What laws were nailed to the cross?

[Lysimachus]

Okay, so what about the other passages from EGW that I quoted?

She does say that there was a law nailed to the cross. How do you interpret those?

My point is that it is not wrong to say the ceremonial law was nailed to the cross. If this expression was wrong to use, Ellen White would not have used it.

[Gerr]

Nobody can pay the debt of another sinner. Everyone must pay for his own sins.

May I ask how you have paid for yours?

Quote:

Ellen White implies that it was the ceremonial law that was nailed to the cross:

I am a firm believer in the prophetic call of EGW. But here are some of her statements:

"The Bible, and the Bible alone, is the foundation of our faith." RH Oct. 13, 1885

"The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this holy word will be in harmony." RH Dec 15, 1885.

"The Bible, and the Bible alone, is the rule of faith and practice." Misc Collections p. 1533

[Gerr]

Okay, so what about the other passages from EGW that I quoted?

She does say that there was a law nailed to the cross. How do you interpret those?

My point is that it is not wrong to say the ceremonial law was nailed to the cross. If this expression was wrong to use, Ellen White would not have used it.

I could be mistaken, but I don't believe that the true meaning of cheirographon was known in her day, so she was using the word as it was known/used in her time.

[ClubV12]

No problem with the "bible and the bible alone".

In the same way, no problem with the 10 commandments and the 10 commandments alone.

So why did the Israelites need Moses?

Because their dull intellect could not comprehend the details within the 10 commandments, it had to be spelled out for them. But we are way smarter than they were, right? So why do we need Ellen White today? In the same way Israel of old needed the laws of Moses, to interpret the laws of God and in our case the bible itself.

The answer is obvious, unless you cling to the concept that all YOU need is the "bible and the bible alone". Sure, no problem, I mean what Adventist wouldn't agree to that? Proudly and loudly proclaim it in fact! Yes Sir, we ARE a "people of the book", and the "book" alone. OK.... All I know is the pioneers needed more than the bible and the bible alone as they wrestled to build a foundation, reached an impasse, and the Lord spoke through His messenger to point the way forward.

...but that was then, this is now, we don't need her anymore. After all, we are rich in knowledge and increased with different versions of the bible, we got plenty of Adventist authors and educated Pastors and teachers to help our understanding, we got it all already! A perfect understanding of all things! Right?

OK,,, a rant a bit over the top, but I think most understand my point.

[barnz]

Are we saying Ellen White is obsolete?

[ClubV12]

Ha Ha,,, well I'M not!!!

Just trying to keep the balance between the bible and the bible only, which indeed WE can and MUST rely on as a singular source of truth.

And yet, recognizing the continuing roll of Sister White in understanding and interpreting it correctly.

Without the Lords messenger and messages to us in that regard would we be any different than Seventh day Baptists? Or Jehovah Witness? Or any other group? Would we even exist at all?

Not without divine revelation in the gift of prophecy, following 1844 it was a "must have", not my opinion, the evidence is clear, this is from the Lord. Didn't have to be Ellen White, could have been someone else the Lord chose. But the fact remains, HE did send someone with His message to keep us on the path. To establish the church then and to keep it on the path now. We need the work, the writings, the Spirit of Prophecy now more than ever.

[John317]

Without the Lords messenger and messages to us in that regard would we be any different than Seventh day Baptists? Or Jehovah Witness? Or any other group? Would we even exist at all?

I don't think there's any doubt about it. I'm sure we wouldn't. As a church, we are what we are largely because of the prophetic ministry of Ellen White.

[miz3]

No problem with the "bible and the bible alone".

In the same way, no problem with the 10 commandments and the 10 commandments alone.

So why did the Israelites need Moses?

Because their dull intellect could not comprehend the details within the 10 commandments, it had to be spelled out for them. But we are way smarter than they were, right? So why do we need Ellen White today? In the same way Israel of old needed the laws of Moses, to interpret the laws of God and in our case the bible itself.

The answer is obvious, unless you cling to the concept that all YOU need is the "bible and the bible alone". Sure, no problem, I mean what Adventist wouldn't agree to that? Proudly and loudly proclaim it in fact! Yes Sir, we ARE a "people of the book", and the "book" alone. OK.... All I know is the pioneers needed more than the bible and the bible alone as they wrestled to build a foundation, reached an impasse, and the Lord spoke through His messenger to point the way forward.

...but that was then, this is now, we don't need her anymore. After all, we are rich in knowledge and increased with different versions of the bible, we got plenty of Adventist authors and educated Pastors and teachers to help our understanding, we got it all already! A perfect understanding of all things! Right?

OK,,, a rant a bit over the top, but I think most understand my point.

You are correct ClubV12 that SDA are a Church that is NOT "Sola Scriptura" it is the Bible and Ellen White together that determine what we SDA believe. Even the pioneers as you say depended on Ellen White to direct them as how to believe in the Scripture (Bible).

[miz3]

Ha Ha,,, well I'M not!!!

Just trying to keep the balance between the bible and the bible only, which indeed WE can and MUST rely on as a singular source of truth.

And yet, recognizing the continuing roll of Sister White in understanding and interpreting it correctly.

Without the Lords messenger and messages to us in that regard would we be any different than Seventh day Baptists? Or Jehovah Witness? Or any other group? Would we even exist at all?

Not without divine revelation in the gift of prophecy, following 1844 it was a "must have", not my opinion, the evidence is clear, this is from the Lord. Didn't have to be Ellen White, could have been someone else the Lord chose. But the fact remains, HE did send someone with His message to keep us on the path. To establish the church then and to keep it on the path now. We need the work, the writings, the Spirit of Prophecy now more than ever.

SDA "double talk" which states that we are a "sola scriptura" church but in actual practice SDA are Bible and Ellen White Church.

SDA say one thing and practice another thing.

[Lysimachus]

The meaning of cheirographon is as follows:

Strong's 5498 (cheirographon):

1. a handwriting, what one has written by his own hand

2. a note of hand or writing in which one acknowledges that money has either been deposited with him or lent to him by another, to be returned at the appointed time

So it can mean either or. It can mean just the "handwriting" of words, written on paper, or it can mean a note of debt.

So the original Greek reads:

"xeirografon toiv dogmasin

According to Strong's, Dogma is as follows:

Strong's 1378 (Dogma):

1. doctrine, decree, ordinance

----a. of public decrees

----b. of the Roman Senate

----c. of rulers

2. the rules and requirements of the law of Moses; carrying a suggestion of severity and of threatened judgment

3. of certain decrees of the apostles relative to right living

I do not see any reason to say that when Ellen White said that there was a law nailed to the cross, that this in any way is contrary to the truth. There might be some "deeper" significance behind it, but it is clear that regardless of the debt that was paid, all the requirements to practice these ceremonies were wiped away.

[Lysimachus]

SDA "double talk" which states that we are a "sola scriptura" church but in actual practice SDA are Bible and Ellen White Church.

SDA say one thing and practice another thing.

You're at liberty to butt in as much as you like, of course, but nonetheless, if you want my advice, I'd advise you to stay out of this.

[Stan]

Would the same thing be said about Luther and the Lutherans? the list goes on.

[ClubV12]

Thats a good point Stan, without Luther, no Lutherans!

I do believe God raised up that man, as He has done so many times in the past, at a time when He needed to get the message across. It's a bit different in the case of Ellen White, but the principle holds true. She was clearly a prophet, Luther was a man of God. What ever the Lord needs to use at the time. IF the Lutherans had continued the reformation it's possible we would not have needed a prophet!

Seventh-day Adventists are clearly bible and bible only doctrines. Every one can be proved from that single source. How those doctrines were arrived at is another issue. Not unlike how Luther arrived at his conclusions and interpretation of scripture, hard work, first and foremost.

[John317]

... There might be some "deeper" significance behind it, but it is clear that regardless of the debt that was paid, all the requirements to practice these ceremonies were wiped away.

I agree with you. Celebrating the ceremonies is not a matter of salvation.

[John317]

Would the same thing be said about Luther and the Lutherans? the list goes on.

If it hadn't been Luther or Ellen White, it would have been someone else that God raised up. In the final analysis, these things didn't depend on any single individual but on God who moved them.

[John317]

IF the Lutherans had continued the reformation it's possible we would not have needed a prophet!

Good point. And yet the book of Revelation did prophesy that before the second coming, the gift of prophecy would be found in the last-day church.

I believe "the testimony of Jesus" in Rev. 12: 17 is a reference to both an individual prophet and to the end-time fulfillment of Joel 2: 28-31, which is yet future--

Joel 2:28-31

"And it shall come to pass afterward,

that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh;

your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,

your old men shall dream dreams,

and your young men shall see visions.

[29] Even on the male and female servants

in those days I will pour out my Spirit.

[30] "And I will show wonders in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke. [31] The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes.

[ClubV12]

Seems to me Malachi had something to say about Ellen White as well....

Of course, the Lord in His wisdom knew Luthers reformation would only take us so far. I guess the question could be posed, will Ellen Whites work only take us so far as well?

Certainly not to the extent that Luthers reformation stalled, but, who knows what our future may hold as it regards additional messages through divine intervention?

As it regards the feasts and other "holidays" I think it's kind of neat that some folks enjoy celebrating them today. Certainly not a requirement of any kind, but what a nice way to honor God, when/if it's done in the right spirit.

Good christian common sense tells us that many of the "laws of Moses" are applicable today. How to treat the poor, our brother in the Lord, the stranger in our land, for instance. And for many of these things we also have additional counsel from the bible and our modern prophet.

Strangely, I can't find any specific referrence from our pioneers that ties the eating of pork to the Levitical laws. It seems to be consistently presented as strictly a "health issue". And yet, surely the motivation behind this counsel originated from a "thus sayeth the Lord" perspective.

[miz3]

Would the same thing be said about Luther and the Lutherans? the list goes on.

Yes, Stan, the same is to be said about the Lutherans.

They are not just "sola scriptura" they are both Luther and the Bible.

However, Lutherans unlike SDA don't claim that Luther is/was a prophet in the same way SDA claim is for Ellen White.

I have great respect for Ellen White because without her the SDA Church would not be possible. However, I don't believe that all her writings and sayings were "inspired" in the same way as the Bible is "inspired".

Thus, there is a great difference between the methodology between the two denominations. Sort of apples and oranges.

[Ron Amnsn]

So the original Greek reads:

"xeirografon toiv dogmasin

According to Strong's, Dogma is as follows:

Strong's 1378 (Dogma):

1. doctrine, decree, ordinance

----a. of public decrees

----b. of the Roman Senate

----c. of rulers

2. the rules and requirements of the law of Moses; carrying a suggestion of severity and of threatened judgment

3. of certain decrees of the apostles relative to right living

Strongs is a lexicon, not a dictionary. It simply catalogs they way that Mr. Strong thought that the KJV translators used the words. Mr. Strong was a great scholar, but his theology is reflected in the definitions that he supplies.

If you look at how dogmasin and dogma are used in the Greek OT (the Septuagint) it becomes obvious that Strongs definition 2 above is bogus. Although the Greek OT talks a zillion times about "the rules and requirements of the law of Moses", not one of those times is the word "dogma" or its derivatives used for that purpose. Not once is dogma used to refer to any of God's instructions. We are talking about the Greek version of the Old Testament that was available to Paul and his readers. If Paul wanted his readers to understand that it was the Law of Moses that was nailed to the cross, he could have used one of the several Greek words that was used in the Greek Old Testament to refer to the Law of Moses, but he didn't use any of those words. Instead he used a word that was only used to refer to man-made decrees (usually the decrees of foreign kings) in the Greek Old Testament.

For more information see this thread: Col 2:14