When Christ's character shall be perfectly reproduced in his people...

[BobRyan]

When Christ said "keep the commandments" and the question is asked "Which ones" -- what answer does Christ give?

Hint:

Matt 19

do that I may have eternal life?”

17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

18 He said to Him, “Which ones?”

Jesus said, “ ‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false witness,’ 19 ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”

How facinating that not only does Jesus quote the Ten Commandments -- he also quotes Lev 19:18

For those looking to ignore the text of scripture found in Exodus and Leviticus -- - that is a big "ouch!".

Even more facinating that there are many non-SDAs that would like to imagine that Christ made no reference at all to the requirement -- keeping the Commandments -- no not even PRE-Cross.

How "instructive" for the Bible student.

in Christ,

Bob

[Robert]

When Christ said "keep the commandments" and the question is asked "Which ones" -- what answer does Christ give?

Hint:

Matt 19

do that I may have eternal life?”

17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

18 He said to Him, “Which ones?”

Jesus said, “ ‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false witness,’ 19 ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”

Jesus didn't say if you love me keep my commandment in the above....In the above Jesus was giving OC terms to a man trapped in his own self-righteousness. Read it carefully taking the whole context into account instead of just misquoting that which suits your law oriented, legalistic gospel

[John317]

John317,

Wikipedia would be my first choice of a source for accurate info on the subject of the canonization of Scripture, only if I wanted to get it wrong. They don't even seem to know that the word 'canon' refers to the operating procedures and laws of the Catholic church and does not refer at all the the actual books of the New Testament.

There is lots of history that whoever it was that posted the content that you site on Wikipedia did not research and does not know. Please do your own research. When you find out what the words 'homologumena' and 'antilogumena' mean you will be in the right spot.

The bottom line is that there is evidence pointing to Paul as the author of 2 Timothy, and many good, even great, Bible scholars believe it was written by the Apostle. At the same time it must be said that there are also scholars who believe that Paul did not write it but that it was written by a follower of Paul.

It is not as if all the evidence points in one direction and that the case is closed. On the contrary.

See L. T. Johnson, The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), pp. 381-389.

A.T. Robinson, a highly respected "liberal" theologian who wrote books on the dating of texts believed it was written by Paul in A.D. 58. See:

http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/r/robinson-john_a-t.html

Let each man be persuaded in his own mind.

[Musicman1228]

That is true, Bob, but they also read letters and writings of many other people that were considered to be authoritative. Examples are that no one knows who wrote Hebrews, or 1 and 2 Peter. There were literally hundreds of people who wrote either on behalf of a legitimate apostle or counterfeited and co-opted the names of the real apostles in order to promote a particular view point and get it read in the churches.

This went on a long time and became very confusing to the individual churches, so much so that these churches began to vet the writings themselves and take out of circulation those of questionable doctrinal authority. These documents caused rifts between the established churches where sides were taken as to whom to believe. (Paul writes about this problem.)

The Council of Nicea (first) and the Council of Leodicea that was established by Emperor Constantine came into being first and foremost to try to unify his empire by unifying the scriptural authority of the Catholic church, which he hoped would help him unify his empire and keep it from fracturing. It worked.

God did not limit that which the Catholic church wanted in the legitimized Scriptures to promote their particular dogma, however, God did make sure that there was enough truth in these Scriptures such that seekers of truth would be able to find it. God did not by His own hand make the New Testament an infallible source of truth because to do so would be to take from men the power of choice. God did preserve the truth in some of the writings of the New Testament such that we today with diligent, thoughtful, careful study can find the truth and decide what is false. That was the purpose of the parable/prophecy of the Wheat and Tares.

You can find a very good explanation of this in The Spirit of the Church by Neufeld/Sterling, Tate Pub.(2007).

[Tom Wetmore]

... Hmmm "If you love Me KEEP My Commandments" John 14:15 (So that would be the pre-cross commandments even)....

Hmmm... Well maybe not. The Greek word used by John here is entole (translated as commandments) and it is different from the word he typically used to refer to the the Mosaic "pre-cross" law, nomos. The words in Greek, though similar and overlapping in meaning, do mean different things. Nomos is more narrowly and precisely the law, the established legal rules, as in the Mosaic law to which you have tried to narrowly connect Jesus' statement.

However the Greek word entole has a broader, more comprehensive and general meaning that includes instructions, admonitions and directions from an authoritative source. This would include the teachings of a rabbi and the immediate importance to be followed that they would have to his disciples. And within the immediate context of Jesus' last teaching opportunity before the crucifixion, the upper room discourse, recorded in detail by John in chapters 13-17, the "commandments" to which He refers in 14:15 are abundantly clear. It is simply the command to love and serve one another. (Isn't that what EGW said of a perfect Christ-like character in the COL quote that started this whole topic!) He says it over and over. "This is the new commandment I give to you, love one another as I have loved you." "If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching." It is His teachings, his last testimony given to His disciples (last will and testament, if you please) before he went to the cross.

And you will recall the trick question put to Jesus earlier about the greatest "commandment" (yes, the word used was entole) in the law (nomos). Jesus at that point was consistent with his later final instructions to his disciples. "First, love God and the second, love one another." And he said that on these two principles (entole) hang all the Law (nomos) and the writings of the Prophets.

And yes, John consistently uses the same word in his letters and in Revelation for those who keep, hold to, obey the testimony of Jesus and His Commandments.

Tom

[Gail]

I've mentioned this before, but look to the story of the sheep and goats in Matthew 25:31-46.

It is a judgment scene. The rejected ones were rejected on the basis of how they treated others. They didn't realise they would be rejected- probably because they had "kept the Law" or had been good persons in their minds.

Jesus narrowed the 10 Commandments to two- Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul, and Love your neighbour as yourself.

Those principles are eternal. Before the Creation of the Sabbath, those principles still reigned. Over time, for our benefit and understanding, the two commands were explained, but they were still guided by the Love principle. That was what Jesus was trying to tell Nicodemus, the rich young ruler, and in fact, everyone.

God is love. Sin is also love, but it is love directed by our SELF towards ministering to ourselves.

I would like to suggest that when we are emptied of our love of self in order to love God and love others, that is when we are of the mind of Christ.

[BobRyan]

When Christ said "keep the commandments" and the question is asked "Which ones" -- what answer does Christ give?

Hint:

Matt 19

do that I may have eternal life?”

17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

18 He said to Him, “Which ones?”

Jesus said, “ ‘You shall not murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false witness,’ 19 ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”

How facinating that not only does Jesus quote the Ten Commandments -- he also quotes Lev 19:18

For those looking to ignore the text of scripture found in Exodus and Leviticus -- - that is a big "ouch!".

Even more facinating that there are many non-SDAs that would like to imagine that Christ made no reference at all to the requirement -- keeping the Commandments -- no not even PRE-Cross.

How "instructive" for the Bible student.

[BobRyan]

What is really facinating in that Matt 19 example is that instead of substituting Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" for the 6 commandments in the Ten that also rest on that same principle - Jesus includes THEM ALL as ALL being in place (a "both-AND" model instead of an "either-OR" model).

How instructive.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

That is true, Bob, but they also read letters and writings of many other people that were considered to be authoritative. Examples are that no one knows who wrote Hebrews, or 1 and 2 Peter. There were literally hundreds of people who wrote either on behalf of a legitimate apostle or counterfeited and co-opted the names of the real apostles in order to promote a particular view point and get it read in the churches.

The apostles were "alive" in the first century to police the situation. Heretical letters written in the first century and actually read by the saints would have been dealt with by the Apostles.

Hence the heresy we see in the false letters - is restricted to a time after the death of John.

Thus leaving us with a trustworthy 66 books of scripture.

in Christ,

Bob

[Musicman1228]

That would be true except for the fact that the Council of Leodicea was held in 325 C.E. not in the first century. The original disciples were not around to monitor anything at that time. Check the data.

[John317]

I've mentioned this before, but look to the story of the sheep and goats in Matthew 25:31-46.

It is a judgment scene. The rejected ones were rejected on the basis of how they treated others. They didn't realise they would be rejected- probably because they had "kept the Law" or had been good persons in their minds.

Jesus narrowed the 10 Commandments to two- Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and soul, and Love your neighbour as yourself.

Those principles are eternal. Before the Creation of the Sabbath, those principles still reigned. Over time, for our benefit and understanding, the two commands were explained, but they were still guided by the Love principle. That was what Jesus was trying to tell Nicodemus, the rich young ruler, and in fact, everyone.

God is love. Sin is also love, but it is love directed by our SELF towards ministering to ourselves.

I would like to suggest that when we are emptied of our love of self in order to love God and love others, that is when we are of the mind of Christ.

And true love for God and for neighbor-- having the mind of Christ-- will result in our obeying all of the moral law of God. That's genuine "righteousness by faith."

[Robert]

And true love for God and for neighbor-- having the mind of Christ-- will result in our obeying all of the moral law of God. That's genuine "righteousness by faith."

And if you are not obeying all the moral law (spirit included) you must not be righteous by faith. Wow! You've turned RBF into works....

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

And true love for God and for neighbor-- having the mind of Christ-- will result in our obeying all of the moral law of God. That's genuine "righteousness by faith."

And if you are not obeying all the moral law (spirit included) you must not be righteous by faith. Wow! You've turned RBF into works....

Robert Wieland, "Faith is an appreciation of God's initiative, and it changes the heart. The sinner has now received the atonement, which is reconciliation with God. It is impossible to be truly reconciled to Him and not also be reconciled to His holy law. Therefore true justification by faith makes the believer to become obedient to all the commandments of God.

"This marvelous change is accomplished through the ministry of the New Covenant. The Lord actually writes His law in the heart of the believer so that obedience is loved. This provides a new motivation which transcends fear of being lost or hope of reward."

1888 For Almost Dummies, 2007.

[Dr. Rich]

Ok Bob, just because you say so-right? Lets not do any research on this tho because it might jeperdize faith.

[John317]

It is not as if all the evidence points in one direction and that the case is closed. On the contrary.

See L. T. Johnson, The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), pp. 381-389.

A.T. Robinson, a highly respected "liberal" theologian who wrote books on the dating of texts believed 2 Timothy was written by Paul in A.D. 58. See:

http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/r/robinson-john_a-t.html

Let each man be persuaded in his own mind.

[Robert]

But you know we are falling short of the glory of God. Even Paul, the great theologian of RBF, said -- "that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ--the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. 10 I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead. 12 Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. 13 Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.15 All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. 16 Only let us live up to what we have already attained.

[Tom Wetmore]

What is really facinating in that Matt 19 example is that instead of substituting Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" for the 6 commandments in the Ten that also rest on that same principle - Jesus includes THEM ALL as ALL being in place (a "both-AND" model instead of an "either-OR" model).

How instructive.

in Christ,

Bob

Instructive yes... but in a different direction than you seem to be driving your "keep the commandments" message.

Understand this in the context of the whole of Jesus' teachings. Jesus said that one needed to be more righteous than the Pharisees, even though everyone knew they were really good at keeping the commandments. Jesus essentially said that they were not going far enough. Their goal of sinless perfection by obeying the law was still way short of the mark required to be righteous.

Here is a basic summary of the requirements of the law of Moses - do no harm. But Jesus said to be righteous, or perfect as the Father in heaven, one must do good. You may find this surprising, but my point (as you can tell from my mini-sermon in my signature line...) is that saying that we must simply obey the law is simply not enough. It is a shallow goal, falling short of the mark. The law keepers equate sinlessness with not doing anything bad or doing nothing harmful to themselves or others. It is relatively easy not to kill someone, or steal their stuff. But to love them as God does is really hard. And the measure of our love of God is simply how well we love and treat other people. This means much more than simply doing them no harm. We must do them some good, something good for them. And that was the real point Jesus ultimately made to the rich young man.

And in terms of the ten commandments, this is what makes the 4th so vitally important. The Sabbath is the bridge or link between the first 3 (our relationship to God) and the last 6 (our relationship with each other). It is that which binds or seals the two great commandments together. And here is why - It is lawful, or very important, to do good on the Sabbath, accroding to Jesus own life and teachings. It is the day to set aside our self interests and focus on what God wants us to do, worship God by reaching out to others (See Isaiah 58). That is what Jesus taught and how he kept the Sabbath. And that doing good stuff is what he said would be decisive in the judgment. (See Matthew 25)

[Woody]

Quote:

"Let the law take care of itself. We have been at work on the law until we get as dry as the hills of Gilboa, without dew or rain. Let us trust in the merits of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. May God help us that our eyes may be anointed with eyesalve, that we may see. God helping us, we will draw nigh to Him, and He says he will draw nigh to us. Do we believe? Will we come in God's appointed way? May the Lord help us and enlighten us, that we may go forth from this place as they went forth to proclaim the truth after the day of Pentecost; and there were souls converted; they could not resist the testimony." Ellen White in {1888 557.2}

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: BobRyan

What is really facinating in that Matt 19 example is that instead of substituting Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself" for the 6 commandments in the Ten that also rest on that same principle - Jesus includes THEM ALL as ALL being in place (a "both-AND" model instead of an "either-OR" model).

How instructive.

in Christ,

Bob

Instructive yes... but in a different direction than you seem to be driving your "keep the commandments" message.

Understand this in the context of the whole of Jesus' teachings. Jesus said that one needed to be more righteous than the Pharisees, even though everyone knew they were really good at keeping the commandments.

[phkrause]

I don't believe that at all Robert. It seems to me everything is legalism to you. Sorry but that's the way I hear it from the things you say.

pk

[BobRyan]

In the 1880's the dominant "popular" aspect of Adventism was at opposite poles to where it is today. In that day, the issue was that "popular Adventism" undervalued the New Birth and righteousness by faith element of the Gospel. In that day it was popular to argue that lost people simply "choose to start making good self-disciplined decisions" in favor of God's law -- so they can be saints, completely bypassing the need for the miracle of the New Birth and the supernatural "walk by faith" where "the Life Live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God" Gal 2:20.

And Ellen White had the perfect remedy for that popular error in the 1800's -- we find it below.

Quote:

"Let the law take care of itself. We have been at work on the law until we get as dry as the hills of Gilboa, without dew or rain. Let us trust in the merits of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. May God help us that our eyes may be anointed with eyesalve, that we may see. God helping us, we will draw nigh to Him, and He says he will draw nigh to us. Do we believe? Will we come in God's appointed way? May the Lord help us and enlighten us, that we may go forth from this place as they went forth to proclaim the truth after the day of Pentecost; and there were souls converted; they could not resist the testimony." Ellen White in {1888 557.2}

How facinating that in today's environment the "popular" errors are the exact opposite ditch as the 1880's. In today's "popular Adventism" the error is to blatantly undercut the importance of Christ's statement "IF you Love Me KEEP My Commandments" and opt instead for a Gospel that is of the form "the Law really doesn't matter that much -- after all, nobody could really keep it anyway".

Truly the OPPOSITE wrong-headed direction from that which was so popular in the 1880's.

How "instructive" then that people want the "medicine" given for the "OTHER problem" when in fact the problem that we see so common today -- is the exact opposite.

If you have a raw-foods rich and protein defficient diet the cure is "more protein". But if you have a protein-excess diet with little or no raw foods -- the fix is "more raw foods". How facinating that those whose problem is too little raw foods and too much protein -- want to take the "other medicine" they want the "other fix" they want the fix to be hardwired as "more protein" and "less raw foods", no matter what the problem really is.

How instructive.

So here we have a thread on the problem of the Close of Probation and the "medicine" that Ellen White recommends about Character that "perfectly reflects" the image of Christ. But what "medicine" is being hoped for? It is the "fix" that suggests that we not pay attention to the problem at hand - but instead look at the problem those 1880's Adventists had as IF that was the popular problem in today's Adventism.

Better to simply deal with the problem at hand.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

I don't believe that at all Robert. It seems to me everything is legalism to you. Sorry but that's the way I hear it from the things you say.

pk

For some people the definition of Legalism is "obeying God in some area I don't care to obey Him in". It will often show up in the form of an offended tossing out of the term "legalism" no matter what the discussion.

in Christ,

Bob

[phkrause]

I hear you Bob. Its like my jewish brothers and sisters, sometimes it does seem like that's the case, but they love worshiping there God and doing things from there heart. Who are we to judge them if they are doing it legalisticly or not. Only God can read our hearts and knows why we do what we do.

pk

[Tom Wetmore]

Bob,

From what you have posted, I am not very sure that you actually understand and are getting the point. You are missing the point, I think. You seem to be repeating the same circular and shallow platitudes about obeying the law and missing the point Jesus was really making. I am not too sure that the windmill against which you keep tilting is even in the same neighborhood as mine. Stop arguing and think. I have two questions for you:

What exactly did Jesus mean when he said that He had come to "fulfill" the law?

What exactly does it mean to have God's law written on the heart?

Go deeper, man...

Tom

[BobRyan]

I hear you Bob. Its like my jewish brothers and sisters, sometimes it does seem like that's the case, but they love worshiping there God and doing things from there heart. Who are we to judge them if they are doing it legalisticly or not. Only God can read our hearts and knows why we do what we do.

pk

Indeed. The matters of the heart are for God alone to judge. But a key element to "actual" legalism is that "something" is set in place of a real supernatural living connection with God where we spend time with Him each day and follow His Word (as in "really obey").

For some the "thing" that is put in place of that is "the church I go to" or the denomination I am a part of.

For others it is "I said the magic phrase at my baptism and now everything is fine" or "I claim to know that I am saved" or "I said righteounsess by faith a certain way" ... none of which matters.

The living connection in which the "Holy Spirit bears witness with our spirit" Rom 8:16 does not happen in a state of feigned obedience while in living rebellion against God's Word.

It also does not happen for the unsaved, those that are not born-again.

in Christ,

Bob