments are included here). Our OC experience of obedience is quite miserable, since we never quite measure up. The legalist would say “try harder” or “pray harder for more strength from God.” God’s solution to our failed relationship with law is quite different. (This is spiritual adultery—trying to gain resources from the new husband to pay respect to the former husband.) Verse 4 says we died to the Law. How? Through the body of Christ. When? In His death on the cross. With what result? That now we can be married to another person. Who would that be? The One who was raised from the dead—Jesus! That’s how we transition from the OC to the NC; through our death on the cross in the body of Jesus Christ. All of us realize that Christ died on the cross for us; few of us (but I’m sure you do, Amy) realize that WE also died on the cross in the body of Christ. And that ended our relationship with the Law under the OC. Our NC relationship is with a Person instead of with a list of rules; it’s based on grace instead of law. (Right now many of my fellow Adventists reading this might be getting quite nervous—if their obedience to God is based on Law. But let’s relax and see this through.) So we died through the body of Christ to a relationship with God based on how well we are keeping the Law. We now have a NC relationship with God based not on our performance before the Law but on Christ’s perfection, which is ours through His resurrection. Now, Amy, what shall we do with this freedom? That’s the key question. Having died and risen with Christ, are we now free to live like Good Time Charlie, running around town doing as we please? God forbid, and I’m sure you would agree. We are united in New Covenant “marriage to another, to Him who was raised from the dead.” And marriage is not a free-for-all do-as-I-please relationship; it has its own set of principles—faithfulness, loyalty, etc. Marriage is actually a ministry! With what outcome? “That we might bear fruit for God.” The fruit of the Spirit is love, which is the fulfilling of the law—not as a means of salvation, but as the expression of it. Cleansed from all guilt and shame, we are free to love God with all of our hearts. And through this love—you guessed it!—we find ourselves drawn into harmony with God’s commandments. Sin (lawlessness) has no dominion over us, for we are not under law but under grace. We are “released from the law so that we serve, in the newness of the Spirit, not in the oldness of the written code” (verse 6). In the OC, we were enslaved to fulfill a written code of Law. In the NC, the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus brings the righteousness of the law into our hearts. We have “lost the law “ for Christ’s sake by dying to the law on the cross with Him—but suddenly we now find ourselves being drawn into harmony with the law. Not for righteousness’ sake, but because of our righteousness already bestowed on us by grace in Christ. We don’t need to find false fulfillment by breaking God’s commandments anymore—to lie, cheat, steal, or do our own thing on the Sabbath day. ### The Sabbath? Yes indeed—the Sabbath perfectly illustrates everything the NC represents. Instead of being a 24-hour tightrope, as under the OC, Sabbath in the NC illustrates our rest in Christ each week. The Sabbath is the brightest of all billboards proclaiming the grace and peace we have in Jesus. On Friday evening when the sun goes down, we lay aside our unfinished works and find rest in the finished accomplishments of Jesus Christ! Our friends at Life Assurance Ministries insist on looking at the Sabbath as an OC Jewish ritual. I pray that their eyes will be opened to see the NC beauty of Gospel rest in Jesus week by week. By making our rest in Christ every day of the week in Christ the Sabbath, they water down and in fact destroy the beauty and glory of God’s gospel memorial to Creation and Salvation—the very reasons we worship Him!
Amy, not only the Sabbath but everything I believe is in the context of NC grace. Nothing is based in OC law. All 28 Seventh-day Adventist Fundamental Beliefs blossom like flowers in the garden of the New Covenant.
One final thought—you asked where in the NT can we find reference to the Ten Commandments specifically? How about Ephesians 6:2, which quotes verbatim the fifth commandment, and lest anyone miss the point it says: “It is the first commandment with promise.” When you look down the list of the 10, that’s exactly true. The Ten Commandments, rather than being destroyed by the NC, are written in our hearts. That’s what the NT says, anyway.
Amy commented on 23-Aug-2009 03:11 PM
You said what the law represents gets written on our hearts. Where do you get this idea? 2 Corinthians 3 does not say that what the law represents is written on our heart. How do you connect the ministry of the Spirit with the old covenant law?
===============================================
Christ’s command as evidenced in John is the same as 1 John. He said “9"As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. 10If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father's commands and remain in his love. 11I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. 14You are my friends if you do what I command. 15I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. 16You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit—fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. 17This is my command: Love each other.” ===================================

Christ was asked the greatest commands of the law and he said love one another and love God. Those are commands in the old covenant law. They are the greatest commands in the old covenant law and all old covenant commands can hang on them. But those are not the commands in the new covenant. Jesus said “a new command I give unto you.” ==========================================

Yes, we died to the law. I agree that we have Christ’s perfection. We have Christ’s righteousness. Are we free to do as we please? Yes. That is what freedom is. But there are consequences for wrong choices. Lying to someone breaks trust. Infidelity can lead to divorce and heartache. It was for freedom that Christ set us free. =====================================

The new covenant is about agape love. I don’t understand why you continue to go back to the words of the old covenant and say that they are what are fulfilled in us. What commands are missing in the new covenant that you feel you need to revert to the 10 commandments? As you mentioned Ephesians does quote one of the 10 commandments and expands on it. Many of the moral principles in the old covenant are reiterated in the new covenant. I think the issue you are having here is the Sabbath. There is no command to keep the Sabbath in the new covenant and several verses that say it is no longer for the new covenant Christian. =============================================

Laws can change. Hebrews says that with the change in priesthood there is also a change in law. 2 Corinthians 3 says that what once had glory has come to have no glory at all. What we have now is better. The instructions in the new covenant hold us to a higher standard. And we have God living in us to guide us and instruct us. ==================================


You said “The Sabbath? Yes indeed—the Sabbath perfectly illustrates everything the NC represents. Instead of being a 24-hour tightrope, as under the OC, Sabbath in the NC illustrates our rest in Christ each week. The Sabbath is the brightest of all billboards proclaiming the grace and peace we have in Jesus.” =========================================

This seems full of irony to me. You work to remember grace? A work is lifted up to proclaim grace? Yes, resting on the Sabbath is a work. Even good deeds are works. The Gospel of Jesus is the brightest of all billboards proclaiming the grace and peace we have in Jesus. The Sabbath does nothing. The Gospel of Jesus is the ONLY billboard that proclaims the grace and peace we have in Jesus. What would happen if you did not stop your physical labours on the Sabbath? What if you esteemed all days alike? ===============================================
The Bible says that the weekly Sabbath is a feast, not some ministry. Lev 23 says “ 1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: 'These are my appointed feasts, the appointed feasts of the LORD, which you are to proclaim as sacred assemblies. 3 " 'There are six days when you may work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, a day of sacred assembly. You are not to do any work; wherever you live, it is a Sabbath to the LORD.” =============================================
I don’t follow your reasoning. It is wrong to remember and celebrate our salvation every day of the week? It is better to focus on it just once a week? That makes no sense. ==================================================
You say that nothing that you believe is based in old covenant law, yet you lift up the weekly Sabbath feast as a billboard when there is not one command in the new covenant regarding it. ================================================

You said” One final thought—you asked where in the NT can we find reference to the Ten Commandments specifically? How about Ephesians 6:2, which quotes verbatim the fifth commandment, and lest anyone miss the point it says: “It is the first commandment with promise.” When you look down the list of the 10, that’s exactly true. The Ten Commandments, rather than being destroyed by the NC, are written in our hearts. That’s what the NT says, anyway.” =======================================

Please show me where the Bible says the 10 commandments are written in our heart. Ephesians quotes a command and expands on it. Are you inferring that because it quotes and expands on a moral principle in the 10 commandments that the old covenant is written on our heart?
Martin answering Colleen commented on 23-Aug-2009 06:24 PM
Everything in ancient Jewish culture was lived in the context of ritual and ceremonies, including food, marriage and the Sabbath. This doesn’t mean that we today, in our own culture, enjoy food, marriage—and the Sabbath. # Now, you say that Jesus broke the Sabbath. Actually, He dismantled the ceremonial rituals about the day, while preserving the intrinsic meaning of His creating/healing life celebrated on that day. Instead of abolishing the weekly Sabbath, He proclaimed Himself Lord of the Sabbath. (He didn’t say that He was the Sabbath, but rather that He is Lord of it—there is a difference between the Creator and the memorial He created.) If Jesus had planned to do away with the Sabbath, He sure didn’t say anything about it. (That ought to say something to us!) Instead, Christ invested a lot of teaching and example in showing how the Sabbath is a celebration of His creative healing power. # As for Hebrews 4, we do find the seventh day specified in connection with Gospel rest. To see the context, let’s go back a few verses to chapter 3, which recounts the fatal unbelief of those who failed to enter Canaan. Then comes a warning for Jewish Christians to avoid likewise falling short of gospel rest. In this context of resting in God's salvation, the seventh day Sabbath is introduced: God's "works were finished from the foundation of the world" and He "rested on the seventh day from all His works" (4:3,4). Then comes the sad history of Jewish failure to enter this Sabbath rest, which God had earned for them. Even after Joshua finally led them into Canaan they were not yet into Sabbath rest. Being external sabbatarians, the Jews did avoid business on the holy day. But they were not true Sabbath keepers they never entered the spirit of Sabbath rest. This passage, read carefully, clearly carries the seventh-day Sabbath into the Christian church. Verse 8 mentions "another day" David introduced. Another day besides what? The Sabbath, of course; the passage is still discussing the seventh day rest. Did David's day replace the Sabbath day? On the contrary. He made true Sabbath keeping possible by calling a time apart to repent and believe in God's salvation. Did the Jews ever become true Sabbath keepers? Unfortunately not: "There remains therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God" (4:9). And what Sabbath rest is this that remains for New Testament Christians? "For the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His" (4:10). When did God rest from His works? Verse 4 says: “God did rest the seventh day from all His works.”
So there we have it. This seventh-day Sabbath, says the apostle, remains for us so we can celebrate gospel rest. Keep in mind that Hebrews 4 has no hint that God would abolish His sacred day of rest. The opposite is stated. So why do even Adventists themselves often ignore this powerful New Testament proof of the Sabbath? Because some of us doubt that the seventh day Sabbath is under discussion throughout the passage. After all, how could the apostle be telling Hebrews that their nation never kept the Sabbath? But this is exactly his point the Jews, who strictly observed the day, ignored its meaning. The apostle proves their need to begin true Sabbath keeping by reminding them of Canaan. In David's day, three centuries after Joshua brought them in, they still had not entered the rest it represented. Therefore they were mere sabbatarians, not Sabbath keepers. The call for spiritual rest on Sabbath, just like God Himself did rest—on the seventh day! This is the rest that remains for us. # Colleen, I am touched rather than offended by your personal appeal to me: “Martin, what would happen if you asked God to remove from your heart whatever attachment was not from Him and to give you Himself and only what He wants for you?” That’s a great idea! In fact, I’ve been doing that every day for 39 years as a believer. Every morning before heading to the Mid-
America Union office I spend two hours at home in study and worship, one hour of it in prayer. The doctor says I have arthritis in my knees and shouldn’t be kneeling down, but I have about eight or more pillows to support my aging joints as I call upon the Lord. You also ask, “Would you be willing to seriously surrender to God your loyalty to the Sabbath to see what God might do or say to you?” Colleen! That’s a loaded question, presuming that perhaps my loyalty is to a day rather than to my Lord. But fair enough, I know you well enough (through a close mutual friend at Union College) that again I’m not offended. All I can say is that I have sold out all my loyalty to the Lord; I just find in the Sabbath a wonderful opportunity from Jesus to express that loyalty to Him as my Creator and Redeemer. That’s why He gave us the Sabbath in the first place, and that’s why I look forward to celebrating it with Him for eternity.
Martin answering Amy commented on 23-Aug-2009 07:07 PM
Amy, I think we are beginning to talk in circles now. If you are not persuaded by the mass of information I've shared, I don't know what else to tell you except that I pray for God to guide you, and me, and all the rest of us on life's continuing journey.
Amy commented on 23-Aug-2009 07:52 PM
Thank you for the opportunity to dialog. I wish you well.
Colleen commented on 24-Aug-2009 01:59 AM
Martin, even the SDA Bible commentary says that "sabbatismos" in Hebrews 4:9 does not teach that "Sabbath-keeping" remains for God's people. That word is completely unique in the Bible, and it refers to a "Sabbath-like rest", but it is not talking about the seventh-day Sabbath.

Actually, in context, Hebrews 4 does teach that Sabbath-keeping was never achieved, and God did set another day. David announced this new day called TODAY, and the rest of the chapter explains that because of this new day, a "Sabbath-like rest" remains for the people of God.

The actual problem with our misunderstanding of our apparently mutual "grace terms" is the difference in our foundations. Underneath your "gospel arguments" you do carry a belief in the eternal significance of Sabbath, a belief in soul sleep which denies the existence of a human spirit which survives the death of the body—thus affecting the definition of man's nature, Jesus' nature, the nature of sin, and also of salvation. Moreover, you also hold to the "great controversy worldview" that assumes God's character is on trial and we participate in vindicating Him to the watching universe. This worldview also assumes Sabbath is a testing truth between believers and unbelievers in the final generaton, and that worship on Sunday will be the mark of the beast.

Finally, you hold to a respect for Ellen White as an important source of spiritual insight and truth. All of these four beliefs alter the meanings of the words you use. No matter how "normal" your initial arguments sound, they are shaped by and must defend these four things. This is why it begins to feel as if "formers" and Adventists end up talking in circles. The actual bottom line definitions and beliefs are very different.
Steven Torres commented on 25-Aug-2009 11:02 AM
Mr. Ratzlaff begins his comments by saying, "There is no command to keep the Sabbath in the N.T." ---I ask, why should there be? Would we really need any of the other 9 commandments repeated for us to believe they are still valid? --- Shouldn't the burden of proof be on those who toss out the Sabbath? Where is the command to stop keeping Sabbath in the NT? Where does it say in the New Testament that we are to stop observing the Seventh day? Please someone show me where the specific line in the NT is that says "Do not observe the Seventh day as My Sabbath." The fact is it's not there. --- In that case, I think I'll just choose to express my love to God by doing what Jesus says in John 14:15, "If you love me, keep my commandments."
Martin answering Colleen commented on 29-Aug-2009 11:17 PM
Colleen, it’s true that we all bring our presuppositions to any interpretations we do, but please don’t obscure or escape the meaning of this passage by introducing four doctrinal issues that have no direct relevance here. Let’s focus on the passage itself: #
1) The theme in Hebrews 4 is entering Gospel rest, carried over from chapter 3. #
2) The warning is about avoid refusing to enter Gospel rest, like the Israelites in their disobedient unbelief under Moses. #
3) We see here two symbols of entering that gospel rest: Canaan, and the Sabbath—specifically the seventh-day Sabbath. (And Coleen, please note that this weekly Sabbath rest is founded in God’s finishing of creation—a truth which you and Dale Ratzlaff deny by trying to push the Sabbath off until the time of Moses, so you can reject it as a Jewish ritual. Yet here’s a direct and undeniable quote from the Creation account in Gen 2:2-3 that is connected with a discussion about the Sabbath.) #
4) The lesson of Hebrews 4 is that the Israelites never entered spiritual rest—even though they were outwardly complying with both symbols of rest: entering Canaan and keeping the seventh-day Sabbath. They were living physically in the land of rest but not embracing spiritual rest. And they were outwardly keeping the Sabbath while missing its meaning of spiritual rest. #
5) The proof that Joshua had failed to lead Israel into spiritual rest, even after he led them into the land of rest, is that several hundred years later David had to set aside “another day.” #
6) “Another day” besides what day? The seventh-day Sabbath day of rest, mentioned two verses earlier—the only day we see in this passage so far. So obviously the seventh-day Sabbath is under discussion. #
7) What was David’s “another day” for? Was it to replace the seventh-day Sabbath? Obviously not, since a thousand years later the seventh-day Sabbath was still being kept in Christ’s day. #
8) David’s “another day” was a special day he set aside for national repentance—as noted in Psalm 95, which Hebrews 4 is quoting. Psalm 95 is a call to repent and worship the Creator God—which is purpose of the seventh-day Sabbath. So seventh-day Sabbath rest is throughout this passage right up to the beginning of verse 9. #
9) After David’s time, did the Jews ever enter the spiritual rest of their own seventh-day Sabbath? No, says verse 9: “There remains therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God.” What is this “sabbatismos,” mentioned only here in the NT? Note that there is no article in front of it, so nobody can say this is just “a sabbath,” turning it into anything restful that they might wish it to be. And Colleen is mistaken by calling it a “sabbath-like rest.” The word means simply “Sabbath rest.” And we don’t have to guess what Sabbath rest is being referred to, for two reasons: what immediately precedes Sabbatismos and what follows it. #
10) Verse 9 begins with an inferential participle, translated “so then” or “therefore.” This picks up the seventh-day Sabbath from verse 8 and carries it into verse 9. “Therefore” it’s the seventh-day Sabbath that “Sabbatismos” is referring to. #
11) Lest anyone miss that connection, notice the next verse (10): “For whoever has entered God’s rest has also rested from His works as God did from His.” When did God “rest from His works”? We don’t have to guess or speculate. Verse 4 already told us, using the exact language here: “And God rested on the seventh day from all His works.” # So there we have it: Rather than doing away with the seventh-day Sabbath by introducing some wishful thinking substitute day, Hebrews 4 specifically and emphatically reinforces the seventh day Sabbath. It’s simple message: “Don’t make the same mistake the ancient Israelites did. They entered the land of rest physically but not spiritually, and they were Sabbath-keepers physically but not spiritually—Sabbatarians who had never entered Gospel rest. # And isn’t this exactly the picture of the Jews of that day? They had hundreds of outward laws for Sabbath observance, but they rejected the Lord of the Sabbath and hurried home before sundown to light Sabbath candles. # But wait a moment—what about the SDA Commentary? It says that Hebrews 4 is probably not talking about the weekly Sabbath, because the Israelites already were keeping the day holy. But actually they weren’t--which is the problem in the passage. Our Commentary somehow overlooks this, which is the very point of the passage, as we’ve been discussing. It was the same situation as in Isaiah’s day, when in chapter 58 God rebukes His people for missing the meaning of the Sabbath despite all their fasting and outward forms of worship. #
12) So there remains therefore a Sabbatismos for the people of God—and if we enter that rest we will do as God did, resting not just physically but spiritually on the seventh day from all our works. And as a bonus, we have in Hebrews 4 undeniable proof that the seventh-day Sabbath began not with Moses but with God’s finished works at the foundation of this world. #
To summarize: When we recognize the reality that Hebrews 4 is a challenge to enter the inner spiritual meaning of what already was being kept only outwardly and physically, then seventh-day worship is reinforced rather than abolished.
| Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

Forgive us—and please don’t forsake us!

Friday, July 31, 2009
I’m writing this with a heavy heart, reaching out to my brothers and sisters who suffer insensitivity and arrogance when asking sincere questions concerning Seventh-day Adventist doctrine. If this is your situation, I am so sorry. Please forgive us.

Perhaps you have asked questions that were quietly troubling you about the Sabbath, the judgment, or Ellen White. Although confiding your doctrinal doubts in all sincerity, perhaps you were brushed off, patronized, rebuked or even denounced. Frustrated in getting answers to vital questions, you may have become disappointed and eventually embittered. At that point you felt betrayed and filled with pain and confusion, leaving you wondering whether the time has come to abandon your beloved Adventist heritage.

Before you do that—and even if you have already taken that step—please let me share with you, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, information that I think can be helpful to you.

I acknowledge there is a problem. Just yesterday someone approached me after church seeking help with a friend who had left the Adventist Church under the above circumstances. She had grown up SDA, attended our schools and remained a faithful member. Her crisis began when she read something in the Bible that seemed to directly contradict Ellen G. White. It was something too important to ignore. So she approached her godly mother, who insisted that nothing Ellen White ever wrote contradicted the Bible, and thus her daughter must be mistaken. This elderly saint was unable to explain just how her daughter was mistaken, nor was she interested in searching out the truth. Instead, she admonished her daughter for “harboring doubts about the Spirit of Prophecy” and urged her to drop them. When her daughter said she really needed to get the truth clarified in her mind, the mother lectured her, scolded her, slandered her motives and ultimately denounced her as a doubter of the faith—in danger of being lost.

I believe that this daughter is the victim of spiritual abuse, unintended yet devastating. If you have suffered this yourself from Seventh-day Adventist friends or family, I plead with you again: Please forgive us, for we didn’t know what we were doing. We were only trying to help you by warning you. Don’t forsake us—at least not yet. Give us a chance to answer your questions; that’s what this website is all about.

I know firsthand of what I speak, having suffered spiritual abuse myself from well-intentioned fellow Seventh-day Adventists. I’ve survived it by God’s grace and now have committed myself to do my part in remedying it.

Here’s my story, if I may share it with you. Back in 1979, I was a young evangelist filled with zeal for the message and mission of the Seventh-day Adventist Church (as I am no less today). I proclaimed from town to town the message of truth as it is in Jesus. I told people that if they belonged to a church that violated Scriptural fundamental beliefs, than please consider joining the Seventh-day Adventist Church, because everything we believe is found in the Bible—and the Bible alone.

I meant that with all of my heart, and scores who attended my meetings responded to my challenge. They left their longtime spiritual heritage to join the Adventist family of believers. Life was great, and I had a fruitful and fulfilling ministry.

Then suddenly I found myself in a great spiritual crisis, facing the same challenge I had brought to others. It happened after some young pastors for whom I was to hold meetings came to me with questions about fundamental SDA beliefs. Specifically they wondered about the investigative judgment and whether it really began in 1844. They asked if it was even appropriate for believers in Jesus to have their salvation threatened—or at least called into question—by being subjected to the scrutiny of judgment.

I opened my Bible with these guys and found that I didn’t have the answers they needed. So I did what everyone who gives Bible studies is supposed to do—promise to look for Bible answers and get back to them. I went to the conference president asking his help in finding answers. He didn’t care to open his Bible with me. Instead, he said: “We already know from the Spirit of Prophecy that the judgment began in 1844. God said it, I believe it, and that settles it for me—and for you. Our job is to go out and preach the SDA message.”

“That’s exactly what I’ve been doing,” I responded. “But these guys have sincere questions, and they are wanting our help. They just want some Bible answers from us.”

The conference president told me that if I really wanted Bible answers, I could get them from Ellen White’s reliable interpretations of Scripture. He urged me to put my faith in her prophetic revelations instead of trusting my own private interpretation.

I told him I had already searched diligently in Ellen White’s writings for the Bible answers, but that these guys were raising questions for which she wasn’t offering any help. The president said they were on dangerous ground and I shouldn’t venture out there with them. He even forbade me from studying the Bible with them.

I asked him: “You’ve assigned me the responsibility of holding meetings with them in their churches, so isn’t it my job to help them? How can I refuse their request to study the Bible? Besides,” I added, “I need to have these questions answered for my own peace of mind. Can you help me?”

The president responded with another dire warning about doubting Seventh-day Adventist truth and the inspiration of Ellen White. He then phoned the Ellen G. White Estate in Washington, DC and set up an appointment for me to visit them and get straightened out.

I willingly went, hoping to find Bible answers. Instead I got platitudes and further admonitions. I went home without the answers I so desperately needed to continue living the life and sharing the message of a Bible-based Christian Seventh-day Adventist.

Meanwhile, some people at conference headquarters started questioning my motives and the state of my heart. They couldn't understand why I needed to see something in the Bible for myself in order to believe it. They thought I was putting my own private interpretation above the wisdom of our current SDA leaders and the pioneers of our past. They didn’t seem to realize that I had no reason to make theological trouble for myself, just when my ministry was beginning to take off. Newly ordained, at 28 I was the conference evangelist, assistant ministerial director and a member of the conference executive committee. It was politically smart for me to keep any questions to myself, especially with two toddlers to feed and a little house in the country to pay for. Causing trouble for my career in ministry was the last thing I wanted to do.

Actually, it was the next-to-last thing I was willing to do. The last thing I could dare to do was to betray my conscience by playing politics instead of searching for truth. Yet things weren’t looking good for me, especially when people my wife counseled with got her alarmed about my spiritual quest—to the point that she was ready to end our marriage if I didn’t stop questioning Adventist truth.

Both of us were victims of first-degree spiritual abuse. A dysfunctional and toxic situation was threatening my ministry, my marriage, and worst of all, my spiritual commitment to submit my faith to God alone through the Bible and the Bible only.

I found myself sinking amid the crisis of my life. Almost panicked now myself, I arranged as a last resort to spend the winter studying at the Andrews University seminary extension in Hinsdale, Illinois. It was a soul-winning institute operated by Mark Finley, an evangelist I respected. I thought that Mark would be willing to take my questions seriously and study with me.

God bless him, he was! He sat down with me and, over our open Bibles, answered my basic questions.

Mark Finley’s explanation of the SDA doctrine of judgment was profoundly deep yet astonishingly simple. The root problem was that we were imposing our Western understanding of judgment upon that biblical doctrine. To the ancient Hebrews, judgment meant first of all vindication, not condemnation. The name “Daniel,” for example, means “God is my judge”—my vindicator and deliverer.  In the book of Judges, you don’t see a bunch of condemners going around; the judges were deliverers of God’s people. To apply this reality to the pre-Advent judgment: God is vindicating His people in heaven’s sanctuary, delivering them from the devil’s accusations. He finds all the evidence He needs to justify us in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, our Savior and High Priest.

That key insight was the tipping point for me. I realized that the core Adventist teaching of the judgment was not inherently legalistic at all. Western presuppositions imposed upon Scripture had caused an unnecessary doctrinal dilemma. I was delighted to discover that Ellen White herself began picking up this theme of vindication in heaven’s pre-Advent judgment in her later writings. (Consider the chapter “Joshua and the Angel” in Prophets and Kings, the last-completed book in her “Conflict of the Ages” series.) But it was because of the Bible and the Bible alone that I chose to remain a Seventh-day Adventist.

Mark Finley, by the way, is now a vice president of the SDA world church—which I believe reflects a positive trend in the leadership of our denomination.

Now, to finish out my story: Once I realized the Gospel-based truth about the judgment—based on the Bible alone—everything else started falling into place. It took about a year to get all my questions answered. I recorded my new insights in the book Some Call It Heresy, officially published by the church. In it I explain my 1979 Gethsemane experience, and the exciting discoveries back then that led me out of confusion and continue to inspire me as a Seventh-day Adventist.  The more I delve into the Scriptures, the more thankful I am to be an Adventist. My ongoing learning adventure is chronicled in many other books officially published by the church, most recently in this year’s God Was There: True Stories of a Police Chaplain.

So that’s my story. I think it’s fair to say that I can relate to whatever anyone reading this may be struggling with in your own doctrinal frustrations. I also can assure you that Bible answers about Adventist beliefs are there for you—in fact, right here on this website. I’ve condensed and compiled for you what I’ve written since 1980 about God’s mercy and truth expressed in Seventh-day Adventist fundamental beliefs.

Before giving up on Adventism, then, please entertain the possibility that God may have led you to this website. Give me a chance to explain how SDA fundamental beliefs are soundly Biblical. As God is my witness, everything I believe is based upon the Bible, not the writings of Ellen White. And nothing I believe is motivated by or derived from law—everything is based upon grace.

Consider the seventh-day Sabbath. It’s not some Jewish ritual, as Dale Ratzlaff insists, but rather our weekly expression of resting in the finished work of Jesus Christ. That’s what the word “Sabbath” means—“rest,” literally “cessation.” We cease from trusting in our own works to find rest in the accomplishments of Jesus Christ. Jesus proclaimed Himself “Lord of the Sabbath,” so it doesn’t matter to me what Dale Ratzlaff says about the seventh day.

Dale says that it’s impossible to be a Seventh-day Adventist without being tainted by legalism. I have found that not to be true. For three decades now, I have rejoiced in Gospel freedom while serving in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Rather than being suppressed, my Gospel testimony has been published in more than 20 books (some of them “ghost-written” for Adventist leaders). In 1983 I was invited to join the staff at the Voice of Prophecy radio broadcast, later to be a scriptwriter and assistant to George Vandeman, founder of the It Is Written telecast.

While at the Adventist Media Center I wrote Adventist Hot Potatoes, after which denominational leaders invited me to join the Ministerial Association of the world church and be an associate editor of Ministry magazine. I also was made a member of the General Conference Executive Committee, the world church’s governing body. Currently I’m editor of Outlook, a church magazine serving 62,000 members in the Mid-America Union, where I also am communication director.

Based on my experience and those of so many others I know personally, I don’t see how Dale Ratzlaff can say there’s no room in Adventism for those who stand up for the Gospel and base all beliefs on the Bible alone. I don’t deny the ongoing problem of “old school” legalism, which remains a powerful—but fading—force in the church. My plea is that you stand with all of us in the Seventh-day Adventist Church who treasure God’s mercy and truth, and help us make a difference for the Gospel.

Please don’t follow Dale Ratzlaff out of the frying pan into the fire—literally. He actually teaches a fire of eternal torment for unbelievers. Do you want to subject your children and grandchildren to such horrific doctrine in Sunday school, about a God of “love” who torments lost people for eternity? Isn’t that a type of spiritual abuse all its own?

Please stay with the Adventist Church and help us make a difference. Every SDA doctrine fits a Gospel context and comes from the Bible alone. Hold me accountable on that. I invite you to challenge me publicly by responding to this blog, or you can connect with me privately via e-mail: martin@midamericaoutlook.org.

Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments
Anonymous commented on 01-Aug-2009 09:01 PM
I like what you have written. Jesus said that men will know that we are his disciples if we love one another. A spirit of love should be the main venue of communication.
LaVonne commented on 19-Aug-2009 01:08 AM
Thanks for this post. I am glad I found this website. It was recommended by a facebook friend, so I placed it on my wall too.
Gloria Dorval commented on 19-Aug-2009 04:46 PM
I have enjoyed reading this blog and am sharing this site with family members. Thank you and God bless!
Bill commented on 25-Aug-2009 07:27 PM
Thank you for sharing your story and the challenges you faced. Admitting doubt publicly can have harsh consequences, but I am glad that it turned out OK and strengthened your faith.
Blind Faithiness commented on 28-Aug-2009 11:40 PM
What a terrible and boring post.

The only "vital questions" SDA's should be dealing with is 'why are we so gullible' and 'what kind of mental trickery am I going to have to play on myself to believe the next load of lies I'm being force fed'.

You're seriously going to cry "I'm being 'spiritually abused!' because someones mom believes these fairy tales different than her daughter. Then, because its the nature of the SDA church, they're both so brain washed and self-righteous that they can't resolve the issue.

Well get used to it. Thats the system that you all have bought into and support. So, don't cry when the self-righteous nature of SDAism comes back to bite you, just like in your example.
Martin answering Blind Faithfulness commented on 30-Aug-2009 02:25 AM
My post must not have been all that boring, if you actually read it and then even took the time to respond! # Seriously, I'm sorry for the obviously disappointing experience you had with the church. I wish I could talk with you in person and hear more of your story and pray with you for healing.
| Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

5 Questions for Dale Ratzlaff

Saturday, July 11, 2009
#1 If Christians in the NT kept Sunday, why is there no “buzz” about this in the book of Acts?  
Paul and fellow apostles are accused of all kinds of anti-Jewish actions and teachings, but never once are they accused of doing away with the Sabbath.

#2 If eternal torment is God’s punishment for sinners, and Jesus received that punishment on the cross, why is He not still suffering today?
John 3:16 says people without Christ will “perish”—not have eternal life in hell. According to 1 John 5:12, only those in Christ have eternal life—to spend anywhere, in heaven or in hell!

#3 Why do you condemn Adventism today for the mistaken things their pioneers did and taught, while letting the Protestant pioneers off the hook?
Luther taught horribly hateful things against the Jews that historians believe set the stage for the German Holocaust. The leading Reformers in Geneva killed Dr. Michael Servetus by burning him alive at the stake for heresy 27 October 1553—no Adventist leader has ever come close to doing that! Many Protestants murdered Anabaptists for their opposition to infant baptism. They also were co-participants in the infamous Thirty Years’ War of religion; SDA have engaged in religious disagreements, but nothing like that! Give us a break!

#4 If you believe that Jesus is your Sabbath so now you don’t have to keep the day holy, what do you say to somebody who says: “Jesus is my baptism—so now I don’t have to be baptized”?
Both are signs of entering Christ’s rest—click on the Sabbath tab to see more on this.

#5 How can you say that Adventist leaders are required to believe that Ellen G. White is an infallible authority over Scripture—or be quiet about it to save their careers?
People like Martin Weber have been teaching and write publicly and emphatically otherwise for nearly 30 years, getting their books published by the church and holding positions of denominational responsibility. Click on the Ellen White tab to see a sample of what Martin has been writing in official church publications since 1983.

Get SDA For Me blog posts delivered to your inbox!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



At this time, comments will no longer be accepted. Click here to see why.

Comments
Ray Garton commented on 11-Aug-2009 08:25 AM
Adventism is condemned today for the mistakes made by ONE pioneer -- Ellen G. White -- because the church still maintains that she was a prophet and ignores the deception and duplicity that surrounds her. She was NOT a prophet. Her failed prophecies, her uncredited use of the work of other writers (especially when she attributes that work to god himself), her outrageous hypocrisy (requiring her followers to do one thing while she did another), and the efforts to change or conceal some of her writings make this painfully obvious. Protestant pioneers are off the hook because there are churches in existence today holding them up as prophets whose writings are infallible interpretations of scripture and equal in weight to scripture, as the Seventh-day Adventist church does with Ellen White. #5 is a typical Seventh-day Adventist evasion. Before you jump to Martin Weber, how do you explain the many Seventh-day Adventist employees who HAVE BEEN FIRED AND/OR DISFELLOWSHIPPED because they refuse to teach the church's lies about Ellen White? Until you address that, jumping to Martin Weber is nothing more than an infantile evasion.
Martin Weber commented on 11-Aug-2009 08:27 AM
(Reply from Martin Weber:) Ray, you say that you see deception and duplicity when you read EGW, and evidently you that sums her up for you. I can't explain why she wasn't more candid than she was, but I do believe that whatever her faults were, a fair-minded reading of her books shows an earnest Christian author, flawed yet faithful. You would probably come back and say—that’s because she copied good stuff. I would reply, well OK, even if she did copy more than most Adventists are aware, at least she chose good things to share from her reading—and that tells you something of her spiritual discernment. That said, I do think it is unnecessary and even outrageous that Adventism should be in a position where it has to prove itself a genuine Christian movement based on the character of one person. It’s not about EGW! It’s about the Bible! We stand or fall based on our faithfulness to what the Word of God says, not based on the faithfulness of one human being. No matter what Ellen White struggled with, Jesus Christ is still Lord of the Sabbath, and He’s still coming again—and that’s the heart of SDA doctrine (in the context of the Gospel, of course). About people being fired or even disfellowshipped. Ray, I know from painful experience what you’re talking about. I lost my three closest friends back in 1980 (the same year that Dale Ratzlaff left the church) when the four of us were wresting with these doctrinal dilemmas. They got disillusioned and bitter when the answers weren’t forthcoming. Had they not gone negative and waited on the Lord, I don’t think they would have been fired. I understand their disappointment totally—I was right there in it with them. But I’m glad I persevered and got the answers I needed to stay with the church and try to make a difference these last 30 years. I think its fair to say that God has made a way for me to freely speak my convictions in church publications—and quite a few others as well. I don’t think that’s an “infantile evasion,” I think it’s simply a matter of record. (And by the way, I’m choosing to be amused rather than offended by your language there. I hope we can be friends, even when we don’t agree. At least discussion partners.) Thanks for sharing, Ray. Sorry for the lag time in getting your comment posted, along with this reply. I’ve been traveling all day.
Dale Ratzlaff commented on 13-Aug-2009 10:13 PM
The missing controversy
There is yet another strong evidence that Paul in his ministry to the Gentile churches did not promote the keeping of the Sabbath. It is clear from the Gospels and Jewish history that the Jews of New Testament times had built up numerous rules to keep themselves from breaking the biblical Sabbath laws. Sabbath rules were legion and varied from one rabbi to the next. One was not to travel beyond 2000 cubits from his lodging. No sexual intercourse was permitted on the Sabbath. Better food was to be served on the Sabbath than on other days. No fasting was allowed on the Sabbath. One could not prepare, or eat anything prepared on the Sabbath. One could not carry an object from his home into a public area on the Sabbath. The Essenes even said that defecation was a work prohibited on the Sabbath. A tailor was not to carry a needle on the Sabbath. A householder was not to reach out of his house and place something in the hand of a poor person on the Sabbath.
Sometimes we laugh at all the rules the Jews made regarding the Sabbath. However, having come from a background where we tried to keep the biblical laws for the Sabbath, I can recall countless hours discussing what was appropriate and what was not appropriate Sabbath keeping.
When I was a boy, my mother did not cook or wash the dishes on the Sabbath. However, for Sabbath dinner she did reheat the food she had prepared the day before. When we began to use frozen vegetables she found that it was no more “work” to take frozen peas and cook them than it was to reheat the ones which were cooked the day before plus they tasted much better and were probably better for us. I remember the discussion we had in making this transition. However, we never did face the fact that even making a fire on the Sabbath was wrong! If we did, would it have been wrong to build a fire in a wood stove? What if you kept coals overnight so you did not have to light a match, would that be building a fire? And what about a modern gas cook-top which lights with a turn of the knob. Is that building a fire?
When we took long trips we tried not to travel on the Sabbath. However, we often took short trips in the car on Sabbath afternoon to “enjoy nature.” I remember on several occasions we compromised and decided to “enjoy nature” at the same time we “traveled.” However, when we did this, we always would gas up on Friday night and drive until the gas tank was about empty. We would then find a place to observe the rest of the Sabbath. As soon as the sun was down, we would gas up and continue our trip.
When I was pastoring in the Seventh-day Adventist church I remember a lady who was baptized and joined our church. I studied with her the biblical principles of Sabbath keeping and encouraged her to follow them. Some time later she called me and said that her husband did not like her keeping the Sabbath because she was not making the beds on Sabbath morning. I assured her that making the beds was acceptable Sabbath keeping. I had, in our previous study, instructed her that she should not use the sacred hours of the Sabbath to do her house-work, such as washing clothes, etc. In interpreting my instruction, coupled with the biblical rules for Sabbath keeping, she felt that there was more “work” in making a bed than there was in washing clothes in an automatic washing machine. I was hard pressed to defend my definition of what was “work” and what was right and what was wrong to do on the Sabbath.
Samuele Bacchiocchi, Seventh-day Adventist theologian, in his book, The Sabbath in the New Testament, has some twenty-one pages devoted to modern Sabbath observance. In these pages he asks many questions about Sabbath keeping and then gives his interpretation. For example: (1) “holding of weddings on the Sabbath should be discouraged.” (2) “As a general rule, however, it is advisable to avoid conducting funerals on the Sabbath, since they disrupt the spirit of rest, joy, and celebration of the Sabbath.” (3) “A distinction must be made between essential services rendered on the Sabbath in a Seventh-day Adventist institution and those rendered in a non-SDA institution.” The reason for this, says Dr. Bacchiocchi, is that in a non-SDA institution, such as a fire station, the Sabbath keeper might be asked to do routine maintenance work which would not be accepted Sabbath observance. (4) “Purchasing goods or services on the Sabbath, such as eating out in restaurants, will turn the mind of the believer away from the sacredness of the Sabbath to the secularism and materialism of the world.” (5) Dr. Bacchiocchi states that “Historically, Seventh-day Adventists have endeavored to follow the principle of sunset reckoning [to mark the beginning and end of Sabbath] even in the Arctic regions by broadening the meaning of ‘sunset’ to include, for example, the end of twilight, the diminishing of light, the moment when the sun is closest to the horizon.” Having said this, however, he then argues for Sabbath to be reckoned in arctic regions using equatorial sunset time, 6 p.m. to 6 p.m.
I include these few examples, from the Jews of Christ’s day, from my own experience and the counsel of Dr. Bacchiocchi, not because they are unusual or wrong, for I believe this counsel is good and necessary for those who keep the Sabbath. The point I want to underline is that when one really sets out to observe the Sabbath according to biblical guidelines there are hundreds of “gray areas” that must be addressed. Anyone who has seriously tried to keep the Sabbath according to biblical guidelines knows this from experience.
We must thoughtfully consider the following facts. There is real need for the interpretation of the Sabbath laws for anyone who is going to keep the Sabbath. Just going to church on Saturday is not “keeping” the Sabbath. The New Testament milieu was one where there were differing interpretations regarding Sabbath observance among the various sects of Judaism. Jesus took issue with at least several of the Jewish interpretations of Sabbath keeping and from their perspective seemed to go out of His way to “break” the Sabbath. It is totally inconceivable that Paul, in forming, instructing and nurturing young Gentile churches over a period of many years, would have said nothing about appropriate Sabbath observance. That the Gentiles knew many of the Jewish customs is evident from the New Testament. If Sabbath observance was a part of the theology and practice of the Gentile Christians they would have needed instruction on how to observe the Sabbath. The believers in Corinth asked many questions about Christian conduct; why did they not include “How do we keep the Sabbath?” Coupled with the other evidence in this chapter, it is obvious that Sabbath keeping was not required, expected or even recommended in the Gentile Churches.
Dale Ratzlaff commented on 13-Aug-2009 11:02 PM
Where is my post?
Dale Ratzlaff. Where can I answer your questions? Please email
dale@Ratzlaf.com
Martin Weber answers commented on 14-Aug-2009 12:45 AM
Dear Dale, I'm sorry about the delay in getting your comment posted--I was traveling all day and only now, past midnight, I'm getting to my e-mail.

The reason I’ve set the software to delay posting comments pending my approval of them is to ensure that nothing on sdaforme.com will be a personal attack (ad hominem) against anybody, including you. Even some religious blogs can get nasty, and I want to keep the level of conversation focused on understanding truth, not denigrating people with what amounts to hate mail. I certainly welcome your critique of whatever we have on this website, Dale, and I hope that, in turn, you will link us up to your website.

Obviously we disagree on a lot of things, but I’m sure we can engage in respectful dialogue. Tomorrow morning I’m traveling again, but I will respond to your post sometime during this weekend.

Grace and peace,
Martin
Steven Torres commented on 14-Aug-2009 07:31 PM
In response to Mr. Garton's comment. I am an ordained minister in the Seventh-day Adventist church and I have never been asked to say, nor required to believe that Ellen G. White is an infallible authority over Scripture. Perhaps there was a time when people were fired for that sort of thing, but I have not seen it. I personally know colleagues who struggle with what to make of Mrs. White's writings and have made that public. I myself have struggled with several of her statements. I do not believe that she was infallible and I certainly do not believe she is equal to or greater than the Scriptures. I'm also not afraid to say so.
Richard commented on 15-Aug-2009 03:11 AM
I appreciate Dale's point that Sabbath had virtually become the outward manifestation of a religion based on behaviorism to passionate Jews of Jesus's day and unfortunately to many well meaning and passionate Adventists in more recent times. Jesus recognized this and pointed out that the Sabbath was made for man not man for the Sabbath. In essence He refocused what the Sabbath should have been about -- not a list of rules but about relationships and primarily our relationship with God.

Relationships tend to be somewhat messy and difficult to quantify (whereas rules are easy to quantify!). As a result what Sabbath observance looks like will usually be as unique and varied as are the people who are involved in that relationship.

It is also true that relationships do better when given some kind of basic definition or boundries (marriage for example). Scripture and particularly the gospels (written by NT Christians including Luke a Gentile) provide some examples and stories that help me understand what these might look like and those things that will strengthen and enhance my Sabbath experience with my friend Jesus. I'm reminded of John Brunts little book "A Day for Healing" where he traces the gospel stories of Jesus' experiences on Sabbath.

But when a relationship is defined primarily by boundries alone it suffers and will eventually die. Sabbath can of course only truly be experienced or "kept" in/with the heart.

Unfortunately Adventism often exists in institutional settings and institutions in general tend to have trouble with applying the principles of relationships-- it often is "easier" to make rules than to do the hard work of relationships in these settings. I think the gift of the Sabbath has sometimes suffered in these environments.

If the Sabbath is primarily about Worshiping God and spending time with fellow believers and with God deepening our relationship with him. And if as is apparent in Acts gathering on the Sabbath was the common practice it would seem unlikely or even dangerous to try to return to the behavior centered focus of Judaism by giving more instructions on "how to keep" Sabbath.

Thank you for spurring on my thinking!

Hope everyone has a blessed Sabbath with Jesus!

Roscoe commented on 16-Aug-2009 05:24 PM
I find it interesting from Mr Ratzlaff's comments about the Sabbath that there are many pre-suppositions and assumptions that have no Biblical foundation, only his human reasoning and oppinions. We all bring meaning to the page and sometimes that meaning is flawed with wrong assumptions that we use to argue from apparent silence on a topic. I would love to see what the scripture (in context), without commentary, has to say about the Sabbath in the Old and New testament. And I would love for him to show me and his followers (in context) without commentary what the scriptures have to say about worship on the first day of the week. On something so important shouldn't we let the Word of God speak for itself with out our interpretations and let the Spirit of God convince and convict us as to what truth is? John 16:5-15
Dale Ratzlaff commented on 16-Aug-2009 11:51 PM
There is no command to keep the Sabbath in the N.T.
All the meetings in the book of Acts are in a Jewish setting.
There is no instruction on how to keep the Sabbath in letters written to young Gentile churches.
Sabbath breaking is never listed in any lists of NT sins.
When the Sabbath in mentioned in the epistles, it is either in a negative or unimportant context.
The O.T. prophets confront the gentile nations for worshiping idols, blaspheming the name of God, ruthless killing, injustice and immorality, but never for breaking the Sabbath.
The Jews considered the Sabbath to be a ritual law.
The Jews insisted that a Gentile staying with a Jew was to keep the Sabbath.
However, if the Gentile kept the Sabbath on his own he was to be put to death.
Jesus, according to John 5 broke the Sabbath and from his defense of his other Sabbath incidents it seems clear that He understood the Sabbath to be a ritual law.
The entrance sign to the Old Covenant was circumcision.
The continuing sign the Old Covenant was Sabbath. “Remember the Sabbath”
The entrance sign to the New Covenant is baptism
The continuing sign in the New Covenant is the Lord’s Supper. “Do this in remembrance of Me”



Martin Weber answers Dale commented on 17-Aug-2009 11:43 AM
Martin Weber responds:

Dear Dale, thanks for engaging us in dialogue. I appreciate this opportunity to have a Christian discussion and am glad to respond to your statements.

Since the Sabbath day itself was deeply entrenched in Christ’s day, there was no need for Him to re-command it. The issue in the Gospels was not whether to keep the Sabbath but how to keep it—and Jesus gave plenty of attention to that. If Christ intended to do away with the Sabbath, He sure wasted a lot of energy defending it. And then to top it off, He proclaimed Himself “Lord of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:8).

As for the rest of the NT, we find nothing negative about the weekly Sabbath—it’s the non-weekly ceremonial sabbaths that are done away with in Colossians 2. Remember, the Mosaic ceremonial laws had monthly and yearly sabbaths beyond the weekly Sabbath of the Ten Commandments (see Leviticus 23:38, for example). These ceremonial monthly and yearly sabbaths are obviously what’s under discussion in verses 17 and 18: “So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.” By contrast, the weekly Sabbath of Creation and Calvary is not a shadow pointing forward. It calls us to “remember,” being a memorial pointing back to Christ’s historic accomplishments.

Romans 14 also refers to ceremonial Sabbaths. The continued keeping of them was optional according to one’s own convictions. Note that once again the context in that chapter is about Jewish ceremonies, not anything in the Ten Commandments.

Throughout the church-planting narrative of the book of Acts, Sabbath-keeping is mentioned quite naturally, and never negatively. If Paul had done away with the seventh-day Sabbath, there would have been a firestorm of controversy—as we do find regarding circumcision and food laws.

To summarize: It is simply not credible to imagine that something as fundamental and entrenched as the Sabbath could be abolished without controversy in the NT, particularly when we see so much discussion about other things Jewish—even in the predominantly Gentile churches.

Moving on with your critique, Dale. You consider the Sabbath a Jewish ritual. Well, everything in Jewish culture was ritualized, including eternal moral principles such as marital fidelity—and the eternal worship principle of the Sabbath. Let’s remember that the Sabbath is not introduced amid rituals and ceremonies but as the grand memorial of Creation. It was “made for man” (Mark 2:27,28)—not just for Jews for Mosaic rituals. The Greek word there is anthropos, which you know means “people.”

As for the Gentile nations of the OT not being confronted for breaking the Sabbath—first things first! They first had to turn from their idols to worship the true Creator. Then they could begin keeping the Sabbath, as Gentile converts indeed were invited to do in Isaiah 56 (verses 6, 7).

I can hardly believe, Dale, that you would accuse Jesus of breaking the Sabbath in John 5. This would turn our Savior into a sinner! Yes, He did ignore the Jewish rituals about the Sabbath, and everything else. But if our Lord had broken His Father’s commandment, He could not have challenged His enemies: “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (John 8:46). He kept the Sabbath in His life and even in His death, as along with His disciples He “rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment” (Luke 23:56—evidently the Sabbath was still a commandment when Luke wrote his Gospel, decades later). Only after Jesus honored the Sabbath by resting on that day from His finished work on the cross did He rise from the dead.

Dale, you teach that the Sabbath is done away, and now Jesus Himself is your Sabbath. Please, let’s not deify the Sabbath! Jesus didn’t say, “The Sabbath used to be a day, but now it’s Me.” No, Jesus said He is Lord of the day, not the day itself. (Let’s maintain the distinction between the Creator and His creation, lest we set the stage for pantheism.) The Sabbath is like baptism in the New Covenant: an expression of identification with Christ for our salvation. Whereas baptism is a once-in-a-lifetime expression of our solidarity with Christ, the Sabbath is a weekly expression of the same faith.

Jesus is not our baptism, and He is not our Sabbath. Both baptism and the Sabbath are symbols of Christ’s rest—but they are not our Lord Himself. Whereas baptism is a once-in-a-lifetime symbol of entering Christ’s rest, the Sabbath is a weekly expression of the same faith experience.

Dale, you teach that the New Covenant does away with the Ten Commandments, including the Sabbath. But the NT teaches that what God wrote on the tables of stone in the Old Covenant is now written on our hearts. Hebrews 10:16 says: “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds.” These are not just spiritual principles (as you say), but God’s actual commandments.

Does this obedience amount to legalism? Not when motivated by loving gratitude rather than appeasement.

We are not saved by keeping the law—but the life of faith will make us faithful, drawing us into harmony with God’s Ten Commandments so that the “righteousness of the law will be fulfilled in us” (Romans 8:3-4). Whereas ceremonial laws are done away with, God’s eternal law remains to test the genuineness of our faith. And so we read in 1 Corinthians 7:19: “Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.”

Keeping the commandments matters to God, Dale. I wish it mattered to you.
Chris commented on 17-Aug-2009 02:34 PM
Dale, I would assume that you believe that God is a perfect, unerring God, yes? If God were not perfect, He would not be God. If God is perfect, why would He ever change? There would be no need to change if indeed He is perfect in everything. Hebrews 13:8 says, "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever." If that is the case, why would God change or do away with any of the commandments, including the 4th? I find it interesting that you have only attempted to answer one of Martin's 5 questions. I am glad that Martin has graciously allowed your comments to be posted on this website for all to see despite the fact that you denied him the courtesy of a voice at your meetings in Nebraska. A few more texts. Paul, in Romans 3:31, states, "Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law." In addition, Jesus says, "If you love me, keep my commandments," John 14:15.
Karen Fandrich commented on 18-Aug-2009 01:39 PM
Dear Martin,

Thank you for being our modern-day Daniel and voicing the truth about Seventh-day Adventists on the website SDA4me. On The Issues page of the website you make the following statement: “We invite you to hold us accountable on this (SDA beliefs) by checking out these six main areas of SDA doctrine that have been challenged by Dale Ratzlaff and Life Assurance Ministries.” I appreciate your transparency and willingness to be challenged, Martin. Accountability and cult activity cannot coexist! Thank you for opening the way for people to see that Ratzlaff’s accusation about Adventists being a cult is a very extreme opinion and falsehood. Personally, I would suggest that a group who holds meetings and presents only their ideas—not allowing the audience to hear the other side of the issues is possibly more engaged in cultic activity and certainly not encouraging critical thinking. Also, I would be very uncomfortable if I heard of newly baptized SDA Christians referred to as “transitioning” out of Catholicism, etc. Once again, that has a cultic ring to my way of thinking.

There is no question many people have been hurt by well meaning SDA’s who do not truly understand grace in Jesus Christ. I’m praying this website will be a vehicle to help clear up those misunderstandings and enable us all to grow in His grace.

Jeremy commented on 18-Aug-2009 06:41 PM
Martin,

You wrote: "I certainly welcome your critique of whatever we have on this website, Dale, and I hope that, in turn, you will link us up to your website."

I don't see any link to Dale's site on your site. Isn't that a bit of a double standard?

Karen,

You wrote: "Personally, I would suggest that a group who holds meetings and presents only their ideas—not allowing the audience to hear the other side of the issues is possibly more engaged in cultic activity and certainly not encouraging critical thinking."

Since when do SDA seminars allow the other side to present their view? Do you really think an SDA evangelistic seminar would allow Dale Ratlzaff to speak??? Again, there's a double standard here.

Jeremy
Martin Weber answers Jeremy commented on 18-Aug-2009 06:55 PM
Jeremy, Martin here. I think that's a great idea! If you can get Dale to link our website to his, I will be very happy to post a link here to his website. Let me know how that works out!
Meanwhile, please note that I've already been posting every comment from Dale that he has sent us. I'm hoping to have the same access to his website.
I really am trying to be fair to Life Assurance Ministries and have a completely open dialogue here.
Thanks for the idea.
Jeremy commented on 19-Aug-2009 12:20 AM
Martin,

Is it possible to make it so that we can add "line breaks" in our comments on here? The lack of paragraphs/spacing makes it it difficult to read some of the longer posts.
Lynric commented on 19-Aug-2009 01:48 AM
I totally understand the Adventist arguments here. The problem is that, in exactly the same way I would have ignored these things as an Adventist, there are certain foundational beliefs that shape Adventism and denature all their "gospel talk".

All Adventists, no matter how liberal or historic or evangelical, hold to at least these four beliefs:1. The eternal significance of the Sabbath in the lives of the saved; 2. The belief in soul sleep which denies the existence of an immaterial human spirit, thus altering the nature of man, the nature of Christ, the nature of sin, and the nature of salvation; 3. The belief in an ongoing judgment in which the saved will have their sins carried away by Satan the scapegoat and in which the saved will help to vindicate God's character to a watching universe after Satan supposedly accuses Him of being unfair; and 4. Some degree of adherence to Ellen White.

These four foundational beliefs shape every doctrine of Adventism. The foundation either supports or condemns the building. The true gospel cannot be built on top of an unbiblical foundation.

No matter how articulately one defends one's Adventist belief in "grace" and "the gospel", they do not mean the same thing evangelical Christians mean when they talk about those things. Adventists add the Sabbath and the "health message" to the gospel; they subtract from the all-sufficiency and infallibility of Jesus; they multiply the requirements for salvation by demanding "commandment keeping"; they divide the body of Christ by demanding that believers "come out of Babylon" and keep the Sabbath.

We cannot ignore the Adventist foundation and pretend that it is a variation of the Christian faith. The Adventist bottom line is incompatible with the Christian faith.

Lynric
Arlie Fandrich commented on 19-Aug-2009 11:35 PM
In reference to not letting Dale Ratzlaff come to an evangalistic meeting to speak, I would say that is not the same type of meeting that Dale wouldn't allow Martin to have input at his meeting in Lincoln. Dale's main purpose of the meeting was to inform people of the errors of Adventism without any dialogue from those inside Adventism. If I want to know what any other religious body believes, I would like someone from tht religious organization to explain their beliefs.

A while ago I went to a religious debate between an authority of the Church of Christ and a Catholic Apologist where both sides were allowed to give their sides which included time for rebutals. The rules of an official debate were followed. Dales meeting was very one sided although he did allow people to turn in questions which is not the same as open dialogue.
Anonymous commented on 21-Aug-2009 12:04 AM
Arlie Fandrich, OK, so would an SDA Revelation Seminar allow someone from the Catholic Church to explain their beliefs, or do they simply condemn the Catholic Church and its beliefs?
Arlie Fandrich commented on 22-Aug-2009 08:11 PM
Anonymous, How long has it been since you've attended an SDA Revelation Seminar and what specifically was done at the seminar that is similar to what Dale's meeting entailed? Seems like Dale's meeting had only one purpose and that was to prove some adventist beliefs are based on scripture. Maybe he thinks all adventist beliefs are not scriptural.
| Trackbacks (0) | Permalink

Recent Posts

Tags

Archive